Book about virginity

The treatise “The Book of Virginity” (84 chapters) was written by St. John Chrysostom around 382 in Antioch, where virginity was very common. The saint writes this work not for the sake of promoting this way of life, but for the sake of protecting virginity from various attacks of heretics: both those who considered abstinence necessary and on this basis belittled marriage, and those to whom virgin life seemed painful and useless. St. John shows the high dignity of virginity and its superiority over marriage, although he does not deny the latter. He views marriage, consecrated by the Church, as a haven of chastity and a legal remedy against intemperance and debauchery, calling immoderate abstinence a devilish trap and a path to destruction. Virginity is as much higher than marriage as angels are higher than people. Marriage is a bond of slavery for both spouses: “How will he be able to walk the path to heaven, which requires free and light legs and a cheerful and adorned soul, who has such a heavy burden, is bound by such bonds and is constantly drawn down by this chain?” The subject of detailed consideration is the teaching of the Apostle Paul on virginity and marriage, set out in the First Epistle to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 7: 1-40). On the issue of virginity, the saint compares heretics and Christians, calling “the chastity of heretics is worse than any debauchery. The latter offends people, while the former rebels against God.” The best example of virginity is St. John sees Christ in earthly life, Who became incarnate in order to make people equal to the angels and teach them heavenly life. *The title of the work in Greek is Περ παρθενίας. *The title of the essay in Latin is De virginitate. Chapter 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 The Jews despise the BEAUTY of virginity, and this is not at all surprising if they did not honor Christ Himself, born of a Virgin; and the pagans admire and are amazed at her; but only the Church of God is jealous of her. I will never call heretical virgins virgins - firstly, because they are unclean, since they are not betrothed to one husband, as the blessed friend of the Bridegroom, Christ, wishes when he says: “I have betrothed you to one husband to present a pure virgin to Christ” (2 Cor. 11:2). Although this is said about the entirety of the Church, these words also mean virgins. How can those be pure who do not have love for one Husband, but attach another non-existent god to Him? So, they cannot be virgins, firstly, for this reason; and secondly, because they, having recognized the marriage as dishonorable, began to abstain from marriage. Having made it a rule to consider marriage a vicious matter, they in advance deprived themselves of the rewards that belong to virginity; for justice demands that those who abstain from evil deeds do not receive crowns, but only not be punished. And such an establishment can be seen not only in ours, but also in external (pagan) laws. The murderer, say (the laws), shall be executed by death; but they do not add: let him who does not kill receive honor. The thief, say (the laws), let him be punished; but they do not command that the one who does not steal someone else’s property should be awarded the gift; and putting to death the adulterer, they do not give any reward to the one who does not harm other people's marriages. This is quite fair. We must praise and be amazed at those who succeed in good, and not at those who (only) avoid evil; for the latter, that honor is enough if they do not tolerate anything bad. Therefore, our Lord threatened with hell the one who, without reason and in vain, would be angry with his brother and call him a freak (Matthew 5:22), but did not promise the Kingdom of Heaven to those who are not angry in vain and refrain from slander, but demanded something else, greater and more important, saying: “Love your enemies” (Matthew 5:44). And wanting to show how unimportant, insignificant and unworthy of any honor it is to abstain from hatred of brothers, He commanded something much greater, i.e. to love them and be in friendship with them, said that this is not enough for us to receive any honor; for how is this possible when in this respect we are in no way superior to the pagans? Therefore, we must add something else more important to this if we want to claim a reward. If, says (Christ), I do not condemn you to hell, who abstains from slander and anger at your brother, then for this alone you do not consider yourself worthy of crowns; because I do not only require such a measure of goodwill; but, even if you add to the non-backbiting that you love him, you still turn around and place yourself in the ranks of tax collectors; If you want to be perfect and worthy of heaven, then do not stop there only, but rise higher and acquire for yourself a thought that surpasses nature itself, that is, love for enemies. So, when everyone agrees with us on this, then let the heretics stop bothering themselves in vain; they will not receive any reward, not because the Lord is not just - let him not be! - but because they themselves are senseless and deceitful. How is this? It was proven above that for mere abstinence from bad deeds there is no reward; and they avoid marriage because they consider it a bad thing: how can they demand a reward for avoiding a bad thing? Just as we are not rewarded with crowns because we do not commit adultery, so they are because we do not marry. On that day He who has to judge us will say to them: I have prepared honors not for those who only abstained from evil deeds (this is of little importance to Me), but I introduce those who performed every virtue into the incorruptible Heavenly inheritance. How can you, having recognized marriage as an unclean and nasty thing, demand for your abstinence from evil things the rewards prepared for those who do good? And He places the lambs at the right hand, and blesses them, and brings them into the Kingdom, not because they did not steal someone else’s, but because they shared their own with others; and the one who was given five talents, He approves, not because he did not reduce their number, but because he also multiplied what was given and returned the deposit to the additional ones. How long will you not stop running in vain, toiling in vain, struggling in vain, and beating the air (1 Cor. 9:26; Phil. 2:16)? And, oh, if only it were in vain! - although for those who worked a lot and expected rewards even greater than their labors, it will serve as a considerable punishment that during the time of honors they will find themselves among those who did not receive them. But this is not the only reason their misfortune lies, and their suffering will not be limited to the fact that they have acquired nothing; but other, even more severe punishments will follow - unquenchable fire, undying worm, pitch darkness, sorrow, cramped conditions. Therefore, we need countless lips and angelic power, so that we can create worthy gratitude to God for His care for us; or better - and then it is impossible. Why? Although both us and the heretics have the same efforts for virginity, and perhaps they have much more; but the fruit of these labors is not the same: for them (they are preparing) bonds, tears, sorrows and eternal torment, but for us - an angelic fate, brilliant lamps and the most important of all blessings - communication with the Bridegroom. Why is this so - for the same work there is opposite retribution? Because they (the heretics) chose virginity in order to establish a law contrary to God; and we do this to fulfill His will. God wants all people to abstain from marriage, according to the testimony of the one through whom Christ says: “I will... that all men may be as I am” (1 Cor. 7:7), i.e. in abstinence. But the Savior, sparing us and knowing that “the spirit... is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Matthew 26:41), did not make this matter an indispensable commandment, but left the choice to our souls. If this were a command and a law, then those who fulfilled it would not receive a reward, but would hear: “Whatever you ought to do, do it” (Luke 17:10); just as those who transgressed would not receive forgiveness, but would be punished as lawbreakers; now, having said: “He who is able to contain, let him contain” (Matthew 19:12), (the Savior), on the one hand, did not condemn the powerless, but on the other hand, revealed a great and extraordinary feat to those who were able. Therefore, Paul, following in the footsteps of the Teacher, says: “But concerning virgins I have not commanded the Lord: but I give counsel” (1 Cor. 7:25). But neither Marcion, nor Valentinus, nor Manes 1 maintained such moderation; for it was not Christ who spoke in them, sparing His sheep and laying down His life for them, but the murderer, the father of lies (John 10:11; John 8:44). Therefore, they destroyed all those who believed in them, here burdening them with useless and unbearable labor, and there dragging them along with them into the fire prepared for them. Oh, you are more miserable than even the pagans! Although the torment of Gehenna awaits the pagans, at least here they enjoy pleasures, entering into marriages, enjoying wealth and other worldly pleasures; you, both here and there, will have to endure torment and sorrow - here voluntarily, and there involuntarily. And no one will give rewards or offer punishment to the pagans for fasting and virginity; and you will be subjected to extreme condemnation for the very thing for which you expected countless praises, and together with others you will hear: “Depart from Me into eternal fire, prepared for the devil and his angel” (Matthew 25:41) - because you fasted, because you were virgins. In themselves, fasting and virginity are neither good nor evil, but they are one or the other depending on the intention of those who practice them. For pagans such virtue is fruitless; because they remove the reward from themselves by not succeeding in it through the fear of God; and you, rebelling against God and slandering His creation, will not only remove the reward from yourself, but will even be punished for it. For dogmas you will be placed along with the pagans; because, like them, having rejected the true God, you introduced polytheism; and in life they will be better than you. Their misfortune is limited to the fact that they will not receive any good, but you will also have to endure evil; but they had to enjoy everything in this life, and you deprived yourself of both. To receive torment as a reward for your labors and efforts - could any punishment be worse than this? The adulterer, the covetous, who takes advantage of someone else, who robs his neighbor have some consolation, although it is of little importance, but they have it in the fact that they are punished for the pleasures here. But it is impossible to say what kind of sorrow will befall the one who voluntarily accepted poverty in order to get rich there, and decided on the feats of virginity in order to rejoice there with the Angels, and suddenly, beyond all expectations, will be punished for the very thing for which he hoped to receive countless benefits. I think that his conscience will torment him just like fire when he imagines that those who worked equally with him are with Christ, and he, for the same thing, for which they enjoy ineffable blessings, suffers extreme punishment, and, although he led a strict life, suffers even more than dissolute and voluptuous people. Truly, the chastity of heretics is worse than any debauchery. The latter causes offense to people, and the former rebels against God and insults infinite Wisdom; The devil lays such snares for his servants. And that the virginity of heretics is really an invention of his cunning, this is not said by me, but by He Who is not unaware of his plans. What is He saying? “The Spirit... clearly speaks, that in the last times there will be some who will depart from the faith, heeding spiritual flatterers and the teachings of demons, in the hypocrisy of false talkers, those who are seared in their conscience, those who forbid to marry, who will abstain from the waste that God has created to be consumed” (1 Tim. 4:1-3). How can one who has apostatized the faith, listened to seducers, trusted demons, and worshiped lies, be a virgin? How can someone whose conscience is burned be a virgin? A virgin must be pure not only in body, but also in soul, if she wishes to accept the holy Bridegroom; and how can she (the heretical virgin) be pure, having so many spots? If it is necessary to remove even worldly cares from this bridal chamber, as incompatible with its beauty, then how will she be able to preserve the beauty of virginity, within which an impious thought dwells? Although her body remains uncorrupted, the best part of her has been corrupted - her spiritual thoughts; and what is the use of the fences remaining when the church is destroyed? Or what is the benefit of keeping the seat of the throne clean if the throne itself is defiled? Or better yet, her body is not free from defilement. Although blasphemy and slander are born within, they do not remain in the soul, and once spoken with the lips, they defile both the tongue (of the speaker) and the hearing of the listener, and like poisonous potions, penetrating into the very soul, they overeat the root (of the human being) worse than any worm, and with it they then destroy the whole body. So, if the essence of virginity consists in the holiness of body and spirit, and (a heretical virgin) is defiled and unclean in both respects: then how can she be a virgin? But she points out to me the pallor (of her face), the emaciated limbs (of her body), the wretched clothes, and the humble gaze. What is the use of this when her inner gaze is shameless? What could be more shameless than the gaze that the eyes here have - to look at God’s creations as if they were evil? “All glory to the daughter of the King within” (Ps. 44:14); but she perverted the harmony of this saying, putting on glory on the outside, but having all dishonor on the inside. The trouble is that before people she shows great decency, but before God who created her she allows herself great madness; and she who is careful not to look at a man - if only there are such (virgins) among heretics - looks with shameless eyes at the Lord of people and utters blasphemy against Heaven: their face turned pale and looked like a dead one. That is why they are worthy of tears and many laments, because they took on such labor not only in vain, but also to the death of their heads. Are their clothes poor? But virginity does not lie in clothes or the color of clothes, but in body and soul. If we judge a philosopher not by his hair, not by his cane and not by his tunic, but by his morals and soul, and of a warrior - not by his cloak and belt, but by his strength and courage; then wouldn’t it be absurd to so simply and frivolously believe all the valor of a virgin - this wondrous and surpassing all human phenomenon - in untied hair, in a drooping face and in gray clothes, without delving into her soul and without carefully examining her inner mood? But this is not allowed by the one who decreed the laws of such asceticism. He commands that those who have dedicated themselves to this feat should be judged not by their clothes, but by their beliefs and souls. “Strive for it,” he says, “to abstain from everything” (1 Cor. 9:25), from everything harmful to the health of the soul; and: “No one gets married unless he fights lawfully” (2 Tim. 2:5). What are the laws of this asceticism? Listen to what else he says, or better yet, through him, the Master of Labor Christ Himself: “Marriage is honorable... and the bed is not filthy” (Heb. 13:4). But what do I care about that, you say, when I have completely given up on marriage? This is it, oh unfortunate one! - this is what ruined you, that you think that this teaching has nothing to do with you. That is why you, carried away by an exorbitant contempt for this subject, insulted God’s Wisdom and slandered the entire creation. If marriage is an unclean thing, then all those born from it are unclean, and you are unclean, which I would not say about human nature. How can an unclean woman be a virgin? You have invented this second, or better yet, third kind of defilement and uncleanness; you, avoiding marriage as unclean, through this very removal you became more filthy than anyone else, having invented virginity, which is more vile than adultery. Who will we put you next to? With the Jews? But they will not tolerate this because they honor marriage and admire God's creation. With us? But you did not want to listen to Christ, who spoke through Paul: “Marriage is honorable... and the bed is undefiled” (Heb. 13:4). It remains (finally) to place you alongside the pagans; but they will also reject you, since you are more wicked than them. Plato says that He who arranged all this was good, and that in good there is no envy of anyone or anything 2; and you call Him evil and the author of evil deeds. But do not be afraid: you have the devil and his angels as partners in such a teaching, or better yet, not them, for, although they instilled in you such recklessness, do not think that they themselves reasoned this way. They know that God is good. Listen to how they themselves speak, sometimes crying out: “We know You who is the Holy One of God” (Mark 1:24), then in these words: “These men are the servants of the Most High God, who proclaim to you the way of salvation” (Acts 16:17). Will you really still mention your virginity and boast about it, instead of going away to cry for yourself and sob about the madness with which the devil bound you as captives and dragged you into the fire of hell? You didn't get married? But this is not virginity yet. I can only call a virgin a woman who, although she had the power to marry, did not enter into marriage; and when you say that marriage is one of the forbidden matters, then your feat no longer becomes a feat of will, but a requirement of the law. Therefore we are surprised at those of the Persians who did not marry their mothers, but we are not surprised at the same thing among the Romans; because among the latter such a thing seemed disgusting to everyone, but among the Persians the impunity of those who dared to do this made those who refrained from such incest worthy of praise. The same thing needs to be said about marriage. With us it is allowed to everyone, and therefore we are rightly surprised at the celibate; and you, who have placed marriage along with the worst things, can no longer expect praise for celibacy; for abstinence from what is forbidden is not yet a sign of a valiant and vigorous soul. The perfection of virtue does not consist in not doing things for which we would be considered bad by everyone, but in shining with such deeds that those who have not done them are not condemned for them, and those who have done them and distinguished themselves by them are not only freed from the glory of bad people, but are also placed among the virtuous. Just as no one will praise eunuchs who do not marry for their virginity, neither will you. What happens with them out of necessity of nature, happens with you out of the prejudice of an evil conscience; and just as physical defect deprives eunuchs of respect for this work, so the devil, on the one hand, exhausts you with labor, and on the other hand, does not allow you to receive honors, although you remain with an intact nature, depriving you of sound thoughts and making it necessary to be celibate. Are you preventing marriage? Therefore, for celibacy you will face not a reward, but punishment and torment. And you, someone will say, aren’t you preventing marriage? “Get away from me so that I don’t fall into madness along with you.” - Why, you say, are you exhorting not to get married? - Because I consider virginity much more honorable than marriage; and yet, through this, I do not rank marriage among the bad deeds, but even highly praise it. It is a haven of chastity for those who wish to use it well, without allowing nature to rage. By presenting lawful intercourse as a stronghold, and thus holding back the waves of lust, he places and preserves us in great tranquility. But there are people who do not need such protection, and instead tame the fury of nature with fasts, vigils, prostrations and other rigors of life; I advise such people not to get married, but I do not forbid marriage. There is a great difference between advice and prohibition, such as between will and necessity. The adviseer gives the hearer the power to choose what he advises; and the one who prohibits takes away this power from him. Moreover, when I advise, I do not condemn marriage and do not blame anyone who does not listen to me; and you, rejecting marriage and recognizing it as a bad thing, and arrogating to yourself the right of a legislator and not an adviser, naturally hate those who do not obey you. That's not how I (act); but on the one hand I am surprised at those who took up this feat, and on the other hand I don’t blame those who remain outside of this feat. Condemnation would then only be fair if someone strived for an evil recognized by all; the one who has less good and has not achieved more, although he is deprived of praise and surprise for this, but in fairness cannot be condemned. How can I prevent people from getting married when I do not condemn those getting married? I forbid fornication and adultery, but never marriage. And those who dare to do the former I punish and excommunicate from church society, but those who choose the latter, if they maintain chastity, I constantly praise. Thus, from here two benefits arise: one is that the institution of God is not condemned, and the other is that the dignity of virginity is not only not humiliated, but even turns out to be much more respectable. Thus, whoever condemns marriage reduces glory and virginity; and whoever approves of marriage elevates virginity even more and makes it more wondrous and bright. What is good in comparison only with evil is not yet great good; and what is better than any generally accepted good is good par excellence; This is how we represent virginity as good. Therefore, just as those who condemn marriage deprive virginity of praise, so those who do not condemn marriage praise not so much marriage as virginity. And among bodies we call beautiful not those that are better than those that are mutilated, but those that are better than those that are whole and without any damage. Marriage is good; and virginity is worthy of admiration because it is better than good, and as much better as the helmsman is better than the oarsmen and the commander is better than the warriors. But how, by taking away the rowers from the ship, you will sink the ship, and by removing the warriors from the battle, you will deliver the commander himself into captivity to the enemies; so here too, if you degrade marriage from its high degree, you will reduce the glory of virginity and reduce it to the last degree of evil. Virginity is good: I also affirm this; it is better than marriage: and I agree with that. And if you wish, I will add how much better it is - exactly as much as heaven is better than earth, and angels are better than people, and, to put it more forcefully, even that is more. Angels, although they also do not marry and do not commit violence (Mark 12:25), do not have flesh and blood, do not live on earth, are not troubled by many lusts, do not need food and drink, do not relax with a pleasant song, are not seduced by a beautiful face and do not experience anything else like that; and just as on a clear noon the sky appears clear, not obscured by any cloud, so their nature necessarily remains bright and brilliant, not darkened by any lust. The human race, by nature inferior to these blessed beings, strains its strength and carefully tries, if possible, to compare with them. How? Angels neither marry nor encroach; Neither does a virgin. They continually stand before and serve God: the virgin does the same. Therefore, Paul freed virgins from all other worries, for unceasing and undistracted service to God (1 Cor. 7ff.). Although they cannot yet ascend to Heaven like the Angels, because the flesh holds them back, even here they have great consolation, receiving the Lord of heaven Himself, if they are holy in body and spirit. Do you see the dignity of virginity, how it helps those on earth to lead their lives like the celestials, those clothed with flesh do not allow them to yield to disembodied forces, it leads people to competition with the Angels themselves? But all this does not apply to you, who distort such a matter, slander the Lord, calling Him evil. The punishment of the evil servant awaits you, and the virgins of the Church are offered many and great benefits, surpassing sight, hearing, and human thought. Therefore, leaving the heretics (since enough has already been said for them), let us then turn our speech to the children of the Church. What is a decent way to start a word? From the very words of the Lord that He speaks through blessed Paul; for one must believe that the advice of the apostle is the advice of the Lord. So with the words: “To those who are married I make a will, not I, but the Lord” (1 Cor. 7:10), and again: “To the rest I speak, and not the Lord” (1 Cor. 7:12), the apostle does not mean to say that one of these (testaments) belongs to himself, and the other to the Lord. How could one who had the speaking Christ within himself, who only tried to live in order for Christ to live in him, who had the Kingdom, and life, and Angels, and Powers, and every other creation, and in general everything to take a secondary place after love for Him, dare to say or think something displeasing to Christ, and, moreover, in the form of legalization? So, what do the apostle’s words mean: “az” and “not az”? The fact that some of the laws and dogmas were taught to us by Christ Himself directly, and others through the apostles. And that He Himself did not directly decree everything (laws and dogmas), about this, listen to what He says: “The Imam has spoken many things to you, but you cannot bear them now” (John 16:12). Thus, “a wife should not be separated from her husband” (1 Cor. 7:10) Christ had already decreed when he was on earth in the flesh, and therefore the Apostle says: “But to those who are married I give this commandment, not to I, but to the Lord.” But regarding the unbelievers, He did not tell us anything directly, but gave the law, moving Paul’s soul to it. Therefore, the apostle said: “not the Lord, but I,” wanting to express not that what he said was human teaching (how is this possible?), but that the Lord taught this commandment not when he spoke to the disciples, but after - through him. Just as the words: “Lord, not I” do not mean that he does not agree with the command of Christ; so the words: “I am not the Lord” do not mean that the apostle is saying something special that is displeasing to God, but only that this commandment is now being taught through him. So, while talking about the widow, he says: “If she remains so blessed, she will remain according to my advice” (1 Cor. 7:40). Then, so that you, having heard the words: “according to my advice,” would not think that this is a human judgment, he, eliminating the misunderstanding, added: “I think I have the Spirit of God.” Just as what he speaks from the Spirit and calls his opinion, we therefore do not call it a human saying, so here, when he says: “I say, not the Lord,” do not think that this is Paul’s word; for he had within himself the speaking Christ, and would not have dared to utter such a teaching if he had not received this law from Him for us. Otherwise, someone would have told him: I, as a faithful person, cannot live with an unfaithful woman, a pure person with an unclean one; You yourself said in advance that it is you who are speaking, not the Lord; where will I find safe and reliable support? And Paul would say to him: Do not be afraid; That’s why I said that I have a speaking Christ within me and that “I believe I have the Spirit of God,” so that you would not suspect anything human in my words; if this were not so, I would not attribute such force to my judgments. “For the thoughts of mortals are fearful, and their plans are sinful” (Wis.9:14). And the entire universal Church confirms the power of this law by strictly observing it; but she would not have observed it if she had not been completely convinced that this saying was the command of Christ. So, what does Paul say at the prompting of the Lord? “And about them we write, it is good for a man not to touch his wife” (1 Cor. 7:1). Here one could praise the Corinthians for the fact that, having not received any advice from the teacher regarding virginity, they themselves warned him with their question. From here their progress in grace is already revealed, since in the Old Testament this subject was not subject to bewilderment; for not only everyone else, but also the Levites, and the priests, and the great bishop himself attached great importance to marriage. Why did the Corinthians come to such a question? They clearly and well understood that they needed the highest virtue, since they were awarded a greater gift. It is also worthy of attention why the apostle had never before offered them such advice; if they had heard something like this before, they certainly would not have written again, asking again about the same thing. Indeed, here too one can see the depth of Paul's wisdom. It was not without reason and not in vain that he had not previously given advice regarding this matter, but expected that they themselves would first wish and receive some understanding about it, so that, having before them souls already disposed towards virginity, they could sow the word with benefit, when the very disposition of the listeners towards this virtue would greatly contribute to the acceptance of the admonition; and on the other hand, he showed by this the greatness and great importance of the matter itself. Otherwise, he certainly would not have expected their readiness, but he himself would have previously proposed this, if not in the form of a command and commandment, then in the form of an admonition and advice. Without starting to do this himself before, he clearly instilled in us that virginity requires many efforts and great feats; and he did so, imitating here our common Master, who then began to talk about virginity when his disciples asked Him about it. So, when they said: “If a man and his wife are guilty of such things, it is better not to marry,” then He said: “They are eunuchs, who have corrupted the Kingdom for themselves for the sake of the Heavenly” (Matthew 19:10, 12). When the required work is great, and therefore cannot be included in the necessary commandment, then we must expect the readiness of those intending to fulfill it, arousing in them in advance the desire and desire of others in some way and imperceptibly for them. This is what Christ did. It was not by talking about virginity that He aroused in them the desire for virginity, but by talking only about marriage and showing its severity and not extending the speech beyond that, He so wisely arranged that those who had not yet heard anything about celibacy said from themselves: “It is better not to get married.” Therefore, Paul, an imitator of Christ, said: “about these I have written,” as if justifying himself to the Corinthians and saying this: I did not dare to elevate you to such an extraordinary height because of the difficulty of this matter; but when you yourself wrote to me about this in advance, I boldly give you advice. Why didn’t he make a similar addition anywhere else, although they wrote about a lot to it? Not for any other reason than because of what I just said: that is, so that someone would not be upset by such an admonition, he reminds them of the letters that they sent him, and, moreover, offers the admonition not strictly, although he had a reason for it, but very condescendingly, imitating Christ in this too; for the Savior, having finished his speech about virginity, added: “He who is able to contain, let him contain” (Matthew 19:12). What does the apostle say? “They write about them; it is good for a man not to touch his wife” (1 Cor. 7:1). But maybe someone will say: if “a man’s goodness should not touch his wife,” then why was marriage established in life? What need will we have of a woman if she does not bring us any benefit either in marriage or in childbearing? And what will prevent the destruction of the entire human race, when death daily diminishes and strikes it, and this teaching does not allow others to be restored to the place of the fallen? If we all became jealous of this good and did not touch women, then everything would disappear, cities and houses, fields and arts, animals and plants; because, just as with the fall of a military leader, the entire order of the army is necessarily upset, so with the destruction, from the celibacy of man reigning over all earthly things, nothing else will remain in the previous structure and order, and thus this good commandment will fulfill the universe of countless evils. If only enemies and infidels spoke this way, then I would recognize their words as unimportant; but since many, apparently, who belong to the Church say this, on the one hand, out of weakness of will, abandoning virginal exploits, and on the other hand, wanting to cover up their negligence by condemnation and disdain of virginity, in order to have a reason to shirk these exploits not out of negligence, but out of a sound judgment of the mind, then we now, having left our enemies (“a spiritual person does not accept even the Spirit of God: for he has foolishness” [ 1 Cor. 2:14 ]), let us teach those who pretend to be ours this and that, i.e., that virginity is not only not unnecessary, but is also very useful and necessary, and that such a judgment will not go unpunished for them, but will bring upon them as many troubles as those who strive in virginity will receive rewards and praises. When this whole world was created and everything necessary for our enjoyment and use was arranged, then God created man, for whom he created the world. The Primordial One lived in Paradise, but there was no talk of marriage. He needed an assistant - and he appeared; and yet marriage did not yet seem necessary. He would not have existed until now, and people would have remained without him, living in Paradise, as in Heaven, and enjoying conversation with God; carnal lust, conception, diseases of childbirth and any kind of corruption in general would not have access to their soul, but, like a bright stream flowing from a pure source, people would remain in that dwelling, adorned with virginity. There were then no people on the whole earth, which is now feared by those trustees of the universe who carefully care about other people’s affairs, and do not want to think about their own, who fear that the entire human race might cease to exist, and each neglects his own soul as if it were someone else’s, although an accurate account of it will be required from them even in the smallest subjects, while for the reduction of people they will not be subject to the slightest responsibility. There were no cities, no arts, no houses then, which you also care a lot about; there was none of this then, but nothing disturbed or distorted that life, blissful and much better than the present. When (the primordial ones) disobeyed God and became earth and ashes, then along with that blessed life they lost the beauty of virginity; and it, together with God, left them and departed. Until they were ensnared by the devil and worshiped their Master, virginity continued to adorn them more than kings are adorned with a diadem and golden robes; and when they, having become captives, took off this royal robe and put away this heavenly adornment, and accepted mortal corruption, curse, sorrow and a difficult life, then along with this marriage took place - this mortal and slave clothing. “He who gets married,” says (the apostle), “takes care of the things of the world” (1 Cor. 7:33). Do you see where marriage got its start and why it turned out to be necessary? From disobedience, from curse, from death. Where there is death, there is marriage; If it weren't for the first, there wouldn't be a last one. But virginity has no such connection (with death); it is always useful, always beautiful and blissful, both before death and after death, and before marriage and after marriage. What marriage, tell me, gave birth to Adam, what diseases of childbirth produced Eve? You can't say anything to this. Why are you in vain afraid and afraid that with the end of marriage the human race will not end? Tens of thousands of Angels serve God, and thousands of thousands of Archangels stand before Him (Dan. 7:10), and not one of them came by succession, from childbirth, diseases of childbirth and conception. Thus, God could all the more have created people without marriage, just as He created the first ones, from whom all people descended. And now it is not the power of marriage that multiplies our race, but the word of the Lord spoken at the beginning: “Grow and multiply, and fill the earth” (Gen. 1:28). Tell me, did marriage help Abraham in having children? Was it not after so many years of marriage that he said: “Lord, what mi dasi? But I go away without children” (Gen. 15:2)? Therefore, just as then in the dead bodies of Abraham and Sarah God created the source and root of so many thousands of people, so in the beginning, if Adam and Eve, obeying His commandments, had refrained from enjoying the tree (the knowledge of good and evil), there would have been no shortage of ways to multiply the human race. Neither marriage, without the permission of God, can increase the number of existing people, nor virginity can harm their reproduction when He wants them to be many; but God deigned it as (Scripture) says, because of us and as a result of our disobedience. Otherwise, why didn’t marriage appear before the seduction? Why was there no intercourse in Paradise? Why were there no diseases of childbearing before the curse? Because then it was unnecessary, but later it became necessary, due to our weakness, both this and everything else: cities, arts, clothing and many other needs. All this attracted and brought death along with it. So, what is allowed because of your weakness, do not prefer it to virginity, or better yet, do not compare it with it; otherwise, continuing this speech, you will say that it is better to have two wives than to be content with one, since this is also permitted in the Law of Moses; and then you will also prefer wealth to arbitrary poverty, satiety to abstinence, and revenge to the generous enduring of insults. You, someone will say, condemn all this. – I don’t condemn it at all, because it was allowed by God and at one time it was useful; but I maintain that this is of little importance and is more the occupation of children than of husbands. Therefore, Christ, wanting to make us perfect, commanded us to put it aside, like children’s clothes and incapable of either covering an adult person or decorating “the measure of the age of the fulfillment of Christ” (Eph. 4:13), and commanded us to put on clothes that are more beautiful and perfect, without contradicting ourselves, but quite consistently. Although the last command is greater than the first, the purpose of the Lawgiver is the same. What is this goal? To stop the depravity of our soul and raise it to perfect virtue. If He were not concerned about establishing a higher law in comparison with the previous one, but about leaving everything in the same form forever and never freeing it from the previous insufficiency, then this would be the work of one who greatly contradicts himself. And how, if He had legitimized such a strict way of life at the beginning, when the human race was still in childhood, we would never have received a proportionate (legitimation) and from such disproportion the whole work of our salvation would have been frustrated; so, if after a long time He had left in force on earth the leadership of the law, when time was already calling for heavenly wisdom, we would not have received any benefit from His coming, for the perfection for which this coming took place would not concern us. And now something similar to what happens to chicks has happened. When the mother feeds them, she takes them out of the nest; if he notices that they are still weak, falling and have a need to stay inside the nest, then he leaves them there for a few more days, not so that they remain there forever, but so that later, when their wings are well strengthened and when strength arrives, they can fly safely. So our Lord from time immemorial drew us to Heaven and showed us the path leading there, not ignorantly, but fully knowing that we were incapable of such soaring, but wanting to show us that our fall does not happen according to His will, but because of our weakness. Having shown this, He then left us for a long time to be brought up in this world and marriage, as if in a nest. When, over a long period of time, the wings of virtue grew in us, He came quietly and little by little to lead us out of this dwelling, teaching us to soar to those above. Thus, while some, remaining careless and falling into a deep sleep, remain in the nest, clinging to the worldly, others, truly noble, loving the light, leaving this nest with great ease, fly to the heights and reach heaven, abandoning everything earthly, marriage, property, worries, in general, everything that usually attracts us to earth. Therefore, we should not think that marriage, which was initially permitted, later became such a necessity that prevents evading marriage. That the Lord wants us to shy away from marriage, listen to how He says: “He who is able to contain it, let him contain it” (Matthew 19:12). If He did not first legitimize this, do not be surprised: the doctor does not prescribe everything to the sick suddenly and at the same time, but while they are possessed by a fever, he keeps them from solid food, and when the fever and the resulting weakness in the body passes, then he, finally, having relieved them of unpleasant dishes, offers them ordinary food. Just as in bodies the elements, mixing one with another, due to their excess or deficiency, produce disease: so in the soul, immoderate impulses of passions upset its health; and it is very necessary, at the time corresponding to the emerging passions, to have another commandment (against them), since without both the law itself is not able to correct the disorder that has occurred in the soul, just as the natural properties of medicines by themselves can never destroy a wound, and what is medicine for wounds, is laws for sins. You don’t question a doctor who either cuts or cauterizes, and sometimes does neither one nor the other on the same wounds, and often fails to achieve his goal; Why do you, man, test God, who never sins, but who arranges everything worthy of His inherent Wisdom, and demand from Him an account of the commandments and do not want to yield to Infinite Wisdom? Isn't this extreme madness? He said: “Grow and multiply” (Gen. 1:28) because this was required by the time when nature was furious and could not withstand the pressure of passions, and in such a storm had no other haven for refuge. And what else should be commanded? Spend your life in abstinence and virginity? But this would result in a grave fall and the flame (of passions) would intensify. If children who only need milk were deprived of this food and forced to take another food suitable for adults, then nothing would save them from imminent death. Timelessness is so harmful. Therefore, virginity was not taught at the beginning: or better to say, virginity appeared to us at the beginning and before marriage, and after that, for reasons explained, marriage came along and began to be considered necessary, although there would have been no need for it if Adam had remained obedient. How, you say, would so many thousands of people come into existence? If this fear continues to bother you greatly, then I will ask you again: how did Adam, like Eve, come into being without the mediation of marriage? Really, you say, would all people come to be this way? One way or another, I will not talk about this, because now it is explained that God did not need marriage to reproduce people on earth. And that it is not virginity that causes the decline of the human race, but sin and debauchery, this was shown by the destruction of people and animals that happened under Noah, and in general of everything living on earth. If the sons of God had then resisted vicious lust and honored virginity, if they had not looked with wicked eyes on the daughters of men, then such destruction would not have befallen them. However, let no one think that I consider marriage to be the cause of their death; I’m not talking about this now, but about the fact that our race is perishing and being destroyed not from virginity, but from sin. Marriage is given for procreation, and even more so for extinguishing the natural flame. Paul is a witness to this, who says: “For the sake of fornication, - (to avoid fornication), - let everyone have his own wife" (1 Cor. 7:2). Didn't say: for childbirth. And then he commands to “gather together” (1 Cor. 7:5) not in order to become parents of many children, but for what? “Let not Satan tempt you,” he says. And continuing his speech, he didn’t say: if they want to have children, so what? “If they do not hold back, let them encroach” (1 Cor. 7:9). In the beginning, marriage had, as I said, the two aforementioned goals, but later, when the earth, the sea, and the whole universe were filled, only one of its purposes remained - the eradication of intemperance and debauchery; for for people who even now still indulge in these passions, who want to lead the life of pigs and be corrupted in obscene shelters, marriage is of great benefit, freeing them from impurity and such needs and preserving them in holiness and honesty. However, how long will I fight the shadows? You yourself, who say this, know no worse than we do the superiority of virginity, and everything that you have said is only fiction, pretexts and a cover for intemperance. Even if it were possible to say this with impunity, then it would be necessary to refrain from blaming (virginity). Whoever holds his opinion against something good, besides other harm, with his perverse and unfair response, presents to everyone considerable evidence of his own lewdness; therefore, if for no other reason, then at least in order to avoid such a bad opinion of oneself, one should hold one’s tongue, remembering that the one who is amazed at people who are famous for the greatest exploits, even if he himself could not achieve the same, will receive forgiveness from everyone, and the one who, in addition to not striving himself, also condemns what is worthy of many crowns, will rightly be hated by everyone as an enemy and opponent of virtue, and being in the worst condition than crazy people. These people are not aware of what they are doing and are involuntarily exposed to suffering, and therefore, when they even insult the rulers, they are not only not punished, but also arouse self-pity in the offended themselves. If anyone arbitrarily dares to do what they do involuntarily, he will rightly be condemned unanimously by everyone as an enemy of our nature. Thus, as I said, one should abstain from censure (virginity) even when such censure was safe. But meanwhile there is still a great danger associated with this; for not only the one who “speaks slander against his brother and lays offense against his mother’s son” (Ps. 49:20) will be punished, but also the one who dares to condemn what is beautiful in the eyes of God. Listen to what another prophet says, talking about the same thing: “Woe to those who say good evil, and good evil; Those who put light into darkness and light into darkness, who put bitter into sweet and sweet into bitter” (Isaiah 5:20). And what is sweeter, more beautiful and brighter than virginity? It emits rays brighter than the very rays of the sun, detaching us from everything worldly and preparing us to look with pure eyes directly at the Sun of Truth. This was what Isaiah proclaimed about those (of the Jews) who had perverse judgments; and listen to what another prophet says about those who utter such destructive words against others, beginning his speech with the same exclamation: “Woe to him who solders his companion with muddy corruption” (Hab. 2:15). - “Grief” here is not an empty word, but a threat foreshadowing us with unspeakable and merciless torment; for in the Scriptures this interjection is used of those who can no longer escape future punishment. And yet another prophet, reproaching the Jews, says: “Those who have been sanctified by drinking wine” (Am. 2:12). If the one who gives wine to the Nazarenes to drink is subjected to such punishment, then what kind of punishment will not be worthy of the one who pours “cloudy corruption” into simple souls? If one who undermines a small part of legal asceticism is inevitably subjected to torture, then what condemnation will befall the one who dares to shake this entire shrine? “Whoever shall cause one of these little ones to stumble,” says (the Lord), “he shall not eat, and the millstone of the village shall fall upon his neck, and he shall drown in the abyss of the sea” (Matthew 18:6). What will they say who seduce with their words not just a few, but many? If he who calls his brother a freak is directly thrown into the fire of Gehenna, then what kind of anger will be brought upon his head by the one who condemns this equal-angelic way of life? Miriam once laughed at Moses, not as much as you now laugh at virginity, but much less and more moderately, for she did not humiliate him and did not ridicule the valor of this then-pleased husband, but she also respected him very much, and only said that she had achieved the same thing that he had achieved; and yet, by this, she brought upon herself such the wrath of God that even the intense prayers of the offended one did not help at all, but her punishment lasted longer than he thought. What am I saying about Mariam? Even the children playing near Bethlehem, when they only said to Elisha: “Come, you bald man” (2 Kings 2:23-24), angered God so much that at these words the bears attacked their crowd (there were forty-two of them), and they were all torn to pieces by these beasts: neither their age, nor their numbers, nor the fact that they said this in jest - nothing saved the youths; and very fair. If those who undertake such feats are ridiculed by both children and adults, then who of the weakest will decide to take on feats pursued by ridicule and mockery? Who among the people will be jealous of virtue, seeing it in such ridicule? If now, when everyone everywhere is amazed at her, not only those who practice her, but also those who have fallen away from her, many do not dare and shy away from these exploits, then would anyone soon want to choose her if they saw that all people, in addition to not admiring her, also slander her? Men who are very strong and seem to have already moved to Heaven, of course, do not at all need encouragement from the crowd: praise from God is quite enough for their encouragement; but the weakest and those who have recently begun this feat receive considerable reinforcement from the opinion of the people, until, guided by everyone, they little by little reach the point that they will not need such guidance. And this happens not only for them, but also for the salvation of those who mock them, so that they no longer succeed in their depravity because they have not received any punishment for the past. With these words, what happened under Elijah came to my mind (2 Kings 1 et seq.). What the children suffered for Elisha from the bears, the same for his teacher two fifty men (King Ahaziah), together with their leaders, suffered from the fire that was ignited from above. When they, with great mockery, approached (to the mountain where Elijah was sitting), called the righteous man and ordered him to come down to them, the fire that descended in his place consumed them all, like those beasts. So, all of you, enemies of virginity, having thought about this, put doors and locks to your lips, so that on the day of Judgment, when you see those shining with virginity, you will not have to say: “These are the things that were once used as a joke and as a parable of reproach. Madness, their life imputed furiously and their death dishonorable. How is it counted among the Sons of God, and what is their lot among the saints? For we have gone astray from the true path, and the light of righteousness has not shone upon us” (Wis. 5:3-6). But what is the use of these words at a time when repentance is already powerless? Perhaps some of you will say: has no one reviled holy men since then? They were reviled by many everywhere on earth. Why, he will say, were they not subjected to the same punishment? We have been, and we know many of them; if some have escaped it, they will not escape it completely; for, according to the testimony of Blessed Paul, “certain... sins are presented as a precursor to judgment; Just as legislators leave the punishments of criminals noted in the records, so our Lord Jesus Christ, having punished one or another of the sinners and noting their punishments, as if on a brass pillar and in writing, through what happened to them, inspires everyone that although others who have sinned equally with those punished are not being punished at the present time, they will in the future be subjected to the most severe punishment. So, if we sin immeasurably and do not tolerate any evil, we should not admire this, but fear it more. If we do not submit to God’s judgment here, then we will be condemned there along with the whole world. This is again not my verdict, but Christ speaking through Paul. Speaking about those who unworthily partake of the Mysteries, he says: “For this reason there are many infirmities and sicknesses in you, and they sleep contentedly. Even if they had reasoned with themselves, they would not have been condemned. If we judge, we are punished by the Lord, lest we be condemned with the world” (1 Cor. 11:30–32). There are people who only need punishment here when their sins are moderate; and they, having been punished, no longer return to the former, like a dog returning to its vomit; There are also those who will be punished both here and there for excessive vices; and others, who have surpassed everyone in their atrocities, will be subjected to torment there, not being worthy to “receive the wound” along with other people. “And men,” it is said (in Scripture), “will not receive wounds” (Ps. 72:5), as those who are reserved for execution along with demons: “Depart from Me,” (the Lord) will say, “into the outer darkness prepared for the devil and his angel” (Matthew 25:41). Many captured the priesthood through money, but did not have a accuser and did not hear what Simon the Magus once heard from Peter (Acts 8:20); but through this they did not escape punishment, but would be subjected to much more severe punishment than what they should have suffered here, for not being enlightened by this example. Many ventured into the works of Korah, and did not suffer like Korah (Num. 16:1); but later they will suffer greater punishment. Many who competed with Pharaoh's wickedness were not drowned in the sea like him; but the abyss of hell awaits them. And those who called their brothers freaks have not yet been punished, because execution is prepared for them there. So, do not think that the definitions of God are only words: for this purpose He fulfilled some of them in action, for example, on Sapphira, on Achar, on Aaron and many others, so that those who do not believe His words, having been convinced by their deeds, would finally stop deceiving themselves with the thought that they will not be punished, and would be convinced that God, in His goodness, tends to give time to sinners (for repentance), and not completely leave those who are in repentance without punishment. sins. More could be said to prove what kind of fire those who degrade the beauty of virginity are preparing for themselves; But for the sane, this is enough, but for the incorrigible and the insane, even a much more extensive speech cannot keep them from madness. Therefore, leaving this part of the speech, we will say all the following for the sane, returning again to blessed Paul. “And about these things,” he says, “it is good for a man not to touch his wife” (1 Cor. 7:1). Let both those who condemn marriage and those who extol it not according to its dignity be ashamed now; Blessed Paul stops the lips of both these and the following words. Marriage is good because it preserves the husband in chastity and does not allow one who deviates into adultery to perish. Therefore do not condemn marriage; he brings great benefit by not allowing the members of Christ to become members of a harlot, not allowing the holy church to be defiled and unclean. He is good because He strengthens and corrects those who are ready to fall. But what use is it to someone who stands firm and does not need his help? Here it is no longer useful or necessary, but even serves as an obstacle to virtue, not only because it causes a lot of inconvenience, but also because it reduces most of the praise. Whoever equips a person with weapons who can fight and win without weapons, not only does not bring him any benefit, but also causes extreme offense, depriving him of glory and bright crowns; because it does not allow him to show all his strength and his trophy to be the most brilliant. And in marriage there is even greater harm; because he deprives not only praise from the people, but also the rewards prepared for virginity. Therefore, “it is good for a man not to touch his wife.” Why do you allow touching? “For the sake of fornication,” says the apostle; I am afraid to raise you to the heights of virginity, lest you fall into the abyss of adultery; your wings are not yet so light for me to lift you to such a height. But they themselves would have decided on these feats and would have strived for the beauty of virginity; Why are you afraid and afraid, blessed Paul? Because, perhaps, he would say that they, not knowing this feat, show such readiness; But my own business and the struggle I have already experienced disposes me to be more careful in advising this state to others. I know the difficulty of this state, I know the strength of these feats, I know the severity of this struggle. This requires a zealous, courageous soul, not subject to lust; here you must walk on hot coals and not get burned (Proverbs 6:28), stand against the sword and not be wounded; for the power of lust is as great as the power of fire and iron; and if the soul comes out unprepared and does not resist its inclinations, it will soon destroy itself. Therefore, we need to have an adamantite mind, vigilant vision, great patience, strong walls with fences and locks, vigilant and valiant guards, and above all this, help from above; for “unless the Lord preserves the city, those who keep it will go in vain” (Ps. 127:1). How can we obtain this help? If we apply everything on our part, sound thoughts, great zeal for fasting and vigil, strict fulfillment of the law, observance of the commandments and, most importantly, we are not arrogant. Even if we manage to accomplish even great feats, we must always say to ourselves: “Unless the Lord builds a house, those who build it labor in vain” (Ps. 126:1); “For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the principalities and powers and rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places” (Eph. 6:12); day and night our thoughts must remain armed and be terrible for shameful lusts; for if they weaken a little, the devil will come with fire in his hands to set fire to and burn down the church of God. Therefore, we must protect ourselves on all sides. We have a struggle with the needs of nature, imitation of the life of Angels, competition with ethereal forces; earth and ashes try to become equal to the inhabitants of heaven, and corruption enters into competition with incorruption. Now, tell me, will anyone dare to equate marriage and pleasure with such a thing? Isn't this pretty crazy? Knowing all this, Paul said: “Let every man have his own wife” (1 Cor. 7:2). Therefore, he avoided, and therefore did not dare to speak to the Corinthians about virginity from the very beginning, but continued his speech about marriage, wanting to little by little distract them from marriage, and into this long speech he inserted brief words about abstinence, so that their ears would not be struck by the severity of this admonition. Whoever composes his entire speech entirely from heavy objects is unbearable for the listener and often forces the soul, which cannot bear the weight of his words, to turn away from them; and whoever diversifies the speech and composes it more from easy than difficult subjects, covers up the heaviness of the subject and, having calmed the listener, thus more successfully convinces and attracts him, as Blessed Paul did. Having said: “It is good for a man not to touch his wife,” he immediately moved on to marriage; “everyone,” he says, “let him have his own wife.” (Virginity) he only praised, saying: “It is good for a man not to touch his wife,” and stopped; and regarding marriage he gives advice and commandments and gives the reason in the words: “fornication for the sake of.” Apparently, he proves the permissibility of marriage; but in fact, in words about marriage, he quietly praises abstinence, without expressing this explicitly, but leaving it to the conscience of the listeners. Whoever understands that he is advised to marry not because marriage is the height of virtue, but because in himself Paul condemns such lust, from which it is impossible for him to restrain himself without marriage, he, ashamed and blushing, will immediately try to choose virginity and evade such dishonor. What then does (the apostle) say? “Let the husband render due love to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband” (1 Cor. 7:3). Then, interpreting and explaining the same thing, he adds: “The wife does not own her body, but the husband; likewise the husband does not own his body, but the wife” (1 Cor. 7:4). And apparently he is talking about marriage, but in fact, as if covering the hook with an ordinary bait, he throws it into the ears of the students, wanting to distract them from marriage with the very words about marriage. Whoever hears that after marriage he will not be master of himself, but will be in the power of his wife, will immediately try to free himself from this bitter slavery, or better yet, and will not begin to submit to this yoke; since he who has once submitted must then servile until his wife pleases. And that I am not just expressing Paul’s thought out of a hunch, this can easily be seen by the example of the disciples (of Christ). And they did not recognize marriage as painful and burdensome before they listened to the Lord, who brought them to the same necessity that Paul brought the Corinthians to; for that saying: “Who... He will let his wife go, ... if she commits adultery in speech” (Matthew 5:32), and this: “the husband does not control his own body” (1 Cor. 7:4), express the same thought, only in different words. If anyone looks more closely into Paul’s saying, he will (see that) it further increases the power (of the wife) and makes the slavery (of the husband) even more difficult. The Lord does not give the husband the power to drive his wife out of the house; and Paul deprives him of power over his own body, transferring all power over him to his wife and subordinating him more than a purchased slave. It is often possible for a slave to obtain complete freedom if he is able, having collected enough silver, to pay his master for himself; and the husband, even if he had the most intolerable wife of all, is obliged to endure slavery and cannot in any way find liberation from it and a way out of this subordination. Having said that “a wife does not own her own body,” the apostle continues: “Do not deprive yourself of one another, but by mutual consent for a time, but continue in fasting and prayer, and gather together again” (1 Cor. 7:4-5). I think that at these words many of those who have devoted themselves to virginity blush and are ashamed of Paul’s such condescension; but do not be embarrassed or indulge in any indecent feeling. Apparently, these words were spoken to please those entering into marriage; but if someone carefully delves into them, he will find in them the same thought as the previous ones. If anyone begins to consider them simply, without regard to the above reason, they will seem more like the words of a matchmaker than of an apostle; but if he fully examines their purpose, he will find this exhortation completely consistent with apostolic dignity. Why does he expound on his speech at greater length? Wouldn't it be enough to say a decent exhortation in the previous words and leave it at that? Does the words: “do not deprive each other, only by mutual consent for the time being,” contain anything more than the words: “let the husband give due love to his wife,” and: “the husband does not own his own body”? Nothing more; but what is expressed briefly and unclearly there is stated here more extensively and clearly. The apostle does this in imitation of God’s holy Samuel. How Samuel laid out with all precision the laws regarding the kingdom to the common people, not so that they would accept them, but so that they would not accept them, and apparently this was an instruction, but in fact it was some deviation from their untimely desire (to have a king); So Paul repeatedly and very clearly expands on submission in marriage, wanting with these words to turn away his listeners from marriage. Having said: “a wife does not own her body,” he continues: “do not deprive yourself of each other, but by consent, but remain in fasting and prayer.” Do you see how imperceptibly and reproachfully he encourages those who are married to practice abstinence? At first he simply praised this matter, saying: “It is good for a man not to touch his wife”; and here he added an admonition, saying: “Do not deprive yourself of each other, only by consent.” Why did he offer what he wanted to establish in the form of an exhortation, and not in the form of a command? He did not say: deprive yourselves of each other by consent; And what? - “Do not deprive yourself of each other, (unless) by consent”; because through this the speech became more pleasant, expressing the teacher’s thought, which does not demand this with persistence, which is why the fulfillment happens more quickly and with great gratitude. And not only by this does he console the listener, but also by the fact that, having outlined the painful in brief words, even before the listener is saddened, he moves on to something more pleasant, and dwells on this longer. The following also deserves investigation: “If marriage is honorable and the bed undefiled” (Heb. 13:4), then why does (the apostle) not allow them during fasting and prayer? Because it would be very strange: if even the Jews, for whom everything had the imprint of the flesh, who were even allowed to have two wives, to cast out some and take others, so protected themselves in this matter that, preparing to listen to the Word of God, they abstained from legal intercourse, moreover, not for one day or two, but for several days (Ex. 19: 1), then it would be strange if we, who received such grace, received the Spirit, those who died and were buried in Christ, worthy of adoption, elevated to such honor, after so many and such great blessings, did not exert the same zeal as these children. If someone were to ask again why Moses himself rejected the Jews from marriage, I would say that marriage, although honest, can only achieve that which does not defile the person living in it, and he alone is not able to impart holiness - this is no longer a matter of his strength, but of virginity. And it was not only Moses and Paul who proclaimed this; listen to what Joel says: “Sanctify the fast, preach celibacy, gather the people, sanctify the church, choose elders” (Joel 2:15–16). But perhaps you want to know where he advised abstaining from his wife? “Let the bridegroom come out from his bed,” he says, “and the bride from her palace” (Joel 2:16). This is even greater than the Mosaic commandment. If the bride and groom, whose passions run high, whose youth blossoms, whose lust is uncontrollable, should not communicate during fasting and prayer, then isn’t it much more so for those for whom there is no such need for communication? Anyone who prays and fasts properly must renounce all worldly lust, all care and distraction, and, having completely concentrated within himself in all respects, in such a state approach God. Therefore, fasting is good because it eliminates the worries of the soul and, stopping the drowsiness that oppresses the mind, turns all thoughts to it itself. Paul alludes to this when he deviates from copulation, and uses a very precise expression. He did not say: “Let not you be defiled,” but: “Let you remain,” i.e. practice in fasting and prayer”; since communication with a wife does not lead to impurity, but to lack of exercise (in these matters). If now, after such precautions, the devil tries to hinder us during prayer, then, having caught the soul relaxed and pampered from addiction to his wife, what will he not do, entertaining our mental eyes here and there? So that we do not tolerate this and do not turn to God with vain prayer, especially when we try to bend Him to mercy towards us, the Apostle then commands us to move away from the (marriage) bed. If those who come to kings, what do I say, to kings? - even to lower superiors, and slaves who resort to their masters, having suffered an insult from others, or needing some kind of benefit, or hastening to tame the anger aroused against them, begin to explain with these persons, fixing their eyes and all their thoughts on them, and at the slightest distraction they not only do not achieve what they want, but also leave, having received some kind of trouble; if those who want to appease the anger of people act with such care, then what will happen to us, the unfortunate ones, if we approach the Lord of all - God with carelessness, subjecting ourselves to much greater anger from Him? Neither a servant will irritate his master, nor a subject of a king, the way we anger God every day. Explaining this, Christ called sins towards one’s neighbor denarii, and sins towards God – “my talent” (Matthew 18:23, 24). Therefore, when we resort to Him in prayer with the intention of calming such anger and appeasing Him, who is so angered by us every day, (the apostle) rightly turns us away from the mentioned pleasure and seems to say: “Beloved, we are talking about the soul, the danger is extreme; we need to tremble, fear and lament; we approach the formidable Lord, who has been repeatedly insulted by us, who has great accusations against us and for great sins; now is not a time for embraces or pleasures, but for tears and bitter lamentations, kneeling, careful confession, diligent contrition, and many prayers.” It will be good for the one who, having approached God with such zeal and fallen down, softens His anger, not because our Lord was cruel and inflexible - on the contrary, He is very meek and loving of mankind - but the excessiveness of our sins does not allow even the Good, Meek and Most Merciful to quickly forgive us. Therefore, the apostle says: “Let you continue in fasting and prayer.” What could be more deplorable than that slavery? I would like to succeed in virtue, ascend to heaven, and wash away the impurity of my soul through constant exercise in fasting and prayer; and meanwhile, if my wife does not want to bow to this intention of mine, I am forced to slavishly submit to her intemperance. Therefore, at first he said: “It is good for a man not to touch his wife.” Therefore, the disciples said to the Lord: “If a man and his wife are guilty of this, it is better not to marry” (Matthew 19:10). Having reasoned that (in marriage) both parties must endure oppression, they, forced by these thoughts, uttered such a saying. That is why Paul turns repeatedly to the same subject in order to instill in the Corinthians the same thought: “Let every man have his own wife, ... let the husband render to his wife the love due... A wife does not own her own body... Do not deprive yourself of each other, ... gather together.” And the blessed disciples (of Christ) did not immediately after the first suggestion judge this way, but when they heard about it for the second time, they realized the need for such a commandment. Christ talked about this while he was sitting on the mountain, and after many other instructions he spoke again, arousing in them a love for abstinence (Matthew 5:28); because the same instructions, the more often they are repeated, the more force they have. So here, too, the student, imitating the Teacher, repeatedly talks about the same thing, and nowhere does he make concessions simply, but with a reason: “for the sake of fornication,” he says, in order to avoid satanic temptations and intemperance; and thus, in words about marriage, he quietly praises virginity. If he feared for people living in marriage, so that in the event of their prolonged separation the devil would not find access to them; then what crowns will be worthy of those who from the very beginning had no need for such assistance and remained elusive to the end? Moreover, the machinations of the devil are not the same against both. The first, in my opinion, are not too bothered by it, knowing that their refuge is close; and, if they feel a fairly strong attack, they can immediately retreat to the pier; why Blessed Paul does not allow them to sail further, but advises them to immediately return back if they get tired, allowing them to “gather together” again. And a virgin must constantly be at sea and sail on the ocean, without having a pier; and even if the most severe storm arises, she cannot moor her boat and rest. Therefore, just as sea robbers do not attack sailors near a city, harbor or pier (for this would mean exposing themselves to danger in vain), but, having overtaken a ship in the middle of the sea and, to encourage their insolence, taking advantage of the lack of help (for this ship), they use all their efforts there, and do not fall behind before either sinking the sailors, or suffering the same themselves; So this terrible robber raises a great storm against the virgin, a cruel whirlwind and unbearable unrest, turning everything upside down in order to capsize the boat with force and speed, for he heard that the virgin is not allowed to “gather together,” but she needs to fight all her life, constantly fight with the spirits of evil, until she reaches a quiet haven (in Heaven). Having placed the virgin, like a valiant warrior, outside the walls, Paul does not allow her to open the gates (of refuge), even if the enemy attacks her strongly and even if he becomes even more furious from the very fact that his enemy is not allowed to have rest. And not only the devil, but also the power of (natural) lust worries those who do not marry even more; and everyone knows this. We are not so quickly attracted by desire to what we use, since unhinderedness (to pleasure) disposes the soul to slowness. A proverb, although common, but very fair, confirms this to us. “What is always in our power,” she says, “we don’t want so much.” If we encounter obstacles to what was previously in our power, then the opposite happens; and the very thing that we neglected due to the possession of it becomes the object of our strongest desire. So, firstly, for this reason - those who marry have more peace of mind; and secondly, because if their flame (of passion) ever rises high, then subsequent copulation will soon extinguish it. And the virgin, not having a way to extinguish this flame, although she sees that it is flaring up and rising, and being unable to extinguish it, she only tries to ensure that in the fight against the fire she herself does not get burned. What could be more amazing than this - to carry a whole hearth inside yourself and not burn out, to feed the flame in the recesses of the soul and keep the mind intact? She is not allowed to throw away these burning coals, and she is forced to endure in her soul what, according to the writer of Proverbs, it is impossible for bodily nature to endure. What is he saying? “Whoever walks on coals of fire will not have his feet burned?” ( Proverbs 6:28 ). But here she walks and endures torture. “If someone binds fire into the depths, will he not burn the robe?” ( Proverbs 6:27 ). And she, carrying a fierce and stormy flame not in her clothes, but inside herself, must restrain and hide it. Who dares, tell me, to equate marriage with virginity or to look with disdain at this latter? Blessed Paul does not allow this, showing the great difference between the one and the other: “She who does not trespass,” he says, “cares for the things of the Lord, ... but she who trespasses cares for the things of the world” (1 Cor. 7:34). Having allowed the couple to “gather together”, and thereby giving them pleasure, listen to how he further disapproves of them. “Gather together,” he says, “let Satan not tempt you.” Wanting to show that not everything here depends on Satan’s temptation, but even more on our depravity, he cited the main reason, saying: “your intemperance” (1 Cor. 7:5). Who would not be ashamed when he hears this? Who would not try to avoid the reproach of intemperance? This admonition does not apply to everyone, but to the very lustful. If, he says, you are such a slave of pleasure, if you are so relaxed that you are constantly inflamed and strive for copulation, then communicate with your wife. Thus, this permission is not approval or praise, but ridicule and condemnation. If he had wanted not to touch the souls of sensualists too much, he would not have used the word “intemperance,” which is very expressive and contains a great reproach. Why didn’t he say, “through your weakness”? Because this would more mean an apology on his part, and with the word “intemperance” he expressed the excessiveness of their carelessness. So, it is characteristic of intemperance that it will not have the strength to avoid adultery, unless someone constantly has a wife next to him and enjoys copulation. What will those who consider virginity unnecessary say now? The more strictly it is observed, the more it deserves praise; and marriage is then especially deprived of all praise when someone uses it to the point of satiety. “This,” says (the apostle), “I say by advice (by condescension), [and] not by command” (1 Cor. 7:6); and where there is condescension, there can be no place for praise. And talking “about virgins”, he said: “I am not an imam of the Lord’s commandments” (1 Cor. 7:25); So didn’t he equalize both? No: he gives his opinion about virginity, but here he is condescending. He commands neither one nor the other, not for the same reason; but there so that someone, wanting to overcome intemperance, would not encounter an obstacle to this in the obligatory command, and here because someone who does not have the strength to achieve virginity would not be condemned as having violated the command. I do not command, he says, to remain in virginity, because I am afraid of the difficulty of this matter; I do not command you to constantly communicate with your wife, because I do not want to be the legislator of intemperance. I said, “Get ready,” holding back from falling lower, but not preventing the diligent ascent higher. So, it is not he who primarily wants (marriage) to constantly communicate with his wife, but this is established by the incontinence of the most careless people. If you want to know Paul’s own desire, then listen to what it is: “I desire,” he says, “that all men may be as I am” (1 Cor. 7:7), i.e. in abstinence. So, do you, (apostle), want everyone to observe abstinence, do you want no one to be married? - Yes, but however, by this I do not prevent those who wish (to get married) and do not blame them, but I pray and wish, “that all ... may be as I was,” and I allow marriage - “for the sake of fornication”; That’s why at the beginning I said: “It is good for a man not to touch his wife,” because this is what I desire more. And why does he mention himself here in the words: “I want all men to be like me”? If this had not been added, he would have avoided talking about himself. Why did he add: “like I”? Not to exalt myself; Although he surpassed the (other) apostles in preaching works, he considered himself unworthy even of the apostolic title. “I... am the apostles,” he says; and, as if he had said something beyond his dignity, he immediately corrects himself and adds: “Who is not worthy to be called an apostle” (1 Cor. 15:9). Why is he exposing himself here, during admonition? Not simply and not in vain, but he knew that students are then especially inspired by zeal for good when they have examples of teachers. Just as someone who philosophizes only in words, without deeds, does not bring great benefit to the listener, so, on the contrary, the one who can offer advice that he himself has carried out in advance, captivates the listener most of all. Moreover, he presents himself as pure from both envy and pride; for he wants such excellent virtue to be common among the disciples, not striving to have anything greater than them, but in everything equating them with himself. I can give a third reason. Which one? – (Being a virgin) seemed difficult and inconvenient for many; therefore, wanting to present it as very easy, the apostle shows him to be successful in this, so that they would not consider it very burdensome, but, looking at the guide, they themselves would boldly embark on the same path. He does the same elsewhere. Talking with the Galatians and trying to free them from the fear of the law, under the influence of which they were attached to the ancient custom and observed many things related to it, what does he say? “Be as you are, as I am, and as you are” (Gal. 4:12). This saying means the following; you cannot, he says, tell me: you are safe to reason with us about all this because you have now converted from the pagans and do not know the fear that comes from breaking the law; no, he says, and like you, I was once in this slavery, I was under the commands of the law, I kept and kept the commandments; but when grace appeared, I completely turned from the law to it (Gal. 1:13); and there is no crime in the fact that we have gone to “another man” (Jer. 3:1); therefore, no one can say that I do one thing and advise another, or that, out of concern for my own safety, I have plunged you into danger; if this matter had been dangerous, then I would not have betrayed myself, and would not have neglected my own salvation. Thus, just as here, by setting himself as an example, he freed (the Galatians) from fear, so there, by making himself visible, he removed the anxiety of the Corinthians. “But every one,” he says, “has his own talent..., in the same way, in the same way” (1 Cor. 7:7). See how the distinctive sign of his apostolic humility is not hidden anywhere, but is clearly expressed everywhere: he calls his merit a gift from God, and for what he spent a lot of work, he attributes it entirely to the Lord. And what is surprising if he does this when speaking about abstinence, when he talks in the same way about preaching, for which he endured countless labors, incessant sorrows, unspeakable disasters, daily deaths? What does he say about this? “I have labored more than all of them: not I, but the grace of God which is with me” (1 Cor. 15:10); does not say that one belongs to him and the other to God; but everything (attributes) to God. Thus, a grateful slave tends to consider nothing as his own, but everything as his master’s, to assimilate nothing to himself, but everything to his master. He does the same elsewhere. Having said: “They have... gifts, according to the grace given to us variously” (Rom. 12:6), then he counted the positions of authority, alms and alms that were among the Romans; and that all this is merit, and not talent, is clear to everyone. I said this so that you, having heard his words: “everyone has his own talent,” would not lose heart and say to yourself: “Virginity does not depend on my zeal; Paul called it a gift.” He says this out of humility, and not because he wanted to put abstinence among the gifts. Thus, he does not contradict either himself or Christ; does not contradict Christ, Who said: “They are eunuchs who have distorted themselves for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven” (Matthew 19:12), and added: “He who is able to contain, let him contain”; does not contradict himself, since he condemns those who, having chosen widowhood, did not want to persist in their intention; Otherwise, if this is a gift, why does he threaten (widows) in the words: “They have sin, because they have rejected the first faith” (1 Tim. 5:12)? Christ never condemned to punishment those who do not have gifts, but always those who do not lead a righteous life. An excellent life and impeccable deeds are especially desirable for him; and the division of gifts does not depend on the will of the recipient, but on the will of the Giver. Therefore, Christ nowhere praises those who perform miracles, and rejects the disciples who admired this from such joy: “Do not rejoice,” He says, “for the souls obey you” (Luke 10:20); and everywhere the merciful, the humble, the meek, the pure in heart, the peacemakers, who do all this and the like, are pleased with Him. And Paul himself, listing his merits, mentioned abstinence among them. Having said: “In much patience, in sorrows, in troubles, in distress, in wounds, in prisons, in disorder, in labor, in vigils, in fasting,” he added: “in purification” (2 Cor. 6:4-6). He would not have done this if this purity were a gift. And why does he reproach those who do not have it, calling them intemperate? Why (in his words) “do not give... your virgin to marriage... he does better” (1 Cor. 7:38)? Why is “most blessed... is” a widow, “if this remains” (1 Cor. 7:40)? Because, as I said above, people are pleased not for miracles, but for deeds, just as they are punished. And why does he repeatedly repeat the exhortation to the same thing, if this matter does not depend on us, and after the grace of God does not require our zeal? Having said: “I want all men to be like me,” i.e. in abstinence, he also says: “I say to the unmarried and to widows, it is good for them if they remain, just as I did” (1 Cor. 7:7, 8). Again he cites himself (as an example) for the same reason, so that, having an example near and at home, (the Corinthians) would sooner decide on the exploits of virginity. And what he said above with the words: “I want... that all... will be as I was,” and here: “good for them... if they remain, as I was,” does not give a reason anywhere, do not be surprised at this; he does this not out of vanity, but considering his opinion, justified in practice, as a sufficient reason. If anyone wants to hear judgments about this (marriage of widowed people), then let him first take into account the opinion of all people about it, and then everything that happens to be associated with this matter. Although legislators do not punish such marriages, they even allow and excuse them, but many, both in their homes and in the square, talk a lot about marriage matters with ridicule, reproach and disgust. Everyone shies away from such people no less than from oathbreakers, so to speak, not daring either to enter into friendship with them, or to conclude agreements with them, or to trust them in anything else. Whoever sees that they have so easily erased such a habit of friendship, cohabitation, and communication from their souls becomes somewhat numb from these thoughts; and he can no longer approach them with all sincerity, as frivolous and quick-witted people. And not only for this reason do they turn away from them, but also because of the very unpleasantness of what is happening to them. What could be, tell me, more unbearable than that, after great crying, screams and tears, disheveled hair and black clothes, suddenly seeing applause and bridal chambers and confusion, all in contrast to what preceded it, as if actors on stage were playing first one role, then another? How can you see the same person now as a king, now as a poor man; so here, too, the one who recently prostrated himself near the grave suddenly becomes a groom, who tousled his hair, again wears a crown on the same head, who with a drooping and sad look, and often with tears, expressed to those who consoled him many praises for the departed (wife) and said that his life was not life, and was indignant at those who kept him from complaining, he often, in front of the same faces, again decorates and dresses up, and as before with with tears in his eyes, he now looks at the same people with a smile and greets everyone in a friendly manner with the same lips with which he previously cursed all such joys. And what is most regrettable is that with this comes discord between children; A lioness appears next to her daughters: for this is what a stepmother usually is. Hence the daily bickering and quarrels, hence the strange and incongruous hostility towards the one who no longer bothers anyone. Usually, the living persecute and are persecuted by envy, and enemies are reconciled with the dead; but this is not the case here: dust and ashes become the object of hostility, inexpressible hatred is directed against the buried, slander, reproach and slander against the decomposed in the earth, irreconcilable hostility towards the one who does not cause any grief to anyone. What could be worse than such unreason, such cruelty? Not at all offended by the deceased - what am I saying - not offended? - who takes advantage of her labors and enjoys her goodness, does not cease to fight with her shadow, and who has not caused any grief, and often has never been seen, daily showers with many reproaches, takes revenge on the non-existent through her children, and often arms her husband against them, if she herself is not successful. And yet all this seems easy and tolerable to people, so that they do not need to endure the attraction of lust. And the virgin is not afraid of this confrontation, does not avoid this struggle, which seems so unbearable to many, but she becomes valiant and enters into a struggle with nature. Is it possible to admire her for her dignity, when others even need a second marriage in order not to ignite, and she, having not experienced one, always remains holy and unharmed? Therefore, and first of all, in view of the rewards prepared for widowhood in heaven, (the apostle), having within himself the speaking Christ, said: “It is good for them, if they remain, as I also did.” Could you not ascend to the highest degree (of perfection)? At least don’t fall with the one that comes after her; let the virgin have only this advantage over you that lust has never overcome her, and, having previously overcome you, she could not keep you in her power forever; and after defeat you won, and she has victory, pure from all defeat; touching you at the end, she surpasses you only at the beginning. So, to those who have entered into marriage (the apostle) teaches many consolations, since he does not deprive them of each other without their mutual consent, and this deprivation by consent does not extend for a long time, and also allows them a second marriage, if they wish, so as not to ignite. But he did not give any such consolation to the virgins; but after such abstinence the first ones are again freed from it, and the virgin, without the slightest relief, is left to fight for the rest of her life, stand steadfastly and be troubled by lusts, and does not give her the slightest rest. Why didn’t he tell her: “If he can’t hold back, he’ll attack” (1 Cor. 7:9)? Because even to a wrestler, when he had already taken off his clothes, oiled himself, went out into the field and became covered in dust, no one would say: “Get up and run away from the enemy”; but it is necessary for each of them to emerge either crowned or fallen and disgraced. In children's play and in gymnastics school, where they practice with loved ones and fight with friends, as if with enemies, everyone has the power to strive and not to struggle; but when someone has already committed, and the theater has assembled, and the director of the competition has appeared, and the spectators have sat down, and the opponent is brought out and opposed, then the law of competition takes away the power from the wrestler. Likewise, a virgin, while she has not yet decided whether to marry or not, is allowed to marry without hindrance, but when she has chosen and doomed herself (to virginity), she has already put herself out into the field. Who will dare, at a time when the spectacle is open, when the Angels and the Master of Labor Christ are looking down from above, when the devil is raging and grinding, standing in plain sight and rushing to fight, to step into the middle and say: “Flee from the enemy, leave your work, refrain from collision, do not overthrow or overcome your opponent, but give him victory?” What am I saying about virgins? No one would even dare to say such words to widows, but instead would say the following, terrible ones: “Whenever... They will become furious against Christ, they will encroach on those who have sin, because they have rejected the first faith” (1 Tim. 5:11, 12). Meanwhile, (the apostle) himself says: “I say... to the unmarried and to widows: it is good for them, if they continue, as I did; If they don’t hold back, they will encroach,” and again: “If her husband dies, she is free to eat, for no good reason, to encroach, but in the Lord” (1 Cor. 7:8, 9, 39); Why does he again punish the one to whom he gives freedom, and condemns that marriage, which he says takes place “in the Lord,” as a lawless matter? Don't be embarrassed; it is not the same marriage, but a different one. As in the words: “if a virgin commits violence, she has not sinned” (1 Cor. 7:28), he is not talking about the virgin who has renounced marriage - it is obvious to everyone that such a virgin would have sinned through this - but about the one who has not yet experienced marriage and has not yet decided on either one or the other, but is in hesitation between these two thoughts; so there he speaks of a widow who simply does not have a husband and has not yet bound herself by the decision of her own will, but is free to choose both; there also about the one who no longer has the power to communicate again with another groom, but has begun the feats of abstinence; for it is possible to be a widow and not be among those who have the dignity of widows, if she has not yet received it. That is why he says: “A widow... let her debt be no less than sixty years old, having been the wife of one husband” (1 Tim. 5:9). He allows a simple widow to marry if she wishes; and he strongly condemns the one who made a vow of permanent widowhood to God, and then entered into marriage, because she trampled on the covenant with God. Thus, to the first, and not to the last, he says: “If they cannot resist, let them encroach; It’s better to get married than to get married” (1 Cor. 7:9). Do you see that marriage in itself is not glorified anywhere by him, but is (allowed) to avoid adultery, temptation, and intemperance? He says all this above, but here, having uttered strong reproaches against them, he again speaks of the same thing in more favorable terms, calling their state inflamed and inflamed. However, even here he did not leave the listener without reproach. He didn’t say: “If they feel any impulse of passion, if they are forced, if they cannot (abstain),” and nothing that is characteristic of those suffering and worthy of indulgence, but what? “Unless they can resist,” which is typical of those who do not want to act out of carelessness. He shows that they do not do the work that is in their power because they do not want to work. However, even at the same time he does not punish them and does not condemn them to torture, but only, having deprived them of praise, limits his displeasure to verbal reproaches, never mentioning childbirth, this plausible and honest reason for marriage, but only about incitement, intemperance, adultery and satanic temptation, and in order to avoid this, allowing marriage. Well, they will say, if he delivers us from punishment, we will complacently endure all condemnation and all reproaches, as long as we are allowed to enjoy and constantly satisfy lust. And what, most respected one, if we are not allowed to enjoy, and we only reap reproach? How, you say, is it not permissible to enjoy when Paul says: “If they cannot restrain themselves, let them trespass”? But listen to what follows. You have learned that it is better to marry than to become inflamed, you accept what is pleasant, you approve of the permission, you are surprised at the condescension of the Apostle; but don’t stop there, but accept what follows; both commands belong to the same (apostle). What does he say after that? “And to those who are married I give this commandment, not to I, but to the Lord: the wife shall not be separated from her husband. Even if she is separated, let her remain single, or let her reconcile herself with [her] husband; neither let the husband let his wife go” (1 Cor. 7:10, 11). What if the husband is meek, but the wife is capricious, slanderous, talkative, wasteful - this is a common ailment for all of them - and full of many other bad qualities? How will he, the unfortunate one, endure such everyday trouble, pride, shamelessness? What if, on the contrary, she is modest and quiet, and he is impudent, suspicious, angry, very arrogant with wealth or power, treats her freely as a slave, and will be no better disposed towards her than he is towards the maidservants? How will she bear such humiliation and oppression? What if he constantly turns away from her and does this incessantly? Be patient, says (the apostle), all this slavery: for only then will you be free when he dies; and during his life one of two things is necessary - either to admonish him very carefully and correct him, or, if this is impossible, to courageously endure constant and irreconcilable hostility. Above he said: “Do not deprive yourself of each other, only by consent”; and here he commands the separated one to abstain, although this time through captivity: “let her remain,” he says, “celibate, or let her reconcile herself with [her] husband.” Do you see how she is between two troubles? She must either endure violence from lust, or, if she does not want this, please her offender and be ready for whatever he wants, whether to beat her, or shower her with slander, or subject her servants to contempt, and so on; since husbands have come up with many means when they want to punish their wives. If she does not tolerate this, then she must remain in fruitless abstinence; barren, I say, because this promise does not apply to him, since it does not come from a desire for holiness, but from anger at her husband. “Let her remain,” she says, “celibate, or let her reconcile herself with her husband.” What do you say if he doesn’t want to make peace? You have another opportunity to get rid and free yourself. Which one? Expect him to die. Just as a virgin is never allowed to marry, because her Groom is always alive and immortal, so a woman who has entered into marriage can only (gain freedom) when her husband dies. If only during his lifetime she could move from him to another, and from this again to another; then what are marriages for, when husbands would begin to indifferently use each other’s wives and everyone would simply mix with everyone else? Wouldn’t mutual affection also disappear if today one, tomorrow another, and then a third began to live with the wife of one of the cohabitants? The Lord rightly called this adultery. Why did He allow this to the Jews? So that they do not quarrel with each other, so that they do not fill their homes with related blood. What was better, tell me, for someone who had become hated - to be driven out, or to be killed inside the house? And they would have done the latter if they had not been allowed to expel. Therefore (the Lord) says: “If you hate, let go” (Deut. 24:1-3). When He talks with the meek and those whom He does not even allow to be angry, He says: “If... she is separated, let her remain single” (1 Cor. 7:11). Do you see the constraint, the inevitable slavery, that binds both of them? Truly, marriage is a bond, not only because of the many worries and daily displeasures, but also because it subjugates the spouses to each other worse than any slave. “The husband will have dominion over the wife,” says (the Lord), “(Gen. 3:16). What is the use of this possession? It also makes him a slave of the property, constituting some new and unusual reward through slavery; how the feet of the fugitives, having been tied by themselves, and also tied one to the other by some small chain attached at both ends to the shackles, cannot walk freely, because each of them is forced to follow the other; So the souls of the spouses, having their own special concerns, also have another constraint that comes from the union with each other, restraining them worse than any chain and taking away freedom from both by not giving leadership to one of them, but dividing power between both. So, where are those who are ready to endure any condemnation for the enjoyment of pleasure? A considerable part of the pleasure is reduced by mutual grief and strife, often lasting for a long time. And slavery itself, which forces one to involuntarily endure the waywardness of another, is able to darken all pleasure. Therefore, the blessed one (Paul) at first restrained the desire for voluptuousness with reproachful words: “for the sake of fornication,” to avoid intemperance and incitement; but knowing that these words of condemnation are of little significance for many, then he adds stronger expressions to curb them. Therefore, the disciples (of Christ) found it necessary to say: “It is better not to marry” (Matthew 19:10), in view of the fact that none of the spouses has power over themselves. And this is offered no longer as admonition or advice, but as an obligatory command and commandment. Whether or not to marry depends on us; and what follows marriage is no longer in our power, but, willingly or unwillingly, we must endure slavery. Why? Because we do not choose this submission out of ignorance, but, knowing very well its rights and laws, we voluntarily expose ourselves to this yoke. Then, having spoken about those living with unfaithful wives, setting out in detail all the laws on marriage, inserting a speech about slaves and sufficiently comforting them with the fact that their spiritual nobility is not humiliated by this slavery, he finally moves on to words about virginity, which he had previously observed in himself and tried to sow, and now he revealed, although he could not resist, he did not keep silent about it in the words about marriage; for briefly and in different places he placed the words (on virginity) in this last exhortation, and in such an excellent way, having prepared our ears and predisposed the mind, he made an excellent introduction to the speech (on virginity). After admonishing the slaves, “at the price,” he says, “you are bought by nature, do not become human servants” (1 Cor. 7:23), - reminding us of the good deed of the Lord, and thereby resurrecting and raising to heaven the minds of everyone, he then expounds the doctrine of virginity, expressing himself in the following words: “I have not given the commandment of the Lord about virgins, but I give advice, for I have received mercy from Be faithful to the Lord" (1 Cor. 7:25). Although he also did not have a command regarding the faithful who mate with the unfaithful, he nevertheless gives the law about them with great authority and writes: “To the rest I say, and not the Lord: if a brother has an unfaithful wife, and she is pleased to live with them, let him not leave her” (1 Cor. 7:12). Why don’t you declare the same regarding virgins? Because Christ gave a clear decree regarding this, prohibiting the introduction of virginity as an obligatory commandment; for His words: “He who is able to contain, let him contain,” give the listener the power of choice. Talking about abstinence, the apostle says: “I want all men to be, like I,” in abstinence; and again: “I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they continue, just as I did” (1 Cor. 7:7-8); speaking of virginity, he nowhere mentions himself. That is why he speaks very modestly and with great caution, because he himself did not accomplish this feat. “Commands,” he says, “are not the imam.” Having first provided a choice and set the listener up well, he then gives advice. Since the very name of virginity immediately points to a great feat, he does not immediately move on to this exhortation, but having first attracted the student to himself through choice and prepared his soul for obedience and submission, he then makes an offer. You have heard that virginity is the name of many labors and exploits, but do not be afraid; it is not a command and is not introduced as an obligatory commandment, but to those who take it upon themselves voluntarily and by election, it rewards with its own benefits, placing a brilliant and good-colored crown on their head; those who refuse and do not want to accept it, it does not punish or force them to do so against their will. And not only by this did he make his word unburdened and pleasant, but also by indicating that the grace of this feat was given not from him, but from Christ. He didn't talk about virgins; I do not command, but: “the imam does not command”; and as if he were saying this: if I offered such an admonition, guided by human reasoning, then I should not have decided on it; but since it pleases God, the guarantee of safety is reliable; I am deprived of the power to give such commands; but if you want to listen to me, as a slave equal to you, then “advice... I give, because you have received mercy from the Lord to be faithful” (1 Cor. 7:25). Here the great art and prudence of the blessed one (Paul) is worthy of admiration, as he, being among two necessities and opposites, - to present his own personality, so that the advice became acceptable and did not say anything superfluous about himself - since he himself did not have this virtue - in short words he achieved both; for with the words: “as if he had mercy,” he seems to be exposing himself, and by not exposing himself from a more brilliant side, he humiliates and humbles himself. He did not say: I give advice as a man entrusted with the gospel, as one honored to be a preacher to the pagans, as one who has been entrusted with authority over you, as a teacher and leader; but how? “I have been pardoned,” he says, claiming less; for “to be” only “faithful” is less than to be a teacher of the faithful. He even adds another humiliation. Which? He does not say: as one who has become faithful; but “as if he had received mercy, he was faithful to be.” Do not think that only apostleship, preaching and teaching are gifts of God, but even faith itself came to me by His grace. Not because I was worthy, I was worthy of faith, he says, but only because I was shown mercy; and mercy is by grace, and not by merit: so if God were not supremely merciful, then I could never have become not only an apostle, but also a faithful one. Do you see the gratitude and contrite heart of the servant, who does not ascribe to himself any advantage over others, but even about what he had in common with his disciples, about faith, he says that it is not his, but a gift of the mercy and grace of God, expressing with these words the following: do not consider it unworthy to accept advice from me, for God did not recognize me as unworthy of His mercy; however, this is only advice, not a command; I advise, not legislate; no law prohibits presenting and offering something useful for everyone, especially if this is done at the request of listeners, such as now at yours; “I consider this,” he says, “to be good” (1 Cor. 7:26). You see how modest and alien to any power the speech is. One could say this: if the Lord did not command virginity, then neither do I (I do not command), but I advise and exhort you to strive for this, for I am your apostle; - just as he told them further: “Even if I am not an apostle to others, I am also to you” (1 Cor. 9:2). Here he does not say anything like that, but uses words with great modesty, instead of: I advise - “I give advice”, instead of: as a teacher - “for I have received mercy from the Lord to be faithful”; and as if this were not enough to make the speech humble, he, starting with advice, again belittles the authority, not just offering it, but also giving a reason: “For,” he says, “I consider ... this good thing to be for the present need” (1 Cor. 7:26). When he spoke about abstinence, he did not say: “I think”, and did not give any reason, but simply said: “It is good for them if they remain as I did”; here: “I think it’s good to be.” He does this not because he has doubts about this subject - no - but because he wants to leave everything to the judgment of his listeners; for the counselor is not the one who decides with his own words, but the one who leaves everything to the judgment of the hearers. What need is he talking about here? Is it about natural? No; because, firstly, if he spoke about this need, then by mentioning it, he would do the opposite of what he wanted; for those who wish to marry constantly refer to it; secondly, he would not call it “real”: it is not only now, but since ancient times it was innate to the human race, and was previously more difficult and unbridled, but after the coming of Christ and with the progress of virtue it became easily overcome. So, he is not talking about her, but he means another (need) that is diverse and heterogeneous. Which one is it? Perversion of everyday affairs. Such confusion ensues, such a burden of worries, such a multitude of circumstances (in life) that those who marry against their will are very often forced to sin and make mistakes. At first, not such a degree of virtue was proposed, but it was allowed to take revenge on the offender, and to respond with reproach to the one who blames, and to take care of wealth, and to give a false oath, and to gouge out an eye for an eye, and to hate the enemy, and it was not forbidden to enjoy or be angry, or to divorce one’s wife and marry another. Not only that, the law even allowed having two wives at the same time, and in general there was great leniency in this and in everything else. But after the coming of Christ, the path became much narrower, not only because this inexpressible and great freedom was taken away from our power in all of the above, but also because even such a wife, who often persuades and forces us against our will in many sins, must always be with us, and anyone who wants to can get a divorce when she is convicted of adultery. And not only for this reason is virtue difficult to fulfill for us, but also because, if the woman living with us has a tolerable character, the multitude of worries about her and about the children does not allow us to look at Heaven even for a short time, producing, as it were, constant dizziness, disturbing and drowning our soul. Look: the husband wants to lead a private, safe and quiet life; but seeing that the children and wife around him require many expenses, he throws himself against his will into the maelstrom of public affairs. As soon as he falls into it, it is impossible to say how many reasons he will have to sin: to be angry, to swear, to scold, to take revenge, to pretend, to do much out of flattery, much out of hatred. How is it possible for someone spinning in such a pool and wanting to distinguish himself in it not to stain himself with the filth of many sins? If anyone pays attention to household chores, he will find the same and even greater difficulties from his wife; here you need to take care of many things that the husband does not need on his own: this is the case when the wife is modest and quiet; if she is willful, stubborn and unbearable, then we will call this not only a difficulty, but punishment and torment. How will he be able to follow the path to Heaven, which requires free and light legs and a vigorous and well-adorned soul, who has such a heavy burden, is bound by such bonds and is constantly drawn down by this chain, i.e. wife's anger? But what (can there be) is a plausible objection from many when we have stated all this? Therefore, they will say, the one who is virtuous under such difficulties will be given greater honor. Which one, most honorable, and for what? For that, you will say that he is subjected to a greater burden in marriage. But who forced him to take on such a burden? If he had married in fulfillment of the commandment and failure to marry was a violation of the law, then this objection would have been plausible; if he, having the power not to be subjected to the yoke of marriage, voluntarily, without any coercion, wished to incur such difficulties on himself that the feat of virtue became very painful for him, then this does not in the least concern the Ascetic; for He commanded to succeed in only one thing, in the fight against the devil, and to achieve victory over evil; But whether someone succeeds in this, getting married, enjoying himself and having a lot of worries, or struggling and being poor, and not caring about anything else, He does not care about this. He says that the method of victory and the path leading to victory must be free from everything worldly; if you want to be at war and fight, having a wife, children and all the related matters, hoping to have the same success as those who are not connected by anything similar, and through this to be rewarded with greater surprise, then we, even if you reproach us for great pride, would now tell you that it is impossible for you to reach the same heights as those; and the end and time of distribution of crowns will well convince you then that security is much better than empty ambition, and it is better to obey Christ than the vanity of your own judgments. Christ says that for virtue it is not enough for us to renounce all property if we do not hate ourselves; and you say that you can win by clinging to all this. But, as I said, then you will know very well what an obstacle to virtue a wife and caring for a wife can be. Why, they will say, did God call the one who serves as an obstacle a helper (husband)? “Let us make him,” He says, “a helper for him” (Gen. 2:18). But I also ask you: what kind of helper is she who deprived her husband of such prosperity, cast him out of his wonderful stay in Paradise and plunged him into the confusion of real life? This is not characteristic of the helper, but only of the attacker. “From woman,” it is said (in Scripture), “the beginning of sin, and by it we all die” (Sir.25:27); and blessed Paul says: “And Adam was not deceived: but the woman was deceived and became transgressed” (1 Tim. 2:14). What kind of helper is she who subjected her husband to death? What kind of helper is that through whom the sons of God, or better yet, all the then inhabitants of the earth, along with animals, birds and all other living creatures, perished in the flood? Didn't she intend to destroy the righteous Job if he were not a strong man (Job.2:9)? Wasn’t she the one who destroyed Samson (Judges 16:1)? Didn’t she arrange for the entire Jewish people to serve Baal-peor and be defeated at the hands of their brothers (Num. 25:1-3)? Who in particular betrayed Ahab to the devil (1 Kings 21:25), and even earlier - Solomon with all his wisdom and glory (1 Kings 11:4)? And do not (wives) often incline their husbands to insult God? Is this why a wise man says: “All malice is small against the malice of women” (Sir.25:21). But why, they will say, did God say: “Let us make him a helper after him”? God's Word is certainly not false. And I won’t say this, no, she was created for this and that’s why, but she didn’t want to remain with her own dignity, just like her husband. God created him in His image and likeness: “Let us create,” He says, “man in our image and likeness” (Gen. 1:26), just as He said: “let us make him a helper”; but after creation, man soon destroyed both. He did not preserve the “likeness” (for how could he preserve it, having indulged in shameful passion, leaning towards seduction and not conquering the desire for pleasure?), and therefore was involuntarily deprived of the property of the “image”; for God deprived him of a considerable part of his dominion, who was terrible to everyone as a ruler, and became an unrecognized slave after insulting the Lord, making him despicable for slaves like him. At first he was terrible for all animals: God brought them all to him, and not one dared to cause him harm or intrigue, seeing the Royal image shining in him; when he darkened these features with sin, God deprived him of this dominance. Just as through the fact that man does not rule over everything on earth, and even fears and fears some, the saying of God is not made false: “and subdue the beasts of the earth” (Gen. 1:28) (for the reduction of power did not come from the One who gave it, but from the one who received it): so the intrigues of wives in relation to their husbands do not weaken the words: “Let us make him a helper after him” - it occurred for this purpose, but did not remain with it. In addition, it can be said that she provides her assistance in arranging real life, in the birth of children and in curbing natural lust; but when there is no longer time for real life, or for procreation, or for lust, then why in vain do you mention the helper here? If someone who is able to assist only in small matters becomes a collaborator in great matters, then not only will they not receive any benefit, but they will tie themselves up with worries. What, they ask, will we say to Paul, who says: “What ... weigh, woman, if you save a husband” (1 Cor. 7:16) and therefore recognizes her help as necessary in spiritual matters? And I agree with this: I do not completely exclude her from helping in the spiritual; - it won’t happen! - but I say that she does this when she is not engaged in marriage matters, but, remaining a woman by nature, achieves the virtue of blessed husbands. She can help her husband not with her jewelry, not with luxury, not with requests to her husband for money, not with pomp and extravagance, but when, having become above everything present and having imprinted the apostolic life in herself, she shows great meekness, great modesty, great contempt for money and patience; then she will be able to support him when she says: “Having food and clothing, we will be satisfied with these” (1 Tim. 6:8), when she will justify such wisdom by works and, laughing at bodily death, consider real life as nothing, when all the glory of this life will be recognized, in agreement with the prophet, as “the flower of grass” (Is. 40:6). Thus, a wife can save her husband not by mating with him as a wife, but by her evangelical life, which many women did even without marriage. Thus, Priscilla, having accepted Apollos, says (in Scripture), guided him along the entire path of truth (Acts 18:26). Although this is no longer possible, women can apply the same diligence and reap the same benefits. A woman, as I said above, converts a man not because she is his wife, otherwise nothing would prevent anyone who has a believing wife from remaining an unbeliever, if community and cohabitation arrange this matter. But this is not the case, not at all: on the contrary, one must show great wisdom and patience, laugh at marriage matters and do this constantly, this is what contributes to the salvation of the soul of the partner; if the wife constantly engages in women's affairs, then she will not only not bring him any benefit, but will also harm him. Even so, this is one of the most difficult matters. Listen to what (the apostle) says: “Why, woman, should you save your husband?” (1 Cor. 7:16). We usually use this type of question in speech about something that rarely happens. What does he say next? “Have you become attached to your wife? Don't look for permission. Have you renounced your wife? Do not seek a wife” (1 Cor. 7:27). Do you see how he constantly makes transitions and often combines both subjects in his exhortation? Just as in the words about marriage he inserted words about abstinence, exciting the listener at times, so here he again inserts words about marriage, giving the listener rest. He began with virginity, but before saying anything about it, he immediately went on to talk about marriage; for the words: “commands not the imam” are the essence of the words allowing and introducing marriage. Then, turning to virginity and saying: “I think... this is good to be,” and noticing that the constant repetition of its name makes a difficult impression on the gentle ear, he does not talk about it continuously; but, having given a sufficient reason for facilitating the feats of virginity, i.e. “real need”, he doesn’t dare to call it “virginity” again, but what? “It is good for a man to be like this,” he says and does not continue his speech about this, but interrupting and stopping it before the difficulty (of virginity) was revealed, he again inserts words about marriage and says: “Have you become attached to your wife? Don't look for permission." If this were not so, if he did not want to offer consolation here, then it would be unnecessary for someone who advises virginity to talk about marriage. Then he goes back to virginity, but even here he doesn’t call it by its proper name, so what? “Have you renounced your wife,” he says, “do not look for a wife.” However, do not be afraid: he did not define or legitimize this; the word about marriage again stands close, rejecting this fear and prophesying: “Even though you were married, you were not matured” (1 Cor. 7:28). But don’t fall now; he again attracts you to virginity, which is what he wants to say in words teaching that those who marry will have great “sorrow of the flesh.” Just as the best and kind doctors, intending to give a bitter medicine, or to perform a cutting, or cauterization, or something similar, do not do everything suddenly, but, always giving the patient rest in between, thus do the rest; Likewise, blessed Paul did not expound his advice on virginity without stopping, holistically and continuously, but by constantly interrupting it with words about marriage and covering up its difficulty, he made his speech meek and acceptable. This is why a variety of words have been mixed up. The following words are also worthy of consideration: “Are you attached to your wife? Don't look for permission." This is not so much advice as an indication of the difficulty and hopelessness of these bonds. Why didn't he say: do you have a wife? – don’t leave her; do you live together? - don’t break up, but call cohabitation a bond? This indicates the difficulty of the matter. Since everyone resorts to marriage as an easy matter, it shows that those who are married are not at all different from those who are bound (by bonds); for here, where one leads, the other must follow, or if one rebels, then the other will perish along with him. What will (the wife) say if my husband is prone to weaknesses, and I would like to abstain? You must follow him: the pleasant chain of marriage imposed on you forces you to do so and, against your will, attracts you to the one who is originally connected with you; if you resist and evade, then not only will you not be freed from the bonds, but you will also be subject to extreme punishment. She who abstains against the will of her husband will not only lose the reward for abstinence, but will also give an answer for his adultery, and an answer more severe than himself. Why? Because she, depriving him of legal intercourse, casts him into the abyss of debauchery. If she does not have the right to do this even for a short time without his consent, then what forgiveness can she receive by constantly depriving him of this consolation? But what, you say, could be heavier than this necessity and threat? And I say the same thing. Why are you exposing yourself to such necessity? This should have been thought through before marriage, not after marriage. Therefore, Paul, having spoken of necessity due to bonds, speaks of liberation. After the words: “Are you attached to your wife? Don’t seek permission,” he adds: “Have you renounced your wife? Don't look for a wife." He does this so that you, having clearly considered and recognized the burden of marriage in advance, will more easily accept the word of celibacy. “Even though you were married, you have not sinned; and even if a virgin has violated you, you have not sinned” (1 Cor. 7:28). This is where the great merit of marriage is limited: by the fact that it is not condemned, and not glorified; the latter belongs to virginity, and the one who enters into marriage must be content with the knowledge that he has not sinned. Why, they will say, do you advise against looking for a wife? Because once bound (by marriage) one should not break it, for this entails many sorrows. So, tell me, will we really get the only benefit from virginity that we will avoid the sorrow here? Who will decide to take on such a feat, expecting to receive only this reward for such labor? What are you saying? Calling me to fight with demons (“for our struggle is not against flesh and blood” - Eph. 6:12), commanding me to resist natural fury, urging me to perform exploits with flesh and blood on a par with incorporeal forces, do you mention only earthly blessings and the fact that we will not have sorrows that come from marriages? In fact, why didn’t the Apostle say this: if a virgin marries, she will not sin, but will deprive herself of crowns for her virginity, many and unspeakable gifts? Why didn’t he list the blessings awaiting them after the struggle, how they would go to meet the Bridegroom, how they would receive brilliant lamps, how they would enter the bridal chamber with the King with great glory and courage, how they would shine most of all near His Throne and the Royal seats? He did not make even a brief mention of this, but both above and below he mentions liberation from everyday troubles. “I remember,” he says, “this is good to be,” and instead of saying: in view of future benefits, he says: “for present need.” Further, again saying: “even if a virgin encroaches, she has not sinned” and, keeping silent about the heavenly gifts that she deprived herself of, says: “sorrow... they will have such flesh.” And he does this not only until now, but also to the end, and omitting the indication of future benefits, he again gives the same reason: “Time,” he says, “has ceased to exist,” and instead of saying: “I want you to shine in heaven and appear much more glorious than those who have married,” he continues to say here: “I want you to be without sorrow” (1 Cor. 7:32). He does this not only in this place, but also when talking about suffering grievances, he uses the same method of exhortation. Having said: “If... your enemy is hungry, feed him; “If he is thirsty, give him something to drink” (Rom. 12:20), having commanded such a thing, commanding him to overcome the need of nature and fight such an unbearable flame, in his words about rewards he kept silent about Heaven and the heavenly, and indicated the reward for this in harm to the offender: “For in doing this,” he says, “you are heaping coals of fire on his head” (Rom. 12:20). Why does he use this method of exhortation? Not out of ignorance and ignorance of how one can persuade and convince a listener, but because he was distinguished more than all people by this virtue, i.e. ability to persuade. Where can you see this? From what he said. Where and how? He talked with the Corinthians (we will first analyze what was said to him about virginity), in whom he “did not judge... know that..., but Jesus Christ and Him was crucified” (1 Cor. 2:2), with whom he could not speak as with spiritual people, and also fed them with milk, for they were carnal, for which he reproached them in this message: “But you can still go lower now,” he said, “even for the sake of carnality.” naturally... and walk according to man” (1 Cor. 3:2, 3). Therefore, he encourages them to virginity and deviates them from marriage with earthly goods, visible and tangible. He knew well that people who were cowardly, base and still committed to the earth could be quickly attracted and rewarded with earthly blessings. Why, tell me, do many ignorant and rude people, both in unimportant and important matters, swear by God without fear and break the oath, and do not dare to begin the oath with the heads of their children? Although the violation of that oath and the punishment for everything is much greater than for the last, they still rather use the first oath than the second. Likewise, regarding helping the poor, they are not so much influenced by words about the Kingdom of Heaven, even if they are often repeated, as by the hope for something useful in this life, either for their children, or for themselves. They are then especially prone to such guardianship when they hope to get relief from a long illness, avoid danger, or achieve some kind of power and authority. And in general it turns out that most people are more likely to be convinced by what is close in front of them. Whatever influences their feelings more, prompts them more quickly to do good deeds and deters them more from doing bad ones. Therefore, (Paul) spoke thus to the Corinthians, and encouraged the Romans to endure insults with real (goods). A weak and offended soul will not so easily cast off the poison of anger if it hears about the Kingdom (Heavenly) and receives distant hopes, as when it expects punishment for the offender. So, wanting to cut off the root of rancor and calm anger for now, he brings out what was most effective for consoling the offended, without depriving him of the appointed reward in the future, but trying for now to lead him in any way onto the path of wisdom and open the door to reconciliation, for the most difficult thing is to begin the feat, and upon entry, the work is no longer so great. But our Lord Jesus Christ does not do this, talking about both virginity and suffering insults: talking about the first, He points to the Kingdom of Heaven: “And they are eunuchs,” He says, “who have corrupted themselves for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven” (Matthew 19:12); when He exhorts to pray for enemies, then, without saying anything about harm to those who offended and without mentioning burning coals, but, leaving all this to be said to cowardly and base people, he encourages them to do so with higher (goods). What kind? “That you may be,” he says, “sons of your Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 5:45). Look how great the reward is, because His listeners were Peter, James, John and a host of other apostles; therefore He motivated them with spiritual rewards. And Paul would have done the same if his speech had referred to such people; but since he spoke to the Corinthians, who were very imperfect, he points them to the immediate fruits of their labors, so that they would more willingly begin to practice virtue. Therefore, God rewarded the Jews, without mentioning the Kingdom of Heaven, with earthly blessings; and for bad deeds he threatened not with Gehenna, but with misfortunes in this century: famine, pestilence, disease, wars, captivity and the like; for carnal people are more likely to be restrained by this, and are more afraid of this, and care less about the invisible and unreal. Therefore, Paul dwelled more on what could especially affect their rudeness. In addition, he wanted to show that some other virtues, placing a lot of work on us, harvest all their fruits in the future, and virginity, even with asceticism in it, gives us considerable reward, freeing us from such work and worries. At the same time, he suggested something third. What then? That this matter should be considered among the not impossible, but very possible. He does this by explaining at great length that marriage has a lot of inconveniences, as if addressing someone like this: this matter seems burdensome and difficult to you; but this is why I myself suggest you take up it, because it is very easy, since it gives us much less worries than marriage; “I will spare you,” he says, and I don’t want you to have sorrows, that’s why I don’t want you to get married. What kind of sorrow? - maybe someone will say; on the contrary, we find that marriage gives great pleasure and pleasure; and firstly, satisfying passion with all freedom, without causing any violence to nature, serves a lot for relief; and then the rest of life is freed from despondency and impurity and becomes full of pleasantries, fun and joy; for people who please the flesh with a luxurious table, delicate clothes, a soft bed, constant ablutions, incense, wine that is in no way inferior to incense, and many other and various excesses, as a result of marriage, give it great pleasure. All this is impermissible; marriage usually gives us only freedom of intercourse, and not pleasure. A witness to this is Blessed Paul, who says: “But she who eats abundantly died alive” (1 Tim. 5:6). This is what he says about widows; listen to what he says about those who are married. “Let women adorn themselves with finery, with all shame and chastity, not in wickerwork, or gold, or beads, or costly garments, but (as) becomes women who promise themselves godliness and good works” (1 Tim. 2:9, 10). And not only here, but also in other places, as everyone can see, he talks a lot about how we should have absolutely no concern about anything like that. But what am I saying about Paul? He said this when there was a time of supreme wisdom and there was great grace of the Spirit. And Amos, speaking to the Jewish infants, who were allowed both pleasure and luxury, and, so to speak, everything unnecessary, listen to how strongly he reproaches those who indulge in pleasure: “Woe to those who come in the day of evil, who draw near and touch the lying Sabbaths, who sleep on a bed of ivory bones and are kind in their beds, who eat the goats of the pastures.” and the calves are fed with milk from the midst of the herds; splashing towards the voice of squeaks, like a standing mush, and not like a running one; drinking strained wine and smelling the first stench” (Amos 6:3–6). So, as I said above, enjoying is not allowed at all; but even if nothing of this kind were prohibited, but everything was permitted, there are so many other things equal to this in their sorrow and grief, and even more numerous and greater to such an extent that we do not feel at all pleasant (marriage) and all pleasure from it disappears. If someone is jealous by nature or has indulged in this passion for some unjust pretext, then tell me, what could be more unfortunate than such a soul? Comparing war and storm with such a family, you can find a sure guide here: everything is full of sadness, suspicion, disagreement and confusion. Those possessed by this fury are no better than those possessed by demons or those suffering from insanity: so often he rushes, retreats and gets irritated at everyone, and constantly takes out his anger on people who are simply present and innocent of anything, be it a slave, or a son, or someone else. All pleasure disappears and everything is filled with despondency, sorrow and displeasure; Whether he stays at home, goes to the square, or goes traveling, this grief accompanies him everywhere, exciting and irritating his soul worse than anything and giving no peace; for this illness usually produces not only despondency, but also unbearable irritation. Each of them in itself is sufficient to destroy the one possessed by it; if they attack him together, depressing him constantly and not giving him rest even for a short time, then how many deaths will this be worse? Whether someone names extreme poverty, incurable disease, fire, iron, he will not indicate anything equal to this. Only those who have experienced it themselves know this well, and no words can express the excessiveness of this grief. When someone is forced to constantly suspect the one whom he loves most and for whom he is gladly ready to give his soul, then what consolation can relieve him? Whether he needs to go to sleep, or take up food and drink, the table will seem to him filled more with poisonous substances than with dishes; on the bed he will not have peace even for a short time, but will worry and spin around, as if on hot coals. Neither the company of friends, nor concern for business, nor the fear of dangers, nor an excess of pleasures, nor anything else can distract him from this storm; but stronger than all joys and sorrows this storm takes possession of his soul. With this in mind, Solomon says: “Jealousy is as cruel as hell” (Song. 8:6), and again: “For the wrath of her husband is filled with jealousy; it will not spare on the day of judgment, and will not change the enmity at any cost; it will be resolved by many gifts” (Prov. 6:34, 35). The fury of this disease is such that the grief from it does not go away even after revenge on the one who caused it; often many, having destroyed the adulterer, were not able to destroy their anger and despondency; and there are also those who, having killed their wives, continued to burn in this fire as much or even more. The husband spends his life in such disasters, when there is not even a sure reason; and the pitiful and unhappy wife suffers more than her husband. When she sees that the one who should be a consolation among all sorrows and from whom protection should have been expected treats her brutally and most hostilely, then where can she turn, to whom can she resort, where can she find deliverance from evils, when the harbor is closed to her and full of a thousand cliffs? Then the slaves and maids treat her more insultingly than her husband; this kind of people is generally prone to suspicion and ingratitude; When they gain more courage and see that their masters disagree with each other, they find in their enmity many reasons for their shamelessness. Then they can, with all the boldness, invent and invent whatever they want, and increase suspicion with their slander. The soul, once infected with this evil disease, easily believes everything and, equally opening its ears to everyone, cannot distinguish slanderers from non-slanderers, and even to it the words of those who increase suspicion seem more reliable than those who try to destroy it. From this, finally, it becomes necessary for a wife to fear and fear slaves and their wives no less than her husband and, having given up her place to them, take their position herself. When can she not shed tears? What night, what day, what holiday can she spend without moaning, lamenting and sobbing? Threats, insults and slander (pursue her) constantly: either from an imaginary insulted husband, or from vile slaves; caution, caution, and everything is filled with fear and trembling. Not only are her entrances and exits observed, but her words, glances, and groans are examined with great care, so that she must either be more motionless than stones and endure everything in silence and constantly sit in her room worse than a prisoner, or, if she wishes, speak, cry and go out, and for everything be subject to the report and trial of these worthless judges, i.e. maids and many slaves. Let there be, if you wish, among these evils countless wealth, a luxurious table, crowds of slaves, nobility of birth, greatness of power, great glory, the celebrity of ancestors; in general, do not omit anything that apparently makes real life enviable, but carefully collect everything, contrast it with this sadness - and you will not even see the manifestation of any pleasure from all this, but it will disappear, as a small spark usually fades out, falling into a huge sea. This is what happens when a husband is jealous; if this passion takes possession of his wife (which often happens), then it will be easier for him than for his wife, and even more grief will fall on this unfortunate woman; because she can't use the same weapon against the suspect. Who would agree, on the orders of his wife, to sit at home all the time? Which of the servants would dare to watch the master without fear of immediately being thrown into the abyss? So, she can neither console herself with these means, nor express her anger in words, but once or twice, perhaps, her husband will bear her indignation; if she constantly continues her reproaches, then he will soon teach her that it is better to endure everything in silence and suffer. All this happens when there is suspicion; if such grief really happens, then no one will snatch the wife from the hands of the offended husband, and he, with the help of laws favorable to him, will bring his beloved to the court and destroy her; the husband, according to the laws, avoids punishment, which is granted to the Supreme and Divine Court. But this is not enough to console the unfortunate; she must suffer a slow and miserable death from the spells or poisons prepared by dissolute women. There were also cases when there was no need for these poisons for distressed women, but they themselves warned and died from severe grief. Thus, even if all men had recourse to marriage, women should not seek it; for they cannot say that they have such power of lust, and they reap most of the disasters from marriage, as this speech proved. Well, they will say, does this happen in all marriages? It doesn’t happen to everyone, but everyone is far, very far from virginity. The one who gets married, if she does not fall into misfortune, will be subject to the expectation of this misfortune; one who intends to enter into communication with her husband cannot but expect and fear troubles along with this communication; a virgin is spared not only from these sorrows, but also from fears. This does not happen (they will say) in all marriages. I don’t even say this, but if this does not happen, then many other things happen; if someone avoids the last one, he cannot avoid everything altogether. But just as it happens with thorns that cling to the clothes of one passing near the thorn hedges, when he turns to pick off some, he is covered with many others: so in marriage matters - he who avoids one is again struck by another, he who avoids this ends up in a third, and in general, it is impossible to find a marriage free from any displeasure. But, if you like, leaving the troubles behind, let’s imagine and now analyze what seems coveted in marriage, and what many often, or better yet, everyone wants to get. What is this? So that the poor, low and despicable can take a wife from great, powerful people and those who own great wealth. But we will find that this enviable state is associated with misfortunes no less than that unpleasant one. The human race in general is prone to arrogance, and women are more so in proportion as they are weaker; therefore they indulge more in this passion; and when there are many reasons for arrogance, then nothing can restrain them; like a flame that engulfs some substance, so they rise to an inexpressible height, pervert the order and overthrow everything. Such a wife does not allow her husband to remain in the place of the head, but, due to her arrogance and madness, having overthrown him from this place and relegating him to what belongs to her - to the place of a subordinate, she herself becomes the head and mistress. What could be worse than this mess? I remain silent about reproaches, insults and troubles, which are the most intolerable. If anyone says (I heard many people say this when similar conversations took place): if only she were rich and prosperous, it would not be at all difficult to endure and tame her arrogance. If someone says this, then, firstly, he does not know that it is very difficult; secondly, if this happens, it will cause considerable harm; because her submission to her husband out of necessity, with fear and violence, is harder and more unpleasant than his submission to her complete power. Why? Because this violence drives out all friendship and pleasure; if there is no friendship and love, but instead fear and coercion, then what meaning will marriage have? All this happens when the wife is rich; if it happens that she has nothing, and her husband is rich, then she will be a servant, and not a wife, the free one will become a slave and, having lost the freedom that belongs to her, she will be in a position no better than bought slaves; but whether her husband wants to be debauched or drunk, or bring many dissolute women to her very bed, she must endure and allow everything, or leave home. And not only this is terrible, but also the fact that with such a disposition of her husband, she cannot freely command either slaves or maidservants, but is forced to do and endure everything as if living among strangers, using what does not belong to her and cohabiting rather with the master than with her husband. If someone wants to take a wife from among his equals, then again equality of honor is violated by the law of subordination, while the equality of property disposes her to be equal to her husband. What can be done when there is such inconvenience everywhere? Do not expose those very few and rare marriages that have escaped this; things must be judged not by rare exceptions, but by ever-present phenomena. In virginity it is difficult to have this, or better said, impossible, but in marriage it is difficult not to have this. If such troubles and misfortunes occur in apparently happy marriages, then what can we say about those that are recognized as unhappy? The wife is afraid not only of her death, although she must die one day, and she does not care about one soul, although she has one soul, but she fears for her husband, fears for her children, fears for their wives and again for her children, and the more the root sends out branches, the more her worries multiply; If each of them experiences either a lack of money, or a physical illness, or something else undesirable, then she needs to suffer and grieve no less than the sufferers themselves. If they all die before her, then it will be an unbearable suffering for her; if some remain, and others die an untimely death, then there will be no pure consolation for her; because fear for the living, which constantly shakes the soul, is no lighter than sadness for the dead and even, if one can say something surprising, even heavier. Time softens sorrow for the dead, but worries about the living inevitably always remain, or end only with death. If we do not have the strength to endure our own suffering, then what kind of life will we lead, forced to mourn the misfortunes of others? Many, often descended from famous parents and brought up in great luxury, were married off to some very noble husband, and then suddenly, before enjoying happiness, from some danger, as if from a storm or blowing wind, they died, subjected to the horrors of shipwreck, and those who enjoyed countless blessings before marriage fell into extreme misfortune as a result of marriage. But this, they will say, does not happen to everyone and not always. This is not far from everyone (I repeat the same thing again), but some experienced it on themselves, and those who avoided such an experience suffered from the expectation of the same. Meanwhile, every virgin is above such a test and expectation. However, leaving this aside, if you like, let us now consider what is naturally associated with marriage and which no one, willy-nilly, can avoid. What is this? The pains of pregnancy and childbirth and raising children. Or better yet, let's start the speech above and set out what precedes marriage, if possible, because only those who have experienced it know exactly. The time for matchmaking has come, and immediately there are continuous and varied concerns: what kind of husband (the daughter) will receive, whether he is of low birth, or dishonest, or proud, or deceitful, or proud, or impudent, or jealous, or petty, or stupid, or vicious, or rude, or weak. Although all this does not happen to everyone who gets married, it is necessary to think and take care of everything; since the betrothed is still unknown, and hope is still doubtful, the soul fears and fears everything, and reflects on all this. If anyone says that she can rejoice while expecting the opposite, then let him know that we are not so much consoled by hopes for the best as we are saddened by expectations of the worst. Joy occurs only when someone probably expects good things; and the bad, even if only imagined, immediately confuses and worries the soul. Just as the soul of slaves cannot be calm from the unknown of future masters, so the soul of girls during the entire time of matchmaking is likened to a ship under storm, while parents daily accept some and refuse others; yesterday the one who gained the upper hand is today interrupted by another suitor, and this one is again supplanted by another. It happens that just before the doors of marriage, a hopeful groom leaves empty-handed, and the parents give their daughter to the unexpected. And not only women, but also men then have grave worries. You can find out everything about the latter, but how can you find out the morals and appearance of the one who is constantly kept inside the house? This is during matchmaking; and when the time comes for marriage, anxiety increases, and pleasure is overcome by fear that that same evening she might turn out to be unpleasant and with great disadvantages, contrary to expectation. For one who was liked at first, it is bearable to be subsequently despised; and which from the very, so to speak, first step seems unpleasant, then when can you like it? Don't tell me: what if she turns out to be pretty? Even in this case, she does not get rid of concern. Many, very resplendent in physical beauty, could not attract their husbands to themselves, who, leaving them, indulged in others much worse than them. When this concern is over, then another displeasure appears when giving the dowry; the father-in-law does not willingly give away what he assigned as a dowry; The groom, although he is in a hurry to receive everything, is forced to demand payment with respect, and the wife, ashamed of the delay in payment, blushes in front of her husband more than any faulty debtor. But I'll leave it at this now. When this concern is over, the fear of childlessness immediately appears, and, on the contrary, concern for many children; but since nothing of the kind has yet been seen, from the very beginning they are worried about both. If she immediately becomes pregnant, then again there will be joy with fear (for none of the pleasures of marriage comes without fear), with the fear that from premature birth the conceived will not suffer harm, and the conceived will not be exposed to extreme danger. During a long pregnancy, a woman is timid, like the culprit of birth. When the time for childbirth comes, then the womb, which has been burdened for so long, is opened and, as it were, dissolved by the pangs of birth, which alone can sufficiently overshadow all the pleasures of marriage. At the same time, she is worried about other concerns. A pitiful and sorrowful woman, although already greatly exhausted by previous sufferings, is no less afraid that the child will turn out damaged and ugly instead of correct and healthy, and that the child will not be female instead of male. This languor outrages women then no less than the pangs of birth; for not only for what they cause, but also for what they do not cause, they fear husbands, and for the latter no less than for the former, and not paying attention to their own safety in this storm, they are worried that something unpleasant for the husband will not happen. When a child appeared on earth and uttered its first cry, new concerns followed about its preservation and upbringing. If it has good natural qualities and is inclined towards virtue, then the parents again worry that the child does not suffer any evil, that it does not die a premature death, that it does not fall into some vice. For not only are bad people made good, but good people are made bad and vicious. If something unexpected happens, the parents' sadness will be more unbearable than if it had happened from the very beginning; if all good things are firmly established, then the fear of change always remains, shaking their souls and depriving them of a significant part of the pleasure. But, (you will say), not all married people have children. By this you also point to another reason for despondency. So, if (married couples) are always, whether they have children or not, whether they are good or bad, depressed by various sorrows and worries, then can married life be called the most pleasant? Further: if spouses live in mutual harmony, there is a fear that death may destroy their pleasure; or better to say, this is no longer only fear and expected disaster, but an inevitable necessity. No one can indicate that both (spouses) ever die on the same day; if this does not happen, then the remaining one must endure a life that is much worse than death, whether they lived together for a long time or a short time. The more he has experienced, the more grief he has, for great habit makes separation unbearable; and this one, before tasting and enjoying love, lost it at the very height of passion, which is why he experiences even more sorrow, and thus both, for opposite reasons, are subjected to equally severe sorrows. And what can we say about separations that sometimes occur, about long journeys, about the anguish that results from this, about illnesses? But how, they will say, does this relate to marriage? And from this reason, very often many (wives) fell ill; upset and irritated, either from anger or from despondency, they received severe fevers. If in the presence of (the husband) they do not tolerate anything like this, but constantly enjoy his caresses, then due to his absence they are exposed to this suffering. However, let’s leave all this aside and let’s not blame the marriage for anything, and yet we cannot protect it from guilt alone. From which one? Because it plunges a healthy person into a state that is not at all better than a sick person and causes him the same despondency as someone lying in illness. Let us not, if you like, talk about all this and let us assume in words the impossible; Let us assume that marriage has all the benefits in general: many children, good children, wealth, the wife has chastity, beauty, prudence, harmony, life to a ripe old age; let there be at the same time the nobility of birth, and the greatness of power, and not be disturbed by the general natural weakness - the fear of changing all this, let every cause of despondency, every reason for care and worry be removed, and neither any other reason nor premature death dissolves the marriage, but let both of them die on the same day, or, what is much more pleasant, let their children remain as heirs, and bury both parents together in old age. What will be the end? With what benefit will they go there from these many pleasures? Leaving many children, enjoying luxury with a good wife and all the other benefits that I have now calculated, and reaching a ripe old age, what benefit can all this bring to us at that Judgment Seat in view of eternal and true benefits? No. All this is a shadow and a dream. If from this we cannot receive any benefit in the endless ages that await us, and have no consolation, then the one who enjoyed it will have to become equal with those who did not enjoy. Thus, if someone over the course of a thousand years saw a pleasant dream in one night, then we would not say about him that he has any advantage over someone who did not enjoy such a vision. However, with this I have not yet expressed everything I wanted; for the blessings here are not so different from those there as dreams are from reality, but much more; and the present century is not related to the future in the same way as one night is related to a thousand years, but even here the difference is much greater. The deeds of a virgin are not like this, but she goes there with great wealth; however, let's start exploring this above. She has no need to investigate about the Groom, and she is not afraid of any deception. God is not a man, the Lord is not a slave. Such is the difference between suitors; Look also at the conditions under which people get married here. Neither slaves, nor tithes of land, nor so many talents of gold, but heaven and heavenly blessings are gifts to such a bride. Moreover, the other one, who has entered into marriage, is afraid of death, both for other reasons and because death separates her from her husband, and the virgin even desires death and is burdened by life, hastening to see the Groom face to face and enjoy that glory. Neither worldly poverty can harm her, as happens in another marriage, but it makes her even more amiable to the Groom, as she endures this poverty voluntarily, nor being born from humble parents, nor lack of physical beauty, nor anything else like that. What am I saying about this? Even if she is not free, this cannot harm her in matchmaking: it is enough to have a beautiful soul to get primacy. She will not have to be afraid of jealousy, she will not have to be tormented by envy of another woman, as if mating with a more glorious husband; because there is no one not only similar or equal to her Bridegroom, but even close to Him; in another marriage, if she has a very rich and very noble husband, there may always be another who has an even more noble one, and the superiority of the greater one greatly reduces the pleasure of possessing the less excellent one. But (they will say) great luxury and abundance of gold, clothes, tableware and other things can seduce and attract the soul. How many women enjoy this? Most people live in poverty, sorrow and toil; if some enjoy such benefits, then very few and rare, and those are against the will of God: as we have proven in the above, He does not allow anyone to enjoy this. However, let us assume in words that luxury is permitted and that neither the prophet nor Paul condemns women who adorn themselves. What is the use of many golden things? Nothing other than envy, concern and no small amount of fear; for those who own them are troubled by worries not only when these things are put in a box or when night falls, but when they put them on during the day, they also experience anxiety and even worse. Both in baths and in churches women appear who kidnap them; and often, even without the latter, those who wear gold things, being subjected to embarrassment and jostling from the crowd, do not notice how any of their gold things are lost. Thus, many women were deprived not only of such things, but even more valuable necklaces decorated with precious stones, simply due to the fact that these things, having come off, were lost. But let there be no such fear; let this concern also be eliminated; what's the use of it? Another, they will say, will see and admire. But not the one who is decorated, but the decorations themselves, and she will often be condemned for this as not being decorated with them according to her dignity. If she is beautiful, she harms natural beauty; for the multitude of decorations does not allow her to fully show herself, covering most of herself; if she is ugly and ugly, she will show herself even more disgusting. Ugliness, which always appears in its own form, appears only as it is; and when he is surrounded by the brilliance of stones or the beauty of some other substance, then the ugliness reaches a greater degree. The blackness of the body seems blacker in comparison with the brilliance of a pearl, sparkling as if in the darkness; the ugliness of the face seems much worse from colored clothing, which does not allow spectators to look at the face in its own form, but in comparison with the graceful beauty of the products, which makes it even more disgraceful. Gold scattered on clothes, the diversity of various items and all sorts of other decorations, like a valiant, strong and healthy warrior, overthrowing the sick, exhausted and hungry, defeating the appearance of the face hung with them, attract the attention of the audience to themselves and make them laugh more at her, and show them greater surprise. This is not the adornment of virginity. It does not disgrace the one who puts on it; because all of it is not physical, but spiritual; and therefore, if she is ugly, it immediately changes the ugliness into graceful beauty; if it is beautiful and shiny, then it gives it even more shine. Neither stones and gold, nor precious clothes and expensive various colors of paints, and nothing else from such perishable things adorns souls, but instead - fasting, sacred vigils, meekness, modesty, poverty, courage, humility, patience, contempt for all objects of real life in general. The gaze of a virgin is so beautiful and attractive that the disembodied forces and their Lord look at it with love; it is so pure and insightful that it can contemplate incorporeal beauties instead of corporeal ones; She is clothed with such decency that even the dissolute are ashamed, blush and restrain their shamelessness when they look closely at her. Like a servant serving a decent woman, she herself necessarily becomes the same, even if she does not want it; so the flesh of such a wise soul must necessarily conform its own impulses to its movements. Her eyes, her tongue, her posture, her gait, and in general everything has an imprint of internal well-being; and just as precious myrrh, even if it were enclosed in a vessel, filling the air with its fragrance, gives pleasure not only to those standing in the same place and nearby, but also to everyone standing at a distance, so the fragrance of the virgin soul, spreading through her feelings, reveals the virtue that is within her, which, placing on all feelings the golden bridle of decency, keeps all these horses in perfect order and does not allow the tongue to speak something dissonant and discordant, neither the eye can look shamelessly and suspiciously, nor the ear perceive any obscene songs. She also takes care of her legs so that they do not protrude randomly and unnaturally, but have an unrefined and artless gait; having rejected the decorations in her clothes, she constantly forces her face not to blur with laughter, and not even to smile slightly, but to always appear sedate and stern, always ready for tears and never for laughter. When you hear about tears, do not imply any grief here; these tears bring such pleasure that the laughter of this world does not have. If you don’t believe it, then listen to Luke, who says that the apostles, having received beatings, “went rejoicing on behalf of the council” (Acts 5:40, 41), although these are not the natural consequences of beatings; for they usually produce not pleasure and joy, but sorrow and suffering. This is not the natural effect of beatings, but faith in Christ is such that it overcomes even the nature of things. If beatings for Christ brought pleasure, then what is surprising if tears for Him produce the same? Therefore, He calls the very path that He called narrow and sorrowful, then a good yoke and a light burden (Matt. 7:13; Matt. 11:30). This feat is so difficult by its nature, but due to the jealousy and good hopes of those who perform it, it becomes very easy. Therefore, one can see that those who choose it walk along the narrow and sorrowful path with greater cheerfulness than along the wide and spacious one, not because they do not encounter sorrows, but because they are above these sorrows, and do not suffer from them anything that others usually endure. And this life (of virgins) has sorrows, but in comparison with marriage, they cannot be called sorrows. Tell me, does a virgin throughout her life experience anything similar to what she experiences, so to speak, every year, when she gets married, tormented by the pains and cries of childbirth? The strength of these torments is such that when Divine Scripture wants to allegorically express captivity, hunger, plagues and unbearable disasters, it calls all this the pains of birth. This is what God assigned to the wife instead of punishment and curse, that is, not the birth itself, but the birth with such labor and pain. “When you are sick,” He said, “give birth to children” (Gen. 3:16). The virgin stands above these torments and curses; The One who freed (us) “from the curses of the law” (Gal. 3:13), freed her from this. But (they will say) it’s nice to rush around the square on horses. This is just unnecessary vanity, which does not bring any pleasure; just as darkness is no better than light, just as being tied is no better than being untied, just as being in need of much is no better than not needing anything, so one who does not use her own legs is no better than (those who do). I omit the difficulties that inevitably arise in this case. She is not allowed to leave the house when she wants, but often, when urgent need requires leaving, she is forced to remain at home, like beggars whose legs are cut off and who cannot move. If the husband gives the hinnies another purpose, then despondency, quarrel and stubborn silence appear; if she herself, not foreseeing the future, does the same, forgetting about her husband, then she incurs his anger upon herself and is constantly tormented by reproaches from him. How much better it would be, using our legs (this is what God gave them to us for), not to be subjected to such troubles, than, due to a penchant for luxury, to have so much torment, sorrow and despondency! And not only these reasons keep her at home, but if a leg disease occurs, whether in both hinnies or in one of them, the same thing happens; also, when it happens that they are sent out to pasture (and this happens every year and for many days), then again she needs to stay at home, as if tied up, and not leave the house, even if there is a necessary need. If anyone says that through this she gets rid of many people she meets and is not obliged to show herself and be ashamed in front of each of her acquaintances, he, it seems to me, does not know at all what he is eliminating and what is bringing shame on the female sex. This does not depend on whether it is shown or hidden, but the latter on inner spiritual pride, and the former on chastity and modesty. Therefore, many, not having this fence and walking among the crowd in the square, not only did not incur condemnation, but even aroused surprise in many for their chastity, and with their posture, and gait, and simplicity of clothing, revealing the light of inner decency; and many, even sitting inside, brought disrepute upon themselves; because it is possible for those who are hidden, more visible, to reveal their pride and arrogance to those who wish. But maybe a crowd of maids is pleasant? There is nothing worse than this pleasure, coupled with such worries; each of them, in the event of her illness or death, needs to be worried and mourned. But if this can be bearable, then it is much more unpleasant to worry daily, correcting their negligence, stopping the malfunction, stopping ingratitude and stopping all their other vices; and the worst thing is - which usually happens when there are many servants - if in the crowd of these servants there turns out to be a pretty one. This must certainly happen when there are many of them; because rich people try to have not only many, but also beautiful maids. If any of them shines (with beauty); whether she attracts the master with love, or whether she is nothing more than an object of admiration, it is equally regrettable for the mistress to give in to her, if not in love, then in bodily beauty and the attention of others. So, if what they consider glorious and joyful causes such sorrow, what can we say about the sad? A virgin does not experience anything like that; her home is free from disorder, and all noise is far from it; inside him, as in a quiet harbor, silence reigns, and even more important than silence is the serenity in her soul, which does not engage in anything human, but constantly talks with God and unflinchingly looks at Him. Who will measure this pleasure? What word will describe the joy of a soul so attuned? None; Only those who place their joy in the Lord know how great this joy is and how much it surpasses all comparison. A large amount of silver (they will say), visible everywhere, gives great pleasure to the eyes. But isn’t it much better to look at Heaven and draw much greater pleasure from there? As far as gold is better than tin and lead, so much is the Sky brighter and more brilliant than gold and silver, and any other substance; Moreover, this contemplation is free from worries, otherwise it is combined with great anxiety, which always causes great harm to desires. But don't you want to look at Heaven? You are allowed to look at the silver that is in the square. “I say to your shame” (1 Cor. 6:5), in the words of Blessed Paul, that you are so devoted to the passion for money! I don’t know what to say: at the same time, bewilderment makes me very difficult, and I cannot understand why the entire, so to speak, human race, having the opportunity to enjoy something easily and freely, does not find pleasure in it, but is consoled most of all by worries, anxieties and troubles? Why aren't people as happy with silver sitting in the market as silver sitting at home? Meanwhile, the first shines brighter and relieves the soul of all worries. Because you will say that this is not mine, but this is mine. Consequently, pleasure is given by greed, and not by silver itself; if it were the latter, then it would be equally possible to enjoy it there. If you say (that it is pleasant) because of its benefits, then glass is much more useful; This can be said by the rich themselves, who mostly prepare cups from this substance; although they, being carried away by luxury, use silver for this, they first put glass inside, and then surround it on the outside with silver, showing by this that the first is more pleasant and drinkable, and the second serves only pride and excessive vanity. What does “mine” and “not mine” even mean? When I carefully delve into these words, I see that these are just empty words. Many, during their lifetime, could not hold on to this silver, which escaped from their power, and those who had it until the end, at death, willy-nilly, lost their possession of it. That the words “mine” and “not mine” are just empty sounds, this can be said not only in relation to silver and gold, but also to baths, and to gardens, and to houses. Everyone uses them, and those who are considered their owners have only the advantage over others that they take care of them. They only use them, while others, after many worries, receive the same thing as those without worries. If anyone admires great luxury, for example, a lot of broken meat, an excess of wine drunk, the delicacy of cookies, the art of the table-keepers and cooks, the crowd of diners and guests, let him know that the condition of the rich is not at all better than the condition of the cooks themselves. Just as the latter fear the masters, so the masters fear those invited (guests), so as not to be condemned for something they have prepared with great difficulty and expense. In this they are equal to cooks, and in others they even exceed them; because they are afraid not only of detractors, but also of envious people. Often envy arose in many from such feasts, which did not calm down until they were exposed to extreme dangers. But (they will say) it’s nice to eat a lot and often. No, this luxury causes headaches, indigestion, shortness of breath, blurred vision, fainting, dizziness and other worse illnesses. And, oh, if only this excess and the harm it caused were limited to just one-day troubles! No, most incurable diseases begin from these feasts: gout, consumption, exhaustion, paralysis and many other even more serious diseases, having taken root in the body, depress it until its last breath. What pleasure can be found that rewards all these disasters? What kind of harsh life wouldn't everyone choose to escape all this? Moderation is not that, but it is far from all these evils, and promotes health and well-being. Even if someone is looking for pleasure, then with her he will receive it more than with luxury; and firstly, from the fact that it brings health and relieves from all those diseases, each of which in itself is capable of overshadowing and even completely destroying any pleasure, and secondly - from the food itself. How? The cause of pleasure is appetite; and appetite is aroused not by satiety and excess, but by need and lack (of food). He always appears not at the feasts of the rich, but at the poor, better than any table-keeper and cook, adding a lot of honey to the prepared food. The rich eat without feeling hungry, and drink without thirst, and go to bed before they have a strong need for sleep; The poor do not begin all this until the need arises, which is where pleasure is most elevated. Why, tell me, does Solomon call the slave’s sleep sweet, saying: “Sweet is the sleep of the one who works, whether he endures a little or a lot” (Eccl. 5:11)? Is it because its bed is soft? But slaves mostly sleep on the ground or on straw. Or from freedom? But they do not own the slightest part of time. Or from leisure? But they are constantly in work and worries. What makes sleep pleasant for them, if not that they first feel the need for it and then indulge in it? And the rich, if the night does not find them plunged into sleep from intoxication, of necessity constantly suffer from insomnia, tossing and turning and languishing, lying on soft beds. One could also point out the unpleasantness, harm, and shame in those diseases that occur (from luxury) in the soul much more and worse than in the body. It makes people effeminate, effeminate, impudent, vain, intemperate, arrogant, shameless, irritable, cruel, mean, selfish, base, and generally incapable of anything useful and necessary; moderation produces everything opposite to this. But now we need to turn our speech to another example; Having added this one thing, then we will again take up the apostolic words. If what seems joyful is filled with such evils, and brings such a stream of illnesses to the soul and body, then what can we say about the sad things, for example, about the fear of leaders, about the attacks of the people, about the intrigues of slanderers and envious people, which especially surrounds the rich, from which wives must suffer even more, not having the strength to endure such vicissitudes courageously? What am I saying about wives? And the husbands themselves suffer pitifully from this. He who lives moderately is not afraid of any change; and whoever enjoys luxury in this intemperate and absent-minded life, if through some misfortune or compulsion he has to be subjected to poverty, he would rather die than endure such a change unless he is prepared and accustomed to it. Therefore, blessed Paul said: “But such will have tribulation in the flesh, but you will have mercy.” Then he goes on to say, “Time has ceased to eat other things” (1 Cor. 7:28, 29). How does this, someone might say, relate to marriage? He even really relates to him. If it is limited to the present life, and in the future “they neither marry nor encroach” (Mark 12:25); the present age is coming to an end, and the resurrection is already at the door; then now is the time not for marriages and not for acquisitions, but for poverty and all wisdom that will be useful to us there. Like a virgin, while she remains at home with her mother, she cares a lot about the children’s things and about what is in the box she has placed in the pantry, and she keeps the key with herself and manages everything, and cares as much about preserving small and empty things as those who manage great things; and when she needs to get married, and the time of marriage forces her to leave her parental home, then, having renounced the small and insignificant, she, of necessity, begins to worry about managing the house and a lot of property and slaves, about pleasing her husband and about other more important things than before: so you, who have reached the age of perfection and manhood, should leave everything earthly, these truly children’s toys, and think about Heaven, the splendor and all the glory of life there. For we too are betrothed to the Bridegroom, Who desires from us such love that we would give up for Him, if necessary, not only insignificant and insignificant earthly blessings, but also our very soul. So, if we must go there, let us abandon these insignificant worries; and going from a poor house to a royal palace, we would not take care of earthenware vessels, firewood, junk and other poor household things. Let us now stop worrying about earthly things; time is already calling us to Heaven, as Blessed Paul said in his letter to the Romans: “For now salvation is nearer to us than when we believed. The night has passed away and the day has come” (Rom. 13:11, 12). And again: “Time has ceased to eat other things, so that... those who have have wives will have the same thing as those who have not” (1 Cor. 7:29). Why marriage for those who will not enjoy marriage, but will be on an equal footing with the celibate? What's the point of money? Why property? What is the use of everything worldly when its use is no longer opportune and untimely? If those who must appear before your court and be held accountable for their crimes, when the appointed day approaches, refuse not only their wife, but also food, drink, and all care, and think only of justification; then all the more so for us, who have to appear not before some earthly court of justice, but before the Heavenly Throne, in order to give an account of our words, deeds and thoughts, we must renounce everything, both from joy and from sorrow for real blessings, and care only about that terrible day. “If anyone,” says (the Lord), “comes to Me, and does not hate his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brothers, and sisters, and also his own soul, he cannot be My disciple. And whoever does not bear his cross and comes after Me, cannot be My disciple” (Luke 14:26, 27); and you carelessly indulge in affection for your wife, laughter, pleasure and luxury? “The Lord is near; worry about nothing” (Phil.4:6); Are you worried and worried about money? The Kingdom of Heaven has arrived; and do you take care of the house, feasts and other pleasures? “...the image of this world passes away” (1 Cor. 7:31); Why are you tormented by worldly affairs, not permanent, but fleeting, without caring about the constant and unchangeable? There will be no marriage, no pains of birth, no pleasure and copulation, no abundance of money, no worries about acquisition, no food, no clothing, no agriculture and navigation, no arts and house-building, no cities and houses, but some other state and another life. All this will die a little later. This is what the words mean: “... the image of this world passes away.” Why do we, as if intending to remain here for all eternity, take such zeal to take care of matters that we often have to leave before evening? Why do we choose a painful life when Christ calls us to a calm one? “I want you,” says (the apostle), “to be without sorrow. He who is not married cares for the Lord’s” (1 Cor. 7:32). Why, wanting us to be without worries, do you yourself impose new worries on us? This is not a concern, just as grief for Christ is not grief, not because the nature of things changes here, but because the voluntariness of those who endure all this with pleasure overcomes nature itself. He who cares about what he cannot enjoy for a long, and often a short time, can rightly be called caring; and he who can gather more fruit than his cares can quite rightly be counted among those who do not care. In addition, there is such a difference between one and the other concerns that the latter, in comparison with the first, cannot even be considered a concern: it is so much easier and more convenient than the other. We expressed all this in the previous words: “He who is married does not care for the things of the Lord, ... but he who is married cares for the things of the world” (1 Cor. 7:32-33); but the latter passes, and the first remains. Doesn't this alone sufficiently demonstrate the superiority of virginity? To the extent that God is above the world, so much better is caring for Him than the world’s. Why does (the apostle) allow marriage, which binds us with worries and distracts us from the spiritual? That’s why, he says, I said: “Yes... the wives of the haves will be like the wives of the have-nots,” so that those already bound or those who are to be bound would loosen their bonds in some other way. If it is impossible to break the bonds already put on, then make them more bearable; for it is possible, if we want, to free ourselves from everything unnecessary and not to bring upon ourselves, through our own carelessness, even more worries than the work itself brings. If anyone wants to know more clearly what it means, “having a wife not to have her,” then let him look at those who have nothing and are crucified (to the world), how they live. How do they live? They do not need to buy many maids, nor gold things and necklaces, nor bright and large houses, nor such and such a number of acres of land, but, leaving all this, they care only about their clothing and food. And he who has a wife can behave in accordance with such wisdom. What was said above: “do not deprive yourself of one another” (1 Cor. 7:5) is said only about copulation; in this he commands to follow each other and does not leave them power over him; and in what one must adhere to another's wisdom, for example, in clothing, in food and in everything else, in that one is not subordinate to the other, but husbands can, even if the wife does not want to, give up all luxury and a depressing multitude of worries; and there is also no need for the wife to decorate against her will and take care of unnecessary things. This is true; because that lust is natural and therefore forgivable, and one (of the spouses) does not have the power to deprive the other of this without his will; and the passion for luxury, extravagance and useless worries does not depend on nature, but comes from carelessness and arrogance. Therefore (the apostle) does not command those who have entered into marriage to submit to each other in these matters, as in those. Thus, the words: “having a wife, not having one” mean that we do not take on unnecessary worries that arise from the whims and effeminacy of wives, but put in as much care as is required for one soul devoted to us and, moreover, disposed to live wisely and modestly. And that he wants to say exactly this, he himself explained, adding: “and those who weep, as well as those who do not weep; and those who rejoice" in their acquisitions, "as those who do not rejoice" (1 Cor. 7:30); for those who do not rejoice will not care about gain, and those who do not mourn will not fear poverty or turn away from moderation. This is the meaning of the words: “having a wife without having her,” i.e. use the world, but do not abuse it. “But he who is married cares for the things of the world” (1 Cor. 7:33). Although care happens here and there, here it is vain and in vain, or better to say, it leads to sadness and sorrow ["the flesh will have such sorrow" (1 Cor. 7:28)], and there - to unspeakable blessings; Why don’t we choose better than the first care, which not only receives so many and great rewards, but is also easier in nature than the last? What does an unmarried woman care about? Is it about money, servants, stewards, fields, etc.? Does she watch the cooks, the weavers and other servants? No; none of this comes to her mind, but she cares only about one thing, to decorate her soul, to decorate this holy church (1 Cor. 3:17), not with braided hair, or gold, or pearls (1 Tim. 2:9), not with rubbing and painting, or other difficult and burdensome ways, but with holiness in body and spirit. “But she who has encroached,” says (the apostle), “is anxious... how to please her husband” (1 Cor. 7:34). Very wisely, he did not list the deeds themselves and did not say what wives endure to please their husbands, both body and soul, rubbing the body, sprinkling dust and subjecting it to other torments, and filling the soul with baseness, flattery, pretense, cowardice and other unnecessary and useless worries, but, hinting at all this in one word, he left the conscience of the listeners to think about it. Having thus demonstrated the advantage of virginity and extolled it to the very sky, he again returns to the speech about the permissibility of marriage, constantly fearing that someone would consider this a command. Therefore, he was not content with the previous admonitions, but said: “The commandments of the Lord are not imam; ... and even if a virgin trespasses, she has not sinned”, again here he says: “Let me not force you” (1 Cor. 7:25, 28, 35). At the same time, someone may rightly be at a loss as to why the apostle, having above called virginity liberation from bonds and said that he advises it for our benefit, so that we would not have sorrows and be without worries, since he spares us, and by all this showing the ease and portability of it, suddenly says: “I will not put force on you” (1 Cor. 7:35). What does this mean? He did not call virginity a noose, no, but the acceptance of this good with violence and coercion. And in fact it is. Everything that someone takes under compulsion and against his will, even if it is very light, is more unbearable than anything and crushes our soul more painfully than a noose. That is why he said: “I will not force you”; that is: I offered and showed all the benefits of virginity, but even after all this I grant you the choice of it and do not attract you to virtue against your will; I advised this, not wanting to cause you grief, but so that decent service (to God) would not be disturbed by everyday affairs. Look here at the wisdom of Paul, how he combines exhortations with requests and advice with permission. Having said: I do not force, but I exhort, he adds: “decency and approach” (1 Cor. 7:35), showing by this the superiority of virginity and the benefit that comes from it for us in a godly life. For a woman, entangled in the worries of life and distracted everywhere, cannot be well-approached (to the Lord), since all her work and leisure is fragmented into many things, i.e. on the husband, housework and everything else that marriage usually entails. What, you say, if a virgin begins to do a lot and has everyday worries? No, by doing this you would exclude her from the host of virgins, because it is not enough just not to marry in order to be a virgin, but spiritual purity is also necessary; By purity I mean not only abstinence from vicious and shameful lust, ornaments and distraction, but also freedom from worldly worries; If this is not the case, then what is the use of bodily purity? Just as nothing can be more shameful than a warrior who throws away his weapon and spends his time drunkenly, so nothing can be more obscene than virgins tied up in everyday worries. So those five virgins also had lamps and labored in virginity, but did not receive any benefit from it, but remained outside the closed doors and perished. Virginity is good because it rejects any reason for excessive care and provides complete leisure for godly deeds; so if this is not the case, it is much worse than marriage, carrying thorns in the soul and drowning out the pure and heavenly seed. “If anyone does not want to dishonor his virgin, if she is overgrown, and so she should be: if he wants, let him do it; he does not sin, even if he commits violence,” says (the apostle) (1 Cor. 7:36). What do you say: “He who wills, let him do”? How do you not correct a perverted concept, but allow marriage? Why didn’t you say: whoever finds it indecent for his maiden (to remain like this) is pitiful and unhappy, considering such a wondrous deed reproachful? Why did you, leaving this assumption, not advise him to keep his daughter from marriage? Because, he says, these souls were too weak and earthbound; and in such a state of mind it was impossible to suddenly instill in them the doctrine of virginity. Whoever is so attached to worldly affairs and admires real life that even after such admonition he considers shameful what is worthy of heaven and is likened to angelic life, how could he accept advice that attracts him to this? And is it surprising that Paul did this regarding a permitted matter, when he does the same regarding a prohibited and illegal matter? I'll give you an example. To be cautious in food, to accept one and reject another, was characteristic of the weakness of the Jews; However, even among the Romans there were those susceptible to this weakness; he not only does not accuse them with severity, but does something else, moreover; leaving those who sinned, he reproaches those who wanted to hinder them: “Why are you condemning your brother?” (Rom.14:10). Meanwhile, he did not do the same when he wrote to the Colossians, but with great authority he addresses them and philosophizes like this: “Yes, no one condemns you about eating or drinking,” and also: “if ... you died with Christ from the elements of the world, why do you contend with those who live in the world? Do not touch, but taste, and touch; they are all corrupted by use” (Col. 2:16, 20, 21, 22). Why does he do this? Because these were strong, and the Romans still needed great leniency, and he waited until faith grew stronger in their souls, fearing that with the premature destruction of the chaff the plants of sound doctrine would be uprooted. Therefore, he does not condemn them directly, and does not leave them without condemnation, but touches them unnoticed and covertly, in the condemnation of others; for with the words: “He stands for his own Lord... and falls” (Rom. 14:4), he apparently stops the mouth of the one who reproaches (another), but in fact influences the soul of this latter, showing that to prefer one or the other (from food) is not characteristic of those who are firm and do not stand unshakably, but who are still wavering, in danger of falling if they do not resist. He acts in the same way here due to the great weakness of those being reproached. He does not openly attack (the person being rebuked), but by praising the one who keeps his damsel, he deals him a strong blow. What is he saying? “Whoever stands firm in his heart” (1 Cor. 7:37). This is said to contrast with those who easily and quickly waver, not knowing how to walk firmly and stand courageously. Then, noticing that this word is enough to influence the soul of such a person, watch how he again covers up his speech, giving a reason that is not very worthy of blame. Having said: “Whoever stands firm in his heart,” he added: “who has no need, but has power,” although it would be more consistent to say: whoever stands firmly and does not find this deed obscene. Since this would be too striking, he instead uses another expression to console him, leaving him better to refer to such a reason. It is not as hard to keep someone from doing something through need as it is through shame: the former concerns a weak and pitiful soul, and the latter concerns a soul that is spoiled and incapable of correctly judging the quality of deeds. However, it was not the time to say this yet: even out of urgent need, one should not hinder someone who wants to be a virgin, but must courageously stand against everything that interferes with this wonderful aspiration, as Christ says: “Whoever loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me” (Matthew 10:37). When we accept something pleasing to God, then anyone who interferes with it is an enemy and adversary, no matter who he is, father or mother. Paul, condescending to the imperfection of his listeners, wrote the following: “But he who stands firm... has no need” (1 Cor. 7:37); and did not stop there - although “having no need” and “having power” mean the same thing - but with extensive speech and incessant repetition of permissions he consoles the weak and base mind, further adding another reason: “Who... has decided to eat in his heart” (1 Cor. 7:37). For it is not enough to be free just to not be held accountable for this, but when someone has chosen and judged, then he does well. Then, so that you do not conclude from such great condescension that there is no difference (between one thing and another), he again sets out the difference between them, although with caution, sets out in (clear) words: “In the same way, he who gives (his virgin) to marriage does good; and do not give, he does better” (1 Cor. 7:38). And how much better, he did not explain again for the same reason; if you want to know, then listen to Christ, who says: “They neither marry nor commit violence, but are as the angels of God in heaven” (Matthew 22:30). Do you see the difference to what height virginity suddenly lifts a mortal when it is true virginity? How, tell me, did Elijah, Elisha and John, these true lovers of virginity, differ from the Angels? Nothing except that they were clothed with a mortal nature; and in everything else, if you carefully examine this, they will turn out to be no worse than those; even this very apparent flaw serves greatly to their praise. What courage, what wisdom there was in those who, living on earth and submitting to the necessity of mortal nature, could achieve such virtue! And what made them such virginity is clear from the following; if they had wives and children, they would not have settled in the desert so easily, they would not have despised houses and all the things of life; and now, freed from all these shackles, they lived on earth as in heaven; they did not need walls, or a roof, or a bed, or a meal, or anything else like that, but instead of a roof they had the sky, instead of a bed - the earth, instead of a meal - the desert; and what for others seems to be the cause of famine, the barrenness of the desert, brought abundance to those saints. They did not need vines, winepresses, crops, or harvest, but springs, rivers and lakes provided them with abundant and pleasant drink, and an Angel prepared a meal for one of them, wonderful and extraordinary and more plentiful than usual for people: one bread, it is said (in Scripture), was enough for “fourty days” (1 Kings 19:6-8); and the other was often nourished by the miraculous grace of the Spirit, and not only him alone, but through him also others (2 Kings 4:41-44). John, “less than a prophet”, greater than whom “there is no resurrection for those born of women” (Matthew 11:11), did not even need human food: it was not bread, wine and oil that supported the life of his body, but locusts and wild honey. Do you see angels on earth? Do you see the power of virginity? It arranged that those clothed with flesh and blood, who walked the earth, subordinate to the necessity of mortal nature, acted in everything as if they were incorporeal, as if they had already reached Heaven, as if they had received immortality. For them, everything was superfluous, not only what is really superfluous: luxury, wealth, power, fame and a number of other similar dreams, but also what seems necessary: ​​housing, cities and art; This is what “decency and propriety” means (1 Cor. 7:35), this is the virtue of virginity! It is amazing and worthy of many crowns - to overcome the fury of passions, to restrain the raging nature; but this is truly amazing when there is such a life; this in itself is weak and insufficient for the salvation of those who have achieved this. Those who are still practicing the feat of virginity can serve as our witnesses: they are as far from Elijah, Elisha and John as the earth is from heaven. Just as by eliminating “decency” and “benevolence,” you will undermine the very power of virginity, so by combining it with an excellent life, you will have the root and foundation of good. Just as rich and fruitful soil nourishes the root, so an excellent life brings back the fruits of virginity, or better said, the life of the cross is both the root and the fruit of virginity. She anointed those valiant men for wondrous feats, cutting all their bonds and making them capable of flying to heaven on free and light legs, as if on wings. Where there is neither pleasing the wife nor caring for children, non-covetousness very easily appears; and non-covetousness brings us closer to heaven, freeing us not only from fear, worries and dangers, but also from other inconveniences. He who has nothing despises everything, as if possessing everything, and has great boldness before rulers, rulers, and even the one adorned with a diadem. He who despises wealth, extending further, will easily despise death; and having become above this, he will boldly speak to everyone, without fear or fear of anyone. And the one who is busy with wealth is a slave not only of wealth, but also of glory, and the honors of real life, and everything in life in general. That is why Paul called the love of money the root of all evil (1 Tim. 6:10). Virginity has sufficient power to dry up this root and invest in us another better one, which produces all that is good: freedom, boldness, courage, ardent jealousy, ardent love for heavenly things, contempt for everything earthly. This is how “decency and propriety” are born. But why do many people get smart? Patriarch Abraham, they say, had a wife, and children, and wealth, and herds, and pastures; and with all this, John, both the Baptist and the Evangelist, both virgins, and Paul and Peter, distinguished by abstinence, desired to be in his bosom. Who told you this, most honorable one, what prophet, what evangelist? Himself, they say, Christ. Seeing the centurion’s great faith, He said: “For many from the east and the west will come and sit with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob” (Matthew 8:11). The rich man saw Lazarus blessed with him (Luke 16:23). But what does this have to do with Paul, Peter and John? Lazarus is not Paul or John, and “many people from east and west” do not constitute the host of the apostles, so these words of yours are unnecessary and in vain. If you want to know exactly the rewards of the apostles, then listen to what He Himself who has to bestow them says: “You will sit... on a throne of twelve, judging the deceived tribes of Israel” (Matthew 19:28). Here is neither Abraham, nor his son, nor his grandson, nor lying in his bosom, but a much higher dignity; the latter will sit down to judge the offspring of the former. And not in this alone is the difference visible, but also in the fact that many will be worthy of Abraham’s fate; “many people,” says (the Lord), “from the east and the west will come and lie down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob”; and no one will receive these thrones except one host of holy apostles. Tell me, will you still remember herds, pastures, marriages and children? What, they say, if many of the virgins, after many exploits, want to move there? I will say even more: many of the virgins will not reach either the womb or the less, but will go to Gehenna itself. This is shown by the virgins who remained outside the bridal chamber (Matthew 25:12). Does it not follow from this that marriage is equal to virginity, or even virginity is worse than it? Your example makes virginity worse (marriage). Abraham, who lived in marriage, is in peace and pleasure, and the virgins are in Gehenna; According to your words, it remains to draw such a conclusion. But that's not true; no: virginity is not only no worse, but much better than marriage. Why? Because it was not marriage that made Abraham like this, and it was not virginity that destroyed those unfortunate (virgins); but other virtues of the soul glorified the patriarch, and other vices of life consigned the virgins to fire. He also tried to perform good deeds of virginity in his married life, i.e. “decency and propriety,” and they, having chosen virginity, fell into the cycle of life and into the worries inherent in marriage. What, they will say, prevents us, together with marriage, children, wealth and everything else, from maintaining this “good approach”? Firstly, the fact that now there is no one equal to Abraham, or even close to him; He, having wealth and a wife, despised wealth more than those who strive in non-acquisitiveness and abstained from pleasures more than virgins. These people burn with passion every day, and he extinguished this fire so much and did not indulge in any addiction that he not only refrained from the concubine, but also let her leave the house in order to destroy any reason for quarrel and disagreement: now this is not very easy to find. Besides this, I will now say what I said at the beginning: not the same degree of virtue is required from us as from them. Now you cannot be perfect without selling everything, without giving up everything, not only money and house, but even your soul (Matthew 10:39), and then such severity was not yet indicated. Well, they will say, do we now live more strictly than the patriarch? We must (live this way), and this is commanded to us, but we do not live, and therefore we lag far behind that righteous man; and that great feats lie before us, everyone knows. Therefore, the Scripture not only glorifies Noah, but with some addition: “Noah,” he says, “is a righteous man, perfect in his generation, pleasing to God” (Gen. 6:9), not just perfect, but at that time; for there are many types of perfection, which are determined by different times. Over time, what was once perfect becomes imperfect. For example, the one who lived according to the law was once perfect; “He who created it,” it is said (in Scripture), “will live in them” (Lev.18:5); and Christ, having come, showed that this perfect thing is imperfect; “Unless your righteousness comes out any more than the scribe and the Pharisee, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:20). Then only murder was considered cruel, but now even anger and slander can lead to Gehenna; then only adultery was punished, but now even a shameless look at a wife is not exempt from punishment; then only the crime of oath was from the evil one, but now it is also an oath: “But this is unnecessary because of hostility,” says (in Scripture) (Matthew 5:37); from the people of that time nothing more was required than to love those who love, but now this great and wondrous work is so imperfect that, after fulfilling it, we are in no way superior to publicans. Why is it that the reward for the same virtues is not the same for us and for those of the Old Testament, but if we want to receive the same as them, we must show greater virtue? Because now the great grace of the Spirit and the great gift of the coming of Christ have been poured out; grace made (people) from babes into perfect men. Just as we demand much greater virtues from our children, when they become young men, and for what in childhood we previously praised them, we no longer admire the same when they become men, but demand something else from them, much more; so in the first times God did not demand great deeds from the human race, as it was in its infant state. When he heard the prophets and apostles and received the grace of the Spirit, God raised the level of virtues, and this is fair. He appointed greater rewards and much brighter rewards; It is no longer earth and earthly blessings, but heaven and blessings that surpass the mind that stand before the righteous. So, is it not reckless for those who have matured to remain in their former infancy? Then human nature was divided against itself, and there was an irreconcilable struggle; Speaking about it, Paul says: “I see another law in my heart, warring against the law of my mind and taking me captive through the law of sin that is in my heart” (Rom. 7:23). But now this is not the case: “For what was weak in the law, in which the flesh was weak, God sent His Son in the likeness of the flesh of sin, and for sin condemned sin in the flesh” (Rom. 8:3). Giving thanks for this, Paul says: “I am a damned man! Who will deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God...by Jesus Christ" (Rom. 7:24, 25). Therefore, we are rightly punished because, having become free, we do not want to go along with the bound; or better to say - if we act the same with them, and then we are not exempt from punishment. Those who enjoy deep peace should achieve much greater and more glorious trophies than those who are greatly depressed by war. If we revolve around money, luxury and wives and take care of business, then when will we be (perfect) husbands, when will we live spiritually, when will we take care of the Lord? Is it really from here? But then it is no longer time for labors and exploits, but for crowns and punishments. Then the virgin, if she does not have oil in her lamps, will not be able to receive it from others, but will remain outside the palace (Matthew 25:1, 12); and if anyone appears dressed in a dirty robe, he will not be able to change his clothes when he comes out, but will be thrown into the fire of Gehenna (Matthew 22:12-13); Even if he asks Abraham himself (Luke 16:24–25), he will no longer achieve any success. When a certain day (of Judgment) comes, a seat will be set, a Judge will sit, a river of fire will flow (Dan. 7:10), and an account of our deeds will be required, then it will no longer be possible for us to receive permission for sins, but willy-nilly we will be drawn to due punishment for them. And then no one can plead for us, but even if anyone with boldness equal to great and wondrous men like Noah, Job, Daniel began to plead even for his sons and daughters, he would not achieve success; sinners will need to undergo eternal punishment, just as the righteous will receive rewards. And that there will be no end to either one or the other, Christ declared this, saying that just as life will be eternal, so will punishment be eternal. When He approved of those standing on the right side and condemned those standing on the left, He added: “These shall go into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into everlasting life” (Matthew 25:46). Therefore, it is necessary in every possible way to arrange everything here, and for one who has a wife to be like one who does not have one, and indeed one who does not have one, to practice in every other virtue along with virginity, so that when we leave here we do not weep in vain. Heretical leaders of the sects known as Marcionites, Valentinians and Manichaeans in the 2nd and 3rd centuries A.D. The philosopher Plato in conversation: Timaeus, Div. 29. You might be interested in: