Книга четвертая

That the Son is in no way less than God and the Father, because He exists from Him by nature, even though some say that He is subject to Him John 6:38–39. For I came down from heaven, not to do My will, but the will of Him who sent Me (the Father): this is the will of Him who sent Me, so that I will not destroy everything that I have given, but I will raise it up on the last day 477 At first glance, this speech may seem difficult to someone and not completely free from temptation in relation to faith, so for this reason alone we expect to encounter cunning objections from our opponents. But in fact, there is nothing at all insurmountable here, for “everything is obvious to those who understand and everything is clear to those who gain knowledge” (Proverbs 8:9), that is, to those who piously try to explain and understand the mysteries in the Divine Scriptures. So, in these words, Christ gives us, as it were, some kind of proof and clear confirmation that whoever comes to Him will not be cast out, for for the sake of this reason, he says, I came down from heaven, that is, I became a man by the good will of God and the Father, and I will not even refuse to do involuntary, in a certain special sense, deeds, until I achieve for those who believe in Me eternal life and revival from the dead, having abolished power of death. What (the question arises) therefore was involuntary and voluntary for Christ? Dishonor from the Jews, reproach, insults, beatings, scourging, spitting and, in addition, slander, and at the end of all the death of the flesh. It was for our sake that Christ suffered voluntarily. And since the daring violence of the Jews against Him was completely inevitable, He accepts suffering upon Himself, but makes the involuntary (desirable undesirable) free, for the sake of (that) benefit (which was from) suffering, with the good will of God and the Father towards Him and the permission to voluntarily endure everything for the salvation of all. It is in this that we must primarily see the immeasurable goodness of the Divine Nature as not refusing for our sake to take upon itself even that which it should have rejected. From here 478 you can understand that although the suffering on the cross was in some respects involuntary (unwanted) for the Savior Christ, it was voluntary (desirable) for our sake and (because of) the good will (on them) of God and the Father. So, when He had to ascend to the cross, He made, obviously in the form of a prayer, the following appeal to the Father: “Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me, however, not as I will, but as You!” (Matthew 26:39). Since “the Word was God,” immortal and incorruptible and life itself by nature, then, I think, it is quite obvious to everyone that He could not be afraid of death. However, as one who has appeared in the flesh, he allows one to endure the things inherent in the flesh and fear the soon-to-be death, in order to appear as a true man. Therefore he says: “If it is possible, let this cup pass from Me.” If it is possible, he says, Father, without being subjected to death, to return life to those who have fallen under it, if 479 death dies without My death, of course according to the flesh, then let the cup pass by, he says. However, if this cannot happen otherwise, then not as I want, but as You want. You see how again human nature, in so far as this applies (only) to it, even in Christ Himself turns out to be exhausted. But through the Word united with her, she rises to Divine boldness and moves into a courageous mood, so that she does not allow what is pleasing to her own desires, but, on the contrary, follows the Divine goal and hastily rushes towards everything that the law of the Creator calls us to. And that we are speaking the truth here, you can learn from the very addition (of His words): “For the spirit,” he says, “is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Matthew 26:41). Christ did not know that to be exposed to death and to feel the fear of it is the least characteristic of Divine dignity, which is why he immediately added a reason to what was said, saying that the flesh, by its very nature, is proper and characteristic of being weak, while the spirit turns out to be vigorous and cannot be subject to any damage. From here you can see how death was involuntary for Christ because of the flesh and the ignominy of suffering, but at the same time it was voluntary, until the will of the Father was brought to a prosperous end for the whole world, that is, the salvation and life of all. Isn’t it the same thing, without any doubt, that He points out to us in the words that “this” is “the will of the Father, that he should not destroy” anything that was brought (to Him), “but raise it up on the last day?” For, as we said earlier, the humane God and Father brings to Christ, as Life and Savior, (everyone) in need of life and salvation. But I feel again that I am speaking in disagreement (with the opinion) of the enemy of truth, for he will not at all agree with what we have just said, but will shout loudly and come at us with such exclamations... Where are you, my dear fellow, taking us again, coming up with intricately woven digressions of thoughts and distracting reasoning from the truth? Probably, he says, you are ashamed to admit the involuntary subordination of the Son, for wouldn’t it be obvious to us that He by no means commands and rules the economy in affairs, but, on the contrary, submits to the desires of the Father? Thus, He recognized Himself as being below equality with Him, so that He was forced in some way to make the involuntary (undesirable) voluntary (desirable) and do not at all what was pleasing to Him, but to the Father. And don’t tell me again, says (the opponent), referring what was said to the incarnation, that “as a person submits.” Now, as you see, while He was still God and the pure Word and not united with the flesh, He “descended from heaven” and, before He was fully clothed in the image of a servant, He was subordinate to the Father, obviously as the superior and the ruler. With strong, as you undoubtedly think, my dear, and with convincing words (like agile cavalry), you rush towards us, however, not going straight, but deviating from the royal and thorny path - and, leaving, as the Hellenes say, the passable road, you rush towards rapids and rocks. Indeed, you are in vain trying to constantly hold against us this subordination of the Son to the Father, as if anyone who is accustomed to thinking correctly thinks that he should prefer the opposite (opinion), and not on the contrary - recognize it as necessary to agree with you on this. After all, we cannot imagine the Holy and Consubstantial Trinity ever rebelling against Itself, but it is also not divided into different opinions or so that the Father or the Son or the Holy Spirit could be pleased with anything in particular (from the other persons of the Holy Trinity), but They agree in everything, so that in the entire Holy Trinity, as existing from the one Divinity, one and the same will always abides. Therefore, we must eliminate detailed speech about this and refrain from completely useless dispute: if no one is affected by this, then it is unnecessary for us to strain ourselves. But since you, who are accustomed to thinking and reasoning incorrectly, call the consent of the Son with the desires of the Father to be subordination due to necessity, then we will present a proper argument against you about this. After all, if you presented such a speech in simplicity, then rightly you could calmly leave this speech without any investigation (that is, the “subordination” of the Son to the Father). But since we see that it is being presented (by you) with some special malice, we must of necessity oppose it, relying on the power of the Holy Spirit, and not on our own words. By no means, 480 not unconditionally and not in all respects in general and not about every subject, the Son asserted that He does not carry out His desires, but says that He preserves the will of the Father in a certain matter, as I can think, because of your malice, as God took care of our safety in advance. He endures what is involuntary and makes Himself free for our sake, I mean suffering on the cross, since such was the good will of the Parent, as we have already said before. And indeed, now one can see the proposed reason and clearly indicated purpose why He, as He Himself says, renounced His desires and fulfills the will of the Father, for He says: “This is the will of the Father, that all that I have given Me I will not lose” (nothing) “of it, but I will raise it up on the last day.” That suffering on the cross turns out to be truly involuntary and at the same time voluntary for the Only Begotten has already been clearly stated before. But now let us again engage in a more precise study of this, revealing the truth to the readers. First of all, I will begin to examine the “subordination” you indicate, and it is obviously assumed and indisputably recognized by you that the desires of the Holy Trinity always converge into one will and one intention. Let these terrible sophists therefore tell us: the name and state of subordination is the essence of the Son and His nature, as, for example, humanity in man, or whether, existing before, He Himself in His own special way is subject to the Father, as, for example, one can think of an Angel or some other rational force, for, since this is and exists, (necessarily) takes on the (corresponding) form of subordination. If you say that the essence of the Son consists in subordination to the Father, then this will already be subordination, and not a son. And in that case, tell me, won’t you find yourself talking the greatest nonsense? Can subordination really be conceivable as existing in itself, without belonging to any of the beings? After all, such objects as subordination always belong to those of the existing beings in which they are, and not otherwise - they are observed to be with essences, and not as components of the essences themselves or existing in themselves. And just as, for example, a desire that calls and attracts to something that exists could not exist in itself, but is generated only in the one who is inclined to perceive, so subordination, which reveals a certain tendency of desires to submit to someone, cannot be conceivably existing in its own special nature, but quite the opposite - as a state or will or desire exists in some (other) of beings. Otherwise, both the name and the state of subordination, expressed indifferently (and pointlessly), will not actually relate to anyone, and it is even impossible to know whether it is bad or good if it is not added to whom this subordination is. After all, you can obey God, but also the devil. And as the name “wise man” is something mutual, for some are “wise (essence) in evil deeds” (Jer. 4:22), and on the contrary, “wise men will inherit glory” (Prov. 3:35), obviously having wisdom in good; Likewise, subordination involves a kind of reciprocity, and not a precisely defined relationship, for it remains completely unclear to whom it will be subordination. Therefore, the nature of the Son must remain unknown to us if it is thought of by you as subordination. To whom is subordination, it would be impossible to answer this accurately, in the absence of any definition (with the term “subordination”). And that subordination can never exist by itself in its own special way, we can see this somewhat more roughly and clearly by directing the speech to the creatures themselves, using for this purpose some inference. If, for example, we define the being of a person (consisting) in subordination, then we must, without a doubt, conclude that he cannot be in a state of disobedience. But how, in this case, did the Songsinger say to someone who already exists and exists and, however, is not yet subordinate: “Submit to the Lord and pray to Him” (Ps. 37:7)? Don't you see how pointless it is to imagine submission existing in itself? Therefore, it is also necessary to recognize that the Son first exists and exists in his own nature, and then as such (already existing as a son) says that he is subordinate to the Father. What, tell me, forces Him who appeared from the essence of the One who gave birth, the exact outline of His nature, to fall away from equality with Him for the sake of His (the Son) obedience (to the Father)? But we, thinking and speaking correctly, recognize the Consubstantial Parent and in everything we assimilate equality of honor to Him and in no way allow Him to be in any respect inferior to the dignity inherent in the Divinity. But look at how, thanks to the so-called submission, you remove from equal honor with the Father the One who shines with the same qualities (with the Father), due to the identity of the essence. But it is precisely this very thing, (the opponent) will say, that should confirm our position that the Son obeys the Father and does not care at all about his own desires, but follows the desires of the Father, obviously as the highest and greater. But precisely this very thing, according to your dearest words, which, in your opinion, should confirm your words, you will again find as nothing other than the fruit of your inherent ignorance. After all, if we were talking about who is higher in dignity and has an advantage in fame, then even then your chatter would hardly have any real meaning. since the image of consubstantiality is being examined, should you not prove to be immensely unreasonable in assigning to God and the Father a greater degree of it (consubstantiality) against His own Generation? We cannot, of course, consider more or less or anything similar to this to belong to the essence itself, as we argued regarding subordination, but all this is outside the essence and refers to what happens only around or with essences. Only what has already appeared and exists can allow more or less, for example, in comparison with another. If there is nothing that already exists and has appeared before, and such (more or less) usually happens, then how could it be in itself, which is thought and defined only as accidental (in relation to the essence)? Therefore, when you call (terms) greater or less, then you do not touch the essence of either the Only Begotten or also the Father, but by mere external advantages or disparagement you give honor, as you think, to the Father and express reproach to the Son, although you clearly hear His cry: “He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father,” and that it is fitting for everyone to honor the Son as they honor the Father ( John 5:23). That beings, who cannot at all be separated from each other as heterogeneous, but who have received the same essence, should be clothed with equal glory, Christ taught this for a good purpose, “not allowing Himself to receive testimony from men,” as He said, but Himself having appeared as a witness about Himself, the most reliable and worthy of all (John 5:34). Being truth by nature, He expresses, without a doubt, only what is true, as this can be proven to us from the very quality of objects. In fact, more or less does not refer to the very essence of something, but to what exists with essences. So, for example, a person, insofar as he is thought of and called as a person, cannot at all have anything greater or less than any other person - a person as a person is neither less than a person nor more, again like a person, for nature turns out to be equal in everyone. The same reasoning remains valid in relation to the Angels, or to everything created and among the creatures. So, such definitions (more and less) turn out to be completely unacceptable in relation to the essences themselves, but are random phenomena in essences or something located with essences, as we showed above. In what way, then, will the Father be greater than the Son, God by nature (greater) than God by nature? The birth of 481 the Son from Him (the Father), without a doubt, should force you, even involuntarily, to assimilate to Him those things that are consubstantial. Having thus accepted for certain that the Son is God by nature, we will resolve, if you like, the question: by giving Him honor equal to the One from Whom He is, will we thereby also assimilate the (appropriate) glory to the One who gave birth, or will we do the opposite, humiliating the Begotten with lower and lesser virtues, which is more likely and actually done (by opponents). After all, it is glory to the Father to give birth to such as He Himself is by nature. But the exact opposite will happen - which God forbid - if the Son does not preserve the nobility due to Him, having less either in terms of glory, or anything else that, without a doubt, should belong to Him, in order to appear in everything as a perfect and true God. But, being of such (equal with the Father) nature, He honors the Father; do not laugh at this, O man, and do not incur punishment on yourself by ignorantly worsening that which should least of all be (worse). In fact, it is fitting to be surprised before Him, of course, because He honors and loves the One who gave birth, for every type of virtue has, as it were, some kind of source and root, the Essence Supreme above all. The good that was previously manifested in Her pours out into us, who are created in Her image. That is why the Legislator proclaimed to us that we must honor our father and mother, and also considered the most beautiful reward for this, recognizing this, as I believe, as the greatest deed and so free from any reproach that it is even the reason for a long life. So, just as we, for the sake of submission and obedience to our parents, do not find ourselves in comparison with them of any other nature, but, being what they are, people from people, and having and preserving the most perfect definition of humanity, we try to show obedience as an illustrious virtue, so we must think about the Father and the Son, for, being that which is, obviously God from God, Perfect from the Perfect, the immutable outline of the essence of the Parent, He cannot think about nothing else but what He Himself thinks about, of Whom He is both the Council and the Word. He can desire, of course, only what is the same as the Father, held together with the Father by the same, so to speak, laws of consubstantiality in the desire for all that is good. Therefore, 483 do not be at all tempted, O man, when you hear His words: “I came down from heaven, not to do My will, but the will of Him who sent Me.” What we said at the beginning (of the discussion) will be said again: Christ spoke here about a definite and clear subject. He speaks these words, teaching that His death for everyone was voluntary, because the Divine Nature wanted it that way, but also involuntary, due to the suffering of the cross and since it concerned the flesh, which turns away from death. And we have already had an extensive discussion about this. And that in some respects it turns out that suffering on the cross was involuntary for the Savior Christ, since He was a man, we can see this from the very nature of the matter. Thus, we affirm that it was a matter of Jewish madness that Christ undoubtedly had to be crucified, and this certainly had to be from them, who were prepared in advance to dare to do this by what they had already done in relation to the holy prophets and saints who were at that time. Since otherwise it was impossible for what had fallen into death to be restored to life again, if the Only Begotten Word of God had not become man, and He had, of course, to endure (everything) that had happened: He made the involuntary free for Himself, and Divine Nature allowed this for the sake of love for us. Yes, the artist of all things, Wisdom, that is, the Son, cunningly constructed as a result of the devil’s malice, I mean His death in the flesh, revealed the path of salvation and the door of life for us, and the hopes of the devil were destroyed, and in the end he learned and experienced that it was cruel for him to fight God. Likewise, the divine Psalmist, it seems to me, agrees with these words and points to something similar when he speaks, as it were, about Christ and the devil: “In his snare he will humble him” (Ps. 9:30-31). The devil laid a net for Christ - death, but with this very own net he was pacified, for death was destroyed by the death of Christ, and the tyrant, who did not expect to fall, was abolished. It is not difficult to formulate an extensive discussion about this, but again we will say only what is necessary in the present case. If the death of Christ was not actually and truly the work of the desires of the Jews and the fruit of their wicked insolence, but the Divine judgment, as some think, undoubtedly led to this; then, finally, should not the Divine will be fulfilled as if out of necessity, through the mediation of people, of course, and not otherwise? But in this case, how, tell me, could those who serve the inevitable decisions of God be subjected to fair punishment? And how will one deserve “woe” and “it would have been better if that man had not been born” through whom Christ was betrayed (Matthew 26:24)? If suffering were only voluntary for the Savior and would not at all be considered involuntary in any other respect, then how could one who turned out to be a servant of the Master’s will and the inevitable future be justly subjected to any punishment? Or should it not be obvious to everyone that what was pleasing to the Divine and Ineffable Nature, without a doubt, had to be accomplished, and accomplished, of course, through someone? But both from this and from many other things it can be seen that if the Son came down from “heaven” to suffer death for everyone, then, of course, together both voluntarily and involuntarily, in order to resurrect everyone on the “last day,” with the good will of the Father Himself for the benefit of everyone, but through this He does not at all want to be considered alien or in any way less than His Parent. I assume that our enemy will already be ashamed and will not contradict our reasoning about this. But to those who continue to insist and who decide that it is necessary to continue the argument, I will say this: if the Son “descended from heaven” in order to fulfill not His “will,” as He Himself says, “but (the will) of the Father,” and you may not find the reasoning we just made about this pleasant (convincing), then otherwise wouldn’t it be necessary to say that Their desires in some way turn out to be mutually opposed and Their will is divided into opposing desires? But it is indisputable for everyone that if there is nothing dividing, then, without any doubt, both must have one will - if He pursues His will as some other will, different from the will of the Father, and meanwhile fulfills this latter, then wouldn’t it be unreasonable for us to say that there is one will, and not another, different from one? Let us now see what the will of the Father is, for in this way we learn, of course, about the other will, what it desires. So, the will of the Father, as the Savior Himself said, “is that all that He has given” He should “not destroy” (anything) “of it, but raise it up (at) the last day.” No one will object to the fact that she is kind and humane. But transferring our thoughts to the opposite will of the Son, we will have to find Him neither humane nor good, thinking completely contrary to the Father and not wanting to either save us or resurrect us from death. And how, in this case, could He already be a good shepherd? How did He consider giving His soul for us as a sign of His inherent love for mankind? After all, if he “came down from heaven” in order to fulfill this by voluntary desire, then how can he not fulfill his own will, not destroying what was handed over to Him by the Father, but even resurrecting on the last day? If He does not have this in His desire, but He serves the desires of the Father, both resurrecting and saving, obviously, those who were lost and subject to death, then are we not expressing the truth when we assert that the Son is neither good nor even loving of mankind? Let the Christ-fighter therefore be silent, in view of the fact that his objections from everywhere accuse him of blasphemy, and let him not bark at us with cruel words about this. John 6:40. For this is the will of My Father, that whoever sees the Son and believes in Him may have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day 484 Having already defined the good will of the Father, he clarifies it again and more fully offers it to the listeners for consideration by repeating the same thing. It clearly reveals what was the method of bringing (those who believe by the Father to the Son) and what those brought gain as a result of this bringing. So, to the Son, who is able to give life, the Father gives that which needs life. And he gives in such a way that through knowledge he imparts to everyone the true concept of the Son and the ability to clearly understand that He is God from the true God the Father, so that, thus attuned and illuminated by the contemplation of Him, one may ascend to the reward for faith, that is, to eternal life and endless bliss. Thus, through knowledge and divine contemplation, the Father brings to the Son those to whom he determines to communicate Divine grace. The Son, having received, gives life and, imparting his own good (life) to those who are naturally subject to decay and introducing into them, as if a spark of fire, the life-giving power of the Spirit, completely transforms them into immortality. And hearing again that the Father brings, the Son gives the power of revival to those who resort to Him, do not deviate from that absurd thought of thinking that One and the Other specifically and separately do something to which the nature of Each corresponds - on the contrary, internalize for yourself the thought that the Father is a co-worker to the Son and, on his part, the Son to the Father - and, I affirm, the whole work of the Holy Trinity is the salvation of us and the raising from death again to life. Know that the Father sufficiently possesses all the power necessary for this, and in the same way the Son, and also the Holy Spirit. Through the entire Holy Trinity, blessings and “all in all” come to us (1 Cor. 15:28; Col. 3, etc.). God the Father is found entirely through the Son in the Spirit. However, we should also pay attention to the fact that something very remarkable is found in faith in the Son, for life has its reward. And if the Father and God are known in the Son (who exists as such) by nature, then who, finally, can bear with those who place Him outside the essence of the Father and direct their unbridled tongue to such blasphemy? Through the fact that He declares Himself capable of restoring what has fallen into death to life, through this very thing He directly, without any mediation, ascends to natural identity with the Parent, for life-giving is a work inherent in life - and if the Father is Life by nature, then, without a doubt, He who is from Him by nature, that is, the Only Begotten, must also be represented as life. John 6:41. The Jews murmured about Him, as if they said: I am the bread that came down from heaven They are indignant again, not understanding anything in the words of Christ. This mostly expresses an ignorant mind, for, unable to embrace the teaching through which they should have been transformed for the better, it finally falls into inappropriate cowardice. And indeed, don’t we find confirmation of the correctness of this again in the Jews themselves? Are they irritated for what reason? What word caused them to do this? Why do they “murmur”? Although, on the contrary, they should, with all curiosity, direct their minds to these words and discern the truth from the very deeds - through the greatness of the perfect miracle, go to a true understanding of whether Christ could speak a lie, calling Himself “bread” and, moreover, “came down from heaven,” or whether He speaks the truth and as such (speaking the truth) He should appear in their eyes. Thus, judging correctly, one could perfectly learn how to acquire useful things. But, without examining anything, they are angry, although already in the past Christ showed Himself to be the real and true bread of life and contrasted Himself with the manna, which was given to their fathers in the wilderness as a type and shadow, for he who comes to Me, he says, will never thirst (John 6:35). After all, those who ate that manna received some short and very fleeting carnal pleasure, and those who come to Him through faith will not achieve the same benefit as the people of that time, but will taste the constant grace of blessing. This is how the mind of the Jews is mistaken, looking only at earthly things. Consequently, it was about them that this was sung: “Let their eyes be darkened (so that) they cannot see, and their backs be forever bent” (Ps. 68:24), so that, not being directed from anywhere to the knowledge of Divine mysteries, “the wicked perish evil” (Matthew 21:41) thanks to their madness and extreme unbridledness in unbelief. And recalling something in the Mosaic writings, we will find that grumbling against the best and kind (people) was, as it were, some kind of paternal heritage inherent in the Jews. But both the then experience with those and the present one with these showed, however, that this leads to a bitter end. They grumbled in the wilderness and raised an ungrateful cry against God, but “they perished by snakes” (Num. 21:6), as the wise Paul testified in one place (1 Cor. 10:9). These too murmur against Christ, and insult the Lawgiver and Redeemer by such prolonged unbelief. But He will command “the dragon and gnaw them” (Amos 9:3), according to what is written, they will be given as food to the all-devouring beast, for unbelief always necessarily leads to the most terrible end. John 6:42. And the verb: Is not this Jesus the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he say that he has fallen from heaven? O great ignorance and mind darkened by indomitable fury! According to what is written, the heart of this people has become hardened (Is.6:10; Matt.13:15). He really does not see anything that he should understand clearly, and in thoughts and words he considers it worthy of laughter. Meanwhile, on the contrary, carefully studying the writings of the wise Moses and using the preaching of the holy prophets, they should have understood that the coming of Christ to us was expected not without flesh and not without bodily vestments, but His appearance was foreshadowed in human form and in this form common to all (people). That is why the prophetic word proclaims to us that the Holy Virgin will conceive and give birth to a Son (Is. 7:14). In the same way, the Lord swore to blessed David the true and immutable promise that he who came from the fruit of his loins will sit on his throne, as it is written (Ps. 131:11). He also foretold that a rod would come out of the root of Jesse (Is. 11:1). They do not recognize themselves as having reached such unreason that if they see the carnal “mother” of Him whose coming in the flesh was foretold, then, they think, without a doubt, they should not believe that He came down from heaven; for although we will find this accomplished not according to the (law of) the flesh, yet it was in the body (received) from the Virgin, as in His church, the Divine Word, who came from above from the Father to us and for the salvation of all received the “seed of Abraham” in order to “in all respects be made like the brothers” (Heb. 2:16-17) and to call human nature to adoption as sons of God, having appeared as God and together human. But not understanding the economy (about the coming) of our Savior in the flesh, the Jews, due to their knowledge of His “mother” and “father”, although not the former father, are not ashamed to be indignant at the fact that Christ says about Himself that He came down from heaven. And here again a very useful example appears to us. Through this, in matters concerning us, we learn that great harm can come to us if, with the mental eyes of the heart, we no longer see the inherent virtue of the saints and do not look at the glory hidden by them, but due to their physical insignificance, we often consider nothing great and honorable from God. Thus, in the prophets, in one place, God speaks of the saints, in the person of one, as if spreading the word to everyone: “Blessed is the man who trusts in the Lord, and the Lord will be his hope, and he will be like a tree planted by water, and (which) puts down its root to the moisture, and in times of dryness will not be afraid and will not cease to produce fruit: the heart is deep above all else, and man is, and who will know him? I am the Lord, who searches the hearts, who searches the reins” (Jer. 17:7–10). If, therefore, with our arrogance we begin to humiliate (a person) known (glorious) by God and honored with the now-mentioned virtues, looking at only his outwardly visible and mortal flesh and considering bodily dishonor a sign of cowardice in him, then will we not find ourselves thinking the opposite of the King of all and, thus, will we not be subjected to considerable punishment, then calling the high low, then considering the light to be darkness, then counting sweet things as bitter (Isaiah 5:20)? Therefore, one must observe (toward) the saints the honor due to them and contemplate them more in their inner and hidden virtues than in their carnal form. But most of us do not at all consider worthy of honor or any kind of glory that which is despised in the world, even if it is distinguished by virtues, but, looking at the mere abundance of wealth and at the fleeting and seemingly ready for death glory, looking with completely unfair glances, they turn the correct judgment into nothing. The Savior’s disciple quite rightly ridicules such people in the words: “You are hypocrites (you), for if any man with a gold ring, in rich (light) clothes comes into your meeting, and a beggar in scanty (thin) clothes also enters, then you,” he says, “tell the rich man to sit in the right place, and the beggar: stand there or sit at my feet (under my footstool), then you do not reason.” in themselves” (James 2:2-4), although from this one can see what just reproach those who honor a person according to his external vestments, and not according to his internal merits, are guilty of. After all, wealth and the splendor of wealth, naturally, can only bring their owners some kind of alien and false glory. And the brilliance of the heart and the radiance of good deeds will be for those who possess them genuine and natural (true) wealth, not coexisting with the body and rotting with it, but cohabiting with the soul when it is still in this (earthly) life, and when it departs, then also flying with it to wherever the Leader of all will indicate, for “many mansions are with the Father,” as we have heard (John 14:2 ). So, one should show respect, without a doubt or (even) with necessity, not to those who are famous for wealth and, as in a picture, decorated with earthly glory, but, on the contrary, to those whose splendor of deeds, with the help of God, generates unfading glory and whose inner beauty exposes in a brilliant light through all kinds of goods. John 6:43–44. Jesus answered and said to them: Do not murmur among yourselves: no one can come to Me unless the Father, who sent Me, will draw him, and I will raise him up on the last day. The Jews humiliate Jesus, not knowing the Father (His existence) in heaven and completely not recognizing that He could be by nature the Son of the Lord of all, but having in mind only His earthly mother and Joseph. Therefore, He answers them somewhat more strongly and immediately again beneficially rushes towards His very Divine dignity and, through the fact that He, as God, knew their quiet whispers and the thoughts that appeared in them, through this very thing He encouraged them to understand that they were deviating from the truth and had formed too insignificant an idea about Him. In fact, a fully knowing heart, experiencing the movements of the mind, knowing the intentions of the soul - shouldn’t it, on the contrary, be crowned with Divine glory and elevated above human insignificance as much as God stands above earthly objects? So, revealing the thought that was still hidden in the unspoken censures and making explicit the murmur expressed in a quiet whisper, for the reason already stated, “don’t murmur,” he says, “with each other.” Then, showing that the good mystery about Him was revealed to people by God and knowledge about Him is a work of highest grace, he says that no one can come to Him who is not attracted by the inspirations of the Father. At the same time, He again had no other goal than to convince them that with crying and sorrow they should try to free themselves from that (forgiveness for that) with which they had already offended Him, and to attract them to salvation through faith in Him through the advice of the Father and heavenly help, making it easier for them to get there and from the terribly difficult one, due to their sin, making it smooth. He also beneficially confirms that he will raise the believer from the dead, again and through this presenting Himself to the fools as God by nature and true, for the complete ability to give life and force those subject to death to return to life (new) - this can rightly befit the nature of God alone and cannot be attributed to any of the created ones. After all, life-giving is a property of the Living One, and not of one who receives this gift (of life) from another. John 6:45. It is written in the prophets: and they will all be taught by God Knowing as God the inherent foolishness of the listeners, he does not leave speech about this without evidence, but shows that this was already foretold from the beginning and proclaimed through the holy prophets. At the same time, he prevents them from wanting to again object to Him and at the same time reveals their inherent ignorance through the fact that they again turn out to be ignorant of this too, although the law guided them to perceive the future. So, he convinces them even involuntarily to agree with Him. After all, it was unnatural for them to rebel against the cries of the holy prophets that God and the Father would inspire the worthy with the secret of Him and reveal His Son, conversing with everyone in an ineffable way and divinely imparting understanding about Him. And that in the previously spoken words: “no one can come to Me unless the Father who Sent Me draws him,” He does not indicate a forced and violent attraction, he explains this by adding: John 6:45. Everyone who has heard and learned from My Father will come 485 to Me Indeed, where there is listening and teaching, there is good fruit from learning, obviously, faith by conviction, and not by compulsion. The understanding of Christ is given from the Father to worthy (people) out of love - supportive, and not compulsory, for the dogmatic basis forces the human soul to preserve autocracy and self-will, so that it can demand fair rewards for virtues, and if it deviates from duty and deviates through negligence from the will of the Lawgiver, it is subject to fair condemnation to punishment. We must also know that if it is said that the Father teaches someone the secret of Christ, then He will not act alone in this, but will do it through the Son as through His own Wisdom, for it should be understood that the revelation of understanding in someone will be from the Father not without Wisdom, and the Wisdom of the Father is the Son. So, through his own Son, as through Wisdom, the Father will bring about revelation to those who are worthy. And in general, and absolutely truly, the one who says that all the actions of God and the Father or desires are the essence of the entire Holy Trinity, equally the Son Himself and the Holy Spirit, will not sin. It is for this reason, I think, that when it is said that God the Father reveals His Son and calls to Him those who are most capable of believing, then the Son Himself turns out to be doing this, as well as the Holy Spirit. Thus, to blessed Peter, who boldly professed faith in the Savior, He says: “Blessed are you, Simon the son of Jonah, because it was not flesh and blood that revealed it to you, but My Father in heaven” (Matthew 16:17). In other cases He finds Himself doing it. Thus, Paul speaks of himself with great triumph, proclaiming the mystery of Christ: “For I did not receive it (the gospel) from man, or learned it, but through the revelation of Jesus Christ” (Gal. 1:12). So the wise John writes in his Epistle: “And the anointing that you received from Him remains in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach you, but as His anointing teaches you in all things” (1 John 2:27). And the Savior Himself speaks in one place as about the Comforter, that is, the Spirit: “I still have many things to tell you, but you cannot bear it now: but when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you in all truth, for He will not speak from Himself, but what He hears He will speak, and He will tell you what is to come (the future)” (John 16:12-13). Being the Spirit of truth, He will provide light to those in whom He resides and guide them to the perception of the truth. And we say this, not wanting to separate from each other and present completely separately the Father from the Son or the Son from the Father, equally the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son; but if indeed one is the Divinity and is preached as contemplated in the Holy and Consubstantial Trinity, then what is appropriated to Each (person of the Divinity) and considered especially to belong to Him we define as the intentions and actions of the entire Divinity. This is because the Divine and Undivided Nature must act inseparably through itself, so far as the unity of the Divinity is concerned, although each of the Persons exists self-hypostatically, for the Father is what He is, and the Son also, and the Holy Spirit. In addition to what has been said, this is what should be kept in mind. Those of the names that have any relation to something are known through each other, and in the designation of one (idea of ​​one) one can see the designation of the other (have an idea of ​​the other). Thus (it turns out) there is a complete necessity for the Son to be revealed through the Father, and to the Father again through the Son. One is necessarily introduced together with the Other, and if anyone sees the Father God by nature, then, of course, he will understand the Son born of Him, as, without a doubt, vice versa, for he who confesses the Son does not know the Parent. So, since God is the Father, he is conceived and preached as such, He also introduces (corresponding) knowledge to the listeners about His own Generation. And since He is called by nature the Son (being) from Him and is such in reality, He proclaims the Father. That is why he says to Him: “I have revealed Your name to people” (John 17:6): since the Son was known by those who believed, the name of the One who gave birth became revealed, he says. However, God and the Father can be imagined as imparting into us the knowledge of His Generation, not so that it is a voice sounding from heaven and like thunder announcing the universe, but, obviously, this is the Divine light-guide shining in us to the understanding of God-inspired Scripture. Again in this regard you will find the Son active in us, for in one place it is written about the holy disciples that “then he opened their eyes” (Luke 24:45), obviously to the understanding of the Holy Scriptures. John 6:46. Not because he saw the Father, there are 486 who, only He is from God, This is the form of the Father Again, God foresaw that the Jews would not at all accept revelation through the Spirit and would not understand the highest wisdom in the light, but out of great recklessness they would even demand to see the Father and learn, so to speak, through personal vision, which, as they thought, once happened with the fathers (Ex. 19:20), when the glory of God descended on Mount Sinai. But again he distracts from this and, as if by some kind of bridle, turns him to not having such a crude idea of ​​​​God and not thinking that the invisible nature can ever be visible, for no one, he says, has seen the Father. It seems that here again a hint is given to the priestly leader Moses himself. After all, the Jews thought, completely, of course, unreasonably reasoning, on the basis of the expression (used) about him: “He entered into darkness” (Ex. 20: 2), that the ineffable nature of God is accessible to vision and with bodily eyes one can see what by nature is pure beauty. But so that, while expressing something more clear about the wise Moses, he would not seem to encourage them to ordinary insolence, He speaks vaguely and together about everyone, as well as about him: “It is not that anyone has seen the Father.” Do not demand, he says, what is above (human) nature and do not get carried away by reckless aspirations for what is inaccessible to all creatures. Inaccessible, hidden and inconceivable is the Divine Nature, not only for our eyes, but for all creation. In the word “nobody” here “everything” is concentrated - Defining Himself as one who alone is from God and has seen the Father, obviously (thus) placing outside of “everything” what can definitely be understood by the word “nobody”. So, since He is outside of everything and while no one sees the Father, He alone is not deprived of this vision, then can He not finally be conceived of existing not in “all”, as one of them, but outside “all”, as (being) above “everything”? And if it is said that “all things are from God” and “no one sees the Father,” for “all things are from God,” according to the word of Paul (1 Cor. 11:12), and meanwhile (it is also said that) He alone “sees God,” because He is “from God”; then we will understand this “from God” correctly if we understand Him only in the sense of “from the essence of the Father.” If not so, then why, as we said earlier, while it is said that “everything is from God,” He alone ascends to the sight of the One who gave birth precisely because He is “from God”? So, about creatures this (the expression “from God”) should be said in an improper sense, for “all things are from God” in the sense of creation as brought into being by Him, but about the Son the expression “from God” should be taken in a different and truer sense, that He (the Son) is from Him (the Father) by nature. Therefore, not being numbered with everyone, but being outside everything and above everything with the Father, He should not share the common weakness with everyone, since He is precisely removed from the same nature with them, but, ascending to the nature of the One who gave birth, He must, of course, contemplate the One from Whom He is. But to express in words how or in what way whether He Himself sees the Father, or vice versa is contemplated by the Father, this is not accessible to our language. It must, however, be presented in a form appropriate to God. John 6:47. Amen (truly), amen (truly) I say to you: believe in Me to have (has) eternal life (eternal life) So, faith is the door and path to life and the ascent from corruption to incorruption. However, here, no less (than in other cases), the listeners will have to marvel at the Savior’s prudence. since he knows and sees that they do not understand anything at all and do not even think about the duty of obedience to prophetic words, then with a spell in the truth he suppresses the weakness of faith, since it depended on human reflections. Offering believers something worthwhile as a reward, as if through some kind of instrument, obviously with desires for this, almost even against their will forces and convinces them to go to what is preached. Indeed, what could be preferable to eternal life for those who experience cruel death and suffering from decay? This is also what befits a wise teacher - I mean that through every path that calls to life, he should re-educate for the better those who decide to think something unreasonable. He, being eternal life, promises to teach Himself to believers, which is what the words (of the Apostle) mean: “Christ (God willing) will dwell in your hearts through faith” (Eph. 3:17). About the fact that the holy Body of Christ is life-giving, where He speaks of His own Body as bread John 6:48–50. I am the bread of life (of life): your fathers ate manna in the desert and died: this is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that whoever eats from it will not die 489 In these words one can very clearly see what was foretold by the prophet Isaiah in the words: “I was revealed to those who did not seek Me, and I was found (found) among those who did not ask about Me; I said, “Here I am,” to the people who did not call on My name; All day long I stretched out My hands to a disobedient and contradictory people” (Isaiah 65:1-2). Having removed the entire (outer) shell from this speech and eliminating all, so to speak, its clothing, He already undisguisedly reveals Himself to the Israelis, saying: “I am the bread of life,” so that they would know that if they want to rise above corruption and free themselves from the very death that struck them as a result of crime, then they will have to go to the acceptance of Him who has the power to give life, who destroys corruption and abolishes death, for all this is real. characteristic and befitting of Life by nature. And since they, citing the fact that manna (from heaven) was given to their fathers in the desert, did not accept the bread that truly came down from heaven, that is, Christ, it is necessary to compare the type with the truth, so that in this way they would see that it is not he (manna) who is the bread of heaven, but Whom the experience of reality shows to be such by nature. Your fathers, he says, and ancestors, eating manna, paid their debt to the nature of the body - acquiring through it the maintenance of temporary life and delivering daily food from it to the body, they barely achieved not to die immediately. And the most obvious proof, he says, that this was not truly heavenly bread, is that those who ate it did not at all achieve immortality through it. In the same way, again, the sign that the Son is in the proper and true sense the bread of life is that once those who have tasted of Him and through communion are in some way united with Him, they find themselves above the very bonds of death. That manna was taken precisely in the image or shadow of Christ and pointed to the bread of life, but it itself was not this bread of life, we have already talked about this a lot. The Psalmist seems to confirm this, exclaiming in the Spirit: “He gave them the bread of heaven; man did eat the bread of angels” (Ps. 77:24–25). It may perhaps seem that these words were spoken by the Spirit-Bearer about the Israelites, but in reality this is not the case, but, on the contrary, the meaning of the saying applies to us. Indeed, is it not the height of absurdity and unreasonableness to think that the holy Angels in heaven, although they have received an incorporeal nature, eat the coarsest food and need help to maintain life, which this earthly body also requires? But nothing, I believe, prevents us from thinking that since they are spirits, they may need the same food, obviously spiritual and mental. Why, however, is it said that the bread of angels was given to the ancestors of the Jews, if the prophet, exclaiming this, expresses (as I think) the truth? But it is obvious that if the manna was representative of the image of Christ, who embraces and contains everything into being, who feeds the Angels and gives life to those on earth, then the prophet calls what is indicated, as if in the vestibule, by its true name, the impossibility for the holy Angels to eat earthly food even against the will of the listeners, distracting them from coarse thoughts, that is, about manna, and leading them to spiritual understanding, that is, about Himself Christ, Who is the bread and the holy Angels themselves. So, those who ate manna, he says, died, obviously as having not received communion from it into any life, for it was not really life-giving, but only a remedy against carnal hunger and had the meaning of a prototype of truth. Those who receive the bread of life will be rewarded with immortality and, completely freed from corruption and all its evils, will be elevated to the eternal and endless continuation of life according to Christ. There is no obstacle to our reasoning that those who have entered into communion with Christ must nevertheless taste death according to the duty of nature, because, falling under this common end, although they are subject to what is characteristic of human nature, they, as Paul says, “live for God” (Rom. 6:10-14, 8; cf. Gal. 2:17-21), (as such), who will have to live (eternally). John 6:51. I am the living bread that came down from heaven: whoever eats of this bread will live forever 490 “To tell you the same thing is not burdensome for me, but it is edifying for you,” writes the divine Paul in his Epistle (to the Philippians) (Phil. 3:1), taught this, I think, from the very words of the Savior. Just as severe wounds require the use of not just one medicine, but a variety of treatments, and moreover, more than once, perhaps used, but with continuous use driving out the disease, so, I think, an unbridled soul and a hardened mind require frequent and continuous help from teachers, for it can be curbed not with one and the first instruction, but through the frequent use and repetition of the same words to it. Therefore, the Savior, often repeating the same teaching to the Jews, offers it in a variety of forms, sometimes mysterious and clothed with great ambiguity, sometimes free from any reciprocity, simply and clearly, so that, having finally turned out to be disobedient, they would no longer require anything for their condemnation, but “the wicked would perish through evil” (Matthew 21:41), themselves bringing the sword of destruction upon their soul. So, now no longer hiding anything, Christ says: “I am the living bread that came down from heaven.” That, he says, was the prototype and the shadow. Now listen clearly and undisguisedly (to what is proclaimed): “I am the living bread; If anyone eats from this bread, he will live forever.” Those who ate of that bread died, for it was not life-giving, but whoever eats this bread, that is, Me, or My Flesh, “will live forever.” Therefore, we must beware and turn away from bitterness towards words about piety, to which Christ convinces us more than once, but often. After all, there can be no doubt that those who deviate towards extreme madness and do not restrain themselves from insulting the Teacher of goodness through excessive disobedience to Him will certainly be subject to the most serious accusations. Therefore, he says about the Jews: “If I had not come and told them, they would not have had sin; now they have no excuse for their sin” (John 15:22). After all, those who have not received the word about salvation into their hearts through hearing will perhaps meet with the Meeker Judge, citing the fact that they have not heard (the teaching about salvation) at all, although, without any doubt, they will give account for not seeking the teaching. Those who, through the same instructions and words, are often guided to receive what is useful, but foolishly consider it necessary to be deprived of benefits, will be subjected to the bitterest punishment and will appear, as it were, before an Offended Judge, not being able to find any excuse for their madness that will soften Him. John 6:51. And the bread, which I will give, My flesh is (I will give) for the life of the world 491 I die, he says, for everyone, in order to give life to everyone through Myself, and I have made My (Flesh) a ransom for the flesh of all, for death must die in My death, and, he says, the fallen nature of man will rise with Me. For this reason I became a man like you, obviously from the seed of Abraham, to be like “brothers in every way” (Heb. 2:17). Having well understood what Christ just told us, Blessed Paul himself says: “Since the children are partakers of Blood and Flesh, (then) He also received them, so that through death He might abolish him who has the power of death, that is, the devil” (Heb. 2:14). Otherwise it would have been impossible for him who had the power of death and death itself to be abolished, except by the fact that Christ gave Himself for us as a ransom for all, for He was one for all. Therefore, in the psalms in one place, dedicating Himself for us as if to be an immaculate sacrifice to God and the Father, He says: “You did not desire sacrifices and offerings, but you prepared a body for Me: burnt offerings and (sacrifices) for sin are not pleasing to You. Then I said: Behold, I come, in chapter 492 of the book it is written about Me - to do Your will, O God, I have willed” ( Ps.39:7-9; Heb.10:5-7). since “the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of a heifer” (Heb. 9:13) were insufficient to cleanse sin and the slaughter of foolish animals could never destroy the power of death, then Christ Himself introduces Himself in some way subject to punishment for everyone, for “by His stripes we were healed” (Is. 53:5), as the prophet says, and “He bore our sins in His body on the tree” ( 1 Peter 2:24). And He was crucified for all and for the sake of all, so that through the death of One for all we all might live in Him (2 Cor. 5:15), for it was impossible for Him to be “held” by death (Acts 2:24), and also corruption could not have taken possession of Life by nature. And what “for the life” of the world Christ brought His “flesh”, we also learn from His words: “Holy Father, keep them,” and also: “For them I sanctify Myself” (John 17:11, 19). He says here that he sanctifies Himself, not in the sense that he accomplishes sanctification, which consists in the purification of the soul or spirit, as is understood about us, but not even in the sense of receiving the Holy Spirit, for the Spirit was in Him naturally - He was and is holy always and will be forever. The word “I will consecrate” He says here instead of “I dedicate and offer” as an immaculate sacrifice into the aroma of fragrance, for what was holy or according to the law was called holy was what was offered to the Divine altar. So, Christ gives His body for the life of everyone and again infuses us with Life through it, but how (this is accomplished), I will tell you to the best of my ability. since the life-giving Word of God dwelt in the flesh, It transformed it into its own quality, that is, life, and, completely uniting with it in an ineffable way of unity, revealed it to be life-giving, as It Itself is by nature. Therefore, the Body of Christ gives life to those who become partakers of Him, for it drives out death when it appears among the dying, and removes corruption, carrying within itself the Word, which completely destroys corruption 493. But, perhaps, someone will say, having thought in his mind about the revival of the deceased: after all, those who have not accepted faith in Christ and have not become partakers of Him will not be revived during the resurrection. What then? Will not all creation that has fallen to death return to life? Yes, let us say to this, all flesh will live, for the prophetic word foretells that the dead will rise (Is. 26:19). We think that the consequences of the mystery of the resurrection of Christ extend to all humanity, and we believe that in Him and the first our entire nature was freed from corruption, for all will rise in the likeness of the One who rose for us and has all in Himself, since He was a man. And just as in the first-born (Adam) we were cast into death, so in the First-born again, who became such for our sake, all will live from the dead, but those who have done good in the resurrection of life, as it is written, and those who have done evil in the resurrection of judgment (John 5:29). Yes, resurrection for punishment and revival for receiving only shame, I can recognize as immeasurably more bitter than death. Therefore, we must understand in its own sense real life in Christ, life in holiness, and bliss, and unceasing joy, since the wise John also recognizes such a life as true, saying: “He who believes in the Son has eternal life, but he who does not believe (does not obey) the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God will remain 494 on him” (John 3:36). So, behold, he says, he who is overcome by unbelief will not see life, although all creation awaits its return to life and resurrection. It is obvious from this that the Savior rightly called the life well prepared for the saints, I mean a life in glory and holiness, which, as is beyond any doubt for any right-thinking person, will be inherited by those who approach the communion of the Life-giving Flesh. But since the Savior often called Himself bread before, let us see again whether through this He does not want to introduce into our minds something of what was foreshadowed and whether He does not recall those places from the Holy Scriptures in which He was once indicated as if in the form of bread. Thus, in Numbers it is written: “And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: When you enter into the land where I am bringing you (there), and it shall come to pass, when you eat of the grain of the land (that), you shall separate a portion for the Lord to separate: the firstfruit of your dough, the bread, you shall separate for Him in a portion, like a portion of the threshing floor, so you shall separate it (the bread), the firstfruit of your dough, and you will give the Lord a portion throughout your generations.” Numbers 15:17–21). The law portrayed this covertly and having, as it were, a rough robe from the letter, but it again foreshadowed the truly true bread coming down from heaven, that is, Christ, and giving life to the world (John 6:33). Understand how, having become a man like us, because of the likeness with us, as if a certain firstfruits of our test and separation, according to what is written (Num. 15:19), He is dedicated to God and the Father, appearing as the firstborn from the dead (Col. 1:18) and as the firstfruits of the resurrection of all (1 Cor. 15:20) ascending into heaven itself; for He was taken from us, He received the seed of Abraham, as Paul says (Heb. 2:16), and was dedicated, as it were, from all and for all, so that He might give life to all, and, as if the first sheaf from the threshing floor, was offered up to God and the Father. And just as, being Himself the true light, He communicated this grace to His disciples: “You,” He says, “are the light of the world” (Matthew 5:14), so, being living bread and life-giving and embracing everything into being, in likeness again and through the canopy of the law, He pointed in the twelve loaves to the sacred choir of the Apostles. This is what the book of Leviticus says about this: “And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Command the children of Israel, and let them take you pure olive oil, beaten for light, (to) light a lamp always, without the veil in the tabernacle of testimony” (Lev. 24:1-3). Then he also says: “And you shall take wheat flour and make twelve loaves of it, (two-tenths of an ephah) will be one loaf: and lay them in two rows, six loaves in one row, on a clean table before the Lord, and put on (each) row clean frankincense and salt, and it will be for the loaves (lit.: in the loaves) for a memorial to those who are set before the Lord” (Lev. 5-7). The lamp, as we said earlier, which was in the holy tabernacle and shone outside the veil, is blessed John, nourished by the purest oil, that is, illumination through the Spirit. However, he was outside the veil, since his sermon was a catechumen (preparatory), for he said: “Prepare the way of the Lord, make straight the paths of our God” (Is. 40:3; cf. Matt. 3:3), but he does not reveal the inner veil, that is, the secret of Christ, very clearly, saying: “I baptize you in the water of repentance, but behind me He who comes mightier than I (is), whom I do not worthy to carry the sandals, He will baptize you in the Holy Spirit and fire” (Matthew 3:11). You see how it shines, as if in a simpler word calling for repentance, but it leaves the inner veil to be uncovered by the Baptizer through fire and the Spirit. But we discussed this in more detail at the beginning of that book (Book 3, Chapter 1), in which the saying was explained: “He was a burning and shining lamp” (John 5:35). Now we touched on this as if in passing, since it was necessary to point out the election (proclamation) of the twelve Apostles that immediately followed the departure of John. It is for this reason, I believe, that Scripture, pointing to it by means of a lamp, offers (then) a contemplation of twelve loaves: “Make,” he says, “twelve loaves, two-tenths (of an ephah) will be one loaf” (Lev. 24:5). The number ten in the Holy Scriptures is usually always taken as perfect and is considered the most complete, since the order and arrangement of ordinary numbers (units) in it, taking doubling and multiplication of the same numbers, can extend anywhere. Therefore, he commands that each loaf be made from two tenths (an ephah), so that you may see in the disciples the most perfect pair of two equal virtues - I mean active and contemplative. Prudently, he also commands that they be placed in two rows, as if indicating to them the position that, in all likelihood, they usually occupied, always having the Lord in the midst of them and usually surrounding Him as a Mentor. And in order for us to know that, as Paul says, they have become a fragrant aroma of Christ to God and the Father (2 Cor. 2:15), he commands to put frankincense on the loaves and sprinkle them with salt, for it is said in one place to them: “You are the salt of the earth” (Matt. 5:13). But he also prudently commands them to be brought on the Sabbath day (Lev. 24:8), for they appeared in the last times of the age, and Saturday is the last day of the week. And not only for this reason, but also because at the time of the coming of our Savior we are spiritually sabbathed (received spiritual rest), that is, we are inactive (free) from sins. At the same time, the appearance of the holy Apostles took place to us, feeding on them with the Divine Scriptures, we ascend to the holy life, which is why it is on the Sabbath day that he commands to place bread at the holy meal, that is, in the Church, for often the part signifies the whole. What could be holier than the holy table of Christ? So, as the bread the Savior was preformed in the law, and as the bread the disciples were also in likeness to Him, for all things were true in Christ, and in likeness to Him they are also in us by His grace. John 6:52–53. The Jews ate among themselves, saying: How can this Flesh give us food? Jesus spoke to them... 495 “Everything is obvious to those who understand and simple to those who gain knowledge,” according to what is written (Proverbs 8:9), but to those who do not understand it is dark and very simple. Indeed, an intelligent listener places the more easily understood teachings into the treasury of the mind, not allowing any slowness here. And what the teaching turns out to be difficult, he subjects to research and is constantly curious. Here it is useful, it seems to me, to try to do something similar to what they say is done by agile and hunting dogs, who, having by nature a great sense of smell in their nostrils, constantly run around the shelter of the animals they are looking for. In fact, doesn’t the prophetic wise saying call for a similar activity, which says: “Seek, seek, and dwell with me” (Is. 21:12)? It is appropriate to “seek to seek,” that is, applying the most intense zeal to this, not to deviate somewhere into empty thoughts, but the more difficult any obstacle turns out to be, the greater, of course, the sharpness of the mind must be here and the more powerful the effort of will to master what is hidden (from our understanding). But an uneducated and uneducated mind, if something eludes it, it expresses complete contempt for it with its unbelief (or doubt about it) and turns away supposedly from the counterfeit (and false) from that which is above it, due to ignorant insolence reaching extreme contempt. And indeed, not wanting to give in to anything and not thinking that there is anything greater than it, isn’t this exactly what we just said? We will also find the Jews fallen into such a state if we look closely at the essence of the matter. After all, they should have immediately accepted the words of the Savior, since they had previously seen many wondrous manifestations of His Divine power and irresistible power over everything, and about what was inaccessible (to their understanding) they should have been curious and asked (from Him) for instruction in that regarding which they might find themselves in difficulty. Again it is unreasonable to say this “how?” about God, as if not knowing that such speech turns out to be full of all blasphemy. And this is because God has the power to do everything without hindrance. They, being spiritual, as Blessed Paul says (1 Cor. 2:14), did not accept “that which is (of) the Spirit of God,” but such a sacred secret turns out to be “madness” for them. Therefore, benefiting ourselves from this and through the ways in which others fall, correcting their lives, we must have undoubted faith in our perceptions of the Divine mysteries (free from self-questioning) and not put this “how?” in anything that is communicated to us. This is a Jewish word and therefore serves as the reason for extreme punishment. So the leader of the Jewish host, Nicodemus, for asking how this could be (John 3:9), when he listened to the Divine words, was rightly ridiculed, hearing: “You are a teacher of Israel, and you do not know this?” (John 3:10). So, becoming more skillful in acquiring useful things even through the stupidity of others, let us refuse to say this “how?” in relation to everything that God does, on the contrary, we strive to dedicate to Him the knowledge of the way of our affairs (Proverbs 21:29). Indeed, just as no one knows what God is by nature, but is justified by believing “that (He) is (exists) and is a rewarder of those who seek Him” (Heb. 11:6); He also does not know exactly how He accomplishes anything in each deed, but by leaving the outcome (of the deed) to faith and recognizing the omnipotence of God over everyone, He will receive a not insignificant reward for such a good mood. After all, desiring this very disposition of ours, the Lord of all Himself speaks through the prophet Isaiah: “For My counsels are not as your counsels, nor as your ways are My ways, says the Lord, but as the heavens are from the earth, so are My ways from your ways, and your thoughts from My thoughts” (Is. 55:8-9). But is it not possible for someone so superior to you in wisdom and strength to act miraculously and be beyond your understanding? Let me give you one more reasoning about this, which, it seems to me, is not without significance. Those engaged in so-called mechanical science in this life often promise to accomplish something great, and the method of this accomplishment is hidden from the minds of the listeners before they see it. But when we see the art inherent in them, then even before the experience itself we accept by faith (we believe them), no longer daring to resist them. How then, one may ask, should not those justly be guilty of terrible guilt who, daring to dishonor with distrust the Supreme Artist of all God, do not refuse to say “how?” about what He does, although they recognize Him as the giver of all wisdom and learn from all Holy Scripture His omnipotence? And if you persist, O Jew, in saying this “how?”, then I, too, will tell you your ignorance, imitating you. How did you leave Egypt? How, tell me, was Moses’ rod turned into a serpent? How was a hand stricken with leprosy, and then restored again, as it is written? How did water become the nature of blood? How did you walk through the middle of the sea as if on dry land (Heb. 11:29)? How does a tree turn the bitter water of Marah into sweet water? How was water given to you from the rocky depths? How did manna come down for you? How did Jordan become in place? Or how the indestructible wall of Jericho was shaken by just one cry? And this very “how?” will not leave you. After all, you will find yourself having already experienced surprise at many miracles, to which if you apply this “how?”, then you will have to completely disbelieve the entire Divine Scripture and distort all the words of the holy prophets, and above all the sacred books of even your own Moses. So, on the contrary, it was necessary, believing Christ and immediately inclining to His words, to hasten to recognize the image of the blessing rather than to offend Him, imprudently saying: “How can this One give us His flesh to eat?” - because they also say this “This” with contempt. This word again hints at their similar arrogance. John 6:53. Amen, amen, I say to you, if you do not bear the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink His Blood, you do not have life in yourself 496 Christ is truly long-suffering and abundantly merciful, as can be seen from the narrative itself. Far from entering into an argument with the foolishness of those who did not believe, he again offers them a life-giving knowledge of the sacrament and, rising as God above the pride of those who insulted Him, he says that through which they can achieve eternal life. But He does not yet teach how He will give them (His) Flesh to eat, for He knew that they were in darkness and could not at all understand the ineffable (sacrament). But it is useful to point out the good consequences that will appear for them from this eating, perhaps with the goal that, by pointing to boundless bliss, more strongly inciting them to the desire to live, (thereby) teach them to believe, for the ability to learn rightly belongs precisely to those who have already believed. The prophet Isaiah speaks about this: “If you do not believe, you will not understand at all” (Is. 7:9). So, having first instilled faith in themselves, they should then begin to understand what they did not know, and research should not come before faith. For this reason, I think, the Lord, rightly omitting to tell them how he would give His flesh to eat, calls for the acceptance of faith before investigation. That is why He broke bread and gave it to those who had already believed, saying: “Take, eat, this is My Body.” Likewise, having carried the cup around to everyone, he says: “Drink from it, all of you, for this is My Blood of the Covenant, 497 which is shed for many for the remission of sins” (Matthew 26:26-28). You see from here that he does not explain the image of the sacrament to those who do not yet understand and refuse to believe without research, but to those who have already believed it turns out to be revealing it with all clarity. Let those, therefore, who have foolishly not yet accepted faith in Christ, listen: “If you do not eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink His Blood, you do not have eternal life in you.” Those who did not receive Jesus through the mysterious blessing (Eucharist) remain completely unparticipated and alien to the holy and blessed life. And this is because He is Life by nature, since He was born of the Living Father. But in the same way, His holy Body is life-giving, united in an inexpressible way with the life-giving Word. Therefore, He (the body) is considered and He (the Word) is thought of together with Him (the body) as one. Inseparable after incarnation, except for what is recognized as the Word coming from God the Father and the church from the Virgin, therefore, not identical by nature, for the body is not consubstantial with the Word (being) from God, but one by ineffable union and intercourse. And if the flesh of the Savior was life-giving as united with Life (which exists as such) by nature, then when we taste it, then we have life in ourselves, uniting ourselves with Him, just as it is united with the Word indwelling it. That is why, even at the resurrection of the dead, the Savior turns out to be acting not only by word and not by Divine commands alone, but He added to this, as a certain collaborator, His holy flesh, in order to show it as having the power to give life and as already being one with Him, for it was really His own, and not someone else’s, body. Thus, when He raised up the daughter of the ruler of the synagogue, saying: “Child, arise!” – He took her hand, as it is written (Luke 8:54). Life-giving as God by an omnipotent command, and also life-giving through the touch of the Holy Flesh, He in both respects reveals a single and related effectiveness (power). But when he entered the city called Nain, and “they carried out the dead man, his mother’s only son,” he again “touched the bed, saying: young man! I tell you, get up” (Luke 7:12, 14). Not only does he revive the dead with words, but also, in order to show the life-giving, His Body, as we have already said, touches the dead, and through it (the body) imparts life to those who have already undergone corruption. And if through one touch of the Holy Flesh that which has undergone corruption is revived, then will we not acquire life-giving blessings in even greater abundance when we begin to partake of it? After all, she will, without a doubt, transform into her quality, that is, into immortality, those who become partakers of her. And do not be amazed at this and do not say to yourself in Jewish: “how?” On the contrary, think about the fact that water is cold by nature, but when, poured into a cauldron, it approaches the fire, then it seems to forget its nature and turns into the property (warmth) of the strongest (fire). In the same way, therefore, we, although we are corruptible by the nature of the flesh, but by joining Life, leaving behind our weakness, we are transformed into its property, that is, into life. Yes, indeed, it was necessary not only for the soul to be recreated through the Holy Spirit into the renewal of life (Rom. 6:4, 7:6), but also for this gross and earthly body, through the same, akin to it, communion (with the Body of Christ) to be sanctified and called to immortality (1 Cor. 15:53–54). But let him not think that he is stupid to understand that we have invented any kind of new sacraments. In the most ancient Scriptures, that is, the Mosaic Scriptures, he will see it (this type of sacrament) already destined and having the power of truth, because it was still performed in simple images. Indeed, what, tell me, tamed the all-destroyer (death)? What helped their ancestors not to perish along with the Egyptians, when all-conquering death armed itself against the firstborn? Shouldn’t it be obvious to everyone that since, in obedience to the Divine law, they sacrificed a lamb and, having tasted its meat, anointed the doorposts with blood, death was forced (thereby) to pass them by as sanctified? This all-destroyer, that is, the death of the flesh, armed himself against all human nature because of the crime (committed by us in the person of) the primordial Adam, when we first heard: “You are earth and to earth you will go” (Gen. 3:19). But since Christ had to overthrow such a terrible tyrant, appearing as life among us through His Holy Flesh, this mystery was prefigured (pre-indicated) for the ancients, and they ate the meat of the lamb and, sanctified by its blood, were saved, since the one appointed (Angel) for the destruction (of the firstborn of Egypt), by the will of God, passed them by, as those who were partakers of the lamb. In view of this, why are you, a Jew, already called to the truth through types, irritated when Christ says: “If you do not eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and (do not) drink His Blood, (then) you do not have life in yourself”? Meanwhile, on the contrary, with all the greater boldness you should go towards the perception of the mysteries, as already prepared for this from the books of Moses and guided to undoubted faith through the most ancient images. John 6:54. Eat My Flesh and drink My Blood to have eternal life 498, and I will raise him up on the last day Also here, it is especially fitting to marvel at the holy Evangelist for the fact that he clearly exclaimed: “And the Word became flesh” (John 1:14), for he, without hesitation, said not that “It became (appeared) in the flesh,” but precisely that “it became flesh,” in order to show unity (with the flesh). And we do not at all affirm that God the Word (being) from the Father turned into the nature of the flesh, nor that the flesh passed into the Word, for both remain what they are by nature, and one of both is Christ. But ineffably and beyond human understanding, the Word, having united with His flesh and, as it were, transferring all of it into Himself through the power that could give life to those in need of life, expelled corruption from our nature and removed death, which initially received power (over us) due to sin. So, he who “eats” the holy “Flesh” of Christ “has eternal life,” for the flesh (of Christ) has in itself the Word, which is Life by nature. That is why he says that “I will resurrect him on the last day.” But instead of saying that he, that is, the one who eats, will be resurrected by My body, I used him as not another, different from My body - and not another, no doubt, by nature, for after unity he by no means allows for division into a duality (two) sons. Thus, I, he says, appearing in him, obviously through My flesh, will “resurrect” the eater “on the last day.” Indeed, without any doubt, it was impossible that He Who is Life by nature should not conquer corruption and overcome death. Therefore, although death, which appeared through crime, forces the human body to decay, but since Christ appears in us through His flesh, then, without a doubt, we will be resurrected. After all, it is incredible, even more impossible, that Life does not give life to those in whom it will be. Just as one who, having taken a spark, pours a lot of chaff on it in order to preserve the seed (continuation) of fire, so our Lord Jesus Christ, through His flesh, hides life in us and imparts immortality as a kind of seed that completely destroys corruption in us. John 6:55. For My true Flesh is meat and My true Blood is drink 499 He again contrasts the giving of manna with the mysterious blessing (bread) and the streams from rocky gorges with eating (drinking from) the cup. What he said earlier in other words, he says the same here again, presenting the same teaching in various ways. He convinces them precisely that they should not be surprised at the manna, but, on the contrary, accept Him as bread from heaven and the giver of eternal life; “For your fathers,” he says, “ate manna in the wilderness and died, but this is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that whoever eats of it should not die” (John 6:49–50). Food from manna, he says, having satisfied the need of the body for a very short time and averted the harm of hunger, again became powerless as it did not impart eternal life to those who ate. Consequently, it was not “true food” and bread from heaven. The holy body of Christ, feeding immortality and eternal life, is truly “true” food. But they also drank water from the rock - and what did they get from it, he says, and what was the benefit to those who drank? After all, they died. Consequently, even that drink was not true, but the “true” genuine “drink” is the honest “Blood” of Christ, completely eradicating corruption to the ground and repelling the death that has taken hold in human flesh, for this is the blood of not just one of the ordinary mortals, but Life Itself by nature. Therefore, we are called both the body and members of Christ as receiving into ourselves through the blessing (Eucharist) of the Son Himself. John 6:56. He who eats My Flesh and drinks My Blood abides in Me, and I am in him The secret guides us through this in various ways. Since this teaching is little accessible to people who have not yet been taught, then, requiring understanding of Himself (Heb. 11:3) from faith, and not research, and presenting the matter comprehensively, it facilitates in various ways and in every possible way clarifies for us the benefits of the revealed teaching, and as a kind of foundation for a certain affirmation for faith, it posits the strongest attraction to Him (cf. Rom. 4:18). “He who eats,” says, “He who eats My Flesh and drinks My Blood abides in Me, and I in him.” Just as if someone connects one wax with another, then he will, of course, see one wax appearing in the other; In exactly the same way, I believe, he who accepts the “Flesh” of our Savior Christ and “drinks” His honest “Blood,” as He Himself says, becomes one with Him, as if co-dissolving and uniting with Him through this perception (the Blood and Flesh of Christ), so that he is found in Christ and vice versa - Christ is also “in him.” Christ taught us in almost the same way in the Gospel according to Matthew, saying: “The kingdom of heaven is like leaven 500, which a woman took and hid (put) in three measures (saty) of flour, until it was all leavened 501” (Matthew 13:33). What is meant here by woman, by the trinity of measures called sats, and by sats in general, this should be said in its proper place 502. In the present case, let’s talk about only sourdough. Just as a little leaven, according to Paul, leavens the whole dough (1 Cor. 5:6; Gal. 5:9), in the same way the “very little eulogy” 503 kneads our whole body (like dough) into itself and fills it with its power, so that Christ abides in us, and we also in Him, for with all justice it can be said that the leaven is in the whole dough, and the dough in the same way it appears in all leaven. Here you have a brief explanation of the saying. But if we love eternal life, if we wish to have within ourselves the Giver of immortality, then let us not, like some of the careless (Christians), refuse the blessing (communion, the Eucharist), lest the devil, skilled in deceit, set us nets and snares in harmful and false fear (of the sacrament). But it is written, you say, that “he who eats the bread and drinks the cup eats and drinks unworthily for himself” (1 Cor. 11:27-29). Meanwhile, having tested myself, I see myself as unworthy. However, when will you be worthy - and the one who says this must listen from us - when will you present yourself to Christ? After all, if you should always be horrified by your falls, and yet you cannot stop committing sins, for “who will understand the falls?” (Ps. 18:13), according to the word of the holy Psalmist, then you will have to be completely unrelated to the saving shrine. Therefore, think more piously about leading a life in accordance with the (gospel) law, and in this way you will partake of the blessing, believing that it drives out not only death, but also our illnesses. And this is because Christ, abiding in us, tames the law of the flesh that rages in our members (Rom. 7:24-25) and life-givingly kindles reverence for God, and mortifies passions, not imputing our sins to us, but, on the contrary, helping us like the sick. As the Good Shepherd who laid down His life for the sheep (John 10:11), He “binds up the broken and restores the fallen” (Ezek. 34:16). That the Son is not involved in (such) life as (received) from another, but, on the contrary, (is) by nature Life as from Life (which exists as such), born by nature - from God and the Father John 6:57. Just as the living Father sent Me, and I live for the Father’s sake, and he who eats Me, will also live for My sake. The meaning of these words is very unclear and fraught with considerable difficulty. However, it does not completely escape research, for it can be understood and assimilated by those who want to think correctly. So, when the Son says that He was sent, He indicates His incarnation, and nothing else. When we say that He became incarnate, we affirm that He became a perfect man. As the “Father,” He says, made Me a man, and since I, being God the Word, as life, was born from Life by nature and, having become a man, filled My church, that is, the body, with My nature; then in the same way the one who eats My Flesh “will live for My sake.” I took on dying flesh, but as soon as I dwelt in it, being Life by nature, because I am from the Living Father, I transformed it all into My life. I am not defeated by the corruption of the flesh, on the contrary, I defeated it as God. Therefore, as I - I will immediately say this again for the sake of benefit - although I have become, he says, flesh - for this means being sent - I “live for the sake of” the Living “Father”, that is, preserving in Myself the nobility of the One who gave birth; so he who receives Me through the communion of My flesh will preserve life in himself, being completely transformed into Me, who can give life because of My existence from the life-giving root, that is, God and the Father. He says that he is incarnate by the Father, although Solomon claims that “Wisdom has made a house for herself” (Proverbs 9:1), and blessed Gabriel assimilates the creation of the Divine body to the power of the Spirit when he addresses the Holy Virgin with the following words: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you and the power of the Most High will overshadow you” (Luke 1:35). This is so that you understand again that since the Divinity is one by nature and is understood (one) both in the Father and the Son and in the Holy Spirit, then Each must act in everything that exists not separately, but even if it were said that it happened through one, then, of course, this is the work of the entire Divine Nature. After all, if the Holy Trinity is one in the sense of consubstantiality, then, without a doubt, the power must be one in everything, for everything is from the Father through the Son in the Spirit. But what we have often said before, we will say again, because saying the same thing, although it is difficult, communicates firmness. The Savior Christ had the habit of beneficially assimilating to the effectiveness of the Father everything that exceeds the power inherent in man. This is because He humbled Himself, becoming a man, and since He took on the form of a servant (Phil. 2:7-8), He does not disdain the manner of speech characteristic of the state of a servant, however, He does not distance itself from activity in everything together with the Father. He who gave birth to Him accomplishes everything through Him, according to the word of the Savior, for “the Father,” He says, “abiding in Me, He does the works” (John 14:10). Thus, giving due credit to the Economy with the flesh, he assimilates to God and the Father that which is beyond the power of man, for to create a church in the Virgin exceeds the power of man. But our adversary will again say to this: but how else could the Son reveal “what He is by nature,” or how could he clearly show “that the Father is greater,” if not through the saying: “I live for the Father’s sake”? After all, if the Father is the giver of life to the Son, then who will finally reach such foolishness as not to understand that what partakes of life will not be the same as Life by nature or with Him who is able to give life? To this, we, contrasting the word of truth, will say at the right time: “A fool will speak foolishly, and his heart will meditate in vain, to commit wickedness and to speak lies against the Lord” (Is. 32:6). Indeed, what could be more unlawful than such a thought of heretics? And is it not an extreme lie that they utter against the life-giving Christ, if these fools are not ashamed to say that He lives (being) a partaker of life from another, just as (lives such a life) what happened through Him? And in this case, won’t the Son, in the end, be an animal for us precisely as one who is involved in life, and not in Life itself by nature? After all, an animal must, without a doubt, be something else, different from the life existing in it. But I don't think anyone sane could do that. So, we should not think of the Only Begotten as an animal, but as Life by nature. In fact, doesn’t He express the truth in the words: “I am the resurrection and the life” (John 11:25)? And life must be life-giving, (itself) not needing life from another, just as, without a doubt, wisdom is understood as the power to make wise, and not the ability to make wise. Therefore, in your opinion, the truth will lie and Christ will not express the truth in the words: “I am life”? The glorious choir of saints will also be fabulous, speaking words through the Spirit and calling the Only Begotten life. Thus, the divine Psalmist appears to us saying to the Father: “For with You is the source of life” (Ps. 35:10). And the venerable evangelist John in his Epistles says this: “What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have beheld and our hands have handled, concerning the Word of Life—and life was revealed, and we have seen, and we testify, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father (to the Father) and was revealed to us” (1 John 1:1-2). You see that from these words of John and the Psalmist turns out to be true when he says to the Father of all God: “For with You is the source of life,” for He had and still has the source of life - the Son. And that the Spirit-Bearer speaks about Him in precisely this sense, he will confirm this through his other words in the same Epistle: “And we know that the Son of God has come and given us understanding, that we may know the True One, and we (are) 504 in the True One, in 505 His Son Jesus Christ: This is the True God and Eternal Life” (1 John 5:20). Therefore, who, tell me, can finally endure such idle talk of other-minded people? Who will not justly accuse them of daring to call the Son a partaker of life from another, although the Holy and Inspired Scripture says nothing of the kind about Him, but, on the contrary, clearly states that He is God by nature, and the True One, and the Source of life, and also eternal Life? Is it possible to represent as the true God one who has a need for life from another, and not, on the contrary, Himself who is Life by nature? Or how could He still be called the source of life if through messages from another He received help for Himself to be able to live? Let it be so, the opponent will say, we can agree that the Son is Life, which is why He Himself can give life as having the living Father in Himself. However, this, dear ones, will not be enough for you to protect yourself from the guilt of your blasphemy against the Only Begotten, but this speech of yours will also turn out to be ignorant and powerless. In fact, to assert that the Son is called Life, because He can give life to what is capable of life, for He has the Father in Himself, is this not filled with some kind of immeasurable ignorance? Apparently, you do not know at all (the difference between) what it means (to be) “by nature” and (what it means to be) “from what is by nature”, as itself being joined (to nature), which happens by communication. For example, fire is hot by nature, but other objects are also hot, receiving this power of heat from it, like iron or wood. However, they are not called fire because they became hot, for they have this property in themselves as alien and unnatural. The meaning of these examples will apply to us ourselves. Grammar, for example, or geometry are considered types of logical science, but whoever turns out to be knowledgeable in grammar or another science is by no means presented as grammar or geometry itself, but from the grammar he has mastered is called a grammarian and from geometry - a geometer. So Life by nature is, of course, something else, different from what it exists in, transforming into itself something that is not such by nature. Therefore, when you say that the Father is present in the Son, precisely as in substance, so that, since He (the Father) is Life by nature, the Son Himself also could give life; then you will unreasonably agree that He is Life, and not, on the contrary, involved in life from another, according to the message, and not in essence, called to accept the dignity of the Giver (Father). And just as it is unreasonable to call hot iron fire, although it has the property of fire, because it is heated by it, or also no one with intelligence will call grammar grammar because he can guide others in this science; So, I believe, no one sane should call the Son Life for the sake of the fact that He can also give life to others, having, according to their teaching, this “being - life” not by nature, but endowed with this from the power of the Father, or “for the sake of” the “Father” living in Him. But what, tell me, can in this case already serve as an obstacle to thinking of the Son as one of us, obviously of a corruptible nature, if He lives “for the sake of the Father,” that is, endowed with life from the One who gave birth, as they think? After all, He, according to the consistent flow of thoughts, would have to undergo destruction if He did not have the Living Father within Himself. And if we recognize His words as true: “I am in the Father and the Father in Me” (John 14:11), then (it turns out that) not only does He have the Father in Himself, Who is Life by nature, but He Himself is in the Father, although He is not Life by nature. I am already silent about blasphemy, although it would be appropriate to talk about it to expose the wickedness of those who fight against God, for the Father will turn out to have in Himself something devoid of life, that is, corruption or a nature subject to destruction. Since our goal is to understand the question with due accuracy, we must again explore and, through various reasoning, reach the revelation that the essence of the subject should force us to think about the Son in exactly this way. You say that God and the Father is Life by nature. Great, that's true. But (this is so) also in the Son, with which your words also agree. But this is what I would then find fair to ask, wanting to know: what will the Father do in the Son, being present in Him? Will He communicate His life to His Own Birth as needy and not having life from itself? And is it not absolutely necessary to think of the Son as deprived of life? And what, finally, will one deprived of life be other than not subject to decay? But He (the Father) does not communicate His life to the Son, for He is Life, although He does not accept (it) from Him (according to communication from outside). Why do some people recklessly and impudently slander and say that the Son lives precisely because he has the Father in Himself, Who is Life by nature? After all, if He lives without the Father, as having existence in essence and as life itself, then He no longer lives “for the sake of the Father,” that is, because of perception (life) from the Father. And if He has the Father as the giver of His life, then He will turn out to not have His life, for He receives it from another, and, as we said at the beginning, He is rather an animal than a life - and already of a corruptible nature. But how, in this case, did He call Himself life? After all, then, perhaps, it will be possible for us to say (about ourselves): “I am life,” although such a speech is incorrect, for it is impossible for a creature to interfere with the Divine virtues. So, the Son knew Himself to Life by nature, otherwise how could He be “the mark of the hypostasis” (Heb. 1:3) of Him who begat Him, as an exact image and likeness? Wouldn’t Philip also have acted correctly when he said: “Show us the Father, and it will be enough for us” (John 14:8)? For in this case, one could really think that whoever has seen the Son has not yet seen the Father, if One is Life by nature, and the Other is involved in life from Him. After all, it is by no means possible to see the life-giving in the life-giving, and in the needy - the non-needing. Consequently, in another case, He will not be true when He said: “He who has seen Me has seen the Father” (John 14:9). But the lover of the pious dogmas of the Church again sees what absurdities follow their chatter. Therefore, let him turn away from them and let him change, according to what is written (Proverbs 4:15), and let him make straight paths and correct his ways (Proverbs 4:26), and let him look at the simple beauty of the truth, believing that God and the Father is Life by nature, and in the same way the Son is born of Him. As 506 He is called Light from Light, so is Life from Life - and as God the Father illuminates those in need of light through His own Son as through Light, and makes wise those who receive wisdom (through the Son) as through His Wisdom, and gives strength to those in need of strength (through the Son) again as through His Power; so he gives life to everything that needs life from Him, both through his own life and that pouring out from Him, that is, through the Son. Therefore, when he says: “I live for the sake of the Father,” do not think that He recognizes Himself as living thanks to the reception of life from the Father, but since He was born from the living Father, therefore He affirms that He also lives. After all, it is impossible for the One who is from the Living Father not to live. And just as if one of us said: “I am a reasonable man for the sake of my father, for I am the child of a reasonable man,” understand this about the Only Begotten Himself. “I live,” he says, “for the sake of the Father”: since the Father who gave birth to Me is Life by nature, and I am His noble and truly legal birth, then I have His property by nature in Me, that is, to be life, for this is also the Father. Since One is conceived and is from One (born), for from the Father the Son, although He was with Him forever, is rightly magnified by the natural virtues of the Parent as His own. John 6:58. This is the bread that came down from heaven: not as your fathers ate up manna and died: this bread (my) eater will live forever 507 Great things, he says, must be (come from) great things, and what is given through the highest grace must turn out to be God-appropriate and worthy of the greatness of the Divine gift. Therefore, if you have fully accepted by faith that this bread came down from heaven, then it should provide constant life to everyone who desires it and have the power of unceasing immortality. And this (its property) should serve as clear proof that this bread is from heaven, that is, from God, since, we think, it is proper for the Eternal to serve the eternal, and not the eating of temporary food, which can hardly have power only for a very short time. Therefore, it will no longer be wise if anyone begins to think that that bread is from God and from above, eating which your ancestors suffered death and did not escape harm from corruption. And there is nothing surprising in this, for it was not bread that has the power to immortalize. Therefore, it should rightly be thought of and called not (bread) from heaven, for the appropriate thing for the bread coming from there (from heaven) should be precisely that He places those who eat It above death and corruption. Again, indisputable proof can be confirmed that this bread is from heaven, obviously (served) through Christ, that is, His body, for to the one who eats it He imparts life “forever.” Indeed, here too there appears a great certain confirmation of the Divine Nature, which does not deign to give anything small, but everything supernatural, although it exceeds our understanding, so that, due to the greatness of grace, it is even subject to distrust from simpletons. Indeed, for such an abundant Hand, shouldn’t there be a desire to give abundantly? Therefore, Paul said with surprise: “Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor has it entered into the heart of man, what God has prepared for those who love Him” (1 Cor. 2:9). The law, in small examples, depicted great things, “having a shadow of future blessings, and not the very image of things” (Heb. 10:1), as it is written, so that in eating manna the blessing through Christ (Eucharist) is indicated, for this was foreshadowed by the ancients as a shadow of the future. John 6:59. This speech was given to the congregation, teaching in Capernaum Presenting to us an exposition of the wonderful mysteries, the wise Evangelist with all justice assimilates to the Savior Christ the beginning of the teaching about them, with the greatness of his Face putting to shame the enemy and in advance frightening those who intended to begin with objections. After all, the celebrity of a teacher sometimes makes the listener so much more ready for faith and requires speedy consent from those being educated. He adds very well: “in the synagogue.” He says this as if: not one person or two heard these words of Christ, He turns out to be teaching openly in front of everyone “in the synagogue,” as He Himself says through the prophet Isaiah: “I did not speak in secret, nor in a dark place on the earth” (Is. 45:19). He clearly communicated this teaching to everyone, making condemnation inevitable for the Jews and, due to their disbelief in Him, presenting their guilt to those who did not believe with the gravest burdens. After all, being not yet taught such a holy secret, they could demand a thorough rejection of the punishment and, exposing their complete ignorance, would be subject to the slight wrath of the Judge. But knowing and often being secretly taught, and at the same time offending by disobedience, shouldn’t they, in all fairness, without any mercy, be punished and receive the strictest condemnation from the One who has been dishonored by them? The Savior Himself said something similar about them: “For if I had not come and told them, they would not have had sin; now they have no excuse for their sin” (John 15:22). Therefore, we must beware, and even more so, renounce disobedience as the cause of death, and let us honor faith in everything that Christ teaches as the author of life. This way we will avoid punishment with them. It also adds that in “Capernaum” Christ said this in order to show that he remembered (the matter) accurately, for whoever knew both the place and the village could have made a mistake in presenting the teachings of Christ? John 6:60–61. Many people, having heard from His disciples, decided: This word is cruel: who can listen to it? Knowing Jesus in Himself, as His disciples grumble about this, He said to them 508 This is the custom of the ignorant: they always condemn the most sublime teaching and ignorantly reject contemplation that exceeds their understanding, since they themselves do not understand. Meanwhile, on the contrary, they should have diligently learned and developed along with what was said to them, and not rebel against such wise words and call cruel what they should have been amazed at. What happens to them is similar to what can be seen happening to those who have lost their teeth. Having resorted to delicate food, they often condemn the more useful of edible items and sometimes worsen the best, not recognizing their vice as the reason that forces them to refuse (more healthy food). Brought up in ignorance and not possessing a good mind, they are afraid of knowledge, which they should have acquired even with great difficulty and achieved with the greatest diligence. Thus, a spiritual person will delight in the words of our Savior and will prefer to cry out with all justice: “How sweet are Your words to my throat, better than honey to my lips!” (Ps.119:103). The spiritual Jew (man), foolishly considering the spiritual sacrament to be madness and called by the words of the Savior to ascend to the understanding appropriate to man, always falls into his usual madness (1 Cor. 2:14, 1:18-23), calling bad things good and good things bad, according to the word of the Prophet (Is. 5:20). And in this too he turns out to be a patriot and an imitator of the ignorance of his ancestors. Those, receiving manna from God and participating in the highest blessing, were carried away to their usual thinness, demanded Egyptian stinking herbs - onions and garlic and wanted to have cauldrons of meat. These same ones, called to receive the life-giving grace of the Spirit and the True Bread, taught to eat Him who came from God the Father, deviate to their usual error, “being more lovers of pleasure than lovers of God” (2 Tim. 3:4). And just as their ancestors condemned eating manna, daring to say: “our soul is withered (languishing)” from this manna (Num. 11:6), so they again reject the True Bread, not ashamed to say: “This word is cruel.” Therefore, one must be a wise listener (student) of the Divine mysteries, one must be an experienced money changer in order to know real and counterfeit coins, neither to what has been acquired by faith, not to untimely pose insoluble questions, nor to what requires research, not to waste faith, sometimes harmful, but to everything that is communicated, to give its due and walk as if on a straight path, refusing to deviate in one direction or the other (from it). It is fitting for one who walks in the rightness of the faith of Christ to walk the royal path. John 6:61–62. Is this 509 tempting you? And if you see the Son of Man ascending, where before? Due to their great ignorance, some of those who learned the Savior Christ were offended at His words. Since they heard from Him: “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you do not have life in you” (John 6:53), they assumed that He was calling them to some kind of bestial cruelty, so that He commanded them to inhumanly eat flesh and drink blood and forced them to do what was scary even to hear. After all, they did not know the beauty of the sacrament and the beautiful economy defined about It, but they reasoned about it within themselves approximately like this: how can the human body introduce eternal life into our nature - and what benefit can be brought in relation to immortality by being one in nature with us (the body of Christ)? Therefore, Christ, understanding their thoughts in themselves, for “all things are naked and open to His eyes” (Heb. 4:13), again helps them and leads them in many different ways to the perception of what they did not yet know. It is very foolish, He tells them, that you are offended by these words of Mine. If you, although often secretly led by Me, have not yet achieved faith that My body can impart life to you, then in what state of mind should you be when you see it (the body) flying even to heaven? After all, I promise not only that I will ascend to heaven itself, so that you will not say this “how?” again, but this spectacle will appear before your eyes, putting every objector to shame. “If,” he says, you see “the Son of Man ascending into heaven,” then what will you say again? After all, you will be convicted of immeasurable folly. Indeed, if you think that My flesh cannot impart life to you, then how can it ascend to heaven like a feathered creature? If it cannot give life, because it does not have a life-giving nature, then how will it move in the air, how will it ascend to heaven? After all, this is just as impossible for the flesh. And if it rises contrary to nature, then what will prevent it from giving life, although it does not have a life-giving nature, as far as its own nature is concerned? He who has made earthly things heavenly can make them life-giving, although by their very nature they are subject to corruption. It must be borne in mind that even now He does not allow division into two Christs, as some foolishly wish, for He everywhere preserves Himself indivisible even after His incarnation. He says precisely that the “Son of Man” ascends to “where he was before,” although His earthly body was not in heaven before this, but the Word alone (was there) before being united with the flesh. Therefore, Paul well stated in his Epistles that “there is one Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 8:6), for one is the Son, both before the incarnation and after the incarnation, and we should not consider His own body alien to the Word. This is why the Word, which descended from above from heaven, is also called the Son of Man: He “became flesh,” according to the teaching of the blessed Evangelist, not passing into flesh as a result of transformation, for He is immutable and unchangeable by nature as God, but having settled as in His church, I mean from the Virgin, and becoming a completely true man. And by saying that He will ascend to where He “before was,” partly allows the listeners to understand that He descended from heaven, for they should, having thus understood the meaning of the word, not only listen to Him as a man, but also recognize in Him God the Word in the flesh and believe that His body should also be life-giving. John 6:63. The Spirit is the life-giver, the flesh benefits nothing 510 Not entirely, he says, it is reckless that you attribute to the flesh the impossibility of life-giving. Since the nature of the flesh is conceived separately and in itself, it obviously will not be life-giving, for it does not at all animate anything that exists, but, on the contrary, it itself needs something capable of vivifying. But when the mystery of (God’s) incarnation is explored and then you find out Who dwells in this flesh, then, without a doubt, you will agree, he says, unless you rebel against the Divine Spirit Himself, that the flesh can give life, even if in itself it does not use anything at all in (this regard). Only when she united with the life-giving Word did she become entirely life-giving, rising to the power of the Highest (the Word), and not herself forcibly introducing into her nature the by no means Invincible. Thus, although the nature of the flesh itself is weak, so far as its ability to give life is concerned, it will be able to do this, having within itself the life-giving Word and carrying within itself all His power. After all, it is the body of Life by nature, and not any one of the earthly ones, in relation to which the saying rightly has all the force: “The flesh will not use (help) anything.” After all, it is not the flesh of Paul or Peter or anyone else that will work in us, but exclusively and only the flesh of our Savior Christ, in which “all the fullness of the Godhead bodily” dwelt (Col. 2:9). And indeed, it would be strange if honey imparts its quality to something that by nature does not have sweetness, and can transform into itself (into its property of sweetness) everything with which it is mixed, and to think about the life-giving nature of God the Word that it does not elevate the body in which it inhabits to its own quality. So, in relation to all others, the saying will be true that “the flesh will not help anything,” but it should not have power in relation to Christ alone, because Life, that is, the Only Begotten, has dwelt in it. He calls himself “Spirit,” “for the Spirit (is) God” (John 4:24) and, according to the words of blessed Paul, “the Lord is the Spirit” (2 Cor. 3:17). We say this without destroying the own (hypostatic) existence of the Holy Spirit, but just as He calls Himself the Son of Man, since He became a man, so again He calls Himself (Spirit) from His own Spirit, for His Spirit is not alien to Him. John 6:63. Verbs, even as I say to you, the spirit is and the belly (life) is 511 He now imagines His entire body to be filled with the life-giving activity of the Spirit, for He finally calls the flesh spirit, without, however, denying that it is flesh, but (only asserting that) because of its perfect unity with Him and the endowment of all His life-giving power, it should already be called spirit. There is nothing surprising in this, and you should not be tempted by it. If “he who is united to the Lord is one spirit” with Him (1 Cor. 6:17), then how much more should His own body be called one with Him? So, in these words He again expresses something similar to the following... From your reflections, I see, he says, that you unreasonably think that I am telling you that the earthly body is life-giving by nature. But this is not the meaning of my words. All this explanation to you was about the Divine Spirit and eternal life. It is not the nature of the flesh that makes the Spirit life-giving, but the power of the Spirit that makes the body life-giving. Therefore, “the sayings that I have expressed to you, “there is spirit,” that is, spiritual and about the Spirit, “and there is life” - instead: life-giving and about Life by nature. And by no means denying His flesh, He says this, but teaching us the truth, for what we recently expressed, we will repeat again for benefit. The nature of the flesh in itself would not be able to give life, since in this case what more would there be in Him who is God by nature? But even in Christ it is not thought of separately and on its own, for it has united with itself the Word, which is Life by nature. When Christ calls it life-giving, he testifies to the life-giving power not so much of it as of Himself or His Spirit; for through Him His body is also life-giving, since He transformed it into His power. How this happened is neither clear to the mind nor expressible to the tongue, but must be honored with silence and faith that exceeds the mind. And that in the Inspired Scriptures the Son is often called by the name of the Spirit, we learn from the passages below. Thus, blessed John writes about Him: “This is Jesus Christ who came through water 512 and the Spirit, not in water only, but also in water and the Spirit, and the Spirit bears witness that the Spirit is the truth” (1 John 5:6). Here he calls truth Spirit, while Christ clearly cries: “I am the truth” (John 14:6). Paul also tells us in the Epistle: “Those who are in the flesh cannot please God. But you are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not Him; but if Christ is in you, the body is dead to sin, but the Spirit is life to righteousness” (Rom. 8:8-10). Here again, having declared that the Spirit of God dwells in us, he says that Christ himself is in us. This is because His Spirit is inseparable from the Son due to the identity of nature, although it is thought of as existing independently (hypostatically). Therefore, he often indifferently calls either the Spirit or himself. John 6:64–65. But the essence is from you, those who do not believe. Knowing for from time immemorial Jesus who is not a believer and who is His betrayer. And he said: For this reason Reh you, that no one can come to Me unless it is given to him from My Father 514 And here you can also clearly see the fulfillment of what was foreshadowed by one of the holy prophets: “By hearing you will hear, but will not understand, and by looking, you will look and will not see; For the heart of this people is hardened, and their ears are heavy, and their eyes are closed, lest they see with their eyes, and understand with their heart, and convert, and heal them” (Isaiah 6:9-10). Being personal listeners of the Savior’s instructions, learning not from any of the saints, but secretly guided by the voice of the Lord of all, even seeing Him with their bodily eyes, they were stricken with madness and, having closed the eye of their minds, turned away from the Sun of Truth, not perceiving the light of the Gospel science, for they were evil and already guilty of many past falls. Therefore, the wise Paul testified to us that “the blinding took place in part in Israel” (Rom. 11:25). But since it was not a matter of ordinary understanding to know God, hidden in human form, he says that one who has not yet received understanding from God and the Father cannot come to Him. This is understandable. If “every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights” (James 1:17), then how much more should the knowledge of Christ be a gift from the right hand of the Father? And shouldn’t the perception of truth be considered the highest degree of grace? Since she is the author of the highest blessings, she must depend even more on Divine generosity. However, the Father does not give the knowledge of Christ to the unclean and does not impart the most beneficial grace of the Spirit to those who zealously deviate towards inappropriate unbelief, for it was not proper to pour precious myrrh into a pit. Likewise, the blessed prophet Jeremiah commands that those who wish to approach Christ through faith must first purify themselves with a desire for every good deed, exclaiming: “Seek God and when you find Him, call upon Him, when He draws near to you, that the wicked may leave his way and the wicked man his intention, and may turn to the Lord and be shown mercy, because generously (in abundance, “glories” .: in abundance) will forgive your sins” (Is. 55:6–7). You see that in advance it is appropriate for us, he says, to leave the previous path and retreat from illegal intentions in order to receive remission of sins, obviously through faith in Christ. This is because we are justified not by the works of the law (Gal. 2:16), but by His grace and the forgiveness given to us from above. But perhaps someone will say: what, therefore, prevented Him from forgiving the Jews and, together with us, granting remission to Israel? Surely this would also be appropriate for the Completely Good One? And how will He be true when He tells us: “I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance” (Matthew 9:13)? What (shall we say) to this? The proclamation of grace by our Savior was intended first for the first and only Israelites, for He was sent, as He Himself affirmed, to the lost sheep of the house of Israel only (Matthew 15:24). Therefore, those who wished could believe and ascend to eternal life. But meanwhile, some who were distinguished by a noble way of life and who were seekers of truth, having accepted the cooperating grace of God and the Father for salvation through faith, received salvation. On the contrary, the arrogant Pharisees and with them the hard-hearted bishops and elders of the people did not want to believe, although they were prepared by Moses and the prophets. And since, thanks to their evil will, they were no longer worthy of eternal life, they did not receive enlightenment from God and the Father. You have a prototype of this in the most ancient Scriptures. Just as those who did not believe God in the wilderness were not given the opportunity to enter the Promised Land, so those who dishonored the Lord through unbelief were not given the opportunity to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, of which the Promised Land was a prototype. And (it turns out) “God is not right, bringing wrath upon everyone” (Rom. 3:5), for, being just by nature, He will, of course, determine only what is right and direct His judgment according to His nature, even if we ourselves do not understand the ways of building our economy. However, the blessed Evangelist helpfully says that Jesus knew everything and did not also know who would not believe and who would be an instrument of wickedness against Him, so that through this it would be clear that as God He “knows all things before He was” (Dan. 13:42). John 6:66. From this many (from) His disciple (from) went back and who did not walk with Him 515 For the foolish, what is wise is always somewhat cruel, and what they think will be very useful for them often turns out to be even harmful. Just as for those suffering from bodily vision, sunlight is disgusting, but staying in unlit places is pleasant, so for those with an unhealthy mind, strict instructions and tinged with sublime and difficult thoughts turn out to be hateful and disgusting, even if they were very useful; on the contrary, amiable and very pleasant - insignificant, even if there was nothing useful in them at all. In the above words (of the Gospel) will we not find confirmation of the truth of what we have said? Christ offers the Divine and great mystery, through various reasonings opens the door to the perception of it, as if he is already gathering the church curtain and opening the inner part of the tabernacle, and they hatefully reject such a wise and heavenly teaching, bow again to bestial ignorance and “went back,” as the Evangelist says, and no longer wanted to “walk” with Him. This is truly a fall back. Therefore, through the prophet Jeremiah he speaks again to the ungrateful and quarrelsome Jerusalem, the teacher of the disobedient: “You have turned away from Me, says the Lord, and you will go back” (Jer. 15:6). After all, aversion from good things really follows a fall back, and all good is God. So, the unfortunate ones “went back” and fell on their backs, no longer following the Savior, but turning, as it were, to other paths and being carried away into ordinary passions. But let's see again whether a prototype for this is found in the books of Moses. When the Jews, having traveled a long way and overcome the wild desert, were already at the very promised land, then, by Divine command, Joshua and some others were sent to inspect it. And so, having examined it all, they returned, and some of them in the assembly began to tell unpleasant things. The land, they said, which we examined, has fierce inhabitants, we saw giants there, and they constantly added something that could frighten the listeners (Num. 13:33-34). But Jesus after them tried to crown that land with many praises and convinced with the following words: “The land that we looked at is very beautiful - if the Lord chooses us, He will lead us into it” (Num. 14: 7-8). But the ancestors of the Jews decided that Jesus should be stoned. Deciding that Almighty God could not (do) anything, they “sat down and wept,” as it is written (Num. 11:4), and for this they aroused the just wrath of the Lord of all. And because they were so disobedient and impudent, they lost the promise, for “as I swore,” he says, “in My wrath: unless (=) they enter My rest” (Ps. 94:11). What happened next? God commands them to return and go back again, for he says to Moses: “In the morning, when you wake up, turn your way to the Red Sea” (Num. 14:25). Since they did not want to enter the land to which they were called, they are sent back and are forced to go along the same road again, for they did not want to follow the words of Jesus and, hearing about the goodness of the land, did not deign to agree with the advice of Jesus. What those suffered then, these have now experienced the same. Taught the path to eternal life and called to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, they respond to this with insolence. Therefore, they rightly “went back” and with their stubbornness, to their own detriment, rejected following the Leader of salvation. John 6:67. Jesus said to the fool: food and do you want to go? 516 Our Lord Jesus Christ does not encourage the holy Apostles to retreat and does not show them self-will by deeds free from any guilt, and also does not allow them to frivolously evade Him, without any harm to themselves. On the contrary, he nobly and decisively threatens that if they do not rise above the ignorance of the Jews, then they too will be sent back and will no longer walk with Him, but will go to destruction. After all, God values ​​not those fans who are great in number, but those who are distinguished by the right faith, even if there are very few of them. Therefore, Divine Scripture says that many are called, but only the elect are accepted, and those most worthy are very few. And this was witnessed to us by the Divine Word itself. So, the Savior told His disciples something like this... If you immediately obey My words; if, having ceased to doubt and accuse, with the simplest faith you finally accept the mystery; if the accusation of cruelty in My words is unpleasant for you and filled with considerable astringency; if you refuse to speak to the Jews: “How can this one give us His flesh to eat?” (John 6:52), - then I will look with pleasure at your presence with Me and with joy I will dwell with you and I will love you as My lawful children. If you decide to think in the same way with those who have fallen (moved) back, then I allow you to leave with them and rightly drive you away with them. After all, I will not have a shortage of admirers, since the gospel preaching should not be limited to Judea alone, but is already spreading throughout the entire universe, calling people from everywhere as if into one assembly and quickly gathering them to the knowledge of the truth. “See therefore the goodness and severity of God” (Rom. 11:22), as Paul says, severity towards those who are disobedient, but kindness towards those who know Him, “if they continue in goodness,” as the same Paul certified this (ibid.). Otherwise, they too will be cut off, for He who did not spare the natural branches will not spare the grafted ones (Rom. 11:21, 24). So, let him who is limping in faith through his own foolishness know and learn through this that if he does not wish to stop such an illness, he will go back and, no longer having a Leader to eternal life, will descend into terrible hell and will mourn his folly, for there will be, as it is said, weeping and gnashing of teeth (Matthew 8:12). But it seems that Jesus also points out something else useful to us through the words to His disciples: “And do you not want to leave?” So that they would not think that they too were leaving along with Jewish ignorance and also falling along with the disobedient, or otherwise accusing Him along with them of teaching cruel things and trying to instill in his listeners the impossible, he usefully asked whether they would like to leave with those, in order through this to cause them to confess the right and pure faith, as actually happened. The fact that the prototype of Christ was the holy tabernacle that led the people in the desert; as well as the ark that was in it, and the lamp and the altars, both incense and burnt offerings, symbolized Christ Himself John 6:68. Simon Peter answered 517 Him: Lord, to whom are we going? Verbs of the belly of the eternal imashi In the person of one representative, everyone speaks, preserving the decency truly befitting saints, so that in this too they would prove to posterity an example of prudence and admirable decency. After all, it was not appropriate for everyone to speak aloud before the Teacher at once and indiscriminately, rushing to compete with each other and indecently interrupting each other, but, on the contrary, to try prudently to give way to those who would find themselves occupying the highest place both in prudence and in rank. That is why Paul says: “Let two or three prophets speak, and separately” (1 Cor. 14:29, 27). He did not allow them to speak without order because they were awarded the grace of prophecy, but since they were saints, he therefore commanded the listeners to speak with all the more decency. Therefore, it was a matter of decency befitting the saints to allow one to answer for all, who had the highest place in the ranks (of the apostles). So, “to whom,” he says, “let’s go” instead: who can secretly guide us like this? Or: to whom, when we come, will we find the best? “You have the words of eternal life” - not cruel, as those say, but elevating to the most abundant of all, that is, to unceasing and eternal life and life free from all corruption. Without a doubt, and from these words it should be obvious to us that it is fitting to follow the only teacher, Christ, to constantly and continuously abide with Him and have Him as our mentor, who is perfectly able to guide us to endless life. This is how we will begin to ascend into the heavenly and Divine court and, entering the Church of the Firstborn, we will enjoy benefits that exceed the human mind. That the desire to follow Christ alone and always be with Him is a good and saving deed, the very nature of the subject can indisputably confirm us. Nevertheless, we can be convinced of this from the most ancient Scriptures. So, when the Israelites, freed from the cruelties of the Egyptians, rushed to the Promised Land, God commanded them to make the procession not in disorder and the Lawgiver did not allow everyone to go wherever and however he wanted. In this case, having no leader, they would, without any doubt, have to get lost. Therefore, again as an example for us, it is written in the book called Numbers: “And on the day in which the tabernacle was pitched, a cloud covered the tabernacle and the house of the testimony, and in the evening there was over the tabernacle the appearance of fire until the morning: and so it always happened—a cloud covered it by day and the appearance of fire by night: and when the cloud was lifted up from the tabernacle, (then) the children of Israel also went up (on their way), and in (the) place where the cloud stopped, they stayed there. the children of Israel will encamp: at the commandment of the Lord the children of Israel will rise up and guard the guard of God, and let them not rise up; at the voice of the Lord they will camp and at the commandment of the Lord they will rise up” (Num. 9:15-20). You see how they are commanded to follow and set off with the departure of the cloud and vice versa - to stop with it and be at peace. Thus, being together with the leader then was just as saving for the Israelites as it is for us now not to be separated from Christ, for He was typified by the ancients both as a tabernacle and a cloud, and as fire. But the historical sense must again, as far as possible, be applied to the spiritual. When “Wisdom,” according to what is written, “created a house for herself” ( Proverbs 9:1 ) and erected the truest tabernacle, that is, the church of the Virgin, into it, in an inaccessible to our understanding and in a godly manner, God the Word, who was in the bosom of God the Father, descended and became man ( John 1:14, 18 ), so that already enlightened and “as in the day” he walked, according to the word of Paul ( Rom. 13:13 ), It served as a cloud, overshadowing and destroying the heat of the passions of our weakness - and for those who still do not know and are mistaken, spending their lives as if in darkness and night, as a fire, illuminating and transforming into burning (boiling) of the Spirit, for those who are virtuous, as we believe, are fiery in spirit. So, I believe, it was not for anything else than for the reason indicated in the previous reasoning that the cloud appeared over the tabernacle during the day, and the fire at night. The command attached to this not to go on a journey without permission, but to rise up with the tabernacle and stay with it, was again given figuratively so that you would understand what Christ said: “Let him who serves me follow me, and where I am, there will my servant also be” (John 12:26), for firmness in following and constancy of abiding is indicated by constantly walking with Him. Walking with the Savior Christ and following Him, of course, is not physical, on the contrary, it is accomplished through works of virtue, on which, having established their minds and rejecting going back with the unbelievers as a disastrous deed, the wise disciples rightly exclaim this “where we can go” instead: with You we will always and will begin to adhere to Your commandments and accept Your words, not accusing You of anything and together with The ignorant do not consider it cruel that You will speak in secret, but, on the contrary, (exclaiming): “How sweet are Your words to my throat, better than honey to my lips” (Ps. 119:103). This is the meaning of the passage being interpreted. And that the tabernacle was for the ancients a type of Christ, we learn this again if we direct the sharpness of our minds to what was said about it by Saint Moses. And although it may seem to someone to be evading (the subject) talking about this, it will bring no small benefit, for I think that we need to carefully and thoroughly examine this, despite the unfounded cavils of our accusers. So, the Divine revelation (concerning the tabernacle) is this - we will set it out in this way separately and explain the hay letter as much as possible. “And the Lord said,” it is said, “to Moses, saying: On the first day of the first month in the new moon you will erect a tabernacle” (Exodus 40:1-2). What prompted the Lord of all, one of the inquisitive will thoroughly ask, to give the command to erect the tabernacle on one day, and not on two or three, and on the new moon, and not on every month in general, but on the first? All this indeed requires proper and careful investigation on our part, for nothing is said in vain in the Divine Scriptures. So, let us stick to our previous discussions about this, the tabernacle being delivered means the holy body of Christ and, so to speak, the construction of His honest tent, in which all the fullness of the Divinity was pleased to dwell bodily (Col. 1:19, 2:9). He commands that it be placed “on one day,” which is very wise and providential, so that by one day you understand the present age in which, and only one, He became man. And by the new moon we should understand nothing more than the coming of the Savior that renews us, in which “old things have passed away and all new things have come” (2 Cor. 5:17). A new time has opened up for us in Christ, casting out the weariness of legal service, through the gospel instructions transforming into a new and renewed life, as well as those who were decayed due to sin and close to destruction (Heb. 8:13), renewing into the original righteousness and destroying the weariness of creeping corruption, delighting with the renewal of incorruption those who ascend through faith to eternal life, “for if anyone is in Christ, (he is) a new creation,” according to what is written (2 Cor. 5:17). He commands the erection of the Divine Tabernacle “in the first month,” when, as if washing away the gloom of winter, the beauty of the spring turn (solstice) shines, and the earth is gently warmed by the lighter and purer rays of the sun, the vineyards are blooming, the farmer is enjoying the fragrance of flowers, the valleys are covered with greenery, “the cornfields are all bristling with ears of corn,” according to one of the Hellenic poets, when “the winter has passed,” according to what is written, “the rain has gone with it,” when “the time has come for pruning (of grapes)” ( Song 2:11–13 ). But you must understand all this spiritually, by the disappearance of winter and the cessation of rain - the temptations of the devil's tyranny and cruelty over everyone that depress us. This is because in the days of Christ the power of demons ceased and the bright sun shone for us, that is, He Himself about whom God and the Father says: “And the Sun of Righteousness will shine upon you” (Mal. 4:2), cooling those cooled by sin, warming them with the warmth of the Spirit to righteousness. Also, understand mental grapes, and spiritual flowers, and under ears of corn also (understand) saints, distinguished by manifold piety towards God and giving rise to the fruit of manifold virtue. Finally, it must be said briefly: spring decorates everything with flowers and makes the earth grow grass, crowns the meadows with young vegetation, makes young again the trunks that were previously dry due to the unbearable severity of winter, brings them into better shape, covers them with the usual green foliage and generously endows the working farmer with the gifts of nature. Something similar, as we will see, happened to us. Once dry, thanks to the sin that reigned over us, and deprived of the fruits of virtue, we have blossomed in righteousness through Christ and are already bringing the newly revealed and new fruit of faith to the Farmer of Spirits. This is exactly how we find it fair to understand what was said by one of the holy prophets, as if on behalf of Christ: “I am the same one who said: Here I am, like the season (of the blooming year - spring) on ​​the mountains” (Is. 52: 6-7), for what “time” does on the mountains, that is, the spring season, we have already clearly said about this before 518. So, he beneficially commands “in one day” to erect the tabernacle, which represents a type of Christ, so that you understand about Him that He only died once in this one present time, for He will not be born again, but will not die, having been born once and died and risen from the dead. After all, death had to be followed by resurrection, which was, as it were, the construction of a holy tent. On the new moon - because we have a new age in Christ and all creation is new in Him. And the first month is taken, which indicates the renewal of human nature from death and corruption into life and incorruption, and from infertility the transition to prosperity, and liberation from the devil’s tyranny, like the cessation and disappearance of winter. Then again, otherwise, as in a type and allegorically, he points us to Emmanuel in the words: “And you will lay up the ark of the testimony and cover the ark with a veil” (Ex. 40:3). In the previous decree, the Word was depicted to us as if in a whole tabernacle, for the holy body of Christ was the house of God who dwelt in Him. But It is no less indicated to us in particular and through the ark. He was built of wood that does not rot, so that you might understand His incorruptible body. He was all overlaid with pure gold, as it is written, inside and out (Exodus 25:9-10, 37:2), for everything in Him is honorable and royal, both Divine and human, and in everything He takes precedence, according to the word of Paul (Col. 1:18) - gold is taken as an image of honor and advantage over everyone. Built from rotting wood and overlaid with gold, the ark had the Divine Law embedded in it in the image of God the Word indwelling and uniting with the holy flesh, for the law was the word of God, although not hypostatic, like the Son. The ark is covered with a veil, for God the Word, who became man, was as if invisible to many, having His body as a cover, and as if in a veil, hiding in His flesh, so that from here some, not recognizing His Divine dignity, tried to stone Him, accusing Him of being a man, calling Himself God (John 10:33), then again, not at all ashamed, they said: “Isn’t this Jesus, son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say that I came down from heaven?” (John 6:42). So, the covering of the ark with a veil indicated that Jesus would not be recognized by many. Thus the ark was a type of Him. That is why he preceded the Israelites in the wilderness, then occupying the place of God, for he was the leader of the people. The Psalmist testifies to this in the words: “O God, when You went before Your people, when You passed through the wilderness, the earth shook, for the heavens also melted” (Ps. 67:8). Although the ark always led and went ahead, it is clearly said here that God preceded. You can also have the clearest proof of this if you also pay attention to this. God once commanded the Israelites through Moses to boldly ascend Mount Seir and besiege the Amorites (Deut. 1:7, 19). But those who received this command fell into cowardly cowardice and, assuming that they should do this on their own instead of hoping for help from above, they “sat down and wept” at the mountain, as it is written (Deut. 1:45). The Lawgiver was rightly indignant at this and finally began to threaten that he would not take them to the promised land. Having barely heeded this threat and indulged in untimely repentance, they tried to ascend, disobeying the Lord a second time and taking up arms against the Amorites. But God, through Moses, predicted the future for them, for he said to them: “Do not rise up and do not fall in the presence of your enemies, for I am not with you” (Deut. 1:42). Despite constantly suffering from the disease of disobedience, they forcibly began to climb the mountain, as it was written. However, the ark of God, it is said, did not go up with them and remained in the camp (Deut. 1:43; Num. 14:44). You see that although God says: “I am not with you,” yet the ark does not go with the disobedient, which clearly indicates to the most prudent that it occupied the place of the leading God. Also around Jericho, the priests carried the ark, and then its high wall fell, without the use of siege weapons and rams, but only from trumpets and sound, which, as we will see again, was truly realized in Christ. He is the One Whom priests and holy men carry, Who overthrows every stronghold of the devil, not with weapons, but with a cry and a trumpet, that is, with apostolic and evangelical preaching and the consent of the whole people, who confess their Master in the rightness of the faith - which, as we see, is also accomplished in the sacramental doxologies, when the priestly trumpet sounds before the people, by which the voice is understood celebrant, - and thus the strength of our opponents falls and is crushed, “for our weapons are not carnal,” according to Paul, “but mighty in God” (2 Cor. 10:4). And that Christ in some way sits and rests on the saints, the prophet Habakkuk will declare this to us in the words: “That You will mount Your horses, and Your riding will bring salvation” (Hab. 3:8). However, the Savior Himself also taught this in the words spoken by Ananias about Paul: “Go, for this is the vessel of My election, to bear My name before all nations” (Acts 9:15). But “and you will bring in the table,” it is said later, “and you will offer its offering, and you will bring in the lamp and set its lamps” (Ex. 40:4). In both we must understand Christ. Under the guise of the table that had the showbread, Christ is typified, because in Him everyone feeds on eternal life, obviously partaking of His holy flesh, according to what He said: “I am the bread that came down from heaven and gives life to the world: if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever, and the bread that I will give, My flesh is for the life of the world” (John 6:51). So, the offering of the table, that is, the bread, signifies the holy Body of Christ, feeding everyone to eternal life. And just as blessed David and those with him who were hungry, as it is written (1 Sam. 21:4-6, Matt. 12:3-4), ate showbread, let us see if this also depicts something mysterious. After all, according to the establishment of the law, it was impossible to eat the showbread except for the priests alone. Meanwhile, those who did not come from the priestly tribe—David and those with him—touched this most sacred food. This was in order to again point to the faith of the pagans and partly the Israelites. Christ belonged to the Israelites as the most sacred “for the sake of the fathers” (Rom. 11:28) and the law, but in some way a multitude of foreigners came to them, although they were not sacred due to error, and began to eat the bread of life, with which David is also present and, as it were, serves as a representative of those saved from Israel, which blessed Isaiah calls “the remnant” (Is. 10:22), for many of them believed in Christ. Thus, Christ must be known through the holy table. In the same way, the lamp is like one that gives light to the whole house, that is, to the world, for “I am the light of the world,” says (John 8:12). He has not one, but seven lamps (Num. 8:2), for he shines (Christ) in a variety of ways and illuminates the souls of believers with various gifts. It is also made of pure gold (Num. 8:4), for Christ is above all and more honorable. It has a solid (cast) trunk, as it is written (ibid.), for in Christ there is nothing empty or light. He also had flowers because of the fragrance of the holy thing (in Christ), according to what was said: “I am the flower of the field, the lily of the valleys” (Song. 2:1). And even its very vessels (for pouring oil) mean the giving of Divine gifts of grace. In addition, the prophet Zechariah claims that he saw two olive branches with him (Zech. 4:3), so that you would understand the two people who had mercy, whom he called “sons of fatness” (anointed), and says that they stand before the Lord of all the earth (Zech. 4:14), although the branches were seen by them in the lamp, thereby giving the most obvious proof that the lamp is Christ, who set it at For himself a people from the Gentiles and from the Jews. Then, showing us Him in many ways, he adds to this: “And you will set up an altar of gold for incense before the ark, and you will hang the covering of the veil on the door of the tabernacle of testimony, and you will set up the altar of offerings (fruits or burnt offerings) at the door of the tabernacle of testimony, and you will surround (around) the tabernacle (court), and you will sanctify everything that is in it around” (Ex. 40: 5-6, 8). Pay attention to how Christ is described to us through two altars. He commands that the golden altar with incense be placed in front of the ark and orders that the curtains be stretched out in the middle of the tabernacle at the entrances so that its interior is not visible, and the altar of burnt offerings is commanded to be placed at the entrance of the tabernacle of testimony, so that it is visible and not hidden, for it is outside the curtain. Contemplate Him here, under the image of the altar of incense rising in the stench of fragrance to God and the Father, for this means incense, - and under the image of the altar of burnt offerings brought for us as a sacrifice of slaughter. The golden altar was covered with a veil, for the glory of Christ was hidden. And the other altar - the burnt offering, on which the slain victims were burned, was visible, because the death of Christ is obvious and known to everyone. The altars are placed not indifferently, but one is in front of the ark, and the other is at the entrance of the tabernacle. The fact that the golden altar was in front of the ark, as if in the sight of God and the Father, secretly indicates the wondrous glory of the Son, according to what was said: “No one knows who the Son is except the Father” (Luke 10:22). And the placement of the altar of burnt offerings at the very entrance of the tabernacle, serving as an image of His death and slaughter for us, again indicates that we could not come to God and the Father except through the sacrifice of Christ, according to what He said: “I am the door” (John 10:9) and: “no one comes to the Father (otherwise) except through Me” (John 14:6). He finally commands that the entire tabernacle be covered with all its accessories, so that it appears to be one, and not many tabernacles, for we have one Christ, although he appears in many ways, namely: as a tabernacle - through the covering of flesh, as an ark, which has the Divine Law - as the Word of God and the Father, as a table again - as food and life, as a lamp - as mental and spiritual light, as an altar of incense - as the aroma of fragrance. shrines, the altar of burnt offerings - as a sacrifice for the life of the world; finally, everything in it (located) is sanctified for this reason and because Christ is considered entirely holy. Thus, under the leadership of the holy tabernacle, the Israelites were commanded to both set off with her and stop, through which he again instructs us profitably and teaches us to make the Word, who became incarnate for us, the leader and instructor of the path to salvation, and, strictly following His commandments, ascend to eternal life. But those who did not want to do this, although they were led by many secret instructions, “went back and walked with Him no more” (John 6:66). On the contrary, blessed Peter wisely says to the Savior: “Where can we go?” - for in no way to move away from God, but to always try to be spiritually with Him - this is truly the most fitting thing for saints. John 6:69. And we by faith and knowledge: Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God" (Holy of God; other: Son of God) 519 " The faith of the holy Apostles is marvelous, the image of their confession is fiery, their understanding is admirable and sublime. They rightly did not step back and did not fall, like some ignorant people or those who called the teaching of the Savior cruel, and they were not frivolously and recklessly called to faith, but they were convinced in advance and truly disposed to the fact that the Mystic Guide was filled with life-giving verbs and is the Teacher of heavenly teachings. This faith is very strong. Something that is not the same can very easily be brushed aside and, having no confirmation of its roots, quickly disappears from the human soul. So the Savior Himself, when speaking the parable of the sower, said that “another (seed) fell on a stone” and, having no root, withered (Luke 8:6), covertly calling a stone a dry mind and completely unable to retain the teaching once introduced into it. Being in such a state due to their great ignorance, the unfortunate Jews learned from the voice of the prophet: “Tear apart your hearts, and not your garments” (Joel 2:13). Just as agricultural custom advises plowing the ground with a plow before sowing seeds, so, I believe, those who seek to perceive Divine teachings in advance should, as it were, open their hearts with an attraction to them. Having perceived in this way, they will turn their burdened soul into some kind of fruitful soil. So, in evidence of faith, the wise disciples say that they “knew”, and moreover, they boldly hope (believe) that He is “Christ the Son of the Living God.” Also, this saying turns out to be composed very wisely. “We believe,” they say, “and we know,” combining both words into one, for it was fitting to both believe and understand. But although the Divine (revelation) is received by faith, nevertheless, without a doubt, we should not therefore completely move away from studying it; on the contrary, we must try to ascend at least to moderate knowledge, which (is given) as if in a mirror and a riddle, as Paul says (1 Cor. 13:12). They also say perfectly well that they did not first know, and then believe, but placing faith first, they put knowledge second, for after faith comes knowledge, and not before faith, according to what is written: “If you do not believe, neither will you understand” (Is. 7:9). Simple faith is placed in us in advance like a certain foundation, and knowledge is then gradually built on it, raising us “to the measure of stature” in Christ and “to a perfect and spiritual man” (Eph. 4:13). That is why God says in one place: “Behold, I will cast into the foundations of Zion the chosen stone, the cornerstone, the precious stone” (Is. 28:16; 1 Pet. 2:6). After all, Christ is for us the beginning and foundation of holiness and righteousness, obviously through faith, and not otherwise, for in this way He dwells in us. Notice how everywhere they say singularly and presuppositionally: “Συ εῖ ὁ Χϱιστὸς ὁ ὑιὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῦ ζῶντος,” separating Him as the only and exclusive true Son from those called to sonship by grace, in whose likeness we also are sons. And “Christ” (του Χριστὸν) they again call Him as the only one. However, one should know that He is called Christ, although no longer for His own sake or as existing as such by nature, which He turns out to be as the Son; but yet He alone is Christ truly and exclusively. Among the Christs (anointed ones) there is no one like Him, but in His likeness to us He is called Christ. His own name and true being, which belongs exclusively to Him alone, is “Son,” but what is common to us is “Christ.” Because He was anointed, because He became man, therefore He is Christ. So, if anointing must be attributed to the need of humanity, then He must be thought of as Christ in His likeness with us, and not as He and the Son are - however, as one and only naturally and exclusively, and before (taking) the flesh and with the flesh, and not as two, as some think, not understanding, apparently, the depth of the mystery. After all, the Word did not descend from God the Father into “man,” as, for example, grace through the Spirit to one of the holy prophets, but It truly “became flesh,” according to what is written (John 1:14), that is, “man.” Therefore, He is indivisible after union (with the flesh) and does not split into two persons, although we must think of it as something else and different - the Word from God and the flesh in which It dwelt. Since the faith regarding this is confirmed to us by the whole choir of the holy Apostles by the fact that they “recognized”, they say individually that He is “ὁ Χϱιστὸς ὁ ϒἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ - “(the only) Christ, the (only) Son of God”, then we, if we want to think correctly, should not accept the teaching of those who, out of madness, do not renounce innovating something other than this. “Jesus answered them: Did I not choose you twelve? and of you there is only one devil. And he said to Judas Simon Iscariot: “He who wanted to betray Him, one of two 520 (John 6:70–71)" He continues his reproof and strikes them with stern words, thereby suppressing weak and indecisive cowardice in the desire to become wise. It turns out that he is saying something like this... Now is the time, My disciples, for vigilance, prudence and concentration of the soul on the desire for salvation, for the path of destruction is very slippery, captivating not only a weak mind, but also one that seems already firmly standing. Sin is insidious and manifold, deceiving the human mind with various pleasures and pleasant lusts, leading to lawlessness. The proof of this, he says, will be what happens among you. I will say for now: I did not “choose” any of those who thoughtlessly fell back as good “you” (like you), for I knew as God what (is) in you. But (one of you) was carried away by Satan through the shamelessness of his greed. And My definition (about the choice of all the apostles and Judas), of course, was by no means false, for people have free will to choose one or the other - whether to go to the right or to the left, I mean good and evil. So, by strongly accusing them (in the person of one of them), it both motivates them to proper vigilance, and forces each to be more careful in relation to himself. After all, He does not yet say who exactly is betraying Him. But by laying this grave wickedness upon one in general and indefinitely, He thereby aroused everyone to heroic deeds and called for the most attentive vigilance, since everyone feared harm to his soul. But at the same time, He also provided something else that was useful for strengthening the faith of the disciples. Since they confessed that they know and firmly believe that He is the “Son of God,” then He reveals Himself to foreknow the future, showing through this their confession regarding Him to be reliable, because it is not fitting for anyone existing to know the future, except God alone by nature, about whom it is written: “He who knows all things before he was” (Dan. 13:42). He called the servant of the devil’s desires a devil, and this is not false, for just as “he who is united with the Lord is one spirit” (1 Cor. 6:17), so, obviously, the opposite is true. About the Feast of the Tabernacle, that it means the restoration of hope due to the saints, and the resurrection from the dead; there is a saying: “Now the feast of the Jews, the setting up of tabernacles, was near.” John 7:1–2. And still Jesus walked into Galilee, not wanting to go among the Jews, as if the Jews were seeking to kill Him. (The Jewish holiday of honoring the canopy is near) 521 “After this,” he says, what was said and done, Christ again stayed in Galilee with greater desire. This, I think, is what the expression “walked” indicates. But he shows that staying with them (the Galileans) was not voluntary for Him, but, on the contrary, happened out of necessity, adding the reason for this, for, he says, “the Jews wanted to kill Him.” Therefore, He withdrew to foreigners for a long time, refusing to “walk in Judea.” But also, I believe, Israel was accused of great stubbornness if being with the pagans turned out (for Christ) to be much better than living with him (Israel). This was announced by the prophet Jeremiah: “I have left My house, I have left My inheritance, I have given My beloved soul into the hands of her enemies” (Jer. 12:7). For Christ to be outside His house for the sake of the wickedness of the persecutors and to move to the Galileans - is this not an obvious giving of His soul into the hands of its enemies? The pagans are enemies of Christ as slaves to another (master) and worshipers of the creature instead of the Creator, because they have not yet accepted faith in Him. He Himself will also clearly teach this in the words: “Whoever is not with Me is against Me” (Luke 11:23). But everyone, I think, will say that before true knowledge of God and faith, the pagans were not with Christ, therefore, they were against Him and therefore were among the enemies. If this is so and is obvious to everyone, then such abomination reigned among the Israelites that moving among enemies turned out (for Christ) to be much better and to live with those with whom it was least fitting, more pleasant than, as it should have been and would have been more decent, among kinsmen according to the flesh, as such they were even supposed to love Him. Thus, Christ moved very rightly to the pagans, as if by the deed itself, saying that if they do not stop persecuting and stopping the Benefactor with their madness, then He will completely give Himself to those outside and Christ will move to the pagans. This, we think, is revealed both from the case itself, and again through the most ancient prototype we can see that He threatened to remove Him from Jerusalem. Thus, when He determined the laws regarding sacrifices, as written in the book of Leviticus, destined, as if in the image of Christ, to offer a bull and a burnt offering as a gift to the Lord (Lev. 1ff.). And he also portrays Him differently, saying: “If you offer your gift from the sheep to the Lord, and from the lambs and goats for burnt offerings, then let a male without blemish offer it and slaughter it on the side of the altar to the north before the Lord” (Lev. 1:10-11). It is necessary to examine how the mystery of Christ is portrayed to us here too. First, I think, it is necessary to say about the position of the temple of Jerusalem itself and the Divine altar, so that in this way we understand what it may mean that the sacrifice was not sacrificed directly against the altar, but turned towards the north. After all, the country of Judea lies in the southern parts of the earth, the church was facing the east and its entrance was illuminated by the first rays of the sun. But the Divine altar itself was built directly opposite the sanctuary, as if in the sight of God, and to those entering from the east it first showed its front side, and its two sides looked - one to the south, the other to the north. That it was exactly as we said, you can be convinced of this by learning from the prophet Ezekiel. When he taught about the death of Phaltius, apparently through spiritual contemplation, he said this: “And I saw, and behold, it was like twenty-five men - their backs were towards the church of the Lord (turned), and their faces were against (towards the east), and they worshiped the sun towards the east” (Ezek. 8:16, 11:13). If the worshiper of the rising sun had a church on the back of his body, then is it not necessary to imagine his face facing the east? Accordingly, the Divine Altar itself had a position and appearance, as we said. So, both the church itself and the altar were facing east, two sides - one to the south, the other to the north, and the remaining side, which is considered the back, looked to the west. If this were so, then lying to the very north will be Galilee, adjacent to Judea, that is, the country of the pagans, according to what is written: “Galilee of the pagans” (Is. 9:1; Matt. 4:15). And just as our Lord Jesus Christ, after his saving suffering, had to leave the country of Judea and come to Galilee, that is, to the Church of the Gentiles, the representative sacrifice that was offered was slain on the side of the altar so that it would look to the north, according to what the Psalmist said about Christ: “His eyes look upon the Gentiles” (Ps. 65:7). Since the blessed Evangelist says that He refuses to be with the Jews, since they wanted to kill Him, we add to what has been said that we should not consider this removal of Christ as cowardice or blame Him for the weakness of the One who can do everything, but should relate this to the goals of the House of God, for it was not premature, but in due time, He had to endure the cross for everyone. John 7:3–5. Therefore His brethren decided to Him: depart from here and go to Judea, so that Your disciples may see the works that You do: no one does anything in secret, and seeks to be in reality: if You do these things, reveal them to The world. Nor did His brethren believe in Him 522 Not yet knowing the Word that dwelt in the holy flesh of God, and at the time when they said this, not knowing that He became a man, those who were revered as the brothers of the Savior still had small ideas about Him and thought much lower than His inherent grace and dignity, since they did not notice anything more than others, but were deceived by the general opinions about Him, considered Him to be really born of Father Joseph and did not see the hidden side of the mystery. Since Christ probably secretly performed many miracles in Galilee, they convince Him to seek empty glory and, as if it were some great deed, they advise accepting the surprise of the spectators, as if He wanted to perform miracles every time for the sole sake of appearing worthy of the spectators and to be adorned with human praise, like ambitious people. Look how they advise Him to go “to Judea” and work miracles there most of all, not so that “His disciples” would believe in Him, but “so that they might see the works that He did.” If, they say, you want to be known - this means to be “in reality” - then do not be a secret miracle worker and, distinguished by the power to do everything, do not avoid “explicitness”, for in this way You will become known to the “world” and will be renowned among the audience. Such was their speech. And the wise Evangelist prudently notes that “His brothers had not yet believed in Him.” And indeed, it would be very strange, with such empty words of theirs, to recognize them as having already received a godly knowledge of Him through faith. But then they spoke wisely 523 as those who did not yet believe. When they believed, having understood the great mystery about Him, they rose to such reverence for God and virtue that they were even called Apostles and acquired excellent reverence. You find this also foreshadowed by the prophetic voice. Thus, blessed Jeremiah, as if to our Lord Jesus Christ, says: “Because both your brothers and your father’s house - and they rejected you, and they cried out, gathered behind you: do not believe (what) they (if) say good things to you” (Jer. 12:6), for the brothers, who before accepting faith rejected Him and even tried to almost accuse Him with the words we have given above, gathered through faith and speak good things about Him, benefiting others and striving for the teaching of faith. Having very prudently called them brothers, the prophet helpfully adds: “the house of your “father”,” so that they too would not be considered born of the Holy Virgin (but are brothers of the Lord) only as (born) of one father, Joseph. John 7:6. Jesus said to them: My time has not come, but your time is always ready 524 The Savior’s speech is always hidden, for it is written about Him that “a man will hide his words” (Is. 32:2). And that He did this for the benefit (of the listeners); who of the right-minded would not say this? So, “the time is not yet” for complete openness and undisguised announcement to everyone, since the Jewish mind is not yet ripe for such understanding as to be able to accommodate My words without anger and rage. But now time does not allow me to reveal myself to the world, since the Jews have not yet completely abandoned grace and are not so furious against me that I finally need to move to others. That is why he says that His “time has not yet come,” but their time has come and is always “ready.” This is because, we say, it is possible for those who move in the world to do whatever pleases them, since for them there is no need that prevents or calls for the commission or non-completion of any deed at a certain time, as, no doubt, was the case with Christ. Moreover, the life of those who wish to move in the world is distinguished by some relaxation and can be free from the most difficult worries, always presenting a ready and convenient time for pleasure and allowing those who take advantage of it to easily go wherever they want. So, in matters that are subject to the necessity of (Divine) good providence, not every time is convenient for doing what is necessary, but such as is appropriate for each matter and as the nature of the subject requires. Those who choose a self-willed (worldly) life will not face anything like this. On the contrary, the path that they choose to follow is completely ready and completely free for them. John 7:7. The world cannot hate you, but it hates Me, because I testify about him, because his deeds are evil 525 The Savior very mercifully denounces the brothers, who even now had a more worldly mood and disposition, and gives, as it were, a second, skillfully composed answer, in which he shows that they not only do not know who He is by nature, but are also so far from loving Him that they prefer to behave in accordance with those who love the worldly life rather than the virtuous one. And indeed, it would be strange if He talked with all others about useful things, eliminating all secrecy here, and did not communicate to those considered His brothers to an even greater and higher extent that from which they could receive no small benefit, already having the opportunity to know the Leader of wisdom. The Savior Christ had a custom: sometimes taking advantage of a timely excuse, He composed long instructions for his listeners. So, he says, it is always nice for everyone to be akin to him and the similarity of character miraculously leads to friendship: “the world does not hate you,” for you still think about worldly things; “He hates me,” not finding pleasant everything for which I accuse him of obscenity. Therefore, you can safely go to this holiday, but I am not yet, for when I come, I will, of course, report and say useful things, but for sensualists, reproof is bitter and can inflame the anger of those who do not allow proper correction. The Lord also tells us something useful in these words, namely: we should not reprove recklessly and not extend reproachful instructions to everyone (without distinction), but we should know what is written: “Do not rebuke the wicked, lest they hate you” (Proverbs 9:8), when hatred is not harmless to us, but try to speak in the ears of those who listen, according to what is written (Sir.25:12). After all, the world is sin-loving, and the Lord is the corrector of what should not be done. Correction should often be done through reproof, for to point out sin in every possible way means to reproach those who love it, and to accuse evil means to reproach those who have it. Therefore, when necessity calls the teacher to reproof and the purpose of healing forces him to turn to this method, and the one taught against desire through reproof becomes very angry, then, of course, evil must arise as a result of hatred. Therefore, the Savior says that the world hates Him because it cannot yet accommodate admonitions combined with reproach when this should be for good. Indeed, a mind devoted to vicious pleasures is indignant in every possible way at the word that convinces it to undergo proper correction. This is what the Savior expresses, not completely denying His journey to Jerusalem and not refusing reproofs that may be useful for sinners, but intending to do this, along with everything else, in due time. It should be noted that He says something similar to His disciples. Comforting them and teaching them not to shy away from what is about to happen to them when they preach to the universe and for this reason are subjected to countless temptations, “If,” he says, “you were of the world, the world would love its own things, but since you are not of the world, therefore the world hates you” (John 15:19). Here he calls the world not a visible creature, but those who think about the world, by whom the one who does not love the same is considered cruel, difficult and as some kind of enemy - on the contrary, the one who has the same desires with them and is united with them by the similarity of shameful life and morals is considered to be a relative and friend. John 7:8. You will go up on this holiday, I will not go up on this holiday, for My time is not fulfilled 527 The Lord already clearly refuses the desire to celebrate with the Jews or to go to the same place with them in order to share with them the joy of the hay (of the hay festival), for once what was said, although to a few who were considered His brothers, extends its meaning to the entire Israeli people. In fact, no one will say that Jesus refused to be with his brothers only for their own sake, while He appears to be staying with them in Galilee, and not without reason, precisely on the basis of the opinion of many about His carnal relationship with them, it must be assumed that He was their cohabitant. Therefore, it is obvious that in the person of the brothers, Christ refuses to celebrate together with the entire multitude of Jews, according to what was said by one of the holy prophets: “I have hated, I have rejected your holidays and will not smell (the victims) at your celebrations, why even if you bring me burnt offerings and sacrifices, I will not accept them, and I will not despise the saving offering (as an expression of gratitude or a thanksgiving sacrifice). Remove the voice of your songs from me, and I will not listen to the sound of your harps" (Am. 5:21–23), for “the Spirit is God, and those who worship Him in spirit and truth must worship” (John 4:24), according to the word of the Savior Himself. Being a spirit, God, as it is fair to think, can only delight in spiritual honors and gifts, in the image of which the commandment of the law established the sacrifices of oxen and small livestock and, in addition, the offerings of incense, flour, wine and oil, indicating through the clearest images the variety of virtues of those who worship in the spirit. So, “you,” he says, who still love the hay and think about it rudely and in a Jewish way, “go” to the hay and educational celebration. It’s unpleasant for me to celebrate like this - I won’t go to “this” “holiday”, that is, educational and hayride. I won't find anything joyful on it. But I’d rather wait for the time of true triumph, which “has not yet come to pass.” It is then, he says, that I will joyfully dwell with My readers in the splendor of the saints and the glory of the Father, radiating the highest joy. He calls time His own and, as it were, His own, for it is His holiday and He Himself is the head of the celebration. Blessed Jeremiah 528 also learned it from him, saying to those who are careless about piety towards God and who value the desire to distinguish themselves by virtues: “What will you do on the day of celebration and on the days of the Feast of the Lord?” (Hos.9:5). He says, completely abandoning the exploits of virtue and not having the bright robe of love for God, what will you do on the day of celebration? How will you enter the Divine and heavenly holiday? Or will not the Lord of the feast, with all justice, expel you from the jubilant circle of those called, with the words: “Friend, how did you come here without a wedding garment” (Matthew 22:12)? Related to this and giving us the same idea is the saying found in the prophet Zechariah: “And it will be,” it is said, “(all) who are left from all the nations that attacked Jerusalem will come annually to worship the King, the Lord Almighty, and to celebrate the Feast of the Setting up of Tabernacles” (Zechariah 14:16). Those who remain (only), he says, will come to worship the Great King and to celebrate the Feast of the Tabernacle: with the multitude of those called by grace, only a few ascend to the highest city, for “a few are chosen,” according to the word of the Savior (Matthew 20:16), that is, taken from every people (into the kingdom of Christ). And when he says that they will come to worship, he points to those who no longer carry out the service of the law, but in the spirit, and who celebrate the feast of the true setting up of the tabernacle, almost singing loudly the following words of the psalm: “Blessed is the Lord, that he hath heeded the voice of my prayer... in him my heart trusted, and he helped, and my flesh flourished” (Ps. 27:6-7). Indeed, the flesh has flourished and will live again, but not without Christ, for He became for us the beginning of the resurrection and the door of the truest tabernacle. One of the holy prophets also said about this: “And I will raise up the tabernacle (tabernacle) of David that has fallen” (Am.9:11). This fallen tabernacle (tabernacle) of Christ from the seed of David in the flesh was the first to be restored to incorruption by the power of God the Father, according to what was said to the Jews about Him through one of the Apostles: “This, according to the definite counsel and foreknowledge of God, having been delivered, you took with the hand of the wicked, nailed, and killed, whom God raised, resolving the pains of death, because it was impossible for it to hold Him” ( Acts 2:23–24), and again: “God raised up this Jesus, of which we are all witnesses” (Acts 2:32). And that Christ, who is from David in the flesh, is usually called David in the Holy Scriptures, there is no difficulty in verifying this. John 7:9–10. This river itself remained in Galilee. When His brethren went up on the feast, then He Himself also went up, not in reality, but in secret 529 Expelled from the land of Judea, Christ walks and lives more pleasantly and safely in Galilee, so that again the host of pagans would appear more noble than the imaginary teachers of the law, although they were poorly prepared thanks to the error (idolatry) that still prevailed among them. This indicates both His just love for them and His fundamental dislike for the Israelis. And in fact, “He who knew all things before he was” (Dan. 13:42) should not have had such a disposition that the Church of the Gentiles, so easily and quickly called to faith in Him, would already (then) be worthy of His Divine love, and Jerusalem, as ungrateful, would rightly reject it and have dislike for it? Isn’t it said about Him that even before the time of His coming He desired her beauty (Ps. 44:12), according to the saying of the Psalmist, and didn’t He call stiff-necked Jerusalem harlot and adulteress and similar names? Thus, through the prophet Ezekiel he speaks very clearly to him: “Therefore, hear, O harlot, the word of the Lord” (Ezek. 16:35). And in the words of the prophet Jeremiah he accuses him as a harlot, exclaiming that “as a woman commits treachery against her husband, so the house of Israel commits treachery against Me, says the Lord” (Jer. 3:20). As having already contemplated, according to His Divine foreknowledge and providence, the beauty of the Church of the Gentiles and the shamefulness of the bad behavior of the Jewish synagogue, He already honors one with His love in advance and brings it as a bride into His palace, and is indignant at the other, having observed for each what is completely appropriate for her in due time. But full punishment is not brought upon the Israelites prematurely, nor is Galilee given over entirely before the saving cross. Having justly done this, He could then, for good reasons, withdraw from love for them. So, having said that he would not go to this holiday, but allowing the brothers, if they wish, to go, He alone - for he claimed that the time had not yet come - comes after them. At the same time, He does not say one thing, but does the opposite of what He says - after all, this would already be a lie, although flattery, that is, a lie, as the prophet says (Is. 53:9), was by no means found in His mouth - but He actually does what He previously promised and desired. In fact, He comes not to celebrate with them, but to teach, and since He came for salvation, then to speak and explain things related to eternal life. That this is His goal is clearly taught to us by His reluctance to accompany those going (to the festival), but by His secret and unnoticed arrival (later), without solemnity and rejoicing, of those who came to the festival. So, when He was already marching on the saving passion, He arrived not secretly, but sitting on a young donkey, in the image of a young people, preceded by a numerous host of infants, who again served as the image of the people who were about to be born, about whom it is written: “And the people who are created will praise the Lord” (Ps. 101:19). And the children who preceded the Lord exclaimed: “Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord, hosanna in the highest” (Matthew 21:9). So, by His secret coming, Christ shows that He arrived in Jerusalem not at all to celebrate with them, but to talk with them, for, as we said earlier, He is not yet completely separated from Israel before, given over to death, He appears to those who are already doing this worthily. The Lord says that He will not go, and after that He does not refuse to come, of which you will find a prototype that was once completed in the book called Exodus. While the divine and most sacred Moses was on the mountain with God, waiting for the message of the law from Him, Israel, who had neglected piety towards God, built a calf for themselves in the desert. But the Lawgiver is rightly angry at this and, accusing the frivolity of those who so quickly inclined to what was not proper, and threatening to immediately destroy them, He finally says to Saint Moses: “Go and get away from here, you and your people, which you brought from Egypt to the land that I swore to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, saying: I will give it to your seed, and I will send it with you before your face. My angel" (Exodus 33:1-2). Then Moses said to Him: “If You do not Yourself go with me, do not take me out of here: and how else will it become known for sure that I have found grace from You, I and Your people, unless You go with us? And the Lord said to Moses: “I will do this word to you that you have spoken, for you have found grace from Me” (Ex. 33:15–17). You see how, offended by Israel’s retreat, he claimed that he would not go with them to the promised land, but said that he would send an Angel with them; however, out of goodwill towards Moses and in memory of the fathers, giving forgiveness, he promised to go with them again. Having thus refused to celebrate with the Jews as proud and stubborn, dishonoring God with their denial, like those who created the calf, not responding with strict retribution for their crimes, but fulfilling their promise to the holy fathers, he comes (to Jerusalem) to teach and offer instructions for salvation to them, providing such service not to an Angel, as this was not the case then, but doing it himself and appearing for salvation ungrateful. John 7:11. The Jews sought Him on the feast and said, “Where is He?” 530 The Jews are not looking for Jesus in order to, having found, believe, for, and forestalling the search, He revealed Himself, according to what He said: “Those who did not seek Me found Me, I revealed myself to those who did not inquire about Me” (Is. 65:1; cf. Rom. 10:20), but due to great lawlessness, falling into Hellenic vanity and being more zealous for those things that are proper to them. (Greeks) than about that through which it was fitting for them to shine with the highest grace. After all, those who are revered as Hellenic sages and zealots of worldly and demonic wisdom spend a lot of sharp words, spinning circles of empty reasoning, and “weave the foundation of the web,” according to what is written (Is. 59:5). They begin to search for the truth or the good or the truth as it is by nature, and, imagining only a shadow of true knowledge, they remain completely devoid of active virtue. Remaining alien to the highest and real wisdom, they never practice anything useful except words. So the Jews, these brothers and neighbors of their ignorance, are looking for Jesus not in order to, having found it, believe, as the case itself showed, but so that, wounding Him with many reproaches, they will bring an unquenchable flame onto their heads. And in another respect, too, one must think that they are making the most vain search, for they begin to look for Him only because He does not exist. After all, this Wonderworker should have been among those celebrating the holiday, they say, pursuing only pleasant pleasure for himself, and not at all the benefit of surprise (before the Wonderworker). Clothed with the glory of teaching the law and considering themselves great experts in the Holy Scriptures, they do not remember the prophetic word that says: “Seek God and, when you have found Him, call upon him: when he comes near to you, let the wicked leave his way and the wicked man his intention, and let him turn to the Lord and have mercy on him” (Is. 55:6-7). You see how seeking alone is not enough for salvation, but having found it, it is necessary to convert, obviously through obedience and faith. This is how the ignorant and disobedient people of Judah had to be saved. If in this too it turns out to be very unreasonable, then rightly one should already hear: “How can you say that we are wise and the word of the Lord is with us? The lying reed of the scribes became in vain, the wise men were put to shame, confused, confused, what kind of wisdom is there in them? Because they rejected the word of the Lord” (Jer. 8:8-9). And in fact, did they not reject Him without accepting (Christ), or did they not dishonor them by recklessly refusing to say this about Him: “Where is He”? After all, this “He” is a sign of the insane (proud), who have not yet honored Him with their surprise, although from His many and great deeds they should have had a completely appropriate idea of ​​Him. John 7:12. And there was much murmuring about Him among the people: I said, “It is good,” and I said, “Nor, but the people flatter” 531 It is always difficult to seek and obtain good, and the ability to explore the beauty of truth is hardly achievable for many, especially for those who are most ignorant and lacking in acuity of mind, who, by the irrational attractions of reckless thoughts, are more easily inclined to what pleases them and without going into the study of the nature of the object they encounter, can never comprehend the true quality of things, although Paul says: “Be experienced money changers,” and urges us to test everything (1 Thess. 5:21), so that through accurate research we can arrive at the acquisition of useful things. Let those who, through great foolishness, are not surprised at Jesus and without any reasoning have decided that they should accuse Him, listen: “Taste and see that the Lord is good” (Ps. 33:9). Just as those who taste the quality of the best honey and through tasting a very small particle of it receive the sensation of what they are looking for (the quality of honey), so even though they have tasted a little of the words of the Savior, they can recognize that He is good, and when they learn, they can be surprised. Thus, the most prudent of the Jews defend Christ and give a fair judgment about Him, agreeing with Him as good, in all likelihood, reasoning in such a way that the power cannot be available to anyone to do what God is the doer of, unless He is God by nature and a partaker of God - and therefore He is good, to whom should be glory in all things and strengthening by the highest grace, although it was not so in Christ, for Christ Himself is the Lord of hosts. On the contrary, those who have not hesitated to call the One who guides the right path of truth a deceiver are spinning around in unreasonable opinions and have strayed far from the truth. Let the foolish Jew therefore listen: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness” (Is. 5:20). After all, blaming good is the same as defending evil; it is shameful to exempt from the most just accusation and to cast an inappropriate censure on objects that belong to the category of the most excellent. Accusations were also proclaimed for these censures, for “woe,” it is said, “to them, that they have departed from Me; unfortunate are they that they dishonored Me; But I set them free, but they spoke lies against Me” (Hos. 7:13). John 7:13. No one ever spoke about Him, for fear of the Jews 532 Among the Jews, he says, there was murmuring and “for fear of the Jews,” no one could “speak openly.” Thus, here the divine Evangelist calls Jews exclusively the leaders of the Jews, considering it unworthy, as it seems to me, to apply to them the names of elders or priests or any other of these, to which he was prompted by zeal for piety and sorrow for them, whom God Himself, with all, of course, justice, accuses of the prophets as destroyers of the spiritual vineyard, saying this: “Many shepherds have destroyed My vineyard, they have desecrated My plot, They turned My desired land into an impassable wilderness, and it came to the destruction of destruction” (Jer. 12:10-11). Indeed, should we not consider the vineyard of the Lord truly destroyed by their abominations, when they declared it dangerous to defend what is good and be amazed at what alone is worthy of astonishment? For any right-thinking person, can it be doubtful that, together with other things, this also entails the gravest punishment on the Jewish leaders? After all, the whole people only fears and trembles at them, and is not brought up according to the law and is not taught what it should be, although they very willingly obeyed their orders. The proof of extreme submission is fear. Thus, he was forced to act contrary to the law or to look indifferently at the will of the Lawgiver, and not only did they not at all dare to freely praise what was good, but, on the contrary, they were forced to consider whatever they wished as bad, and to condemn anything worthy of praise and surprise as shameful. Like a man who has perfect mastery of the art of navigation and controls the helm of a ship that is completely obedient to him, if he steers it onto the rocks, he himself will have to be considered guilty of a shipwreck - or like an experienced rider, driving fast and young horses and having the opportunity through the bridle and reins to easily direct their run wherever he wants, when he breaks the chariot on a stone, he will have to rightly consider himself to be the cause of the misfortune, not the horses, but himself; In the same way, I think, the Jewish teachers, if, having a people who not only honored them, but also, moreover, had a slavish fear of them, governed them in disagreement with Divine decrees, then you must be subject to fair punishment for the destruction of all. And that they became the cause of the destruction of the people, this is testified by the prophet Jeremiah: “Because the shepherds went mad and did not seek the Lord, therefore the whole flock did not understand and were scattered” (Jer. 10:21). John 7:14. Abi, at half-time of the feast, Jesus went up to the church and taught 533 As sacred, the teaching of our Savior befits a sacred (place), for where else is it appropriate to hear the Divine voice, if not in places in which the Divine is believed to dwell? After all, God embraces everything, although He must be represented as unlimited in place and by His nature completely inaccessible to (created) beings. But still we must believe that it is more fitting for Him to dwell in holy places, and with all seriousness think that it is appropriate for us to listen to what is pleasing to Divine Nature primarily in sacred places. What was once outlined by the ancients in an image and a shadow, this is now again transformed by Christ into truth. God spoke to Moses the priest: “And you will put the atonement on top of the ark, and in the ark you will put the testimony that I will give you: and I will reveal myself to you there and talk to you from above the atonement in the midst of the two cherubim that are over the ark of the testimony, about everything that I will command you to the children of Israel” (Ex. 25: 21-22). Our Lord Jesus Christ, “already in the middle of the holiday,” as it is written, how God came to sacred and dedicated places to God, talks there with the people, although he came secretly, just as the descent of God into the purification in the tabernacle was secret, only then becoming known when the time came to speak. Then God spoke with only blessed Moses and did not speak with anyone else; So Christ instructed while still one people of Judea, talked with one people, without yet extending the common grace to the nations. It’s also good that the blessed Evangelist says not just “entered,” but “went up into the church.” This is because entering the Divine School and staying in holy places is truly something lofty and very elevated above the base earthly wickedness. But this image reaches the truth with us. After all, the one who consecrated the church was Christ. And the prototype of this was once Moses, who anointed the tabernacle with oil and sanctified it, as it is written (Lev. 8:11), although a person should rather be sanctified through holy places than to sanctify them. But nothing that happened in the prototype had the significance of the truth itself, for the sake of which the hay's foretellings were given, as can be seen in the holy prophets. So, one received a command to cohabit, and, moreover, involuntarily, with a prodigal wife (Hos. 3:1-3), another - to walk naked (Is. 20:2), and also to lie on his right side for a considerable number of days (Ezek. 4:6). This was done, no doubt, not for its own sake, but for the sake of what it meant. So blessed Moses received the command to consecrate the tabernacle, although, on the contrary, he himself had to be sanctified by it, so that Christ would again be understood as consecrating His church in it (the face of Moses), although He cohabited with the Jews in the flesh and talked in it (the church) with the people, as God once did from purification. John 7:15. The Jews marveled, saying: How can this book be taught without having studied? 534 The surprise of the Jews was not without reason, but there was a reason for their speech about this. Indeed, it was natural for them to be amazed when they saw that He who did not study the sciences was distinguished by amazing words and knowledge. After all, the human mind has the capacity for wisdom, and even if someone does not turn out to be wise, nature still remains very capable of perceiving understanding and knowing something. But the natural ability is in some way darkened and put to sleep in those who do not have practice in words. On the contrary, for those who are accustomed to working on this and enjoying the decorations in words, this ability is brilliant and always ready for activity, proving fruitful in the invention of wise words and teachings. So, the Jews are amazed, listening to the Savior Christ, not yet as God by nature, but also as a simple man. They are surprised precisely because He abounds in wisdom, and especially because He had no practice in reading, which brings wisdom, but knows the “Scriptures” without learning. Thus, this, along with other things, serves as an accusation of Jewish madness, for otherwise it would not seem at all strange to them that the artist of all things, Wisdom (Prov. 8:30), that is, the Only Begotten Word, who hid among them in human form, does not need the Scriptures. Again, it is useful to note this. Those who were looking for Jesus earlier said: “Where is He?” (v. 11), as those who knew Him only by miracles, but did not yet know clearly and precisely who He actually was, or whose, or where He came from. Here, not as those who do not know anything about Him, but as everyone who clearly knows, they say that they even “know the Scriptures without studying.” Therefore, the less clear question about Him from the crowd and people who certainly did not know Him, namely “where is He,” sounded disdainful. It’s a different matter on the part of those who recognized Him. Those who were not ignorant of Him must, therefore, be subjected to a more severe punishment than those who did not have knowledge, for for some ignorance serves as an excuse, for others knowledge serves as an accusation. Therefore, it is said that for some it is better not to know the way of truth (2 Pet. 2:21), for with knowledge the punishment is greater for them, just as for “the lovers of pleasure more than the lovers of God” (2 Tim. 3:4). So, according to the question of the Jews, Jesus knew the Scriptures without studying. Moses was taught, as it is written, “all the wisdom of Egypt” (Acts 7:22). But knowing nothing at all, although he was very wise among them, he learned the highest knowledge from Divine words, so that worldly wisdom is thereby exposed as powerless through Divine and higher wisdom, by which or through which we are secretly guided in the knowledge of Christ or receive truly higher understanding from God. Therefore Christ is the most perfect good in all, the one of all, both wisdom and understanding, which glorious gifts He, as one must think, possesses not by teaching, but by nature. So the prophet Isaiah speaks about Him in one place: “... because before a child knows good or evil, he rejects wickedness in order to choose good” (Is. 7:16). We must not, of course, think foolishly that the divine and heavenly Birth (Child), through discernment of thoughts or by choosing the best, turns away from evil and turns to good. But as about fire, if someone says that it turns away from cold, not suffering to be cooled, then this will indicate not the choice existing in it at will, but its constant preservation of the properties of its nature; So it is about Christ (one must think), for everything good is natural in God, and does not come from outside. In the same way, there was wisdom in Him, or rather, He Himself was its source and the actual and only wisdom, through which private, both heavenly and earthly, rational creatures receive wisdom through participation in It. John 7:16. Jesus answered and said to them: My teaching is not Mine, but that of Him who sent Me. We find quite true the saying of one of the sages that “The Spirit of the Lord fills the world... and the ear of hearing (hearing) 535 hears everything” (Wis. 1:7, 10). And to those who, completely unreasonably, or rather, wickedly, think that any word of theirs can hide from the Divine mind, the divine Psalmist says in one place: “Understand, then, the foolish among the people and the foolish will ever understand (this is this): He who has planted an ear, will he not hear?” ( Ps. 94:8-9 ). Is it even possible to admit that He who planted the very sense of hearing in His creations did not hear everything unconditionally? Therefore, from here also see that the Lord is God by nature, for He does not know what was said among the people by the Jews secretly and in whispers. But He, as befits God, accepts this with His hearing, although out of fear of the rulers they do not say anything about Him publicly. Since some of those who had gathered in the church were once surprised and probably reasoned to themselves or spoke quietly to each other: “How does this one know the Scripture without having studied” (v. 15), then again with obvious necessity He shows Himself equal to God and the Father, Who, of course, did not learn anything, but has knowledge of everything by nature and without teaching, because He surpasses every mind and rises above all understanding of creatures. But it was possible to prove this on other grounds and assure the listeners that what the Parent has is also inherent in Him, due to natural identity. He did this in another case, when from the identity of omnipotence and equal effectiveness in everything He rightly ascended to equal dignity, “for whatever the Father does,” He said, “these the Son does likewise,” and again: “For as the Father raises the dead and gives life, so the Son gives life to whomever He will” (John 5:19, 21). But in the present case it was quite timely and proper that the greatest evidence should be drawn from it. After all, those who thought about it were talking about understanding and knowledge without teaching. Therefore, He had to prove that He had this, as, without a doubt, the Father did. What (does He use) method of proof? The fact that He has wisdom equal to Him, although in the proper and precise sense He Himself is Wisdom and is born of God the Father, Whom, being similar in everything, speaks and teaches the same as Him, is in no way different from Him. At the same time, either because the teaching is completely similar to the teaching of the Father, He calls His teaching the teaching of the Father, or because He is the Wisdom of the Father, through which He speaks and legitimizes everything, He calls His teaching His teaching. In addition, there is something else here that is very useful for the salvation of those being instructed. Since, due to his earthly flesh, they saw Him as a man and did not accept His teaching as a teaching from God, He beneficially assimilates the teaching of God and the Father, expressing the true reality and at the same time, through the fear of appearing to be fighters against God, encouraging those who continued to resist the higher definitions to accept His words. But it should be known that, again calling Himself sent, He does not indicate His lower dignity compared to the Father. This embassy should not be presented as servile, although He could with all justice say about Himself that He was clothed in the form of a servant (Phil. 2:7). He was sent like a word - from the mind, like a reflection of rays - from the sun. This is the essence of discovering that in which they exist, through the manifestation (of the essence) in external appearance, and they naturally and inseparably abide in that from which they arise. Indeed, if the word comes from the mind and the shine from the sun, then on this basis, of course, one should not think that producing objects (mind, sun) exist without what comes from them (word, shine), but, on the contrary, we find them existing - both these in these, and these in those. After all, the mind can never be wordless, just as a word cannot have the mind expressed in it. The other thing should be understood similarly (the comparison of the sun and its radiance). John 7:17. If anyone wants to do His will, he understands the teaching that is from God, or I say from Myself 536 Without examining and without any doubt, one had to accept the words of truth and believe that what had already been said could not be otherwise than He determined it to be. However, for the sake of those who did not believe, He does not leave His words without proof, but gives the clearest and most obvious reason for them, composing an image of speech with great skill. What this art consists of and what kind of benevolent word this is, we will also talk about this. They sought to kill Him because of the paralytic, I mean the one healed on the Sabbath. Therefore, He imperceptibly strikes those who were already planning something bad against Him, and at the same time clearly exposes those who carried murderous plans against Him as having decided to do what was pleasing to themselves, and not to the Lawgiver. So, it is then that you will especially learn about “My teaching”, that “God” and the Father “are” it, if you “want” to follow Him, and not your own “desires.” The will of the Lawgiver and God is to completely move away from murder. Then, he says, without being overwhelmed by unjust enmity and without being prompted to vain anger by an animal-like disposition, you will clearly know whether the word “of My teaching is from God or whether I speak from Myself.” So, having combined reproof with usefulness, he rightly accuses them of unjustifiably neglecting everything that He teaches, although God and the Father pleases and deigns to Him, or, which is also true, co-teaches and co-explains. The expression “from Himself” is used instead of “especially and properly”, completely in accordance with the same will and the same intention of the Father. And no one, of course, who thinks correctly, will think that He accuses His own words as incorrect, but says this because they could never have been otherwise than by the will of God and the Father, for He (the Father) speaks through His Son as through the Word and His Wisdom. And he says, without a doubt, not in contradiction with himself. Can He allow this? John 7:18. Speak from Yourself 537 seeks His glory Here he gives a clear indication that He is not at all seeking glory for Himself if He teaches that He does not use words that are new or alien to the law, for this would mean “speaking from oneself.” On the contrary, He convinces them to follow what has already been legitimized by Him, but only by removing the useless and crude shadow of the letter and correctly transforming what was still hidden in the prototypes into spiritual contemplation. He says this in the Gospel according to Matthew: “I did not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it” (Matthew 5:17). This is also indirectly indicated here: the teaching of the Gospel is only the transformation of the letter into truth, and the transformation of any Mosaic type into the corresponding truth serves to the knowledge of service in the spirit. So, Christ also speaks “not from Himself,” that is, nothing alien to what has already been foretold. After all, He does not reject Moses and does not teach to abandon the decrees of the law, but on what was written in darkness and in type, He puts the truth, as it were, in some brighter color. At the same time, wishing to favor the Jews towards Himself, He assimilates honor and glory to God and the Father. Since the Jews, not knowing about the Word that appeared from God the Father, thought that the law was given by the Father alone, He rightly asserted that He is also glorified when the law is kept, and the opposite happens when it is not properly preserved. But although the Son is a sharer of the glory of the Father and through Him God the Father spoke to Moses, yet He is wisely applied to the opinion of those (the Jews). And in the words that He “speaks nothing of Himself” that is not consistent with the law, He confesses that He does not at all strive to create His own glory, but that which is appropriate to the law. In addition, you need to pay attention to this. He also indirectly and covertly accuses the Jews of being susceptible to the very thing that they ignorantly accuse Him of, that is, of habitually stealing for themselves the glory that does not belong to them, but to the Lord of all God. I’ll explain how this is. Having deviated from the provisions of the law, each of them rushed towards their own arbitrariness, “teaching, as it is written, the doctrines of the commandments of men” (Matthew 15:9). Here, too, Christ nobly exposes them (the teachers) for violating the law and for committing a crime against the Lawgiver himself, since they urged the people not to live according to His statutes, but to follow their teachings more closely. So, although Christ still vaguely and generally says: “He who speaks seeks his own glory from Himself,” he nevertheless denounces the disease of the Pharisees’ madness in the fact that they, preferring to speak their own, steal the glory of the Lawgiver and transfer onto themselves what is due to God, and even finally decide to kill Him for the sake of this. This is why He particularly denounces them for breaking the Law, wisely taking as a reason for speaking the fact that He carefully observes the law and through this honors God and the Father. John 7:18. Seek the glory of Him who sent Him; He is true, and there is no untruth in Him 538 He who seeks not God's, but his own, is untrue and unjust. He is untrue because he slanders the law and introduces his own desires into it. He is unjust as he rejects the righteous judgment of the Lawgiver and places his own above the Lord. Consequently, Christ is just and true as not subject to any of the above-mentioned accusations. John 7:19. Didn't Moses give you the law? and no one makes law for you. Why are you trying to kill me? 539 Through many ways the Savior's speech is directed towards one goal. In the above words, indirectly denouncing, as it should be, the Pharisees in the fact that they considered it necessary not to obey the Divine decrees, but to introduce their own opinions and sought to seize honor from the people obedient to them and not to appropriate it to the Lord of all, but to transfer it to their own person, so that as a result of this they already transgressed the law with all the more audacity and ease - now again, using a different and stronger method (accusations), is already exposing them directly and undisguisedly. Condemned for violating the Sabbath and exposed to the most unjust accusation of lawlessness, He now exposed not everyone individually for violating the law, but the entire Jewish people for turning the decrees of Moses into nothing. Tell me, he says, you who condemn those who wish to show mercy on the Sabbath, who determine a vile sentence on those who do good and shamelessly accuse those who are compassionate: was it not through Moses, before whom you always revere, that a decree was given to you not to commit murder? Have you not heard his words: “Do not kill the innocent and the righteous” (Ex. 23:7)? Why then do you insult your Moses by so easily breaking the law established through him? And the denunciation of this and obvious proof is your persecution of Me, who has not sinned in anything, and your attempt to unjustly kill Him Who cannot be accused of anything for which one should be subjected to this very thing (death). So, with great power and astonishment, this speech of the Savior exposes the madness of the Jews and shows that they, as if with unbridled aspirations, are carried away to condemn Him for the sake of the crime of the Sabbath, commit lawlessness, decide to kill Him, and through this alone they fall into the worst of all sins. As if he were crying out to them: On the Sabbath day I healed the paralytic, who was subjected to a serious and incurable illness, and who was consumed by an intolerable illness. But having performed this good deed, I am condemned as having been convicted of something most vile, and for this you condemn murder on My head. What kind of punishment, he says, could be worthy of your insolence? After all, you yourself are breaking the law. But this type of crime is not similar to what I am accused of. It is not for the sake of a good deed, as I do, that you force this to be done, but for murder, the worst of iniquities. Where is Moses here, for whose sake I, although I fulfill (his commandments), am condemned? Didn't he determine the law for you regarding this? And just as you trample My teaching, don’t you impute crime (of the law) to anything, unjustly subjecting Me to death? This is what Christ could rightly say to the wicked Pharisees. In the present case, He separates the law from His Person, although He Himself was the Lawgiver, but assimilates it only to the Father, especially shaming the shameless Jews through Him Who was considered superior to Him by them. This is because, as we have often said, they did not yet recognize Him as God by nature and did not yet know the deep mystery of the economy with the flesh, but they were more in awe of the glory of Moses. John 7:20–21. The people answered: Is it a demon who seeks to kill You? Jesus answered and spoke to them... 540 They feel the accusations and, as a result, already using bitter words, move on to denial, not actually refusing to kill, but only diligently avoiding appearing to be violators of the law. Indeed, in the opinion of people alone there is the praise of the Pharisees. That is why Christ called them whitewashed tombs, externally clothed with the beauty of skillful reasoning, but internally filled with the uncleanness of the dead (Matthew 23:27). They say, I believe, this, wanting to distract Him from the fear of expecting to be subjected to something, not in order to give Him real confirmation that He will not be subjected, but in order to instill in Him dangerous confidence (in His safety) and thinking to force Him not to hide from them. Then, in their opinion, there would no longer be any difficulty in plotting against Him, for, not knowing the Persecuted One, they ignorantly thought that He would be subjected to their malicious intent, even if He did not even want it, and would turn out to be unaware of the intent hidden in their souls. Thus, denial is the fruit of malice and another kind of wickedness against Christ, for by the fact that they try to reject what He said as not true, they condemn Him as having told a lie, adding, as it is written, “iniquity to iniquity” (Ps. 69:28). John 7:21. I have done one thing, and you all marvel? We should read this saying as a question, with a question mark at the end. Moreover, one should not ignore the art in this saying, which contains wise forethought. In fact, notice how, revealing to the Jews the kindness shown to the paralytic, he prudently says: I healed a man on Saturday, and for this reason you are surprised? Now, more modestly and very restrainedly, he says: “I have done one thing,” taming the untimely anger of the crowd, for it was not incredible that, irritated by the violation of the Sabbath, they were already trying to stone Jesus. After all, according to the Hellenic poets, the crowd is always reckless and quick to anger, quickly and unanimously doing its will, easily reaching uncontrollable insolence and rage, and more quickly than it should be carried away into terrible furies. So, having removed from the event for the sake of benefit everything that was miraculous in it, He uses meek speech and very modestly says: “I have done one thing, and you all marvel.” For this alone, he says, although it was for the salvation and life of the lying (sick), as for some daring iniquities, you condemn the Wonderworker and, looking at the honor of the Sabbath alone, you do not deign to be surprised at the miraculous act, which in reality would, of course, be more decent. But you were unjustly surprised that, according to your ignorant opinion, a legal decree was allegedly violated, not because of something small or worthless, but because of the salvation and life of a person, while you, on the contrary, should have given praise to Him who is endowed with such great and Divine power. Thus, and through this, the Jewish people are convicted of ignorance, since they directed their surprise in the wrong direction - to the healed one, while, on the contrary, they should have turned it to Christ, who miraculously saved. You need to know that, talking with the Israelis and saying: “I have done one thing, you all are amazed,” he again makes an indirect denunciation and expresses something like this: for this alone, he says, in your opinion, you are surprised at My mood, as if I dare to resist the Lawgiver; but in this case, how do you think God is disposed, who have themselves violated the law more than once and consider committing crimes for which you condemn others to be nothing? John 7:22. For this reason Moses gave you circumcision, not as it is from Moses, but from the father: and on the Sabbath ye circumcise a man 541 The explanation of this text is profound and presents some difficulties. However, it will be clear for the sake of the grace of the Enlightener. So, through many words, revealing the ignorance of the Jews and teaching in various ways that it was not fitting for them to come into untimely anger for breaking the Sabbath, because the Son of Man is the lord of the Sabbath, - He did not, however, bring any benefit to the listeners due to the corruption of their wills and therefore now moves on to another kind of instruction and tries to show clearly that the priestly leader Moses himself, the servant of the law, breaks the law on the Sabbath for the sake of “circumcision” - a custom that came down from the forefathers to his times, so that He Himself would rightly prove to be preserving the paternal custom and, just as God “does” on the Sabbath, He would also reveal Himself as a worker, not at all considering this to be a crime of the Sabbath, since He always thinks in accordance with the Parent. That is why he said: “My Father is working hitherto, and I am working” (John 5:17), so that in this way you, seeing Me doing something on the Sabbath, would not be surprised at it as something strange and unusual - “Moses gave you circumcision” on the Sabbath, and thus he broke the law on the Sabbath before Me. And for what reason? He did not consider it fair for the sake of the Sabbath not to honor the law and custom determined by the fathers. That is why “a man is circumcised on the Sabbath.” If Moses considered it necessary to honor the fatherly custom and put it above the reverence of the Sabbath, then why are you in vain grumbling at Me and being surprised for supposedly neglecting the law, how can any of those who are accustomed to frivolously commit lawlessness? After all, I do the same with the Parent, I always think in accordance with everything pleasing to Him, and if He is active on Saturday, then I rightly refuse to be inactive on it. At the same time, he claims that Moses “gave circumcision,” although, according to what has just been said, it is not from him, “but from the fathers,” because the commandment about circumcision was given to the fathers (Abraham). But through Moses more precise and detailed regulations about him were determined, for although the forefather Abraham was circumcised, he did not do so on the eighth day and did not sacrifice a pair of turtle doves or two doves, according to the statute of Moses. Discourse on the Sabbath rest, revealing in various ways what it is a sign of John 7:23. If a person accepts circumcision on the Sabbath, so that the law of Moses may not be destroyed, are you angry with Me, because I made all man healthy on the Sabbath? In many (lists) this passage is read without punctuation marks and the combination of sentences in it is not very clear. So let's talk about this first. So, let’s begin to read individual sentences, rearranging their combination in this saying, for only in this way can we understand the exact meaning of the saying. “If,” he says, “a person receives circumcision on the Sabbath, are you angry with Me (because) the law of Moses would not be broken” (by the fact that I made the whole person healthy on the Sabbath?) After all, a person receives circumcision on the Sabbath, of course, not in order “so that the law of Moses is not broken,” for it is broken if the Sabbath (the law of Sabbath rest) is not abolished (cancelled) for the sake of circumcision. As we have already revealed earlier, or rather, as the Savior Himself said, circumcision does not come from Moses, but from the fathers, so that for the sake of circumcision coming from the fathers, the law of Moses, that is, the law of the Sabbath, is in some way broken. That is why the sentence “so that the law of Moses is not broken” must be combined in the Savior’s saying like this: “Are you angry with Me,” he says (because) “so that the law of Moses is not broken” (by the fact that I made all man healthy on the Sabbath?) This is how we need to separate the proposals here. Let us now move on to explaining the meaning (of these words), although it is very difficult to understand. So, circumcision, he says, is a kind of care for a person, and it is higher than the law of the Sabbath, for it was necessary to heal (part of the body) the one who was circumcised. What, therefore, prohibits or how can the Sabbath legislation serve as a reasonable obstacle to the healing of the whole body, since it already allows as an innocent violation of the commandment by treating a separate part of the body? After all, everyone is circumcised and, having been circumcised, is treated on the Sabbath without being accused (of breaking the law). It is in vain, therefore, he says, that you are indignant at the Finer of something much better, accusing Him of breaking the law, when the law does not suffer because it is abolished by Moses even because of such an insignificant circumcision (in relation to the whole body and in comparison with the healing of the whole person). This is the reasoning He makes, convincing them to agree that they should not fall into vain sorrow, if the prototype of this was already Moses, whom, although they considered it necessary to foolishly defend, but (at the same time) they were carried away to murder, turning his law (on murder) into nothing. John 7:24. Judge not according to persons, but judge righteous judgment 542 The law, says, which you are trying to defend, for the sake of which you are inflamed with such fierce anger, clearly exclaims: “You shall not accept persons (do not show partiality) in judgment, because the judgment of God (this) is” (Deut. 1:17). Therefore, you, for the sake of the Sabbath, condemn Me as a lawbreaker and consider it quite fitting to be indignant for this, take care of respect for the law, be ashamed of what was announced to you: “Judge not according to appearance, but judge justice.” After all, if you do not consider Moses a lawbreaker and quite rightly do not classify him as worthy of condemnation, although he violated the Sabbath statute for the sake of circumcision from the fathers, then free from accusations the Son, who always follows the intentions of the Father and is consistent with His desires, who is accustomed to do in the same way everything that He (the Father) does (John 5:19). If you accuse the Son alone, without condemning Moses, although he is guilty, he says, the same thing that you consider Me guilty of for the sake of the Sabbath, then will you not find yourself trampling on the Divine law and appearing to be opponents of the highest decrees, out of respect for someone, destroying the commandment of just judgment and placing above the Divine decrees the one to whom you, transgressing the law, bestow partial respect? Let the prudent listener again notice the wondrous art of our Savior Christ. Accused of violating only one law, He denounces them for the crime of very many, almost saying the well-known gospel saying: “And why do you look at the bitches in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the beam in your own eye?” (Matthew 7:3). It is bad, therefore, to judge others, “for in what he judges another, he condemns himself,” according to what is written (Rom. 2:1). That is why the Savior Himself said: “Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned” (Luke 6:37). We say this in relation to ourselves, for Christ cannot at all be a lawbreaker, transposing His laws according to His will and imposing the brilliance of truth on the legal canopy, so that the somewhat crude legalizations of the ancients would finally turn into spiritual contemplation. But if once our speech has already reached the remembrance of the Sabbath and circumcision, then, I believe, no less than as much as it should, it will be of benefit to anyone who is inquisitive to understand exactly what the sign of which could be the rest on the seventh day, which was also indicated by circumcision on the eighth day, and, in addition, to find out for what reason circumcision is accepted even on the Sabbath itself, without maintaining legal inactivity. Having considered this as best I can, I will try to present a clear basis for each of these laws. In the first place we must speak about the seventh day, or Sabbath, and about rest during it. Thus, it will be entirely possible for us to properly investigate other issues as well. So, let us now examine the first law about it (the Sabbath), how and under what circumstances it appeared. When God, having removed Israel from the slavery of Egypt, through the wise Moses called him to his former and primordial freedom and, having miraculously walked with dry and unwet feet in the middle of the sea, commanded him to diligently go to the land of promise; then, considering it necessary to accustom them to be presanctified and purified in a certain way, he called them to an assembly on Mount Sinai and, descending on it in the form of fire, gave saving laws. At the same time, He said this: “I (am) the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery: you shall have no other gods besides Me: you shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth below, or that is in the waters under the earth: you shall not worship them, nor serve them, for I (am) the Lord Your God, a jealous God.” Exodus 20:2–5). Yes, truly, it was precisely with this that it was necessary to begin the law on the useful and in advance to lead the secret teaching in the knowledge of God to those who had once presented themselves in slavery and obedience to God. After all, knowledge of God is the root of all virtue and faith is the foundation of piety. Having thus revealed Himself and, as it were, already placing Himself before the eyes of everyone through the words “I am the Lord your God,” having pre-empted faith in them through knowledge and completely forbidding the construction of an idol and the worship of false gods, He makes it clear that the transgression (of this commandment) is not harmless for them and the punishment for departing (from it), exclaiming thus: “You shall not take (say) the name of the Lord your God in vain,” that is, not attach a Divine and terrible name to an empty idol, “for,” he says, “the Lord will not purify him who takes His name in vain” (Ex. 20:7). So, having revealed that anyone who has a desire to worship another and recognize a false god will be guilty of no small sin, and having accordingly threatened them as those who have just been brought to faith and who still have an unsteady mind, he then sets out the second, as if outlining a law, saying: “Remember the Sabbath day, (to) keep it holy: six days you shall work and finish all your works, and on the seventh day there will be Sabbath (rest). unto the Lord thy God, thou shalt not do any work against him” (Ex. 20:8-10). Then, usefully showing whom, in doing this, they will imitate, he says: “For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth and the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day: therefore the Lord blessed the seventh day and sanctified it” (Ex. 20:11). But why again, who will say, did he give them the statute about the Sabbath? For what reason was this second law introduced immediately after the threat for crimes? It is appropriate, we answer this, not only to threaten the criminals that they will be subjected to severe punishment, and not only through fear to confirm Israel in piety - for reverence for God through fear is more characteristic of slaves - but also to show what they will be partakers of or to what end they will achieve those who are completely devoted to love for Him. Therefore, he defines and gives, as in a type, a promise of future benefits to them, for the law has a shadow of future benefits, as it is written (Heb. 10:1), and the image inscribed in it is a certain preliminary realization of the truth. He commands not to work on the last day of the week, that is, Saturday, and to stop all work, but to rest and observe peace during it, indicating thereby the rest and, as a result, joy that will be for the saints at the end of the ages, when, having ceased to live in the world and freed from the exploits of virtue, those who are in Christ will lead their lives without labor and without any exhaustion, according to what was said about them in the words of the prophet: “For they will forget their former sorrow, and it will not come into their hearts” (Is. 65:16), but “everlasting joy will be upon their head, for praise is on their head, and joy will overtake them; sickness and sorrow and groaning will be removed” (Is. 35:10). So they, too, in imitation of the Creator who stopped and, as it were, ceased His labors during the creation (of the world), will have to free themselves from the labors of this life, ascending to the joy that Christ gives them at the end of the ages. I think the legalized rest on Saturday is aimed at this goal. Notice how strictly the Lawgiver says, “Do not worship other gods.” And when setting out the statute about the Sabbath next to this, he uses the expression “remember.” For what reason? Because then the time had already come not to worship other gods, which is why he commanded them to immediately be active in this (do it). The future and those depicted in prototypes He allowed, as it were, to be seen through memory and contemplated in the mind. Then, in addition, you need to keep this in mind. Having well and duly established the things pertaining to faith, He immediately makes mention of the promise relating to the end of the ages, and then defines other laws, such as: “Honor your father and your mother” and “Thou shalt not kill” and others (Ex. 20:12). This is so that we do not think that we are justified by works, and so that not as the fruit of our own labors, but, on the contrary, from faith we expect great and abundant gifts of God in the future. Therefore, before the laws about a pious lifestyle, the grace of expected benefits immediately appears next to faith. So, Sabbath rest means the life of the saints in peace and holiness, when, freed from all sorrows and ceasing all work, they will enjoy heavenly blessings. Therefore, blessed Paul, when he spoke for us about this and considered it necessary to more accurately examine the image of the sabbath of the people, said this: “Against whom did he swear that they would not enter into His rest, if not against the disobedient? And we see that we could not enter because of unbelief” (Heb. 3:18–19). Since some thought that the land of rest was exactly the one to which they went, coming out of the land of Egypt, although it was taken as a type of what was to be given to the saints from Christ, which David called also the land of the living (Ps. 26:13); then the wisest Paul tries to show that the land, then distributed by lot according to the decrees of Jesus among the sons of Israel, was a prototype of the expected land. That this is taken as a type of truth, (the Apostle) decisively explains further, citing to prove what has been said a conclusion of this kind: “So, if there remains (still to be) some to enter into it, and those who were previously preached (those who received the gospel, the promise) did not enter because of unbelief, then he again determines a certain day, “today,” speaking through David, after so much time, as was said before: “today (today), if you hear His voice, do not harden your hearts as if you were angry,” for if Joshua (Joshua) had given them rest, he (God through David) would not have spoken of anything else after this day” (Heb. 4:6–8). You see how he (the Apostle) decisively eliminated the apparent contradiction. After all, someone defending Jewish views could immediately object to this: “What, my dear, are you saying? Didn't Joshua (Joshua) lead the people into the promised land? Didn’t (the Israelis) find rest and peace in it?” Yes, he answers, but as if in a prototype of true peace and rest and in the likeness. After all, if in this alone lies the grace of God and the whole measure of the promise given to him, and the hopes of Israel were fulfilled on the people of that time, and besides this, the subordinate scripture does not mean anything else; then how, after so much time after that, another time is again determined through blessed David, since Joshua (Joshua) has not yet given them peace? So, having wisely and very thoughtfully shown the type and foreshadowing of spiritual things in historical events, he (the Apostle) already explains the mysterious and hidden meaning of the law on the Sabbath, adding: “Consequently, there remains (still to come) a Sabbath (rest) for the people of God: for he who entered into His rest also rested from all his works, just as God did from His” (Heb. 4:9-10). Therefore, shouldn’t it be recognized as absolutely clear from here that the mind of the saints considers as peace liberation from the labors of deeds (virtue), when the bright host of saints will enjoy the deeds already accomplished in this life, in the likeness of the Creator of all things, who rested and rejoiced on the seventh day, as Wisdom speaks about this in the book of Proverbs: “I was (she) in whom He rejoiced, every day I rejoiced in the presence of Him, at all times, when He rejoiced, having completed the world, and I rejoiced in the sons of men” (Prov. 8:30-31). So - let me return again to the beginning and understand the meaning of the whole saying - rest on the Sabbath means a life of saints free from work. All good things will at that time be given from God to the saints without their labor, and we will then no longer commit sin, which serves as the beginning of evil, since it will be destroyed from the roots in us along with those who usually sow it in us, according to what has been said: “There will be no lion there, and not one of the evil beasts will enter there, but there will be a pure path there and will be called the holy way” (Is. 35: 9, 8), but the spirit of the saints will easily possess all the best. That is why the one who gathers wood on the Sabbath is subject to death by stoning (Num. 15:36) as having transgressed the truth in the type, for we, having achieved this rest and peace, should never leave the wonderful and glorious way of life, like those from their tent, just as it is a sin to gather the feeder and the mother of fire, like those - wood out of their great foolishness, without understanding the type, pointing to the truth. That is why he, as if convicted of great unreason, was beaten with unreasonable stones by those who carried out the punishment, having in the execution itself an image of the quality of his morals. So, that then (after the end of the world) we will not commit abominable sin is clear, as is the fact that we will not achieve something useful for ourselves through labor. This is also indicated, as if in a riddle, in the books of Moses. God sent down manna like dew to the children of Israel in the desert and gave them the bread of angels, according to what was written (Ps. 77:25). Then, through the wise Moses, he defines the following law about it: “Eat today, for today is the Sabbath (rest) of the Lord, you will not find it in the field: six days you shall gather, but on the seventh day there will be rest; This indicates that until the end of the ages we should labor to collect what is useful to us and nourishes us for eternal life, just as those who walked through the vast desert collected manna from everywhere for themselves to eat. And on the seventh day, that is, after the end of the world, the time will pass to collect useful things, and we will enjoy the benefits we have already acquired, according to what the Psalmist said: “Taste the fruits of your labors” (Ps. 127:2). So, the Lawgiver and God, not caring about shadows, but foretelling the very image of things, commanded that one should not work on the Sabbath. But some, despising the law he had defined on this and allowing themselves to impudently insult the Lord of all, decided that they could also go on Saturday to collect manna. And they had this daring decision not only in their minds, but also in reality. For this, the Lawgiver also accuses them and says: “How long do you not want to obey My commandments and My law? See, the Lord has given you this day to rest (Saturday): therefore on the sixth day He gave you bread for two days; you shall sit (stay) every one of you in your houses; let none of you go out from his place on the seventh day” (Ex. 16:28-29). Don’t you see that, prescribing to us under the image of rest a life free from all labor and exhaustion, he does not allow us to do anything at all on the Sabbath? After all, not only does he not allow one to gather (manna), but at the same time he also commands that one should not leave one’s home or go out from one’s places. What he wants to teach us by this, we will explain by presenting a related and exactly the same saying. Thus, the blessed prophet Jeremiah says to the Jews the following: “Thus says the Lord: preserve your souls, and do not lift up a burden on the Sabbath day, and do not go out through the gates of Jerusalem, and do not carry a burden out of your houses on the Sabbath day, and do not do any work: sanctify the Sabbath day, as I commanded your fathers” (Jer. 17:21-22). What follows from here? Encouraging us to stay awake, he commands us to protect our souls, for in this way it will be easy for us to achieve the expected peace. In other words of this saying, He clearly revealed what benefits await those who have achieved this. Thus, He does not allow anyone to burden themselves with burdens, since at that time no one will take upon themselves the unbearable burden of sin. Then the time of holiness will come, original sin will be completely destroyed and the soul of everyone will be renewed in a state of unceasing virtue. He also does not allow walking outside the gates of Jerusalem. But the bright host of saints, according to the true and right teaching, will continually inhabit the heavenly Jerusalem and will not leave the holy city, on the contrary, they will always remain in it, kept by Divine power in the complete impossibility of losing the blessings once given, “for the gifts and calling of God are immutable,” according to St. Paul (Rom. 11:29). Then, in the words “do not each one leave his place,” obviously indicates that God and the Father “has many mansions” (John 14:2), according to the word of the Savior. A clear prototype of this was also the holy tabernacle, which received “ten courts” 543. Each will be given a monastery according to his worth and according to his exploits. But having received possession of the local monasteries, they will always dwell in them and will never come to the point of falling away from the blessings given to them from God. A reliable witness to this will be Isaiah the prophet, who speaks about it this way: “Your eyes will see Jerusalem, a rich city, tents that will not be shaken or removed forever” (Is. 33:20). The words that the tents in a rich city will not be shaken indicate the continuity of stay and residence in it. But, in addition, he also says: “Do not do any work on it and sanctify the Sabbath day,” which, as we have often said, indicates the rest and peace of both times and all the holy time dedicated to the celebration of Christ. That on the Sabbath it is by no means proper for us to work, but, on the contrary, to withdraw and free ourselves from everything that calls us to work and exhaustion, we can learn this from other laws. Thus, the book of Exodus says: “For six years you shall sow your land and reap its fruits, and in the seventh year, give it rest and leave it” (Ex. 23:10–11). And in Leviticus: “When you enter into the land that I will give you, and the land that I will give you shall rest, it will be a sabbath for the Lord: six years you will sow your field, and six years you will cut your grapes, and gather your fruit, and in the seventh year there will be a rest for the land, a sabbath for the Lord” (Lev. 25:2-4). It was not the land, of course, that he left to be free from labor, and it was not the land that was actually given the law on this, but by leaving the land alone he tried to provide rest to those who had acquired it. In so many ways he pointed out to us the Feast of Christ, on which those who have spent their lives in the fear of God will achieve perfect and complete freedom in holiness and the most abundant grace of the Spirit. And we can also learn this from the Mosaic commandments. “When your brother or your sister, a Jew or a Jewess, is sold to you, he will serve you for six years, and in the seventh year - release” (Deut. 15:12), that is: having once been slaves to sin and vicious pleasures, having in some way sold ourselves to the devil, having been justified in Christ through faith, we will ascend into true and holy rest, we will be clothed with freedom through grace and we will shine as divine benefits. Discourse on circumcision on the eighth day, revealing in many ways what it means Having already revealed the doctrine of the Sabbath to a sufficient extent, as I believe, and according to the strength of our inherent understanding, we will now transfer the work of research to circumcision, which is close to it, since we have decided that it is appropriate to grasp what is useful from everywhere. In fact, it would be strange and worthy of complete ridicule - not to devote all the work and with full desire to the knowledge of this. Therefore, explaining spiritually, according to the gracious help of God, who reveals everything dark and opens secret and invisible treasuries to us (Is. 45:3), we will again explain what it (circumcision) pointed out to the ancients, as if in a type. Of course, those who have already achieved great perfection and have a higher mind can think and speak about this subject much better than us. But we will offer our listeners whatever comes to our minds, even if it seems lower than it should be, not wanting to harm brotherly love out of shame to appear inferior to anyone, but, on the contrary, knowing what is written: “Give instruction to a wise man, and he will be wiser; teach the truthful, and attention will increase” (Proverbs 9:9). For the first time, God defined the law of circumcision when he said to Abraham: “You shall keep My covenant, you and your seed after you throughout their generations; and this is my covenant that I will make between you and Me, and between your seed after you throughout their generations: every male shall be circumcised, and you shall circumcise your foreskin, and it shall be a covenant between Me and you, and every male child of yours shall be circumcised on the eighth day” (Gen. 17:9-12). Having defined the law about this and decreed that they must certainly circumcise the foreskin, He declares the crime of this law not harmless, presenting this matter as a prototype of the most important sacrament. Therefore, after this He says: “And My covenant will be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant, and the uncircumcised male whose foreskin is not circumcised on the eighth day will be cut off from his seed, because he has broken My covenant” (Gen. 17:13-14). Therefore, the divine Paul argued that circumcision was given to the patriarch as if as a sign and seal of faith in uncircumcision (Rom. 4:11), his purpose and greatest effort, as it turns out, was to prove that calling and justification through faith prevails and precedes the whole statute of the law (of Moses). By this, he seemed to shame the Israelites and persuaded them to consider justification through faith not a crime of the law, but, on the contrary, a return to what was from time immemorial and before any law. But having applied the meaning of this reasoning to what is useful and necessary at the present time, he turns out to also know another certain image of circumcision. Thus, advising the Jews to wean themselves from their usual boasting of the flesh, he writes again: “For no one is publicly (outwardly) a Jew, and not (outwardly) circumcision (one who is) publicly (outwardly) circumcised, but in secret (inwardly) a Jew, and the circumcision of the heart in the spirit, not in the letter, whose praise is not from men, but from God” (Rom. 2:28-29). And indeed, doesn’t he convince them to finally move on to other views on this (circumcision) and doesn’t he want them not to believe that circumcision was given to the forefather (Abraham) only as a “seal of faith in uncircumcision” (Rom. 4:11), but to understand something more and spiritual about it? So, it is necessary to examine and carefully consider what kind of circumcision in the spirit it is, what the symbol of circumcision performed in the flesh is, and for what reason a person is not circumcised on every day that happens, but only on the eighth. No one, of course, will doubt that if our purpose is to strive for union with God through the mediation of Christ, then for this it is appropriate to be purified in advance and sanctified in every possible way by those who, through faith, ascend to union with the all-holy Master. As the best example of this, let us take what God said to holy Moses: “Go down, testify to the people and sanctify them today and tomorrow, and let them wash their clothes and be ready for the third day, for on the third day the Lord will descend on Mount Sinai” (Ex. 19:10-11). Through preliminary sanctification, he expresses the desire that we strive to acquire a good character, and through washing clothes, he indicates the cleansing of the body itself, for the body is, as it were, clothing and clothing for the soul. So, since those who strived - I will return to the first and most important subject of speech - to communion with the holy God were to be sanctified in every possible way, according to what He said: “Be holy, because I am holy” (Lev. 19:2), then by means of circumcision of the flesh the ancients determined the symbol of sanctification. But how? Let's talk about it. Having carefully examined the nature of our (moral) phenomena, we will find that pleasure precedes every sin. We are called to sin by some ardent desire, which always precedes action and anticipates the mind of the soul and thus finally forces us to take the right road to the fulfillment of intention. The truth of this reasoning of ours is revealed by the disciple of Christ, exclaiming like this: “Do not let anyone who is tempted say that I am tempted by God, because God is not tempted by evil and He Himself does not tempt anyone, but everyone is tempted by being carried away and deceived by his own lust; then lust, having conceived, gives birth to sin, and the sin committed gives birth to death” (James 1:13-15). You see how the initial birth of depravity takes place in lusts and the initial seeds of sin are born in obscene pleasures. That is why the Lawgiver and God commands to apply a cutting iron (knife) to that very part of the body in which and through which the generation of lust occurs, so that you, as if through a riddle, learn from here that it will never be possible for us to be pure if we, having perceived in our hearts the sharpest effect of the Divine word and having received the sword of the Spirit in our minds (Heb. 4:12), do not put away from ourselves the lust for everything shameful, nothing Let us not do according to our own wishes, even though they seem to seem to us to be the most pleasant pleasure, but let us obediently do and love what is pleasing to God. If this is the meaning of true circumcision, then to those who are accustomed to be proud of themselves only in the flesh, it will rightly be said: “Circumcise to God and circumcise your hardness of heart, you men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem” (Jer. 4:4). Truly, whoever circumcises his flesh is circumcised for the flesh alone, but whoever has received circumcision in the spirit through faith in Christ is truly circumcised to God alone. But we accept circumcision in the spirit, which brings us into communion with God, on the eighth day, that is, on the day of the Savior’s resurrection, considering this a sign that circumcision in the spirit is the cause of life, and in some way, through the act itself, agreeing to live together with Christ, according to what Paul said: “For you are dead, and your life is hidden with Christ in God: when Christ appears, your life, then are you also with Him appear in glory” ( Col. 3:3–4 ). Indeed, is it not fair to say that he who renounces the pleasures of the world for God must die to the world? The divine Paul also turns out to be like this, saying: “But I do not want to boast except in the Cross of Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world” (Gal. 6:14). Having become partakers of Him through the Spirit, who circumcises all uncleanness in us without hands, we must die to the world and live a better life for God. So, on the eighth day, circumcision is performed - for the sake of the resurrection of Christ, and not before the eighth day, for the giving of the Spirit is not accomplished before the resurrection, but after it or during the resurrection itself, when He breathed on His disciples and said: “Receive the Holy Spirit” (John 20:22). Thus, it is entirely fitting for the Jews to be circumcised by means of iron, for they are still slaves and under the punishing law - and iron is a symbol of punishment - but for us, as free and spiritual, there is purification through the Spirit, destroying all filthiness of our souls and introducing perfect purity of piety through faith. That the highest level of perfection in piety is achieved through true and spiritual circumcision, we can be convinced of this again by considering what is written about the patriarch Abraham. It is written about the forefather Abraham that when he was ninety-nine years old, then God considered it useful to establish the law on circumcision, considering this to be the most obvious sign that circumcision is, as it were, a kind of threshold and preliminary introduction to the perfection of virtue, or rather, clearly indicating that no one will ever achieve this if he does not have the purification that is clearly depicted through circumcision. And in fact, the number one hundred is a symbol of perfection and circumcision is thus (given) before perfection, for preceding it (perfection), it (circumcision) easily leads us to it. However, the benefit of circumcision for us is not limited to this alone, I mean circumcision in the spirit, but we will find it necessary even for those who are free in Christ. And free in Christ, without a doubt, is the person who has cast off the slavery of the devil and the yoke of sin, “breaking their bonds,” as it is written (Ps. 2:3), and having put on the glorious praise of righteousness, free from tyranny, I mean the truth of the faith of Christ. By examining the Holy and Divine Scripture, we will again receive absolutely undeniable evidence that circumcision on the eighth day is appropriate for the free, and not for those who are still slaves. Thus, Ishmael, the son born to the patriarch from the maidservant Hagar, although he was circumcised, was not on the eighth day, but on the thirteenth year. It is written precisely that Abraham circumcised Ishmael his thirteen-year-old son (Gen. 17:25), by which the Divine word indicates to us that the son of enslaved Jerusalem, that is, Israel, is outside both the eighth day and the twelfth. He is outside the eighth day, because he did not want to accept the saving sermon about the resurrection that took place on the eighth day, that is, the Gospel of Christ, through which the benefit of circumcision in the spirit and for faith became undeniable. He is also outside the twelfth, since, as if in a riddle, with his unbelief he expels the sacred choir of the Apostles and prefers to remain not tasting and completely not experiencing the teachings from them. This is how the servant is represented here. And Isaac, free (born) from a free woman, is circumcised on the eighth day, for the free children of the free woman, that is, the Jerusalem above, having accepted the eighth day, that is, the resurrection of Christ, received circumcision in the spirit, which freed them from all sin, and also delivered them from death, as soon as from sin, from which and for which there is death, and leading to the life of Christ. In the same way, examining the book called “Exodus”, we, in addition to what has already been said, will easily see that circumcision in the spirit turns out to be the destruction of death and the aversion of corruption. Blessed Moses was sent by Divine command to the Egyptian tyrant Pharaoh with the message that it was fitting for him to free Israel from such a long slavery. And so he went to do what we said. But “it happened,” it is said, “on the way, at a stopover, an Angel 544 met him and wanted to kill him. But Zipporah, taking a pebble, circumcised the foreskin of her son and said: 545 has become the blood of the circumcision of my child; and she departed from him, because she said, “The blood of the circumcision of my child is become” (Ex. 4:24–26). Here, listen carefully to me. The one called Angel wants to kill and kill Moses, but he barely moves away from him and retreats out of fear of the circumcision of the baby, which he performed with a (sharp) pebble. Zipporah says that she has fulfilled her duty, for “the blood of the circumcision of my child has become,” she cries, frightening the one who wanted to kill Moses. But if there were not some mysterious meaning hidden here, then tell me: what probable meaning could there be in the fact that the priestly leader Moses is saved by circumcising his child, and the destroyer, rushing like a beast, stopped his attack when blood appeared, retreated and turned back? So, I will turn to the presentation of the main idea - the good (of possession) or the praise of one's own circumcision were not sufficient for the salvation of blessed Moses - I can better express it this way: the power of legal circumcision is not able to avert death, which befalls everyone without distinction (man), both bad and good, and the circumcision of the new people, that is, those who believe in Christ, is properly performed in the spirit Zipporah, that is, the Church, even involuntarily frightens and turns away the furious. But how, someone can quite rightly ask, during the spiritual circumcision of the new people, Israel, who has not experienced it, remains (existing)? To this we say that since it concerns Israel’s unwillingness to accept the resurrection of our Savior Christ, death should reign, and forever. But since those who believed accepted (the resurrection of Christ), then for their sake the grace of the resurrection spread to all nature, through circumcision in the spirit, extending in some way to everyone. However, there is a great difference between the resurrection of both. Those who reject faith in Christ and by their unbelief offend the Giver of life will acquire from the resurrection only the ability to revive, but those who do not love the justifying Christ will come to life in condemnation. The admirers of the resurrection of the Savior and the true keepers of the commandments “at the resurrection of life,” as it is written (John 5:29), will leave the earth in which they are (now). Thus, the people, circumcised in spirit, will also send their own good to the unbelievers, for the grace of resurrection is actually due to them, but they will also extend it to others, thanks to God’s wise desire to save all nature. So Paul says that just as we were once disobedient for the sake of mercy 546 Israel, so that through their good obedience we might acquire the grace of Christ, “so they also have now been disobedient (turned out) for our mercy, so that they too may again be shown mercy” (Rom. 11:31), since our Savior Christ, through our faith, sends the benefit of the resurrection to them. What is due to believers is accordingly bestowed upon the whole of nature. That is why the God-speaking Apostle Paul, revealing to us the secret of the future resurrection, says that Christ will rise as the firstfruits; for He rose first from the dead, but “later,” he says, “Christ’s at His coming” (1 Cor. 15:23). First of all, he says, others will have to be resurrected by those united with Him through faith, showing that the resurrection primarily, strictly and exclusively befits them, although it extends to all nature, obviously due to the goodness and love of God, who wanted to completely abolish death. Note that Zipporah does not circumcise the child with iron (an iron knife), for iron serves for punishment and is fitting for those under the punishing law, but with a “pebble” (sharp), as it is written (Ex. 4:25), understood in the sense of a type of Christ, for this indicates the immutability and firmness in everything of the nature of the Only Begotten. Therefore, God and the Father, through the holy prophets, called Christ adamant (diamond), saying this: “Behold, I am putting adamant in the midst of My people Israel” (Am. 7:8). Adamant figuratively again shows us that the Divine and ineffable nature of the Word cannot at all yield to His opponents. Thus, the divine Jesus, after the military leadership of Moses and his death, called to lead (Israel), by Divine definition, made the sons of Israel pure. And since it was fitting for them to rebel against the enemies, he promptly ordered them to arm themselves in advance through circumcision, knowing that otherwise they would not avoid defeat and would not be saved from death by those who had to immediately begin the battle. It is written about him like this: “And the Lord said to Joshua: Make yourself stone knives from a sharp stone, and sit down and circumcise the children of Israel 547; And Joshua made knives of stone and circumcised the children of Israel” (Joshua 5:2–3). The name “stone” here indicates to us the hardness and indestructibility of God’s Word. And its name “sharp” denotes His power to subtly penetrate everything and His sharpest effectiveness, just as Paul, brought up on the Sacred and Divine Scriptures, calls us the Divine Word “living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword” and says that it penetrates “to the dividing of soul and spirit” (Heb. 4:12). So subtle and sharp, penetrating into our hearts through its Own Spirit 548, It frees us from all impurity. By circumcising in an indescribable way that which fills us with great abomination, He makes us both holy and blameless. Please notice here the clearest image of the truth. Jesus who circumcises, and those who undergo it from him, are “every young child,” as it is written, “who today does not know good or evil” (Deut. 1:39). Thus, those who came out of Egypt had Divine wrath as retribution for disobedience and various punishments befell them in the desert, since it was justly pleasing to the All-Holy God not to bring them into the land that he swore to their fathers. Those who came after them, as free from the guilt of disobedience, served as a prototype of the new people, which is why they accept circumcision in the spirit through Christ, while the ancient and former people, that is, Israel, as we just said, comes to destruction. However, the noble and new people are circumcised when Jesus gave a command about this beyond the Jordan, as it is written (Joshua 5:1). So it is in the contemplated truth (of the New Testament), for we cannot at all perceive circumcision in the heart through the Spirit if we have not yet crossed the mysterious Jordan, but are on the other side of the holy waters. After all the people were circumcised at the command of Jesus, the Lawgiver immediately reveals the benefit of this matter and says to holy Jesus: “Today I have taken away the shame of Egypt from you” (Joshua 5:9). How should we determine the benefit of circumcision to Israel? Or what, say, shame was removed from him? Obviously there is slavery, submission through powerlessness to cruelty, and, in addition, labor on clay and making bricks. Look, then, from how many evils the power of circumcision, understood as circumcision in the spirit, frees. It removes the human soul from the hand of the devil, makes it free and absolved from the sin that cruelly dominates us, and reveals it above all the cruelty of evil demons. But he also frees her from clay and making bricks, for he no longer allows her to be defiled by the pleasures of the flesh or to be polluted by earthly labors—he also frees her from death and corruption. And not only are all the good consequences of (spiritual) circumcision contained in this, but it also makes (spiritually circumcised) fellow members of the Divine Nature through the communion of our Savior Christ (2 Pet. 1:4). To what has been said, the writer of the book also adds (Joshua 5:10-11) that “the children of Israel kept the Passover on the fourteenth day of the month, and ate of the wheat of the land (that) unleavened bread and new bread” 549. It is impossible otherwise to partake of the True Lamb, who takes away the sin of the world (John 1:29), and to receive the unleavened and new food of the gospel preaching, than by first passing through the mystical Jordan and receiving circumcision from the Living Word, having first destroyed the shame of Egypt, as if some kind of defilement of the soul, in the manner we have just explained. That God hates the uncircumcised as full of all uncleanness and shame, not, of course, despising the flesh, which He deigned to create, but also firmly and completely, so to speak, devoted to vicious pleasures, because He does not at all reject them - we also learn this when we find Him speaking to Saint Moses and Aaron: “This is the law of the Passover; Every foreigner (let) not eat from her, and every servant of someone else and bought with money - circumcise him (first), and then (yes) eat from her” (Ex. 12:43-44). So, it completely excludes the foreigner, denoting by this one who has not yet entered into communion with Christ through faith; He considers it appropriate to allow someone who is enslaved to sin and in some way sold to the devil to touch sacred meats (only) after first circumcising and cleansing him. After all, we only the pure must commune purely with Christ, as it is beautifully proclaimed in the churches: “Holy to holies.” And indeed, it is completely fair and fitting that, in accordance with the death of our Savior Christ for us and the cleansing of us not by lawful sprinklings, but by His own blood, we should devote our own lives to Him and, as a just duty, decide to live no longer for ourselves, but to repay for this with the entire offering of our souls for sanctification. That the Honest Blood and death of Christ who died for all both saves us from all evil and becomes the cause of spiritual circumcision, through which we acquire communion with God who is above all, we can also see this from the place where the following is written about the leader who was after Moses, I mean Joshua again: “And it came to pass after this, that Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of the Lord, died an hundred and ten years old: and they buried him in within the limits of his inheritance, - there they laid with him in the coffin in which they buried him there, the stone knives with which he circumcised the children of Israel" (Joshua 24:30-31). Blessed Jesus is buried after death, and the knives that served as an image of circumcision are usefully attached to the monument, so that through this we again understand that the grace of spiritual circumcision, this guarantee for us of all heavenly blessings, is attached to the death of our Savior Christ. So, by circumcision on the eighth day, we, not understanding anything Jewish, must understand cleansing through the Spirit, faith and resurrection of Christ - the rejection of all sin, the destruction of death and corruption, the reason for holiness and communion with Christ, the image of freedom, the path and door of communion with God. But we have already collected enough spiritual speculations about this from everywhere, divided, as it turned out to be necessary, into two chapters, of which in each we have completely exhausted the subject appropriate to it. It remains necessary to say why exactly spiritual circumcision is superior to even the veneration of the Sabbath, since circumcision is allowed on the Sabbath, despite the law of rest during it? Rest on the seventh day means rest and removal from all evil and freedom from sin - nothing more than this, but in another way it also means circumcision in the spirit, because rest from evil, I think, obviously includes removal from excess of lusts and numerous pleasures. Therefore, we must find circumcision not only in no way violating the law of the Sabbath, but even promoting it and, as it were, converging with it in one and the same goal, clearly proclaiming that one must rest and be freed from evil, so that both are the same thing, I mean circumcision and rest on the Sabbath, since in both of them, with all justice, one can see a direction towards the same goal. After all, we should not heed the crude prototype of history, but strive spiritually towards the revelation of the Spirit. So, it turns out to be innocent and beneficial to perform circumcision on Saturday, if, according to the words of the Savior, “the priests violate the Sabbath in the church,” performing sacred rites on it and not stopping the usual services, “and they are innocent” (Matthew 12:5), as the Judge Himself testified to them very clearly and with all justice. And indeed, what time can there be at which it would be proper for us to abstain from deeds that are sacred and pleasing to God? At what time is it not harmful to stop caring for godliness? Sabbath rest, therefore, requires the cessation and abandonment of evil and only abominable sin, but does not at all prevent one from enjoying sacred deeds - and what everyone considers useful for his soul, He allows to be done innocently and rightly with all diligence. The same beneficial meaning, as you see, lies in circumcision, for in the cutting off of vicious pleasures there is the appearance of inaction in relation to sin and the beginning of the most sacred service in spirit and truth. But although the difference between them (the Sabbath as a symbol of inaction in relation to sin and circumcision as a symbol of service in spirit and truth) is small, it is nevertheless necessary, for the decree to perform them neither on the (same) seventh day, nor also on the (same) eighth day makes it clear that the meaning of each is somewhat different. And this, it seems to me, has some important meaning. In fact, abstinence from evil is by no means a rejection of evil. Passions often remain inactive in us, not because they are completely outside our soul, but because by chaste reason, as if by some kind of bridle, they are forcibly brought into a calmness that does not correspond to them, just as they involuntarily yield to ascetic labors. And to remove passion from oneself, as far as it befits a person, is, of course, something completely different and much greater than abstinence from passion. In view of the above considerations, it is already possible to understand that before we reject the passions in ourselves, which is indicated by circumcision, or fall through lust, we cannot achieve it until we have first freed ourselves from the active power of evil and put, as it were, into inactivity the movements of the soul directed towards sin. Then, using this as a kind of step, we will easily ascend to a larger and higher (state), I mean the complete cutting off of passions. But abstinence from passion also has some dependence on our own will, for we can stop evil by giving precedence to the better of our own desires. And to be freed from passion depends, of course, not on us, but this is a matter truly befitting of Christ, who suffered for us, in order to transform everyone into a renewal of life (Rom. 12:2). This is why circumcision rightly received an eighth day, so to speak, a renewal day, indicating the time of resurrection. And rest (Sabbath) is the seventh, adjacent (to that), but somewhat behind (standing behind it). This is because the temporary abstinence (from the passions) that is in the (human) will lags somewhat behind and stands a little behind the complete cutting off of the passions. “No yes” Al. "Father" 38 Art. op. author. Greek and ancient words and Al. (Kir. in sense?). "Father" in verse 39 approx. glory acc. late "Father" after "Dade Mi" approx. Arm. lat. one and Ostr. and Al. (Kir. in interpretation?) Kir. to the point? approx. μηδέν before ἐξ αὐτοῦ as D Sir. chickens syn. and Ephr. 234? no. lat. Tert. Wed Russian Vm. αὐτὸ author. and Slav. "e" Jur. Nick. Serb. Zogr. ("I") Const. cheat αὐτὸν late. Mayusk. and Ostr. Mst. Mar. Gal. Al. "and" Note. coincidence Good and Sim. with Sir. syn. in op: “Same...Father.” Vm. “I create” ποιῶ Al. “I create” ποιήσω and vm. "like" trans. "zane", like Pandas. This section is cited in the Acts of the Third Constantinople (VIth Ecumenical) Council of 680. From here to the words: “in a courageous mood” was also quoted at the Lateran Council of 649. This section is also cited in the Acts of the Third Council of Constantinople. This sentence is quoted by Veccus in Epigraph XI. This sentence is quoted by Veccus in Epigraph XIII. This section quotes the Third Council of Constantinople and in parts the Lateran. "Bo" Ancient Greek. Gal. Mar. Zogr. vm. "same" late Greek Spicy Legal Al. - “My Father...” Acute. Gal. Mar. acc. one vm. “Sent Me” according to others Const. Al. and late (some approx. also “Father”), “eternal life” Al. The omission in Sir is noteworthy. Syn. "see the Son". So ancient words. according to St. Al. “coming” – exactly, Russian. "comes" So ancient, but St. Al. in both cases the same: "in the form of" . Aubert and Migne read ἀποφατιϰῶς – negatively, in a negative form (i.e. “no one” as opposed to the positive “all”), but Pusey on the basis of the manuscript. corrects in ἀποφαντιϰῶς. ῾Ολϰός – skating rink, a machine used to drag ships on land. "Yadosha" Const. and late in ancient times and Al. "Yesha", Art. 50 so cheat. and at St. Al. acc. Ancient Greek vm. ancient “lest he die” (without “and”). At Kir. rep. to VI, 55. "Live" ancient (Island Mar. Zagr. Gal. etc.) “animal” Const. Al. late “Izhe” is not for them. ancient and Al. “(From) heaven descended” from Al. "Forever" Poignant. Mar. Zogr. vm. "eyelids" Gal. and others. Vm. ζήσει as one, understandably. Cyrus ζήσεται like others, and Cyrus. to VI, 68. “And - the same”, as some, - the other is one “and”, or “the same” and Al., or “bo” glory. and Kir. by 17, 13, or op. - Wm. "I will give" δωσω in Sim. “I give” δω as a goth. and approx. "you" as in no. and Kir. to 17, 13. The words “I’ll give you to the south” are not read. and ancient gr. and Jur., but other glory. and Kir. to 13, 17 and in Contra synousiastas, Pusey, III. 481 cheats acc. late Mayusk. Έν ϰεφαλίδι βιβλίου lit. “in the chapter of the book, book, book.” Alone, resp. Heb., they mean "roll of Ak". ἐν εἰλήμττι βιβλίου, slav. Apostle Christian. 12th century Carp. 13. and Psalm. 13th–14th centuries: “in the book retinue.” – other “volume, department of the book” Sim. ἐν τῷ τείχει τοῦ ὁϱισμοῦ σοῦ, – third “chapter” or “beginning of the book” (the beginning of the book of Genesis, the initial book of the Bible?) in capite libri Vulg. Sire. Ethiopian. Arab. no. glory “ahead of the books, in the chapter of the book”, others “in the beginning” (Ap. 14th century and Ps. 15th century); Wed Russian, - current glory. “in the main book” is taken from St. Al. and some late App. and Ps. (Amphilochia the Apostle and Psalter). Not found in Greek when applied to books. writers, this term could come either from the appearance of the decoration on the top of the cylindrical case in which the scroll was placed, or from the division of books into large (volumes, chapters) and small (chapters) sections. Another translation is also possible: carrying (literally: burdening, giving birth) within oneself a foundation (principle, beginning), which completely destroys corruption (Latin translation). "Jews" ancient and Al. vm. now. "Jew" Ancient approx. "seoi", like Cyrus. to the point and to VI, 67 acc. no. ancient gr., but Al. Const. etc. not to them. At Al. “getting worse.” Mst. "naturally", Gal. “Yes. And drink” Mar. Zogr. "and not" Gal. "neither" Al. “His blood does not give life to you.” Al. resp. authentic So Sin. Wat. and some, but approx. "Novago" Al. and more Vulg. Copt. Sire. (both Afr. and Sin.) Eph. Arm. Irin. Cyprus. Orig. glory "Eternal life" St. Al. vm. "belly" or "belly". "True" ἀληϑής acc. one Greek and Zogr. Reim. (My body is truly meat and my blood is “drink of fresh water”) and St. Al. vm. other Greek and glory "truly" ἀληϑῶς. "Drinking" Reim. and Al. vm. etc. "beer". It sprouted, fermented, soured. From this we see that the interpretation of the Gospels by St. Kirill started from the fourth. The name of the Eucharistic bread. These and further words are important from a liturgical-archaeological point of view. So is St. Al. ἐσμέν acc. more and ancient vm. glory “we will” ὦμεν – some. some and Vulg. Έν τῷ acc. ancient and more and St. Al. and Karp. and many slav., but others slav. omit resp. no. some Greek and Vulg. This point is quoted from Veccus in Epigraph V. “Descended from heaven” arrangement of words accordingly. Greek to Reim. and Al. "In the century" resp. Greek Spicy Mar. Zogr. Al. "This bread" dist. resp. Greek at Al. ζήσει ancient gr. Reim. "live" - ​​vm. ζήσεται. Slav. “will live” – μοῦ approx. Hymn. min. at St. Cyrus. only in one codex, but the oldest (12th century Barber.). "Ubo" Const. and late vm. "same" ancient The word "this" acc. ancient gr. and ancient words vm. late Greek and slav.: “This is the word” Al. "Listen" ancient resp. Greek ἀϰούειν vm. Al. and late "listen" “Give life” - St. Al. vm. "who lives like that" Gal. Ass. etc. and “lives” Ostr. Legal etc. or: “vivifies” Mar. “revives” – late. - Al. "won't make it" Spicy Gal. Mar. etc. “the flesh is of no use”, Jur.: “no success”. Note Sire. syn.: “The spirit is (the one or that) that gives life to the body (sic.), but you say: the body is of no use.” "Verbs" – λελάληϰα ancient. and author. and Ostr. Mar. Zogr. vm. λαλῶ – others and Gal. Mst. Al.: “I verb. Yes” – Al. vm. "essence" etc. So no., but in 1:32–33 Cyrus. approx.: “and in blood - and in blood”, as in others. Wed. approx. at 1:32–33, Trans. 1, 194. Al. "of you". Gal. and Al. "netsyi", others: "friends, unites, ethers". Al. “originally” – exactly vm. "from the beginning" Ostr. "excavate" other Wm. now. "cue" Al. "which" . – ancient: “who”. Al.: “betray” – resp. Thurs. ὁ παϱαδιδούς. D and some. vm. ancient: “want to betray” – ὁ παϱαδόσων – alone and St. Cyrus. or ὁ παϱαδιδόναι א and some. So the ancient word, but Al. “many disciples - and not yet walk with Him” resp. Cyrus. Al.: "two..." Sim. "take away" Greek ὑπάγειν. Without οὖν acc. author. Greek and ancient words, but Al. "same", late "bad" ‛Ως ὥϱα acc. author. Thurs. LXX in Sin. Wat. al.: “like the (blooming) “time” (of the year) on the mountains “like the feet” of one who brings good news to the preaching of peace” vm. other Thu. and glory: “since the “feet” of those who bring good news of peace are “red” (ὥϱαιοι) on the mountains (like – ὡς).” This place is wonderful for its diversity. Instead of ὁ ὑιὸς τοῦ ϑεοῦ τοῦ ζῶντος, as read. Cyrus. to the point twice and then to 6:70–71 at the end of the chapter, - manuscript. text by Cyrus. has: ὁ ἅγιος other ὑιὸς τοῦ ϑεοῦ without τοῦ ζῶντος. ‛Ο Χϱιστός omission. א BCDL Space Nonn. 17. "b" . Cyprus. Sire. Kur., - Read: SZ. late oz. It. more Vulg. Sire. utr, syn. and Jerus. saga Copt. Goth. ef. Arm. You. Zlat. Cyprus. ὁ ἅγιος א BC*DL Cosm. Nonn. Sag. Copt. instead of ὁ ὑιός: C3 and later, oz. more It. Vg. Sire. all Arm. Goth. Ef. You. Zlat. Cyprus. τοῦ ϑεοῦ without approx. τοῦ ζῶντος: א BCDL pl. min. It. more Vg. Sire. chickens and syn. saga Copt. Arm. ef. Non. Space – from arr.: late oz. Sire. utr. and Jer. Goth. You. Zlat. Cyprus. Ef. at Valt's. From the glory only in Mar. “Christ” (HS) is written above the line, and Ass.: “highest”, - and in Ostr. Mst. and Sim. op. “and by knowledge” as in German. Greek Al. op. "Jesus" resp. no. Al.: “from” (better) “one of you”, ancient “one of you” according to. one vm. now. “one of you” like others. “Betray Him” - ancient words. and Al. acc. one vm. now. “betray Him” as in others. Slav.: “and Jesus walked after these” or “and x. to this day I." acc. var. Greek – Zogr. Gal. Mst. “with them” is an erroneous translation. Al. exactly: “you didn’t want to...” and: “before” vm. "like" Spicy Mar. Zogr. Gal. Mst. Al. "skinopygia", type. weeks 12th century “tabernacle of veneration”, Const. 1383: “respect for the tabernacle”, Ostrozh. “reverence for the canopy” and later. 15th–17th centuries and now. Vm. now. "Judea" ancient and Al. "Jews" "Ubo" late. vm. "same" ancient Al. "rekosha" Slav. approx. "your" to "deeds" acc. one Greek Al. "look back" - “What’s going on in secret” according to one and Ostr. (“nothing”), others “secretly nothing”, Al. "what" Al. "in boldness" Maybe vm. σοφῶς should be σαφῶς – “obviously”. Al. exactly: "verb". Vm. late "wretched" ancient and Al. "same". Vm. "come" Al. exactly: "nasta". Ancient better: “and time”, Al.: “the same”. Ancient and Al.: “is ready” acc. author. and for almost everyone, instead of late: “ready to eat.” St. Al.: “for sure” - better. Dr. read: must leave evil (which appears) as a result of hatred (reproached towards the accuser). Slav. "My time" according to late oz. “It will be fulfilled” – Gal. Mar. Zogr. Legal Type. Al. vm. "come closer" Ostr. Mst. – in Al.: “not at home” like some ancient gr. and “for the holiday” - in both cases. The most ancient code of works of St. Cyril (Barak. 12th century) omission. "Himself" acc. one Greek and ancient words vm. "to them" other Greek Al. ("they may abide") Const. and now. "yako" – ὡ before "tai" read. ancient Al. and now. acc. one ancient Greek BL. Vulg. Const. Cup. utr. and St. Cyrus. Wat. code. But in the interpretation and in other codes. St. Cyrus. no cheat acc. א D... Sag. Ef. Sire. chickens and syn. and glory Simon. 12th century "Jews" ancient, and Al. vm. "Jew" late and heat Vm. "people" like some Greek. Al. "to the people" like Sin. and other Greek (which is better) - and “the people” as well as Cyrus. resp. author. vm. "peoples" glory. resp. rare Thurs. (same as Vulg.). Ancient “neither which, nor which”, Al. “not one with boldness.” Al. more precisely: “I will already celebrate the holiday - in the sanctuary.” Cyrus. cheat οὖν acc. ancient and author. vm. ϰαὶ late oz. and glory "Jews" - all ancient words. and Al. "news" Al. and Const. vm. ancient "can" Spicy Mst. Legal Tun. Al.: “not studying” vm. Ass. Mar. Zogr. Gal. "don't study" ’Αϰϱοάσεως and to the point. 9vm. ζηλώσεως Book. Prem. “ear of zeal, zealous”, glory. "zeal", rus: "jealousy". In the text Cyrus. omitted ϑέλη – “wants”, but like this: ποιῇ – “creates” (there are no options for this). But to the point. words: ἐπὸν βούλοισϑε ἀϰολουϑῆσαι ϑελήμασι prep. correct reading. Al: “I say “not” (?) about myself” funny. ἤ with μη. St. Al.: “speak about yourself” according to Greek vm. ancient word: “verb about yourself.” Late: "on my own" . Al.: “look for it” according to Thurs. ὁ δὲ vm. Old English: “and seek” ϰαι ὁ. “There is no untruth in Him” according to author. Greek Ostrom. Mst. Al. vm. - “there is no unrighteousness in Him” Mar. Zogr. Gal. and now. acc. other Thu. "Dade" late Al.: “gave” – better, ancient: “give(b)”. Al.: “of you” is better. Slav. approx. "and speech" acc. Greek var. To the point. there is also: ϰαὶ ἐν σαββάτῷ πεϱιτέμνεται ἄνϑϱωπος as some. δι’ τοῦτο in other rel. to previous in the third omission. Al.: "gave". "Faces" Mar. Zogr. "face" Gal. Simon. Mst. FACES Sharp "right" Al. Simon. - better. Ex.37:1 ( John 36:8 ). Instead of αὐλαίας St. Cyrus. reads αὐλάς – erroneously. Op. ϰυϱίου as codex Ambrosianus. In Vat. code. Cyrus. vm. ἔστη read. in both cases: ἔστι. In Hebrew: “you are a bridegroom of my blood” and: “a bridegroom of blood by circumcision” and Ak. Sim. Feud. Lat. incorrect: non “credidimus in misericordiam” Israelis, – Pusey incorrectly assumes conjecture: ἀπειϑείας instead of: εὐπειϑείας. Ἐϰ δευτέϱου – available for the second time, resp. euro in Alex. Codex, St. Kirill does not read acc. Vatik. When reviewing this passage, the dogmatic question about the recurrence of baptism could have been in mind. Lat. inaccurate: pertingat usque ad nostrum spiritum. Unleavened bread from new wheat. You might be interested in: