Four conversations "On changing names"

Four conversations “On Changing Names” were delivered by St. John Chrysostom in Antioch in the spring of 388 or 389. At the beginning of the first conversation (6 chapters), the saint says that those who come to church and listen to the Word of God should not use it only for themselves, but carry it to their brothers and arouse in them a desire to come to meetings. Then the conversion of the Apostle Paul (chapter 9 of the Book of Acts of the Holy Apostles) is spoken of as proof of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ: “For this reason, Christ allowed him to show all his enmity, and then called him to make the proof of the Resurrection and the word of (Christian) teaching undeniable.” Appeal from Ap. Paul was alien to all human motives: “he did not change for the sake of men, but the power of God converted him.” In the second conversation (4 chapters) we are talking about the fact that changes in names in the Holy Scriptures have importance and meaning, which cannot be treated with disdain. God named the first man Adam, which means “virgin land.” This “virgin land” from which Adam emerged was a prototype of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of the Second Adam - Jesus Christ. The name of earthly Adam constantly called upon the first man to be humble and protected him from the proud thought that he was equal to God. In the third conversation (6 chapters), the saint answers the question why the Holy Spirit renamed the apostle not immediately after his conversion, but after a long time - then the change in the apostle would not have become obvious. Paul and the conversion to faith: “If he had been renamed immediately when he left the Jews and came to us, no one would have known that he was a persecutor and became an evangelist. And to know that he was a persecutor and became an apostle was very important.” It was also important to show that the apostle’s conversion was not under compulsion, but according to his free will. In the fourth conversation (6 chapters) St. John calls for visiting churches and saving their brothers, because worship of God is the only necessary thing. He says that it is important not only to read the Holy Scriptures, but also to understand them. The words of the ap. are also explained in the conversation. Paul "called apostle" (1 Cor. 1:1). They mean that it was not the apostle who first came to the Lord, but that he answered the calling. The Corinthians were very vain, they were proud even of the teaching that St. Paul preached to them for the first time. To teach them a lesson in humility, he uses the word “called.” *The title of the essay in Latin is De mutatione nominum, hom. 1-4. Contents Conversation I. After reading the passage: “Saul was still breathing threats and murder” (Acts 9:1), when everyone expected that the conversation at the beginning of Chapter 9 would be said. Acts - that Paul's calling is proof of the Resurrection Conversation II. To those who grumbled about the length of the teachings and to those who were dissatisfied with their brevity; about the name of Saul and Paul, and about why the first man was called Adam - that it was useful and beneficial - and to the newly enlightened. Conversation III. To those who reproached for the extensiveness of the introductions, and that it is useful to endure reproaches; also, why Paul was not renamed immediately as soon as he believed - that this change happened to him, not under compulsion, but according to his free will; and to the words: “Saul, Saul! Why are you persecuting Me? (Acts 9:4). CONVERSATION IV. Containing reproach for those who were not in the church and an admonition to those who were to take care of the brothers; also at the beginning of the Epistle to the Corinthians: “Paul is called” (1 Cor. 1:1), and about humility Conversation I. After reading the passage: “Saul was still breathing threats and murder” (Acts 9:1), when everyone expected that the conversation at the beginning of Chapter 9 would be said. Acts - that Paul's calling is evidence of the Resurrection This and the following three conversations have in common content of the question about changing names If the prophets refuse to name a person who, while present in church, neglects to listen to the word of God, then what can we say about those who do not go to church at all? – Those who come to church, having had their fill of verbal bread, should not use it only for themselves, but take it to their absent brothers and arouse in them the desire to come to this meal themselves. – The relationship of such edification to the question of the conversion of St. Paul - Allegory, in which St. Paul is depicted as a fish, Jesus Christ as a fisherman and the saying: “Saul, Saul! Why are you persecuting Me? (Acts 9:1) - under the guise of oud. – The greatness of the miracle of the resurrection of the dead, but an even greater miracle is the change of free will. – It is enough to think a little about the conversion of St. Paul, to see how great and amazing it is as proof of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. - Address by Ap. Paul was alien to all human motives. – Why was the apostle called Saul and then Paul? – Why did this change in name occur, examples of which are found in other cases, both in the Old Testament and in the New Testament? Discussion of this issue in the following conversations. 1. Can it be demolished? Can it be tolerated? Our congregation is getting smaller every day. The city is full of people, but the church is empty; the square, theaters and portico are full, but the house of God is empty. Or better yet, if you tell the truth, the city is empty and the church is full of people. People should be called not those who are in the square, but you who are in the church; not those who are careless, but you who are diligent; not those who are addicted to worldly things, but you who prefer spiritual things to worldly things. Not the person who has a human body and voice, but the one who has a human soul and spiritual mood. And nothing testifies to the human soul more than love for the word of God; Equally, nothing shows and exposes the soul as bestial and unreasonable as disdain for the word of God. Do you want to know that those who neglect to hear the word of God, by this neglect, have lost humanity (τό είναι άνθρωποι) and have lost their most natural dignity? I will tell you not my word, but a prophetic saying confirming my thought, so that you can see that those who do not love spiritual words cannot be people, so that you can see that our city is depopulated. The loudest Isaiah, this contemplator of wonderful visions, who was honored to see the Seraphim in the flesh and hear that mysterious song, - he, having entered the crowded capital of the Jews, that is, Jerusalem, standing in the middle of the square, while all the people surrounded him, - wanting to show that he who does not listen to the prophetic words is not a man, cried out like this: “When I came, there was no one, and when I called, no one answered” (Is. 50:2). And to prove that he said this, not due to the complete lack of those present, but because of the carelessness of the listeners, after the words: “when I came, there was no one,” he added: “no one answered.” Therefore, those present were present, but they were not considered present because they did not listen to the prophet. Therefore, as he came, “when I came, there was no one,” he called, and “no one answered,” he turns his speech to the elements, and says: “Hear, O heavens, and listen, O earth” (Is. 1:2). I, he says, was sent to people, to people who have intelligence; but since they have neither reason nor feeling, I speak to the elements that do not have feeling, to denounce those gifted with feeling, but who do not take advantage of this advantage. This is what another prophet, Jeremiah, says. And he, standing among many Jews, in the same city, as if there was no one, exclaimed like this: “To whom should I speak and whom should I exhort...?” (Jer.6:10). What are you saying? Seeing so many people, you ask, who should you talk to? Yes, he says, there are many bodies, but not people; there are many bodies that have no hearing. That’s why he added: “Their ears are uncircumcised, and they cannot listen.” Do you see that all these are non-humans because they don’t hear? He (Isaiah) says: “When I came, there was no one, and when I called, no one answered?” , and this one (Jeremiah) says: “To whom shall I speak and whom shall I exhort... their ear is uncircumcised, and they cannot listen.” If the prophets say about those present that they are non-humans, because they did not diligently listen to the words (prophetic), then what can we say about those who not only do not listen, but also do not want to enter this sanctuary, about those who wander outside this sacred flock, are far from this maternal home, at crossroads and alleys, like disorderly and lazy children? And these, leaving their father’s house, wander around here and there, and spend whole days in children’s games. As a result, such children often lose both freedom and life, fall into the hands of kidnappers and thieves, and often, as a punishment for freedom, are subjected to death, because those, having taken them and removed (from them) gold jewelry, either drown them in the waves of the river, or, if they want to treat them a little more humanely, take them to a foreign land and deprive them of their freedom. The same thing happens to those who don’t come to church. And they, as soon as they stray from their father’s house and stay here, fall into the mouth of heretics and into the tongues of the enemies of the truth; and these, having seized them like kidnappers, and taken away from them the golden ornament of faith, they immediately kill them, not throwing them into the river, but plunging them into the muddy dogmas of evil. 2. It would be your job to take care of the salvation of these brothers and bring them to us, no matter how they resist, no matter how stubborn, no matter how they make excuses, no matter how upset they are. This persistence and negligence is characteristic of a child’s soul. But you correct their soul, which is still so imperfect. Your job is to force them to be human. Just as we cannot call someone who averts human food and eats thorns and grass with livestock a person, so we certainly cannot call someone a person who does not like true and proper human food, i.e. the words of God, but sits in worldly meetings and assemblies, where there is always an abyss of debauchery, and feeds on wicked speeches. Man, in our opinion, is not one who only eats bread, but who, primarily before this food, eats Divine and spiritual words. And (to be sure) that this is a man, listen to Christ, who says: “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4). Therefore, the food necessary for our life is twofold: one is worse, the other is better; and we must most of all accept this latter in order to nourish the soul and not let it suffer from hunger. You should make our city full of people. Since this great and populous city was depopulated, you should show this benefit to your homeland - attract the brothers (here), telling them what you heard here. In fact, we assure (others) that we have eaten a meal not when we only praise the meal, but when we can give something from the dishes that were there to those who did not eat it. Do this now, and then one of two things will certainly happen - either you will convince them to return to us, or, if they remain in their stubbornness, they will be saturated with your tongue, or rather, they will certainly return (here). They will not want to feed themselves on alms, when they can rightfully eat this fatherly meal. I firmly hope and believe that you are doing this, or have already done it, or will do it, because I myself have constantly instilled this, and you are enriched with knowledge and can instruct others. Now is the time to offer you our meal, of course, insignificant, meager and very poor, but with excellent seasoning - with your zeal for listening. What makes a meal most enjoyable is not the high cost of the food alone, but also the greed of those invited: thus, a magnificent meal is meager when guests come without hunger, and a poor one seems rich when the hungry sit down to it. Therefore, someone else, knowing that the high cost of a meal is judged not by the quality of the food, but by the disposition of the guests, says this: “A well-fed soul tramples on a honeycomb, but to a hungry soul all bitter things are sweet” (Prov. 27:7), not because the very quality of the dishes offered changes, but because the disposition of the guests takes away their taste. If the bitter, called by hunger, seems sweet, the more meager seems rich. That is why we, although extremely poor, imitate the rich founders of feasts, inviting you to our meal at every meeting. And we do this, not relying on our wealth, but being confident in the abundance of your attention. 3. We have paid you the entire debt regarding the inscription, i.e. inscriptions of the Acts of the Apostles. We should now take up the beginning of this book and say what it means: “The first book I wrote to you, Theophilus, about everything that Jesus did and taught from the beginning” (Acts 1:1). But Paul, who calls our tongue to himself and to his exploits, does not allow me to observe this order. I want to see him being led to Damascus, bound not by an iron chain, but by the voice of the Lord; I want to see how this great fish was caught, which brought the whole sea to a boil, raising thousands of waves on the Church; I want to see how she is caught, not by fish, but by the word of the Lord. Like a fisherman, sitting on a high stone and raising his fishing rod, lowers his fishing rod into the sea from above; So our Lord, who opened a spiritual trap, as if sitting on a high stone of heaven, lowered this voice from above, like a fishtail, and said: “Saul, Saul! Why are you persecuting Me? (Acts 9:4), and thus caught this great fish. And what happened to that fish that, at the command of the Lord, Peter caught, the same happened to this one. And in the mouth of this fish a statir was found - only an unclean statir, because (Paul) had zeal, “but not according to judgment” (Rom. 10:2). Therefore God, having given him (true) knowledge, made this coin real; and what happens to fish that are caught, so it happened to Paul. Like those, as soon as they are taken out of the sea, they go blind; so this one, as soon as he took the oud and was removed, he immediately became blind. But this blindness made the whole universe see. I want to see all this. After all, if a war befell us with foreigners, and the enemies, having taken up arms, greatly disturbed us; then the leader of the foreigners, plotting a thousand intrigues, throwing all our affairs into disorder, arousing confusion and excitement everywhere, threatening to destroy and burn the city itself, and take us into captivity - if he had suddenly been tied up by our king and brought captive to the city - we all, with our wives and children, would have run out to such a spectacle. And now, as the war opened, when the Jews were disturbing everything and bringing it into disorder, and were building many intrigues against the security of the Church, and the head of the enemies was Paul, who did and spoke more than anyone else, agitated and outraged everything; and now, as our Lord Jesus Christ our King bound him, he bound and brought captive the one who was bringing everything into disorder: will we not all come out to this spectacle to see how he is led captive? And the Angels, looking then from heaven as he was bound and led, rejoiced, not only because they saw him bound, but because they imagined how many people he would deliver from their bonds; not because they saw him led by the hand, but because they thought how many people he would lead from earth to Heaven. So they rejoiced, not because they saw him blind, but because they thought how many he would lead out of darkness. Go, the Lord told him, to the pagans and, having freed them from darkness, transfer them to the Kingdom of the love of Christ (Acts 26:17, 18). That is why I, leaving the beginning (of the book of the Acts of the Apostles), hasten to move on to the middle of it. Paul and the love for Paul made me take this leap. Yes, Paul and love for Paul! Forgive me, or better yet, don’t forgive me, but compete with me in this love. He who loves with impure love has reason to ask for forgiveness; but whoever loves a love (like me) must flaunt it, must make many accomplices of this disposition and in thousands (of people) arouse a love similar to his own. Moreover, if it were possible (for us), walking the straight path and stretching forward, to say in order what was written first in the book of the Acts of the Apostles, and to reach what is in the middle of it, we would not immediately move on to the middle, leaving the beginning; but, since the law of the fathers commands that after Pentecost this book be put aside, and with the end of this holiday the reading of the book stops, I was afraid that, while we would dwell on the explanation of the beginning (of the book), further history would escape our consideration. Therefore, I stepped back from the beginning of the story and, holding onto the introduction of the story, as if from behind my head, I told you to stop and stand at the beginning of the path. Having touched the head of the story, I will boldly consider everything else, even though the holiday will pass. No one will then accuse us of untimeliness, because the very necessity of consistency will save us from accusations of untimeliness. That's why I moved from the introduction to the middle. And that it was impossible to reach Paul by following the direct path, but that this book (the Acts of the Apostles) would rather have fled from our language and locked the doors in front of us, I will show you this from the very introduction, although this is already clear by itself. 4. In fact, if we spent half the holiday reading and explaining only one inscription (the book of the Acts of the Apostles), then when we decided, starting with the introduction, to launch the word into the very sea of ​​​​the book, how much time would it take to get to the legends about Paul? Better yet, I’ll try to figure this out for you from the introduction itself. “I wrote the first book for you, Theophilus” (Acts 1:1). How many questions do you think there are here? First: why (Evangelist Luke) reminds him (Theophilus) of his first book (the Gospel). Second: why does he call (this book) a word (λόγος), and not the Gospel, while Paul calls it the Gospel when he speaks of Luke like this: “a brother praised in all churches for the gospel” (2 Cor. 8:18). Third: why does he say: “about everything that Jesus did and taught.” If John, this beloved of Christ, who had such boldness, who was worthy to bow to that holy breast, who drew from there the sources of the Spirit, if he no longer dared to say this, but was so careful that he said: “Jesus did many other things; but if we were to write about this in detail, then, I think, the world itself could not contain the books written” (John 21:25), then how did this (Luke) dare to say: “The first book I wrote to you, Theophilus, about everything that Jesus did and taught from the beginning”? Does this question seem unimportant to you? Moreover, there (in the Gospel it is said): “venerable Theophilus” (Luke 1:3), a name with an honorific adjective. But the saints did not just say that, and we, it seems, have already partially proven that in Scripture not a single jot, not a single line is used in vain. So, if there are so many questions in the introduction, how much time would we waste when we started to look at everything in order? This is why I had to, having passed the interval (i.e. from the beginning of Chapter 1 of Acts of the Apostles to Chapter 9), go to Paul. Why did we, having proposed questions, not add their solutions? To teach you not only to accept chewed food, but also to invent a solution to your thoughts yourself, as doves do. And they feed their chicks, as long as they remain in the nest, from their mouths; when they manage to take them out of the nest and see that their wings have grown, they no longer do this, but bring grain in their mouths and show it (to the children), and, like chicks waiting (for food), they come close, the mothers, leaving the food on the ground, tell them to pick it up themselves. This is what we did: having taken spiritual food to our lips, we invited you, as if we wanted to present you, according to custom, with a solution; but when you came and hoped to receive, we left (you) to choose your own thoughts. So, leaving the introduction, we hasten to Paul. And let’s talk not only about how much benefit he brought to the Church, but also about how much harm, because we need to talk about this too. Let's say how he opposed the word of the sermon, how he fought with Christ, how he persecuted the apostles, how he nurtured hostile plans, how he disturbed the Church most of all. But no one should be ashamed to hear this about Paul: this does not serve to accuse him, but to praise him. It would be shameful for him not if he, having previously been evil, later became good, but if he, having previously been good, later went over to the side of evil: deeds are always judged by their end. And about the helmsmen, even if they suffered a thousand wrecks before they managed to arrive at the pier, we do not speak ill of them when they brought a ship filled with cargo, because the end covered the past. And the fighters, even if they have been defeated a thousand times before, if they win the fight for the crown, we, because of previous defeats, do not deprive them of the praise that follows such a victory. Let's do the same with Paul. And although he suffered countless shipwrecks, when he came to the pier, he brought a ship full of cargo. Just as it did not benefit Judas at all that he was formerly a disciple and then became a traitor, so it did no harm to this (Paul) that he was formerly a persecutor and then became an evangelist. This serves to praise Paul, not because he destroyed the Church, but because he created it again; not because he opposed the word (sermon), but because after he opposed the word, he himself again spread it; not because he persecuted the apostles, not because he scattered the flock (of Christ), but because, having scattered the flock, he himself later gathered it. 5. What could be more surprising than this? The wolf became a shepherd; the one who reveled in the blood of sheep began to shed his own blood for the salvation of the sheep! Do you want to know how he reveled in the blood of sheep, how bloody his tongue was? “And Saul was still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord” (Acts 9:1). But this one who breathes threat and murder, and sheds the blood of saints, listen to how he shed his blood for the saints. “According to human reasoning,” he says, “when I fought with the beasts in Ephesus” (1 Cor. 15:32), and again: “I die every day” (1 Cor. 15:31), and again: “they count us as sheep doomed to the slaughter” (Rom. 8:36). And this was said by the one who was present when Stephen’s blood was shed, and who approved of his murder (Acts 7:58, 8:1). Do you see how the wolf became a shepherd? So are you ashamed to hear that he (the Apostle Paul) was formerly a persecutor, a blasphemer and an offender (1 Tim. 1:13)? Do you see how his former guilt served to make him more glorified? Didn’t I tell you in the previous meeting that the miracles after the Cross were greater than the miracles before the Cross? Did he not prove to you both by miracles and by the goodness (εύνοιας) of the disciples, how before Christ raised the dead by command, and afterward the shadow of His servants did this? How then did He Himself perform miracles with His word, and then His servants performed great miracles in His name? Did I not tell you about the enemies (Jesus Christ), how He terrified their consciences, how He subjugated the whole universe to Himself? How were the miracles after the Cross greater than the miracles before the Cross? – The word today is similar to what it was then. Indeed, what miracle could be greater than the one that happened to Paul? Peter denied the living Jesus, and Paul confessed the dead. And to attract and conquer Pavlov’s soul - this miracle was more than resurrecting the dead with a shadow. There nature obeyed and did not contradict the commander; here it was necessary to conquer free will, which is powerful and not to submit: this means that the power of the One who conquered is great. Changing the will was much more important than correcting nature, therefore, the fact that Paul turned to Christ after the Cross and the tomb was a miracle, greater than all other miracles. This is why Christ allowed him to show all his hostility, and then called him to make the proof of the Resurrection and the word of (Christian) teaching undeniable. Peter, for example, might have been suspected when he spoke about Christ, because some of the shameless people might have said something (against him). I said “of the shameless ones,” because even there the evidence was clear. And he (Peter) first denied Christ and denied with an oath; but afterward he confessed the same (Christ) and gave up his life for Him. And if Christ had not been resurrected, then the one who renounced the living would not have endured thousands of deaths in order not to renounce the dead. That is why Peter presented clear proof of the Resurrection. However, the shameless could say that since he was a disciple (of Jesus Christ), had fellowship with Him at meals and spent three years with Him, because he used His teaching and, deceived by Him, fell into deception, then he preaches about His Resurrection. But when you see that Paul, who did not see Christ, did not listen to Him, did not use His teaching, fought against Him and, after the Cross, killed those who believed in Him, disturbed everything and brought it into disorder - (when you see that) he suddenly changed and by the labors of preaching surpassed all the friends of Christ, what, tell me, will you have an excuse for shamelessness, not believing the teaching of Resurrection? If Christ had not been resurrected, who would have attracted and brought to himself such a cruel and inhumane person, inflamed by enmity and enraged like a beast? Tell me, Jew, who made Paul turn to Christ? Peter? Jacob? John? But they all feared and trembled at him, and not only before his conversion, but also when he became one of Christ’s friends, when Barnabas, taking him by the hand, led him to Jerusalem, and then they were afraid to pester him; the war had already stopped, but fear was still on the apostles. So, those who were still afraid of him even when he changed, did they dare to convince him when he was an enemy and adversary? Could they even approach, or stand, or open their lips, and even appear? No way, no; it was not a matter of human effort, but of Divine grace. So, if Christ, as you say, was dead, and His disciples came and stole Him, then how greater were the miracles after the Cross? What is a stronger proof of power? Christ not only changed the enemy (His own) and the supreme leader of your war - although if only He had done this, then capturing the enemy and the enemy would have been a matter of the greatest power - but He did not only this, but much more than this: He not only changed (Paul), but also made him so close to Himself, so disposed to love Himself that He even entrusted to him all the affairs of the Church: “A vessel,” says the Lord, “to proclaim the name Mine before the nations and kings” (Acts 9:15), and forced him to work more than the (other) apostles for the Church against which he had previously fought. 6. Do you want to know how (Christ) changed him, how he made him close, how he attracted him to Himself, how He placed him among the first of His friends? He did not deign to reveal such secrets to any people as He did to Paul. Where can you see this? “I heard,” Paul says (about himself), “unspeakable words, which it is impossible for a man to utter” (2 Cor. 12:4). Do you see what love the enemy, the enemy, showed? Therefore, it is necessary to tell us about his previous life: this will show us both love for mankind and the power of God, love for mankind - because God wanted to save and draw to Himself the one who had done so much evil, and strength - because, having desired, He was able. This will also show us the soul of Paul, i.e., that he did nothing out of stubbornness or passion for human glory, like the Jews, but (he did everything) out of zeal, of course, not right, nevertheless out of zeal, for which he himself cried out like this: “for this reason he received mercy, because he did so out of ignorance, in unbelief” (1 Tim. 1:13). And, marveling at God’s love for mankind, he said: “For this reason I received mercy, so that Jesus Christ in me first might show all long-suffering, as an example to those who will believe in Him for eternal life” (1 Tim. 1:16). And in another place he again said that God “the greatness of His power” showed especially “in us who believe” (Eph. 1:19). Do you see how Paul’s previous life showed his love for mankind, the power of God, and the sincerity of Paul’s own disposition? He cited this in the Epistle to the Galatians as proof that he did not change for the sake of people, but it was the power of God that converted him. “If I were still pleasing men today,” he says, “I would not be a servant of Christ” (Gal. 1:10). How can it be seen that you did not accept the preaching (of Christ) out of pleasing people? “You have heard about my former way of life in Judaism, that I cruelly persecuted the Church of God and devastated it” (Gal. 1:13). But he would not have turned to faith if he wanted to please people. Why? He was revered by the Jews, enjoyed great peace and was especially respected; therefore, he would not have passed (from pleasing people) to the life of the apostles, covered with ignominy and filled with disasters. Thus, this sudden abandonment of honor from the Jews and the deceased life, and the transition to the life of the apostles, associated with a thousand deaths, is the strongest proof that Paul was not converted by any human calculation. Therefore, we wanted to present his former life and show how he burned with zeal against the Church, so that when you see his great care for the Church, you would revere God, who creates and transforms everything. Therefore, Paul’s disciple (Evangelist Luke) accurately and very expressively told us about his previous deeds in the following words: “Saul, while still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord.” I would like to start today and the introduction (to the biography of Paul), I would like to start the beginning of the story (about Paul), but I see a sea of ​​​​thoughts in one name. Think, in fact, what question this name Saul immediately raises for us. In the epistles, I see, another name is used: “Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called an Apostle” (Rom. 1:1); “Paul, called by the will of God to be an apostle of Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 1:1); “Behold, I, Paul, speak to you” (Gal.5:2). Both here and everywhere he is called Paul, not Saul. Why was he first called Saul, and then called Paul? This is not an empty question: now Peter appears, and he was formerly called Simon, and then called Cephas; and the sons of Zebedee, James and John, are renamed “sons of thunder” (Mark 3:16, 17). And not only in the New, but also in the Old Testament we find that Abraham was first called Abram, and then Abraham; Jacob was first called Jacob, and after Israel, and Sarah was first called Sarah, and then Sarah. In a word, the change of names encourages us to greater research, and I am afraid that, having released many streams of rivers, I will not drown the word of teaching. Just as in wet soil, wherever you dig, springs run out everywhere, so in the land of Divine Scripture, wherever you dig, many rivers will flow out everywhere, which is why it is very scary to let all these rivers suddenly flow today. Therefore, having blocked our stream, I will send your love to the sacred source of these primates and teachers - to this pure, intoxicating and sweet source that comes out of the spiritual stone itself. Let us prepare our minds to accept the teaching, to water ourselves with spiritual streams, so that a source of water may be opened in us, flowing into eternal life, which may we all receive by the grace and love of our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom and with whom be glory, honor and power to the Father, with the Holy and Life-giving Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages of ages. Amen. Conversation II. To those who grumbled about the length of the teachings and to those who were dissatisfied with their brevity; about the name of Saul and Paul, and about why the first man was called Adam - that it was useful and beneficial - and to the newly enlightened. Some like long edifications, others short ones; How to satisfy such different tastes? “The preacher declares himself the slave of his hearers, and he is more famous for his slavery than the emperor for his purple.” – Changes of names in the Holy Scriptures have an importance and meaning that cannot be neglected. – The Apostle Paul was also called Saul even after his conversion. – For the first time, the name Paul appears in the book of Acts in the story of the conversion of the proconsul Sergius Paulus. – Regarding the change of names, two questions arise: firstly, why did God rename some saints, and not all? Secondly, why among those whom He honored with names, He named some throughout their lives, and others before their birth? – God named the first man Adam, which means “virgin land”; this “virgin land” from which Adam emerged was a type of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of the Second Adam. – The name of earthly Adam constantly exhorted the first man to be humble and protected against the proud thought that he was equal to God. – The first who, after Adam, received a name from God is Isaac; and this name means laughter. – Being the son of grace, Isaac is a type of Christians. 1. What should we do today? Seeing how many of you there are, I am afraid to spread the word, because when the teaching continues longer, I see you crowd, crowd, and the discomfort of crowding prevents you from listening attentively, since the listener, lacking space, cannot diligently listen to what is said. So, seeing that there are many of you, I, as I said, am afraid to spread the word. But, on the other hand, looking at your zeal, I am afraid to shorten the teaching, because the thirsty one, if he does not see in advance that the cup is full, will not willingly bring it to his lips; Although he won’t drink it all, he still wants to see it full. Therefore, I don’t know what to do in a (real) conversation. I would like to make your work easier with the brevity of the word, and to satisfy your zeal with its vastness. But I have often done both, and have never escaped censure. I know that often, sparing you, I stopped speaking before the end, and those who had an insatiable soul, constantly enjoying the Divine streams and never being satisfied, those blessed ones who hungered and thirsted for righteousness (Matthew 5:6), raised a murmur against me - and I, fearing their murmur, again moved on, continued the word, and for this I suffered reproaches, because those who like short teachings, meeting (with me), they asked to spare their weakness and shorten their words. So, when I see that you are cramped, I hasten to finish the word; but when I notice that, despite the cramped conditions, you do not retreat, but are determined to move on, I want to give freedom to my tongue. “I am pressed on every side” (Dan. 13:22). What should I do? He who serves one master and is obliged to obey one will can easily please the master and not sin. But I have many masters, and I am obliged to serve such a multitude, with such varied demands. However, I did not say this because I was burdened by such slavery - let it not be! - and not because he wanted to free himself from your dominance. For me there is nothing more honorable than this slavery: it is not so much the king who admires the diadem and purple, as I now flaunt the service of your love. After that kingdom comes death, and for this service, if it is completed well, the Kingdom of Heaven is prepared. “Blessed...is the faithful and prudent servant, whom the master has appointed over his servants, to distribute to them in due season a measure of bread...Truly I say to you, that he will appoint him over all his possessions” (Matthew 24:45–47; Luke 12:42–44). Do you see what the fruit of this service will be if it is done diligently? It places (the slave) over all the master's property. So, I am not running away from ministry, because I am serving with Paul. And he says: “We do not preach ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and we are your servants for Jesus” (2 Cor. 4:5). And what can we say about Pavel? If “he made himself of no reputation, taking the form of a servant” for the sake of slaves (Phil. 2:7), then what is the importance if I, a servant, became a slave to my fellow servants for my own sake? So, I said this not because I wanted to free myself from your domination, but because I want to receive forgiveness (from you) if I offer a meal that is not pleasing to everyone. Better yet, do what I tell you now. You, who can never be satisfied, but hunger and thirst for righteousness, and demand long words, be lenient when, for the sake of the weakness of your brethren, the usual measure of teaching is shortened. And you, who love short words and are weak, endure, for the sake of your insatiable brethren, a little labor, bearing “one another’s burdens, and in this way fulfill the law of Christ” (Gal. 6:2). Don’t you see how the wrestlers at the Olympic Games, at midday, stand in the middle of the theater in the arena, as if in a furnace, and, like some copper statues, receive the sun’s rays with their naked bodies, and fight in the sun, in the heat and in the dust, to crown their heads, which have endured so much, with laurel leaves? And for you, as a reward for listening, there is not a laurel wreath, but a crown of righteousness; and we do not keep you until noon, but, having compassion for your weakness, we release you at the very beginning of the day, when the air is still cool and not heated by the falling (sun) rays - we do not force you to receive these rays on your naked head, but we bring you under this beautiful vault and under the roof we provide you with coolness, taking every care of your comfort so that you can listen for a long time. Let us not be weaker than our children who go to school. They do not dare return home before noon; having just weaned milk, having just been weaned, not yet reaching the age of five, with a young and tender body, they show perfect patience; Even though they are bothered by fever or thirst, or something else, they endure and endure it until noon, sitting at school. So, if not someone else, then we, men who have reached full age, will imitate these children. If we do not have the patience to listen to words about virtue, then who will believe us that we will raise the very works of virtue? If we are so disinclined to listen, how will it be seen that we will be zealous for the cause? If we give up the easiest, how will we endure the most difficult? However, the crowding is great, the crush is great! But listen: those who force themselves “take away” the Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 11:12), and “strait is the gate and narrow is the way that leads to life” (Matthew 7:14). So, when we walk a narrow and cramped path, we ourselves need to constrain and force ourselves so that we can walk the narrow and cramped path. He who expands will not pass through a narrow path as easily as he who compresses himself, bores and constrains. 2. And our question today is not about unimportant things, but about research that was just begun yesterday, but not completed, on many subjects presented. What is this? We began to talk about changing the names that God gave to the Saints. This subject seems unimportant at first, but if you look carefully, it contains a great treasure. After all, even gold-bearing soil in mines is considered by inexperienced people and those who look at it without attention only as ordinary land, containing nothing more, like any other land, but those who examine it with an experienced eye understand the dignity of this land and, throwing it into the fire, discover all its superiority. So it is in relation to the Divine Scripture: those who read the words without attention think that these are simple words and there is nothing special in them, but those who examine them with the eyes of faith - testing them with the fire of the Spirit, as they do with the tools of art - will easily see everything, the gold contained in them. Where did that research begin? It was not without reason that we embarked on this consideration, so that someone would not reproach us for inconsistency; no, we wanted to talk about the deeds of Paul, on the occasion of the reading of the Acts of the Apostles, and touched on the beginning of this story. And the beginning of the story was found like this: “Saul was still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord” (Acts 9:1). You were immediately struck by the change of name, because in all the epistles and in their introductions we find that he is called not Saul, but Paul; and this (change of names) was not with him alone, but with many others. And Peter was formerly called Simon, and the sons of Zebedee, James and John, were renamed after “the sons of thunder,” and in the Old Testament, it is known, the same happened with some. Thus Abraham, who was formerly called Abram, was afterwards called Abraham, and Sarah was formerly called Sarai, and afterward was called Sarah, and Jacob was afterwards given the name Israel. So, it seemed indecent to me to pass such a treasure of names without attention. The same thing happens with secular leaders; and they use double names. Look, for example: “in place,” it says, “Felix... Porcius Festus" (Acts 24:27); and again: “with the proconsul Sergius Paulus” (Acts 13:7); and the one who betrayed Christ to the Jews was called Pontius Pilate. And not only commanders, but also warriors often have double names; and even private people, for some reasons and circumstances, have double names. But as for them, there is no benefit to us in trying to find out why they are so named; and when God gives the name, then one must show all zeal to find the reason. God, as a rule, neither says nor does anything without reason and without intention, but everything (both says and does) with His characteristic wisdom. So, why was (Paul) called Saul when he persecuted (the Church) and renamed Paul when he believed? Some say that as long as he disturbed, shook and brought everything into disorder, and disturbed the Church, until then he was called Saul, having a name for his work - for the very thing that disturbed (σαλεύειν) the Church, and as he left these furies, stopped disturbing, stopped fighting, ended the persecution, then he was renamed Paul because he stopped ( άπό του παύσασθαι ). But such an explanation is unfounded and unfair, and I put it forward only so that you do not get carried away by empty interpretations. Firstly, this name (Saul) was given to him by his parents, who were not prophets and did not foresee the future. Then, if he was called Saul because he worried and outraged the Church, then he should have given up his name immediately after he stopped disturbing the Church; but now we see that he stopped disturbing the Church, and did not leave his name, but was still called Saul. And so that you don’t think that I’m saying this to deceive you, I’ll tell you about it first. “They brought Stephen out,” it says, “and began to stone him. The witnesses laid their clothes at the feet of the young man named Saul" (Acts 7:58), and again: "Saul approved of his murder" (Acts 8:1), and in another place: "Saul tormented the Church, entering houses and dragging off men and women" (Acts 8:3), and again: "Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord" (Acts 9:1), and again: “he heard a voice saying to him: Saul, Saul! Why are you persecuting Me? (Acts 9:4). So, by now he should have given up his name, because he stopped driving. Well, did he fold it right away? No way; and this is clear from what follows - look: “Saul arose from the ground, and with his eyes open he saw no one” (Acts 9:8), and again: “The Lord said to him (Ananias): get up and go to the street, the so-called Straight, and ask in the house of Judah a Tarsian named Saul” (Acts 9:11), and again: Ananias entered and said: “brother Saul! The Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the way you were walking, sent me so that you could receive your sight” (Acts 9:17). Then he began to preach “and confused the Jews” (Acts 9:22); however, even at this time he did not give up his name, but was still called Saul: “Saul knew,” says Scripture, “about this plan” (of the Jews) (Acts 9:24). And is it only here (that’s what it’s called)? No; but there was, they say, a famine and “then the disciples decided, each according to his means, to send relief to the brothers living in Judea, which they did, sending what they had collected to the elders through Barnabas and Saul” (Acts 11:29, 30). Now he serves the saints, and is also called Saul. And after this, Barnabas came to Antioch and, “seeing” the “grace of God” there and the multitude of believers who were there, “then Barnabas went to Tarsus to look for Saul” (Acts 11:23, 25). So he converts many, and is called Saul. And again: “In Antioch, in the church there there were certain prophets and teachers: Barnabas, and Simeon, who is called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manael, a fellow pupil of Herod the tetrarch, and Saul” (Acts 13:1). So he became both a teacher and a prophet, and was also called Saul. And again: “As they served the Lord and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, “Set apart for Me Barnabas and Saul” (Acts 13:2). 3. So he is separated by the Spirit, but has not yet formed a name! Only when he came to Salamis, when he found the sorcerer, then Luke says about him: “Saul, who is also Paul, was filled with the Holy Spirit” (Acts 13:9). This is where the renaming began. Let's not get bored with this study about names. After all, in everyday affairs, finding names is very important: it often renews acquaintances after a long time, reveals forgotten kinships, resolves legal disputes, stops quarrels, extinguishes wars and is the cause of reconciliation. If the discovery of names means so much in everyday affairs, even more so in spiritual ones. However, first of all, it is necessary to accurately differentiate the issues themselves. So, the question is, firstly, why did God give names to some of the saints, but not others? Indeed, both in the New and Old Testaments, he himself did not give names to all the saints. And what was in the New Testament is the same in the Old - so that you know that there is one Lord of both Testaments. Thus, in the New Testament, Christ called Simon Peter and the sons of Zebedee, James and John, “sons of thunder,” and only them, and none of the other disciples, but left them with the same names that their parents first gave them. And in the Old Testament, God renamed Abraham and Jacob, but did not rename Joseph, Samuel, David, Elijah, Elisha, or other prophets, but left them with the same names. So, the first question is why some of the saints were renamed and others were not? The second after him is the one for which of these (renamed) some received a name in adulthood, and others at first, and even before their birth? Christ renamed Peter, James and John in their adulthood, and gave the name to John the Baptist even before his birth: the Angel of the Lord came and said: “Do not be afraid, Zechariah... your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you will call his name John” (Luke 1:13). Do you see the name (given) before birth? This was also in the Old Testament. Just as in the New - Peter, James and John were renamed and began to be called by a double name in adulthood, and John the Baptist received the name before conception and birth, so in the Old - Abraham and Jacob were renamed in adulthood - because one was first called Abram, and then called Abraham, and the other was first called Jacob, then called Israel. But Isaac is no longer like that, he receives a name before he is born; and just as there the Angel said: “Your wife... will conceive and bear... a son, and you will call his name John,” so here God said to Abraham: “Sarah your wife will bear you a son, and you will call his name Isaac” (Gen. 17:19). So, the first question is: why are some renamed and others not? The second follows: why are some in adulthood, and others even before birth - and this is in both Testaments? We will turn first to the second, because in this way the first will be clearer; Let's look at those who received names first, and ascending little by little, we will reach the first person who received a name from God, so that the issues will be resolved from the very beginning. So, who was the first person God gave a name to? Who else but the one who was first created, because (before him) there was no other person to whom a name could be given? What did he call it? In Hebrew, Adam. This name is not Greek, and when translated into Greek it means nothing more than earthly. Eden means virgin land, and this was the country in which God planted Paradise. “The Lord God planted,” says the Scripture, “a paradise in Eden in the east” (Gen. 2:8), so that you would know that Paradise was not the work of human hands; the earth was virgin, did not accept the plow, was not furrowed, but, untouched by the hands of farmers, according to one command (of God) it grew those trees. That is why (God) called it Eden, which means “virgin land.” This maiden was the image of another maiden. Just as this earth brought forth Paradise for us, without receiving any seeds, so that (Virgin), without receiving the seed of a man, brought forth Christ for us. So, if a Jew asks you: how did the Virgin give birth? Tell him: how did the virgin land grow those wonderful trees, because Eden in Hebrew means “virgin land”? And if anyone does not believe, let him ask those who know the Hebrew language, and see that this is precisely the meaning of the name Eden. Although I am speaking to those who do not know (the Hebrew language), I therefore do not want to deceive you, but, trying to make you invincible, I explain everything to you with precision, as if there were opponents here who knew it. So, since man was created from the virgin soil of Eden, he was named Adam after his mother. This is what people often do, calling newborn children by the name of their mothers; So God called man created from the earth, by the name of his mother, Adam: she is Eden; he is Adam. 4. But what is the benefit of this? People call (children) by the name of their mothers in honor of the wives who gave birth: Why did God call (a person) by the name of their mother? What, great or small, did He want to make of this? Exactly, He does nothing without reason and without intention, but (does everything) with great intelligence and wisdom, “and His understanding is immeasurable” (Ps. 147:5). Eden means earth; Adam is earthly, earthy, born from the earth. Why did God call him that? With this name He wanted to remind him of the insignificance of his nature, and on the name, as if on a copper pillar, to display the baseness of his origin, so that the name would teach him humility, so that he would not think too much about his dignity. We, already from experience itself, clearly know that we are the earth; and he did not see anyone die before him and turn to dust, but his body was beautiful and shone like a golden statue that had just been taken out of a furnace. So, so that the beauty of the appearance would not overwhelm him with pride, (God) contrasted it with a name that could give a sufficient lesson in humility, because the devil was already ready to come (to Adam) and instill pride in him, he was ready to tell him: “You will be like gods” (Gen. 3:5). So, so that he, remembering his name, which taught him that he was earth, never dreamed of equality with God, (God) warns his conscience through the name, giving him in advance, in the name itself, a sufficient warning against the slander that threatened him from the evil demon, at the same time reminding him of his kinship with the earth, and showing all the nobility of nature, as if saying: if anyone tells you that you will be like God, remember (your) name - and you will receive a sufficient lesson not to accept such a suggestion; remember your (your) mother - and from this kinship learn (your) insignificance, not in order to learn humiliation, but so that you never fall into pride. That’s why Paul says: “The first man (Adam) is from the earth, earthy” (1 Cor. 15:47). He wanted to explain to us what the name Adam means, that’s why he said: “from the earth, earthy; the second person is the Lord from heaven." Here heretics attack us and say: behold, Christ did not take on flesh, because (the apostle) says: “The second man is the Lord from heaven.” Do you hear: “second man,” and say that you did not take on flesh? What can compare with this shamelessness? Indeed, what kind of person does not have flesh? (The Apostle) called Him (Christ) man, and second man, so that both from number and from nature you would see His affinity (with us). Who, you say, is this “second man - the Lord from heaven.” But, you say, I am tempted by the place that is spoken of - “from heaven”. When you hear that the “first man” Adam is “from the earth, earthy,” do you really consider him earthly and think that he is only earthy and does not have (in himself) an incorporeal force, that is, the soul and its nature? Who can say that? Therefore, just as when you hear about Adam that he was earthy, you do not think that he was a body without a soul, so when you hear: “The Lord is from heaven,” do not reject the incarnation because of the addition: “from heaven.” Thus, the first name is sufficiently justified: Adam was named after his mother so that he would not think about himself beyond his strength, so that he would be protected from seduction by the devil, who precisely said: “you will be like gods.” Now let’s move on to another person, who received a name from God even before birth, and let’s stop the word. Who after Adam received a name from God even before his birth? Isaac. “God said [to Abraham]... Sarah your wife will bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac” (Gen. 17:19). And Sarah, when she gave birth to him, gave him the name Isaac, saying: “God made me laugh” (Gen. 21:6). Why? “Who would say to Abraham: Sarah will suckle the children?” (Gen.21:7). Now listen to me with attention so that you may see a miracle. Sarah did not say that she had given birth to a child, but that she was “breastfeeding.” So that no one would consider the baby abandoned, the sources of milk certified the legality of his birth; so that he himself, remembering his name, (subsequently) found (in it) sufficient understanding of his miraculous birth. That’s why she said: “God made me laugh,” because everyone saw how a woman, who had grown old and lived to a very old age, had a baby. Laughter reminded of the mercy of God, and feeding on milk testified to a miraculous birth, because this was not a work of nature, but entirely an action of grace. That is why Paul says: “children of promise according to Isaac” (Gal.4:28). Just as grace did everything there, so here he came from a womb that had already grown cold. You came out of cold water: it means that for him there was a womb, then for you there is a font of water. So, do you see the similarity of birth? Do you see the unity of grace? Do you see how nature is inactive everywhere, and everything is accomplished by the power of God? That is why we are “children of promise according to Isaac.” But there is one more question: it is said about us that we are “neither of blood nor of the will of the flesh” (John 1:13). How is this possible? And Isaac “is not of blood,” because “the custom among women has ceased with Sarah” (Gen. 18:11). The sources of blood dried up, the seed of birth was exhausted, the activity of nature was fruitless: and God revealed His power. So we have finished explaining the name of Isaac. It remains to go to Abraham, the sons of Zebedee and Peter; but, in order not to bore you with the length, we will postpone this until another conversation and finish the word by asking you, born in (the image of) Isaac, to imitate the meekness, modesty and every other virtue of Isaac, so that, through the prayers of this righteous man and all these leaders, we may all enter into the bosom of Abraham by the grace and love of mankind of our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom and with whom be glory, honor and power To the Father, with the Holy and Life-giving Spirit, now and ever, and unto ages of ages. Amen. Conversation III. To those who reproached for the extensiveness of the introductions, and that it is useful to endure reproaches; also, why Paul was not renamed immediately as soon as he believed - that this change happened to him, not under compulsion, but according to his free will; and to the words: “Saul, Saul! Why are you persecuting Me? (Acts 9:4). St. John Chrysostom was reproached for making too many introductions. - This reproach here becomes the reason for an even longer introduction, in which the preacher develops such thoughts that wounds inflicted by friends are less dangerous than kisses imprinted by enemies; that admonitions are as beneficial to those who receive them as to those who make them, and that it is good to know how to receive them. - An explanation of Moses' opening speech, in which he, on the advice of his father-in-law Jethro, expressed the need to elect wise and enlightened people to help him govern the people of Israel. – The preacher gives several reasons to explain the length of his introductions. – Generalization of the previous instruction. – Why was the name of the Apostle Paul changed? - Why wasn’t this done immediately after his appeal? – Explanation of the words: “Saul, Saul! Why are you persecuting Me? to the words “I am Jesus, whom you persecute.” Reasoning that the conversion of the Apostle Paul was completely free. 1. Some of our kind (listeners) began to reproach us for the fact that we spread the introductions of our teachings too much; whether they began to reproach justly or unjustly, you will know this when you listen to our justification, and then pronounce judgment as if in a public tribunal. I, for my part, without yet going into the explanation of this matter, bring them gratitude for the reproaches, because these reproaches come from a good, and not from an evil, disposition; and I can say about myself that I love the one who loves me not only when he praises me, but also when he reproaches me and corrects me. To praise indiscriminately everything, good and bad, is not characteristic of a friend, but of a flatterer and a scoffer; on the contrary, to praise for a good deed and reproach for a misdeed is the duty of a friend and well-wisher. And so that you can be convinced that indiscriminately praising everything and glorifying for everything is not characteristic of a friend, but of a deceiver, (this is what) God says: “Your leaders lead you astray and corrupt the way of your paths” (Is. 3:12). So, I don’t love the enemy even when he praises (me); I love a friend, and when he reproaches. Even though he kisses me, he is disgusting; this one, although it hurts me, is kind: the kiss is suspicious, the wound from this is a sign of concern (for me). Therefore, someone says: “The reproaches of one who loves are sincere, and the kisses of one who hates deceitful” (Proverbs 27:6). What are you saying? Are wounds better than kisses? Yes, he says, because I look not at the quality of what is being done, but at the disposition of those doing it. Do you want to know how it is “sincere reproaches from a lover, and deceitful kisses from a hater”? – Judas kissed the Lord (Matthew 26:49), but his kiss was imbued with betrayal, poison was hidden in his lips, his tongue was full of deceit. Paul wounded the Corinthian libertine, but for that he saved him. How would you say it hurt? Having handed him over to Satan: “to hand him over,” he says, “to Satan for the destruction of the flesh.” - For what? “That the spirit may be saved in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 5:5). Have you seen the life-saving wounds? Did you see the treacherous kiss? This is how “sincere reproaches from a lover are sincere, and deceitful kisses from a hater.” We will see this not only in people, but also in God and the devil. This one is a friend, and this one is an enemy; This one is the Savior and Provider, and this one is a seducer and evil-wisher. But this one kissed once, and that one wounded. How did this one kiss and that one hurt? One said: “You will be like gods” (Gen. 3:5), and Another: “You are dust and to dust you will return” (Gen. 3:19). Who brought more benefit, the one who said: “You will be like gods,” or the One who said: “You are dust and to dust you will return.” One threatened death, the other promised immortality; but he who promised immortality drove him out of Paradise, and he who threatened death brought him to Heaven. You see how “sincere are the reproaches of a lover, and the deceitful kisses of a hater.” Therefore, without going into explanation, I thank those who reproach. Whether they reproach correctly or incorrectly, they do it not to shame, but to correct; on the contrary, even if enemies rightly reproach, they reproach not in order to correct, but in order to dishonor. The former, therefore, with praise want to make (the person being praised) more perfect, and the latter, even if they praise, try to make him fall through it. However, no matter how the reproach occurs, it is a great good to have the strength to endure reproaches and reproofs, and not be irritated. “Whoever hates reproof is ignorant” (Proverbs 12:1). It does not say: this or that kind of reproof, but simply: “reproof.” Indeed, if a friend has accused you justly, correct the sin; if he reproaches without reason, then praise him for his intention, approve of his goal, thank him for his friendship: this reproach comes from strong friendship. Let us not be upset when we are rebuked. A lot of good for our lives will come from the fact that we all reprove those who sin, and ourselves easily endure the reproof of sins. What medicine is for wounds, so is reproof for sins. This means that just as he who rejects medicine is unreasonable, so he who does not accept reproof is foolish. But many often get irritated, thinking to themselves and saying: “Should I, being smart and educated, tolerate such and such?” What they don’t know is that this proves their extreme stupidity. “Have you seen,” says Solomon, “a man wise in his own eyes? There is more hope in a fool than in him” (Proverbs 26:12). That is why Paul says: “Do not be arrogant” (Rom. 12:16). No matter how smart you are, no matter how insightful you are in goodness, you are a human being and need an adviser. God alone needs nothing; He alone has no need for an adviser. Why is it said about Him alone: ​​“Who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who was His adviser?” (Rom.11:34)? And we humans, no matter how smart we are, are reproached a thousand times, and this exposes the weakness of our nature. “It is not possible,” it is said, “to be everything in a person.” - Why? “Because the son of man is not immortal” (Sir. 17:28, 29). What's brighter than the sun? However, it is also eclipsed. Just as this (solar) clear light, this brilliant ray is covered by the coming darkness, so often our mind, shining, shining as if at noon, finds stupidity and darkens it; and so, the smart one does not see the matter, and he who is stupider than him sees the matter better than him. And this happens so that the smart person does not become proud, and the simple person does not consider himself unhappy. It is a great good to be able to bear reproof; it is a great good to be able to reprove - this (the latter) is a sign of the greatest care (for one’s neighbor). But here we are, if we see that someone’s tunic has fallen off his shoulders, or that other clothes are lying poorly, we notice this to him and correct him; and if we see that his life is corrupt, we will not utter a word. If we see that he leads a shameful life, then we pass by; meanwhile, the poor state of clothing is only ridiculous, and the (sinful state of) the soul is dangerous and disastrous. Do you see, tell me, that your brother is striving for the abyss, lives carelessly, does not look at what he should, and does not offer his hand, does not raise the fallen, does not reproach and denounce, but you think that it is better not to upset or bother him than to take care of his salvation? What kind of condescension and forgiveness will you receive from God? Haven't you heard that God (commanded) the Jews not to leave draft animals unattended, even enemies, when they wander, and not to pass by them when they fell (Ex. 23: 4, 5; Deut. 22: 1). So, the Jews are commanded not to leave enemy animals without care, but we do not take care of the souls of our brothers who fall every day? How, then, isn’t it extreme cruelty and bestiality not to show such care for people as they (the Jews) did for the dumb? This is what brought everything into disarray, this is what ruined our lives, that we ourselves do not generously endure reproof, and we do not want to reprove others. That is why we are difficult (for others) with our reproofs, because we ourselves get irritated when we are rebuked. If your brother knew that, having denounced you, he was praised by you, then he himself would repay (you) the same when you began to denounce him. 2. Do you want to know that, even though you are very smart, very perfect and have ascended to the very heights of virtue, you still need an adviser, a corrector and a accuser? Listen to ancient history. There was nothing equal to Moses: he was, it is said, “the meekest of all people on earth” (Num. 12:3), a friend of God, enriched with worldly wisdom and filled with spiritual knowledge. “And Moses was taught,” it is said, “in all the wisdom of Egypt” (Acts 7:22). Do you see that his education was perfect? And Moses was strong in speech and other virtues. But listen to other evidence. It is said that God talked with many prophets, but with none did he talk like this: with others - through fortune telling and dreams, and with Moses - “face to face” (Deut. 34:10). What other testimony do you need about his (Moses’) virtue, more important than this, when the Lord of all talks with a slave as with a friend (Ex. 33:11)? So, Moses was wise both in external and internal education, was strong in word and deed, commanded nature itself, because he was a friend of the Lord of nature, brought such a great people out of Egypt, divided the sea and united it again - in a word, a new miracle appeared (through Moses): for the first time then the sun saw how they did not swim across the sea, but crossed, how they crossed the depths of the sea not on oars and ships, but on horses. And, however, this wise, strong in word and deed, friend of God, who commanded nature, who performed so many miracles, did not understand the matter, which was very clear to most people, and his father-in-law, an uneducated and simple man, understood this matter and showed it, but Moses himself did not reach it. What's the matter? Listen - and you will learn that everyone, be he equal to Moses, needs an adviser, and that things that are hidden from great and important people are often not hidden from small and simple ones. When Moses came out of Egypt and was in the wilderness, “and the people stood before Moses” (Ex. 18:13–16), six hundred thousand, and he resolved the complaints of everyone who had a quarrel with each other. Seeing that he was doing this, his father-in-law Jethro, an uneducated man who lived in the desert, who knew neither the laws nor the rules of community life, on the contrary, lived in wickedness (and what could be, more than this, a strong proof of ignorance - after all, there is nothing crazier than the pagans?), However, this foreigner, the wicked, the ignorant, seeing that Moses was doing wrong, corrected him - the wise and prudent, and the friend of God. He said: “What are you doing to the people? Why do you sit alone, while all the people stand before you from morning to evening?” (Exodus 18:14), and having learned the reason, he says to Moses: “You are not doing this well” (Exodus 18:17). The advice was reproachful, and yet Moses was not irritated; no, this wise, prudent and friend of God, who ruled over so many thousands, patiently endured. After all, it is also important that he was taught by an uneducated and simple person. And neither the miracles he performed nor the great power made him proud; and he was not ashamed of being corrected in front of his subordinates. No, thinking that, although he had performed great signs, he still had a human nature, from which much is often hidden, he modestly accepted the advice. And many, in order not to show that they need advice, often rather decide to lose the benefits expected from advice than to accept admonition and correct sins; they would rather remain in ignorance than learn: they do not argue that it is not learning, but ignorance, that is shameful, that it is humiliating not to learn, but to remain in ignorance, not to be exposed to reproof, but to sin without correction. After all, maybe, just maybe, a small and simple person can be found in another matter, in which the smart and great are often not found. Knowing this, Moses listened with all modesty to his father-in-law when he advised and said: “You, therefore, look for [yourself] from among all the people capable people, those who fear God, truthful people who hate self-interest, and appoint [them] over him as commanders of thousands, commanders of hundreds, commanders of fifties and commanders of tens [and clerks]; let them judge the people at all times and report to you about every important matter, and judge all small matters themselves: and it will be easier for you” (Ex. 18:21, 22). Hearing this, Moses was not ashamed, did not blush, did not convict his subordinates, did not say to himself: “My subordinates will despise me if I, the boss, learn from another what I should do”; on the contrary, he obeyed and carried out the order. And he was not ashamed not only of his contemporaries, but also of us, descendants; on the contrary, as if flaunting the admonition given to him from his father-in-law, not only the people of that time, but also those who lived after him until now, and those who will live throughout the entire universe until the coming of Christ, he taught through Scripture that which he himself could not discern what he should do, and that he accepted advice from his father-in-law. And we, if we see that there is an outsider while we are being rebuked and corrected, we become confused, lose our temper, and think that we are already lost. Not so Moses, no: seeing before him so many thousands of contemporaries, or better yet, so many thousands who lived throughout the entire earth after him until now, he was not ashamed, but every day he proclaims to everyone through the Scriptures that what he himself did not see, his father-in-law saw. Why did he do this and commit this incident to memory? To instill in us to never think highly of ourselves, even if we were smarter than everyone else, and not to disdain the advice of others, even if they were the worst of everyone. So, if anyone, even a servant, advises something good, accept the advice; but if there is anything harmful, even if he is a person of the highest rank, reject the suggestion, because everywhere one must look not at the quality of the persons advising, but at the very quality of the advice. Moses did the same, and by this he teaches us not to be ashamed of reproof, even if it were the whole people. This is the most important difference, this is the great honor, this is the glory of the highest wisdom - to generously endure reproof. Now we do not praise and glorify Jethro so much for admonishing Moses as we marvel at this saint because he was not ashamed of admonishing him in front of so many witnesses, and commemorated this event, showing his wisdom in all this, and completely disregarded the opinion of the crowd. 3. But, wanting to justify ourselves in the vastness of the introductions, we again made a large introduction, however, not without reason and not without intention, but because we discussed with you about the most important and necessary subjects - about how we should generously endure reproof, in order to zealously reprove and correct those who sin. We must finally present a justification for the extensiveness (of the introductions) and say why we make long introductions. Why are we doing this? We talk with so many (listeners) - with people who have wives, who manage houses, who spend their lives in daily work, in worldly affairs. And the bad thing is not only that they are constantly busy, but also that they come here to us only once a week. So, in order for our words to be understandable to them, we try to make our teaching clearer through introductions. He who has nothing to do, but is constantly engaged in the Scriptures, does not need introductions, does not need preparation; no, as soon as he hears the speaker, he understands the meaning of the speech. But a person who spends most of his time in worldly affairs, and comes here for a short and short time, if he does not listen to the introduction, if he does not see that the path to the word is open to him from all sides, will leave here without any benefit. However, this is not the only reason for the extensiveness of our introductions; There is another, no less important reason. Of this multitude of listeners, some come and others often do not. So, it is necessary to praise those who came, and scold those who did not come, so that those who have come will become even more diligent, and those who have come because of reproaches will give up laziness. There is another reason why intros are important to you. We often take up a rather extensive subject for conversation, one that cannot be completed in one day; on the contrary, we sometimes need a second, third, and fourth day to explain the same subject. Therefore, it is necessary on this second day to repeat the end of the previous teaching, so that through such a connection of the end with the beginning, the study will be made clearer for those present, and so that the word, deprived of connection with the previous one, will not be dark for the listeners. And to make sure that no one will understand the word without an introduction, here I am, for the sake of experience, now presenting the word without an introduction. “Jesus looked at him and said, “You are Simon, the son of Jonah; you will be called Cephas, which means: stone (Peter)” (John 1:42). See, do you understand this saying? Do you know the connection and reason why it is said? This is because I proposed this saying without an introduction, and acted in the same way as if someone brought a person to a spectacle, closed on all sides. Let us open it by giving it an introduction. Recently we had a word here about Paul, when we talked about names, and explored why he was once called Saul, and then called Paul. From here we moved on to ancient history, and reviewed all those who had nicknames. Then they immediately remembered Simon and Christ’s words spoken to him: “You are Simon, son of Jonah; you will be called Cephas, which means: stone (Peter)” Do you see how what seemed incomprehensible a short time ago has now become clearer? Just as a body needs a head, a tree needs a root, and a river needs a source, so does a word need an introduction. So, when we have placed you at the beginning of the same path, and shown the connection (of this conversation with the previous ones), then we will deal with the very introduction of the story (about Paul). “And Saul was still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord” (Acts 9:1). And in the epistles he is called Paul: why did the Holy Spirit change his name? Just as a master, having bought a slave and wanting to show him his power over him, changes his name, so did the Holy Spirit then. He took Paul captive, and this one had recently come under the authority of the Holy Spirit, who therefore changed his name, so that from this he would recognize (new) power over himself. That naming is a sign of power is very clear from what we do, but it will be even clearer from what God did with Adam. Wanting to convince him that he was the king and ruler of everything, (God) brought all the animals to him “to see what he would call them” (Gen. 2:19), thereby showing that naming serves as confirmation of power. If you want to see this among people, and to know that those who take slaves from captivity often change their names, listen to what the Babylonian king did. Having taken Hananiah, Azariah and Mishael captive, he did not leave them with their former names, but called them Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego (Dan.1:6, 7). But why did (the Holy Spirit) rename Paul not immediately, but after a long time? Because if he had renamed him immediately after his conversion, Paul’s change and conversion to faith would not have become obvious. On the contrary, what happens to slaves, i.e., that when they run away and immediately change their names, they become unknown, the same would have happened with Paul, if he had been renamed immediately when he left the Jews and came to us, no one would have known that he was a persecutor and became an evangelist. And to know that he was a persecutor and became an apostle was very important. This is what humbled the Jews, that they saw how the teacher who stood for them stood against them. So, so that the sudden change of name does not hide the change of will, (the Holy Spirit) allows Paul to bear his former name for a long time: let him, when everyone knows that he is the one who previously persecuted the Church, let him then, as it will be known to everyone, change his name. And what is the real reason, listen to how he himself says: “After this I went to the countries of Syria and Cilicia. I was not personally known to the Churches of Christ in Judea” (Gal. 1:21, 22). If he was not known to the churches that were in Palestine, where he lived, much less those that were in other places. “I was not known personally,” he says, not by name. Why "personally"? Because none of the believers dared to see him when he was pursuing us: he breathed murder, he was so filled with fury! Therefore, if he went anywhere, everyone moved away, everyone ran away and did not dare to look at him: so he raged against the believers! They (believers) only heard that the one who once persecuted us now preaches the good news of the faith that he previously destroyed (Gal. 1:23). So, since (the Palestinian Christians) did not personally know Paul, but only heard (about him), then if his name were immediately changed, those who heard would not have known that the one who persecuted the faith was preaching. Since they knew that Paul was previously called Saul, if he was immediately called Paul after his conversion, and then someone had told them that Paul was preaching, who persecuted the Church, they would not have known that it was he, because he was called not Paul, but Saul. That is why (the Holy Spirit) left him to bear his former name for a long time, so that he would become known to all believers, even those who were distant and had not seen him. 4. So, it is sufficiently shown why Paul did not immediately change his name. Now we need to turn to the very beginning of the word. “Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord.” What does "still" mean? What did he do before that (Evangelist Luke) says “yet”? This “yet” indicates a person who has previously done much evil. What did he do? Tell me, what evil did he not do? He filled Jerusalem with blood, killing believers, ravaged the Church, persecuted the apostles, killed Stephen, and spared neither husbands nor wives. Listen to what his disciple says: “Saul tormented the Church, entering houses and dragging away men and women” (Acts 8:3). The marketplace was not enough for him; no, he invaded houses too: “entering houses,” he says. And he (the writer) did not say: “leading away,” or “spearing out” husbands and wives, but: “dragging men and women,” as if he were talking about a beast. “Dragging men and women,” not only husbands, but also wives. He was not ashamed of nature, did not spare sex, and was not touched by weakness. And he did this out of jealousy, and not out of (blind) rage. Therefore, the Jews who did the same are worthy of condemnation, but he, although he did the same, deserves forgiveness. They proved by their very deeds that they did this for honor and glory from the people; he is not for this purpose, but out of zeal for God, albeit without reasoning. That is why those wives were left alone, and rebelled against their husbands, because they saw that their (the Jews) honor had passed onto these; and Paul, because he was driven by jealousy, rebelled against everyone. So, imagining all this in his mind and seeing that Paul was not yet satisfied, Luke said: “Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord.” The murder of Stephen did not satisfy him, the persecution of the Church did not satisfy his desire; no, he strived further, and did not stop anywhere in his fury, because it was jealousy. No, he had just returned from the murder of Stephen when he began to persecute the apostles; and acted exactly as if a ferocious wolf, having attacked a flock of sheep, grabbed a lamb from there and tore it to pieces with his teeth, and from this abduction he became even more ferocious. So Saul attacked the apostolic face, grabbed from there the lamb of Christ, Stephen, tore him to pieces, and from this murder he became even more ferocious. That's why it says "yet". Who wouldn't be fed up with this murder? Who would not be pacified by the meekness of the one being killed and the prayer that he, being stoned, offered up for those slaying: “Lord! Do not count this sin against them” (Acts 7:60)? This is why the persecutor became an evangelist: soon after killing (Stephen) he changed - God heard his voice. And indeed, Stephen deserved to be heard, both for Paul’s future virtue and for his own confession: “Lord! Do not impute this sin to them." Let everyone who has enemies, everyone who is offended, hear this. Even if you have suffered a thousand insults, you have not yet been stoned like Stephen. And look what is being done. One source, Stefanov, was blocked - and another opened, which released thousands of rivers. Stefan's lips fell silent - and immediately Paul's trumpet sounded. Thus, God never completely abandons those who resort to Him, but He Himself gives them greater gifts than what their enemies take away from them. In fact, the enemies did not tear out such a warrior from the (Christian) army as Christ placed in his place. “Saul still...” This “still” indicates something else, namely, that Christ drew him to Himself while he was still raging, still raging, was still in the full force of rage, still breathing murder. He did not wait until the illness stopped, the passion died down and this fierce one pacified, and then he attracted him to Himself: no, he took him in the very heat of his fury, in order to show His strength, that is, that He defeats and overcomes the persecutor in his most complete intoxication, when rage was still burning in him. And we are especially surprised at the doctor when he is able to extinguish and completely stop the fever at its highest level and the flame of the disease at its extreme strength. So it was with Paul: when he was in the most intense fire, then the voice of the Lord, like dew falling from heaven, completely freed him from his illness. “Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord.” He left the people and attacked the main ones. Just as someone who wants to cut down a tree, leaving the branches, cuts out the root from below, so he went against the disciples to destroy the root of the sermon. But the root of the sermon was not the disciples, but the Lord of the disciples. That is why He said: “I am the vine, and you are the branches” (John 15:5). But that root is invincible: therefore, the more branches were cut off, the more numerous and longer they grew again. So, Stephen was cut off - and Paul and those who believed through Paul grew up. “As he walked and approached Damascus, suddenly a light from heaven shone around him. He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him: Saul, Saul! Why are you persecuting Me? (Acts 9:3, 4). Why did not a voice descend before, but a light shine upon it? So that he calmly listens to the voice. A person who is too busy with some task and overwhelmed with strong anger, even if thousands (of people) call him, does not turn to them, because he is completely devoted to his subject: so that this does not happen to Paul, so that he, intoxicated by the fury of (his previous) deeds, rejects the voice or even does not hear it at all, due to the fact that he turned all his thoughts to the devastation (of the Church), Christ first blinded his eyes with light, tamed his rage, completely pacified the spiritual storm and established perfect silence in his heart, and then gave up his voice, so that (Saul), after his pride had been cast down, would listen to the words (of the Lord) with a sober thought. “Saul, Saul! Why are you persecuting Me? The words are not so much reproachful as defensive! “Why are you persecuting Me?” What, small or great, can you reproach Me for? Why are you offended by Me? Is it because I raised your dead, cleansed your lepers, cast out your demons? But for this they had to worship Me, and not persecute Me. And so that you can be convinced that these words: “Why are you persecuting Me?” The essence is more the words of the one defending himself, listen, just as His Father (Jesus Christ) addressed the Jews with the same words. As He says: “Saul, Saul! Why are you persecuting Me? - so He said to the Jews: “My people! What have I done to you and how have I burdened you?” (Micah 6:3). “Saul, Saul! Why are you persecuting Me? - Here you are lying on the ground, here you are tied without a chain! Just like a master, having caught and tied up a slave who has run away many times and done a lot of bad things, says to him - the bound one: what should I do with you now? are you in my hands? - So Christ, taking Paul, threw him to the ground, and seeing that he was trembling, afraid and could not do anything, he said: “Saul, Saul! Why are you persecuting Me? What will this rage be for? Why the frenzy? Why untimely jealousy? Why fetters and attacks? Why this ferocity? Now you will be motionless, and you will not see the persecuted; you, who quickly walked and ran everywhere, now need a counselor. Indeed, this is why Christ now says to him: “Why are you persecuting Me?” so that he knows that in the past time (the Lord) yielded to him voluntarily, that neither the previous (permission) came from weakness, nor the present (defeat) from cruelty, but even that from love for mankind, and this from trustworthiness. What about Pavel? “Who are you, Lord?” From the former allowance I learned power, from present blindness I understood power; now he already confesses the sovereignty (of the Lord): “Who are you, Lord?” Do you see what a grateful soul; see what a noble heart; see what a straight conscience! He did not persist, did not argue, but immediately recognized the Lord. Not like the Jews, who, seeing that the dead are raised, the blind receive their sight, and lepers are cleansed, not only did not resort to the one who did this (Jesus Christ), but also called Him a deceiver; no, Paul did not do that, but he was immediately converted. What about Christ? “I am Jesus, whom you persecute” (Acts 9:5). Why didn’t he say: I am the risen Jesus, I am Jesus sitting at the right hand of God, but: “I am Jesus, whom you persecute”? He said this in order to amaze his mind and crush his soul. Listen to how Paul, after a long time and after his countless exploits, cried about this: “For I,” he said, “am the least of all the Apostles, and am not worthy to be called an Apostle, because I persecuted the Church of God” (1 Cor. 15:9). If he cried about this after countless exploits and for such a long time, then how fitting it was for him to grieve at a time when he had not yet accomplished a single feat, but was already aware of himself guilty of persecution and heard that voice! 5. But here (opponents) are rebelling against us. But do not give in to fatigue, even if evening has come, because we are talking about Paul - about Paul, who taught the disciples day and night for three years (Acts 20:31). So here some rebel and say, What wonder is it that Paul was converted? God, after all, like a rope, threw that voice around his neck - and so drew him to Himself. Listen carefully. Here our word is directed both against the pagans and against the Jews, who think to cover up their unbelief by slandering the righteous, but do not know what they are doing, thus a double sin: they do not reject their error, and intensify to bring such accusations against the holy (man) of God. But we, with the help of God’s grace, will justify him. What is the charge? God, they say, drew him to Himself by force. How by force? - Tell me. Called him from heaven. Are you absolutely sure that (God) called him from heaven? So He calls you today with the same voice, but you don’t listen. Do you see that this did not happen by force? If there were compulsion here, then you too would have to obey; if you do not listen, then he, obviously, obeyed of his own free will. And so that you can be convinced that the calling (of God), of course, greatly contributed to the salvation of Paul, like all other people, but did not take away from him his own exploits and merits acquired by willpower, and did not restrict his freedom, but that, on the contrary, he converted voluntarily and according to his own disposition, I will explain this with another example. The Jews heard a voice sounding from heaven on the waves of the Jordan, not of the Son, but of the Father, saying about Christ: “This is my beloved Son” (Matthew 3:17), and, however, they say: “This is a deceiver” (Matthew 27:63). Do you see how obvious the struggle is? Do you see what an open war? Do you see that good will and a direct soul unoccupied by passion are needed everywhere? Behold, there is a voice here, and there is a voice here: but one (Paul) obeyed, and the others (the Jews) persisted. Moreover, (on the Jordan) not only a voice, but also a Spirit in the form of a dove. As John baptized, and Christ was baptized, so that (the Jews), judging humanly, would not consider the one baptizing greater than the one being baptized, a voice would come and distinguish this one from that one. And as it was unknown about whom the voice uttered its words, the Holy Spirit came in the form of a dove, attracting this voice to the head of Christ. But, although (the Father) announced about Him (Jesus Christ) with a voice, and pointed to Him by the Spirit, and besides this, John cried out: “Whose sandal strap I am not worthy to untie” (Luke 3:16), and there were many other testimonies both in words and deeds; however, the Jews were blind to all this, or rather, they saw everything, but did not believe anything - neither words nor deeds, because their hearts were preoccupied with an insane love for human glory. This is what the Evangelist speaks about, that is, that “many of the Jews believed in Him; but for the sake of the Pharisees they did not confess, lest they should be put out of the synagogue” (John 12:42); and Christ Himself said: “How can you believe when you receive glory from one another, but do not seek the glory that is from the One God?” (John 5:44). Not so Paul; no, having heard only one voice of Him, the Persecuted One, he immediately flowed (to Him), immediately submitted, and showed a complete change in himself. If you are not tired of the length of the word, then I will offer an even closer example. The Jews heard the Son, and heard just as Paul heard; They heard it at the same time as Paul heard it, and, despite this, they did not believe. Paul heard a voice when he was raging, when he was raging, when he was persecuting his disciples: so did the Jews. Where and when? They went out at night, with lanterns and lamps, to take Him (Jesus): they thought they were attacking a common man. And so, wanting to show them His power, and that He is God, and they are going against the pricks, (Christ) says to them: “Whom are you looking for?” (John 18:4). They stood in front of Him and close - and did not see Him; but the Searched One Himself helps them find Himself, so that they know that He voluntarily goes to suffer, that if He had not wanted to allow them to do so, they would not have taken possession of Him. How could they, in fact, take possession of Him when they could not find Him? What am I saying: they couldn’t find Him? They couldn't even see Him while He was in front of them; and not only could they not see Him when He was in front of them, but even when they answered His question, they did not know who was in front of them: so He blinded their eyes excessively! And he not only blinded them, but even threw them to the ground with His voice. When He said, “Whom are you looking for?” - they all “stepped back” from these words (John 18:6). Just as the voice cast Paul down and threw him to the ground, so this voice cast them all down to the ground; just as he did not see the One he was persecuting, so they did not see the One they were looking for; just as he became blind during his fury, so they became blind during the fury itself. And he (got blind) when he went to bind the disciples, and they suffered the same thing when they went out to bind Christ. And there are bonds there, and there are bonds here; and there is persecution, and here there is persecution; and there is blindness, and here is blindness; and there is a voice, and there is a voice; in a word: the same manifestation of the power of Christ, the same healing, but not the same correction, because the sick were very different. What, in fact, is more insensitive, what is more ungrateful than them? They fell back, and got up again, and attacked again! Were they not more insensitive than stones? And so that they would know that He is exactly the One who said to them: “Whom are you looking for?” - and threw them back, (Jesus) again, as they stood up, he said to them: “Who are you looking for?” They answer: “Jesus the Nazarene,” and says to them: “I told you that it was I” (John 18:7, 8). It’s as if He says this: know that I am the same One who said before: “Who are you looking for?” and who brought you down. But no good came of it; no, they remained in the same blindness. Comparing all this one with another, know for sure that Paul did not convert under compulsion, but from a good soul and a clear conscience. 6. If you are patient and complacent, I will present another closest (example) that irrefutably proves that Paul did not turn to the Lord under duress. Paul subsequently came to Salamis, on the island of Cyprus, and found there a certain magician who was with the proconsul Sergius. Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to him: “O full of all deceit and all evil, son of the devil, enemy of all righteousness! will you stop turning aside from the straight paths of the Lord?” (Acts 13:10). This was the former persecutor speaking. Let us glorify the One who converted him. Previously you heard that he “tormented the Church, entering houses and dragging away men and women, handing them over to prison” (Acts 8:3); Now you see how boldly he defends the sermon. “Will you stop turning aside from the straight paths of the Lord? And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon you: you will be blind and will not see the sun until the time comes” (Acts 13:10, 11). The same medicine that restored his (spiritual) sight, Paul also used on the magician, but this one remained blinded, so that you know that Paul was led (to Jesus Christ) not by one calling, but also by his own disposition. If the reason for this (Paul's conversion) was one defeat by blindness, then the same should have happened with the magician, but it was not. No, he was blind, but the proconsul, seeing what had happened, believed (Acts 13:12). One took the medicine, and the other received his sight. You see what a good disposition of the heart means - what stubbornness and bitterness mean! The wizard became blind, but he himself did not benefit from this, because he was stubborn, and the proconsul knew Christ. But it has already been sufficiently proven that Paul converted voluntarily and out of choice. Now I want you to firmly know this truth, that God does not do violence to those who do not want, but attracts only those who want. Therefore (Christ) says: “No one can come to Me unless the Father draws him” (John 6:44). The attractor attracts the desirer, who lies on the ground and stretches out his hand. And so that you can be convinced that (God) does not force anyone, but that even if He wants, but we do not want, the work of our salvation falls apart, not because His will is weak, but because He does not want to force anyone; it is necessary to consider this subject, since many often use this pretext to justify their carelessness and, exhorted to accept enlightenment (i.e. the Sacrament of Baptism), to change their way of life for a better one and to other similar exploits, but at the same time, remaining in negligence and negligence, they answer in such a way that if God pleases, He will convince me - and I will change. I don’t condemn them, on the contrary, I still highly approve of them for resorting to the will of God; I just want them to do what they should on their part, and then say: if God wills. If you, giving yourself over to sleep and laziness, do not try to do good deeds, but only begin to refer to the will of God, you will never have anything good. God, as I said, never leads anyone to Himself by force or coercion; no, He wants everyone to be saved, but does not force anyone, just as Paul says: “So that all people may be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim. 2:4). How is it that not everyone is saved if He wants everyone to be saved? This is because not everyone’s will follows His will, and He does not force anyone. Thus (Christ) speaks to Jerusalem: “Jerusalem! Jerusalem! how many times have I wanted to gather your children... and you did not want to!” So what? “Behold, your house is left to you empty” (Luke 13:34, 35). Do you see that if God wants, but we do not surrender (to His will), then we remain in destruction? God, I repeat once again, is ready to save a person, not coerced, not against the will, but according to the good will and disposition (of the person himself). People, whether their slaves want it or not, want to be masters and rule over them, meaning not the benefit of the slaves, but their own benefit; but God, lacking nothing and wanting to show you that he does not need anything of ours, requires our service only for our own benefit, and does everything, not out of His need, for our good, if we approach (Him) voluntarily, willingly and with gratitude for the very enslavement. Those who do not want and evade, He does not force or force, wanting to show by this that it is not He who should thank us for our service, but we – Him for His dominion. So, knowing this, and reflecting on the Lord’s love for mankind, let us lead our lives, if possible, in accordance with His goodness, so that we may receive the Kingdom of Heaven, which may we all achieve, according to the grace and love for mankind of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom, with the Father and the Holy Spirit, be glory and dominion, now and ever, and to the ages of ages. Amen. CONVERSATION IV. Containing reproach for those who were not in the church and an admonition to those who were to take care of the brothers; also at the beginning of the Epistle to the Corinthians: “Paul is called” (1 Cor. 1:1), and about humility Those who do not attend churches have not heard the words of the prophet: “I would rather be at the threshold of the house of God than to live in the tents of wickedness” (Ps. 83:11). – What the soul experiences when entering the church. Respect for God is the only necessary thing and must come first. – The need to save your brothers. – Explanation of Paul’s words “called apostle”, found at the beginning of the First Epistle to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 1:1). – It is not so much important to read as to understand the Holy Scriptures. – The names of saints are pleasant for the faithful, terrible for sinners. – The word “called” means that it was not the apostle who first came to the Lord, but that he responded to the calling. – The Corinthians were rich in all the blessings of this world, where their vanity came from. “They were even proud of the teaching that the ap. Paul preached to them for the first time; in order to teach them a lesson in humility, the apostle uses this word “called.” – An exhortation to humility as the basis of all virtues. 1. When I look at your small number and see that our flock is decreasing with each meeting, then I both grieve and rejoice: I rejoice because of you who are here now; I grieve for those who are not here. You are worthy of praise for not becoming more careless because of your small numbers; they deserve blame for not being aroused by zeal and your jealousy. That’s why I call you happy and blessed because you were not harmed at all by the carelessness of those; and I consider those pitiful and mourn because your jealousy did not bring them any benefit. They did not hear what the prophet said: “I would rather be at the threshold of the house of God than to live in the tents of wickedness” (Ps. 83:11). He did not say: “I desire to live in the house of my God,” nor: “to dwell,” nor: “to enter,” but: “to be at the threshold.” I am glad, he says, to be among the last; I will be pleased if I am worthy to enter the vestibule; mail for the greatest gift, if I am placed among the last in the house of my God. Love assimilates to itself the common Lord of all: such is love. "In the House of God". The lover wants to see not only the beloved himself, and not only his house, but also the vestibule; and not only the entrance to the house, but also the street and alley itself (i.e. the house of a loved one); and if he even sees a friend’s clothes or shoes, he thinks that it is his friend himself. Such were the prophets: since they did not see the incorporeal God, they looked at the church, and imagined God himself to be present in it. “I would rather be at the threshold of the house of God than to live in the tents of wickedness.” Every place, every house - whether it be a court of law, or a senate, or a private house - in comparison with the house of God, is a village of sinners, because although there are prayers and supplications, there are inevitably also discords, quarrels, battles, and meetings about everyday affairs: but this house (of God) is clean from all this. That is why those places are the villages of sinners, and this is the house of God. And just as a pier, protected from winds and waves, gives complete safety to the ships entering it, so the house of God, as if plucking those entering it from the storm of worldly affairs, allows them to stand calmly and safely, and listen to the word of God. This place is a school of virtue, a school of wisdom. Come, not only during the meeting, when there is reading of Scripture, spiritual teaching and a council of honest fathers; no, and at any other time, come only to the vestibule - and you will immediately put aside everyday worries. Enter the vestibule - and like a spiritual breeze, it will blow on your soul. This silence inspires fear and teaches wisdom, excites the mind and does not allow you to remember the present, transports you from earth to Heaven. If it is so useful to be here without a meeting, then what benefit do those present here receive, and what loss do those absent suffer when the prophets cry out on all sides, when the apostles preach the gospel, when Christ stands in the midst, when the Father approves of what is happening (here), when the Holy Spirit communicates his joy? I would like to know where those who avoided the meeting are now, what held them back and distracted them from this sacred meal - what are they talking about? However, I know this well: they either talk about obscene and funny things, or indulge in everyday worries, and doing both is unforgivable and deserves the most severe punishment. There is no need to talk or prove about the first ones: but those who refer to us to household chores and say that the inevitable need for these matters keeps them (from being present in the church) - that these people cannot receive forgiveness, since they are called here only once a week, meanwhile, at this time, do not want to prefer the spiritual to the earthly - this is clear from the Gospel. Those invited to the spiritual wedding feast did not apologize like this: one bought working oxen, another bought land, a third got married; however, they are punished (Luke 14:18–24). Things are necessary, but they are not excusable when God calls, because everything that is necessary for us is below God. First honor God, and then worry about other things. What kind of servant, tell me, will take care of his home before performing his master’s service? So, isn’t it strange - in relation to people, where dominance is a bare name, to show such respect and obedience to masters, but to the true Master, not only ours, but also the powers above, not to have such respect as we show to slaves like us? Oh, if you could enter into their (i.e. those who did not come to church) conscience, then you would clearly see how many wounds they have, how many thorns! Just as the land, not cultivated by the hands of the farmer, becomes deaf and overgrown with bushes, so the soul, which does not benefit from spiritual guidance, grows thorns and thistles. If we, who listen to the prophets and apostles every day, can barely restrain our anger, barely curb our rage, barely tame lust, barely spew out the pus of envy and, constantly singing verses from the Divine Scripture to our passions, barely pacify these insolent beasts, then they, who never use this medicine and do not listen to Divine wisdom, what, tell me, can they do? have hope of salvation? I would like to be able to show your eyes their soul: you would see how unclean, defiled, upset, humiliated and hopeless it is! Just as the bodies of those who do not use the bathhouse are covered with a lot of dust and dirt, so the soul that does not use spiritual teaching is covered with the great impurity of sins. What is here (that is, the church and everything that exists and happens in the church) is a spiritual bath, cleansing all impurity with the warmth of the Spirit; even more, the fire of the Spirit purifies not only impurity, but also the color itself. “Though,” says God, “your sins be as scarlet, they will be as white as snow” (Is. 1:18); let, that is, sinful filth penetrate so firmly into the being of the soul that it will already receive an unchanged color of paint, and then I can transfer it to the opposite state, because just one wave of Mine is enough - and all sins will be destroyed. 2. I am not saying this for you to hear, because by the grace of God you have no need for medicine; but - so that they (i.e. those who did not come to church) learn about it through you. If I could know the places where they gather, I would not disturb your love; but since it is impossible for me alone to recognize such a multitude of people, I entrust you with the care of your brothers. Take care of your brothers, attract them, call them. I know that you have already done this often, but it’s not enough - do it often, you have to do it until you convince them and attract them here. I know that you worried them, that you often seemed burdensome to them, that you could not convince them, and because of this you became less zealous; but may you be comforted by Paul, who says: “Love... bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails” (1 Cor. 13:4, 7, 8). You do your part: and even if he (your neighbor) does not accept healing, you will still receive a reward from God. From the ground, if you throw seeds into it and it does not produce ears of corn, you must leave empty-handed; not so with the soul: no, you teach her the teaching, and even if she does not listen to your words, despite this, you will receive the full reward - the same as (you would have received) if she had listened, because God looks not just at the end of things, but at the disposition of those who do it and, judging by it, determines the rewards. So, I ask you: what those addicted to the spectacle of horse racing do, do the same. What are they doing? In the evening everyone gets together, goes to each other’s houses until dawn, appoints other places for themselves, so that, having gathered together, they will go to that satanic spectacle with greater pleasure. Just as they are zealous and drag each other to the destruction of their souls, so take care of your souls and save each other; and, before the (church) meeting begins, (each of you) go to your brother’s house, wait for him at the door, and when he comes out, stop him. Even if thousands of needs call upon (him), do not yield to him and do not let him take up anything worldly before you bring him to church and force him to stay there for the entire duration of the meeting. Let him argue and contradict, let him present a thousand excuses, do not bow down and do not give in, but having told and inspired him that his other deeds will be much more successful when he begins them, having stood through the entire (church) service, prayed and accepted the blessing of the fathers - and having bound him with these and similar words, lead him to this sacred meal in order to receive a double reward for you: both for himself and for his coming (to church). There is no doubt that if we use so much zeal and zeal to catch the careless, we will achieve salvation. No matter how careless, shameless and stubborn they are, but, ashamed of such constancy of your determination, they will finally give up laziness. After all, no matter how insensitive they are, they are not crueler than that judge who did not know God and was not ashamed of people (Luke 18:2); Meanwhile, his cruel, stern, iron, hard as a diamond, was bowed down by the persistent request of one widow. What excuse can we hope for if, while the widow managed to bow down and make merciful the cruel judge, who did not fear God and was not ashamed of people, we do not have time to attract brothers who are much softer and more modest than this judge, when, moreover, we admonish them for their own good? I have often spoken about this, and I will not stop talking until I see that the sick have recovered. I will look for them every day until I manage to find them, with the help of your diligence. I earnestly ask you to investigate the careless with the same sorrow with which I now say this, with the same effort. Paul commanded not me alone, but also you, to take care of your fellow members: “Admonish one another,” he says, “with these words, just as you are also doing.” and again: “edify” one another (1 Thess. 5:11). Great is the reward for those who care for their brothers, and very great is the punishment for those who do not care and neglect their salvation. 3. Therefore, I firmly hope and am confident that you will fulfill my words with great zeal, and therefore I will stop admonishing you here, and will try to lead you to Pavlova’s meal. “Paul... the called Apostle” (1 Cor. 1:1). You have often heard this, and we have read it: but the words (of Scripture) must not only be read, but also understood, otherwise there will be no benefit to us from reading. The treasure, as long as people walk on it, does not show wealth; no, you need to dig it up first, go down, and so find all the (hidden) wealth. It is the same with Scripture: if you do not explore its depths, then reading alone will not reveal the treasure of blessings contained (in Scripture). If reading alone had been enough, Philip would not have said to the eunuch: “Do you understand what you are reading?” (Acts 8:30). If reading had been enough, Christ would not have said to the Jews: “Search the Scriptures” (John 5:39). And the explorer does not stop at the surface, but descends into the very depths. After all, in the very introduction (of the message) I see a great sea of ​​thoughts. In secular letters, greetings are simply meant to show respect, but this is not the case here; on the contrary, the very beginning is filled with great wisdom, because it is not Paul himself who speaks, but Christ moves his soul. "Paul... called". This word “Paul” is, of course, just a simple name, but it contains within itself such a treasure of thoughts that you already know from experience. If you remember, you know that I spoke for three whole days only about this name, explaining the reasons why the formerly called Saul was later called Paul, and also why he did not accept this name immediately after converting to faith, but for a long time still bore the name that his parents first gave him. In this study, we discovered the great wisdom and care of God both for us and for those saints (i.e., whose names God changed). If people give names to their children not simply, but - sometimes after their father, sometimes after their uncle, sometimes after other ancestors - much more so did God give names to his slaves not simply and not without reason, but with great wisdom. People often name their children by the names of the dead, both in honor of the deceased and to please themselves, finding in such a name for their children a relief from their grief over the death of the dead; and God places a reminder and lesson of virtue in the name of the saints, as on a copper pillar. Thus, He called Peter by this name out of virtue, wanting in his name to contain proof of the firmness of his faith, so that in his name (Peter) he would have an everlasting teacher of this firmness. So he called both John and James (sons of thunder) because of their loudness in preaching. But, in order not to get bored with repeating what has been said, leaving this aside, I will only say that the names of saints, in themselves, are honorable for those who love God, and terrible for those who sin. So, Paul, after he received Onesimus, this fugitive and thief of the master's money, after he converted him and initiated him into the mysteries of the faith, wanting to return him to his master, this is what he wrote to him: “Therefore, having great boldness in Christ to command you what you should, out of love I better ask, none other than I, Paul the elder, and now a prisoner of Jesus Christ” (Phil. 1: 8, 9). Do you see that (Paul) offered three reasons: bonds for Christ, his condition according to his age, and the respect inspired by his name? Since he asked for one, he tried to make three from one petitioner for Onesimus - Paul, the elder and the prisoner. Do you see that the very names (of the saints) are honorable and dear to believers? If the mention of the name of a beloved child often forces a father, even against his will, to show mercy for the sake of his beloved name, all the more should it be so with the saints. And to make sure that (the names of the saints) were terrible for sinners, just as the names of teachers are terrible for careless children, listen to how Paul meant this in the Epistle to the Galatians. Since they had fallen into Jewish weakness (i.e., circumcision and other Jewish rites) and were in danger of losing the very faith (Christian), Paul, wanting to restore them and convince them not to mix anything Jewish into the gospel teaching, wrote to them like this: “Behold, I, Paul, say to you: if you are circumcised, Christ will not benefit you at all” (Gal. 5:2). You said “I”, why did you add another name? Wasn’t this “I” enough to signify who is writing? No, so that you know that just adding a name is enough to defeat the listeners, therefore (Paul) adds his name, wanting to remind them (the Galatians) of the teacher. And the same thing happens to us: when we remember the saints, then if we are careless, we awaken, if we are fearless, we become afraid. So, when I hear about the Apostle Paul, I imagine how he was in sorrow, in cramped quarters, in beatings, in prisons, in the depths (of the sea) day and night (2 Cor. 11:23–28), how he was caught up into the third Heaven, heard ineffable words in Paradise (2 Cor. 12:2–4), I imagine this chosen instrument, the bridegroom of Christ, who “would desire he himself was excommunicated from Christ for his brothers' sake (Rom. 9:3). Just like some kind of golden chain, a series of deeds (of the saint) are revealed to the mind of those who are attentive when remembering his name. And this brings us considerable benefit. 4. We could say more about the name (Paul), but in order for us to touch on the second word, we will stop examining the name here and now move on to this word. Just as the name (Paul) brought us great wealth, so the word: “called”, if only we decide to study it with due diligence, will give us the same, or even more abundant, object for contemplation. In fact, just as someone who has taken out just one stone from any piece of jewelry or a royal diadem can, by selling this precious stone, buy magnificent houses and expensive fields, crowds of servants and many other objects - so in relation to the words of God, if you want to explain the meaning of one saying, it will give you great spiritual wealth, not by bringing you houses or servants, or tithes of land, but by awakening the souls of those who are attentive to piety and wisdom. This very word: “called”, look at what the history of spiritual affairs leads us to. However, we must first find out what “called” means, and then consider why (Paul) wrote this in his letters only to the Corinthians and Romans, and to no one else: it is not without reason and not without reason that he does this. If we do not indiscriminately write the inscriptions of our letters, but when sending a letter to the lower ones, we write: such and such; and when we send to equals, we call the recipient of the letter master in the inscription; when we write to those much higher in dignity, we add many other names that express deep respect - if we observe such legibility, and we do not write to everyone in the same way, but, judging by the differences in the persons receiving the letters, we use these or other names; much more so did Paul write to some one way, and to others another way, not without reason and not without reason, but with some spiritual wisdom. That Paul in none of the other epistles did not call himself, in the very introduction of the epistle, called, we can learn this by running through the very beginnings of the epistles. It remains for us to tell why he did this; Only we will show in advance what “called” means and what Paul wanted to instill in us with this word. What does he want to inspire us by calling himself called? The fact that he was not the first to come to the Lord, but obeyed, having been called; I did not seek and find, but was found while I was wandering; He was not the first to look at the light, but the (Heavenly) light shed its rays on his gaze and, blinding his carnal eyes, then opened his inner ones. So, he calls himself called, wanting to make us understand that he attributes all his good deeds not to himself, but to God who called him. He who opened for me, he says, the gates to the arena and opened the field for the fight, is the culprit of the crowns; He who made the beginning and planted the root gave me the opportunity to subsequently produce fruit. Therefore, in another place, having said: “But I have labored more than all of them,” he added: “Not I, however, but the grace of God that is with me” (1 Cor. 15:10). So, the word “called” means nothing more than that Paul did not take credit for any of his exploits, but attributed everything to the Lord God. Christ instilled this in his disciples, saying: “You did not choose Me, but I chose you” (John 15:16). The apostle points to this same thing in the same epistle, saying: “Then I will know, even as I am known” (1 Cor. 13:12); now, that is, I was not the first to know, but I myself was known in advance, because when he persecuted and devastated the Church, then Christ called him, saying: “Saul, Saul! Why are you persecuting Me? (Acts 9:4). That's why he calls himself called. Why did he write to the Corinthians like that? Corinth is the main city of Achaia, and was rich in spiritual gifts, which should have been so, because it was the first time (Acts 13:1, 8-11; 1 Cor. 1:14-17, 2:1, 3, 3:6, 10) that it heard a sermon from Paul. Just as a vineyard, cultivated by a skillful and zealous farmer, abounds in leaves and is always laden with a multitude of fruits, so this city, having first taken advantage of the teaching of Paul, as if cultivated by a skilled farmer, and for a long time enjoying his wisdom, was adorned with all the blessings. It not only had an abundance of spiritual gifts, but also a great abundance of worldly goods, because it surpassed other cities in external learning, wealth, and power. It was these benefits that made him proud, and through his pride they divided him into different parts. This is the property of pride: it dissolves the union of love, separates people from each other, and forces everyone it possesses to live separately from others. Just as a wall, when swollen, destroys a building, so a soul, puffed up with pride, cannot be in union with others. This same thing happened then with the Corinthians: they began to argue among themselves, cut the Church into many parts, appointed many teachers other than Paul, and, dividing into communities and special brotherhoods, harmed the dignity of the Church, because the dignity of the Church is supported by the fact that its constituents maintain among themselves the connection (which should be between members) of the body. 5. However, it is also necessary to show you that the Corinthians first heard a sermon from Paul, that they were enriched with spiritual gifts, that they also had worldly benefits, and that, being proud of these benefits, they were divided among themselves, and some of them went over to the side of some, and others to the side of others (teachers). So, to make sure that they first heard the teaching from Paul, listen to how Paul himself pointed it out. “For although you have thousands of teachers in Christ, you have not many fathers; I have begotten you in Christ Jesus through the gospel” (1 Cor. 4:15). And whoever gave birth is the first to bring the born into the world. And again: “I planted, Apollos watered” (1 Cor. 3:6); here shows that he was the first to sow the doctrine (among the Corinthians). And that they were rich in spiritual gifts can be seen from this: “I thank my God for you without ceasing, because of the grace of God which was given to you in Christ Jesus, because in Him you have been enriched in everything” (1 Cor. 1:4, 5). Then, that they possessed external wisdom, this was shown to us (Paul) by those many and lengthy words that he directs against this wisdom. In another letter he did not do this anywhere, but here (i.e. in the First Epistle to the Corinthians) he strongly condemned (outward wisdom), and very rightly. Since a tumor arose from it, Paul also used cutting on it, saying: “For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of speech, lest the Cross of Christ should be made of no effect” (1 Cor. 1:17). Look at the accusation against external wisdom: not only does it not contribute to piety, but it can also be a hindrance and an obstacle. Just as beautiful bodies and beautiful and beautiful faces, if they receive any external decoration, lose the glory of their own beauty, because the honor of this glory is stolen by rouge, rubbing and other embellishments; If you don’t use anything extraneous on them, then you will show their beauty much better when the mere sight of them acts on its own and causes complete surprise: this is what happens with faith, this spiritual bride. If you give her anything external—wealth, or power, or the power of eloquence—you will diminish her glory, because you will not allow all her splendor to appear, but you will split her glory into many parts; on the contrary, if you allow it to act on its own, eliminating everything human, then all its beauty will truly appear, then its irresistible power will clearly shine through, when, i.e., without taking advantage of wealth, wisdom, power, nobility of the family, or other human benefits, it will conquer and overcome everything - when, through people insignificant, low, propertyless, poor and unlearned, it will overcome wicked rhetoricians, and philosophers, and tyrants, and the entire universe. That is why Paul said: “I came to proclaim to you the testimony of God, not in excellence of speech or wisdom” (1 Cor. 2:1), and: “God has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise” (1 Cor. 1:27). He said not just: “unwise,” but: “unwise of the world,” and of course, the crazy of the world is not crazy before God, on the contrary, many of those who seem here (in the world) crazy are smarter than everyone else before God, just like many of those living here in poverty are richer than everyone else before God. So Lazarus was the poorest of all in the world, but in Heaven he became the richest of all. So, the fools of the world (Paul) calls those who do not have a sophisticated language, do not have secular learning, and are devoid of eloquence. And these are the people “God chose,” he says, “to confound the wise.” How, tell me, are these put to shame through those? In fact. When you ask a widow, sitting at the gate and begging for alms, and often crippled, about the immortality of the soul, about the resurrection of bodies, about the Providence of God, about rewards according to merit, about the local report, about the Last Judgment Seat, about the bliss prepared for the virtuous, about the punishments that threaten sinners and about everything else, and she will answer with accuracy and complete confidence; but the philosopher and the one who boasts a lot about the hairstyle and the cane, after many and long courses of study, after many and intense studies, cannot even stutter, does not dare even open his mouth about these subjects: then you will know well how “God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise.” What these wise men, through pride and arrogance, could not find, because they deviated from the teaching of the Spirit, and completely indulged in their own speculations, the poorest and most despicable people, deprived of any worldly education, learned with perfect accuracy, because they trusted in Heavenly instruction. But (the apostle) does not stop there in condemning worldly wisdom; no, he adds another, stronger condemnation, saying: “The wisdom of this world is foolishness in the sight of God” (1 Cor. 3:19), and, teaching instructions to the listeners, again with complete contempt (for earthly wisdom) and with force he said to them: “If anyone among you thinks to be wise in this age, he must be foolish in order to be wise” (1 Cor. 3:18), and again: “I will destroy wisdom I will reject the understanding of wise men” (1 Cor. 1:19), and again: “The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are vanity” (1 Cor. 3:20). 6. Thus, it is clear from this that the Corinthians possessed (worldly) wisdom. And that they were proud and arrogant is again clear from the same message. Having condemned the fornicator in one place, Paul added the following words: “And you became proud” (1 Cor. 5:2). And that they quarreled among themselves out of pride, and he showed this very thing, saying: “If there is envy, disputes and disagreements among you, are you not carnal? and are you not acting according to human custom?” (1 Cor. 3:3). What was the quarrel about? They were divided among many leaders, which is why (Paul) says: “I mean what you say: “I am Pavlov”; “I am Apollosov”; “I am Cephas” (1 Cor. 1:12). He says this not because they surrendered to Paul and Cephas and Apollos; no, with these names he wants to cover up the perpetrators of discord, so that, having discovered them, he will not become more persistent and lead to greater shamelessness. And that, in fact, they devoted themselves not to Paul and Peter and Apollos, but to some others, and this is clear from the following words. Having condemned them for this discord, he added this: “This, brethren, I have applied to myself and to Apollos for your sake, so that you may learn from us not to philosophize beyond what is written, and not to be proud of one another” (1 Cor. 4:6). Many of the ordinary people, not having anything to be proud of themselves and to reproach their neighbors, having installed bosses over themselves, became proud of their merits over others, and the wisdom of their teachers became for them a reason to exalt themselves over others: and this was the height of vanity - not having anything to boast about themselves, to take advantage of other people’s advantages to exalt themselves over others. So, just as they were puffed up with pride, and quarreled, and were divided into many parts, and dreamed highly of their faith, as if they had invented it of themselves, and not from above and from the grace of God they had received the dogmas of truth, then Paul, wanting to humble their pride, at the very beginning (of the epistle) immediately called himself called, as if to say: if I, the teacher, did not invent anything on my own, and was not the first to come to God, but had already obeyed Then, as you were called, then you, the disciples, who accepted the dogmas from me, how can you be so high-minded, as if you had invented them yourself?! Therefore, he further said to them: “Who distinguishes you? What do you have that you wouldn't get? And if you received it, why do you boast as if you didn’t receive it?” (1 Cor. 4:7). So, this word: “called” is nothing more than a lesson in humility, the overthrow of arrogance, the taming of arrogance. Nothing, absolutely nothing can curb and restrain us so much as humility, when i.e. we are modest, humble and never dream about ourselves at all. Knowing this, Christ, when he began to teach that spiritual teaching, began with an exhortation to humility and, opening his lips, decreed this law in advance with the words: “Blessed are the poor in spirit” (Matthew 5:3). Whoever intends to build a large and magnificent house lays down an appropriate foundation so that it can withstand the weight that will subsequently lie on it: so Christ, beginning to erect in the souls of his disciples the great building of wisdom, lays in advance the exhortation to humility as a solid and unshakable foundation - the first and lower part of the building, knowing that when this virtue is rooted in the hearts of his listeners, then all other virtues can safely be edified. Consequently, when a person does not have this virtue, then he will work in vain, in vain and without benefit, although he will perform all other virtues. Just as a man, having built a house on sand, although he took a lot of work, will not receive any benefit because he did not lay a reliable foundation, so, no matter how much good someone does, without humility, he will destroy and ruin everything. And humility, I mean, is not what is in words and on the tongue, but what is in the heart, from the soul, in the conscience - which only God can see. This virtue alone is sufficient to appease God, as the publican proved. Having nothing good and unable to boast of good deeds, he only said: “God! be merciful to me, a sinner! (Luke 18:13) - and he came out more righteous than the Pharisee; Meanwhile, these were words not yet of humility, but of sincere consciousness. Humility consists in when a person, recognizing great perfections in himself, does not dream at all about himself; and consciousness is when a person, being a sinner, himself confesses it. If he who did not recognize anything good in himself, having confessed what he was, bowed down to God's mercy, then what kind of boldness will those who could point out their many virtues, hide them and place themselves among the last? This is what Paul did: being the first of all the righteous, he called himself the first of sinners (1 Tim. 1:15); and not only called himself that, but was also convinced of this, having learned from the Teacher that, having done everything, we should call ourselves slaves, worthless (Luke 17:10). This is what humility consists of! Imitate him, you who have good deeds, and imitate the publican, you who are burdened with sins. Let us recognize ourselves as we really are; Let us strike in the chest and force our soul not to dream of itself at all. If we are in such a disposition, then it will serve as a sufficient offering and sacrifice for us, just as David said: “A sacrifice to God is a broken spirit; You will not despise a broken and humble heart, O God” (Ps. 50:19). He didn’t just say “humble”, but also “contrite”; but the broken one is broken and can no longer, even if it wants to, rise up. So we will not only humble our soul, but also crush and pierce; and she laments when she constantly remembers her sins. When we humble her in this way, even if she wants to, she will not be able to rise to pride, because conscience, like a bridle, will keep her from arrogance, will tame and moderate her in everything. In this way, we will be able to find grace from God: “As great as you are, humble yourself, and you will find grace from the Lord” (Sir.3:18). And whoever has found grace from God will not feel any trouble, but here, with God’s grace, he can easily endure all misfortunes and avoid the punishments prepared for sinners there, because God’s grace will precede him everywhere and promote good in everything. May we all be worthy to receive this, in Christ Jesus our Lord, through whom and with whom to the Father, with the Holy Spirit, be glory, now and ever and unto ages of ages. Amen.