Книга девятая

John 12:49–50. Because I did not speak from Himself, but the Father who sent Me, He gave Me a commandment, what I should say and what I should say. And behold, as His commandment is, there is eternal life. As I say I, as the Father speaks to Me, so I say 887 He brings to the memory of the Jewish people what was foretold about Him by Moses, and through this he decently reproaches and, revealing their inherent wickedness, clearly denounces the fact that frantic mockery of the law itself, although they recognized it as given by God, means nothing to them. And about what he said through Moses about Christ, although everyone knows this, I will still say it for the benefit of interpretation. “I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers” (Deut. 18:18-19), that is, a Lawgiver and Mediator between God and people, “and I will give My word in His mouth, and He will speak to them according to what I command Him, and whoever does not listen to what the Prophet says in My name, I will exact from him.” So, at the same time, our Lord Jesus Christ reproaches the stubborn people of Judea for opposing God and the Father Himself, and in the words that He received the commandment from Him and did not speak from Himself, He clearly shows Himself to be a Prophet, foretold in the law and proclaimed by the voice of God and the Father from very ancient times. Calls them, although disobedient, to remember that if they do not want to obey His words, they will probably undergo inevitable punishment and endure what God has spoken. In fact, those who transgress the holy commandment of God and the Father and reject the life-giving word of God our Savior Christ should not find themselves in the most terrible disasters and remain unparticipated in the life given by Him, rightly hearing what was said in the voice of the prophet: “Earth, earth! Hear, hear the word of the Lord: behold, I will bring trouble upon this people, the fruit of their disgust, because you have not heeded My law, and you have rejected My word” (Jer. 6:19). We find the Jews subject to a double charge, for they did not honor the law itself, although it was considered holy and dear to them, without accepting what was proclaimed by him (Christ) - and they did not heed the words of Christ our Savior, although he openly proclaimed that He is the Prophet clearly preached by the law (Deut. 18:18), because He says that He uses words emanating from God and the Father. And let no one think that in the words of the Lord, that He does not say anything from Himself, but from the Father, there may be a disparagement of Him in any respect, either in essence or in Divine dignity, but, firstly, let him consider again and answer our question: will anyone consider it fitting for the name and work of prophecy to Him who really is and is considered the true God by nature? Anyone, even the very simple ones, I believe, will reject this, considering it incredible to be called a prophet to God who speaks in the prophets, for He Himself “multiplied visions,” according to what is written (Hos. 12:10), and “was made like in the hands of the prophets.” So, as soon as He, having assumed the name and form of slavery similar to us, was called a prophet in our likeness, then the law necessarily assimilated to Him what befits a prophet, that is, to ask something from the Father and receive a commandment, “what to say and what to say.” In addition, I consider it necessary to say one more thing: although the Jews highly revered the law, believing that it was spoken from God, they did not accept the words of the Savior, who transformed the ancient laws into spiritual worship. What was the reason that they did not want to accept the transformation of prototypes into truth? That they did not know the True God by nature and did not have it in their minds that, being the Word of the Father, the Only Begotten bore our flesh for our sake, for otherwise, by immediately worshiping God and immediately turning to everything pleasing to Him, they would have shown the glory due to Him. On the contrary, the unfortunate believed that He was one of our kind and, being a simple man, thought so much about himself that he even tried to destroy the very laws given by God and the Father. Thus, they shamelessly told Him: “We do not stone You for a good deed, but for blasphemy, because You, being a man, make Yourself God” (John 10:33). So, according to His great mercy and wise providence, our Lord Jesus, distracting the listeners from their inherent suspicion, as if from a simple and only human face, transfers the speech to the indisputably and according to all Worship, I mean God and the Father, in every possible way wanting to shame the ignorant heart of the Jews and in various ways trying to direct the foolish to the desire to know what is true and proper. The same words and reasoning could be used by anyone to repel the slander of wicked heretics, who think that the Son should be in any way less in comparison with His Parent, since He claims that He does not speak anything from Himself, but a commandment was given to Him and He speaks as He heard. I think this is sufficient. However, I will say something else to expose the unbridled audacity of their language. Perhaps, if you wish, omitting in the present case the talk about the Economy with the flesh, we can prove that it is rightly and beautifully said about the Only Begotten Himself: “Because I do not speak on My own behalf, but the Father who sent Me, He gave Me a commandment, what I will say and what I will say.” He Himself, the living and hypostatic Word of God and the Father, necessarily speaks out what is in Him, and, bringing to light what is pleasing to His Own Parent, says that He receives it as a commandment. That this is really so and not otherwise can be seen in ourselves. After all, the spoken word, consisting of a combination of words and utterances and expressed outwardly through articulate sound, as if receiving a commandment from our mind, reveals what is in it (the mind). And this happens in a short time, because what the mind understands, it at the same time conveys it to the voice, which, bringing out what is inside, reveals what is contained in the mind, without changing anything in what is commanded to it (the word - the mind). What is therefore strange, could anyone tell them, if the Word, being the Son of God the Father, not like ours - for God is beyond all comparison - reveals the will of Him who begat Him? And doesn’t the prophet say that the most appropriate name for Him is called “The Messenger of the Great Council” (Is. 9:6)? But I think this is clear too. Therefore, both in terms of essence and dignity. The Only Begotten does not suffer any harm, even if it is said that He received a commandment from God the Father. After all, we ourselves often command something to others and command them to do it, but for this reason we are not deprived of our likeness and do not cease to be people, as less of the same essence, both before the commandment and after the commandment. But, you will say, although they remain consubstantial, yet with us those who are inferior serve (others) in dignity. To this I will answer you regarding the Only Begotten. Now, if it had not been written about Him that “being in the form of God, He did not consider it an abduction to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a servant, and being found in the form of a man, He made Himself of no reputation” (Phil. 2:6-8), then your objection could have any significance. But if the image of submission and humiliation is obvious, then why do you recklessly reproach Him who was subjected to this state for our sake? So, having presented a comprehensive explanation of the correctness of the dogmas, we affirm that in the proposed saying our Lord Jesus Christ spoke providentially. :glava13 John 13:1. Before the feast of Easter, Jesus knew that His hour had come, that He should pass from this world to the Father, love those who are in this world, love them to the end 888 For many, the reasoning contained in the above words is very unclear and difficult to interpret, and it is not at all simple, as some might think, that it makes sense. In fact, why does the divine Evangelist indicate now and how he notes something extremely important in the words: “Before the feast of Easter, knowing that His hour has come, let him pass from this world to the Father?” And what do the following words mean: “Having loved His own who are in the world, He loved them to the end?” In this saying, which contains considerable darkness, I think He wants to say something such that the Savior, before His saving suffering, although knowing that the time had already come for His transition to heaven, showed the most perfect love for His own in this world. And if it is necessary to expand a little more widely on the meaning of these words, I will repeat again what I said recently. So, he says, having the opportunity to escape the fury of the Jews and the wickedness of the crucifiers, He showed the most perfect love for His own in the world, for He did not at all refuse to lay down His life for them. And that we really need to see in this the most perfect measure of love, I will present as a witness our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, saying to the holy disciples: “This is My commandment, that you love one another, as I have loved you; For no one has greater love than this, but he who would lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:12-13). However, in another way, the holy Evangelists always carefully tried to show that our Lord Jesus Christ foretold the time of His suffering, so that those who are accustomed to think differently would not disparage His glory by saying that He was taken because of His weakness and, having unwittingly fallen into the snare of the Jews, thus suffered a most terrible death. Therefore, the word of the saints is provident and profitable. John 13:2–5. And the supper that had been, the devil had already put into the heart of Judas Simon Iscariot, so that He might betray Him, knowing, as the Father had given all things to Him in His hand and as He came from God and came to God: arose from the supper and put on the vestments and received the lention girded: then he poured water into the laver and began to wash the disciples’ feet and wipe them with lention, which belted 889 The Savior uproots pride from our souls, as the most shameful of vices and worthy of the greatest disgust from everyone. He knew that nothing usually harms the soul as much as this especially nasty and despicable passion, which the Lord of all Himself, as if as an enemy, rightly opposes, “for the Lord opposes the proud,” according to the word of Solomon (Proverbs 3:34). And especially the holy disciples needed a modest and humble mood and thought, not very much concerned about empty honor. Having considerable reasons to suffer from such an illness, they would easily have slipped if they had not received (from the Lord) great help. After all, this fierce beast of pride usually almost always attacks those who have something honorable. But what is more glorious than the holy Apostles? Or what could be more honorable than friendship with God? On the contrary, this passion does not concern those who mean nothing among people, and it almost always avoids those who have nothing worthy of competition, and is inaccessible to those who are no different from others. Indeed, how can any of these people extol anything? On the contrary, the one who is worthy of competition usually falls into pride and therefore places himself above his neighbor, unreasonably assuming that he is very different from others, as if he has achieved some kind of considerable and wonderful valor and has completed a path of life that is extraordinary and inaccessible to others. If, therefore, the disease of pride usually occurs in those who have something honorable, then should not Christ have become a model of humility for the holy Apostles, so that, having the example and image of the Lord of all, they themselves would transform their minds according to the will of God? So, this ailment could only be destroyed in no other way than through clear learning to consider oneself so inferior to others in dignity as to place oneself even as a slave, without fear of performing the most appropriate service for a slave, even by washing the feet of the brothers and girding with a towel for the sake of necessity. Notice, in fact, how humiliating this service is, I mean from the point of view of worldly morals and external customs. So, Christ became a model of a modest and humble mood for all people, and not for just the disciples. Therefore, the divine Paul, taking Him as a model, exhorts this, saying: “Let each of you be wise in these things, as is also in Christ Jesus” (Phil. 2:5), and also: “With humility of mind, considering one another superior to one another” (Phil. 2:3). This is because the law of love and unanimity is humility. But in order to raise the idea of ​​​​this act (of Christ) to its due height and so that we do not think that something of little importance was accomplished by Christ, the divine Evangelist again finds it necessary to expose to wonder his inherent glory and power and possession of everything by means of what he says (further): “Knowing that the Father has delivered all things into His hands.” Although, he says, and not unaware of the fact that He has power over everything and “that He came from God,” that is, from the essence of God and the Father, “and goes to God,” that is, again returns to heaven, obviously sitting with His Parent, He was subjected to such humiliation that He girded himself with a towel and washed the feet of the disciples. So, having from here the most excellent example of reverence and the most glorious image of love for one another, let us be humble, beloved, and begin to think that brothers have greater advantages compared to us, even if we were kind. This great example convinces us to think and desire. John 13:6–8. She came to Simon Peter and said to Him: Lord, have You washed my nose? Jesus answered and said to him: What I do, do not weigh it now, but you will understand from now on. Peter said to Him: Thou shalt not wash my foot forever 890 In all, one might say, the Scriptures, everyone can see that the movements (of the soul) of Peter were always almost more fiery and much more swift towards reverence. So now, following his disposition and character, he rejects this instruction of humility and love reaching the last limit, imagining in his mind who he was by nature and who, on the other hand, is the One who brought him the laver and did not refuse to fulfill the duty of a servant. This act of the Savior greatly frightens him, as it is difficult to accept for faith, even if it was visible to many eyes. Indeed, who will not shudder to learn that He, who together with the Father is the Lord of all, performed such a humiliating service to His disciples that He Himself, quite voluntarily, wanted to do something that seems to occupy the very last place among the servants, as an example and model of humility? So, the divine disciple was afraid of such a difficult feat and declared his refusal as the fruit of his usual and characteristic reverence. Having not yet understood the reason for the Lord’s action, he thinks that the Lord is doing something unnecessary and cares only about the simple peace of the body for them. After all, washing your feet partly helps with this and somewhat alleviates the fatigue from walking. That is why he stops (the Lord) very ardently, saying: “Lord, do you wash my feet?” After all, he says, it was proper for us to do this as servants by nature, and not for You, the Lord of all. But Christ postpones the explanation of this act until His time, because He had quite sufficient reason for Peter to understand what He had done “after this,” he says, obviously, when He makes the most extensive explanation of it. Likewise, this, together with others, will bring us considerable benefit. See how, when the time called for action, He put off words, and when, on the contrary, time called for a word, He stops the action. Everything must belong to the appropriate and proper time. So, when Peter rejected and resolutely refused that (the Lord) would not wash his “feet forever,” the Savior points out the harm that would come from here, saying: John 13:8. Jesus answered him: If I do not wash you, have no part with Me. As for the obvious and simple meaning of this saying, it is this: if, he says, you do not accept this strange and extraordinary instruction in humility, then you will not find a part and inheritance with Me. But since our Lord Jesus Christ often, taking advantage of even small occasions in words, makes a general explanation and, widely disseminating the meaning of a single object or something privately and separately said, brings abundant benefit to those who contemplate, then here, too, one must think, He is saying that if someone does not wash through His grace the filth of sin and crime, he will not participate in the life given by Him, and will remain not to have tasted the Kingdom of Heaven. For it is not fitting for the unclean to enter the highest mansions, but for those who have a clear conscience through love for Christ and are sanctified in the Spirit through holy baptism. John 13:9. Simon Peter said to Him: Lord, not only my nose, but also my hand and head. Having just shown us such resistance and clearly refusing to wash his feet, he now offers not only them alone, but “both his hands and his head.” If, he says, through this I must fall away from fellowship with You and find myself deprived of the benefits of the promise, unless I agree to allow You, who desires and has decided to do this, to wash my feet, then I will leave the rest to You, refusing such terrible harm. So, the fruit of reverence was an initial refusal and great fear of the difficulty of the matter, and not at all opposition to the Lord’s commands. Imagining in his mind, as I said, the dignity of the Savior and the insignificance of his nature, he renounced at first. But having learned the harm, he immediately moves on to the desire of what is pleasing to the Lord. Notice again and accept what is perfect as an example of benefit. After all, although he said: “You will never wash my feet,” he immediately retreats from this intention, no longer thinking about the fact that he should appear true to us by sticking to his words, but that he will receive much greater and stronger harm from keeping his words. Therefore, one should beware of speaking hastily and thoughtlessly and not trying with great effort to adhere to a renunciation of something made out of frivolity, but if someone happens to say something hastily, and then, thanks to persistence (in fulfilling the word), it turns out to be harmful to something good and necessary, let him see in the interpreted saying that it is much better not to speak at all and (if already said) not to insist in vain on what he gave his word, but it is better to try to do useful. Everyone, I think, will say that it is better for us to be accused of words than to allow necessary objects to be damaged. And let the oath be completely absent from our language, due to hasty and thoughtless words, as well as the necessary changes that sometimes occur. It is truly worthy of any competition, everyone will say, to have a careful tongue and rarely deviate to the wrong. And since this is a difficult thing to achieve, the word of God itself showed us this, for “no one can tame the tongue” (James 3:8), according to what was said. We will pronounce words without oaths. Then, if circumstances force one to commit a crime, there will be less guilt and the offense will be subject to a weaker charge. Such a person, I think, will easily receive leniency from God in view of the frivolity that is almost always inherent in our thoughts. “Who will consider the fall?” - according to what is written (Ps. 18:13), or how could an earthly man not sin if his word easily deviates from everything? After all, our tongue is not easy to restrain. John 13:10–11. Jesus said to him: he who is exhausted does not only need to wash his nose, but is completely clean: and you are clean, but not all: knowing Him who betrayed Him, for this reason I say that not all are clean 891 He takes an example from what usually happens among us and very timely reproaches the traitor, teaching a person to change his mind and change to a better state. After all, although He does not yet openly expose the guilt of his inherent malice, His speech has acute penetration. In fact, by testifying to the complete purity of others (the disciples), He obviously casts suspicion on the one who is not (the traitor) and points to him as unclean. And indeed, to His other disciples, the constancy of being with Him, and the work of following Him, and firmness in faith, and the fullness of love for Christ brought purity. And to this other (traitor) both the guilt of insatiable love of money and the weakness of disposition towards our Lord Jesus Christ introduce indelible filth and bring impurity of incomparable evil will. Therefore, when Christ says: “You are pure in nature, but not all of you” - then He makes, although hidden, but useful, a reproof for the traitor. After all, although he did not express it clearly, as we just noticed, there was a conscience in everyone, judging and piercing the sinner and, as if by necessity, calling on the power of the spoken words against the guilty one. Understand what good intentions and Divine longsuffering this matter was accomplished. After all, if he had said clearly who would betray Him, He would have made the others (the disciples) enemies of him (the traitor), and perhaps something irreparable could have happened and he would have been subjected to premature punishment, as soon as someone would have been inflamed with zeal for piety and decided to prematurely put to death the traitor of the Lord. So, having used veiled speech and given sharp reproof to his conscience, He showed the incomparable greatness of His inherent long-suffering, for although He knew that He had an unkind and unwise disciple, suffering from the poison of devilish bitterness and thinking only about how to betray Him, yet He honored him on an equal basis with others and even washed his feet, preserving His love to the last limit and before the guilt reached end without inflicting His wrath. You can see here too the dignity inherent in His Divine nature. After all, although God knows the future, for this reason he does not impose premature punishment on anyone. On the contrary, being patient for a long time, when he sees that nothing helps them (sinners) and they remain in their chosen vices, then he finally punishes, revealing this (punishment) to be a matter of their (sinners) evil will, and not of His own will or desire. That is why Ezekiel says: “As I live, says the Lord, I do not want the death of the dying, so that he may turn from his evil way and live for him” (Ezek. 18:32, 33:11). So, long-suffering and merciful, our Lord Jesus Christ, still allowing the traitor to communicate with His other disciples, although “the devil had already put it in his heart to betray Him” (John 13:2) - and this, by the way, the Evangelist considered it necessary to indicate at the beginning - however, he also washed his feet, making his wickedness unpardonable, so that his apostasy would be the fruit of his inherent evil. John 13:12–15. When the minds of the disciples’ feet had come and they had accepted their garments and lay down again, I said to them: Do you know what I have done to you? You call Me: Lord and Teacher! and you say good, there is more. If I have washed your feet, O Lord and Teacher, you too should wash each other’s feet: I have given you an image, that as I have done to you, you also do 892 Now he clearly expresses the reason for His action and says that for our benefit he gave this “example” of incomparable humility. Presenting the vice of pride as inexcusable, He considers it necessary to show off the dignity of His face. And in this everyone will see the incomparable greatness of humility. Indeed, what is base in itself and means nothing, how could it be subjected to humiliation or where could what lies below descend? After all, by its nature it can only bring down from top to bottom. And what is on top, if it turns out to be in humiliation, arouses surprise, for it has descended into something that was not. So, our Lord Jesus Christ, giving His disciples, or rather, through them to everyone living on earth, the necessary lesson of humility, does not simply say that as I washed your feet, so you should do. No, He first displays His dignity and, pointing to His inherent natural glory, by His very deed puts to shame the love of glory. After all, “You,” he says, “yourselves call Me: Lord and Teacher, and you say it well, for such am I.” Notice how, between the words, he took care in advance of the dispensation of the believers and warned against the slander of the wicked heretics. After all, when he said to His disciples: “You call Me: Lord and Teacher,” so that no one would think that by nature He is not Lord and not Teacher, but has this name as if as an honor from His future followers, he considered it necessary to add, destroying their suspicions: and say well, for such am I. It is not just the simple name of honor that the Lord contains within himself, as, for example, we, remaining slaves by nature, but by grace are adorned with names that exceed our nature and dignity. But He is by nature Lord, ruling over everything, like God, to whom it is said in one place in the voice of the Psalmist: “For all are in bondage to You” (Ps. 119:91). He is also a Teacher by nature, “for all wisdom is from the Lord” (Sir.1:1) and all understanding is through Him. As wisdom, He makes spiritual beings wise, and He instills in every rational creature, both heavenly and earthly, the intelligence appropriate to it. Just as He Himself, being Life by nature, animates everything capable of life, so, since He is the Wisdom of the Father, He imparts to everyone the gifts of wisdom, that is, reason and all knowledge of good things. So, the Son is by nature the Lord of all and the Teacher. When, therefore, Great in glory and such as I am, I do not hesitate to stoop to such humiliation that I even washed your feet, then how can you, he says, begin to refuse to do this to each other? This teaches that one should not be proud of the honor of others, but think that a fellow servant is superior to him and prevails in everything. Yes, a very excellent instruction, for I do not think that anyone could indicate anything equal to the habit of humbly philosophizing, and nothing divides brothers and friends more than the insatiable desire for trivial differences. After all, we almost always strive for more and empty worldly honors make our fickle mind get carried away by more brilliant ones. Therefore, in order for us to free ourselves from such an illness and stop such disgusting desires - after all, deception and nothing else is the passion of love of glory - let us perceive in our minds the King of all Christ Himself, who washed the feet of the disciples, so that we too wash each other’s feet. Through this, every kind of pride will be eliminated and every kind of worldly love of glory will be removed. And indeed, if the Lord by nature appears as a servant, then how can a slave not want to suffer something decent for him and not be subjected to the most extreme punishment? John 13:16–17. Amen, amen, I say to you: there is no great servant of his master, nor a great messenger of the one who sent him. If you know this, you are blessed, if you create 893 Christ now reinforces the meaning of His act with necessary laws (oaths) 894 and represents the crime of the saving commandment as very dangerous, for reinforced by an oath makes the violation of this unpardonable. Therefore, he says, it turns out to be an unforgivable fault for servants if they do not want to think about the same things with their masters. After all, greed, and nothing else, is to seek more and exceed our dignity. In the same way, for the Apostles, the desire to be greater than the One who sent them should rightly serve as the same guilt. To the extent of all the glory, the mood of the Sender is sufficient for them. And this means nothing more than to say something like this: you will rightly appear ridiculous before the Divine court if you refuse, although you have received the common name of slaves, out of pride, to do to each other what I do to you, although by nature you are God and Lord. After all, it is truly absurd, even more so - not without the height of madness, for servants who have a much lower dignity compared to the Lord and the Sender, to be ashamed of slavery to each other. So, “if this,” he says, you know, that is, if you can clearly understand what I say, “you are blessed if you do this.” After all, everyone will say that not knowing virtue, but doing it, is more worthy of love and deserves competition. I even think that it is better, perhaps, not to know at all, than, with knowledge, to bind the mind with laziness and not want to do what someone has recognized as the best and fair, according to the word of the Savior: “He who did not know the will of his master (slave) and did not do the punishment will be few, but the one who knew and did not do the punishment will be many” (Luke 12:47-48). After all, for someone who did not know at all, even if it happened to be subjected to some kind of punishment for negligence, it would not be very strange to ask for at least a little leniency, but for someone who knew this very knowledge would lead to an even more severe condemnation, for he turned out to be negligent when nothing prevented him from fulfilling his duty. So it is fitting for those who know to do. Then, clothed with the perfect glory of life in Christ, we will receive a timely and complete reward. So the Savior said that he who created and taught will be called great, and quite rightly, in the Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 5:19). And in fact, what does he lack in piety? Whoever has the full glory of good deeds, should he not receive the most perfect gifts as a reward from God? Therefore, when knowledge is a companion to good deeds, then, undoubtedly, considerable benefit is obtained, and when one of the two is lacking, then the other, of course, will be lame. Scripture says about this that “faith without works is dead” (James 2:26). Although faith consists in knowing the one God by nature and confessing it unfeignedly and truly, this too is dead if it is not accompanied by the glory of works. So, isn’t it completely useless to know what good is and not want to do it? It is for this reason that he says that His disciples or those who believe in Him will be blessed if they not only receive the knowledge of His words, but also fulfill them. John 13:18. I'm not talking about all of you. For we know whom I have chosen, but let the Scripture be fulfilled: He who eats bread with Me lifts up his heel against Me 895 The meaning of these words is quite obscure. Saying that those who have the knowledge of good and who try to put it into action will be blessed, he immediately added: “I am not talking about everyone,” in the opinion of many and mine, covertly pointing here to the traitor, for a hater of God who made such a soul subject to such great wickedness could never be placed among the virtuous and blessed. This is one meaning of this saying, accepted by very many. There is another meaning besides this. Intending to say that, according to the most perfect and Holy Scripture, “He who ate my bread increased my stumbling or lifted up his heel against me” (Ps. 40:10), Christ in some way protects and protects the true circle of other disciples in advance, appropriating the guilt only to one and only one. Since everyone ate His bread, that is, they ate and used what was brought through Him, therefore it is beneficial for the spirit of the free (disciples) not to allow the spirit of the free (disciples) to be overwhelmed by vain fears and prevents the torment of suspicion, saying: “I am not speaking about all of you, for I know whom I have chosen, but so that,” he says, “the Scripture is fulfilled: he who eats My bread has lifted up his heel against Me,” or: “he has increased his stumbling,” according to the word Psalmist 896. This, I think, is the meaning of these words. In them, therefore, we are given a twofold contemplation. Let the inquisitive determine the better and truer meaning. However, let’s say something else about this saying to strengthen the minds of simpler people. Regarding these words, two confusions can be raised. And, firstly, we can make the following objection: if we believe that Christ knows everything, then why did he choose Judas and why did he join him with the other disciples, not knowing that he would turn out to be a traitor and fall into the net of greed? In addition, someone can say: if for this reason he “raised his heel” against Christ, as He Himself says, “so that the Scripture would be fulfilled,” then it is not he (Judas) who should be considered guilty of the incident (tradition), but the necessity of fulfilling the Scripture. To each of these objections we must give an immediate explanation and, using feasible reasoning, compose an answer corresponding to both bewilderments, for the edification and consolation of those who, on their own, are not able to understand the meaning of Divine Scripture. And first of all, let us point out that if we begin to use such reasoning about every action of God, then we will never cease to reproach the Creator, to blame God for calling into existence the non-existent, and to recklessly blaspheme His immeasurable love for mankind. What, in fact, tell me, will prevent others from accusing Him, for example, like this: why did you choose Saul and anoint him king over Israel, knowing that he would certainly reject grace? And what does it say about this? The pretext for the accusation can be traced back to the head of the human race, that is, Adam. After all, you can reason in this way, for example: why did You, Omniscient, create the first man from the earth? After all, You knew that he would fall, breaking the commandment given to him. In exactly the same way, for the highest and most perfect creatures one can blame (the Creator) this way: why did You form the nature of the Angels, if, as God, You were not unaware of their deviation to retreat, for not all kept their authority (Jude 6)? What follows from here? The foreknowledge of God would not have allowed Him to be revealed to the Creator Himself, or at least the rational creature would not have passed into existence at all, so that God would reign over only the unreasonable and insensible creature, no longer being cognizable that He is God by nature. In particular, I think, when discussing this, one must keep in mind that the Creator of everything gave rational creatures the ability to be governed by their own will and allowed them to follow the impulses of their own will, whatever everyone wants and recognizes as best. Thus, some, rightly striving for the highest perfection, retain their glory, receive a share in the benefits assigned to them, and achieve unceasing bliss. Those who are corrupted by their minds and, as if by uncontrollable streams of lusts, are carried away to what they should not, will undergo the judgment due to them, will fall under the just accusation of ingratitude and will receive severe and eternal punishment. In the same conditions you will find the nature of the Angels. Some, having retained their superiors, have an unshakable and firm tenure in all blessings. Others, having been deprived of their original glory and dignity by their attractions to evil, are bound by the bonds of darkness in hell, according to the word of Scripture (2 Pet. 2:4; Jude 6), are reserved for the day of the great judgment. This is how the first man, that is, Adam, was created in the beginning. He was in paradise and enjoyed the highest bliss, obviously spiritual, and glory with God. And so he would have remained in the original blessings of his nature if he had not turned to apostasy and disobedience, recklessly breaking the commandment determined for him from above. So he anointed Saul as king, for at first he was not a bad man, but when he later turned out to be not so, he deprived him of glory and royal dignity. So he chose Judas and added him to the holy disciples, obviously, as he was at first capable of following (Christ). But Satan, tempting him with greed, little by little entangled him, defeated by this passion, and through it he became a traitor, completely captivated. Here, therefore, there is nothing that would relate to the Chosen One, for he (Judas) had the opportunity not to fall if, obviously, he had chosen what was due and devoted all his mind to the cause of truly following Christ. Let us answer another of the above objections as follows. Let no one think, according to some fools, that the things announced through the holy prophets come to fruition so that the Scriptures may be fulfilled. If this is true, then nothing will prevent those who, of necessity, fulfilled what was written, from having justification for their sin, and even more, from being completely without sin. After all, if, someone will say, it was necessary for Scripture to be fulfilled, and it was fulfilled through them, then they, thanks to what was thus fulfilled through them, should be free from all guilt. Otherwise, Scripture itself, of course, will turn out to be a “minister of sin” (Gal. 2:17), as if forcibly forcing some to what is spoken in it, so that what was once proclaimed can come to fruition. But in such reasoning, I think, lies great blasphemy, for who can be so deprived of common sense as to consider the words of the Holy Spirit to be the cause of sin for anyone? So, it is not for this reason, we think, that (known) deeds are performed by anyone so that the Scriptures will be fulfilled, but the Spirit, foretelling the future, spoke what will happen, so that when it happens to be, having this prediction as a guarantee of faith, they will already firmly know what it is written about. But since we had a great discussion about this in another book 897, we consider it unnecessary to go into long explanations of this again. John 13:19. Henceforth I say unto you, before even being, that ye may believe, even when it shall be, that I am 898 The most necessary and ahead of time (fulfillment), he says, I am making an explanation of what is to come in the near future, as it will reinforce the 899 listeners and will bring considerable benefit if they recognize the purpose of the event. After all, I am not used to and do not like to waste words on unnecessary explanations, but I consider it necessary to introduce into your ears something that will be of considerable benefit to you if it reaches your knowledge. Therefore, “I now tell” you about what is already ready to happen, and I give you knowledge about what has not yet been fulfilled, so that when it actually happens, comparing the fulfillment of the event with My prediction, you will believe that I am the One about whom the Divine Scripture revealed this. Thus, our Lord Jesus Christ at the same time tries to correctly correct the traitor, making a dark and somewhat unclear denunciation, and says about the fulfillment of betrayal that it will serve as a sign and the clearest proof that He is Christ. As we said a little earlier, whoever compares the prediction of the Holy Scriptures with the insolence of a traitor, I think, will very easily receive a clearer and truer idea of ​​it. John 13:20. Amen, amen I say to you: accept, if anyone I send, he accepts Me, but he who accepts Me 900 accepts Him who sent Me. Having beneficially foretold that He is Christ, and taking advantage of the crime that the traitor intended to commit against Him, he again reveals something useful for averting his malice. And now His speech also has some darkness, for it still tries to cover up the villainy and clearly does not yet say who will betray Him. So, he reveals, and, moreover, for greater benefit with a clear example, that the love and honor shown to Him in the end is absolutely necessary to attribute to the person of God and the Father. And this was not His actual purpose to show, but, apparently, rather something the opposite. Not wanting, as it seems, to express more clearly what he expressed in other words, namely: “He who does not honor the Son and the Father does not honor” (John 15:23), he preferred a more pleasant way of speaking, suggesting from here that the listeners should understand something opposite, since now a threat was more timely than an admonition, when villainy was at the door and betrayal was already being planned, for Satan had already put this intention in the heart of the traitor ( John 13:2). So, he says, just as he who receives what is sent from Me will receive Me, of course, Myself, and not anyone else, so he who receives the One sent from God and the Father will, without a doubt, receive the Father Himself. But in these words of His one can see some softening in the expression of their meaning. And whoever begins to consider the opposite side will see that the wickedness of the traitor extends not only to the Son, but also to the Father Himself. So, these words contain a kind of threat, expressed in pleasant words, as if with an indirect indication of their meaning. As the One sent from God will be received by each of us who agrees with His words and through the observance of His commandments will honor the Proclaimed One (by God), on the same basis, I think, he who believes in the Son will accept the Lord and through Him the Father, for with an indication of the Begotten, an indication is also given of the Parent. He who fully believes that He is the Son, confesses, of course, the One who gave birth. That is why the crime of a traitor is terrible, through wickedness he committed an insult to the Son and to God the Father Himself. Otherwise, I would have accepted and honored, sincerely betraying my heart to the Lord, if I had confessed with undoubted faith that the Son is God from God, and, unhappy, I would have placed love for Him above bad acquisitions, but even, I believe, without turning out to be a traitor, I would not have made myself someone who would be better off not to be at all. John 13:21. This river, Jesus was troubled in spirit and testified and said: Amen, Amen I say to you, for only one of you will betray Me 901 For whom is it not obvious that our nature does not possess either concepts or words through which it would be possible to quite truly and correctly express the properties of the Divine and ineffable nature? Therefore, we are forced to use words consistent with our nature, at least for some understanding of objects that exceed our mind. Indeed, is it possible to clearly express something that exceeds even our very thought? As a result of this, we, taking the crudeness of human concepts and words as if for a symbol or image, must try to move, in a way accessible to us, to the very properties of the Divine. So it is in relation to the terrible wrath of God during reproofs and strong hatred of the depravity of those against whom this should be done by Divine judgment, although God is patient beyond words. When, therefore, Divine Scripture wants to express, as it were, the movement of the Divine against the wicked, then, using a comparison with us and using human words, it calls it anger or rage, although the Divine essence is not at all subjected, even in the likeness to us, to any of our states, but is only moved by indignation, as is only known and characteristic of It, for the properties of God are completely ineffable. But following our example, as we have just said, Divine Scripture usually describes what is above us. Therefore, here too, the divine Evangelist says that Christ was “indignant” with the “spirit,” calling the movement of the Spirit indignation, for, as it turns out, it was impossible to express it otherwise. And so, of course, it was natural for the flesh, which could not withstand the movement of the Divine, to shudder somewhat, take on the appearance of embarrassment and show signs of anger, just as in the story of Lazarus it is written that “he began to enter the grave with sorrow in himself” (John 11:38). Just as there he called grief a strong indignation against death, so here the name indignation denotes excitement (anger) against the wicked traitor. And He was “indignant” quite rightly, indignant at Judas’ immorality. Indeed, what could be higher than the wickedness of one who, being overly honored along with the other disciples and placed among the elect, exchanged love for Christ for a completely insignificant amount of money - and, eating His bread, lifted up his heel (John 13:18; Ps. 40:10), thinking not about honor, not about glory, not about the law of love, not about the reverence due to God, and not about anything friend, according to his position, but looking only at the vile pieces of Jewish silver, selling his soul for very little money and betraying the Innocent and Right Blood into the hands of vile murderers. Therefore, the reason for the indignation was quite reasonable. And after this follows a strong denunciation, although in this way it applied exclusively to the person of only one of the twelve, however, such a terrible accusation brought fear to each of them and, as it were, prompted each of those who listened to take care of his soul, so that through negligence it would not fall into such a terrible snare and would not become a pleasant prey of the devil’s malice. Thus, the denunciation turned out to be useful, which the traitor, imputing as nothing, continued to fulfill his intentions. So, Christ says very expressively, “one of you will betray Me,” which either accuses the ingratitude of the impudent traitor, or shows the greatness of the devil’s malice, which turned out to be so strong that it carried away even one of the Apostles themselves. John 13:22. The students looked at each other, wondering who they were talking about 902 Amazement and fear at the same time attack the disciples, and they look at each other, receiving from these words double fear. Each, naturally, caring for his own soul, was in no small fear, but also, thanks to the concern for everyone in general, they were subject to no less concern for others. After all, they believe that what is said must, of course, be true, for they know that the word of the Savior cannot be in vain. However, considering it terrible and unbearable for one of those numbered among the disciples to fall into such wickedness, they each interrogate their own conscience and find out exactly on whom the lot of destruction should fall and why or how Satan will turn out to be so strong that he will kidnap even one of the closest persons. John 13:23–26. Be the only one of His disciples to recline in the bosom of Jesus, whom Jesus loved 903. Simon Peter aspires to ask who it would be, speaking about him 904. Then she attacked Jesus’s breasts and said to Him: Lord, who is it? 905 And Jesus answered: He is there, and having wet him, I will give him bread 906 Also here, with all justice, we must marvel at the swiftness of the holy disciples towards love of God and great zeal for reverence. Not being able to find out the culprit on their own, but also not falling into deceptive guesses, they are curious again and rush to find out through one supreme figure - it was Peter - who, however, did not at all propose the question himself, but leaves the question to his closest and beloved for the sake of his greatest purity. This is John, the writer of the book being interpreted, who, since, according to him, he was beloved (by the Lord), he hid his name, consigning himself to silence, so as not to appear vain to anyone. After all, the mind of saints is free from love of glory. So, leaning a little towards the Teacher, he speaks secretly and in a whisper, asking him to show the son of destruction. But the Savior does not give him any other indication of this, except for what was foretold from ancient times by the voice of the prophet: “He who eats My bread has increased stumbling upon Me” (Ps. 40:10), for, having “immersed” (in a dish), “he gives a piece,” indicating thereby to the one who eats His bread. At the same time, he removes fear from the holy Apostles and brings to their memory, as it were, another prophecy, which says this: “But you, a man of one accord (friend), are My leader and My close one, who together with Me enjoyed the dishes, (with whom) in the house of God we walked in one mind” (Ps. 55:14-15). After all, the Savior himself was once unanimous and close and a table companion and everything that relates to intimacy, as he was numbered with other holy disciples, who, having the same goal with the Savior and going around the Jewish country, turned out to be zealous servants of miracles and tried to do everything related to His honor and glory. But this close and unanimous (disciple) exchanged the grace of the One who honored him for shameful acquisitions. Notice how the wisest Evangelist wonderfully encourages us to choose the most intelligent life and exercise the sharpness of our minds to more easily comprehend Divine contemplations and diligently achieve possible accuracy in the expression (verbal) related to the knowledge of God. Fairly, he says, he was honored and loved by our Savior Christ, so that he reclined close, even on the very breast of the Lady, presenting this as proof of excessive love for him. So, near God and in the very first places with Him there will be, especially before everyone, those who have a pure heart, to whom the Savior Himself assigns a fair reward, calling the pure in heart blessed, because they will see God (Matthew 5:8). And as proof of the truth of these words, let us cite this wisest Evangelist himself. After all, he contemplated the glory of Christ, according to his word: “I contemplated His glory, the glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full (the Word) of grace and truth” (John 1:14). No one, of course, can see with their bodily eyes the Nature that is completely invisible to all creation, for no one has seen the Father, according to the word of the Savior, only He who is from God, that is, the Son, “He who has seen the Father” (John 6:46). However, to those who have a mind that is alien to worldly evil spirits and vain worries, that is, in this very life, Christ reveals His own glory through a kind of subtle contemplation that exceeds the mind, showing in it (glory) the glory of the Father, which is why he said: “He who has seen Me has seen the Father” (John 14:9). John 13:26–27. And Judas gives Simon Iscariot a piece [of bread] to soak. And through the bread Satan entered 907 The Savior gave His disciples the clearest indication of the traitor, for having “immersed” (in a dish), he handed over a “piece” of bread, thereby making it clear that “he eats His bread” and has “to lift up his heel.” At the same time, the wisest Evangelist notes that after giving a piece to the heart of the traitor, the leader and leader of the deadly malice against Christ invaded and the whole Satan found himself in him. And again, let no one think that this piece will become the reason for Satan’s acceptance as a traitor. We will not, of course, reach such a degree of unreason and, having lost common sense, we will not think that the communication of the Eucharistic bread (εὐλογία) to an evil person could serve as a pretext for the devil to enter (into a person). On the contrary, without moving away from the truth, let's put it this way: since despite the fact that the entire measure of love for him has been exhausted and there is nothing more left for his respect and favor, he continues to have the same intention, does not correct his evil intent by repentance, does not distract his heart from the lawless desire and does not mourn with tears what he even dared to even think about, but even worse yearns to achieve his wicked intent, overwhelmed by evil insolence, then finally “Satan entered” (into him), finding his heart, like some door wide open, deprived of protective wakefulness, and seeing his mind open and very ready to willingly accomplish what he desired and thought about. Turning to the Inspired Scripture, we will find everywhere in it that this is the constant and usual way of acting of the devil. First, he approaches God-fearing people with temptation in their hearts, first of all he sows evil thoughts and with unclean lusts incites us to all kinds of sins. And with particular force he strikes at what he sees us already predisposed and prepared for. He almost always almost accepts our weakness and passion, to which our soul is already subject to, as if they were assistants to his malicious intrigues. So, for one, let’s say for example, he inspires and introduces strong sensuality and the nasty excitement of carnal lust. Another considers it best to be exposed to evil gain and highly values ​​the acquisition of wicked money. Thus, when he sets out to take possession of us, he makes his ally the passion that has already defeated us and has taken possession of us, and with its assistance arranges our destruction. Like some very experienced commander, having surrounded a city and trying in every possible way to enter it, he orders battering machines to be placed on the weakest parts of the wall, from here receiving the opportunity to take it in a timely manner; In the same way, I believe, Satan, when he wants to take possession of the human soul, rushes to the weakest part in it, hoping in this way to easily defeat it, especially when he sees that it will not receive any benefit from what, on the contrary, should curb passion, such as, for example: good advice and the mysterious Eucharist, for this especially strongly counteracts the murderous poison of the devil. So, the traitor was not ashamed not only of the preliminary denunciations made secretly and in secret, but also of the necessary power of love, honor and glory and grace, even the Eucharist received from Christ. Without looking back and with uncontrollable force, striving for only that which he had previously been overcome with, I mean the disease of greed, he finally found himself in its complete power and fell. He no longer has Satan as his advisor, but makes the one who was at first his earpiece the complete ruler of his entire heart and the ruler of his entire soul, for he “entered” him, according to the word of the Gospel. Therefore, we must with all our might take care and beware of the harmfulness of any preliminary addictions, but it is proper to remember the words: “If the spirit of the ruler comes upon you, do not leave your place, because healing will put an end to great sins” (Eccl. 10:4). It is necessary, as it were, to reinforce the spirit of the ruler with the power of thoughts in our hearts. After all, if it is not in our power to prevent (the entry of bad thoughts into our hearts), then we can, at least, immediately tear out what has entered and not allow it to take many roots through our negligence, but hasten from the very beginning to pull them out like some kind of weed and make our soul free from them. Otherwise, it is appropriate to clearly know that Satan will soon defeat us with his deception, and we will be subjected to what the Psalmist says: “Before I was humbled, I sinned” (Ps. 119:67), for before the final commission of sin, we sin in advance by approving it in our thoughts, honoring it and accepting it, and through this giving a place for Satan to enter. Let the passion of a traitor be the image and example of this subject (the passion of greed). John 13:27–28. Jesus said to him: Whatever you do, do it quickly. But no one understands from those reclining, why do I speak to him 908 This place may perhaps seem to someone contradictory and not very consistent with what has already been said. Why, someone may ask, not without reason, does the Lord, exposing and gently and covertly turning away those who tried to betray Him from the deadly plan against Him, now turns out to be encouraging this and commanding us to immediately begin to fulfill such a vile and wicked intention? And why, he will say, someone who was already internally inclined and disposed towards this still needed to be encouraged to do this, and not vice versa - to be directed by admonitions for the better and distracted from his intended intention? This is how someone can accuse Christ, sinning against the proper way of reasoning. But focusing our minds more closely on the meaning contained in these words, we will not find anything strange in them, on the contrary, they have a deep meaning, which I will try to express briefly as best I can. Very prudently, the wise Evangelist previously said that Satan himself invaded and entered the heart of the traitor, so that our Lord Jesus Christ appears rather speaking to him (Satan) than to the one who really and truly fell through his negligence to his power (the traitor): “What you are doing, do it quickly.” It is as if He clearly said this: “do your work, which is the only thing you know how to do and which is always kind to you to do,” “do it quickly.” You killed the prophets, you led the Jews to wickedness, you even then arranged the stoning of those who preached the saving teaching to the Jews, you spared none of those sent by God. You showed all the unspeakable cruelty and excessive fury against them. Now, after them, I have come, giving those who have already lost the opportunity to no longer be mistaken, arranging for those in darkness to remain in the Divine light and freeing from the snares those who have already fallen into your snare and become the prey of your cruelty. I came to destroy the power of sin, which has dominion through you, and to show every man who God is by nature (the True One). But I finally know your completely indomitable temper. Therefore, what you do with your usual insolence against those who want to arrange this, do it now. After all, you will not leave your swift and frequent attacks until My upcoming suffering is completed first. This is how I think to interpret the meaning of this saying of the Savior. And why He commands this evil plot to accelerate, we also intend to consider. True, the audacity of the atheists, who decided to unbridledly rage against Him, turns out to be terrible, for He was awaited by reproach, an intolerable crowd of scolders, blows and spitting, and finally a shameful death on a tree, nails and a crucifix, vinegar, bile, an ulcer from a spear; Why does he hurry, say, and desire the immediate fulfillment of suffering from the devil? After all, the Jews were servants and helpers in crime, but everything relates to that leader of murder and the head of primordial evils. But although the atrocities of the wicked Jews against Christ were very terrible and the insolence of the crucifiers was unbearable, He knew the outcome of the suffering and its consequences. After all, through the Honest Cross the tyranny of the devil should have finally fallen, death and the power of corruption should have been abolished, and the human race should have been freed from that original curse; finally, according to the love of mankind and the grace of our Savior Christ, the abolition of the punishment given in the words of God was expected: “You are earth and you will go back to earth” (Gen. 3:19). It was necessary, according to the word of the prophet, “to stop all iniquity” (Ps. 106:42) and the accusation of those who fell under it, but those who did not know the true nature and the one God, who were justified by faith in Christ, had to disappear completely throughout the entire universe, who were justified by faith in Christ - the opening of the gates of paradise was finally expected. The lower things had to come into contact with the higher things and open to heaven, according to the word of the Savior (John 1:51), and the ranks of angels should ascend and descend on the Son of Man. How then, tell me, in view of so many expected benefits and revivals for us of such a bright hope through the saving Cross - how should it not be right for Him who thirsted for our salvation and for this purpose became like us, except for sin, to strive to see such a long-awaited time already coming? Was it not appropriate for the One who knew no evil to neglect the tricks of the devil’s malice and, on the contrary, to hasten to come to the coveted time of such a glorious holiday? So, to Satan, who did not know that he was fighting on his own head, and who was completely unaware that he was being thrown into the abyss, having nailed death on the cross, the Savior said: “What are you doing, do it quickly.” These are words more of a threat than a command. How a very young and beautiful young man, possessing blossoming bodily strength, when he sees someone quickly attacking him, armed with his right hand with a sharp ax and knowing that the attacker will certainly suffer death from him, can exclaim to him: what are you doing, do it quickly, for you will see the strength of my right hand - and no one, of course, will say that this is the word of one who is striving to die, but on the contrary - of one who foresees, that he will win and surpass those who want to do him harm. Thus, our Lord Jesus Christ commands us to use, as it were, a quick run to commit evil against Him, for He intends to show the villain to those who have already been mocked and to show the universe free from the one who once conquered it and cruelly took possession of it through deception, so that he distracted it from faith in God. The disciples do not understand the meaning of these words, and Christ, it seems, did not prudently reveal it to them. So in other cases, He foretells that He will be delivered into the hands of sinners and that He will be crucified and killed and will rise on the third day (Matthew 17:22-23, 20:18-19; Luke 9:21), but at the same time He does not allow anyone to say this, since He had the goal of hiding from the ruler of this age Who He is in His true nature, so that, having come, to undergo crucifixion and, having suffered crucifixion, destroy death and arrange salvation for those who believe in Him. So, He prudently conceals much of what He said, for, as God, He knew everything useful. John 13:29. But I beg to differ, because the ark is called Judas, as Jesus said to him: buy what we require for the holiday, or give something to the poor 909 Not understanding the meaning of the Lord’s words, the disciples immediately turn to their usual guesses and think that the Savior is again indicating what He usually commanded. Since the holiday was approaching, they naturally expected an order from Him to the one who had the “ark” to buy something needed for the holiday or a command to fulfill what He was especially concerned about, that is, to provide assistance to those in need, in accordance with the number of offerings available (in the ark). After all, “the Lord is good and merciful,” according to what is written (Ps. 102:8). This should serve us most beautifully too. Those who wish to celebrate purely and pleasingly, I think, should keep in mind not only their own complacency and not only care that they alone spend the holiday joyfully, but in addition to caring for themselves, add mercy to those in need. Only then, fulfilling the law of love for each other, will we celebrate a truly spiritual holiday to the Savior Christ. Likewise, the law once given to the Jews about collecting manna commands that it be collected not only for those who were able to do it, for “each one,” he says, “gather for those who live with you” (Ex. 16:16). If one of their cohabitants became weak, then those who were not subject to such a state, as if devoting their strength to him, collected together with their own measure what was necessary for others, so that, according to what is written, whoever had a lot would not have an increase, and whoever had less would not have a decrease (Ex. 16:18). Thus, with some mutual communication taking place, it was possible to maintain equality for everyone. Therefore, the one who does not add concern for those in need to caring for himself violates the image appropriate to holy holidays. And a perfect union would be a real holiday. John 13:30 . Let us accept the bread when it departed: it was night 910 He quickly leaves to fulfill the will of the devil and, like one stung, jumps out of the house. He does not see anything higher than greed at all, and, strangely, we do not see any benefit for him from the Eucharist, obviously due to his inherent uncontrollable attraction to acquiring (money). Already previously subject to this passion and having introduced into himself the whole father of lawlessness, the unfortunate man now does not think at all about where he is striving. Having chosen the night, as if some gloomy swarm of wicked thoughts in the chest, he rushes into the depths of the bottom of hell and, according to the saying of the book of Proverbs, “like a deer hastens, struck in the liver by an arrow, or like a dog in a chain, not knowing what is coming to the soul (destruction)” (Proverbs 7:22-23). And it seems to me that it was not in vain that the divine Evangelist said that “he took the piece and went out immediately.” Satan is powerful in ordering those who fall in line and obey him to immediately commit evil and force them, even against their will, to do what pleases him without any delay. Perhaps he was afraid, being always malicious and eager to commit villainy, that during a slowdown, repentance that had imperceptibly appeared would prompt a person to change his mind about something good and, as if some kind of intoxication, would remove the pleasure of sin from his mind and would remove the already captured person from the net that he had laid out. For this reason, I believe, this villain forces those who fall under his power to strive to do, and very quickly, what pleases him. So, after the piece, Judas immediately, as if having already taken it in his hands, finally forces him to commit such an ungodly act, fearing, in all likelihood, along with repentance, the power of the Eucharist, lest it, like a light shining in the heart of a person, would prompt him to rather prefer a good deed or would not give rise to a sound thought in someone who was already convinced (by the devil) to betrayal. And that the devil usually and always acts against us, we can learn from the former types. Pharaoh subjugated the Jews who were in Egypt and, having ordered to mercilessly oppress them by making clay and bricks and various forced labor, did not give them any time to serve God. By the way, he said to the overseers of the work: “Let the deeds of these people be aggravated, and let them not worry about empty objects” (Ex. 5:9). He called empty objects a return to a free state and an ardent wish for this, also crying about slavery and prayers for better times, for he knew that by practicing this they would gain considerable benefit. Moving from prototypes to the knowledge of the truest things, we will find that Satan very quickly encourages those who have fallen into his snare and have already been completely subjected to his power and submitted to his will to do evil. John 13:31–32. When Jesus went out, he said: Now is the Son of Man glorified, and God is glorified in Him, and He will glorify Him in Himself, and He will glorify Him 911 The traitor leaves to fulfill the intentions of the devil, and Christ begins His speech, and through this, as if by example, teaching us that we should not say out loud to everyone what is appropriate only for the true disciples of Christ, for we should not give what is holy to dogs, according to His word, and allow pigs to trample pearls underfoot (Matthew 7:6). What he had previously expressed as if in the form of a parable, he tries to teach this when time called for action and clearer proof. So, after rejecting the traitor and removing him from home, he now communicates the secrets to His true disciples, as at the proper time, and says: “Now is the Son of Man glorified.” Through this, it denotes saving suffering, as already standing at the door and soon to be. He glorified, he says, the Son of Man, calling no one else but Himself, inseparably, as it seemed to some, for one Son is Christ, both before the flesh and with the flesh, and before he became man like us and when he became man. And how He, according to Him, became glorified, this must be investigated. Some may say: wasn’t He previously glorified by performing miracles? When with one word he calmed the raging sea and stopped the movement of the strongest winds, then those in the boat bowed before him and He heard that “truly You are the Son of God” (Matthew 14:33). So, having forced Lazarus, a resident of Bethany, to return to life, he performed such a glorious miracle that when He entered Jerusalem during the holiday, everyone along with the babies came out to meet Him and expressed a most wonderful greeting to Him in the words “Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord” (Matthew 21:9). But having once broken five loaves and two fish, he fed the multitude who came to Him, without infants and women, reaching up to five thousand men. This miracle seemed so glorious to some that, amazed by the extraordinary nature of the event, they looked for Him in order to even declare Him king (John 6:15). The Evangelist himself testified to this. There is nothing difficult and it is much more difficult to spread the word about events that have a glory no less than those listed. Therefore, how, having already been glorified for a long time, does He call Himself “now” glorified? Yes, He became glorified and appeared to possess Divine glory through other events. But the end of glory and the fullness of greatness consisted, without a doubt, in the fact that He suffered for the life of the world and provided the means for the resurrection of all. Exploring, as well as possible, the meaning of the sacrament He performed, we will see that He did not die for Himself and actually did not die for His own sake, but suffered for all humanity and accomplished both the suffering itself and the resurrection after it. He died according to the flesh, showing His life as equal to the life of all and, equal in value to all, fulfilling on Himself the power of that original oath. He rose again from the dead to eternal and unceasing life, restoring in Himself the whole (human) nature, for, having once undergone death, according to what is written, “he dies no more, death no longer possesses Him, for what died died to sin at once, but what lives lives to God” (Rom. 6:9-10). This, thanks to Christ, must be true of ourselves. And we will also be resurrected, no longer for death, but for endless life, although after this there will be a great difference between those who rise, I mean in glory and the reward due to each life. So, having been “obedient to God the Father until death, even death on the cross,” according to the word of Paul, He ascended again, receiving the name that is above every name (Phil. 2:8–9). Considered to be a simple man, He was greatly glorified, having appeared as the real God and the true Son of God, called not to the new dignity of being God by nature, but what He was before the flesh, and, without a doubt, ascended into this with the flesh itself - this is what, let us think, consisted of His glorification, although He is always the Lord of Glory. None of the Divine virtues are new in Christ, since He has everything naturally, like God, even before the aforementioned humiliation (Phil. 2:7). But even after perceiving the image of a servant, since He again elevated Himself to that state, He is thought of and called as having received glorification. But with the glorified Christ, of course, “God” and the Father are also glorified. “He was glorified” “in” the Son, not having received an addition of glory from His Son, for the Divine and ineffable nature has no need of all this, but because He was known of Whom He is the Father. Just as it is glory and praise for the Son to have such a Father by nature, in the same way, I think, it is glory and praise for the Father Himself to have from Himself such a Son of His own. That’s why he says: “And God was glorified in Him, and God will glorify Him in Himself and will immediately glorify Him.” Thanks to the Son, the Father was glorified along with Him, and on His part immediately glorified the Son - glory comes to both and through both. However, in order to reduce the meaning of these words to us, people, bringing benefit to the listeners from here, let us add to this the following. If we glorify God within ourselves, then we must expect that we will be glorified by Him, for I live, says the Lord, because “those who glorify Me I will glorify and not be destroyed” (cf. 1 Samuel 2 and Ps. 50:19). And God is glorified through us and in us when we, having cast away the filth of sin, decorate our own lives through every good deed, for in this way we live for His glory. John 13:33. Children, I have not been with you for long 912 As “children” and among the newly born babies, he places disciples, although they have already achieved such a measure of virtue and have a mind accessible to few, showing through this, and it is very clear that even the most perfect among people is an insignificant baby before God and is weak in mind. In fact, what does human reason mean in comparison with wisdom (of God), the artist of everything? Therefore, someone in a psalm said to God: “I have become like a bestial to You” (Ps. 72:22). And no one, of course, will say, if he has any intelligence, that the Psalmist is called bestial because of his attachment to God. This would be a grave accusation of the Divine nature and would seem the greatest absurdity. After all, he who becomes attached to a wise man and stays with him - I consider it necessary for the benefit to make such an application of the Psalmist's saying - would not be at all bestial, but on the contrary - insightful, intelligent and capable of prudence. If everyone calls this, and very thoroughly, true, then how can one not consider the one who tends to think that he who finds himself in the wisdom of God Himself will be bestial and insane? So what? Therefore, says (the Psalmist), even the very wise among men, if compared with the wisdom of God, will turn out to be bestial and will be counted among those who have no understanding. Just as the smallest of stars cannot compete with the rays of the sun, or a heavy stone with a mountain towering above all, so the human mind can never be compared with the wisdom of God; on the contrary, it will be a complete insignificance in comparison with it. “Childish” is therefore a perfect person. However, “for a little while yet” Christ said with His disciples, not because He intended to completely leave them and forever and completely separate from them, for He is with us “all the days, even to the end of the age” (Matthew 28:20), according to His word, but because He will not be co-present with the flesh, as yesterday and the third day. But it was already at the door, even more so - at the very door, the time of His departure from here to the Father and ascension into heaven. For those who think right and have a strong faith, I believe we should reason in such a way that although He is absent from us in the flesh, having completed His departure to God and the Father, He rules everything with His Divine power and is co-present with those who love Him. That is why he said: “Truly, truly, I say to you, if two or three are gathered together in My name, there I am in the midst of them” (Matthew 18:20). In fact, just as when He still lived with people and was present on earth with flesh, He filled the heavens, was then with the holy Angels and did not leave the higher countries, so now, being in heaven with His flesh, He fills the earth and is with His followers. Notice how He, intending to separate himself, albeit only by flesh, for by the power of the Divinity He is always with us, says that “yet a little time” will be with us, completely and completely designating Himself as His part (flesh), so that no one would try to divide the one Christ into two Sons, but so that he would be thought of and accepted as a single thing - both as the Word born from God the Father, and as a church received from the Holy Virgin, - not because they are of the same essence, but because after the ineffable unity it will be a work of wickedness to cut them apart, for one of both is Christ. John 13:33. You will seek Me, and as Reh to the Jews, even though I am going, you cannot come: and to you now I say 913 His departure, he says, will not remain completely carefree for His disciples. This is because, firstly, they will be remorseful about this and, as a result, will be subjected to unbearably severe sadness. Therefore, they, without a doubt, will long to be with Him again and desire to live with Him always, just as the divine Paul, preferring being with Christ even to this very life, said that it is better to “be resolved to be with Christ” (Phil. 1:23). Foreseeing this and knowing the hearts of those who loved Him, Christ said that His ascension would not be without worry for the disciples. But at the same time there was some other true reason that forced the holy disciples to be with Christ. After all, they immediately had to fall into considerable dangers, often being attacked by the uncontrollable madness of the Jews and subject to furies from some others, going around the whole universe and preaching the teachings of the Savior to those who were still in error, so that they endured bonds, did not remain alien to insults and reproaches, and no less experienced all sorts of other torments, although before, during their stay with Christ, they knew nothing like this. It is then, he says, that “you will seek” My presence intensely, when various waves of temptations engulf you. But these words of the Savior did not at all lead the disciples to timidity or crush them with fear, but rather prepared them for the perception of courage and, as it were, taught them in advance to be patient in enduring the future that awaited them. Therefore, we will not find it useless, on the contrary, everyone will see great benefit in the words of the psalm: “I prepared myself and was not embarrassed” (Ps. 119:60). After all, something that completely unexpectedly attacks us can greatly harm us and bring us into great fear. But what, through expectation and foreknowledge, has already exhausted most of the fear in someone in advance, does not have such irresistible power against those whom it attacks, since the soul is accustomed to this and in its mind often experiences it as already coming. Like some bloodthirsty and wild beast, jumping out of a forest thicket and a hidden lair, when it attacks one of those who do not see it, it strikes the one who was not expecting the attack and devours it, grabbing the one who is not prepared for the fight. And whoever sees from afar and knows what awaits him, taking up arms, will either suffer less harm, or will run away without any obstacle. In the same way, I think, with temptations, the completely unexpected strikes us much stronger and more fiercely than what was already expected. Therefore, in the words “you will seek Me,” our Lord Jesus Christ usefully points out what is about to happen to His disciples as a result of His absence, and the horrors that will appear from their future enemies, through prediction, preparing them for the perception of courage. He considers it necessary to add an indication of the obstacle that currently lies in the way of their following Him. What I said to the “Jews,” he notes, is what I “now” say to you: “Where I go, you cannot come,” for the time has not yet come for the holy Apostles, who have not yet completed their ministry, to find themselves in the highest abodes. Their transition to this state was undoubtedly observed for the proper time. However, we must again pay attention to the fact that when the Lord spoke to the Jews and pointed out the same thing, He said: “You will seek Me, and will not find Me” (John 7:34, 36). And He only says to His disciples: “You will seek Me,” but considers it necessary to remain silent: “You will not find me.” For what reason? Those (Jews) corresponded to this non-finding of Him, due to their immeasurable unbelief and extreme wickedness towards Him. And to those who had a sincere disposition towards Him and maintained genuine love, it would be unfair to say: “You will not find Me,” for He was with them and will always be with them. John 13:34. I give you a new commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you, that you also love each other 914 The divine Paul writes beautifully and truly: “So if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away, and behold, all things have become new” (2 Cor. 5:17). He renews us and transforms us in some way into a new life, not available to others and unknown to those for whom it is pleasant to live under the law and follow the commandments of Moses, for the law makes nothing perfect according to what is written (Heb. 7:19). Everyone can see the most perfect measure of piety towards God in the institutions of our Savior. That is why He Himself tells us in one place: “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven” (Matthew 5:20). After all, if we not only do not compete with the morals of the Jews, but also do not surpass, and, moreover, completely, the righteousness under the law, we will never, I believe, reach the Kingdom of Heaven. It is not that we affirm that the law of Moses was completely useless and unnecessary, for it communicated to us, albeit imperfectly, good, but it turns out to be a guide to teaching the gospel life and, through riddles and images, introducing the image of true piety, as if drawing in our souls the shadow of teaching through Christ. That is why He Himself said: “I tell you that every scribe who has been taught in the kingdom of heaven is like a rich man who brings out from his treasury new and old things” (Matthew 13:52). Of course, following the words of Moses and the benefit received from them in the soul represents considerable and true wealth for a person, but when he perceives the beauty of the Gospel instructions, he is doubly adorned with the knowledge of both ancient and new laws. Therefore, our Lord Jesus Christ, showing that His commandment is better than the ancient one and that the saving sermon was not yet available to those who lived under the law when He intended to ascend to heaven, the law of love presupposes, as it were, some foundation and support of all good, but love not according to the law, but above the law. Therefore he says: “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another.” But how, tell me, someone might ask, did He who spoke through Moses call this commandment new to the ancients: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself” (Deut. 6:5; Mark 12:30–31; Luke 10:27; cf. Matt. 22:37–39)? So, having placed, as is natural, love for God above and in front of everything else, he added next to it love for each other and with love for God he combined love for ourselves, since love for God in justice could not exist if it were not followed by appropriate love for one’s neighbor, for we are all brothers to each other. So the wisest John, knowing well and teaching others, says: “He who loves his brother loves God” (1 John 4:21). So, how is Christ’s commandment new, although it was proclaimed by ancient laws? But please note the accuracy of the speech and look at the subsequent words. After all, he was not content with saying: “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another,” but, showing the news of the speech and that His love is much higher than that ancient love, I mean for each other, he immediately added: “As I have loved you, that you also love one another.” It is therefore necessary to examine for a clear understanding of the meaning of these words, how Christ loved us. Then we will see, and very easily, the news and difference of this commandment. So, “being in the form of God, he did not consider it by abduction to be equal with God, but he made himself of no reputation, taking on the form of a servant, and being in the likeness of men, and found in the form of a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient to death, even death on the cross” (Phil. 2:6-8). But even though he was rich, he became poor, as Paul again testified to us (2 Cor. 8:9). Don't you see the news of love for us here? The law commanded to love your brother as yourself. And our Lord Jesus Christ loved us more than Himself. After all, being in the form and equality with God and the Father, He would not have condescended to our insignificance, would not have suffered such a hard physical death for us, would not have endured the strangulation of the Jews, shame, ridicule and everything else, so that by listing in parts everything that happened to Him, He would not stretch out the speech into infinity - and would not have become poor, being rich, if He had not loved us much more than Himself. Indeed, this is a strange (new) measure of love. This also commands us to have the disposition to put absolutely nothing above love for our brothers, neither fame nor wealth - without any hesitation even to go, if necessary, to the very death of the flesh, in order to acquire the salvation of our neighbor. This is what the blessed disciples of our Savior did and those who followed in their footsteps, recognizing the salvation of others above their own lives, experiencing every kind of labor, being in extreme distress, in order to save the souls of the perishing. So Paul says in one place: “I die daily” (1 Cor. 15:31), and in another: “Who faints, and I do not faint? Who is tempted, and I am not inflamed?” (2 Cor. 11:29). So, the Savior commanded us to exercise the above-lawful love, as the root of the most perfect piety towards God, since He knew that otherwise we would not receive approval from God and that only by achieving the beauty of the love He innately in us will we abide in great and perfect blessings. John 13:35. All will bear witness to this, for you are My disciples, if you love [love] one another for [each other] 915 He says that you will inscribe on your heads an irrefutable and indisputable sign of My discipleship if you try to follow My life, to the extent accessible to your human nature, so as to have an indissoluble union of love for each other and be in complete agreement with each other, in accordance with the requirement of mutual love and the incomparable dignity of love for mankind, for this will definitely inscribe the glory of the Teacher for you. But, I think, maybe someone will come to such an objection to this: why is love a sign of discipleship with Christ and a type of all the virtues in Him, acquired not through education and not through work and diligence, as it happens in a person, but innate to His nature? After all, this is a special property of the Divine nature and is actually and truly inherent in It, being beyond any surprise. Yes, quite rightly, my friend, we say, I need to add a reasoning about this. The fruit of the Supreme Being is that which belongs specifically and properly to Her. But the investigator can easily see that every kind of virtue is the fulfillment of love, and everything that is considered to be the doing of good refers and is addressed to it. That is why the most important and first commandment according to the law is to love the Lord God with all your soul and with all your heart and with all your mind, while the second, related and close to it, is love for your neighbor, which contains the fullness of the law (Mark 12:30). So the divine Paul, heading all the commandments in it, writes in the Epistle: “For (the commandments) “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” “Thou shalt not murder,” “Thou shalt not swear,” and if there is any other commandment, it is headed in this word, namely, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” - therefore, the fulfillment of the law (is) love” (Rom. 13:9-10). And that it (love) within its limits contains the form of all virtues and, as if in its depths, contains blessings, this wise Paul again confirms in the words: “Love does not exalt itself, is not puffed up, does not disgrace, does not seek its own” and what follows (1 Cor. 13: 4-5). But it takes a long time to express the full measure of love in words. However, to those who have decided to choose love for themselves, I will say: so that it becomes known everywhere that they have become disciples of Christ, it is appropriate and proper for them to be adorned with the crown of love and love for each other to wear on themselves, as it were, some banner of this discipleship. For this reason, I will briefly talk about this too. After all, if any of us is engaged in coppersmithing or weaving, shouldn’t he, without any doubt, be an apprentice to some coppersmith or weaver? Isn’t it the same for someone who knows the carpenter’s craft? Will he not declare that he is able to perform his craft so well because he had a carpenter as a teacher of the craft? On the same basis, I think, those who have within themselves the full power of Divine love, without any hesitation, recognize that they are disciples of love or of Christ, who has the highest love. After all, He loved the world so much that He laid down His very soul for it and was subjected to the cruelty of Jewish atrocities. He Himself will testify to this, saying to His disciples that “greater love has no one, but he who would lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:13). And since “God is love” (1 John 4:16), according to the word of John, then, being the Son of Love, that is, the one who exists by nature and the one true God, He Himself is love, having this property or dignity, not only expressed in words and decorated with the pomp of speech, but by the very deeds and events showing Himself to be the real fruit of the essence of His Parent. In fact, we should not at all think that the Essence Supreme over all essences can be the one receiving goods into Itself, but we also will not call the form of all goods acquired in It, as it is in us, or thought of as something else in another, similar, one might say for example, to knowledge of something in a person. And this is because man himself is not knowledge, but, on the contrary, perceives knowledge (from the outside, from another). But the All-Good Itself, as it should be thought of by us, It, in fact, according to our statement, is the Divine and ineffable Nature itself, every kind of virtue, as if some kind of spring, having in itself and flowing from itself. Therefore, very thoroughly He must be the fruit of love and, being love, like the Father of whom He is the Son, through love it must primarily be imprinted on our souls and in virtuous people it inscribes, as a sign of kinship with Him, a constant presence in love for each other. Otherwise, if, according to the word of Paul, Christ is our peace, for in Him everything is united, below with what is above, and through Him we are reconciled with God and the Father, although at first we allowed a great apostasy, thanks to the deviation towards evil, and once divided into two nations, into the Gentiles and Israel, we became one new man in Him: after all, the mediastinum of the fence was destroyed and the power of enmity was abolished, when Gospel teachings (dogmas) silenced the law (Eph. 2:14-15), - how could one admit that those who do not have peace among themselves have become disciples of peace? What else could rejection of love be, if not the generation of war, the overthrow of peace and the appearance of all double-mindedness? Just as in the indissoluble union of love all the blessings of the world are preserved for us, in the same way, I think, with the suppression of love, evil from enmity invades. What from here? Resentment, discord, jealousy, anger, rage, incitement, slander, envy and all kinds of evil appear. If, therefore, in the form and manner of love all virtue is headed and fulfilled, then let none of us become wise because of abstinence in food and sleep on the (bare) earth or for any other ascetic labors, if he does not properly preserve love for his brother. Such a one goes beyond the marked line of the field like inexperienced drivers (on the lists) and deviates from the course, like a helmsman who has the rudder of a ship, but out of ignorance does not hold the goal assigned for navigation. Therefore, he who dared to say: “If you seek proof of Christ speaking in me (what Christ speaks in me),” I mean the divine Paul (2 Cor. 13:3), boasted not that he was simply striving, but that he was doing it according to the goal (Phil. 3:14). Yes, to boast about bodily labors, I think, means moving away from the most important and necessary goods, that is, not striving according to the goal. He, therefore, knew that love, like a certain crown, rests on all virtues, so that, being jealous of it, he beautifully says: “If I spend all my possessions and if I give up my body to be burned for me, but I do not have love, I mean nothing; If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but I do not have love, I become a sounding brass or a clanging cymbal” (1 Cor. 13:1, 3). So, the praise of love serves as a manifestation in us of the face and image of the Savior Christ. John 13:36. Simon Peter said to Him: Lord, where are you going? 916 Peter is again curious out of curiosity and tries to find out the meaning of the words (of Christ), not yet understanding, as it seems, what is said (by Christ), but showing, however, an ardent desire to follow Christ. The order (prevailing among) the disciples here is also worthy of surprise. Not because, as someone might think, the leader among them (Peter) asks, because he alone did not understand (the words of Christ), while others understood, but, on the contrary, they grant him, as the one who had the upper hand, primacy in the word and boldness in questioning (the Lord). After all, speaking to the Teacher is not safe even for the famous (Gal. 2:6). And Peter deserves great surprise in that he was not afraid to appear incomprehensible, trying to know what he did not know, but quickly strived to acquire wisdom, putting the benefit of curiosity above inappropriate modesty, so that in this he became an example for posterity. It is not appropriate, I think, to ignore the words of teachers, even if they are not very clear, because of the desire to appear very understanding and prone to prudence - on the contrary, it is appropriate to find out and examine exactly what has been taught first for our benefit. After all, knowledge of what is useful is much better than empty superstition and truly learning something is higher than the apparent knowledge of something. John 13:36. Jesus answered him: Even though I am going, you cannot follow Me now, but follow me when you go 917 Knowing that he would cause His disciples severe and unbearable grief if he said clearly that He would ascend to heaven and leave them deprived of His presence on earth, although He would again be with them as God, in this case he uses covert speech, slightly depriving it of its direct meaning. Seeing them ignorant, he leaves them to remain in the same state. It is common for sages to sometimes cover up with heavy (sophisticated) words what can cause sorrow. So Christ, although He exalted Himself to God and the Father and arranged His departure to heaven as the firstfruits of humanity, and this was done for the benefit of all, for He renewed for us a path that human nature had not known before, but for the holy disciples, who wanted to always be with Him, separation from Christ turned out to be unbearable, although He was always co-present with them by the power and action of the Holy Spirit. So, blessed Peter, who did not know the meaning of the spoken words (of Christ), together with the other disciples, conveniently leaves to remain in the same state until he finishes his speech, which can strengthen them. As we will see, He does the same thing later when He says to them: “It is good for you that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Comforter will not come to you” (John 16:7). However, like God, he hastens to warn the willing disciple that he will willingly follow Him and will soon be with Him, when nothing will hinder his zeal, and says: “Where I am going, you cannot follow Me now, but you will follow later.” This saying contains a twofold idea. One of them is very simple and very accessible, while the other is somewhat unclear and mysterious. He says that he could not now follow the One who goes to God and Returns to heaven. However, it will follow later, that is, when, with the coming of the glory and honor promised from Christ to the saints, they will ascend to the highest City and reign with Him. But in addition, it also means something else, which I will tell you about. Not yet endowed with power from above (Luke 24:49) and not having received the Holy Spirit, who strengthens them and transforms human nature to courage, I mean, they were not able to fight against death and resist such insurmountable horrors, for otherwise it would be incredible that, when it was fitting and determined for our Savior Christ alone to crush the power of death, others before him were found doing this. After all, not to be afraid of death, what else could it mean other than to despise death as not being able to cause any harm? That is why, as we think, the blessed prophets themselves trembled before the onset of death, as if it had not yet been abolished through the Resurrection of Christ. Having correctly understood this, Paul also said that the Word received from the seed of Abraham what is from God the Father and in God, in order to abolish death through the death of the Holy Flesh “and to deliver those who, through the fear of death, were guilty of slavery all their lives” (Heb. 2:14-16). The first destruction of death was saving suffering, and the beginning of bold courage against it among the saints was the Resurrection of Christ. So, when Life by nature (Christ) had not yet abolished death and had not crushed the fear that attacks our souls from it, the disciples were still very weak against dangers. Therefore, the Lord, with careful secrecy, hints and says that in due time Peter will be crucified and in this he will follow Him. But the fact that now for such a great feat he does not yet have the fortitude of spirit is indicated in the words: “Where I am going, you cannot follow Me now, but you will follow later.” If in these words Christ did not give us a mysterious indication of the death of Peter, then why does He refer the meaning of the speech to the person of Peter alone, although the other holy Apostles had a promise to be with Him and follow Him, obviously at the time of the resurrection, when endless life and promised blessings would come for them? But it is obvious that it foreshadows Peter and mysteriously indicates what was to happen to him in the future. He indicated this more clearly in another saying, namely: “When you were young, you girded yourself and went where you wanted; when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and others will gird you and take you where you do not want to go. “He said this,” he says, “pointing out by what death he would glorify God” (John 21:18-19). Of course, for saints, although it is pleasant to suffer for Christ, the danger (of death) is (still) undesirable, but it is endured when imposed out of necessity. This is why he commands us to pray, so that we do not fall into temptation (Matthew 26 et al.). John 13:37. Peter said to Him: Lord, why can’t I walk after You now? I will lay down my soul for You 918 What, he says, prevents or what does not allow one to follow (follow You) for one whose goal is to die for the Teacher and who considers this to be a praiseworthy deed? After all, the end of all danger and the limit of the indomitable cruelty of the persecutors extends only to the flesh, for death (has power only) against it. He (the Apostle Peter), having already decided and prepared for this, who, he says, could have prevented or how would have destroyed the firm decision to follow? Peter's readiness is ardent, and his promise (to follow Christ) exceeds all measure, from which one can see the considerable power inherent in him, which the very subsequent events revealed. However, this is what needs to be taken into account. Meanwhile, our Savior Christ, above and below, points to His ascension into heaven and says that now he (Peter) will not follow Him, but will follow after that, obviously at the end of his apostolic ministry, when the due time comes for the calling of the saints to the highest City, he promises to be ready and undergo death, as if going a different way and walking (guided) not by the direct meaning of the words of Christ. He says this, as I believe, without understanding exactly the meaning of these words, and perhaps he thinks that the Lord will either go to some wilder villages than the Jews, or even to other nations, who, having heard His preaching, will be so strongly embittered against His words that the insolence of other Jews will turn out to be completely insignificant and the fury inherent in the Pharisees will seem completely meek. That is why one promises to follow Him strictly - not only to die, but, if necessary, to die without any hesitation. There is something similar to this in the previous one, which I will say again. Once moving away from the madness of the Jews, their uncontrollable rage and unbridled language, Christ began to walk through the Galilean areas and with His miracles aroused great surprise in them. When the brother of Mary and Martha died, I mean Lazarus, He again recognized this as God, and then said to the disciples: “Lazarus our friend has fallen asleep, but I am going to wake him up” (John 11:11). To this, the disciples, out of love for Him, said to Him: “Today the Jews sought to stone You, and are You going there again?” (John 11:8). When the Lord insisted and ordered to return to the country of the Jews, then “Thomas, who is called the Twin, said to the other fellow disciples: let us also go to die with Him” (John 11:16). I think the same purpose is contained in the words of Peter. Perhaps he thinks, as I said before, that Christ will go somewhere to preach and there He will be in danger. Therefore, he himself (Peter), united with Him by indissoluble love, promises to show some kind of irresistible and unshakable desire for this, saying that there is nothing left that can hinder him, who has already decided to follow, even if he faces death for the Teacher. John 13:38. Jesus answered him: Will you lay down your life for Me? Amen, amen, I say to you: he will not cry out any loopholes until he has denied Me three times 919 Peter promises more than he could fulfill, although he has a commendable zeal for this. But Christ, bearing in mind the sorrow of future disasters, the severity of temptations and the power of persecution, as if bowing His head and, as if spreading out all the suffering before His eyes, imagining the excessive madness of the Jews and seeing what was happening at that time, perhaps proclaims something like this: “You will lay down your soul,” Peter, “for Me” and say that there is nothing terrible in this and that you hope to be the winner of future trials? But you don't know the severity of temptation. After all, you will face the most severe suffering, and you, even against your will, will experience great cowardice, and “you will deny Me three times,” and this very thing (you will do) even in one night. We must assume that Jesus is thinking of saying something similar to this. However, here again His inherent love for mankind is worthy of surprise. Having predicted that the tension of his inherent jealousy would not be matched by the strength of his soul, but that he would weaken and retreat so much that he would renounce out of fear of danger alone, He, however, did not make any threat and did not say that for this he could be subject to Divine wrath. For some reason, 920 does not impose punishment on those who have been subjected to anything human. He knew that nature was still weak and could not bear the threat of death. After all, it (death), not yet abolished through His resurrection, depressed the souls of everyone and was still able to crush even the very courageous and very capable of courage through fear alone. Nature, contrary to nature, having undergone death, yields to it as the winner, or rather, continued (still) to yield then. When our Savior broke her bonds, she appeared sweet to those who love Christ, even though she approached cruelly, for eternal life entered in her place, destroying the power of corruption. Also here again, let no one think that Peter denied and fainted because of the words of Christ. By no means imposing necessity and not forcibly involving in suffering, Christ says this, but what He knew, as God, that would certainly and undoubtedly happen, this he predicts to the disciple. And since what happened to the ancients was written for the admonition of their descendants (1 Cor. 10:11), here we find ourselves encouraged to talk about what should be useful in this section. We should not, I think, make any hasty promises to God and undertake to do things that are sometimes beyond our strength, as if we had power over objects - I say this in view of reproaches from failure. However, I think it is not without pride to hastily say that I will do this or that. On the contrary, in everything that anyone decides to do and wants to do, one should proclaim what the wisest disciple said: “If the Lord wills, we too will live” (James 4:15). Beneficial zeal, I say, should be inherent in the souls of lovers of God and an ardent desire to perform virtue with all one’s might, but the way to this is to ask for the highest favor and not to make frivolous promises, as if it were in your hands. In this way, we will preserve to God the true promise of all blessings and we will have our feet free from guilt, according to the Hellenic proverb 921. Also in other respects, it is better for everyone not to promise, than to promise and not fulfill (Eccl. 5:4). :glava14 John 14:1. Let not your heart be troubled 922 Having said that Peter would descend to such cowardice that he would deny three times and experience this in one night, He, by the excessiveness of the subject, seemed to indicate the final degree of fear of danger. Therefore, it was natural for other students to immediately begin such a reasoning: what kind of fear is this of the future, and to what extent will it reach, and what is this such an insurmountable test that it will even overcome the leader among them and overthrow him not just once, but in one go (one night) several times, and in a short time? Who, therefore, among us will avoid being in an even worse position, or how can anyone else resist him, if Peter is already hesitating and, as if of necessity, yielding to the gravity of what happened (the test)? In vain, therefore, we have endured the labors of following Him, and our hard efforts end in harm, although they are considered capable of giving life to God. There is nothing incredible in the fact that the disciples reflected within themselves in this way. And since the mind that had wavered in them had to be corrected again, it opposes such thoughts and fears as if it were a necessary medicine and commands them to make the absence of confusion their instrument, saying: “Let not your heart be troubled.” Notice, however, how in a hidden form he promises them remission of their future cowardice. After all, he does not say directly and openly that he will show mercy to those who are exhausted, or that, nevertheless, it will happen again to those who have renounced or fled, so that, completely freeing them from the fear of negligence and completely destroying in them the thought of anger (of God), thereby not making it too easy for them to sin and not teaching them to value the depravity of renunciation at all. Saying that it was not appropriate to be embarrassed, he put them in the middle between hope and fear, so that, on the one hand, when they began to grow weak and were subject to human weakness, the hope of mercy (of God) would assist them in rebellion, and on the other hand, the fear of angering God would forbid them to fall often, since they did not yet have the opportunity not to sin at all, as they had not yet been endowed with the power of heaven and from above, that is, grace through the Spirit (Luke 24:49). So, he commands them not to be embarrassed, teaching them at once that those who have had to strive and go into labor for the sake of the highest glory, without a doubt, should be above timidity, for an unperturbed spirit is a great aid for courage, and, on the other hand, again, although it is unclear and not very open, but sowing the hope of forgiveness in the event that they happen to fall into timidity due to human cowardice. Indeed, the mind, not yet strengthened by heavenly grace, is fearful, unstable and quick to waver. That is why the wisest Paul makes such a prayer appeal in one of his Epistles: “...and the peace of Christ, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts” (Phil. 4:7), for this means not to be troubled in heart. John 14:1. Believe in God and believe in Me He makes a former coward into a brave warrior and, from being fearful of wounds, commands him through deeds to become strong in faith, for this is how, and not otherwise, we are saved, according to what is sung in the psalms: “The Lord is my enlightenment and my savior, whom will I fear? The Lord is the protector of my life, whom shall I fear?” (Ps. 26:1). And indeed, when we are protected and helped by almighty God, who is able to harm us? Who can possess such power to subjugate the chosen ones under his power and subject them to the troubles of his evil nature? Or who could take and make prisoners those who possess the Divine armor? So, faith is an indestructible and enormous weapon, turning away all cowardice from the thought of suffering and making the tempting arrows of their wickedness completely powerless and completely useless. But if faith has such a meaning, then, on the other hand, we must also pay attention to the fact that He commanded them to believe not “in God” only, but “and in Him,” not because He was something else, different from what exists by the nature of God, I mean in relation to the identity of essence, but because to believe in God and limit the entire content of faith to only this one word (God) is a property of Jewish thoughtlessness, and to 923 faith in To add God and (faith in) the name of the Son is the command of the gospel preaching. Those who think right must believe both in God the Father, and not just in the Son, but also in the One Who became man, and in the Holy Spirit. After all, the Holy and Consubstantial Trinity is distinguished both by the difference in names and by the qualities and properties of the Persons: the Father is the Father, and not the Son; and the Son is again the Son, and not the Father; and the Holy Spirit is the Spirit possessing the Godhead; and She is united in one and the same essence, presenting to us not three, but one God. However, I say, it is fitting for us to believe separately, not simply saying: we believe “in God,” but spreading the confession and appropriating to each person the same measure of glory. There should not be any difference in faith in us, that is, we do not have greater faith in the Father, but less in the Son or in the Holy Spirit. But one and the same limit and image of confession, passing through the three names in equal measure, so that through them (the names) the Holy Trinity also appeared to have the unity of nature, Her glory shone completely immaculately, and in 924 our souls there was faith in the Father and in the Son, and when He became man, and the Holy Spirit. And no one, I think, if he has a sound mind, will separate the church (perceived by him) from the Virgin from the Logos of God, since this refers specifically to sonship, “for there is one Lord, Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 8:6), according to the words of Paul. And whoever divides the One and Only into two sons, let him know that he completely denies faith. So the divine Paul, speaking very beautifully and quite correctly about this, makes the object of faith not only the Only Begotten, but also one who became like us, that is, as a man who died and rose from the dead, for what does he say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart, that is, the word of faith that we preach, because if you say with your mouth that the Lord (is) Jesus, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; For with the heart he believes the truth, and with his lips he confesses for salvation” (Rom. 10:8-10). If we believe in the Son as risen, then who (will be) died so that he could rise? But it is obvious that the dead are thought to be according to the flesh. His own body was imprisoned in death and came to life again, for it was the body of Him who is Life by nature, bearing all the properties of the One who dwelt in him and was inexpressibly united, that is, life-giving power. When, therefore, someone divides and, putting apart the flesh and Him who dwelt in it bodily, dares to call two sons, let him know that he believes in the flesh alone. After all, 925 The Divine Scriptures teach us to believe in Him who was crucified and died and rose from the dead, not as another, different from God the Word present in it (the flesh) - I say this not in relation to the identity of essence, for the body is a body, and not the Word, although it is the body of the Word - but in relation to true sonship. If it seems to anyone that we are speaking badly, let him then prove that God’s Word has died, since It is thought by God, which is impossible, even more wicked, to even think about this. John 14:2–3. In My Father's house there are many abodes: even if I told you, I am going to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and take you with Me, so that where I am you too will be 926 Having said that they should not be embarrassed at all, but commanding them to believe both in the Father God and in Himself, then, obviously wanting to give consolation to the faint-hearted, he says that they will not remain outside the sacred court, but will dwell in the highest monasteries, will spend eternal life in the church of the firstborn and will abide in endless blessings. “Many,” he says, are “abodes in the house” of the Father, teaching that heaven is very spacious and that the creation (heaven) created by Him does not at all need any addition (expansion) in order to be able to receive (accommodate) those who love Him. It seems that he wants to point out the difference in honor when he says that there are many abodes, so that everyone who wants to lead a life in virtue will receive, as it were, a special place and glory corresponding to his exploits. Therefore, “if” there were not “many” “abodes” of God and the Father, then for this reason He, according to His words, would have had to depart in advance, obviously in order to prepare the dwellings of the saints. But knowing that there are already many of them prepared and awaiting the coming of those who love God, not for the sake of this reason, he says, I will leave, but in order to prepare for you and equalize the once inaccessible, as it were, certain place and space of ascension into heaven. After all, heaven was completely inaccessible to people and no flesh had previously trampled on that pure and holy country of Angels. Christ was the first to renew our entrance into it and gave the flesh a place of ascension into heaven, for the first time offering Himself to God and the Father as a kind of firstfruits of those who rested and lay in the earth and became the first man to appear to the inhabitants of heaven. That is why the Angels in heaven, not knowing the most honorable and great mystery of His coming with the flesh, were amazed at His ascension and, confused by this strange and unusual phenomenon, seemed to say: “Who is this who appears from Edom?” (Is.63:1), that is, from the earth. But the Spirit did not leave this highest multitude (Angels) without teaching the wondrous wisdom of God and the Father, but commanded them (Angels) to open the heavenly gates to Him as the King and Lord of all, proclaiming: “Lift up your gates, princes, and lift up the eternal gates, and the King of glory will come in” (Ps. 23:7). So, our Lord Jesus Christ renewed for us “a new and living way” (Heb. 10:19), as Paul says, not “entering into holy places made with hands (sanctuary, church), but into heaven itself, now to appear before the face of God for us” (Heb. 9:24). Of course, Christ did not enter with the goal of revealing Himself to the face of God and the Father, because He was and is and will always be in the Father and before the eyes of His Parent, for He is the One in Whom He always rejoices (Proverbs 8:30). Now the Logos, once alien to humanity, has risen as a man in an unusual and wonderful way to appear (to the Father). And this is for us and for us, so that, having been found as man (Phil. 2:7) and as the Son in power and with the flesh, having heard together and inseparably: “Sit on My right hand” (Ps. 109:1), He provided through Himself to the whole (human) race the glory of sonship. This is because He is one of us, since He appeared as a man, at the right hand of God and the Father, although He is above every creature and consubstantial with His Parent, since He appeared from Him truly as God from God and Light from Light. So, for us, as a man, He appeared before the Father, so that we, because of the original crime, removed from the face of God, could be brought again before the face of the Father. He sat down as the Son, so that through Him we too, as sons, might be called children of God. That is why Paul, claiming that he has Christ speaking within himself (2 Cor. 13:3), and teaching that what actually happened to Him was common to human nature, says that “he also raised him up and made him sit in heaven in Christ” (Eph. 2:6). The dignity of sitting together (with the Father) is a property of Christ as the Son by nature, and the glory of sitting next to the Father we must appropriate to Him alone in a true and fitting manner. But since the Co-Seater is completely similar to us, since He appeared as a man, and at the same time is thought of as God from God, then the grace of this dignity extends to us. After all, if we do not sit with the Father with Him, then how could servitude ever achieve equal honor with the Master? Meanwhile, He promised the holy disciples sitting on thrones, for “when,” He says, “the Son of Man sits on the throne of His glory, you also will sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel” (Matthew 19:28). So, I will leave, he says, not to prepare abodes for you, for there are already many of them and it is unnecessary to add anything new to what has been created, but to prepare a place for you, so that, as a result of the sin that has penetrated among people, those on earth will finally have the opportunity to be together with the holy Angels, for the holy multitude of the above (creatures) could not have communion with such unclean ones. Having arranged this and connecting the lower with the higher (earthly with heaven), giving you a place for ascending to the mountainous City, “again” I will return during the rebirth (Second Coming) and “I will take you with Me, so that where I am, you too may be.” Understanding this, Paul in his Epistles says this: “This is exactly what we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain at the coming of the Lord will not warn those who have fallen asleep, because the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a command, in the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first, then we who are alive and remain will be caught up with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so We will always be with the Lord" (1 Thess. 4:15-17). John 14:4. And even though I am walking, I know, and the way is true 927 I will go first, he says, to prepare for you the place of ascension into heaven. But if you wish and enjoy settling in those monasteries and you highly value staying in the highest City and cohabiting with the holy spirits, then you “know the way,” that is, Me, for through Me, of course, and not through anyone else, you will acquire such wonderful grace. There is no one else who will open the heavens to you and make accessible to you a place that was once completely inaccessible and alien to the inhabitants of the earth, as soon as I am alone. And this word is true. That is why the prophet Jeremiah in spirit commanded us to primarily seek this path, saying: “Stand on the paths and ask the eternal ways of the Lord, and see what the good way is, and walk in it, and you will find sanctification for your souls” (Jer. 6:16). The ways of the Lord and paths, according to the prophet, are the saving writings of the holy prophets. And if anyone puts his mind on them, he will find the good way, that is, Christ, through whom there is complete sanctification of our souls, for we are justified through faith (2 Pet. 1:4) and through the communion of the Holy Spirit we are made partakers of the Divine nature. But the most powerfully spoken prophet Isaiah himself preached Christ to us in these words: “The way there will be pure and the way will be called holy” (Is. 35:8). “There” he speaks, obviously during the time of the dispensation of the Only Begotten with flesh, for He became for us a pure and holy path - those who follow them will see at the appointed times the beautiful city of saints and free Jerusalem. So again the divine Psalmist himself tells us, turning as if to God the Father: “Law me, O Lord, in Thy way” (Ps. 26:11). He desires to be taught the laws of Christ, not unaware that through the gospel instruction he goes straight to every good and will reach the highest City. It would not be difficult to cite many other testimonies from the prophets, through which we could learn that Jesus is called the holy way, but I think there is no need or benefit to try to further clarify such clear subjects. So, you know the path through which you will go, he himself says, to the heavenly abodes, pointing to this and nothing else, or to the fact that there are many well-appointed chambers with God and the Father, and “I will go first” to prepare for you a place of free stay in those countries. Moreover, he says, you know that through no one else can anyone obtain residence there, except through Me and only one. Therefore, if anyone falls away from the love of Christ or, listening to the vile idle talk (1 Tim. 6:20) and the impurity of the false words of slanderers, places His ineffable and incomprehensible nature in the ranks of slaves, classifies the free Word born from the essence of the Father among the creatures or in any way causes harm, let him finally know that he has lost the path of march to heaven and has deviated from the furrows his arable land, as someone said, and must certainly undergo the punishment befitting those in hell. Therefore, the wisest Paul says that those who, due to mental damage, have renounced life in Christ and returned to the shadows of the law have alienated themselves from Christ and fallen from grace because they prefer justification from the law (Gal. 5:4). Just as one who deviates from the rough and straight path must certainly be harmed by wandering, in the same way, I think, those who have rejected justification in Christ and set the instruction of the gospel life at nothing will not see the City on High, but will not live together with the saints, for the path leading to this is Christ alone. John 14:5–6. Thomas said to Him: [Lord], we don’t know where you are going, and what is the way? Jesus said to him: I am the way and the truth and the life: no one will come to the Father except by Me 928 Christ, who did not yet want to clearly tell His disciples that He would ascend to heaven and go to the Father, but who was still mysteriously and through many hints pointing to this, was asked by the disciple - “Thomas”, and at the same time, as if involuntarily forced to speak, he also added some reasoning - the question of where He would go and to what place the path of His departure was heading. We don’t know, he said, “where are you going”, then: “how” could we know “the path”? But the Lord passes over (in silence) the student’s excessive curiosity. Nothing answers what he wanted, but, keeping it in His own knowledge and giving it the proper time, he considers it useful to reveal what was necessary for them to learn. So, “I,” he says, “am the way, I am the truth, I am the life.” That the Lord truly says this about Himself, I believe, no one who is sane will ever doubt. However, I consider it necessary to carefully examine the question: for what reason, although He is called by light, and wisdom, and power, and many other names in the Inspired Scriptures, in the present case He uses only a few chosen and special ones, calling Himself “way” and “truth” and “life”? The meaning of this saying is deep, I believe, and not easily accessible, but this should not stop us from trying to explain it. I will say what comes to my mind, leaving a better understanding to those who have a keener ability to contemplate. So, through three objects we will penetrate into the heavenly and Divine courts and ascend into the church of the firstborn, I mean: through the practice of various virtues, right faith and hope for life. But how could there be another giver, or culprit, or reason, or source of our ability to do this, other than our Lord Jesus Christ? Not at all, don’t even think about it. After all, He laid down for us what is above the law, He showed us the path that, I believe, everyone should take in relation to the practice of virtue, and (showed) the accessibility and pleasantness of deeds that are consistent with the teachings of Christ. So, He is the “truth”, He is the “way”, that is, the true definition of faith, the canon and rule of the non-false concept of God. And indeed, by believing in the Son truly, that is, born from the very essence of God and the Father, not imaginary, not falsely named, but also not a creature or creature, we will be clothed with the praise of true faith. After all, he who accepted the Son as a son, without a doubt, also confessed Him from Whom He is, knew and must accept God as the Father. That is why He is “truth”, He is “life”, for no one else will restore to us the life we ​​expect, that is, immortal, blessed, holy. After all, He resurrects us and those who were subjected to death thanks to the original curse will raise us back to what we were in the beginning. Therefore, everything beautiful and excellent, as has already appeared to us, will still be through Him and in Him. And please pay attention again to the fact that what we are talking about is completely consistent with the subject of the discussion. In fact, since the disciple still doubted and said: “as we know the way,” he briefly pointed out that as soon as they learned that He is the author, giver and distributor of goods that can be transferred to heaven, then they would no longer need anything in order to know “the way.” And since we added to this: “no one comes to the Father except through Me,” then let us say to this something from what will be said later, having examined in advance how everyone can go to the Father. We come in two ways. Or, having become holy to the extent appropriate to humanity, we seem to join the Holy God, for “you will be holy,” it is said, “because I am holy” (Lev. 19:2). Or we come to the knowledge of the Father through faith and contemplation, as in a mirror and a riddle, according to what is written (1 Cor. 13:12). But no one could ever be a saint and lead a virtuous life if Christ did not instruct him in everything, and could not unite with God and the Father Himself without the mediation of Christ. He is a mediator between God and people, through Himself and in Himself connecting humanity with God. As born from the essence of God and the Father, since He is the Word and the reflection and reflection (of God), He is one with the Father, being wholly in Him and having Him in Himself. And since He became a man similar to us, without our sin, He unites with earthly beings and became, as it were, a kind of middle ground, containing within itself what has converged towards unity and friendship. So, “no one” will come to the “Father,” that is, will not be a sharer of the Divine nature, except through Christ alone. After all, if He had not become a man and had not become a mediator, then we would not have reached such bliss, but even if anyone comes to the Father through contemplation, that is, through faith and pious (religious) knowledge, he will also come only through our Savior Christ. Yes, what I recently said, I will say again, since there is no other way of reasoning: he who has accepted the Son truly as a son must come to the knowledge of God and the Father, for it is impossible to imagine the existence of a son if the one who begat him is not accepted along with him: the knowledge of the Father is united with the knowledge of the Son, and vice versa - the knowledge of the Son with the knowledge of the Father. Therefore, the Lord is true when he says: “No one comes to the Father except through Me,” because the natural and essential image of the Father is the Son, and not, as it seemed to some, by acquired virtues He becomes a reflection of Him, essentially being and thought of as something else. John 14:7. If they knew Me more quickly, then they knew My Father more quickly 929 Perhaps someone will say and think that the Son Himself is speaking against Himself. But this is not the case. He would not say anything vain or unnecessary, although He sometimes makes useful repetitions for those who could not fully follow His words. However, in the present case it brings us considerable benefit by adding this to the previous words. Since Thomas asked where He would go, or: how can we know the way without knowing where He will go, he considered it necessary to say: “I am the way and the life and the truth, and no one comes to the Father except through Me” (John 14:6), showing from here that if anyone wanted to know the way by which he can come to eternal life, he should try in every possible way to know Christ. And how natural it was that some, following more Jewish than evangelical teaching and considering the knowledge and confession of one God of all to be sufficient for the right faith, did not strive to know the doctrine of the Holy and Consubstantial Trinity, then Christ, of necessity, in some way excludes from those who think so the knowledge of God, if they do not wish to accept Him. And this is because through the Son we must come to God and the Father, just as in the same way, by contemplating the Begotten, we will come to the Parent Himself. After all, there is no doubt that whoever believes in the existence of the Son as a son, that is, from the essence of the One who gave birth, he, of course, also knows the Father. This is how the saying can be understood in relation to the simplest and unexplored knowledge. If anyone would like to turn to the very study of the subject through subtle speculation, then he will also find the truth in the words of the Son. True, the Divine nature is completely inaccessible to any mind, and to dare to fully investigate what is essentially the Creator of all things is a sign of complete mental deterioration. However, there is partly an opportunity for us to collect some knowledge, as if in shadows and riddles, as if some kind of mirror presenting to the mind an enumeration of the advantages inherent in the nature of the Son. From what He Himself is and what He accomplished when He became man and before His incarnation, accordingly everyone can finally come to the contemplation of Him who gave birth to Him. Please notice His inherent glory and power, keep in mind His unlimited power over everything. What, tell me, even of that which exceeds reason turns out not to be arranged by His free movements, both before the flesh and with the flesh? But, having appeared to us as such through the very works, he says: “I and the Father are one: he who has seen Me has seen the Father” (John 10:30, 14:9). Therefore, according to the meaning of this saying, it is appropriate to go from image to prototype and from reflection, of course, and to the one of whom it is a reflection. And we do not say, as some are accustomed to think otherwise, that the Son is likened to the Father by any acquired and external virtues, nor that He, as it seems to those who are mistaken, is called the image of God and the Father as, although possessing His glory, power, wisdom, but having a different nature. This chatter of theirs and flowery words, or rather, wickedness, are invented to pervert and destroy the consubstantiality of the Son, of course, in accordance with their wicked and ungodly goal. But as the Son truly, ineffably and superintelligently begotten from the essence of God and the Father, He is His imprint and image and reflection, bearing in His nature the property of the essence of Him who begat Him and the beauty of natural advantages. Let us not be fools like them and let us not bring our minds to such impiety as to call Him who is not God by nature like God, not born from the essence of God and the Father to endow with the glory of God, or to say that wholly created and brought from non-existence into being can ever truly bear all the Divine power and wisdom and be the same as the Divine and ineffable nature of God and the Father should be thought of. In fact, what, in this case, will there be a difference between the Creator and the creature, or what can serve as a mediating division of the identity of essence between the creature and the Creator? After all, if He completely possesses His glory and power and wisdom, in equal measure with God and the Father, then what greater thing will be in Him and what advantage He will have over us or over the creation, I could not say at all, and I suppose they will not be able to. So, it is not by external merits that the Son appears to us as equal to the Father, and not as someone inscribed on a board appears before us through a varied combination of colors, depicting and replacing the appearance of a king, but He is the mark and true image of Him who gave birth to Him, in His own and natural qualities making the nature of the Father clear. That is why we say that it is impossible for anyone to know the Father if they do not first know Him, that is, the Son. John 14:7. And henceforth you know Him and have seen Him 930 I consider the inherent arrangement (of words) and the difficult-to-express (in words) construction worthy of surprise in this saying. In the words “if you knew Me, you would also know My Father,” having accused the disciples of ignorance of such a necessary subject, He immediately pointed out the opposite: “from now on you know Him and have seen Him.” Since they had to be the leaders of the churches located everywhere, having heard from the Savior Himself: “Go and teach all nations” (Matthew 28:19), then for this particular reason, I believe, having beneficially pointed out in advance and as if expressing generally about everyone, that if anyone has known the Son, he knows without any doubt the Father and God, from whom He is, he considers it useful to testify to the knowledge in His disciples - not for the sake of pleasantness, for He could not say anything that was not true, but as having actually known and known. After all, for those who are sensible, there is no doubt that they knew and believed that the Lord is truly the Son of God. Otherwise, in what way did Nathanael (the true) Israelite, hearing: “Before Philip called you, I saw you under the fig tree,” immediately expressed his confession of faith in the words: “Rabbi, You are the Son of God, You are the king of Israel” (John 1:49-50)? So, during the miraculous and extraordinary calm of the sea, didn’t those in the ship worship Him, “saying: Truly You are the Son of God” (Matthew 14:33)? Can anyone who does not know that He is God and born of God the Father say such words? Otherwise, shouldn't he be so weak-minded? Also near the borders of Caesarea Philippi, when Christ Himself asked them: “Who do people say that I am, the Son of Man?” -Have you not expressed the assumptions of others before? Some, it is said, consider Elijah, others Jeremiah or one of the prophets. And who they themselves consider Him to be, they also did not refuse to clearly express everything through the one who had the upper hand - it was Peter himself - and without hesitation they answered: “You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God” (Matthew 16:13-14, 16). So, when Christ said: “If you knew Me, and you would know My Father,” do not think that this saying was said (only) to the disciples themselves, but, taking the face of the holy Apostles, it makes, as it were, a general definition that is found everywhere. Note that we should not consider them not to know that He is God and the Son of God. But when God called Himself the way, they did not really understand what seemed to be said mysteriously, and only regarding this alone they should be guilty of ignorance. Therefore, having denounced in a few words the fact that they cannot understand what was not directly expressed by him, then from here he offered a word common to all and clearly taught that the very knowledge of the Father will be damaged by the one who does not know the Son - just as in the disciples who confessed the faith, knowledge rightly testifies with the words: “From now on you know Him and have seen Him.” The word “from now on” is used, of course, not in the sense: from that hour or day when He spoke to them about this. He says “from now on,” contrasting the ancient and first with the present and new time of His coming, when the knowledge of the Father through the Son shone throughout the entire universe. That is why in the book of psalms he says, as it were, to God and the Father: “It is amazing to know You because of Me” (Ps. 139:6). And indeed, having seen the Son, shining with miracles that surpass reason and with Divine power easily accomplishing whatever He wanted, we were amazed at the knowledge about the Father received from here, meaning by it nothing more than the knowledge about the Son who came from Him. So, “from now on you know Him and have seen Him.” We knew in the Son, as I just said, who the Father is, and not only did we know, but we also saw or beheld. After all, knowledge points to speculation through thoughts, which can be obtained about the Divine and ineffable nature existing above everyone, through everyone and in everyone. And to see means confirmation through miracles. After all, we not only learned that the Father is Life by nature - and not only in pure intellect did we receive knowledge of this in ourselves - in the Son, who gives life to the dead and again raises those who have decayed into being, we not only learned that God and the Father is Life by nature and that He has all creation in His power and reigns royally over His creation, so that “all works are shaken for His sake and tremble” (2 Ezra 4:36), according to what is written, but we also see Him like this in the Son, when He, rebuking the sea and the winds, with great authority said: “Be silent, cease” (Mark 4:39). So, since He intended to say that not only did you know the Father, but that you also “saw” Him, then He found it necessary to put the word “from now on” in front - for what reason? The Law of Moses proclaimed to the children of Israel: “The Lord your God is one Lord” (Deut. 6:4), and did not offer the doctrine of the Son to the ancients, but, tearing them out of polytheism alone, called them to worship the One. And our Lord Jesus Christ, when he became a man, through many signs and actions made us know the Father through Himself and showed us the One nature of the Divinity conceivable in the Holy Trinity and truly existing. Therefore, he perfectly says “from now on,” pointing out the imperfection of knowledge among people who follow the law and live by their rules. It is also necessary to point out this: in the words that He Himself is seen instead of the Father, it does not destroy the true and especially personal existence of God and the Father, from whom He is, and does not say that He is the Father, as far as indicating a person is concerned. But since He is consubstantial with the Father, He is seen, he says, in Him, the One who gave birth, just as if the son of a person, wanting to express the nature of his own father, pointing to himself, says to the one who wants to know something like this: “You saw my father in me.” But God, we repeat, must be above all comparisons. John 14:8. Philip said to Him: Lord, show us the Father, and it will be sufficient for us 931 Philip is inquisitive, however, he is not very capable of the understanding required for the knowledge of God, otherwise he would never have thought that he could see the Divine nature with his bodily eyes, although God clearly says: “No one will see My face and live” (Ex. 33:20). And if he ever appeared to holy people, as the Inspired Scripture says, then no one, I believe, will think that the Divine nature ever appeared as it is in itself, but, of course, takes on an image corresponding to the time. So the prophets contemplated Him in different ways and their speech about God varied. Isaiah is different, Ezekiel is also not the same way. Therefore, Philip should have understood that it was completely impossible to see the Divine essence, and moreover through the flesh and with the flesh, when it is not very reasonable even to try to go to the Prototype Himself in the presence of the Image and the exact reflection of God and the Father, as not yet present and not properly expressed. Indeed, to represent the essence of God and the Father, the contemplation of Christ is quite sufficient, showing with perfect accuracy the much-desired beauty of the Royal Essence from which He was born, for “from the fruit the tree is known,” according to the word of the Savior Himself (Matthew 12:33). So, while contemplation of the Son is completely sufficient for a prudent person to imagine and accurately verify who is by nature the One who gave birth to Him, perhaps the disciple’s speech is unnecessary, although it should not be devoid of the highest praise. I think we should marvel a lot at his words: “Show us the Father and it’s enough for us.” This is similar to saying, for example: “We would recognize it as our greatest joy and would not seek anything else for bliss if we ourselves were rewarded with the most precious vision of God and the Father.” He, who preferred the vision of the Father to every good and everything considered the height of bliss, should not he be considered worthy of all surprise? So, in my opinion, we should understand the interpreted saying in the simplest sense that is accessible to everyone. But if (Scripture) needs to be examined more carefully and, perhaps, something from the secret must be expressed, then we must think that Philip understands and at the same time expresses something like that. After all, the Jewish representatives and with them the scribes and Pharisees were indignant at the miracles of the Savior and, struck in the heart by Divine signs as if by some kind of stones, they were tormented by envy, did not know what to do against this, and could not in any way prevent the Wonderworker. Condemning such wonderful events and disparaging His glory with false words, they went everywhere around the country of Judea and Jerusalem itself, either saying that He was performing signs with Beelzebub (Luke 11:15), or, excited to the point of uncontrollable fury, claiming that He was mad and did not know what he was saying. So, one day they gave the people the following prohibition: “He has a demon and is raging, why are you listening to Him?” (John 10:20). But 932 I consider it necessary to say (in more detail) what was the reason for such intolerable opposition to His glory. They convinced the people, as we have just indicated, not to accept the words of our Savior and to move away from Him, as He taught contrary to the law, and to try to run away from Him as far as possible, on the contrary, to adhere to the laws of Moses. For what reason? They said that the great Moses led the ancient people “to meet God,” according to what is written (Ex. 19:17), placed them at Mount Sinai, showed them God on the mountain, gave them the opportunity to listen to His words and very clearly certified that God spoke the laws. But this (Christ) showed nothing of the kind at all. That they had great reasoning about this, you can learn from the fact that you will see them speaking to a man blind from birth, whom the Savior healed with indescribable power: “You are a fellow disciple of Him, but we are Moses’ disciples, for we know what God spoke to Moses, but we do not know where He is from” (John 9:28-29). Thus, the adherents of Jewish dogmas thought that they represented an irrefutable basis for them and inevitable for many, which, as naturally, confused the few and misled them. And so Philip, thinking to himself that all this objection of the Jews would be destroyed if Christ Himself showed the Father to those who believed in Him, addressed with the words: “Lord, show us the Father, and that is enough for us.” Understand these words this way: Master, he says, everything that leads to faith is accomplished by Your power - through numerous miracles it would be possible to curb the uncontrollable slander of the Jews - there will be nothing left for us (to desire) if You Yourself show us God and the Father, for this will be enough for Your disciples to be able to fully reflect the words of those who defend those (the laws of Moses). Having given a contemplation similar to this to the interpreted saying, we will not sin, it seems, against the proper meaning. Philip himself calls us to such understanding, saying: “it is enough for us” to see God and the Father, as if this alone remains for those who believe. The Savior Himself partly assumes this in His further words: “The words that I speak to you, I do not speak from Myself, but the Father, abiding in Me, does the works Himself” (John 14:10). As this should also be understood, this should be said not here, but in the proper and next place. John 14:9. Jesus said to him: I have been with you so long, and you have not known Me, Philip: he who has seen Me in the form of the Father 933 It presents the student with his ignorance as unreasonable. Even the most difficult contemplations and for the perception of the mind require the subtlest research, at least perhaps not in a short time, but over a long period of time, will become accessible to the inquisitive and will become clear. Those in which there is nothing difficult, but are accessible to direct knowledge, everyone could understand without difficulty. What, Philip says, prevents you from understanding Me accurately, tell me? After all, such a long time has already passed in which “I am with you” and sufficient to confirm what you should know, and you still doubt, even more - you turned out to not know who I am by nature and where I come from, although you see Me as the creator of such amazing things for you. How do you not know, he says, that he who sees Me beholds the Father? But you think about the Jews that they once saw the Divine nature on Mount Sinai and heard Her speech when She laid down the laws for activity - and you yourself are not yet convinced that you contemplate the Father through Me and in Me. After all, “he who has seen Me has seen the Father.” That Christ does not point out to us physical vision, I think the listeners do not need lengthy proof of this. No one with intelligence will say that the nature of God is subject to bodily vision, but even with non-carnal eyes one can only contemplate what is barely accessible, as in a mirror, for we see as in a riddle (1 Cor. 13:12), and even one who boasts of very great knowledge, I think, thinks meagerly about God. However, to the enemies of truth, who sharpen their language against us, or rather, against the very essence of the Only Begotten, let us say this again. If the Son is not from the very essence of God and the Father, being by birth what He is, that is, God by nature and truly, but shines only in appearance and shines only with acquired glory, but is not adorned with it as a natural dignity and in this sense reflects the Father in Himself and is the unchangeable image of God, then, firstly, He would not be the Son by nature, nor the true birth (of God the Father), but the same as we, creation or something else like that. And having accepted this and believed so, we must, of course, consider it completely true that the Father will not be a father by action and nature, but by desire only and, perhaps, by opinion, as is called our Father. And then - what follows from here? The trinity (in the Divinity) will have to confess and, as if by necessity, appear. After all, then we have faith in a certain way, not in the Holy Trinity, but rather in three, since They do not exist in each other essentially, but each is, as it were, separated from His names into the property of His own nature (being by nature not what is given in the names of the Father and the Son) and completely cut off from the other. But the significance of this contemplation prompts us to say a little more about it. After all, if we admit this to be true, call it real and recognize the Son as completely alien to the essence of God and the Father, then will He not turn out to be a liar when he says: “He who has seen Me has seen the Father”? If the Father is God by nature, then how can the Son, not being, according to them, God by nature, reveal the Father in Himself? How can we contemplate the uncreated in the created? In the once non-existent, since He is considered created, how can one always see the Existing One? And let none of those who express these blasphemies tell me, distorting the truth, that since He has the glory of God and the Father, and His power, and His wisdom, and goodness, and omnipotence, and the power to bring into existence what once did not exist, then therefore His image is. But let him prove first whether He is God by nature, and moreover in such a true sense that there is by no means any defect in the general and complete similarity of the Image with the Prototype. If, contrary to his wishes, he is unable to prove this, then, secondly, we will demand from him to say what reason would allow, although not a God by nature, according to their chatter, to have the power to perform the works of the Divine? After all, this means bearing the image of the Father. If the Son, not having within Himself sufficient strength for this, receives from the Father and is endowed from Him with both wisdom and strength in order to be able to do what befits, say, the Father’s nature alone, then He will in this case turn out to be expressing a lie in the image and likeness (when He speaks of Himself as the image of God the Father). If we cannot allow Him to speak a lie, being as we have said (the true image of God), and must agree with Him as speaking the truth, then we will find ourselves damaging the very glory of God the Father. I'll tell you how it is. After all, it is either necessary to say that he speaks a lie against the image of God and the Father, not having within himself sufficient strength for deeds, but endowed with it from another, for such is not the Prototype. Or, if His words are true, that it is the Father who speaks in Him and that there is nothing at all that distinguishes (their essence) or mediates or changes their entire similarity, then it is finally necessary, even involuntarily, to say that the Father Himself also has power received from another, for in this way He wanted to show Himself to us in the Image of His nature or glory. So, don’t you see, someone will finally tell them, where your reasoning deviates from the straight path and into what jungle it leads those who think this way? But, they will say, the Son can, even though he is created, perform the works of the Divine nature, if it so pleases God and the Father. But what could be more wicked than this? In this case, there will be nothing greater or higher in God compared to creation, as soon as we begin to assimilate to it the power and glory of the Divine. And let no one, out of great delusion, consider it something wonderful and great to think about the Son and say that although He is a creature, He is not one of the creatures. Let him know that he is causing considerable harm to His glory. After all, it is necessary to examine not whether He has a fair nature compared to other creatures, but whether He is created at all. Indeed, how can anything avoid being a creation, even if it were the most beautiful of all creations? When the glory of the Son is degraded by classifying Him among the creatures, why, as if in some kind of reproach, do they point out to Him in vain that He is in the most beautiful place compared to other (creatures)? So, we will harm the essence of God and the Father if we assign the power to perform such things (Divine) to the Son, and, moreover, as a creature, according to their ignorant and reckless reasoning. We must not allow them to say that the works of the Divine are performed by the Son, being a creature by nature, for this is what pleases God and the Father. If they can prove this from Divine Scripture, then let them bring what they want, only let them keep the sayings of the saints genuine for us. And if here too they formulate such arguments that are images of their own opinion, then we will kindly say: “Woe to those who prophesy from their hearts” (Ezek. 13:3). After all, we must agree that the Father always desires that which can preserve His Divine glory unchanged and that preserves the correctness of the dogmas about Him. Therefore, having said goodbye to the folly of those, let us turn to the true teaching about Him, believing that the Son was truly begotten from the essence of God the Father and is God from God by nature. So, being the image and likeness of God and the Father, He proves to be true when He says: “He who has seen Me has seen the Father; How can you say: show us the Father? After all, Philip, he says, it is possible for you to contemplate in Me the nature of the Father and from the fact that I am Myself, to discern the Parent, for I have appeared and am truly and in essence His exact and similar image, outlining in Myself the whole nature of God and the Father. How else will you begin to look for another image of God’s vision, if it turns out that the ability to think correctly is (already) inherent in you - or what (else), tell me, contemplation do you require? Do you really think that the ancients were given the highest and most accurate (knowledge of God) when (God) descended in the form of fire on Mount Sinai? After all, the Jews are usually especially proud of this. This is approximately how we can assume Christ reasoned. And that the manifestation of the miracles of our Christ according to (the message of) the knowledge of God and the Father is higher than what happened on Mount Sinai, I consider it necessary for myself to speak about this now immediately. You will see in this way that Philip, as soon as the true Image (of God) was before him, there was no need to demand another kind of contemplation of God and the Father, which was given to the ancients on Mount Sinai. The Lord descended there in the form of fire, as it is written (Ex. 19:18), that is, this is how the Israelites contemplated. But, I think, no one could ever through this (contemplation of God in the form of fire) achieve true ideas about God or rise to the proper concept of the Divine. In fact, how would it be through fire, as if from some image, that we would come to the Prototype, that is, to the Father and God? After all, God is good by nature and, in addition, the Creator, who calls the once non-existent into being, and contains everything for existence and gives life, He is wisdom and power, good, merciful and merciful. But there is none of this at all in the fire. No one can think, if he has a mind, that fire is good and humane; not a single prudent person will say that it is constructive, wise and life-giving. Then how, tell me, through fire could anyone obtain ideas about the true Divinity? Or how could any of His natural properties be seen in a mirror and a riddle? What, they will ask, is the basis and what was the reason that prompted God to take the form of fire on Mount Sinai? Let us answer that at that very time the upbringing of Israel by God began and, as if a certain rule of their own life, the guiding law was communicated to them, which is why it was necessary for God then to appear to them primarily as a punishing and terrible person, so that the criminals could know that they were dealing with fire. That is why the great Moses proclaimed to the Israelites: “Our God is a destroying fire” (Deut. 4:24; cf. Heb. 12:29). We cannot, of course, assert that such a wise man (Moses), when explaining the nature of God, began to liken it to fire, but he called God that because, out of great aversion to evil, He, like an all-consuming fire, does not refuse to destroy and destroy those who despise Him. So, through fire God is known not by the fact that He is by nature. But He allowed Him to be called and appear as such for the benefit of the listeners (and the spectators of the Israelites of the time of Moses). Let us finally turn to the true and most accurate contemplation of the Father, that is, to the Son. And we will see in Him the image of the Parent if we fix the eyes of our minds on His inherent advantages. God the Father is good by nature, and so will we find the Son, for isn’t He good who endured such humiliation for our sake and “came into the world to save sinners” (1 Tim. 1:15) and laid down His life for them? The Father is also omnipotent, so is the Son; for what could be more powerful than the One who commanded the elements themselves, forbade the sea and the winds, transformed the nature of things into whatever he wanted, commanded the leper to be cleansed, and gave sight to the blind by His Divine power? Life by nature is the Father, Life is also the Son, giving life to the decayed, destroying the power of death and therefore raising the dead. Rightly, therefore, he says to Philip: “He who has seen Me has seen the Father.” If, he says, you have the opportunity to fully perceive in Me and through Me the Parent, then what other kind of vision of God do you require, having received much better than that given by the ancients and being with the truest Image, that is, with Me? John 14:10. Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me? Depicting in Myself, Philip, the nature of the One who gave birth, I, he says, am the image of His essence, as reflected by Him, not by external glory, as anyone can think, and not as adorned with alien and imparted qualities, but in my own nature I bear the properties of the Parent and am truly what He can be, I say in relation to the identity of the essence. But you will again say to this that in the end you are still not convinced that “I am in the Father, and the Father” for His part also “is in Me.” However, the meaning of My words, he says, even involuntarily leads you to finally agree to this. So, what I will say is, of course, the essence and words of the Father; and whatever I do, the Father also does. Christ says this, not as using the words of someone else and not in the position and measure of a prophet conveying the voices on high and emanating from the Father, for they spoke, of course, not their own, but God gave them and inspired. He also assimilates to His Father the performance of miracles, not as one who works miracles by communicated (external) power, like, for example, those who said: do not think of us that “by our own power or piety” we healed, that is, the sick (Acts 3:12). After all, it is common for saints to use for miracles not their own power, of course, but God’s, for they turn out to be servants and performers of both Divine words and deeds. And since the Son is consubstantial with the Father, in no way different from Him and having nothing different in comparison with Him, His own words, he says, are the words of the Father, so that the Father could not use other words than those of the Son. But understand the greatness of things in the same way. Since the Father cannot and does not do anything other than what the Son can and does, he says that these are His works. You can more clearly understand His words like this: “In general, I am like the Father and the Image of His essence, adorned not only with external similarity and external glory, but having in Me the whole Who gave birth, due to the identity of the essence.” John 14:10. The verbs that I say, I do not speak about Myself, but the Father abides in Me, He does things 934 If, he says, the Father addressed us with a speech, he would use the same words that I now (say), and not others, for I have such a significant similarity with Him that My speeches are His and what I do is considered His deeds: “Abiding in Me,” due to the identity of the essence, “He Himself does the works.” Since the Divinity has one essence, conceived in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, then every word from the Father, of course, is through the Son in the Spirit - and every deed or miracle through the Son in the Spirit - but is accomplished as if from the Father. The Son, like the Holy Spirit, is not outside the essence of the One who gave birth, but being in Him the Only Begotten and also having in Himself the One who gave birth. He Himself, he says, acts, for the nature of the Father is active, shining beautifully in the Son. To this we can add another thought, to which a good reason is given by House-building with the flesh. “From Myself,” he says, “I do not say” - instead: inseparably and not contrary to the will of God and the Father. Since in human form He appears as a beholder, He assimilates His words to the nature of the Divinity, as if in the person of the Father, and also His deeds. As if he were saying this: let not this human form of Me take away the appropriate and appropriate idea of ​​Me, and do not consider My words to be the words of a simple man like you, but (consider them) truly Divine and befitting the Father Himself, just like Me. He acts by “abiding in Me,” for I am in Him and He is in Me. So, do not think, he says, that the ancients were given something great and excessive, namely to see God as if in the form of fire and to hear the voice that spoke to them, for through Me and in Me you truly contemplate the Father, although I appeared like you, I came clearly, according to the word of the Psalmist (Ps. 49:3). Know that when you heard My words, you heard words (coming) from the Father. And you also became spectators of His works and His inherent power. And this is because through Me He speaks, as through His Word, and also performs and accomplishes wondrous deeds, again as through His Power.” I consider it certain that no one, unless he is damaged in his mind, will ever cut off her Word and Power from the essence of the Father, but everyone will agree that they exist in it and are inherent in it by nature. That by reason of the identity of nature the Son is in the Father and the Father also in the Son John 14:11. Believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me 935 He already speaks clearly, even more - and finally commands that we must think no differently than the Word of Truth Himself desires. It is consubstantial (ὁμοούσιος) with its Parent, without any mediation between Them or any separation of One and the Other by difference of nature. He has one, so that the nature (φύσις) of the Son appears in the essence (οὐσία) of the One who gave birth, and likewise the nature of God and the Father appears and shines in the essence of the One who was born, as, without a doubt, can be seen in us (people). After all, we do not turn out to be different in nature compared to our children and are not separated from them by the difference of nature, although we are separated by the difference of bodies. That is why anyone who looks at the son born of him can see blessed Abraham. But here there is a very large division among people, since each in his own image is and is, as it were, a completely separate individual collected in himself and in his body is not internally united with others, although everyone has a common nature. This is not how one should think about the True God. The Father is a father personally and specifically, and not a son, just as He who is begotten of Him is a son, and not a father, and the Spirit is a spirit personally. But since the Holy Trinity is united and collected into one nature of the Divinity, then we have one God, and let no one allow the complete separation of each of the so designated (Persons of the One Divinity) and let no one recognize the complete separateness of Their existence (essence), but we believe that each of Them is what He is, and is called by us according to His special hypostasis. We understand the Son to be from the Father, that is, he came from His essence inexpressibly and abides in Him. In the same way - and about the Holy Spirit: He truly is from God by nature, but is by no means separated from His essence, but proceeds from Him and always abides in Him, given to the saints through Christ. All through the Son in the Holy Spirit. The mind of the holy fathers taught us such correctness and truth of dogmas. This is how we are taught to speak and think by the Holy Scriptures themselves. And that we are quite correctly moving towards this irreproachable faith, the Lord will confirm this with the words: “Believe that I am in the Father and the Father in Me.” John 14:11. Otherwise, believe in Mi 936 for that deed Here he clearly states that He would not have done and would never have accomplished what befits the Divine nature alone, if He had not been from it by nature. And notice with what firmness and at the same time truth he expresses this. He demands faith not so much because of His words, although He knew no lies, but because of His deeds. And for what reason, I’ll tell you about it. After all, to use words and speech appropriate to God and to express something foolish, for example, is nothing difficult for a person who is raging and insane, but to use deeds and power appropriate to God, who would ever be able to? Which of the creatures can the Father give His glory? Do we not consider it to be the glory of the Father to have the power to do all things and to have omnipotent power, which in no way belongs to anything else among the creatures? So, wanting to give confirmation of Himself through necessary and at the same time irrefutable evidence, Christ commands us to believe, as a result of His very works, that He is in the Father and on His part has the Father in Himself, that is, in His own existence bears the nature of the Father, as His authentic birth, as a true fruit, as the Son, naturally manifested from the Father. But while the Church of Christ, although very famous for the correctness of its dogmas, has such an idea of ​​the Only Begotten, yet the God-fighting heretics convince those who listen and accept their destructive words to think differently. Raging with their censures against Christ, they, pathetic ones, try to surpass each other not in zeal for piety, but in order for one to be more wicked than the other and to say something more absurd. Since they drink wine from Sodom and gather bitter grapes from Gomorrah (Deut. 32:32), because they do not receive ideas about Him from the Divine Spirit and not from revelation from the Father, but from the head of the dragon (cf. Ps. 73:13), they do not have any sound thoughts at all, but say things that make the souls of the listeners miserable, bringing them down to hell and the abyss of the grave. By even daring to set this out in books, they seem to perpetuate their inherent cunning with immortality. Having sufficiently stated on this occasion what may help the hearers to have a correct idea of ​​the Son, we should not make any mention of their teaching. But since there is nothing incredible in the fact that the souls of some simple-minded people will be carried away by their pitiful words, I considered it necessary to overthrow their malicious chatter with true dogmas and show easily refutable their slander with which they want to surround the Son, but rather the entire Divine nature, which would be more accurate to say. This is what I found in the book of our opponents. While studying the interpreted words, I found (in this book) after some other reasoning literally the following words: “So, the Son, essentially (essentially) embraced by the Father (οὐσιωδῶς πεϱιεχόμενος ὑπὸ τοῦ Πατϱός), He has the Father in Him who speaks words and performs signs, which he explains in the words: “What I say to you, I do not speak of Myself, but the Father, abiding in Me, does the works Himself” (John 14:10).” Such is their idle chatter. But if we need to imagine something that can counter their words and expose their unskillful mind (Rom. 1:28), then I will say this. Their expression that “the Son is essentially embraced by the Father”, what meaning it has and what it means, I don’t really understand. So great, I must tell the truth, is its ambiguity. It is as if they are ashamed of this reasoning and hide in obscurity, not having the courage (to be expressed clearly). Just as “he who does evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest he be exposed,” according to the words of the Savior (John 3:20), so any speech that signifies evil usually turns to dark expressions and does not resort to clear disclosure, lest its inherent vulgarity and stupidity be revealed. In fact, what does this mean: “The Son is essentially embraced by the Father”? With all my might, I will try to reveal this unclear expression and, perhaps, afraid that, clearly understood, it will actually reveal the malice of its creator. After all, if it wants to express that the Son, appearing in the essence of the Father, as consubstantial with Him, also has in Himself the Father, wholly illuminated in the nature of His Son, then we will agree with such reasoning. Only the term “embrace” (πεϱιοχῆς), used about the Son, seems to us very inappropriate. If he does not express this - after all, he who has spewed such blasphemy against Him and who claims that the nature of the Son is embraced by the nature of the Father, as if some kind of limited body, can never allow the birth of the Son from the essence of the Father - then will he not be clearly blasphemous and filled with mental harm reaching the extreme? And calling the Son God, they, contrary to reason, try to assign to Him the properties of bodies. After all, that which is entirely limited by some definition and measurement, conceivable at a distance, so that it has a beginning and an end, without a doubt, must also allow existence, for example, in some place, to have quantity and form and image. But aren’t all these properties of bodies? And will not He who is higher than us be thought of with us as similar to us? And will He not turn out to be related to every other creature, no longer having anything greater in comparison with it, as far as its limitations are concerned? But if so, according to the unreasonable assumption of our opponents, then why in vain does he frighten us with the words: “You are from below, I am from above,” and again: “You are of this world, I am not of this world” (John 8:23)? And when speaking about Himself that He is “from above” (ἂνωϑεν), He did not simply use it from “heaven,” for what advantage would He then have over the holy Angels, as soon as we find that they are “from above,” taking the expression in the local sense? But it indicates that He was born from the Highest and Dominant Essence over all. So, how can He turn out to be true if He has the properties of bodies common to other creatures, and together with what is brought from non-existence into being is embraced by the Father, if we must admit that nothing can be outside of Him? So the divine Psalmist, uttering completely true and hidden mysteries by the Spirit, says that the Son is not absolutely absent from any place, thereby testifying to His incorporeality and unlimitedness, as well as to the fact that He is not encompassed by a place like God. “Where,” he says, “will I go from Your Spirit and where will I run from Your presence? If I ascend to heaven, You are there; if I go to hell, you will be present (and there); If I take my wings in the morning and go to the borders of the sea, and there Your hand will guide me and Your right hand will support me” (Ps. 139:7-10). And these (false teachers), recklessly opposing their opinions to the revelations of the Spirit, subject the Only Begotten to limitation, although they are obliged to have correct and proper reasoning regarding this. After all, if He fills the heavens and the ends of the earth, that is, hell, then is it not the height of foolishness to apply the term volume to Him, without taking into account the fact that if His face, that is, the Spirit - for the face of the Son is called the Spirit - fills everything, then how could He Himself be within the volume of His God and Father? But it is no less reckless to assimilate the describability of the incorporeal and to subject the unlimited to measure. After all, to say that He is essentially embraced by God and the Father means nothing else but that He has a limited essence, as, without a doubt, each of His creations, to which we boldly and truly must assimilate the scope, for (and they) are bodies, even if not the same as ours. In addition, you need to take into account this. If we consider it necessary that what is embraced by something be within that which embraces it, then should it not follow beyond doubt that what is embraced is thought to be less than what embraces it and is limited, as if being enclosed by the volume of the greater? What do you say again, my dear? So He, presenting Himself as the image of God and the Father and clearly saying: “He who has seen Me, has seen the Father,” immediately added again: “I am in the Father and the Father in Me” (John 14:9-10). After all, if, in your opinion, He says that, being the mark and image of the One who gave birth, He is, however, essentially embraced by Him, then is it not indisputable for everyone that by this He wants us to have the same ideas about the Father that we received about Him? Therefore, it is necessary for the Father to be limited, for this is in the Son. Let the heretic decide who is greater than Him? But it is not proper for me to talk or think about this, for the Son must not be partly the image of the Father, but partly not. After all, if he has anything that alienates or mediates complete likeness (to His Father), then He will already be a partial, and not a complete image. But can you show where the Holy Scripture says this? Of course, we will not follow your words and will not reject the correctness of the sacred dogmas. I am surprised that they were not afraid to say at the same time: “Just as Paul had Christ in himself speaking and performing miracles, in exactly the same way the Son had in Himself the Father speaking and doing signs, which is why he says: “Believe that I am in the Father and the Father in Me,” “but if not, believe for the sake of the works.” But who will call someone who thinks and thinks about Christ like this a Christian? After all, he already clearly says that He is not truly God. But, having foolishly adopted the measure due to creatures, He preaches Him as some kind of God-bearing and partaker of God, or born of God by God. And his goal is to completely exclude Him, so to speak, by measures and methods, from the essence of God and the Father and generally separate Him from the natural and essential unity that He has with His Father and God. Is the highest degree of insanity possible? And shouldn’t we shed a tear of love over those who are given over to such unbridled wickedness, as if over the dead and the lost, and it is quite timely to say: “Who will give my head water and a fountain of tears for my eyes, and I will mourn for this people day and night” (Jer. 9:1)? Indeed, continuous tears should be shed over those who have adopted such a way of thinking. But since, I believe, it is necessary to reflect their slander with true dogmas, for the benefit of the simple, then again we will tell them the following, because “we were jealous for the Lord” (1 Kings 19:10). After all, the divine Paul, most dear, or any other of the saints, having Christ in their minds, dwelling through the Spirit, did what was completely pleasing to God and were performers of miracles. Therefore, there is no doubt - you yourself must recognize this as true - that, being human by nature and essentially different from the Holy Spirit of Christ who dwelt in them, some turned out to be God-fearing and glorious through the grace given to them by Christ. You, of course, will agree with us that they were once deprived of the gift of grace, but were called to it, for it is so pleasing to the just and fair God who rules. Therefore, it is possible to admit that through some lawlessness or unjust act, blessed Paul or someone else like him, having offended God, may find himself deprived of the grace given to him and be cast down again and return to the humiliation from which he ascended (through grace), for something completely external and communicated can easily be rejected and taken away as given. So, dearest one, the word (ours) will again be addressed to you: if, according to your ignorant and most impious assumption, just as in Paul Christ was speaking and working miracles, so the existence of the Father in the Son should be recognized, then is it not obvious that He will not at all be God by nature, but something else, different from the Father who dwells in Him, the true God? After all, Christ was also in Paul. Consequently, the Only Begotten in this case is an instrument and, as it were, a certain vessel prepared for glory, and will not differ in any way from a flute or lyre, producing those sounds that are forced to make it harmoniously emit by means of blowing or a drummer (stick). It will be used by the Father to work miracles in the same way as a saw or an ax is used by carpenters. But what could be more unreasonable than this? After all, if He is such by nature, as they say, then He will be completely alien to God and the Father, since He is recognized by us as God by nature and by no one else but Him. If the Son is separated from the essence of the Father, in relation to being God by nature, then should we not recognize as true that He is classified in the category of creatures and numbered among the creatures, that He is taken as an instrument and the Son, sitting before the Father, in the end turns out to be our servant instead of the Master. Moreover, He is no longer the true Son, for what is recognized as an instrument cannot be thought of and accepted as a son. Thus, the Father gave birth to the instrument of His inherent art or wisdom and turns out to have generated from Himself something other than what He is Himself. But is this acceptable? And isn’t it completely stupid to think something like that? If, therefore, you do not change the idea of ​​the Son as an instrument and servant and do not recognize Him as the true generation, but deny His ineffable birth, I mean from the essence of God and the Father, then you will have to diminish the very glory of the One who gave birth. Then the Father will no longer be a true father, for, having not begotten anyone from Himself, whom will He be the father of by nature? Therefore, the Holy Trinity is completely false, since the Father is not the true Father, nor the Son is the Son by nature, and according to this speculation, blasphemy will follow against the Spirit. Therefore, we are deceived and our faith is false; The Holy Scripture also expresses lies when it calls God Father. And if the Son is not God by nature, as born of God and the Father, then we are mistaken, and together with the inhabitants of the earth, the highest City and the purest host of holy Angels are mistaken, together with God by nature glorifying and worshiping and, I don’t know how, inclined to glorify a certain God-bearing vessel and one of the creations, of course, in their reckless opinion. If the Father ever wished to cease His state and dwelling in the Son, then He (the Son) would, perhaps, not differ in any way from (creatures) who have deviated from their supremacy (evil angels), since he has nothing of his own and does not bear in His nature the One who gave birth to Him, but, on the contrary, is in everything similar to us and is strengthened only by Divine grace and is awarded the name of sonship with us. But why, in this case, tell me, does He Himself not confess His nature (similar) to us? Why “we are perishing forever, but He is enthroned forever” (Bar.3:3)? Why are we servants and He is Lord? After all, we too are called sons of God, and at the same time, fully aware of our nature, we are not at all ashamed of this glory. And for what reason, tell me, although He is similar to us and does not rise above creatures in any way, since He is not God by nature, as these ignoramuses think, why does He not confess His slavery with us? On the contrary, having appropriated to Himself the honor and glory that is proper and proper to the Divine nature, He turns out to be saying to the holy disciples: “You call Me “Lord and Teacher,” and say well, for such am I” (John 13:13). This is what the Savior says. And these wise inventors of dogmas contrary to Him, although they praise Him for the fact that He says and affirms that He is quite truly called Lord, but, depriving Him of natural dominion by their reluctance to recognize Him as God from God by nature, do not think that by this they are accusing themselves of the most shameful abomination. That He does not want to be ranked among the category of created beings and occupying a slave position, but, on the contrary, directs His gaze to the freedom inherent in Him by nature, although He was in the form of a slave, you can understand this from the following. He arrived (one day) in Capernaum, as we read in the Gospels. And so the collectors of the didrachm established by law (church taxes), approaching Peter, said: “Won’t your teacher give the didrachm?” And since Christ learned about this, it is necessary to know that He answered Peter: “Whom do the kings of the earth take dues or taxes from? From sons or from strangers? And when Peter wisely and intelligibly recognized that a stranger to royal dignity, as far as it concerns the family (royal) and (in general) any close relationship (with the king), should be subject to laws or taxes, Christ immediately added, testifying to the truly inherent Divine dignity: “Consequently, they are free” (Matt. 17:24-26). If there were a fellow servant, and not the True Son, born from the essence of the Father, then why, subjecting all others to taxes, as strangers according to the race that collects taxes 937 and occupying the position of slaves, did He alone acquire freedom? Actually, what truly belongs only to the Divinity is applied to us allegorically, but truly belongs to Him, so that if anyone accurately examines the nature of creatures, he will, without a doubt, find both the name and the state of slavery quite appropriate to it. And if some of us are honored with the glory of freedom, then in an untrue sense they possess what befits God alone. In addition, with great pleasure we will ask them this: will they call Paul God-bearing because Christ dwelt in him through His Spirit, or will they reject this too with their chatter? If they say that he was not truly God-bearing, then this will be enough to make everyone finally turn away from their chatter and feel extreme hatred towards them, as they do not hesitate to express all sorts of absurdities. If, avoiding this, they want to speak the truth and recognize him as truly God-bearing, because of Christ’s indwelling in him, then won’t their speech that the Son is alien to the essence of God and the Father turn out to be extremely wicked? After all, Paul is no longer God-bearing, just as the Son is not God by nature. But sometimes they too are ashamed, although their speeches are distinguished by guile and malice; they call the Son God, but by nature He was not born of God. But everyone, no doubt, will easily catch them in this too. How can one be God if one is not born of God by nature? Besides, let's say this. You say that the Son is God by nature. But can He who is God by nature be God-bearing or partaker of God? After all, you cannot be a communicant of yourself. And why will God dwell in God, as another in another? If what is perceived by nature is the same as what is thought and inhabits, then what, finally, will be the need for communion (of one another)? If, then, just as He (the Son) dwelt in Paul, in the same way the Father also dwelt in Him (the Son), then how could He not prove to be God-bearing like Paul, no longer being God by nature, as in need of the highest, that is, God dwelling in Him? Then, besides this, this brave enemy of ours comes up with something else and, through many proofs, as he imagines, tries to spread his teaching. I am talking about this because I consider it necessary to touch upon all his words and broadly examine his inherent God-fighting intention, so that he will be clearly exposed in the fact that he places the Only Begotten among the creations and, having scattered wickedness against Him with embellished deceptions, he is a pitiful (heretic), although he co-confesses (with the Orthodox) His God, but, taking away from Him the true Divinity by nature, he thinks to somehow hide from those who look on. to the truth itself. He writes this: “But just as it is said of us that we are in Him, although we have a hypostasis not mixed with Him, in the same way the Son, being in the Father, has (however) a different essence from the Unbegotten.” How much insolence! What a terrible speech and full of thoughtlessness, or rather, complete stupidity and madness! Indeed, they became mad, calling themselves wise (Rom. 1:22), and, thinking this way about the Only Begotten, they rejected the Master who bought them (2 Pet. 2:1), according to what is written. After all, if, as they say, the Word of God is a man and one of our kind, then there is no longer any obstacle to saying that He exists in God just like us. And if they believe that He is God and recognize the worship of Him as such by nature, then why do they not admit that He, as befits God, abides in His Parent and has Him in Himself? After all, thinking and speaking like this, I believe, is most appropriate for truly God-loving people. And if, holding on to their indestructible shamelessness, they insist on their words and affirm that the Son is in the Father, just as each of us can be (in God) from nothingness and from the earth who came through Him, then why, finally, are not those of us allowed to boldly say: “He who has seen me has seen the Father, and I am in the Father and the Father is in me”? But, I believe, for this anyone would be accused of the most extreme insanity, and quite rightly. After all, this is absurdity, and such a saying in the Inspired Scripture has never been used about any of the saints. On the contrary, everyone assigns to the Lord by nature and the Only Begotten God 938 an incomparable advantage over all the saints and exclaims exactly like this: “Who will be like the Lord among the sons of God?” (Ps.89:7). How, therefore, will the Only Begotten be like us, if, according to the voice of the saints, no one is equal or like Him? And if He is in God in the same way as we are, then wouldn’t it be necessary to affirm that the host of saints tell lies and do not assimilate to the Son by nature anything more than that He would be unequal with those born into sons (by grace)? Move away from this abomination, man! We will not think like that, no, but, following the opinion of the holy fathers, we with faith expect God’s favor for ourselves. But since, to prove their thoughts and words, they cite Paul’s saying that in God we “live and move and have our being” (Acts 17:28), weakening the demonstrative power of the saying that “the Son is in the Father” by comparison with us, we will try, by subjecting the above words of the Apostle Paul to proper research, to expose them in the fact that they want to slander the mind of the holy Apostles and completely it is reckless to distort what is correctly said according to one’s own will. Blessed Paul arrived in Athens and, seeing that the people there, although considered wise, were completely immersed in polytheistic error, with pious reasoning he tried to distract them from the primordial lie, nobly directing them to the knowledge of the one and only God, who gives movement and life and being to His creatures. The Creator of all things gives life to everything, being Life by nature, ineffably introducing into them the power of His property (life). Otherwise, something that received existence from non-existence could not maintain its existence, and would immediately return to its nature, that is, again into non-existence, if it did not overcome the weakness of its existence by its communication with the Existing. Therefore, the divine Paul justly and very beautifully said, showing God by the life of everyone, that “in Him we live and move and have our being.” Not, of course, wanting to express what they, destroying the correctness of the Holy Scriptures, invented in accordance with their own purpose, but what was true and very useful for those now being guided to the knowledge of God. And if it is necessary to say more clearly, he does not at all want to point out that we, being human by nature, are in the essence of the Father and find ourselves existing in Him, but that we live and move and exist in God or consist (cf. Col. 1:17). Note: he did not simply and without any additions say that we only “are” (exist) in God, for the sake of your, as it seems, ignorance, my dear, but he explained in various ways what he wanted to express - he put “we live” in front, then he added “we move” to this, and already in third place he put “we”, adding this too to express the thoughts of the previous words. This is already our correct reasoning, I think, perhaps, it will at least somewhat put the god-fighter to shame. But if he still insists on his own and the expression “in God” is used to prove his opinion, then we must show the use of this expression “in God” instead of “through God.” Otherwise, let the heretic tell us why in the psalms someone makes such an exclamation: “In God we will create strength” (Ps. 59:14), and also to God: “In You we gore our enemies” (Ps. 43:6). No one, of course, thinks that the one who exclaims this way promises to create some kind of power in the essence of God, or that the Psalmist says that, having met their enemies, they will gore them in it (the essence of God). But “in God” says instead of “through God” and also “in You” instead of “through You”. Why did blessed Paul in his Epistle to the Corinthians say: “I thank my God on behalf of all of you for the grace given to you in Christ Jesus” (1 Cor. 1:4), and again: “From him you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification, redemption” (1 Cor. 1:30)? Will anyone sensibly say that the Spirit-Bearer claims that the grace communicated from above to the Corinthians was given in the very essence of Christ, or will he accept anything else similar? And won't he turn out to be a chatterbox? Why, therefore, contradicting the use of these expressions in the Holy Scriptures themselves and slandering the thought of blessed Paul, do you say that we exist in God, that is, in the essence of the Father, when you hear the words of the Apostle said: “In Him we live and move and we are” (Acts 17:28)? “But yes,” says the representative of destructive dogmas, “since it seems to you and seems correct to consider the expression “in God” to be equivalent to “through God,” then why are you conducting unnecessary ranting? Why do you accuse us of blasphemy when we affirm that the Son was created through the Father? After all, He Himself says that “I am in the Father” instead of “through the Father,” according to your own words, my dear, and according to the custom just presented to us from the Holy Scriptures.” I will say that we must again defend ourselves against this and discover their malice and harmful intentions. I am surprised how they, having joyfully learned the custom of Divine Scripture to use the expression “in God” instead of “through God” and for the sake of the mere opportunity to humiliate the glory of the Only Begotten, willingly accepted this saying, nevertheless did not notice at all that they would again turn out to be talkers, although they call themselves wise and skillful. Now, if only our opponents were allowed to affirm the use of words of the Inspired Scripture in relation to the essence of the Only Begotten and on this basis to say that He was created by the Father, although He abides in God, as it is said about Him - after all, we have already agreed that “in God” can be understood in the sense of “through God,” then their evil teaching, apparently, would have, perhaps, some kind of not completely ignorant basis. But since for ourselves, who want to overthrow their rotten dogmas by means of bringing them to greater absurdity, there is no obstacle to attributing the meaning of this expression to the Father Himself and to clearly say that the saying “The Father is in Me” should be understood instead of “through Me,” so that the Father Himself will already be created, then can they, who dared to make such very unreasonable reasoning, avoid being condemned to extreme madness? After all, just as the Son, he says, is Himself in the Father, so the Father is in Himself. If one wants to understand “in the Father” in the sense of “through the Father,” then what prohibits saying that “in the Son” should be understood as “through the Son”? But even now we will not allow ourselves to fall into such madness together with them. Let us not say that through the Father the Son was created, nor that through the Son He received being, from whom are all things, the Father and God. On the contrary, by properly applying to each time, person and subject the ordinary usage of the inspired Scriptures, let us formulate a pure and impeccable reasoning on all necessary subjects. About objects translated from non-existence into being and occurring through God, is it not entirely appropriate for us to think and say that they are in God, that is, through God? On the contrary, to the Son by nature and Lord and God and Creator of all things, I do not consider this to be applicable in the proper and true sense, but He is naturally in the Father and abides in Him and He Himself has Him in Himself, because He appears in the identity of essence (with Him) and has absolutely nothing intervening and is not separated by natural difference. Perhaps our reasoning will seem to the most prudent, as I think, good, but the enemy, of course, will by no means agree with it. He will again put forward the statement already given at the beginning that the Father is in the Son just as we are in Him. So, what, we would say, not without reason denouncing rotten and childish thoughts and speeches, are you saying that the Son is in the Father just as we are in Him? Wonderful. But in this case, why, let’s say to this, the limitation inherent in our nature does not allow us to be proud of ourselves in the same words that Christ Himself used about Himself? He Himself, since He is in the Father and has the Father in Himself, being His image and therefore a completely accurate reflection, says: “He who has seen Me has seen the Father, I and the Father are one.” And we, tell me, if we are also in Him and have Him in ourselves, as, without a doubt, He is in the Father and the Father in Him, why, with our heads held high and our bold face and gaze before those we meet, do we not boldly say: “I am in Christ and Christ in me, whoever has seen me has seen Christ, I and Christ are one”? What's next from here? Someone, I believe, will probably not be afraid and will not hesitate to say directly and boldly finally about the Father Himself: “I and the Father are one.” If the Father and the Son are one, then how can he (man) no longer be equal to the Father Himself, having become the unchanging image of the Unchanging Image, that is, the Son? But who can ever reach such madness as to dare to say: “He who has seen me has seen Christ, I and Christ are one”? After all, if we assume that the Son abides in the Father only by state, and not by nature, and equally has the Father in Himself, just as we in the same way are in Christ and Christ in us, then, firstly, the Son will be on the same level with us, and then there will be no obstacle for us, bypassing, if we want, the Son Himself, as being in the middle, as if to go directly to the Father Himself and say that we are so exactly like Him that there is nothing dividing, for the expression “to be one with something” has such a meaning. Do you not notice, therefore, into what recklessness and at the same time wickedness their minds fell and what confusion resulted in their absurd reasoning? What excuse do they have for saying and asserting this and using such vulgar reasoning, I will say this again. They have one goal - to present the Son as completely alien and devoid of the essence of the Father. We learn that this is true from the words that stand nearby and are added to his previous blasphemies. He adds exactly this: “But just as we, being in Him, have a hypostasis not mixed with Him, in the same way the Son, being in the Father, has an essence different from the Unbegotten God.” What are you saying, fool? Thus, are you not already committing obvious blasphemy against the Son? Now who can say that we are trying to put unnecessary slander on the heads of the atheists? It is clear that they do not assimilate to Him anything more than earthly creatures and those brought into existence. I, although with great disgust at what these miserable people dare to say, will try to show this, again bearing in mind the purpose of Divine Scripture, that as soon as they deny the Son, they also deny the Father and in the end they turn out to be godless and have no hope in this world, according to what is written (Eph. 2:12). That we say correctly, the true witness for us is the God-loving John, who wrote the following: “Whoever denies the Father and the Son, whoever denies the Son and does not have the Father, confesses that he has the Son and the Father” (1 John 2:22-23). Very justly and in proper accordance with our reasoning, the Spirit-Bearer offers us his contemplation. Since he knew, not only in name, but, on the contrary, in reality itself, what is called being a father by nature, this is why he says that one (the Father) is necessarily negated with the other (the Son). After all, with the one who by nature is and is thought of as a father, the idea and indication of the generation that has occurred from him is always connected, and with the truly and truly begotten son the person of the parent is also thought of. At the same time, as someone recognizes the Father, he imagines that he gave birth, and if he recognizes the generation, he will, of course, comprehend that it was born from some father. Thus, through both (Father and Son) knowledge of both arises in the hearers. And whoever denies that God is truly the Father must, of course, also deny the birth of the Son. And whoever again does not recognize the existence of the Son will, of course, destroy the knowledge of the Father along with Him. When, therefore, he who attacks us with his wicked reasoning asserts that the Son has an essence different from the unbegotten God, does he not clearly admit that the Son himself does not exist? And if there is no Son, then the Father Himself is no longer thought of as truly a father. Who will He be the Father of, if He has not begotten? And we ourselves affirm that the Son differs, but not from the essence, but from the person (πϱοσώπου) of the Father, not as alien to Him by nature, which, no doubt, seems to be God-fighting, but as existing and conceivable in his own person (ἐν ἰδίῳ πϱοσώπῳ) and in the difference in his own existence (ϰατ’ ἰδίαν ὕπαϱξιν ἑτεϱότητι), for the Son is, and not the Father. But that He differs (from the Father) in essence, neither we ourselves affirm this, unless, of course, we think correctly, nor do we advise any of the brothers. But how can one thing be different? After all, Peter is Peter, and not Paul, and Paul is not Peter, but they remain indifferent in nature, for both have the same essence, and that which is connected by natural unity must have exactly the same essence. Our goal is to show that those (heretics), wickedly thinking, deprive the Son of the Divinity by nature, leaving Him, as we have already said, nothing more relative to the Father and God. Otherwise, for what reason, taking us as an example of reasoning, do they say: “Just as we have a hypostasis not mixed with Him, being in Him, so He also has an essence separate from God, although it is said that He is in Him”? Isn't his malicious intent obvious to everyone? Wouldn't everyone honestly say that the one who invented such an absurd reasoning is one of the deceivers foretold by the Spirit? What does Judas, the Savior’s disciple, write to us in the Epistle? “But you, beloved, remember the words prophesied by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ, which told you that in the last time deceivers would come, walking according to their own lusts to the ungodly; these are separated, natural, not having the Spirit” (Jude 17-19), for no one speaking by the Holy Spirit will say anything against the glory of the Only Begotten - this, I believe, means the words: “Jesus is accursed” (1 Cor. 12:3). Soulful and unfortunate people, having a heart devoid of the Holy Spirit, separate the Son from the Father, saying that He has an essential separation, as, without a doubt, the creatures and each of His creatures, and thinking that He is in the Father just as we are in Him. And that those who dared to write this have reached the extreme limit of ignorance, let us again consider this from Divine Scripture, as far as is accessible, and try to show the listeners that otherwise we are in the Son and in a completely different way the Son is in his own Father. After all, not as being formed after Him by free virtues, He is the image of His hypostasis and therefore is in Him, but as being in natural identity with Him and having one essence with Him. Let the wisest John be called as our witness in this, saying: “And our fellowship is with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ” (1 John 1:3). How, according to them, or in what way, according to them, should we have fellowship with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ? If we think that through the union of our essence with the Divine nature, or with the Father and the Son, we are in Them, and our communication with Him does not relate to the likeness of desires (consent with the will of God), then how could we have such communication with the Father and the Son without being consubstantial with Them? Or, finally, reasoning in a way worthy of laughter, it will be necessary to say that, cutting apart our nature, we give one half to the Father, and the other to ourselves and the Son, and thus, we think, we are in Them. Or, avoiding crazy speech, let’s say that we acquire the grace of communion (with God) by trying to illuminate our soul with free virtues and conformity with Divine and ineffable beauty. Shall we assert that this is precisely how the Son is in the Father, that is, has relative and acquired communion with His Parent? But why, in this case, does He want to lead our mind, through identity and similarity of deeds, to an unshakable belief that He is in the Father and, in turn, has the Father in Himself? Is it not obvious and true for everyone that He, wanting us to examine the splendor of His deeds, shows Himself equal to His Father, so that there is no longer any basis for division in essence and natural difference, since both He and the Father are distinguished by equal merits? Note that not in these relationships, but in some others, when we achieve conformity with God, we are rewarded with communion with Him. Thus, by showing mercy to each other, constantly devoting ourselves to works of love and doing everything praiseworthy in our lives, then we barely say about ourselves that we are in God. Witness John, saying: “By this we know that we are in Him: he who says that he abides in Him must also walk as He walked” (1 John 2:5-6), and again: “Let that which we have heard from the beginning abide in you; For if that which you have heard from the beginning remains in you, you also will remain in the Son and Father” (1 John 2:24). And what this “from the beginning” is, which, according to his command, must abide in us so that we may be in God, he himself shows us with no less clarity in the words: “For this is the promise which you heard from the beginning, that you love one another” (1 John 3:11). Do you hear how we are in God, obviously when we exercise love for each other and try, as much as possible, to follow the virtue of the Savior. I mean virtue not consisting in having the power to create the heavens, or creating angels, or founding the earth, or spreading out the sea, and not in having the ineffable and incomprehensible power of a word to tame the movement of the winds, raise the dead, or give sight to the blind, or with some great power to command the leper to be cleansed - but, on the contrary, such a virtue that corresponds to the limits humanity. We will find Him, as Paul (Peter) says, reproached by the wicked Jews, and not reproachful, on the contrary, enduring, not threatening, but delivering (judgment) to the Righteous Judge (1 Pet. 2:23). We will find Him saying again: “Learn from Me that I am meek and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls” (Matthew 11:29). So, by means of so many virtues, trying to imitate the Leader of all virtue for us - Christ, we say that we abide both in the Father and in Him (Christ), which abiding we acquire as a reward for the holiness of our lives. But the Son does not want us to determine His inherent glory by these His virtues, but commands us, in the greatness of His miracles, to consider with all possible care and wit the unchangeable similarity that He has with His Father, and thus finally believe that, as the Consubstantial One, He has in Himself the One who gave birth and is Himself present in Him. Or at the same time, let the opponents teach that He, like us, has as a reward and corresponding reward for living according to the law of the Gospel that He is thought of as (dwelling) in the Father. But, I think, this turns out to be not at all scary for them. To those who are not unfamiliar with any type of evil tongue, will any kind of absurdity remain untried? They will probably say this too, that is, that it is for this reason that the Son is in the Father and, for his part, has the Father in Himself, since in the virtues available to us He seems to resemble Him. But why, dearest ones, we ask, when Philip said: “Lord, show us the Father” (John 14:8), Christ did not present all the holy Apostles in the image and exact likeness of a conceivable object (the Father) and did not say: “We have been with each other for so long, and you have not known the Father?” But he does not take any of the others (people) to Himself (side by side in comparison), but compares Himself with the Father alone, yet ours (human) is completely bypassed and, not wanting to indicate here any exact likeness to the Divine essence, He leaves the most perfect likeness to Himself alone, for He says: “Whoever has seen Me has seen the Father,” and then immediately adds to this: “Believe that I am in the Father and the Father in Me” ( John 14:9, 11). Indeed, since He has the most exact and complete resemblance (with the Father), then how will He no longer have the Father in Himself and the Father have Him in Himself? Keep this or something similar in your mind and use it to prove what we are talking about. After all, if someone took, for example, a child of Abraham or some other person and then began to question him about the nature of his parent and wanted to know who and what his parent was, would the son not without reason exclaim and probably point to his own nature, saying: “He who has seen me has seen the father, I am in the father and the father in me”? Then, to prove the truth of his words, could he not, with all justice, refer to the sameness in human affairs or natural qualities, saying: “For the sake of the works themselves, believe me, for I have everything and can do what is inherent in humanity”? But, I believe, everyone will say and rightly agree that he will tell the truth and, in the identity of his deeds, will present sharp proof (of the identity of his human nature with the nature of his parent). Why, therefore, do those who corrupt the right (Mic. 3:9) not force their pupils to follow the straight path of speculation, but, diverting them from the royal and well-traveled path, just as they themselves go astray, walking an impassable and rocky path, so they destroy those who consider it necessary to follow them? But we, who do not follow this path, will walk on the straight path and, following the Holy Scriptures, we believe that the Son, born of Him by nature, is equivalent and consubstantial with God and the Father and is His image, therefore and just as He Himself is in the Father, so the Father is in Him. John 14:12–13. Amen, amen, I say to you: believe in Me, the works that I do, He will do this, and more of these He will do: for I go to the Father 939. And whatever you ask in My name, that I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son 940 If anyone here wanted to expand his speculations according to the breadth of the subject, it would turn out to be a long and deep discussion. But for the greater benefit of the listeners, we consider it necessary to limit the subject by shortening too much of the duration of the speech, for in this form our reasoning will be most understandable for the majority. So, wanting to show that He is consubstantial with His Parent and that He is His mark, worn by the Father, as in a prototype, and also having the prototype in Himself, as a mark (of Him), naturally and essentially, and not by any external appearance only, conceived as a form - after all, the Divinity is above forms, since it is incorporeal - He says: “I am in the Father and the Father is in Me” ( John 14:11). But so that we do not represent the equality of similarity and unswervingly exact conformity to others in any way, but only according to some advantages inherent in nature - for from here only one can discern natural and essential similarity - he says: “If not, believe by works” (John 14:11). With complete justice, of course, He thought that whoever sees Him shining in dignities equal to those of God and the Father will accept Him as a truly natural outline and image of His (God the Father) essence. After all, it is by no means appropriate for someone who is not God by nature to perform deeds equal to God, and not one of the created beings can work miracles in equal measure with the Divine nature, for the own blessings of the Ever-Eternal are completely inaccessible and alien to that which is called into being from non-existence. No one, of course, could doubt that the word of the Savior would not be subject to any censure from the right-thinking. However, as God, He knew that even what was beautifully said would serve as a pretext and reason for heretical teaching for the heterodox. Therefore, so that for those who corrupt the right there is no room for idle talk in this saying and so that they do not say that the Son was a creator of miracles not according to His inherent strength and not according to His omnipotence, but since He had the Father in Himself as the performer of deeds, as He Himself expressed and confirmed, the Lord considered it necessary to prevent this by adding the above thoughts. He promises here that to those who believe in Him, He will be the giver of whatever they wish to ask for, and He promises to give them not only such great strength and power, but also much greater: “more,” he says, “he will do” than what I have done. You see how usefully he suppresses the insolence of his opponents and somehow distracts those going against the rocks with reproofs. After all, one can address them with the following speech: O senseless and blind ones, who assume that the Son cannot do anything in Himself, but, on the contrary, is endowed with power and authority to perform all miracles from the Father! How does He promise to give those who believe in Him to do even “more.” How will someone else, endowed by Him with the power to do it, do what He did not do? Notice that I did not say here that the Father will give strength to believers, but: “Whatever you ask in My name, I will do.” He, who imparts to others the power to accomplish even greater deeds, could He Himself be endowed with this power from another? Thus, their reasoning turns out to be complete nonsense and empty chatter, an invention of demonic wickedness. However, no one should at all consider the power of the Son to be limited, extending to a certain area of ​​​​existence, but insufficient for something even greater; on the contrary, easily accomplishing everything that He desires, and telling worthy people to be adorned with the same or even greater deeds. However, let no one think that we are saying that anyone who has accepted faith in Him will ever have the inherent power, for example, to create the sky, the sun, the moon, or to reveal a glorious choir of stars, or to create Angels or the earth or what is on it. The purpose of the saying does not revolve around these objects, but is directed towards what was natural and probable, that is, in relation to glory and holiness, it does not exceed the measure of greatness inherent in man. That is why, as if stopping the movement of speech from extending it to everything, no matter what anyone desired, and only those performed by Him on earth when he was a man, contrasting the greatness of even greater miracles with miracles, he says: “What I have done, He will do greater things than these.” It was not out of weakness that He limited His power to perform more than the miracles He performed, but He did what was necessary and what the circumstances of the time required, so that the greatness of His inherent power, inaccessible to our minds, cannot extend only to those miracles (performed by Him), He beneficially teaches this in the words interpreted. But in view of the fact that we, observing the order of the passage being interpreted, must direct the minds of the listeners to consider this saying, he says: “Truly I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do, he will do also, and greater ones will he do, because I am going to the Father.” But why is this, one of the listeners could very appropriately ask, I mean the walk of the Son to the Father so that those who believe in Him can perform even greater miracles than those shown by Him? Thus, this saying introduces some kind of hidden speculation. What His words mean, understand approximately this way: “Listeners of My words and My true disciples! While I cohabited with you on earth, I treated myself as a man, did not show you My omnipotent power of the Divine, but spoke and did in some accordance with the measure of humiliation and the appearance characteristic of a slave. But since this has already been done in the proper way and My sacrament of the House of God has been fulfilled with the flesh, for soon I will suffer death and rise again, I promise to give you the power to perform even greater miracles than those that happened through Me, when the time comes for them and the need for them appears, for I “go to the Father” to sit next to Him and, obviously, to reign as God from God, who is no longer hidden by the power and authority 941 to give the blessings of My nature to My true disciples. “Whatever you ask,” he says, “in My name, I will do it,” when the time in which I had to appear in a humiliated form is over. I have observed what was right for the sake of the House. Now I already openly, as God, promise to do the works of God, not removing the Father from such Divine glory, but “so that I may be glorified in the Son.” With the glorification of the Son, the One who begat Him must, undoubtedly, be glorified in Him, for as God by nature, the Son is revealed through many other things, but no less than this through the fact that He accepts the prayers of the saints and gives them everything they ask and desire. How, then, would not the Father be glorified in Him? Just as it would be a dishonor (for God the Father) if the Birth that came from Him (the Son) were not God by nature, so He will be very glorious, having the fruit that comes from His essence as the true God, able to do everything Himself and at the same time impart this power to both. And if it extends to the glory of the Father that the Son appears with Divine virtues, then what reason can be taken away from punishment for a heretic who is not afraid to humiliate Him in various ways with shameless slander? To this I will add another thing, which, I believe, is very hostile to their ignorance. After all, if we pray to the Son and seek from Him the fulfillment of our requests, and He Himself promises to fulfill them, then how can He not be God and born of God by nature? And if they consider Him not to be such, but call Him created, then how will we distinguish Him from the sun or the sky or from anything else that is called creation? For, although very insidiously, ashamed of their ugly foolishness, they call Him a creature on a par with other creatures, but endow Him with some incomparable advantage over everyone, but let them know that by this they will no less offend the glory of the Father, that is, the Son, as soon as they classify Him among created beings. After all, the question is not whether creation is great or small, but whether He is created at all and thus is no longer God by nature, as He really is. John 14:14. Whatever you ask in My name, I will do 942 He already openly says that, being the True God, He will very favorably accept prayers from His (followers) and with full readiness to give what they wish to receive, obviously spiritual gifts and worthy of the highest (Divine) generosity. And he does not say this as a servant of another’s love for mankind or as a helper of someone else’s mercy, but as having all things in power with the Father and Himself being the One through whom all things are both from us to God and to us from Him (1 Cor. 8:6). Therefore, Paul always prays for the gifts of blessings associated with each other to those who are worthy, saying: “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ” (Phil. 1:2). And no one who has intelligence should again think that the Father gives a certain grace especially and the Son especially and, as it were, in parts from His side, but it is one and the same and united, although it is called (given) through both (Father and Son). All good things and the distribution of Divine gifts to those worthy (of their people) come from the Father through the Son, accepted not as a helper, as we said, but conceived and actually existing as creator and co-distributor. After all, the nature of the Divine is one and so is believed. And although it expands (πλατύνεται) into the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, it does not generally and completely dissolve (διασπασμόν), I mean for each of those designated (Father, Son and Spirit). Thinking correctly, we must reason in such a way that from the Father there is a natural Son in the Father, and from Him and in Him, and both His (the Father’s) and the Son’s own Spirit, that is, the Holy One. Therefore, since the Divinity is and is thought to be one in nature, the gifts from Them (Father, Son and Spirit) must be given to the worthy through the Son from the Father in the Spirit, just as from us (prayers) to God must obviously be addressed through the mediation of the Son, “for no one comes to the Father except through” Him (John 14:6), as, without a doubt, He Himself confessed. Thus, the Son was and is the door and way of love and at the same time precedence to God and the Father and the co-giver and at the same time the distributor of the gift from Him (God the Father), as if out of one and common generosity. After all, there is one nature of the Divinity both in person and in hypostasis (ἐν πϱοσώπῳ τε ϰαὶ ὑποστάσει) and the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. And just as this coming to the Father through the Son was unusual and still uncommon among the ancients, he teaches this also beneficially, and, as if some kind of foundation for this work in His disciples, laying faith in this and teaching in advance, it also points us to prayer and hope. He promises us that He Himself will fulfill our prayers, adding this to everything else as proof of His Divinity by nature and His inherent royal power. h5 John 14:15 . If you love Me, keep My commandments 943 Having commanded that those praying should ask in His name, and having promised that He Himself would give to those praying whatever they wished to receive, He shows great care not to appear to be telling a lie for the sake of the wicked slander of people accustomed to slander. After all, from the Holy Scriptures themselves one can see most clearly how some turn (to God) and pray in His name, but they do not receive at all, since God knows what everyone needs and what is useful for those who ask. Therefore, our Lord Jesus Christ, in order to clearly show to whom He had and is speaking and to whom the grace of the promise is due, in which it will be true, immediately set forth those who love (Him) and added in the speech an indication of the exact guardian of the law, showing that for them specifically, and not for anyone else, the promise of mercy and the giving of spiritual blessings will have power and be accomplished through Him. And that the giving hand of God often stops (giving) and hesitates, closing the limit of hope for those who do not want the right to ask, you can easily understand from what Christ’s disciple reveals in the Epistle: “You ask and do not receive, because you ask evilly, so that you can squander your pleasures” (James 4:3). Therefore, again, about those who are accustomed to double-mindedness, he says: “Let no man think that he will receive anything from the Lord, for he is a double-minded man, fickle in all his ways” (James 1:7-8). For those who ask for the highest grace not for the accomplishment of virtue, but for the enjoyment of carnal pleasures and worldly lusts, God, as it were, closes His ear and gives nothing at all, for how could He give anyone what He must avert and reject for the sake of its inherent abomination? The fountain of all sweetness, how could He bring forth bitter water? And that He distributes blessings to lovers of spiritual gifts with a generous and ready hand, you will easily see when you hear Him speaking to them through the prophet Isaiah: “When you still say (prayer), I will say (ask): what is there (what is needed)?” (Isa.65:24; cf. Is.58:9), and through the voice of the Psalmist: “The eyes of the Lord are upon the righteous, and His ears are upon their petition” (Ps.33:16). Having thus defined and clearly said that the enjoyment of the highest blessings, obviously given through Him from the Father, should and undoubtedly will be among those who love Him, he immediately describes the power of love and teaches how we must exercise it in the best possible way and impeccably, for our benefit. After all, if someone says that he loves God, he will not yet receive, of course, the glory of a true lover, since the meaning of virtue is not in just one word and the beauty of piety towards God is not imagined in words alone, but is fully recognized from good deeds and a good-obedient heart, and observance of the Divine commandments best depicts love for God, represents it as a completely living and true virtue, not in the sounds of the tongue alone written in hay, as we said, but shining all over and shining with different types of deeds, as if with bright colors. So our Lord Jesus Christ, clearly pointing this out to us, says: “Not everyone who says to Me, Lord, Lord, will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 7:21). After all, faith is not proven by idle and flattering words, but by the qualities of deeds. That is why Divine Scripture calls it dead if it is not accompanied by deeds (James 2:20, 26), for the knowledge, as it is said, that there is one God, we can find not only in the human mind, but also in the unclean demons themselves, who tremble, albeit involuntarily, before the power of the Creator (James 2:19). On the contrary, the brilliance of doing good deeds as a companion to faith turns out to be appropriate and (really) shining only among those who truly love God. So, the proof of love and the definition of the perfection of faith is the observance of the Gospel dogmas and the fulfillment of the Divine commandments. And it might not be difficult to add to this something else that is related in meaning, but, I think, not in the present case. Therefore, we must again move on to what is needed to explain the words cited: “If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.” Understand again and remember well that He often said in speeches to the disciples and the Jews themselves: “The words that I speak are not mine, but those of him who sent me” (John 14:10); and again: “I do not speak on My own behalf, but the Father who sent Me gave Me a commandment, what I would say and what I would say” (John 12:49); and again: “Therefore what I say is not Mine, but His who sent Me” (cf. John 12:50). Now, again, although he admitted that the words that He spoke to us are entirely God and the Father, he nevertheless affirms that what He spoke to us are His own commandments. And no one with intelligence, of course, will think that He is telling a lie - this is not characteristic of a Christian. On the contrary, He will again turn out to be true, since He Himself is the truth. After all, not as one of the prophets, as a servant and servant, He conveyed to us the word from the Father, but as having similarities with Him, so that He does not differ from Him even in word, but always speaks as the Father Himself would in a certain case talk, for the immutability of the essence (of Them) forces the Son to speak the same with the One who gave birth. As the Word, being both the wisdom and advice of God the Father, He accepted, he says, the commandment of what to say and what to utter. So we ourselves see that the mind of each of us seems to command the word, pronounced through speech and expressed outwardly, to clarify what is in it (the mind). Of course, the significance of this example in relation to God is small, but still, taking an image from ourselves to ascertain what is above us, we, as in a mirror and a riddle, understand the Divine mysteries. h5 John 14:16–17. And I will pray to the Father, and he will give you another Paraclete, that he may be with you forever 944, the Spirit of truth, which the world cannot accept, for it does not see Him; below, it knows Him, you know Him, for it abides with you and will be in you 945 The human is again mixed with the Divine and neither rises to the unmixed glory of the Divinity, nor does it revolve entirely within the boundaries of humanity alone, but in an amazing way touches both together and mixedly, since He is at the same time God and man. He is God by nature, as a fruit from the Father and a reflection of His essence. But also man again, since he became flesh. Therefore He speaks as God and at the same time as man, for in this way it was possible to speak in proper language about the Economy with the flesh. However, examining the meaning of the above passage, we will point out that even now our Lord considered it necessary to introduce a mention of God and the Father in the building of faith and for the greater benefit of the listeners, as the subsequent speech will show. Since He commanded us to ask in His name (John 14:14) and, together with many others, established the ancient way of prayer (Matthew 6:9-13), giving a promise to fulfill, and moreover, very willingly, whatever we wished to receive, so that it would not seem that He thereby rejects the face of God and the Father or destroys the power of Him who gave birth to Him, I mean over the generous distribution of goods to the saints; He said that He will be a necessary co-creator and will give us a co-Intercessor (Paraclitus), again using this word: “I beseech,” as man and all the Divine and ineffable nature have assimilated what is properly and especially appropriate for it, as if in the person of God and the Father. This is usually to Him, as we have often said before. However, “Another Intercessor” he calls the Spirit of the essence of God and the Father or Himself (the Son), for both have one essence, positing Him not outside (the Divine essence), but making it clear that the difference lies only in His self-hypostatic being and existence. After all, the Spirit is not the Son, but we must accept by faith that what He is really has a special (hypostatic) being and existence, for He is the Spirit of the Father and the Son. But knowing that He Himself (the Son) is the Intercessor and in reality and in the Holy Scriptures is so called, He calls the Spirit “Another Intercessor,” but not as being able to produce in the saints anything other than what He Himself (would have done), Whom He is and is called the Spirit. And that the Son Himself is and is called an Advocate, this is testified by John, who says in his writings: “I say this to you, so that you do not sin; but if anyone sins, we have an Advocate to the Father, Jesus Christ the Righteous, and He is the propitiation for our sins” (1 John 2:1-2). Thus, he calls the Spirit “another Mediator,” wanting Him to be understood in His own hypostases, but having such similarity with Him and being able to do such things so indistinguishably from Him that He Himself would have done, in a certain case, that He seems to be the Son Himself and nothing else, for the Spirit is His. So he called Him “the Spirit of truth,” calling Himself here the truth. But those who consider the Son to be alien to the essence of God and the Father, someone will rightly ask: how, tell me, does the Father give the “Spirit of truth,” that is, the Spirit of the Son, not as foreign or alien, but as His own Spirit, although, in your opinion, He (the Father) has an essence separate from the Son, and it is certain that the Spirit is also the Spirit of the Son? How, on the other hand, if the Son is non-existent with Him (the Father), does He (the Son) give the Spirit of the Father as His own? After all, it is written that he “breathed to the disciples, saying, Receive the Holy Spirit” (John 20:22). Should not everyone recognize, and quite rightly, even more, be firmly convinced that the Son, being essentially a sharer of the natural blessings of the Father, has the Spirit in the same way as he should understand about the Father, not as alien and external to Him - it is stupid, even more insane to think so - but in the way that each of us contains within himself his own spirit and pours it out from the inner depths? That is why Christ also breathed into Him bodily, showing that just as the spirit proceeds bodily from the mouth of men, so from the Divine essence the Spirit is poured out in a manner characteristic of the Divinity, proceeding from Him. When, therefore, the Spirit Himself is both God and the Father and the Son, how can They not undoubtedly have one essence, both separately and at the same time united? After all, the Father is the Father, and not the Son, and the Son is the Son, and not the Father, however, the Father is in the Son and the Son is in the Father. However, it is not especially the Father and especially the Son who gives the Intercessor or the Holy Spirit, but He is communicated to the saints from the Father through the Son. Therefore, when it is said that His Father gives, He through Whom He gives everything is the Son. And when it is said that the Son gives, the One from Whom gives everything is the Father. And that the Spirit is Divine and is not different in essence from either the Father or the Son, this, I believe, is not subject to doubt for any right-thinking person, and the necessary basis will convince us of this. After all, if He, according to some, is not from the essence of God, then how could a creature that has already received the Spirit participate in God? How can we be called and be churches of God (1 Cor. 3:16), receiving a created or foreign Spirit, and not the Spirit of God? How can they be partakers of the Divine nature, according to the word of the saints (2 Pet. 1:4), partakers of the Spirit, since He is numbered among the creatures, and does not come to us from the Divine nature itself - not in the way that passes through It to us as a stranger to It, but, so to speak, as if a certain quality of the Divinity appears in us and dwells in the saints and always abides, if they, purifying the eyes of their souls with all decency and with unflagging zeal for every virtue, they will retain grace within themselves. He is inaccessible and invisible, says Christ, for those who are in the world, that is, for those who think about worldly things and want to love earthly things; on the contrary, He is accessible and visible to the saints. For what reason? Those who have indelible uncleanliness and have filled their minds with whatever kind of dirt do not see the beauty of the Divine nature and do not accept the law of the Spirit, since they are in complete submission to carnal passions. But the good and sober, having a heart free from worldly evils, willingly infuse themselves with the Intercessor (Spirit), and having received it, they preserve it and, as much as is available to people, mentally contemplate Him, receiving from here a great reward worthy of competition, for He will sanctify them and reveal them as performers of all good things in general, and also remove from them the shame of slavery inherent in man and invest them with the dignity of sonship. Paul testified to this in the words: “Because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying: Abba, Father!” (Gal.4:6). h5 John 14:18 . I will not leave you sires, I will come to you 946 And now our Lord Jesus Christ considers it necessary to talk about the Holy and Consubstantial Trinity. Presenting both His words and His deeds as evidence to those who love Him, He has already indicated that He is God by nature and born of God the Father, and also that He has power equal to Him and the same intention as Him. That is why he once said: “What I say, I do not speak of Myself” (John 14:10), and another time: “If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me; But if I do, and if you do not believe Me, believe My works” (John 10:37–38). But at the same time, it was extremely necessary that a correct and impeccable opinion be adopted about the Holy Spirit, for in this way it was possible to completely direct the minds of the listeners to the right faith. So, what Christ teaches us in the proposed saying, I will outline in a few words. Saying that another will be sent to us from God and the Father, for the purposes of the Economy, again confirms this doctrine, for for some, who misunderstood this saying, it was possible to think that the Holy Spirit, according to Him, is not from the essence of God, as it seems to some fools, but He is something else by nature. Moreover, the expression “Other” could serve as a particularly strong basis for such an opinion. Therefore, in order to clearly show that He wants to understand this difference not in any other way, but in the sense of a special (personal or hypostatic) only His existence - after all, the Spirit is Spirit, and not the Son, just as the Son is the Son, and not the Father - having said that the Intercessor will be sent, He promises to come Himself, thereby showing the Spirit in no other way than that He is Himself, since He is from the Father His own Spirit and is thought of by Him (the Spirit). That is why He is also called mind. So, Paul, pointing to this very thing, says: “We have the mind of Christ” (1 Cor. 2:16). So, correctly and unerringly understanding (this saying), and rejecting the perversion of the truth as an ugly matter, and following the words of the Inspired Scripture, let us say that He (the Spirit) is not something other than Him (the Son), as far as natural identity is concerned, separately and especially. Understanding this, and the divine Paul, I believe, often confuses both One and the other as one and the same, I speak of the Mediator and the Son. So, you will find in him the words: “If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not Him” (Rom. 8:9), and again following this: “If Christ is in you, (then) the body is dead because of sin, but the Spirit is life because of righteousness” (Rom. 8:10). Do you hear how clearly he acknowledges that those who have received His Spirit have Christ? He says in other places: “I also think that I have the Spirit of God” (1 Cor. 7:40). He, having told us these words: “If you seek proof of this, that Christ speaks in me” (2 Cor. 13:3), he often boasts that Christ has also indwelled us who have believed through faith, although He receives the Holy Spirit. And let no one think that we are saying that in relation to One and the Other, he destroys the meaning of the difference in names or persons, or that he does not consider the Son to be the Son, but the Spirit, or that he does not recognize the Spirit as the Spirit, but considers him to be the Son. This was not the purpose of that saying and this is not how we believe. He knows the threefold nature of the Holy and Consubstantial Trinity and teaches about the special existence (ἰδία ὑφεστάναι) of each of the Designated (Divine Persons). However, it clearly proclaims that the Holy Trinity abides in unchangeable identity. Otherwise, how can the Spirit be called God? “Do you not know,” he says, “that you are the church of God, and the Spirit of God lives in you?” (1 Cor. 3:16). If we have become churches of God because the Spirit lives in us, then how will it be not from God, that is, from His essence, that the Spirit infuses God into us through Himself? So, the Only Begotten, showing the Spirit as not alien to His own nature and saying that an Intercessor will be sent to the saints from the Father, promises that He Himself will come and fill the Father’s place, so that they do not find themselves, like some “orphans,” deprived of protective help and through this already easily caught by the snares of the devil and very susceptible to temptations in the world, and, moreover, very numerous and, as it were, out of necessity coming for the sake of the unbridled fury of those who lead them. Thus, the Father gave the Spirit of Christ as an instrument and steadfast support to our souls, fulfilling His grace and presence and power in us. Indeed, it is impossible for the human soul to do anything good, or to restrain its passions, or to escape the great and strong snare of the devil, if it is not protected by the grace of the Holy Spirit and therefore has Christ Himself within itself. So the divine Psalmist, giving thanks for this through his inherent wisdom, exclaimed to God: “Lord, as with a weapon of favor You have crowned us” (Ps. 5:13). He called something else a weapon of goodwill, as the Holy Spirit protecting us and keeping us pleasing to God with incredible power. So, He promises that He will be present and help through the Spirit to those who believe in Him, despite the fact that He will ascend into the very heavens, after being raised from the dead, “now to appear before the face of God for us,” according to the word of Paul (Heb. 9:24). h5 John 14:19 . It’s still a little 947, and the world will no longer see Me, but you will see Me, as I live, and you will live 948 Since His suffering was already at the door and the time of His ascension was approaching, He says that He will be invisible to the world, that is, to those who preferred temporal pleasures to Divine blessings and placed earthly things above heavenly ones. And then, developing a thought related and similar to what has already been said, not without reason we can point out that the Intercessor, that is, the Holy Spirit, was given by God and the Father, obviously through the Son, for through Him all things are from the Father. However, He (the Spirit) did not come to everyone indifferently, both evil and good, but to those on whom it was fitting for Him to come. True, with regard to the abundance and inexhaustibility of the grace of the Giver, none of the inhabitants of the earth remained unparticipated in it, for the prophets say: “I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh” (Joel 2:28). However, everyone is responsible for himself either to acquire a God-given blessing, or to lose it completely. Some who do not at all purify their minds through any virtue, but are very devoted to worldly evil, will remain unparticipated in Divine grace, will not see Christ in themselves and will have a heart devoid of the Spirit. That is why, finding themselves, as it were, among the orphans, they are, so to speak, subjected to oppression from anyone capable of violence, whether from passion, or a demon, or some kind of worldly lust, and in general any object that seems to attract and involuntarily to sin. On the contrary, he rightly said to the pious and those who had the ability to receive Him, since they had not been subjected to anything like this: “I will not leave you orphans, I will come to you” (John 14:18). So, He calls Himself invisible and completely invisible to those who think about worldly things, after departing from here, I mean ascending to heaven. But he says that he will appear visible to the saints, putting into the eyes of their hearts a certain Divine and mental radiance of the Holy Spirit and all good knowledge. Or this is how we should understand: “It’s still a little while, and the world will no longer see Me, but you will see Me.” Or, heading towards some other speculation, especially in view of the fact that He added to these words: “because I live, and you will live,” we can reason as follows. After being revived from the dead, having arranged for our nature to return to the state in which it was from the beginning, and having shown man incorruptible, as in the firstfruits and in the first church of his own (in Himself), he ascended to the Heavenly Father and God. But after a short period of time, He will descend again, as we believe, and will come again to us “in the glory of His Father with the holy Angels” (Matthew 16:27), and will offer the Last Judgment to everyone, both the evil and the good. Everything done will come to judgment. And giving due respect to each life, He will say to those on the left, that is, to those who once thought about what is in the world: “Depart from Me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matthew 25:41). And to those on the right side, that is, the holy and good: “Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world” (Matthew 25:34). They will be and co-reign with Christ, enjoy heavenly blessings, having become conformed to His Resurrection and having escaped the snares of initial corruption, but having been clothed with eternal and ineffable life and endlessly cohabiting with the ever-living Lord. And that those who have led a God-loving and honorable life will continually be with Christ, obviously contemplating His Divine and indescribable beauty, Paul will explain this in the words: “For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven by command, with the voice of the Archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first, then we who are alive and remain will be caught up with Him. in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord" (1 Thess. 4:16-17). And again to those who have decided to mortify worldly passions: “For you are dead, and your life is hidden with Christ in God; when Christ appears, your life, then you also will appear with Him in glory” (Col. 3:3-4). So, I will outline the general meaning of this saying. Lovers of worldly evils will descend to hell and will be removed from the Face of Christ. On the contrary, lovers of virtue will always be and cohabit with Him and, keeping the deposit of the Spirit intact, will be with Him and unhindered to contemplate His Divine beauty, “for the Lord will be your eternal light, and God your glory” (Is. 60:19). And it seems that this is precisely what the Lord wants to point out when we hear His words: “It is yet a little while, and the world will see Me no more, but you will see Me, because I live and you will live.” And of course, he is by no means telling a lie when he calls the interim time before His revelation “short.” For the ever-existing God, even time, which in our opinion is long, is counted as complete nothingness, as the Psalmist testified to in the words: “For a thousand years are in your sight, O Lord, like yesterday, which has passed away, and a watch in the night” (Ps. 89:5). h5 John 14:20 . On that day you will understand that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you 949 The meaning of the above words is somewhat inconceivable and requires, as it were, acute research for oneself, causing a significant slowdown in our reasoning. However, we believe that Christ will again guide us to the truth. Some, although they were once among the wicked heretics, cunningly refusing to confess the Son (born) from the essence of God and the Father, therefore think that He has only an external or relative, and not a natural unity (with God the Father). And so they wrote, spouting from their own mind, and not speaking from the Holy Spirit, that since the Son has love for himself from the Father and, in turn, also loves the Father, then in this way he is in him (the Father). And as some kind of irresistible proof, these fools cite, attached to the above saying, words about us and about Him. And so, substituting, as it were, a kind of reed staff (as a support) to their blasphemies, they claim that while we are called to be in Him and have Him in ourselves, we are not united with Him in essence and the image of unity is that we love and love is mutually shown in us (from Christ); so, they say, the Son does not at all have the essence of God and the Father, but is completely separated (from Him) by nature and is completely distinguished (from Him), but according to the law of love alone, they say, he is conceived in the Father. Their goal, as we recently said, is to declare the Only Begotten a creature and a creature that received existence in time, although awarded some advantages over other creatures, but located outside the essence of God and the Father. Since we have already had a long discussion about this, where we, according to our inherent strength, proved that by nature the Son is in the Father and has an essential unity with Him, then in the present case we will leave it for now to expand on this. However, in order not to provide a field completely free from verbal opposition for the attack of opponents, we will make a few brief objections in order to show, if possible, how malicious and at the same time ignorant the nasty trick of their craftiness is, and we will say the following. If for the sole sake of the fact that the Son is loved and loves, He is in the Father and therefore for the same reason, as we are in Him, so He is in us, but no other connection is recognized that unites either the Son with the Father, or us with Him and Him with us, then how or on what basis, tell me, says that “on that day” we will learn the secret of this? For we, apparently, have not yet understood that the Father loves the Son and He also loves the Father - yes, it seems, we have not yet learned about ourselves (our love for Christ), but some empty consideration deceptively makes us think that the Son loved us and thereby purchased us to the Father, and we also loved Him. After all, saying: “On that day you will know” represents the time of knowledge that has not yet come. Why does the Lord inspire us in vain, saying: “The Father loves the Son” (John 3:35)? And that He Himself loves the Father, who wouldn’t say that? And how, tell me, did He give clear proof of His love for us in that He wished to suffer for us? For, he says, no one has this love greater, that one would lay down his life for his friends (John 15:13). And why did He clearly demand from us love for Himself and for this purpose He wanted us to willingly fulfill His will? He who loves Me, says, will keep My commandments (cf. John 14:15). When will we keep the Divine commandment if we have neglected it at the present time? If, therefore, it is necessary to believe that the Son loves the Father, and also loves us, just as we love Him, then shouldn’t we think that the Son wants to point out something else and determines the image of unity not by the law of love, but in some other way clearly represents it when he says to us: “In that day you will know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you?” But to this the opponent can say that before suffering it was Christ who spoke to us, that is, that He loves the Father and is mutually loved by the Father, and loves us, just as we love Him. After suffering and being raised from the dead, as soon as we saw Him breaking the bonds of death, we knew that He was “in the Father,” precisely as loved by Him, and therefore risen from the dead. Therefore, He is in us and we are in Him, on the same basis of love. But we will answer it this way. Your objection is empty, completely reckless and expressed in rotten words. However, please, my dear ones, pay attention to the fact that after the resurrection (of Christ) we had no need to learn what we truly understood before His resurrection from the dead. After all, if we have imperfectly believed that the Son has love for Himself with His Father and loves the Father Himself, then we really should have expected the resurrection, so that from that time we would have perfect knowledge. If the Father is trustworthy, and even before the resurrection he says: “He is my beloved Son” (Matthew 3:17), and the Savior Himself also speaks the truth: “The Father loves the Son” (John 3:35), - and love must be thought of properly in everything perfect (Col. 3:14), - then why do you bother our ears with your chatter? Why, rejecting the beauty of truth, do you invent ugly lies for us, tear away the Son (born) from Him and through Him from the essence of the Father, invent very rotten words and invent intricacies of absurd conclusions? After all, anyone who wants to delve into the very nature of truth can easily and easily see that the Only Begotten loved us and we loved Him. And indeed, being in the form of God and the Father, “he did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made himself of no reputation, taking on the form of a servant” (Phil. 2:6-7). What, tell me, is the reason for such humiliation? Isn't it love for us? And how can there be any doubt about this? But does not our desire and readiness to give our very soul to the persecutors for Christ, just so as not to deny our Lord, represent a clear proof of love for Him? But everyone either recognizes this as true, or must blame the holy martyrs, as they fought for Christ without any benefit and were exposed to such great danger for nothing. So, if it is shown with complete clarity that the Father has the most perfect love for the Son, and equally loves the Father Himself, just as we love Him and He loves us, then what basis will there be for the idea that knowledge of this can relate to other times, when the Lord says: “In that day you will understand that I am in the Father, and you in Me, and I in you”? But let their chatter and the fabrication of God-hating reasoning perish. We, relying on the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit, will not hesitate to say what seemed to us correct to explain the words being interpreted. So, having said first that “I and you will live” (John 14:19), he immediately finds himself adding to this: “In that day you will understand that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you.” But who among existing (people) and accustomed to thinking correctly will not be completely clear that “day” determines the time of knowledge of this, in which we ourselves, transformed according to Him, will ascend into eternal life and escape the curse of death? And what exactly, as it seems to me, Christ is pointing to, one apostle speaks about this - I mean Paul - when, revealing to us the Divine secret, he writes in one Epistle: “For you are dead, and your life is hidden with Christ in God; When Christ, your life, appears, then you also will appear with Him in glory” (Col. 3:3-4). This is because He will transform the body of our humiliation - precisely this, without a doubt, and not another - in accordance with His glory and will change (it) with ineffable power into the original nature of man, easily transforming everything into what He pleases, without any obstacle. For He is the true God, “who creates and changes all things” (Amos 5:8), according to what is written. Consequently, in “that day” or time when you yourself “will live,” for “I live,” although having become a man like us and having put on a body subject to corruption by its own nature, you will clearly “understand,” he says, “that I am in the Father, you in Me, and I in you.” We must accept that the Lord says this to us so that we do not think that He exists in the Father only in relation to love, as it seemed (should) be argued by opponents, but in the sense of a deep mystery, which is difficult to understand and difficult to express. However, I will try to explain as best I can. Although the exact presentation of this, as I assume, greatly exceeds any mind of the inhabitants of the earth, but, prompted by the fire of love to understand and express this at least to a small extent, I will now consider the purpose of the incarnation of the Only Begotten. So, let us examine the reason why He, being in the form of God and the Father as God, “counted it not robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking on the form of a servant” (Phil. 2:6-7), “and endured the cross, despising the shame” (Heb. 12:2). In this case, at least a little, to the extent accessible to us, the depth of this subject will be understood. Let us try to understand how the Son is in the Father - obviously by nature, and not by some relation invented by opponents to what He loves and loves - and we again, for our part, are in Him in the same way, and He is in us. Therefore, the wise Paul, revealing to us the one, as it were, true and general reason for the incarnation of the Only Begotten, said that God and the Father deigned to “head all things in Christ” (Eph. 1:10), and the term and concept of heading means the elevation again and return to the original state of that which has deviated towards another goal. Then, wanting to clarify for us the images of leadership in particular, in one case he said: “Because of the weakness of the law, since it became weak through the flesh, God, having sent His Son in the likeness of the flesh of sin and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh, so that justification (from) the law might be fulfilled in us, walking not in the flesh, but in the Spirit” (Rom. 8:3-4); and in another again: “Since the children partook of flesh and blood, therefore He Himself also in like manner received the same (flesh and blood), so that through death He might abolish him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, and free those who through the fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives” (Heb. 2:14-15). These two images of headship (restoration), which necessarily conclude the work of the incarnation of the Only Begotten, Paul explained to us. And the image, in addition, which embraces both (the above), is explained by the wise evangelist John, when he writes about Christ like this: “He came into His own, and His own did not receive Him, but (to all) who received Him, He gave them power to become children of God, believing in His name, who were born not of blood, not of the desire of the flesh, not of the desire of a man, but of God” (John 1:11-13). It is obvious, therefore, and I think it is clear to everyone, that for these primarily reasons the Only Begotten, being God and of God by nature, became man, obviously in order to condemn sin in the flesh, put to death death by His own death, and reveal us as sons of God, having been reborn in the Spirit in the Spirit to a dignity that exceeds their nature. It was precisely in this way, without a doubt, that it was possible to completely lead again and restore the fallen race, that is, the human race, to its original state. Снова подвергнув обсуждению каждую из только что сказанных нами причин, станем говорить о них то, что им соответствует. And precisely, we must examine how we must understand that “God the Father condemned sin in the flesh, sending His Son in the likeness of the flesh of sin.” After all, the True God by nature, who appeared from the essence of His (God) and naturally possessed the immutability of His properties, and therefore was completely unable to fall into sin or deviate into wrongness, He (God and the Father) forced voluntarily to descend into the sin that infected the flesh, so that, having made it His own flesh, He would transform it into His own natural property, that is, not to sin. And in fact, we cannot, of course, thinking correctly, admit that the Only Begotten became man for the purpose of arranging this only for His own church (body). Where, then, will be the splendor and benefit of His coming to us, if He saved only His body? On the contrary, we believe that the Only Begotten became like us for the purpose of acquiring benefits for all nature (human) through Himself and in Himself first, as the firstfruits of humanity. Just as we followed not only death, but all the sufferings of the flesh, having undergone this in the first man, because of the crime and the Divine oath; In the same way, I think, we should all follow Christ, who saves and sanctifies the nature of the flesh in Himself in various ways. That is why Paul said: “And just as we have borne the image of the earthy, we will also bear the image of the heavenly” (1 Cor. 15:49). The image of the earthly, that is, Adam, is to be in passions and corruption, and the image of the Heavenly, that is, Christ, is to be in dispassion and incorruption. So, the Word, being God by nature, condemned sin in His flesh, commanding it to remain inactive and forcing it to be directed towards what is pleasing to God, and not towards its own desires, and thus transformed the body, which was spiritual, into spiritual. This is one image of leadership (restoration). But after it, another should come in, especially necessary and useful for the contemplation of this subject. The talk will be about eternal life and the mortification of death and about how the Only Begotten removed from human nature the corruption that appeared as a result of crime. So, “since the children partook of flesh and blood, He also received them in the same way” (Heb. 2:14), in order to put death to death and so that He who created all things for incorruption and revealed the beings of the world as salvation, according to what is written (Wis. 1:14), would again transform the image of things into their original state. And although it is much more detailed than necessary, it is nevertheless necessary that we must again have a speech that reveals our original state. The desire to correctly grasp the subject of speculation, I think, will completely free you from the vice of laziness. So, this rational animal on earth, I mean man, was created in the beginning “in the image of Him who created,” according to the Scriptures (Col. 3:10). But the image is different, for the image exists not in one, but in many respects. But the most important of all aspects of similarity with the God who created is immortality and incorruptibility. But, I think, this animal in itself was never able and could not be like this, by the nature of its nature. Indeed, how could one who is from the earth be found to have the dignity of incorruptibility in his nature, if, in the likeness of other goods, he did not receive this from God, who is immortal by nature and incorruptible and always unchangeable? For “what do you have that you did not receive?” - the divine Paul tells us very appropriately and truly in one place (1 Cor. 4:7). So, so that what was brought from non-existence into being, returning to its beginning, does not again turn into nothing, but remains unceasingly, for such was the goal of the Creator, God makes him (man) a partaker of His Own nature, for “he breathed into his nostrils the breath of life” (Gen. 2:7), that is, the Spirit of the Son, since He is life with the Father, containing everything into being. For in Him moves and lives (everything) capable of life, according to the word of Paul (Acts 17:28). However, let no one accuse us of false teaching, thinking that, according to our statement, Divine inspiration became the soul for the animal. We do not say this, guided to the truth of the subject by such reasoning. After all, if some think that Divine inspiration became the soul, let them answer us: did it once deviate from its nature and turn into the soul or remained identical to itself? And if they say that they have changed and transgressed the law of their nature, they will turn out to be blasphemers, for they will certainly have to assert that the unchangeable and always abiding nature (of God) is changeable. If His inspiration, which came from God, did not change at all, but remained what it had always been, then how did it deviate towards sin and become capable of such a variety of passions? They will not say, of course, that sin is possible for the Divine nature. But so that, using lengthy proofs here, we do not omit what is necessary for our subject of discussion, I find it necessary to repeat again this: no right-thinking person, as I believe, admits that the inspiration that came from the Divine essence became the soul for an animal; on the contrary, already animated and brought to the property of perfect nature through both, I mean soul and body, the Creator, as a kind of seal of His nature, introduced the Holy Spirit, that is “breath of life”, through which he was formed according to original beauty and created in the image of the Creator, guided by the power of the Spirit living in him to every kind of virtue. But since he (man), possessing self-will and endowed with power over his desires - after all, this is part of the image, for God rules over His desires - changed and fell - and how this happened, let the Divine Scripture teach, for it is clear about this - then God and the Father wanted and undertook to restore human nature again to its original state and, having willed, did it. How it happened should be found out. It was impossible for a man with a corruptible nature to avoid death otherwise than in such a way that he again received that original grace and again became a partaker of God, who contains and gives life to all things through the Son in the Spirit. Therefore, He partook of flesh and blood, that is, became man, being Life by nature and born of Life by nature, that is, from God and the Father, His Only Begotten Word, so that, inexpressibly and ineffably and as He Himself only knew, according to His nature, uniting Himself with corruptible flesh, He would raise it into His own life and reveal through Himself a participant in God and the Father. After all, He is the mediator of God and people, according to what is written (1 Tim. 2:5), being united with God and the Father naturally as God and of Him (born), and with people again as a man and as having the Father in Himself and Himself being in the Father. He is the mark and reflection of His hypostasis (Heb. 1:3), being inseparable from the essence of which He is the mark and from which He comes as a reflection, but Himself being in it and having it in Himself. But he also has us in Himself, since He accepted our nature and made our body the body of the Word, for “the Word became flesh,” according to the word of John (John 1:14). And He took our nature, transforming it into His own life. And He is in us, for we have all become partakers of Him and have Him in us through the Spirit. Therefore, we have become partakers of the Divine nature and are called sons, thus having in us the Father Himself through the Son. Paul testified to this in the words: “And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying: Abba, Father” (Gal. 4:6), for His Spirit is not anything else separate from the Son, I say, of course, in relation to natural identity. Having given space in advance to this discussion of ours about these subjects, let us now turn to explaining the meaning of the above words of the Lord and apply the remarks made to them: “On that day you will understand,” he says, “that I am in the Father, and you in Me, and I in you.” I live, He said (John 14:19), for I am Life by nature and have revealed My church (body) to the living! But when you yourself, although having a corruptible nature, see yourself alive in the likeness of Me, then you will “understand”, and it is very clear that I, being Life by nature, have united you through Myself with God and the Father Himself, Who is also Life by nature, making you, as it were, partakers of His incorruption. After all, I am naturally in the Father, for I am the fruit of His essence and a true generation, existing and emerging from it as Life from Life. “You” are “in Me, and I in you,” since I appeared as a man and showed you to be partakers of the Divine nature, having infused My Spirit into you. Christ dwells in us through the Spirit, transforming those subject to corruption into incorruption and transforming us from a mortal state into its opposite. That is why Paul says that “He who raised Jesus Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His (Himself or His) Spirit’s indwelling in you” (Rom. 8:11). After all, even if the Holy Spirit comes from the Father, it comes through the Son and is His own, for all things are from the Father through the Son. That we have been transformed through the Spirit into eternal life is testified to us by the divine Psalmist, who appeals to the God of all: “When You open Your hand, everything will be filled with goodness, but when You turn Your face away, they will be confused, You will take away their spirit (the Spirit from them) and they will disappear, and they will turn to their own dust; You will send Your Spirit, and they will be created, and You will renew their face earth" (Ps. 103:28-30). Do you hear how the crime (that happened) in Adam and how, as it were, the rejection of the Divine commandments changed our human nature and forced it to return to its land. When God sent His Spirit, and revealed us to be partakers of His nature, and through Him the face of the earth was renewed, then we were transformed into newness of life, throwing away the corruption that came as a result of sin, and receiving again eternal life, by the grace and love of our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom and with whom be glory to God and the Father with the Holy Spirit forever. Amen. From myself now. and Kyiv. 1788 – exactly, vm. ancient: about myself. Al. zane vm. like . Al. I can't breathe according to some ἐλήλυϑα vm. ἐλάλησα. That ancient t Al. Himself - I gave the commandment. Ancient will give vm. heat dade. Al. usual eternal life - as I say Az according to. no. and sitse. Nick. commandments In the text ἦλϑεν as some, more author., but in the interpretation ἐλήλυϑεν as others [code. D παϱῆν]. Read in the text. τοὐτῳ after ϰόσμῳ, but not read in the interpretation. according to all ancient Nikol. form of ancient Godina, Reim: before the day of Easter. Al. His time has come - even in the world. Savv. Reim. Al.: in the world, others, all over the world. St. Cyrus and all glory: γενομένου according to one instead of γινομένου others. In the heart of Judas St. Cyrus. and glory acc. one vm. others: in the heart, may Judas betray Him. - Slav. Judas... a disciple. Al. Iscariot vm. Jesus reads to Iscariot. glory acc. one, but St. Cyrus. no cheat Vm. Dade ancient: will give, and Reim. yes In Ost. Sav. Legal goes vm. Dr. Wm. is coming. set accordingly Greek Spicy Reim. World. Const. standing up - not corresponding. Greek Rizas are only Greek. and glory but other approx. own Ostr. Ac. Reim. Vm. receive Al. and Mstisl. up: Acute Ass. Zogr. Sav. V'lia Gal. Vlya Mar. pour in the world. Ass. Vlie Zogr. will of Reim. pour in Jur. Vliev Nik. vylyi. At St. Al. omitted: leader - ruce. Then, as usual, more precisely: he gets up - sits down - pours the girdles on himself, and then: then vm. then I started vm. started To Reim. No. and before the verb according to one Greek After λέγει Art. 6 is not a cheat. ἐϰεῖνος like some Greek. and glory Mirosl., but others [he is Jur. and Al. – Peter Reim.]. My leg according to one Spicy Zogr. Ass. Gal. Mst. Nick. vm. my foot etc. and Mar. Ass. Reim. World. Al. In the century according to Greek everything except Mir. Gal. Mst. Nick. eyelids Al. as usual, exactly: comes - verb. Various Greek οὐ χϱείαν ἔχει, like St. Cyrus. vm. οὐϰ ε. χ. as other εἰ μὴ τοὺς πόδας op. pl. author., no. approx. μόνον. Coffee D: τὴν ϰεφαλὴν νίψασϑαι εἰ μὴ τ. π. μόνον. Vm. ἄλλα big. and ed. cheat γαϱ D, Sir. on foot Hier. syn. Arm. and some and slav., except St. Al. In 11th Art. pl. and av. op. οτι. Slav.: there is everything clean and 11 tbsp. Naturally clean Mar. Zogr. Sav. World. Nick. But St. Al. more precisely: the verb says - you don’t need to wash your feet [but only omits - inaccuracy] - but [acc. more and better] is all clean - pure by nature [acc. Greek Prison and Reim.]. Art. 12. Greek auto more cheat αὐτῶν vm. μαϑητῶν, plural op. ϰαὶ before ἔλαβεν and vm. ἀνέπεσεν read. ἀναπέσων. Slav. When is the OZ op. damn MPCA World. N Al. op. poor. Oh, when the minds of Jesus were His disciples, the rest of them, without Jesus, agreed. author. Greek vm. nose cheat. here are the legs of A World. Al., but in others as now. nose Cheat. and GZS Mir was introduced. Al., op. AROMN. Z and vzlezhe. paki speech. Oh and come back again. speech R and vzleg again speech G and volezhe. again, M said, and again, lying down. and speech S and got out again. speech Op. packs A [lying down] N [lying down] Sim. At Al. washed - lay down. paki speech. Art. 13. ὁ = ϰύϱιος ϰαὶ ὁ διδάσϰαλος – alone, but different and famous. rearranged. Call Mst. Good Sim. Typ., but P take C verb Al. you say. you say the rest. The Teacher and the Lord agreed. Greek Oh Al. Teacher and Lord in R, and in others: Teacher and Lord or Teacher and Lord. Art. 14, vm. ἀλλήλων no. ὑμῶν and glory. S. St. 15. Peace. op. Yes, as I have done for you: Z and N op. bo R cheat. woe and op. yes before you, but yes, do it. Type. right vm. Amen. Vm. Gentlemen ON Al. Gentlemen. GSOZM World. Al. Apostle, A. Yu. Nick. sul , Type. sent by Const. and late messenger Al. Below is the apostle more. Vm. I am OMSG World. N. cheat. e. A. se Mst. Type. and this Al. inaccurate. Vm. νόμοις publishers offer reading ὄϱϰοις. Cyrus. cheat γάϱ, like Slav. all acc. one Greek except Al. and late no cheat acc. Dr. Kir. cheat τίνας as some vm. οῦς others and slav. even MG Mst. Al., hedgehog ZN, and also Const. and late But let the Scripture be fulfilled Al. [exactly] vm. but yes the books will come true GM Mst. N. cheat. like before the poisonous ZG Mst. N, no cheat. acc. Greek: M Al. late G Mst. op. bread, but MZN Al. Const. and late cheat acc. Greek Vazdvizhe M Al. Const. and late vm. move up the ZGN. His heel ZN Al., but G op. your M your seduction. In LXX: ὁ εσϑίων (as in Cyrus in this place) ἄϱτους μου (in Cyrus μοῦ τὸν ἄϱτον in both places) ἐμεγάλυνευ (lit. corresponding Heb.) ἐπ᾽ ἐμὲ πτεϱνισμόν, but in Orig. IV 423 ὁ τϱώγων (as in Cyrus above) – ἐπῆϱεν and πτέϱναν (literally corresponding to Hebrew), like Ak. (cf. Hebrews in the interpretation of this psalm). Before even being Al. before there won’t even be any other heat. Yes, you believe only the Greek. and Kir. and others as heat. sl. yes there will always be. Do you believe Al. vm. etc. you have faith. ᾽Ησϑήσει – dubious reading. Pusey is inclined to correct: ἡσϑήσεϰαι - it will console, it will be pleasant. So Al. acc. Greek Cyrus. vm. ancient word: and accept Mene. So St. Al. - exactly. Ancient: looking worse among [between, between] each other - unthinkingly [ite] Now: bewildered and late. print. and handicraft worse than St. Al. and for vm. same ancient Greek alone and St. Cyrus. cheat οὖν, others not read. Cyrus. διαποϱούμενοι vm. ἀποϱούμενοι handicraft. and ἀποϱοῦντες nek. Without δε as alone and Al. but other cheat. and glory Mar. Zogr. Nick. lie down Al. vm. reclining Dr. Nick. be Now glory. but one of His disciples reclined from Kyiv. not compliant neither Greek nor ancient Only Mar: the only one standing up is also not corresponding. Greek Al. he's waving - exactly vm. ancient I beckon. Now. and Kyiv. ask who would be the VM. ancient: whoever is, Al. who else will be - literalism - resp. Cyrus. and Greek [Syn. – both readings] Alex. Cambre. [approx. οὗτος] other plural. Sire. on foot hercules and syn. Goth. - In glory W. arrive. and then ask. Gal. about him without the same. Ἀναπεσών attack Al. decline, like some and Cyrus. and slav., but others ἐπιπεσών – having fallen [Russian]. Ancient t Al. he is Zogr. op. Cyrus. and ancient words cheat οὗτως, but Ostrozh. Kut. and heat omission acc. to another Greek Thurs. Al. exactly. verb. Cyrus. cheat οὖν acc. one, but glory. everything doesn't read. acc. Friend. Al. ordinary; answers - exactly VM. answered friend. Ancient T . Al. Const. and now wet the VM. ancient wet [b] . Thurs. Cyrus. and glory resp. one, but different: βάψω ϰαὶ δώσω. All glory. no cheat I’ll give him the corresponding. Greek ἐπιδώσω, but in Cyrus. other Thu. δώσω - I will give, although in the interpretation of ἐπιδίωσι, - cf. also in the next note. Cyrus. op. λαμβάνει ϰαὶ acc. one, like Al. M Const. and late, but other read. as well as GZN. gives Al. vm. etc. give it late. dade. Cyrus. Simonov according to one, but other. Simon ZNA Simon MG, late. Simonov Iscariot Al. vm. Iscariot Dr. Cyrus. no cheat τότε acc. one, but glory. cheat then acc. etc. M stink Al. v’onogo GZN vn [better]. Vm. δίδωσιν in comm. ἐπιδέδωϰε acc. no. Greek cheat οὖν alone, ϰαὶ others and omission. third. Slav. ancient op., but Nick. Al. cheat same . Al. exactly: lithargy. Zogr. create accordingly Greek ποίης and ποίει vm. Friend. create Greek ποίησον. Ancient: no one, late. op. Not . Al. not a single one knew those who were lying down. Al. Nick. why M. for chesom Z cheso sake. Same Cyrus. and some vm. more bo – γάϱ Gal. Zogr. Nick. Al. but Mar. op. as no. Greek netsyi G Al. etheri ZN edini M. ark Z Al. screenshot GMN speech resp. εἶπεν Cyrus. but Greek and glory λέγει verb. hedgehog N and late. its also ZMG and its Al. Kut. we require MZGN late. trebe Imam Al. at MZGN in Al. what will I give [sic]? Al. G and accept it. All glory: he is bread accordingly. one, and other: ἐϰεῖνος after ψώμιον. Al. up . In addition, MZGN [ and abie; It was night when I left] Al. It was night, when it was gone - they attribute the beginning of the 31st verse to the 30th, acc. pl. Greek Wed. approx. to verse 31. Cyrus. cheat οὖν acc. one, but glory. no cheat acc. to others. After the verb chit. the same ancient word, but Al. no cheat and according to custom, exactly: verb. Cyrus. acc. pl. op. if God was glorified in Him and from the glories. Sav. and Peace. Sav. op. and before Abiye. Al. will become famous Zogr also became famous. in 32 Art. St. Cyrus in Art. 32 cheat. He is Vm. God is like everyone else and like Cyrus himself. in interpretation. Χϱόνον read. Cyrus. acc. one, but glory. no cheat acc. others, but no. late XV century at Amphil. cheat [Sav. op. and little by mistake]. World. and Nick. My children are like Syrians. Cyrus. no cheat ὅτι according to one, but glory. cheat acc. etc. [Amph. 15th century op.]. I go and glory. acc. author. vm. I'm going az other pl. and Al. Vm. Now I say the Greek verb. and glory I say now. Gal. Jew, Al. Where am I going? Ἐγώ approx. Cyrus. acc. pl., but glory. no cheat acc. more auto World. I'll give, I'll give the others. Sav. op. as if I loved to the end of the verse, but Greek. no. op. yes you too. Sav. yes he loves [?], Mar. At Yagich I will tell you the commandment. new give [error]. Each other O G Mar. World. Mst. ZAS Pandas. Nick. Al. vm. Const. and late and heat itself - the amendment is incorrect, ambiguous, representing a strange and unreasonable deviation from the ancient texts. Cyrus. as no. ἀγαπᾶτε vm. author. ἀγάπην ἔχητε and glory. will be taken away St. Al. exactly vm. will understand all others, others and new ones. Slav. to each other - exactly, as usual, St. Al.: vm. others among themselves. Carp. Panda in yourself. and from that - keep Sav in yourself about me. approx. Bo Sav. About Arch. love. Dr. op. Az - etc. etc. Now walk after Me, but follow Me and follow. Al. exactly: You can’t follow Me, but follow Me. Cyrus. νῦν vm. ἄϱτι etc. Ancient. now follow you. now the soul... AGZOS Mar. N. But Yu Mst. D, T Karp. Al. op. the second now. A World. cheat one thing now, but connects with the soul... like Sir. syn. ed. Bensly cet. and, it seems, the code. I, ascribing at the top [at Tishend.], Sir. on foot ed. Sch, but Pusey-Gwilliam as usual. Al.: lithargy - why can’t I follow you now - for sure. Al. answers according to Thurs. Cyrus. ἀποϰϱίνεται vm. etc. ἀπεϰϱίϑη. Him op. OAN acc. pl. Greek its S. World. Vm. Gal will shout, Vm will sing. alektor late and now. cocotte Mar., loop Nick. all other chickens. Ancient three times vm. now: trishchi, Al. three times. A few words are missing. Aeschylus. Prometheus, Art. 263. Code. D. a. With. In some approx. and said to his disciples. Sire. syn. Jesus said [to the disciples]. OGSS Mar. World. Al. your heart according to Greek, but now AN: your heart. From here ending with the words: and in the Holy Spirit - quoted from Severus against John the Grammar, ch. 29. Hence ending with the words: risen from the dead - quoted by ibid. From here and ending with the words: to true sonship - quotes Ephraim of Antioch from Photius in the Bible. code. 229. Yako op. Al. and late and now. acc. much less the author. Greek Vm. bykh other bim. prepare others prepare according to no. Greek, but Al. I will prepare according to more Sav. and Gal. places World. in the house bo. World. and Ass. there are many abodes. Words: and if I go... prophecy to you. Ass. and Sav. acc. no. Greek Cyrus. μετ’ ἑμαυτοῦ and to the point. vm. πϱὸς ἑμαυτόν. Ass. Zogr. Sav. Nick. lead the way as plural Greek vm. you know and the path is like Ostr. Mar. World. Mst. Arch. Al. [where] acc. more best Greek Al. says in both places, Cyrus. op. ϰύϱιε, but it is available in all texts. Gal. Mst. Sav. Ass. We don’t know, Al. not we acc. Greek, but O Mar. Nick. we don't know. Cyrus. kako wemy acc. one, but glory. what path can we take, Nick. see, Al. How can we lead the way according to etc. Gal. approx. not before. Al. comes . All belly. Cyrus. cheat ἐγνώϰειτε vi. – ατε others and ᾒδειτε as one, vm. γνώσεσϑε others and ἐγνώϰειτε ἂν third. Ancient approx. at the end, Sav. refers slaughter to the future, Al. and late op. acc. Greek Dr. Greek Thurs. op. ϰαὶ, like, apparently, Cyrus. in the interpretation of Sav. [referring to this proposal] Ass. Zogr. Gal. Mst. Cheat. acc. author. Greek: O Mar. World. Al. [omitting the slaughter]. γινώσϰετε Cyrus. acc. author. and O Al. you know, other γνώσεσϑε - you will know Sav. [with emphasis on a] Ass. Zogr. World. Gal. Mst. Mar. [know]. Now. glory know acc. no. Latin, but incorrect and inappropriate. none of the cited ancient Slavic ones, which is why it requires correction. Mst. news vm. videste. Mar. Sav. how much? Everything is ancient. learned, Al. bear learned . Late You did not know Kut. Kiev. Cyrus. λαλῶ vm. other λέγω. Op. ὑμῖν, like others and glory. Cyrus. αλλά vm. δέ Greek and glory: father. Cyrus. αὐτός, as one and glory. t Al. VM himself etc. ἔϱγα αὐτοῦ. But in the interpretation of ποιεῖ ἔϱγα αὐτός, it may be necessary to αὐτοῦ. To the World. error remains . V O As. Nick. the case is not compatible. to the original. Large auto Greek and glory approx.: me. Mn. Greek and glory op. there is, like Cyrus. understandably, but more cheat and Ostr. Believe in Me - exactly the same. Greek Ass. World. Al. Const. and late, but Mar. Gal. Mst. Nick. You have faith in Me, and Sav. You have faith in Me. In Greek no. op. αὐτά, other αὐτοῦ. Al. and late believe, ancient: you have faith, etc. you have Al. things for the sake of these. There is no need to read here the negation of οὐϰ, as Aubert does: φύσις can be understood in the meaning of genus, breed. John 1:18. The Alexandrian fathers, like many others. etc. and coded. Syn. Wat. etc. and many more lane cheat ὁ μονογενὴς ϑεός vm. υἱός. Wed. sense and approx. to fl. m. Z World. creates - twice. Gal. Sav. creates - in the first case. About Ass. Mar. Al. will do it twice. I'm going O Sav. Al. others are coming. Al. zane - and he. And O Vengeance will do more of these. Type. Sim. Nick. Al. late vm. Bolsha will create these T Z Mar. Ass. Sav. World. - Carp. approx. according to my no. Greek Hedgehog Ostrozh. and late vm. its also ancient. At Al. very much. even Gal. Al. vm. any other one Ev. XV century [Amph.] approx. from the father, as some. Latin vulg. and Greek min. Op. and at the beginning of the verse according to one Greek, like Ass. Carp. Al., but O Z Mar. World. G Sav. Nick. cheat acc. other Greek - that Sav. vm. chso Gal, cheso O Z Mar. Ass. Nik., and his World. aka Peace. vm. and also... Approx. I have Arch. Al., like some. Greek, Al. op. What . acc. one Greek then to them. ancient words, but Mst. Legal Al. and late az, like other Greek. In Ev. 15th century Amphil. op. the whole verse, as in some. Greek Cyrus. τηϱήσατε - observe Al. and late vm. other Thu. τηϱήσετε - observe [Nick. – here] and Cyrus. in the interpretation below. Greek diff. μεϑ’ ὑμῶν ἦ, plural. μένῃ μ. ὑ. Slav.: May the Archbishop be with you. and Al. vm. May Dr. Sav be with you. Ass. and late approx. my father's front. Mst. approx. for you after your father. Gal. Comforter, how late it is. and now. instead of the Paraclete of all the ancients and Al. in the century according to Greek O A Mar. Sav. Al. vm. forever and ever Z G Peace. Nick. All are true except O G Mst. true. Arr. all before the world Ass. Zogr. Nick. below Const. Al. and late Vm. neither ancient You agree. to another Greek Thurs. all glory. Al. and now. you know him after. Vm. and ancient Al. below you will know - you will know [Nick. don't lead him Al. exactly: you have - in you vm. al. in you in both cases, and Nick. you have in both cases. Slav. and Kir. cheat μένει see μενεῖ nek. and ἐσται vm. ἐστίν friend. Sires Const. Al. late vm. sire ancient These words in some. conn. from previous in verse. All ancient doesn’t see - you see exactly the same. Greek, but Kut. Kyiv. and heat If you see, you will see, Al. see - see. Sav. and Zogr. op. who agrees no. ancient Greek lat. sir. Arrangement of the world Men who are not Sharp. and Al. acc. Greek and Cyrus, and in others: and the world who does not see Me. Ancient in t, Al. in he . Cyrus. you are awesome. as some, and others and glory. Uraz. you, but to the point. Cyrus. op. as third and from glories. Mar. In Zogr. approx. after you are in Me, but in Greek. No. You might be interested in: