Беседа 28

2 Corinthians 12:16–18. Let us suppose that I myself did not burden you, but, being cunning, took from you with cunning. But did I benefit from anything from you through any of those whom I sent to you? I begged Titus and sent one of the brothers with him: Has Titus taken advantage of anything from you? Were we not acting in the same spirit? Didn't we go the same way? Protection from suspicions of greed. – The teacher sympathizes with the misfortunes of the students. – Virtue is terrible for its opponents. 1. These words were spoken very vaguely by Paul, but not without purpose and not in vain. Since we are talking about money, and (the apostle) defends himself by saying that he does not take anything, it was proper for him to cover up his words. What, however, does this mean? Previously (the apostle) said that he did not take anything, on the contrary, he was even ready to give and spend his own, and he talked a lot about this, both in this epistle and in the first. And now he says something else - as if he introduces words from the objection made to him and first resolves it. This is the meaning of what he said: “I was not looking for profits from you, but perhaps someone else will say that, although I myself did not take anything, but, like a cunning man, I set up those sent by me on my behalf to ask you for something, and from them I myself received, and, thus, receiving through others, I rejected the suspicion that I was taking it myself. But no one can say this either. You yourselves are witnesses of this.” That is why he speaks with questions, saying: “I asked Titus and sent one of the brothers with him: did Titus take advantage of anything from you?” ("I begged Titus, and sent my brother with him. Is Titus covetous of you?” ) Didn’t he come to you in the same way as I?” That is, he didn’t take anything either. Do you see with what care he tried not only to keep himself clean from greed, but also to place those he sent in such a way as not to give even a small pretext to those who wanted to reproach him? This is much higher than what the patriarch (Abraham) did. This latter, returning from victory, when the king gave him part of the spoils of war, refused to take more than what his household ate; but he (Paul), just as he did not use it himself, nor did he allow his employees to use even the necessary food, in order to thus completely stop the mouths of the shameless. Therefore, he does not say on his own behalf that they did not take anything, but, what is much more important, he presents the Corinthians themselves as witnesses to this, so that the testimony does not come from his own person, but is confirmed by their verdict. This is what we usually do when it comes to something obvious and not subject to any doubt. “Tell me,” says (the apostle), “is any of those we sent enriched by anything from you?” He doesn’t say, “Who took anything from you?” But he calls such a thing extortion, reproaching them, bringing them to shame, and showing that taking from someone against his will is extortion. And he did not say: “Titus,” but: “someone,” that is, “You cannot even say that although one did not take, the other did.” On the contrary, none of those sent took it.” “I begged Titus” (“I begged Titus”). And this is said reproachfully. He did not say: “I sent Titus,” but “he begged” (“I begged”), showing that even if he took something from them, he would have taken it by right; however, despite all this, he remained clean. Therefore, he asks them again: “Did Titus take advantage of anything from you? Weren’t we acting in the same spirit?” ("Does Titus covet you? Do we not walk with the same spirit?") What does it mean: "in the same spirit" ("with the same spirit")? The fact that he attributes everything to grace, and shows that everything worthy of praise is accomplished not by our labors, but is the work of the gift of the Spirit and grace. Truly, the greatest grace was when those who lacked everything and were hungry took nothing for the edification of those being taught. “Didn’t we go the same way?” ("Isn't it the same feet?") That is: "They did not deviate at all from the caution I had adopted, but retained the same rule." “Don’t you still think that we are only making excuses for you?” (“Do you think that we have given you an answer?”) (2 Cor. 12:19). Do you see with what apostolic prudence he often repeats this? So earlier he said: “We do not again present ourselves to you, but we give you a reason to boast about us” (“we do not again praise ourselves before you, but we give guilt to you for boasting”) (2 Cor. 5:12), and at the beginning of the message: “Do we really need ... letters of approval to you or from you?” ("or we demand... messages of information") (2 Cor. 3:1). “And all this, beloved, is for your edification” (“All about your creation”). Calms them down again. But even here he does not say clearly: “We did not take from you because of your weakness, but for your edification,” although, however, he expressed it more clearly than before, which upset him, however, without reproach. Namely, he did not say: “because of your weakness,” but “so that you may receive edification.” “For I fear that when I come, I will not find you as I do not want, and also lest you find me as you do not want.” (The Apostle) wants to say something important and unpleasant for them; That’s why it represents a justification by saying: “all this is for your edification” (“it’s all about your creation”), and adding: “I’m afraid” (“I’m afraid”), softens what I intended to say. This no longer shows arrogance or teacher power, but fatherly care, when he fears more than the sinners themselves, and with trepidation begins to correct them. But even so he does not attack them and says not directly, but in the form of doubt: “lest I, when I come, find you as I do not want” (“what food I came, I do not want”). He did not say: “virtuous,” but: “whatever I do not want” (“I do not want”), everywhere using words expressing friendly love. And the word “find” (“I will find”) expresses something unexpected, as well as “you will not find me” (“I will find you”), since both are not arbitrary, but necessary, having their beginning in yourself. That’s why he says: “so that you don’t find me the way you don’t want” (“I will be found, but you don’t want me”). He didn’t say here either: “the way I don’t want,” but much more strikingly, “the way you don’t want” (“the way you don’t want”). This was already in his will, although not mainly, however, in his will. He could again say: “what I don’t want,” and thereby show his love; but does not want the listener to weaken; Moreover, his speech in this case would have been much stricter. And now he made them feel it more strongly, and showed himself to be more meek. This is how his prudence tends to act - so that the wound is deeper and the blow is lighter. Then, due to the fact that what was said was unclear, he reveals it, saying: “so that you do not find strife, envy, anger, quarrels, slander, gossip, pride, unrest” (“let us not find any zeal, envy, rage, slander, whispering, arrogance”). Thus, what should have been said at the beginning, he says at the end, because they rebelled against him. So, not wanting to show that he is mainly looking for his own, he speaks first in general. 2. Indeed, all of the above - slander, accusations, disagreements - were generated by envy. Envy, like a harmful root, gave rise to irritation, condemnation, arrogance, and everything else, and through them it itself grew even more. “So that when I come again, my God will not humble me among you” (“Let not my God again, when I come, humble me among you”) (2 Cor. 12:21). The word “again” (“pack”) contains a new reproach. “The former is enough,” he says, which is what he said at the beginning: “sparing you, I have not come to Corinth until now” (“sparing you, I have not come to Corinth”) (2 Cor. 1:23). Do you see how he shows both indignation and compassion? What does the word “humiliate” (“humble”) mean? To accuse, to punish, to demand an account, to sit as a judge, seems to constitute glory, and he calls all this humility. Not only was he not ashamed of this humility - that the coming of his body was weak and his word was despised, but he even wanted to always be like that, and asked so as not to reach the opposite state. He speaks about this further more clearly, showing that he considers it the greatest humility for himself to reach the need to punish and punish. But why didn’t he say: “Let me not come, I will humble myself,” but: “Lest again, when I come, my God will humiliate me from you” (“Let my God, who has not come, humble me”)? “If it were not for God,” he says, “I would not pay attention to it, I would not worry about it, because I do not autocratically or arbitrarily impose punishment, but according to (God’s) command.” Above, he expressed the same thing, saying: “so that you do not find me as you do not want” (“I will find myself, but you do not want me”); and here he weakens his speech and says with greater condescension and meekness: “so as not to mourn for me many who have sinned before” (“I will mourn many who have sinned”) - not just “sinned” (“those who sinned”), but “did not repent” (“those who did not repent”). And he did not say: “all”, but “many”, and he does not announce these many by name, making it easier for them to return to the path repentance and letting them know that repentance can correct their crimes; mourns only the unrepentant, incurably sick, who remain in ulcers. So, imagine what the virtue of an apostle is if he, not knowing anything bad about himself, weeps for the sins of others and humbles himself for the crimes of others. This is primarily the duty of a teacher, to sympathize with the misfortunes of his students, to cry and sob over the ulcers of the people under his command. Then he enumerates the types of sin: “in uncleanness, fornication and lewdness, which they did” (“about adultery and uncleanness, which they did”). Although the apostle himself here means fornication, if you carefully delve into the matter, you can call every kind of sin by this name, because although the fornicator and the adulterer are primarily called unclean, other sins also produce uncleanness in the soul. That is why Christ calls the Jews unclean, accusing them not only of fornication, but also of other vices. That’s why he says that they cleansed only the external (Matthew 23:26), and that “it is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but what comes out of the mouth defiles a person” (“it is not what goes in... that defiles a person, but what goes out”) (Matthew 15:11). And in another place it is said: “Everyone who is proud in heart is an abomination to the Lord” (“Everyone who is proud in heart is unclean to the Lord”) (Prov. 16:5). And quite rightly, because there is nothing purer than virtue, and nothing dirtier than vice. Virtue is brighter than the sun, and vice is more stinking than dung. And those who are mired in dung and living in darkness can testify to this themselves, if someone opens their eyes even a little. As long as they remain with themselves and revel in passion, as long as they remain, as it were, in darkness, they shamelessly wallow in the abominations of vice, and although they feel their position, it is not completely. When one of the virtuous denounces them, or only appears before them, then they see their pitiful position more clearly, and, as if illuminated by a ray of sunlight, they hide their vileness and are ashamed of their acquaintances, although one is a slave and the other is free, one is a king and the other is a subject. So Ahab was ashamed when he saw Elijah, and, before the latter said anything, he was caught with one glance. The accuser was silent, and he himself pronounced a sentence condemning him, saying, as if he had been captured: “You have found me, my enemy” (“you have found me, my enemy”) (1 Kings 21:20). So Elijah himself fearlessly spoke to his tormentor. So Herod, unable to bear the shame of the accusations (and the great and trumpet voice of the prophetic tongue clearly reproached him), threw John into prison. As if being naked, he wanted to extinguish the lamp so that he could again remain in darkness. Or, better yet, he did not dare to extinguish it himself, but placed it in the house, as if under a bushel, and the pitiful and unhappy woman forced him to do it. But even in this way they could not hide the exposure, but only revealed it even more, since those who asked: “Why was John put in prison?” - they learned the reason, and subsequently everyone who inhabits the sea and land, all the people who hitherto were, are and will be, clearly learned and will learn about their vile deeds, that is, about debauchery and murder, and no time can destroy the memory of this crime. 3. Such is virtue! So immortal is her memory! So in one word she defeats her opponents! Indeed, why did (Herod) imprison (John)? Why didn't you ignore him? Would (John) really have dragged him to trial? Would he really punish for adultery? Did not all that was said (by John) consist of one reproof? What did (Herod) fear and tremble? Wasn’t it a simple speech, wasn’t it just words? But they hurt him more than the matter itself. (John) did not take him to an ordinary court, but handed him over to another court, the court of his own conscience, and appointed everyone as judges over him, everyone in their hearts then pronounced judgment over him with full authority. That is why the tyrant trembled, unable to bear the radiance of virtue. Do you see what the power of wisdom is? It made the prisoner more glorious than the tyrant, so that the latter feared and trembled at the former. But (Herod) only put (John) in chains; and the lawless one (Herodias) also inspired murder. Meanwhile, (John) the accusation fell more on him, because it was not her who (John) said then: “Why are you living with a tyrant?” He did not denounce her, not because she was not subject to responsibility (could this be?), but because he wanted to correct everything (starting with Herod). That’s why I reproached him alone, and what’s more, I didn’t even reproach him strictly. He didn’t say: “Bad and vile, lawless and vile! You have trampled the law of God, you have despised the commandments of God, and you have made your own power a law for yourself.” He did not say anything like that, but even in his denunciations one can see great moderation and meekness: “It is not worthy for you,” he said, “to have your brother’s wife” (“It is not worthy for you to have [Philip’s] brother’s wife”) (Mark 6:18). Such words are more fitting for one who teaches than one who reproaches; admonishing rather than punishing; to guide rather than to disgrace; the corrector rather than the attacker. But, as I said, the light is hostile to the thief, the righteous is hated by sinners, even at his very appearance: “It is hard for us to look at him” (“hard for us to see”) (Wis. 2:15). (Sinners) cannot bear its rays, like sick eyes cannot bear the rays of the sun. And for many sinners it is difficult not only to see the righteous, but even to hear about him. That is why that nasty and vile woman, the mentor, or, better to say, the murderer of her daughter, although she herself did not even see (John) or hear his speeches, rushed to kill, and forced her dissolutely brought up daughter to go dissolutely to murder. She (John) was so afraid! And what does he say? “Give me here on a platter the head of John the Baptist” (“Give me here on a platter the head of John the Baptist”) (Matthew 14:8). Poor and unfortunate, what abyss are you rushing into? Has your accuser come? Is he in front of you and bothering you? Others said: “It’s hard for us to look at him” (“it’s hard for us to see”); and, as I said, it was hard for her to hear, which is why she says: “Give me the head of John here on a platter” (“Give me the head of John here on a platter”). For you (Herodias, John) in prison, for you imprisoned; You can be vain of the king’s love and say: “I took possession of him, but even the one who was publicly convicted did not grow cold towards me, did not stop loving me, did not reject fornication with me, but even the accuser was put in chains.” Why are you furious and furious when, even after being exposed to sin, you have a husband? Why are you looking for the furies' meal and preparing a feast for murderers - demons? Do you see how insignificant, how timid, how powerless anger is, how the more it overcomes, the weaker it becomes? (Herodias) was not so much worried when John was not yet imprisoned as she was worried when he was already bound. And therefore he urgently asks: “Give me the head of John here on a platter.” What is “here” for? “I’m afraid,” she says, “that they will not deceive me with false news of the murder, that someone will save (John) from death.” But why are you asking not for the whole dead man, but for one chapter? “I passionately wish,” he says, “to see the tongue that insulted me silent.” But, poor and unhappy! You will see the opposite (as it happened): the severed head will speak even louder than before. Then John cried out in Judea alone, but now his voice will reach the ends of the universe; and wherever you enter a church, whether among the Moors, or among the Persians, or even in the British Isles, everywhere you will hear John crying: “You must not have the wife of your brother Philip.” But (Herodias) did not know how to reason; she relentlessly asks, demands, forces the senseless tyrant to commit murder, fearing that he will come to his senses. And from here you will again learn the power of virtue. He cannot stand the righteous when he is even imprisoned, in chains, and silent. Do you see how powerless and unclean vice is? Here they bring in a human head on a platter instead of food. What is more disgusting, what is more vicious, what is more shameless than this girl? What did she say at the devil's spectacle, at the demon's feast? You see, a tongue, and another tongue - one delivers saving medicine, and the other carries poison on itself and prepares a devilish feast. But why didn’t she order him to be beheaded in the middle of the feast, which would have given her more pleasure? She was afraid that (John), presenting himself at the feast, would win over everyone with his appearance and boldness. That is why he demands the head, wanting to erect a brilliant monument to fornication: “and she gave it to her mother” (“And she gave it to her mother”) (Mark 6:28). 4. Do you see the reward for dancing? Do you see the spoils of the devil's wiles? I do not mean the head of John, but the man himself (Herod). In fact, whoever carefully understands will see that the king was defeated, that the winner herself was defeated, and the beheaded man was crowned, proclaimed the winner, and after his death strikes the hearts of sinners even more with fear. And what was said is not empty words, ask Herod himself. When he heard about the miracles of Christ, he said: “This is John the Baptist; he rose from the dead, and therefore miracles were done by him” (“this is John; he is risen from the dead, and for this reason they work on him for the sake of power”) (Matthew 14:2). He was so afraid and incessantly trembling, and no one could free him from the fear of conscience; on the contrary, this judge remained incorruptible, tortured him, and punished him every day for murder. So, knowing this, let us be afraid not to endure, but to do evil. One is victory, and the other is defeat. That’s why Paul said: “Why would it be better for you not to remain offended?... But you yourselves offend and take away, and from your brothers” (“why are you not more offended by nature?... But you [yourselves] offend and deprive, and even the brethren” (1 Cor. 6:7–8). Crowns, rewards and glorification are ready for those who endure evil. And this can be seen in all the saints. If everyone is thus crowned and proclaimed winners, then we too will go the same way; Let us pray so as not to fall into temptation; and if it comes, then, armed with courage, we will show due zeal in order to receive future benefits for us, by the grace and love of our Lord Jesus Christ, with whom to the Father and the Holy Spirit be glory, power, honor, now and ever, and to the ages of ages. Amen. You might be interested in: