This Sunday the Church recalls the parable of the healing of lepers to understand the meaning of thanksgiving.

The rector of the Kiev-Pechersk Lavra, Metropolitan of Vyshgorod and Chernobyl, Vladyka Pavel, addressed the readers of Vesti with a sermon on this day.

“To live life is not to cross the field. There are all kinds of damage to the field, the land is poorly plowed, the harrow is poorly laid, the grass is not collected correctly, etc. But a person’s life is filled with sorrows and sorrows. Why? Because sin has distorted everything. The Lord does not force a person to take any actions, but gives freedom of choice - to follow the path that a person has chosen for himself. And we are with you, dear brothers and sisters, during the Sacrament of Baptism in the Holy Apostolic Canonical Orthodox Church, a Church recognized by the whole world. and established by the Lord, we write our name in the Book of Eternal Life. And everything else is tares, this applies to the clergy to some extent, as well as people who have shown stubbornness in sin, who want an easy way to reach the Kingdom of Heaven. There is no easy way. “There is a path of suffering, a path of experiences, a path of death, resurrection - and then, as the Lord determines, that is what awaits the person,” the Metropolitan recalled.

And he noted: “We often think incorrectly and think distortedly. Why? We say: what will happen to everyone will happen to me too. This is not true. How can you compare yourself, for example, with St. Anthony or with the holy martyrs. Parasites, lazy people, drunkards, fornicators, alcoholics and so on, so forth, all kinds of lawless people want to get into the Kingdom of Heaven. This does not happen. There is a righteous Judgment and an unhypocritical Judge. If the conscience is not silenced, then it will answer to the icon, to people, to itself - and will receive what it deserves. And in the Gospel reading we see that Christ passes through cities, villages, and many, many suffering people come to Him. And we come to the temple to meet God. everyone chooses what suits him. If a person feels that someone insulted him, told him what not to do or what not to do, and exposed his sin, he begins to be offended with the words: “I will never go to the temple, everyone there is like that..." Remember that it is not the Church that needs us, but we who need the Church. It is not the Kingdom of God that needs us, but we need the Kingdom of God. Either we deserve it, or we go with the enemy of the human race - the devil. You and I have a distorted human nature. The Lord created us beautiful, healthy, but when sin entered, our body and soul received changes. And after this sin came illness, suffering and death. Therefore, today we are talking about the ten lepers and the meaning of thanksgiving."

Parable about the healing of 10 lepers

And when Jesus entered a certain village, ten lepers met Him, who stopped at a distance and said in a loud voice: Jesus the Mentor! have mercy on us.

When He saw them, He said to them: Go show yourself to the priests. And as they walked, they purified themselves.

One of them, seeing that he was healed, returned, glorifying God with a loud voice, and fell prostrate at His feet, thanking Him; and it was a Samaritan.

Then Jesus said, “Were not ten cleansed?” where is nine? how did they not return to give glory to God, except this foreigner? And he said to him: get up, go; your faith has saved you.

Luke, 85, 17, 12-19

Healing of 10 lepers: interpretation

“We don’t know who sinned (they or their parents), and it’s not our fate to judge other people’s destinies. We can only be helpers in their grief and misfortune, because we don’t know what awaits us,” the rector noted laurel.

So, 10 lepers came out to meet Christ and asked Christ: “Jesus Mentor! Have mercy on us.”

And they called the Lord by name - Jesus. “What does this mean? This suggests that a spirit of malice and hatred lived in these people, but he also knows the Lord. Because he saw, heard and communicated with God to some extent, when the Word was not yet Flesh. When it was still the Word that we were waiting for, and today it became Flesh in the image of Jesus Christ. And this is higher than a teacher, this is the one who cares for the soul and leads a person along the path of salvation,” Bishop Paul emphasized. .

"But let's also look at what leprosy is. If we look at it from a medical point of view, it was an incurable disease. It is a terrible disease when the body falls away from the bone and at the same time the bone decomposes. It is a terrible pain and it is a contagious disease. The one who had such a disease, he could not live in the villages and be among people. And there was no treatment, there were no such medicines and drugs that could heal a person. The law stated this: “A leper who has this ulcer, His clothes must be torn, and his head must not be covered, and his mouth must be covered and he must cry out: unclean! unclean!" (Lev. 13:45). Clothes should be torn so that leprosy is visible. Closed to the mouth - this is so that those passing by know that he is sick. The head is not covered - so that illness is visible, since leprosy causes the hair to turn white and And also, shouting “Unclean!”, he warned those around him about his approach. The man had no choice but to leave the house, he was expelled from society, and they wandered in the desert, living in coffins,” the Metropolitan said.

And in addition to the terrible, incurable disease, the person found himself in complete isolation, abandoned by all people, with no one to say just words of support, and no one to turn to for consolation.

These people were rejected and despised by everyone. Their fate was worse than death. And just 10 such sick people came out to meet the Lord.”

How could rumors about Christ reach such outcasts of society? “We can assume that the miraculous power of Christ was talked about everywhere and everywhere, and, probably, the one who threw them bread out of pity somehow mentioned the great Wonderworker,” suggested Vladyka Paul.

It does not say that the Lord healed them. He said: "Go, show yourself to the priests." According to the law, it was the priests who declared lepers unclean and expelled from society, and those who were healed were declared healthy and returned to society.

“The Lord indicates that all the power of grace is in the temple, in communion with God. He did not say that you will be healed at this moment. But walking along the road, you can think like this, you will receive the healing you ask for. And here the obedience of the lepers is striking the Word of the Lord and their faith,” noted Metropolitan Pavel.

As they walked along the road, they saw that the leprosy had left them and they became healthy. One Samaritan, feeling himself healed, began to look for the Savior who healed him. This point also tells us that although the Jews despised the Samaritans, the Samaritans were sometimes superior to them.

And when he found it, he fell at His feet and thanked Him. Jesus said, "Were not ten cleansed? Where are the nine?"

“They had to thank the Lord. We can think that they showed themselves to the priest, made some kind of cleansing sacrifice, for sure. But a foreigner came to Christ to thank, and the Lord said to him: “Get up, go. Your faith has saved you." These words have a deep meaning for you and me. The word “Arise” means that the illness is over, you already see that you are not sick, your body is clean. The Lord Jesus Christ Himself healed you of leprosy. You are already received a testimony before the Apostles and at the same time before the Heavenly Father,” explained the rector of the monastery.

Why thank God

Jesus Christ is the Lord Almighty. Icon

“Unfortunately, only one came to thank God, and nine did not return. This suggests that the Jews who knew Christ knew God all their lives - but they did not accept, they rejected Him. And they did not thank God for that grace-filled time, which came to them in order to receive their sight and be healed of their ailments. And for us, the pagans, who had the good fortune to be a Samaritan, enlightenment came with Divine Light and Grace. And we, like the Samaritan, came to God and worshiped the Lord. healed us from the leprosy of ignorance, from the leprosy of the coarseness of our character, from the leprosy of ignorance, and the light of Christ’s teaching shone in our hearts,” noted Metropolitan Paul.

But, unfortunately, we have spiritual leprosy - ingratitude towards God and people, he added. “And this disease can become the cause of all the unrest and disasters in the life of every person. The Lord pleases everyone with sunshine, warmth, rain, some with wealth, some with friends...

But of all those to whom the Lord sends mercies, several dozen come to the temple. Where are the others? Doesn't everyone have something to thank God for?

If everyone went to the temples in one impulse, overcoming disbelief and despair, then a miracle would happen along the way. Everything would change in our lives! Many go to church, but ask for help in their own misfortune, hoping for a miracle - but not even trying to find the Greatest Miracle in the life of mankind - Christ!" - said Bishop Pavel.

Many people wonder, why thank God? “I would like to remember the words of St. Nicholas (Velimirović): “Human gratitude will not make God greater, nor more powerful, nor more glorious, nor richer, nor more alive. But it will make the people themselves greater, more powerful, more glorious, richer and more alive. Human gratitude will not add anything to the peace and bliss of God, but it will add peace and bliss to people themselves. And gratitude to God will not at all change the existence and being of God, but it will change the existence and being of the one giving thanks.”

“In prayer and thanksgiving to God, a person frees himself from earthly attachments, life’s worries, is freed from mortal corruption and cleaves to the Lord Jesus Christ. Gratitude gives wings to mercy and encourages a person to do works of mercy, and Divine grace strengthens him on all paths of life. Therefore, let us try to rush to the temple after each of our spiritual and physical healings, to thank God for His greatest mercies. And at the same time, to show those gifts of Divine love that the Lord has not yet refused to anyone. Even to foreigners and people of other faiths, the Lord has shown His mercy. so that they would understand and come and worship the Lord and glorify Him and His greatness,” the rector of the monastery emphasized in conclusion.

Prayer of gratitude to the Lord God

Prayer of thanksgiving to the Lord God

We thank Thee, Lord our God, for all Thy good deeds, even from the first age to the present, in us, Thy unworthy servants (names), who were, known and unknown, about those revealed and unmanifested, even those who were in deed and in word: who loved us as and You deigned to give Your Only Begotten Son for us, making us worthy to be worthy of Your love.

Grant with Your word wisdom and with Your fear inhale strength from Your power, and whether we have sinned, whether willingly or unwillingly, forgive and not impute, and keep our soul holy, and present it to Thy Throne, having a clear conscience, and the end is worthy of Thy love for mankind; and remember, O Lord, all who call upon Thy name in truth, remember all who desire good or evil against us: for all are men, and every man is in vain; We also pray to You, Lord, grant us Your great mercy.

Prayer of gratitude to the Almighty

The Cathedral of Saints Angel and Archangel, with all the heavenly powers, sings to Thee and says: Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord of hosts, heaven and earth are filled with Thy glory. Hosanna in the highest, blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord, Hosanna in the highest. Save me, Who art thou King on high, save me and sanctify me, Source of sanctification; For from You all creation is strengthened, To You countless warriors sing the Trisagion hymn. Unworthy of You, who sits in the unapproachable light, of whom all things are terrified, I pray: enlighten my mind, cleanse my heart, and open my lips, so that I may worthily sing to You: Holy, Holy, Holy art thou, Lord, always, now, and ever and to endless ages of ages. Amen.

Prayer of thanks upon receiving what you asked for

Glory to Thee Savior, Almighty Power! Glory to Thee Savior, Omnipresent Power! Glory to Thee, most merciful Womb! Glory to Thee, ever-opening Hearing to hear the prayer of the accursed me, to have mercy on me and save me from my sins! Glory to Thee, brightest Eyes, I will look upon me with kindness and insight into all my secrets! Glory to Thee, glory to Thee, glory to Thee, Sweetest Jesus, my Savior!

(Luke 17.11-37)

Luke 17:11. Going to Jerusalem, He passed between Samaria and Galilee.

Luke 17:12. And when He entered a certain village, ten lepers who stood at a distance met Him.

And from here everyone can know that nothing prevents anyone from pleasing God, even if he is from a cursed family, as long as he has a good will. So “ten lepers” met Jesus when He was about to enter a certain city. They met Him outside the city, for they, since they were considered unclean, were not allowed to live inside the city (Lev. 13:46). They stopped “far away,” as if ashamed of their imaginary uncleanness and not daring to come closer in the thought that Jesus also abhors them, as others did, raising their voices and asking for mercy. According to their location, they stood far away, but through prayer they stood close. For the Lord is near to all who call on Him in truth (Ps. 144:18). They ask for mercy not as from an ordinary person, but as from one who is higher than man. For they call Jesus Mentor, that is, Master, Trustee, Overseer, which is very close to calling him God.

Luke 17:14. Seeing them, He said to them: Go, show yourself to the priests. And as they walked, they purified themselves.

    He (Jesus) commands them (the lepers) to show themselves to the priests. For the priests examined such, and from them they made a decision whether they were clean from leprosy or not (Lev. 13). The priests had signs by which they noted incurable leprosy. And even then, when someone fell ill with leprosy and then recovered, the priests examined it, and they were given a gift, which was commanded in the Law. Here, when the lepers were indisputably such, what need was there for them to appear to the priests if they did not have to be completely cleansed? The command for them to go to the priests indicated nothing else but that they would become clean. That is why it is said that as they walked along the road they purified themselves.

Luke 17:15. One of them, seeing that he was healed, returned, glorifying God with a loud voice,

Luke 17:16. and fell on his face at His feet, giving thanks to Him; and it was a Samaritan.

    But look, as we said at first, out of ten people, nine, although they were Israelis, remained ungrateful. And the Samaritan, although he was of an alien race, returned and expressed his gratitude (and the Samaritans were Assyrians), so that none of the pagans would despair, and none of those descended from holy ancestors would boast about this.

Luke 17:17. Then Jesus said, “Were not ten cleansed?” where is nine?

Luke 17:18. how did they not return to give glory to God, except this foreigner?

Luke 17:19. And he said to him: get up, go; your faith has saved you.

    This miracle also hints at the general salvation that existed for the entire human race. The ten lepers represent the entire human nature, leprous with malice, bearing the ugliness of sin, living for its uncleanness outside the city of heaven and standing far from God. This very distance from God interceded for mercy. For for someone who loves mankind and wants to save everyone and bless God, the strongest motivation for mercy is to see that no one participates in goodness. For this very reason, He bowed down to heal those in such a situation. And although He healed all leprous nature, becoming incarnate and tasting death for every person, the Jews, despite the fact that by the Lord they were cleansed from all the impurities of leprous sin, turned out to be ungrateful and did not turn from their vain path to give glory to the Savior God, that is, to believe Him that He, the true God, was pleased to endure the most severe suffering. For the Flesh and the Cross are the glory of God. So, they did not recognize the Incarnate and Crucified as the Lord of glory. And the pagans, a strange people, recognized Him who had purified them and glorified Him by faith that God is so loving and powerful that for our sake He took upon Himself extreme dishonor, which is a matter of love for mankind, and, having accepted it, did not suffer any harm in His nature, which is a matter of power.

Luke 17:20. Having been asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come,

The Lord often mentioned the Kingdom of God in His teaching. But the Pharisees, hearing about it, laughed at the Lord and therefore began to ask when it would come, in the form of ridicule of Him as an eccentric preaching about an extraordinary and strange subject. For none of the former teachers and prophets mentioned it (the Kingdom of God). Or, perhaps, having in mind their intention to kill Him in a short time, they approach Him with a question in order to prick Him and ridicule Him, as if to say: You are talking about the Kingdom, when will this Kingdom of Yours come? For in the morning You will be betrayed by us to death, You will be lifted up on a cross, and You will receive many other dishonors. What about Christ?

He answered them: The Kingdom of God will not come in a noticeable way,

Luke 17:21. and they will not say: behold, it is here, or, behold, there. For behold, the Kingdom of God is within you.

He does not answer the foolish according to their foolish thoughts and madness (Prov. 26:4), but leaves them to wander as to the similarity of the Kingdom, and does not reveal to them what kind of Kingdom He is talking about (for they would not accept it), nor the fact that this Kingdom is not like a worldly kingdom, but is a premium Kingdom (John 18:36). Having kept silent about this, since they, due to their arbitrary deafness, were unworthy to hear about this, the Lord says about the time of the coming of the Kingdom that it is unknown and cannot be observed; since the Kingdom of God does not have a specific time, but is present to those who wish it at any time. For the Kingdom of God, without a doubt, constitutes living and forming itself in the image of the Angels. Then, they say, God truly reigns when there is nothing worldly in our souls, but when we behave above the world in everything. And we have this way of life within ourselves, that is, whenever we want. For faith does not require either long time or travel, but faith, and following faith, a life pleasing to God, is close to us. About this very thing the apostle said: “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart, that is, the word of faith, which we preach” (Rom. 10:8). For that we may believe, and having believed, walk worthy of the calling, this is within us. So, the Pharisees mocked the Lord because He was preaching a Kingdom that no one had preached about. But the Lord declares that they do not understand an object that is within them and which it is very convenient for those who wish to achieve it. Now that I am among you, you can undoubtedly receive the Kingdom of God if you believe in Me and decide to live according to My commandments.

Luke 17:22. He also said to the disciples: the days will come when you will wish to see even one of the days of the Son of Man, and you will not see;

    That is, the Kingdom of God is inherent in you as long as I am with you. It is inherent in you not only because you believed in Me and followed Me, but also because you now live with complete carelessness, since I care and think about you. But when I am not with you, days will come that you will be given over to dangers, and you will be led before rulers and kings. Then you, as the Kingdom of God, will wish for the current safe life that you lead with Me, and you will repeatedly wish to receive at least one of My days, that is, the days of My stay with you, as the safest days. Although they (the disciples of the Lord), even while they were with Him, did not lead a life without labor and dangers, but suffered flight with the fleeing and insult with the insulted, but if their previous adventures are compared with future dangers, it turns out that they were then very safe. Therefore, even with this way of life, that is, with little danger and labor, the Kingdom of God was within the apostles; whereas after the Resurrection they were, as it were, captives and exiles. With these words the Lord prepares the hearts of the apostles for labor and patience and first tells them not to be tempted (John 16:1).

Luke 17:23. and they will say to you: here, here, or: here, there - do not go and do not chase,

Don’t listen, he says, to anyone’s beliefs that I came here or there.

Luke 17:24. For as lightning that flashes from one end of the sky shines to the other end of the sky, so will the Son of Man be on His day.

For My second coming, most brilliant and most glorious, will not be limited to any place, but just as lightning does not hide, but appears from one end of the earth to the other, so My second coming will be bright and obvious and will not be hidden from anyone. So, do not give in to the temptations of false Christs. Previously, I appeared in a manger and was in humiliation for thirty years, but then it will not be so: I will come in all glory, accompanied by angelic armies, and in an instant.

Luke 17:25. But first He must suffer much and be rejected by this generation.

Then, since he predicted terrible disasters for them, consoling them and convincing them to endure them courageously, he sets himself up for them as an example. Do not be surprised, he says, if such difficulties happen to you that they will make you wish for the return of My present stay with you. For I Myself, who am about to appear like lightning, must first suffer much and be rejected, and then come in this glory. Let this be for you a conviction to virtue and encouragement to patience, that is, look at Me and trust that you too will receive glory for enduring dangers and for rejection, just like Me.

Luke 17:26. And as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be in the days of the Son of Man:

Luke 17:27. They ate, they drank, they married, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all.

Luke 17:28. Just as it was in the days of Lot: they ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built;

Luke 17:29. but on the day that Lot came out of Sodom, it rained fire and brimstone from the sky and destroyed everyone;

Luke 17:30. so it will be on the day when the Son of Man appears.

And here the Lord points out the suddenness and unexpectedness of His coming. For just as under Noah the flood suddenly came and destroyed everyone, so will His coming be. These examples, that is, the example of the pre-flood people and the Sodomites (before the fire), also hint that at the coming of the Antichrist all indecent pleasures will increase among people, that people will be dissolute and given over to criminal pleasures, just as the apostle said that “in the last days ... people will ... be lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God” (2 Tim. 3:1-2, 4). And it is not surprising that under the reign of the seducer, evil will flourish. For it is the abode of the malice of all sin. What else will he try to instill in the pitiful generation of people of that time, if not his own properties? For what can be made clean from something unclean? So, people will then wallow in every sensual pleasure, like in the time of Noah, and will not expect any trouble, they will not even believe if anyone speaks to them about the occurrence of any misfortune, like the people who lived in the days of Noah and in the days of Lot .

Luke 17:31. On that day, whoever is on the housetop and his belongings are in the house, do not go down to take them;

On that day of the coming of the Antichrist, “whoever is on the roof,” that is, at the height of virtue, do not go down with it, do not go down for any everyday object. For all everyday objects are called vessels for man, serving one for virtue, and another for evil. So, standing at the height of virtue, do not descend for anything worldly and do not fall from your height, but resist malice and do not weaken.

and whoever is on the field, also do not turn back.

Likewise, let him “whoever is on the field” not turn back. For one who is in the field, that is, cultivating virtue in this world, should not turn back, but should extend forward, as it is said in another place: “No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is fit for the Kingdom of God.” (Luke 9:62).

Luke 17:32. Remember Lot's wife.

The Lord presents Lot's wife as an example. She, turning back, became a pillar of salt (Gen. 19:26), that is, without moving away from anger, she remained with its saltiness, becoming completely evil, and, having wallowed and remained in evil, constitutes a monument to the defeat that she suffered.

Luke 17:33. Whoever saves his soul will destroy it; and whoever destroys her will bring her to life.

Then the Lord adds something also related to the above: “Whoever will save his life will lose it.” No one, he says, during the persecution of the Antichrist, do not try to save your soul, for such a one will destroy it. And whoever gives himself up to death and to disasters in general will be saved without bowing to the tormentor out of love for life. Above, the Lord said that he who stands at the height of virtue should not go with it for everyday objects, should not be carried away by acquisitions or property and because of them weaken in the struggle. Likewise now, extending further, he says: and why do I say, do not go for the vessels? No, do not abandon virtue because of external benefits, or even for the very preservation of your soul, do not dare to bow before the seducer and persecutor.

Evangelist Matthew (Matthew 24) says that the Lord said all this about the captivity of Jerusalem, hinting at the siege from enemies and that during the invasion of the Romans one should flee from them without looking back: those on the roof do not need to go into the house to take what - something from everyday life, but must immediately flee, for this is not a time of peace to collect vessels; Likewise, those who are in the field do not need to return home, and even those who are at home need to flee. However, there is nothing surprising if this came true during the capture of Jerusalem and will come true again at the coming of the Antichrist, especially if just before the time of death (the world) grief is unbearably severe.

Luke 17:34. I tell you: on that night there will be two in one bed: one will be taken, and the other will be left;

And from here we learn that the coming of the Lord will follow unexpectedly and suddenly. For the saying that “two... will be... on one bed” shows the carelessness of people. Likewise, the grinding signifies the surprise of the coming. We also learn that the coming will follow at night. So, the Lord says that of the rich who rest on their beds, some will be saved and others will not. The Lord once said that the rich are saved with difficulty (Matthew 19:23-24). Now He shows that not all the rich perish, not all the poor are saved, but even of the rich one will be taken up and caught up “to meet the Lord” (1 Sol. 4:17), as light in spirit and heavenly, and the other will be left below, as convicted.

Luke 17:35. two will grind together: one will be taken, and the other will be left;

Luke 17:36. two will be on the field: one will be taken, and the other will be left.

In the same way, of the poor, who are designated as grinders, one will be saved and the other will not. For not all the poor are righteous: some of them are thieves and cut wallets. The grinding indicates the difficult life of the poor.

Luke 17:37. To this they said to Him: Where, Lord? He said to them, “Where the corpse is, there the eagles will also gather.”

When the disciples asked the Lord where these would be taken, He answered: “Where the corpse is, there... are the eagles”; that is, where the Son of Man is, there are all the saints, light and high-flying, while sinners are heavy and therefore remain below. Just as when a dead body lies, all the carnivorous birds flock to it, so when the Son of Man appears from heaven, who died for us and was counted among the corpse, all the saints and even the angels themselves will gather. For He will come with them in the glory of the Father and in unspeakable splendor. Although He called this time night, He called it so because it was unexpected and that darkness would then embrace sinners. But the light will shine on the righteous, and they themselves will be illuminated like the sun (Matt. 13:43).

Luke 85, 17:12-20

Let us learn from the example of small things if we cannot immediately understand the great ones.

If we cannot understand how God sees all people, let's look at how the sun illuminates all objects on earth.

If we cannot understand how the human soul cannot live a single minute without God, let us look at how the human body cannot live a single minute without air.

If we don’t know why God demands obedience from people, let’s figure out why the head of a family demands obedience from his household, a king from his subjects, a commander from soldiers, an architect from builders.

If we don’t know why God demands gratitude from people, let’s think and understand why a parent demands gratitude from his children. But let’s dwell on this question for a while: why do parents demand gratitude from their children?

Why does a father demand that his son bow to him, take off his hat, and thank him for every big and small thing received from his parents? What does father need this for? Does filial gratitude make him richer, stronger, more respected, more influential in society? No, not at all. But if he personally has nothing from filial gratitude, isn’t it funny that he constantly teaches it to his child and teaches him to be grateful, and not only a pious parent, but even an unpious one?

No, it's not funny at all; it's noble. For this reveals the most selfless parental love, which forces parents to teach their child gratitude. For what? So that the child feels good. So that the child grows up like a garden fruit, and not like a wild thorn. So that he would feel good in this temporary life among people, among friends and enemies, in villages and cities, in power and in trade. For everywhere a grateful person is valued, loved, invited, helped and welcomed. Whoever teaches you to be grateful will teach you to be merciful. And a merciful person walks more freely on this earth.

Now let’s ask ourselves, why does God require gratitude from people? Why did He demand from Noah, Moses, Abraham and other forefathers that they bring Him thanksgiving sacrifices (Gen. 8:20; 12: 7-8; 35: 1; Lev. 3: 1)? Why did our Lord Jesus Christ daily set people an example of how to give praise to God (Matthew 11:25; 14:19; 26:26-27)? Why did the holy apostles do the same (Acts 2:47; 27:35), commanding all the faithful to always thank God for everything (Eph.5:20; Col.3:17)? Is it not reasonable that the great Isaiah exclaims: I will remember the mercies of the Lord and the glory of the Lord for everything that the Lord has given us, and His great kindness to the house of Israel, which He showed them according to His mercy and according to the multitude of His bounties(Isa.63:7)? Or what the touching psalmist advises his soul: Bless the Lord, my soul, and do not forget all His rewards(Ps. 102:2)? So why does God require gratitude from people? And why do people pay him with gratitude? Out of His infinite love for people, God requires that people thank Him. Human gratitude will not make God greater, more powerful, more glorious, richer, or more alive; but it will make the people themselves greater, more powerful, more glorious, richer and more alive. Human gratitude will not add anything to the peace and bliss of God, but it will add peace and bliss to people themselves. And gratitude to God will not at all change the existence and being of God, but it will change the existence and being of the one giving thanks. Personally, God does not need our gratitude, just as He does not need our prayer. But still the Lord, who said: your Father knows what you need before you ask Him(Matthew 6:8), at the same time teaches us, that one should always pray and not lose heart(Luke 18:1). So, although God has no need for our prayer, He still commands us to pray. And although He has no need for our gratitude, He still requires gratitude from us, which in essence is nothing more than prayer, a prayer of thanks. For gratitude to God raises us, mortals, from the corruption of mortals, frees us from attachment to that with which we will one day, whether we want it or not, will have to part with, and cleaves us to the Living and Immortal God, near Whom we will never be in life. eternal, if we do not cleave to Him in temporary life. Gratitude ennobles the thanker and touches the benefactor. Gratitude gives wings to charity in the world and refreshes every virtue. However, mortal language cannot even remotely depict the beauty of gratitude and the ugliness of ingratitude as clearly as they are presented in today’s Gospel reading.

At the time when Christ entered a certain village, He was met by ten lepers who stopped at a distance and said in a loud voice: Ten lepers! It’s scary to see one, much less a crowd of ten people. A body covered from head to toe with white ulcers, and then with white festering scabs that first itch and then burn like fire! A body rotting and disintegrating! A body in which pus is stronger than blood! A body that is a complete stench both inside and outside! This is a person with leprosy. And when leprosy covers the nose, mouth, and eyes, can you imagine: what is the air like that they breathe through the pus? What kind of food is eaten along with pus? And what does the world even look like when you look at it through pus?

According to the Law of Moses, lepers were forbidden to come into contact with other people in any way. However, this is still the case in those places where there is leprosy. To prevent anyone from coming close to the leper, he had to shout from afar: “Unclean, unclean!” This is literally what the law says: The leper who has this ulcer must have his clothes torn, and his head must not be covered, and his mouth must be covered and shout: unclean! unclean(Lev.13:45)! Clothes must be torn so that leprosy is visible. The head should not be covered - again, so that it could be seen that he was a leper, since leprosy caused the hair to turn white and come out. It should be closed to the lips - again an identification mark for those passing by. And besides all this, lepers were also obliged to shout: “Unclean! Unclean!” They were driven out of the city or village, and they lived worse than cattle - rejected, despised, forgotten. He is unclean, says the law, he must live separately, his dwelling is outside the camp(Lev.13:46). They were considered dead, although their fate was worse than death.

Jesus, the Source of health, beauty and strength, walked past such tattered and stinking wrecks of life that day. And when the lepers knew that it was He, then stopped in the distance and said in a loud voice: Jesus Mentor! have mercy on us. How could these unfortunate people know about Jesus that He was able to help them if they did not enter into communication with people? Probably someone, throwing bread from the road, told them this news. Of course, from afar a voice reached their ears about the only news in the world that could interest them. Everything else that happened in the world: the change of kings and battles of nations, the construction and destruction of cities, entertainment, fires and earthquakes - everything was indifferent to them. Cloaked in pus, they could only think about these ill-fated clothes of theirs and, perhaps, about who could take these clothes off of them and clothe them in the robe of health. Having heard about our Lord Jesus Christ as an almighty Healer, they, of course, also heard about special cases of Christ healing lepers like them (Luke 5:12-13). That is why they should have wished for a happy opportunity to meet the Lord. Somewhere on the edge of the plain of Galilee, where the road begins to climb the Samarina hills, they were waiting for Him. He passed through there on his way to Jerusalem. And here is a happy accident, not accidental, but arranged by God! They see Christ walking with His disciples. And seeing Him, they shouted with one voice: Jesus Mentor! have mercy on us. Why do they call Him Mentor? Because this word is more significant and indicates greater dignity than the title of teacher. For “mentor” means not just a teacher, but also a counselor, who in word, example and care guides people on the path of salvation. Why then do they not call Him Lord, a word containing even more dignity and meaning than the word “mentor”? Of course, because they have not yet learned about this dignity of Christ.

Have mercy on us, - they shouted in a loud voice. When He saw them, He said to them: Go, show yourself to the priests. And as they walked, they purified themselves. In one of the previous cases of healing lepers, the Lord touched the sick man with his hand and said to him: cleanse yourself. And immediately the leprosy left him(Luke 5:13). And in this case, He not only did not touch the lepers, but did not even come close to them. For they stopped in the distance and they cried out to Him. Thus, He was forced to shout to them from afar. Why does the Lord send them to the priests? Because the priests had the responsibility to declare lepers unclean and expel them from society, and to recognize those healed as clean and healthy and return them to human society (Lev. 13:34,44). The Lord does not want to break the law, especially since the law did not interfere, but, on the contrary, helped His work in this case, since the priests themselves would have the opportunity to make sure that the ten lepers were healed, and they themselves would confirm and testify to this. So, having heard what the Lord told them and where he had sent them, they went to their village to do so. But, on the way, they looked at themselves, and there was no leprosy on them. And as they walked, they purified themselves. And they looked at their bodies - and their bodies were healthy and clean, and they looked at each other and were convinced that they were all healthy and clean. And the scab, and the pus, and the stench - everything disappeared, so that not a trace of the terrible leprosy remained on them. Who could say that this miracle of Christ is no greater than the resurrection of the dead? Think a little about the fact that with one powerful word, ten leprous human bodies, eaten away by illness, suddenly became healthy and clean! And when you think about it, you yourself will easily admit: truly, this word could not have come from a mortal man! This word had to be spoken by God through a human bodily organ. Indeed, the human tongue uttered it, but it came from the same depth from which the commanding word came, which entailed the creation of the world. There are words and words. There are words that are pure and sinless, which therefore have power. These words flow from the original source of eternal love. The gates of all things open before them; things, and people, and illnesses, and spirits submit to them. And there are words diluted with water, dulled, killed by sin, which produce no more effect than the whistle of the wind in a hollow reed; and no matter how many such dead words are spoken, they remain powerless, like the effect of smoke on an iron door. And just imagine what an incomparable consolation for us - to know what an omnipotent and humane Lord we believe in! Our God, in heaven and on earth, does whatever He pleases. He is the Director of life, He is the Lord of diseases, He is the Ruler of nature, He is the Conqueror of death. We were created not by a thoughtless and dumb nature, but by Him, the all-wise. We are not slaves of natural conditions, but servants of the Living and Humane God. We are not a game of chance, but the creation of the One who created our elder brothers, angels and archangels, and all the immortal army of heaven. Although we suffer in this world, He knows the meaning and purpose of our suffering; although we are leprous by sin, His word is stronger than leprosy - both physical and mental; though we are drowning, His saving hand is near us; even though we are dying, He is waiting for us on the other side of the grave.

But let us return to the Gospel story about the healing of lepers and now look at the clear picture of gratitude and ingratitude. What did these lepers do when they noticed that they were healed of their illness? Here's the thing: only one of them returned to thank Christ, while the other nine continued on their way, forgetting about their Benefactor and Savior.

One of them, seeing that he was healed, returned, glorifying God with a loud voice, and fell prostrate at His feet, thanking Him; and it was a Samaritan. This only grateful person, seeing that the serious illness had left him, sighed with relief, as if the fierce snakes had stopped strangling him, and his first thought was to thank the One who saved him from indescribable misfortune. And how he had just raised his hoarse voice and cried out with purulent lips: Jesus Mentor! have mercy on us- so now he raises a ringing voice from his healthy chest and loudly glorifies God with healthy and clean lips. But this was not enough for him, and he ran back to his Benefactor to express gratitude to him. And, returning to Christ, he fell on his face before Him, no longer on his ulcerated and sick knees, but on his healthy knees, and began to thank Him. The body is full of health, the heart is full of joy, the eyes are full of tears! This is the true man. One moment he was a pile of pus, and now he has become a man again! Just now he was the discarded garbage of human life, and now he is again a worthy member of human society! One moment he was a sad trumpet, playing only one song: “Unclean, unclean,” and now he is a joyful trumpet of the praise and glory of God!

And this only grateful man was not a Jew, but a Samaritan. The Samaritans were not Jews, but either purebred Assyrians, or descendants of Assyrians and Jews. These are the same Assyrians whom the Assyrian king Shalmaneser once settled in conquered Samaria, having previously resettled the Israelites from there to Assyria (2 Kings 17:3-6, 24). That this grateful man was a purebred Assyrian is evident from the fact that the Lord Himself calls him foreigner: Do you hear how gently the Lord rebukes the ungrateful? He only asks about them - weren’t they healed too? And why didn’t they come back to thank? He asks not because he doesn’t know that they have all been cleansed. No, he knew they would be healed before he met them and saw them. But by asking this question, He reproaches. And what a mild reproach this is, isn’t it? Like any of us, when he gives a coin to some poor fellow, he screams and rages if he doesn’t thank him! Imagine how each of us would expose nine sick people in the most formidable way, if he, suppose, managed to restore their health, and they would not even express gratitude for such an unpaid service! How all the days are filled with human screams at the ungrateful! How heavy the air is with anger and curses, pouring out of people’s lips on the ungrateful every day from morning to evening! Meanwhile, how insignificant is everything done to man by man in comparison with the good deeds that God does to people, He does tirelessly and incessantly, from the cradle of man to the grave! But still, God does not shout, does not scold, does not curse the ungrateful, but only gently reproaches them, asking those who pray to Him privately or in church: where are my other children? Didn’t I give health to thousands of them, but behold, only hundreds of you giving thanks? Have I not adorned the fields with harvest, and have I not filled everyone’s pens, but behold, only a few of you kneel before Me and give praise? Where are my other children? Where are the mighty and strong who rule the nations by My power and with My help? Where are the rich and prosperous, enriched by My wealth and prosperous by My mercy? Where are the healthy and cheerful, filled with health and joy from My source? Where are the parents whose children I help grow and become stronger? Where are the teachers to whom I add wisdom and knowledge? Where are the numerous sick people healed by Me? Where are the many, many sinners and sinners whose souls I cleansed from sin, like leprosy?

Then Jesus said, “Were not ten cleansed?” where is nine? how did they not return to give glory to God, except this foreigner?

How did they not return to give glory to God except this foreigner? He was the only one who returned to say thank you. But do foreigners really exist for Christ? Did He not come to save all people, but only the Jews? The Jews boasted of their being chosen by God and the fact that their knowledge of God surpassed all other peoples of the earth. But here is an example showing the dullness of their minds and the hardness of their hearts! The Assyrian, a pagan, turned out to have a more enlightened mind and noble heart than the boastful Jews. But, unfortunately, this story is repeated to this day with the chosen and the unelected. And today some of the pagans have a mind more open to God and a heart grateful to Him than many, many Christians. Many Muslims or, say, Buddhists, with their zeal in prayer and warm gratitude to the Creator, can shame other Christians.

Finally, this story ends with the words of the Savior addressed to this grateful Samaritan:

And he said to him: get up, go; your faith has saved you. See how great the Lord is in humility, as well as in goodness! It is His joy to call people co-workers in His great and good works. By this He wants to raise the dignity of the humiliated and humiliated human race. Being above human vanity and pride, He desires to share His merits with others, His wealth with the poor, His glory with the unfortunate and pitiful. Your faith saved you. Indeed, this Samaritan believed, as did the other nine lepers; for if they did not believe in the power of the Lord, they would not shout: Jesus Mentor! have mercy on us. But what was the cost of this faith? They could shout with the same faith to thousands of the most famous doctors on earth: “Have mercy on us and heal us!” But it would all be in vain. Even suppose that one of these thousands of earthly mortal doctors would cure them: do you think that he - any of them - would attribute this healing to the faith of the patient, and not to himself, solely to himself and his abilities? Is it not the custom of earthly mortal doctors to deliberately hush up the role of patients in recovery, in order to highlight themselves and their merits as clearly as possible? This is how people treat people. But our Lord Jesus Christ treats people differently. Christ placed His cart of wheat, and the leper Samaritan threw one of his grains into this cart. Christ's load of wheat is His Divine power and authority, and the leper's grain is his faith in Christ. But the just and philanthropic Christ does not want to hide even this one grain; on the contrary, he gives it greater honor than His cart. That is why he does not say, as all mortals would say in such a case: “My cartload of wheat fed you,” but: “Your grain fed you!” He does not say: “I saved you!”, but: Your faith saved you. Oh, how much generosity there is in these words! And what a lesson for all of us! And what a reproach to human self-love and pride!

Let all those who hide the grain of someone else's merit and bulge their own cart come and learn with shame from the righteous Christ. They are kidnappers and thieves no less than the rich man who annexes the poor man's small field to his big one!

Let all the generals who hide the contribution of their soldiers to the victory, but loudly trumpet everywhere about their exceptional merits, come and learn with shame from the just Christ!

Let all merchants and industrialists who gloss over the role of their workers and assistants in their success come and learn with shame from the humble Christ and attribute it only to their own hard work, wisdom and luck!

Let the entire human race, in its proud blindness, attribute all the good, all the skill, all the successes exclusively to themselves, but silence the lion’s share of God in all this or forget about it, and learn with shame from the philanthropic Christ! Let him come and learn, seeing how the just God does not suppress a single grain of human merit in the whole cart of His merits, but, on the contrary, hides His merits and is silent about them, but emphasizes the merits of people!

Is it possible to imagine a stronger blow and a more terrible reproach to people for their theft, embezzlement, rudeness, lack of love for humanity and love of God? Truly, he who has shame will be ashamed at the sight of such humility of Christ. He who has one unquenched spark of conscience within himself will repent of his rude and stupid self-praise and display of himself and will become grateful to God and people. And gratitude will teach him justice, righteousness and humility.

Oh, if we Christians knew what spiritual leprosy Christ heals us from every day, we would immediately return to Him, fall prostrate at His feet, glorifying God with a loud voice, and thank Him from this hour until the hour of death - until the hour a mortal who is not far from each of us! To our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ honor and glory, with the Father and the Holy Spirit - the Trinity, Consubstantial and Indivisible, now and ever, at all times and unto ages of ages. Amen.

From the publishing house of the Sretensky Monastery.

Commentary on the book

Comment to the section

1. Luke, “beloved physician,” was one of the closest associates of the apostle. Paul (Col 4:14). According to Eusebius (Church East 3:4), he came from Syrian Antioch and was raised in a Greek pagan family. He received a good education and became a doctor. The history of his conversion is unknown. Apparently, it occurred after his meeting with St. Paul, whom he joined c. 50 He visited with him Macedonia, the cities of Asia Minor (Acts 16:10-17; Acts 20:5-21:18) and remained with him during his stay in custody in Caesarea and Rome (Acts 24:23; Acts 27; Acts 28; Col 4:14). The narration of Acts was extended to the year 63. There is no reliable data about the life of Luke in subsequent years.

2. Very ancient information has reached us confirming that the third Gospel was written by Luke. St. Irenaeus (Against Heresies 3:1) writes: “Luke, Paul’s companion, set forth the Gospel taught by the Apostle in a separate book.” According to Origen, “the third Gospel is from Luke” (see Eusebius, Church. Ist. 6, 25). In the list of sacred books that have come down to us, recognized as canonical in the Roman Church since the 2nd century, it is noted that Luke wrote the Gospel in the name of Paul.

Scholars of the 3rd Gospel unanimously recognize the writing talent of its author. According to such an expert on antiquity as Eduard Mayer, Ev. Luke is one of the best writers of his time.

3. In the preface to the Gospel, Luke says that he used previously written “narratives” and the testimony of eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word from the very beginning (Luke 1:2). He wrote it, in all likelihood, before 70. He undertook his work “to thoroughly examine everything from the beginning” (Luke 1:3). The Gospel is continued in Acts, where the evangelist included his personal memories (starting from Acts 16:10, the story is often told in the first person).

Its main sources were, obviously, Matthew, Mark, manuscripts that have not reached us, called “logia,” and oral traditions. Among these legends, a special place is occupied by stories about the birth and childhood of the Baptist, which developed among the circle of admirers of the prophet. The story of the infancy of Jesus (chapters 1 and 2) is apparently based on sacred tradition, in which the voice of the Virgin Mary herself is also heard.

Not being a Palestinian and addressing pagan Christians, Luke reveals less knowledge of the situation in which the gospel events took place than Matthew and John. But as a historian, he seeks to clarify the chronology of these events, pointing to kings and rulers (eg Luke 2:1; Luke 3:1-2). Luke includes prayers that, according to commentators, were used by the first Christians (the prayer of Zechariah, the song of the Virgin Mary, the song of the angels).

5. Luke views the life of Jesus Christ as the path to voluntary death and victory over it. Only in Luke the Savior is called κυριος (Lord), as was customary in the early Christian communities. The Evangelist repeatedly speaks about the action of the Spirit of God in the life of the Virgin Mary, Christ Himself and later the apostles. Luke conveys the atmosphere of joy, hope and eschatological expectation in which the first Christians lived. He lovingly depicts the merciful appearance of the Savior, clearly manifested in the parables of the merciful Samaritan, the prodigal son, the lost coin, the publican and the Pharisee.

As a student of ap. Paul Lk emphasizes the universal character of the Gospel (Lk 2:32; Lk 24:47); He traces the genealogy of the Savior not from Abraham, but from the forefather of all mankind (Luke 3:38).

INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

The Holy Scriptures of the New Testament were written in Greek, with the exception of the Gospel of Matthew, which, according to tradition, was written in Hebrew or Aramaic. But since this Hebrew text has not survived, the Greek text is considered the original for the Gospel of Matthew. Thus, only the Greek text of the New Testament is the original, and numerous editions in various modern languages ​​around the world are translations from the Greek original.

The Greek language in which the New Testament was written was no longer the classical ancient Greek language and was not, as previously thought, a special New Testament language. It is a spoken everyday language of the first century A.D., which spread throughout the Greco-Roman world and is known in science as “κοινη”, i.e. "ordinary adverb"; yet both the style, the turns of phrase, and the way of thinking of the sacred writers of the New Testament reveal Hebrew or Aramaic influence.

The original text of the NT has come down to us in a large number of ancient manuscripts, more or less complete, numbering about 5000 (from the 2nd to the 16th century). Until recent years, the most ancient of them did not go back further than the 4th century no P.X. But recently, many fragments of ancient NT manuscripts on papyrus (3rd and even 2nd century) have been discovered. For example, Bodmer's manuscripts: John, Luke, 1 and 2 Peter, Jude - were found and published in the 60s of our century. In addition to Greek manuscripts, we have ancient translations or versions into Latin, Syriac, Coptic and other languages ​​(Vetus Itala, Peshitto, Vulgata, etc.), of which the most ancient existed already from the 2nd century AD.

Finally, numerous quotes from the Church Fathers have been preserved in Greek and other languages ​​in such quantities that if the text of the New Testament were lost and all the ancient manuscripts were destroyed, then experts could restore this text from quotes from the works of the Holy Fathers. All this abundant material makes it possible to check and clarify the text of the NT and classify its various forms (so-called textual criticism). Compared with any ancient author (Homer, Euripides, Aeschylus, Sophocles, Cornelius Nepos, Julius Caesar, Horace, Virgil, etc.), our modern printed Greek text of the NT is in an exceptionally favorable position. And in the number of manuscripts, and in the shortness of time separating the oldest of them from the original, and in the number of translations, and in their antiquity, and in the seriousness and volume of critical work carried out on the text, it surpasses all other texts (for details, see “Hidden Treasures and new life,” archaeological discoveries and the Gospel, Bruges, 1959, pp. 34 ff.). The text of the NT as a whole is recorded completely irrefutably.

The New Testament consists of 27 books. The publishers have divided them into 260 chapters of unequal length to accommodate references and quotations. This division is not present in the original text. The modern division into chapters in the New Testament, as in the whole Bible, has often been attributed to the Dominican Cardinal Hugo (1263), who worked it out in his symphony to the Latin Vulgate, but it is now thought with greater reason that this division goes back to Archbishop Stephen of Canterbury Langton, who died in 1228. As for the division into verses, now accepted in all editions of the New Testament, it goes back to the publisher of the Greek New Testament text, Robert Stephen, and was introduced by him in his edition in 1551.

The sacred books of the New Testament are usually divided into laws (the Four Gospels), historical (the Acts of the Apostles), teaching (seven conciliar epistles and fourteen epistles of the Apostle Paul) and prophetic: the Apocalypse or the Revelation of John the Theologian (see Long Catechism of St. Philaret of Moscow).

However, modern experts consider this distribution to be outdated: in fact, all the books of the New Testament are legal, historical and educational, and prophecy is not only in the Apocalypse. New Testament scholarship pays great attention to the precise establishment of the chronology of the Gospel and other New Testament events. Scientific chronology allows the reader to trace with sufficient accuracy through the New Testament the life and ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ, the apostles and the primitive Church (see Appendices).

The books of the New Testament can be distributed as follows:

1) Three so-called synoptic Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke and, separately, the fourth: the Gospel of John. New Testament scholarship devotes much attention to the study of the relationships of the first three Gospels and their relation to the Gospel of John (synoptic problem).

2) The Book of the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles of the Apostle Paul (“Corpus Paulinum”), which are usually divided into:

a) Early Epistles: 1st and 2nd Thessalonians.

b) Greater Epistles: Galatians, 1st and 2nd Corinthians, Romans.

c) Messages from bonds, i.e. written from Rome, where ap. Paul was in prison: Philippians, Colossians, Ephesians, Philemon.

d) Pastoral Epistles: 1st Timothy, Titus, 2nd Timothy.

e) Epistle to the Hebrews.

3) Council Epistles (“Corpus Catholicum”).

4) Revelation of John the Theologian. (Sometimes in the NT they distinguish “Corpus Joannicum”, i.e. everything that St. John wrote for the comparative study of his Gospel in connection with his epistles and the book of Rev.).

FOUR GOSPEL

1. The word “gospel” (ευανγελιον) in Greek means “good news.” This is what our Lord Jesus Christ Himself called His teaching (Mt 24:14; Mt 26:13; Mk 1:15; Mk 13:10; Mk 14:9; Mk 16:15). Therefore, for us, the “gospel” is inextricably linked with Him: it is the “good news” of the salvation given to the world through the incarnate Son of God.

Christ and His apostles preached the gospel without writing it down. By the mid-1st century, this preaching had been established by the Church in a strong oral tradition. The Eastern custom of memorizing sayings, stories, and even large texts helped Christians of the apostolic era accurately preserve the unrecorded First Gospel. After the 50s, when eyewitnesses of Christ's earthly ministry began to pass away one after another, the need arose to write down the gospel (Luke 1:1). Thus, “gospel” came to mean the narrative recorded by the apostles about the life and teachings of the Savior. It was read at prayer meetings and in preparing people for baptism.

2. The most important Christian centers of the 1st century (Jerusalem, Antioch, Rome, Ephesus, etc.) had their own Gospels. Of these, only four (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) are recognized by the Church as inspired by God, i.e. written under the direct influence of the Holy Spirit. They are called “from Matthew”, “from Mark”, etc. (Greek “kata” corresponds to Russian “according to Matthew”, “according to Mark”, etc.), for the life and teachings of Christ are set out in these books by these four sacred writers. Their gospels were not compiled into one book, which made it possible to see the gospel story from different points of view. In the 2nd century St. Irenaeus of Lyons calls the evangelists by name and points to their gospels as the only canonical ones (Against heresies 2, 28, 2). A contemporary of St. Irenaeus, Tatian, made the first attempt to create a single gospel narrative, compiled from various texts of the four gospels, “Diatessaron”, i.e. "gospel of four"

3. The apostles did not set out to create a historical work in the modern sense of the word. They sought to spread the teachings of Jesus Christ, helped people to believe in Him, to correctly understand and fulfill His commandments. The testimonies of the evangelists do not coincide in all details, which proves their independence from each other: the testimonies of eyewitnesses always have an individual coloring. The Holy Spirit does not certify the accuracy of the details of the facts described in the gospel, but the spiritual meaning contained in them.

The minor contradictions found in the presentation of the evangelists are explained by the fact that God gave the sacred writers complete freedom in conveying certain specific facts in relation to different categories of listeners, which further emphasizes the unity of meaning and orientation of all four gospels (see also General Introduction, pp. 13 and 14) .

Hide

Commentary on the current passage

Commentary on the book

Comment to the section

11 Ev. Luke again repeats that Christ is going to Jerusalem, heading towards Jerusalem, although this procession is very slow. So, in the present case, the Lord passes along the line that separated two regions: Samaria and Galilee. About Samaria ev. mentions and, moreover, puts it in the foreground in order to explain how one Samaritan ended up among the ten lepers, nine of whom were Jews.

12-19 Upon entering a certain village, Christ was met by ten lepers (see Matthew 8:2). They stood away because the law forbade them to approach healthy people, so as not to infect them ( Lev 13:46), and loudly spoke to Christ to have mercy on them. It is clear that they had some faith in Christ as a God-sent prophet. The Lord in response commands them to go and show themselves to the priests. Obviously, He thereby made it clear to them that they would now be healed, that the very process of healing had already begun, and that as soon as they reached the priests, they would turn out to be completely healthy. The lepers believed the Lord and went so that the priests could look at them and declare them well ( Lev 14:3-4). It is not said where or to which priest the Samaritan went, but, undoubtedly, to his Samaritan. And then on the road it turned out that everyone was truly freed from leprosy. This was a great miracle, and, of course, all those healed should have quickly returned to Christ in order to thank Him and, through Him, God for the healing received. But only one of those healed soon, apparently, without reaching the priest, returned and it was a Samaritan. Christ, noting the ingratitude of the healed Jews, turns to the foreigner (ἀλλογενὴς cf. Matthew 10:5) with soothing words, showing him what actually saved him.

This fact is Luke reports, obviously, with the purpose of showing that the pagans - the Samaritan was close to them, at least in his origin - turned out to be more capable of appreciating the benefits of the revealed Kingdom of God than the Jews, who had long been prepared to accept this Kingdom .

The personality of the Gospel writer. Evangelist Luke, according to legends preserved by some ancient church writers (Eusebius of Caesarea, Jerome, Theophylact, Euthymius Zigabene, etc.), was born in Antioch. His name, in all likelihood, is a contraction of the Roman name Lucilius. Was he a Jew or a pagan by birth? This question is answered by the passage from the Epistle to the Colossians, where St. Paul distinguishes Luke from the circumcision (Luke 4:11-14) and therefore testifies that Luke was a Gentile by birth. It is safe to assume that before joining the Church of Christ, Luke was a Jewish proselyte, since he is very familiar with Jewish customs. By his civilian profession, Luke was a doctor (Col. 4:14), and church tradition, although rather later, says that he was also engaged in painting (Nicephorus Callistus. Church history. II, 43). When and how he turned to Christ is unknown. The tradition that he belonged to the 70 apostles of Christ (Epiphanius. Panarius, haer. LI, 12, etc.) cannot be considered credible in view of the clear statement of Luke himself, who does not include himself among the witnesses of the life of Christ (Luke 1:1ff.). He acts for the first time as a companion and assistant to the ap. Paul during Paul's second missionary journey. This took place in Troas, where Luke may have lived before (Acts 16:10 et seq.). Then he was with Paul in Macedonia (Acts 16:11ff.) and, during the third journey, in Troas, Miletus and other places (Acts 24:23; Col. 4:14; Phil. 1:24). He accompanied Paul to Rome (Acts 27:1-28; cf. 2 Tim 4:11). Then information about him ceases in the writings of the New Testament, and only a relatively later tradition (Gregory the Theologian) reports his martyrdom; his relics, according to Jerome (de vir. ill. VII), under the emperor. Constantia was transferred from Achaia to Constantinople.

Origin of the Gospel of Luke. According to the evangelist himself (Luke 1:1-4), he compiled his Gospel on the basis of the tradition of eyewitnesses and the study of written experiences in presenting this tradition, trying to give a relatively detailed and correct, ordered account of the events of the gospel history. And those works that Ev. used. Luke, were compiled on the basis of the apostolic tradition, but nevertheless, they seemed to be true. Luke insufficient for the purpose that he had when composing his Gospel. One of these sources, maybe even the main source, was for Ev. Luke Gospel Mark. They even say that a huge part of Luke's Gospel is literary dependent on Ev. Mark (this is precisely what Weiss proved in his work on St. Mark by comparing the texts of these two Gospels).

Some critics also tried to make the Gospel of Luke dependent on the Gospel of Matthew, but these attempts were extremely unsuccessful and are now almost never repeated. If anything can be said with certainty, it is that in some places Ev. Luke uses a source that agrees with the Gospel of Matthew. This must be said primarily about the history of the childhood of Jesus Christ. The nature of the presentation of this story, the very speech of the Gospel in this section, which is very reminiscent of the works of Jewish writing, suggests that Luke here used a Jewish source, which was quite close to the story of the childhood of Jesus Christ as set out in the Gospel of Matthew.

Finally, even in ancient times it was suggested that Ev. Luke as a companion. Paul, expounded the “Gospel” of this particular apostle (Irenaeus. Against heresy. III, 1; in Eusebius of Caesarea, V, 8). Although this assumption is very likely and agrees with the nature of Luke's Gospel, which, apparently, deliberately chose such narratives as could prove the general and main idea of ​​​​Paul's Gospel about the salvation of the Gentiles, nevertheless, the evangelist's own statement (1:1 et seq.) does not indicate this source.

The reason and purpose, place and time of writing the Gospel. The Gospel of Luke (and the book of Acts) was written for a certain Theophilus to enable him to ensure that the Christian teaching he was taught rested on solid foundations. There are many assumptions about the origin, profession and place of residence of this Theophilus, but all these assumptions do not have sufficient grounds. One can only say that Theophilus was a noble man, since Luke calls him “venerable” (κράτ ιστε 1:3), and from the nature of the Gospel, which is close to the nature of the teaching of the apostle. Paul naturally draws the conclusion that Theophilus was converted to Christianity by the Apostle Paul and was probably previously a pagan. One can also accept the testimony of the Meetings (a work attributed to Clement of Rome, X, 71) that Theophilus was a resident of Antioch. Finally, from the fact that in the book of Acts, written for the same Theophilus, Luke does not explain the apostles mentioned in the history of the journey. Paul to Rome of the localities (Acts 28:12.13.15), we can conclude that Theophilus was well acquainted with the named localities and probably traveled to Rome himself several times. But there is no doubt that the Gospel is its own. Luke wrote not for Theophilus alone, but for all Christians, for whom it was important to become acquainted with the history of the life of Christ in such a systematic and verified form as this story is in the Gospel of Luke.

That the Gospel of Luke was in any case written for a Christian or, more correctly, for pagan Christians, this is clearly evident from the fact that the evangelist nowhere presents Jesus Christ as primarily the Messiah expected by the Jews and does not strive to indicate in his activity and teaching Christ fulfillment of messianic prophecies. Instead, we find in the third Gospel repeated indications that Christ is the Redeemer of the entire human race and that the Gospel is intended for all nations. This idea was already expressed by the righteous elder Simeon (Luke 2:31 et seq.), and then passes through the genealogy of Christ, which is given by Heb. Luke is brought down to Adam, the ancestor of all mankind and which, therefore, shows that Christ does not belong to the Jewish people alone, but to all mankind. Then, beginning to depict the Galilean activity of Christ, Ev. Luke puts in the foreground the rejection of Christ by His fellow citizens - the inhabitants of Nazareth, in which the Lord indicated a feature that characterizes the attitude of the Jews towards the prophets in general - an attitude due to which the prophets left the Jewish land for the pagans or showed their favor to the pagans (Elijah and Elisha Luke 4 :25-27). In the Nagornoy conversation, Ev. Luke does not cite Christ’s sayings about His attitude to the law (Luke 1:20-49) and Pharisaic righteousness, and in his instructions to the apostles he omits the prohibition for the apostles to preach to the pagans and Samaritans (Luke 9:1-6). On the contrary, he alone talks about the grateful Samaritan, about the merciful Samaritan, about Christ’s disapproval of the immoderate irritation of the disciples against the Samaritans who did not accept Christ. This should also include various parables and sayings of Christ, in which there is great similarity with the teaching about righteousness from faith, which the apostle. Paul proclaimed in his letters written to churches made up primarily of Gentiles.

The influence of ap. Paul and the desire to explain the universality of salvation brought by Christ undoubtedly had a great influence on the choice of material for composing the Gospel of Luke. However, there is not the slightest reason to assume that the writer pursued purely subjective views in his work and deviated from historical truth. On the contrary, we see that he gives place in his Gospel to such narratives that undoubtedly developed in the Judeo-Christian circle (the story of Christ’s childhood). It is in vain, therefore, that they attribute to him the desire to adapt Jewish ideas about the Messiah to the views of the apostle. Paul (Zeller) or another desire to elevate Paul above the twelve apostles and Paul's teaching before Judeo-Christianity (Baur, Hilgenfeld). This assumption is contradicted by the content of the Gospel, in which there are many sections that run counter to this supposed desire of Luke (this is, firstly, the story of the birth of Christ and His childhood, and then the following parts: Luke 4:16-30; Luke 5:39; Luke 10:22; Luke 12:6 et seq.; Luke 16:17; Luke 19:18-46, etc. (To reconcile his assumption with the existence of such sections in the Gospel of Luke, resort to a new assumption that in its present form the Gospel of Luke is the work of some later person (editor), Holsten, who sees in the Gospel of Luke a combination of the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, believes that Luke intended to unite the Judeo-Christian and. Paul's views, highlighting from them the Judaistic and extremely Pauline. The same view of the Gospel of Luke, as a work pursuing purely reconciliatory goals of two directions that fought in the primal Church, continues to exist in the latest criticism of the apostolic writings. to the interpretation of Ev. Luke (2nd ed. 1907) come to the conclusion that this Gospel cannot in any way be recognized as pursuing the task of exalting Paulinism. Luke shows his complete “non-partisanship”, and if he has frequent coincidences in thoughts and expressions with the messages of the Apostle Paul, this can only be explained by the fact that by the time Luke wrote his Gospel, these messages were already widespread in all churches . The love of Christ for sinners, the manifestations of which he so often dwells on. Luke, there is nothing particularly characterizing Paul’s idea of ​​Christ: on the contrary, the entire Christian tradition presented Christ precisely as loving sinners...

The time when the Gospel of Luke was written by some ancient writers belonged to a very early period in the history of Christianity - even to the time of the activity of the apostle. Paul, and the newest interpreters in most cases claim that the Gospel of Luke was written shortly before the destruction of Jerusalem: at the time when the two-year stay of the ap. Paul in Roman imprisonment. There is, however, an opinion, supported by fairly authoritative scholars (for example, B. Weiss), that the Gospel of Luke was written after the 70th year, i.e., after the destruction of Jerusalem. This opinion seeks to find its basis mainly in Chapter 21. The Gospel of Luke (v. 24 et seq.), where the destruction of Jerusalem is supposed to be an already accomplished fact. With this, it seems, the idea that Luke has about the position of the Christian Church, as being in a very oppressed state, also agrees (cf. Luke 6:20 et seq.). However, according to the conviction of the same Weiss, it is impossible to date the origin of the Gospel further than the 70s (as, for example, Baur and Zeller do, putting the origin of the Gospel of Luke in 110-130, or as Hilgenfeld, Keim, Volkmar - in 100-100). m g.). Regarding this opinion of Weiss, we can say that it does not contain anything incredible and even, perhaps, can find a basis for itself in the testimony of St. Irenaeus, who says that the Gospel of Luke was written after the death of the apostles Peter and Paul (Against Heresies III, 1).

Where the Gospel of Luke is written - nothing definite is known about this from tradition. According to some, the place of writing was Achaia, according to others, Alexandria or Caesarea. Some point to Corinth, others to Rome as the place where the Gospel was written; but all this is just speculation.

On the authenticity and integrity of the Gospel of Luke. The writer of the Gospel does not call himself by name, but the ancient tradition of the Church unanimously calls the apostle the writer of the third Gospel. Luke (Irenaeus. Against heresy. III, 1, 1; Origen in Eusebius, Church history VI, 25, etc. See also the canon of Muratorium). There is nothing in the Gospel itself that would prevent us from accepting this testimony of tradition. If opponents of authenticity point out that the apostolic men do not cite passages from it at all, then this circumstance can be explained by the fact that under the apostolic men it was customary to be guided more by the oral tradition about the life of Christ than by the records about Him; In addition, the Gospel of Luke, as having, judging by its writing, a private purpose first of all, could be considered by the apostolic men as a private document. Only later did it acquire the significance of a generally binding guide for the study of Gospel history.

Modern criticism still does not agree with the testimony of tradition and does not recognize Luke as the writer of the Gospel. The basis for doubting the authenticity of the Gospel of Luke for critics (for example, for Johann Weiss) is the fact that the author of the Gospel must be recognized as the one who compiled the book of the Acts of the Apostles: this is evidenced not only by the inscription of the book. Acts (Acts 1:1), but also the style of both books. Meanwhile, criticism claims that the book of Acts was not written by Luke himself or even by his companion. Paul, and a person who lived much later, who only in the second part of the book uses the notes that remained from the companion of the ap. Paul (see, for example, Luke 16:10: we...). Obviously, this assumption expressed by Weiss stands and falls with the question of the authenticity of the book of the Acts of the Apostles and therefore cannot be discussed here.

As for the integrity of the Gospel of Luke, critics have long expressed the idea that not all of the Gospel of Luke originated from this writer, but that there are sections inserted into it by a later hand. Therefore, they tried to highlight the so-called “first-Luke” (Scholten). But most new interpreters defend the position that the Gospel of Luke, in its entirety, is the work of Luke. Those objections that, for example, he expresses in his commentary on Ev. Luke Yog. Weiss, a sane person can hardly shake the confidence that the Gospel of Luke in all its sections is a completely integral work of one author. (Some of these objections will be dealt with in the interpretation of Luke's Gospel.)

Contents of the Gospel. In relation to the choice and order of the Gospel events, Ev. Luke, like Matthew and Mark, divides these events into two groups, one of which embraces the Galilean activity of Christ, and the other His activity in Jerusalem. At the same time, Luke greatly abridges some of the stories contained in the first two Gospels, but gives many stories that are not at all found in those Gospels. Finally, those stories that in his Gospel represent a reproduction of what is in the first two Gospels, he groups and modifies in his own way.

Like Ev. Matthew, Luke begins his Gospel with the very first moments of New Testament revelation. In the first three chapters he depicts: a) the announcement of the birth of John the Baptist and the Lord Jesus Christ, as well as the birth and circumcision of John the Baptist and the circumstances surrounding them (chapter 1), b) the history of the birth, circumcision and bringing of Christ to the temple , and then the appearance of Christ in the temple when He was a 12-year-old boy (chapter 11), c) the appearance of John the Baptist as the Forerunner of the Messiah, the descent of the Spirit of God on Christ during His baptism, the age of Christ, at what He was at that time, and His genealogy (chapter 3).

The depiction of Christ's messianic activity in the Gospel of Luke is also quite clearly divided into three parts. The first part covers the work of Christ in Galilee (Luke 4:1-9:50), the second contains the speeches and miracles of Christ during His long journey to Jerusalem (Luke 9:51-19:27) and the third contains the story of the completion of the messianic ministry Christ in Jerusalem (Luke 19:28-24:53).

In the first part, where the Evangelist Luke apparently follows St. Mark, both in the choice and in the sequence of events, several releases are made from Mark's narrative. Omitted specifically: Mark 3:20-30, - the malicious judgments of the Pharisees about the expulsion of demons by Christ, Mark 6:17-29 - the news of the capture and killing of the Baptist, and then everything that is given in Mark (as well as in Matthew) from history the activities of Christ in northern Galilee and Perea (Mark 6:44-8:27 et seq.). The miracle of the feeding of the people (Luke 9:10-17) is directly joined by the story of Peter’s confession and the Lord’s first prediction about His suffering (Luke 9:18 et seq.). On the other hand, ev. Luke, instead of the section on the recognition of Simon and Andrew and the sons of Zebedee to follow Christ (Mark 6:16-20; cf. Matthew 4:18-22), reports the story of a miraculous fishing event, as a result of which Peter and his comrades abandoned their occupation in order to constantly follow Christ (Luke 5:1-11), and instead of the story of Christ’s rejection in Nazareth (Mark 6:1-6; cf. Matthew 13:54-58), he places a story of the same content when describing Christ’s first visit as Messiah of His father city (Luke 4:16-30). Further, after the calling of the 12 apostles, Luke places in his Gospel the following sections, not found in the Gospel of Mark: Sermon on the Mount (Luke 6:20-49, but in a more concise form than it is set out in St. Matthew), the question of the Baptist to the Lord about His Messiahship (Luke 7:18-35), and inserted between these two parts is the story of the resurrection of the Nain youth (Luke 7:11-17), then the story of the anointing of Christ at a dinner in the house of the Pharisee Simon (Luke 7:36-50) and the names of the Galilean women who served Christ with their property (Luke 8:1-3).

This closeness of Luke's Gospel to Mark's Gospel is undoubtedly explained by the fact that both evangelists wrote their Gospels for pagan Christians. Both evangelists also show a desire to depict the gospel events not in their exact chronological sequence, but to give as complete and clear an idea as possible of Christ as the founder of the Messianic kingdom. Luke’s deviations from Mark can be explained by his desire to give more space to those stories that Luke borrows from tradition, as well as the desire to group the facts reported to Luke by eyewitnesses, so that his Gospel would represent not only the image of Christ, His life and works, but also His teaching about the Kingdom of God, expressed in His speeches and conversations with both His disciples and His opponents.

In order to systematically implement this intention of his. Luke places between both, predominantly historical, parts of his Gospel - the first and third - the middle part (Luke 9:51-19:27), in which conversations and speeches predominate, and in this part he cites such speeches and events that according to others The Gospels took place at a different time. Some interpreters (for example, Meyer, Godet) see in this section an accurate chronological presentation of events, based on the words of Ev. himself. Luke, who promised to present “everything in order” (καθ ’ ε ̔ ξη ̃ ς - 1:3). But such an assumption is hardly valid. Although ev. Luke says that he wants to write “in order,” but this does not mean at all that he wants to give only a chronicle of the life of Christ in his Gospel. On the contrary, he set out to give Theophilus, through an accurate presentation of the Gospel story, complete confidence in the truth of those teachings in which he was instructed. General sequential order of events. Luke preserved it: his gospel story begins with the birth of Christ and even with the birth of His Forerunner, then there is a depiction of the public ministry of Christ, and the moments of the revelation of Christ’s teaching about Himself as the Messiah are indicated, and finally, the whole story ends with a statement of the events of the last days of Christ’s presence on the ground. There was no need to list in sequential order everything that was accomplished by Christ from baptism to ascension - it was enough for the purpose that Luke had, to convey the events of the gospel history in a certain group. About this intention ev. Luke also says that most of the sections of the second part are connected not by exact chronological indications, but by simple transitional formulas: and it was (Luke 11:1; Luke 14:1), and it was (Luke 10:38; Luke 11:27 ), and behold (Luke 10:25), he said (Luke 12:54), etc. or in simple connectives: a, and (δε ̀ - Luke 11:29; Luke 12:10). These transitions were made, obviously, not in order to determine the time of events, but only their setting. It is also impossible not to point out that the evangelist here describes events that took place either in Samaria (Luke 9:52), then in Bethany, not far from Jerusalem (Luke 10:38), then again somewhere far from Jerusalem (Luke 13 :31), in Galilee - in a word, these are events of different times, and not just those that happened during the last journey of Christ to Jerusalem for the Passover of suffering Some interpreters, in order to maintain chronological order in this section, tried to find in it indications of two journeys of Christ to Jerusalem - on the feast of renewal and the feast of the last Easter (Schleiermacher, Olshausen, Neander) or even three, which John mentions in his Gospel ( Wieseler). But, not to mention the fact that there is no definite allusion to various journeys, the passage in Luke’s Gospel clearly speaks against such an assumption, where it is definitely said that the evangelist wants to describe in this section only the last journey of the Lord to Jerusalem - on the Passover of Passion. In the 9th chapter. 51st art. It is said: “When the days of His taking from the world drew near, He wanted to go to Jerusalem.” Explanation see clearly. Chapter 9 .

Finally, in the third section (Luke 19:28-24:53) Hev. Luke sometimes deviates from the chronological order of events in the interests of his grouping of facts (for example, he places the denial of Peter before the trial of Christ before the high priest). Here again ev. Luke adheres to the Gospel of Mark as the source of his narratives, supplementing his story with information drawn from another, unknown to us, source Thus, Luke alone has stories about the tax collector Zacchaeus (Luke 19:1-10), about the dispute between the disciples during the celebration of the Eucharist (Luke 22:24-30), about the trial of Christ by Herod (Luke 23:4-12), about the women who mourned Christ during His procession to Calvary (Luke 23:27-31), the conversation with the thief on the cross (Luke 23:39-43), the appearance of the Emmaus travelers (Luke 24:13-35) and some other messages representing itself a addition to the stories of Ev. Brand. .

Gospel Plan. In accordance with his intended goal - to provide a basis for faith in the teaching that had already been taught to Theophilus, Hev. Luke planned the entire content of his Gospel in such a way that it really leads the reader to the conviction that the Lord Jesus Christ accomplished the salvation of all mankind, that He fulfilled all the promises of the Old Testament about the Messiah as the Savior of not just the Jewish people, but of all nations. Naturally, in order to achieve his goal, the Evangelist Luke did not need to give his Gospel the appearance of a chronicle of Gospel events, but rather needed to group all the events so that his narrative would make the impression he desired on the reader.

The evangelist's plan is already evident in the introduction to the history of the messianic ministry of Christ (chapters 1-3). In the story of the conception and birth of Christ, it is mentioned that an angel announced to the Blessed Virgin the birth of a Son, whom she would conceive by the power of the Holy Spirit and who would therefore be the Son of God, and in the flesh - the Son of David, who would forever occupy the throne of his father, David. The birth of Christ, as the birth of the promised Redeemer, is announced through an angel to the shepherds. When the Infant Christ was brought to the temple, the inspired elder Simeon and the prophetess Anna testified to His high dignity. Jesus Himself, still a 12-year-old boy, already declares that He should be in the temple as in the house of His Father. At the baptism of Christ in the Jordan, He receives heavenly testimony that He is the beloved Son of God, who received all the fullness of the gifts of the Holy Spirit for His messianic ministry. Finally, His genealogy given in Chapter 3, going back to Adam and God, testifies that He is the founder of a new humanity, born of God through the Holy Spirit.

Then, in the first part of the Gospel, an image is given of the messianic ministry of Christ, which is accomplished in the power of the Holy Spirit indwelling Christ (4:1). By the power of the Holy Spirit, Christ defeats the devil in the wilderness (Luke 4:1-13), and then appears in to this “power of the Spirit” in Galilee, and in Nazareth, His own city, He declares Himself the Anointed One and the Redeemer, about whom the prophets of the Old Testament predicted. Not finding faith in Himself here, He reminds His unbelieving fellow citizens that God, even in the Old Testament, prepared acceptance for the prophets among the pagans (Luke 4:14-30).

After this, which had a predictive significance for the future attitude towards Christ on the part of the Jews, the event was followed by a series of deeds performed by Christ in Capernaum and its environs: the healing of a demoniac by the power of the word of Christ in the synagogue, the healing of Simon’s mother-in-law and other sick and demoniacs who were brought and brought to Christ (Luke 4:31-44), miraculous fishing, healing of the leper. All this is depicted as events that entailed the spread of the rumor about Christ and the arrival to Christ of entire masses of people who came to listen to the teachings of Christ and brought with them their sick in the hope that Christ would heal them (Luke 5:1-16).

Then follows a group of incidents that aroused opposition to Christ on the part of the Pharisees and scribes: the forgiveness of the sins of the healed paralytic (Luke 5:17-26), the announcement at the publican’s dinner that Christ came to save not the righteous, but sinners (Luke 5:27-32 ), justification of Christ's disciples for non-observance of fasts, based on the fact that the Bridegroom-Messiah is with them (Luke 5:33-39), and in breaking the Sabbath, based on the fact that Christ is the Lord of the Sabbath, and, moreover, confirmed by a miracle, which Christ did this on the Sabbath with the withered hand (Luke 6:1-11). But while these deeds and statements of Christ irritated his opponents to the point that they began to think about how to take Him, He chose 12 from among His disciples as apostles (Luke 6:12-16), proclaimed from the mountain in the hearing of all the people who followed Him, the main provisions on which the Kingdom of God, which He founded, should be built (Luke 6:17-49), and, after descending from the mountain, not only fulfilled the request of the pagan centurion for the healing of his servant, because the centurion showed such faith in Christ, which Christ did not find in Israel (Luke 7:1-10), but also raised the son of the widow of Nain, after which he was glorified by all the people accompanying the funeral procession as a prophet sent by God to the chosen people (Luke 7:11-17 ).

The embassy from John the Baptist to Christ with the question whether He is the Messiah prompted Christ to point to His deeds as evidence of His Messianic dignity and at the same time reproach the people for their lack of trust in John the Baptist and in Him, Christ. At the same time, Christ makes a distinction between those listeners who long to hear from Him an indication of the path to salvation, and between those, of whom there are a huge mass and who do not believe in Him (Luke 7:18-35). The subsequent sections, in accordance with this intention of the evangelist to show the difference between the Jews who listened to Christ, report a number of facts that illustrate such a division among the people and at the same time the relationship of Christ to the people, to its different parts, consistent with their relationship to Christ, namely: the anointing of Christ a repentant sinner and the behavior of a Pharisee (Luke 7:36-50), a mention of the Galilean women who served Christ with their property (Luke 8:1-3), a parable about the various qualities of a field in which sowing is done, indicating the bitterness of the people (Luke 8: 4-18), the attitude of Christ towards His relatives (Luke 8:19-21), the crossing into the country of the Gadarenes, during which the lack of faith of the disciples was revealed, and the healing of a demoniac, and the contrast between the stupid indifference that the Gadarenes showed to the miracle performed by Christ is noted, and by the gratitude of the healed (Luke 8:22-39), the healing of the bleeding woman and the resurrection of Jairus’ daughter, because both the woman and Jairus showed their faith in Christ (Luke 8:40-56). What follows are the events related in chapter 9, which were intended to strengthen the disciples of Christ in the faith: equipping the disciples with power to cast out and heal the sick, together with instructions on how they should act during their preaching journey (Luke 9:1- 6), and it is indicated, as the tetrarch Herod understood the activity of Jesus (Luke 9:7-9), the feeding of five thousand, with which Christ showed the apostles returning from the journey His power to provide help in every need (Luke 9:10-17), the question of Christ , for whom the people consider Him to be and for whom the disciples, and the confession of Peter on behalf of all the apostles is given: “You are the Christ of God,” and then Christ’s prediction of His rejection by the representatives of the people and His death and resurrection, as well as the admonition addressed to the disciples so that they imitated Him in self-sacrifice, for which He will reward them at His second glorious coming (Luke 9:18-27), the transfiguration of Christ, which allowed His disciples to penetrate with their gaze into His future glorification (Luke 9:28-36), the healing of the demoniac a sleepwalking youth - whom Christ's disciples could not heal due to the weakness of their faith - which resulted in the enthusiastic glorification of God by the people. At the same time, however, Christ once again pointed out to His disciples the fate awaiting Him, and they turned out to be incomprehensible in relation to such a clear statement made by Christ (Luke 9:37-45).

This inability of the disciples, despite their confession of the Messiahship of Christ, to understand His prophecy about His death and resurrection, had its basis in the fact that they were still in those ideas about the Kingdom of the Messiah that had developed among the Jewish scribes, who understood the Messianic Kingdom as an earthly kingdom, political, and at the same time testified to how weak their knowledge was still about the nature of the Kingdom of God and its spiritual benefits. Therefore, according to Ev. Luke, Christ devoted the rest of the time before His triumphal entry into Jerusalem to teaching His disciples precisely these most important truths about the nature of the Kingdom of God, about its form and spread (second part), about what is needed to achieve eternal life, and warnings not to get carried away the teachings of the Pharisees and the views of His enemies, whom He will eventually come to judge as the King of this Kingdom of God (Luke 9:51-19:27).

Finally, in the third part, the evangelist shows how Christ, by His suffering, death and resurrection, proved that He is truly the promised Savior and the King of the Kingdom of God anointed by the Holy Spirit. Depicting the solemn entry of the Lord into Jerusalem, the evangelist Luke speaks not only about the rapture of the people - which is also reported by other evangelists, but also about the fact that Christ announced His judgment over the city that disobeyed Him (Luke 19:28-44) and then, according to with Mark and Matthew, about how He put His enemies to shame in the temple (Luke 20:1-47), and then, pointing out the superiority of the poor widow's alms for the temple compared to the contributions of the rich, He foretold to His disciples the fate of Jerusalem and His followers ( Luke 21:1-36).

In the description of the suffering and death of Christ (chap. 22 and 23), it is exposed that Satan prompted Judas to betray Christ (Luke 22:3), and then Christ’s confidence is put forward that He will eat supper with His disciples in the Kingdom of God and that the Old Testament Passover must henceforth be replaced by the Eucharist established by Him (Luke 22:15-23). The evangelist also mentions that Christ at the Last Supper, calling his disciples to service, and not to domination, nevertheless promised them dominion in His Kingdom (Luke 22:24-30). Then follows the story of three moments of Christ's last hours: Christ's promise to pray for Peter, given in view of his imminent fall (Luke 22:31-34), the call of the disciples in the fight against temptations (Luke 22:35-38), and Christ's prayer in Gethsemane, in which He was strengthened by an angel from heaven (Luke 22:39-46). Then the evangelist speaks about the capture of Christ and Christ’s healing of the servant wounded by Peter (51) and about His denunciation of the high priests who came with the soldiers (53). All these particulars clearly show that Christ went to suffering and death voluntarily, in the consciousness of their necessity so that the salvation of mankind could be accomplished.

In the depiction of the very suffering of Christ, the denial of Peter is presented by the Evangelist Luke as evidence that even during His own suffering, Christ pitied His weak disciple (Luke 22:54-62). Then follows a description of the great sufferings of Christ in the following three features: 1) the denial of the high dignity of Christ, partly by the soldiers who mocked Christ in the court of the high priest (Luke 22:63-65), and mainly by the members of the Sanhedrin (Luke 22:66-71), 2 ) recognition of Christ as a dreamer at the trial of Pilate and Herod (Luke 23:1-12) and 3) the people’s preference for Barabbas the thief over Christ and the sentencing of Christ to death by crucifixion (Luke 23:13-25).

After depicting the depth of Christ’s suffering, the evangelist notes such features from the circumstances of this suffering that clearly testified that Christ, even in His suffering, remained the King of the Kingdom of God. The Evangelist reports that the Convict 1) as a judge addressed the women who wept for Him (Luke 23:26-31) and asked the Father for his enemies who were committing a crime against Him unconsciously (Luke 23:32-34), 2) gave a place in paradise to the repentant thief, as having the right to do so (Luke 23:35-43), 3) realized that, dying, He betrayed His very spirit to the Father (Luke 23:44-46), 4) was recognized as righteous by the centurion and By His death he aroused repentance among the people (Luke 23:47-48) and 5) was honored with a particularly solemn burial (Luke 23:49-56). Finally, in the history of the resurrection of Christ, the evangelist brings to light such events that clearly proved the greatness of Christ and served to clarify the work of salvation accomplished by Him. This is precisely: the testimony of the angels that Christ conquered death, according to His prophecies about this (Luke 24: 1-12), then the appearance of Christ himself to the Emmaus travelers, to whom Christ showed from Scripture the necessity of His suffering in order for Him to enter into glory His (Luke 24:13-35), the appearance of Christ to all the apostles, to whom He also explained the prophecies that spoke about Him, and commissioned in His name to preach the message of forgiveness of sins to all the nations of the earth, promising at the same time to the apostles to send down the power of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:36-49). Finally, having briefly depicted the ascension of Christ into heaven (Luke 24:50-53), Hev. Luke ended his Gospel with this, which really was a confirmation of everything taught to Theophilus and other pagan Christians, Christian teaching: Christ is truly depicted here as the promised Messiah, as the Son of God and the King of the Kingdom of God.

Sources and aids for studying the Gospel of Luke. Of the patristic interpretations of the Gospel of Luke, the most thorough are the works of Blessed. Theophylact and Euthymius Zigabena. Of our Russian commentators, in the first place we must put Bishop Michael (Explanatory Gospel), then who compiled a textbook for reading the Four Gospels by D.P. Bogolepov, B.I. Gladkov, who wrote the “Explanatory Gospel,” and Prof. Kaz. spirit. Academy of M. Theologian, who compiled the books: 1) The Childhood of Our Lord Jesus Christ and His Forerunner, according to the Gospels of St. apostles Matthew and Luke. Kazan, 1893; and 2) The public ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ according to the stories of the holy evangelists. Vol. first. Kazan, 1908.

Of the works on the Gospel of Luke, we have only the dissertation of Fr. Polotebnova: The Holy Gospel of Luke. Orthodox critical-exegetical study against F. H. Baur. Moscow, 1873.

From foreign comments we mention interpretations: Keil K. Fr. 1879 (in German), Meyer as revised by B. Weiss 1885 (in German), Jog. Weiss "Writings of N. Zav." 2nd ed. 1907 (in German); Trench coat. Interpretation of the parables of our Lord Jesus Christ. 1888 (in Russian) and Miracles of Our Lord Jesus Christ (1883 in Russian, language); and Merckx. The four canonical Gospels according to their oldest known text. Part 2, 2nd half of 1905 (in German).

The following works are also quoted: Geiki. Life and teachings of Christ. Per. St. M. Fiveysky, 1894; Edersheim. The life and times of Jesus the Messiah. Per. St. M. Fiveysky. T. 1. 1900. Reville A. Jesus of Nazareth. Per. Zelinsky, vol. 1-2, 1909; and some articles from spiritual magazines.

Gospel

The word “Gospel” (τὸ εὐαγγέλιον) in classical Greek was used to designate: a) a reward that is given to the messenger of joy (τῷ εὐαγγέλῳ), b) a sacrifice sacrificed on the occasion of receiving some good news or a holiday celebrated on the same occasion and c) this good news itself. In the New Testament this expression means:

a) the good news that Christ reconciled people with God and brought us the greatest benefits - mainly founded the Kingdom of God on earth ( Mf. 4:23),

b) the teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ, preached by Himself and His Apostles about Him as the King of this Kingdom, the Messiah and the Son of God ( 2 Cor. 4:4),

c) all New Testament or Christian teaching in general, primarily the narration of the most important events from the life of Christ ( 1 Cor. 15:1-4), and then an explanation of the meaning of these events ( Rome. 1:16).

e) Finally, the word “Gospel” is sometimes used to designate the very process of preaching Christian teaching ( Rome. 1:1).

Sometimes the word “Gospel” is accompanied by a designation and its content. There are, for example, phrases: Gospel of the kingdom ( Mf. 4:23), i.e. good news of the kingdom of God, the gospel of peace ( Eph. 6:15), i.e. about peace, the gospel of salvation ( Eph. 1:13), i.e. about salvation, etc. Sometimes the genitive case following the word "Gospel" means the author or source of the good news ( Rome. 1:1, 15:16 ; 2 Cor. 11:7; 1 Thess. 2:8) or the personality of the preacher ( Rome. 2:16).

For quite a long time, stories about the life of the Lord Jesus Christ were transmitted only orally. The Lord Himself did not leave any records of His speeches and deeds. In the same way, the 12 apostles were not born writers: they were “unlearned and simple people” ( Acts 4:13), although literate. Among the Christians of the apostolic time there were also very few “wise according to the flesh, strong” and “noble” ( 1 Cor. 1:26), and for most believers, oral stories about Christ were much more important than written ones. In this way, the apostles and preachers or evangelists “transmitted” (παραδιδόναι) the stories about the deeds and speeches of Christ, and the believers “received” (παραλαμβάνειν) - but, of course, not mechanically, only by memory, as can be said about the students of rabbinical schools, but with all my soul, as if something living and life-giving. But this period of oral tradition was soon to end. On the one hand, Christians should have felt the need for a written presentation of the Gospel in their disputes with the Jews, who, as we know, denied the reality of Christ’s miracles and even argued that Christ did not declare Himself the Messiah. It was necessary to show the Jews that Christians have genuine stories about Christ from those persons who were either among His apostles or who were in close communication with eyewitnesses of the deeds of Christ. On the other hand, the need for a written presentation of the history of Christ began to be felt because the generation of the first disciples was gradually dying out and the ranks of direct witnesses to the miracles of Christ were thinning. Therefore, it was necessary to secure in writing individual sayings of the Lord and His entire speeches, as well as the stories of the apostles about Him. It was then that separate records began to appear here and there of what was reported in the oral tradition about Christ. The words of Christ, which contained the rules of Christian life, were most carefully recorded, and they were much more free to convey various events from the life of Christ, preserving only their general impression. Thus, one thing in these records, due to its originality, was transmitted everywhere in the same way, while the other was modified. These initial recordings did not think about the completeness of the story. Even our Gospels, as can be seen from the conclusion of the Gospel of John ( In. 21:25), did not intend to report all the speeches and deeds of Christ. This is evident, by the way, from the fact that they do not contain, for example, the following saying of Christ: “It is more blessed to give than to receive” ( Acts 20:35). The Evangelist Luke reports about such records, saying that many before him had already begun to compile narratives about the life of Christ, but that they lacked proper completeness and that therefore they did not provide sufficient “affirmation” in the faith ( OK. 1:1-4).

Our canonical Gospels apparently arose from the same motives. The period of their appearance can be determined to be approximately thirty years - from 60 to 90 (the last was the Gospel of John). The first three Gospels are usually called synoptic in biblical scholarship, because they depict the life of Christ in such a way that their three narratives can be viewed in one without much difficulty and combined into one coherent narrative (synoptics - from Greek - looking together). They began to be called Gospels individually, perhaps as early as the end of the 1st century, but from church writing we have information that such a name began to be given to the entire composition of the Gospels only in the second half of the 2nd century. As for the names: “Gospel of Matthew”, “Gospel of Mark”, etc., then more correctly these very ancient names from Greek should be translated as follows: “Gospel according to Matthew”, “Gospel according to Mark” (κατὰ Ματθαῖον, κατὰ Μᾶρκον). By this the Church wanted to say that in all the Gospels there is a single Christian gospel about Christ the Savior, but according to the images of different writers: one image belongs to Matthew, another to Mark, etc.

Four Gospels

Thus, the ancient Church looked upon the portrayal of the life of Christ in our four Gospels, not as different Gospels or narratives, but as one Gospel, one book in four types. That is why in the Church the name Four Gospels was established for our Gospels. Saint Irenaeus called them the “fourfold Gospel” (τετράμορφον τὸ εὐαγγέλιον - see Irenaeus Lugdunensis, Adversus haereses liber 3, ed. A. Rousseau and L. Doutreleaü Irenée Lyon. Contre les hé résies, livre 3, vol. 2. Paris, 1974, 11, 11).

The Fathers of the Church dwell on the question: why exactly did the Church accept not one Gospel, but four? So St. John Chrysostom says: “Couldn’t one evangelist write everything that was needed. Of course, he could, but when four people wrote, they wrote not at the same time, not in the same place, without communicating or conspiring with each other, and for all that they wrote in such a way that everything seemed to be uttered by one mouth, then this is the strongest proof of the truth. You will say: “What happened, however, was the opposite, for the four Gospels are often found to be in disagreement.” This very thing is a sure sign of truth. For if the Gospels had exactly agreed with each other in everything, even regarding the words themselves, then none of the enemies would have believed that the Gospels were not written according to ordinary mutual agreement. Now the slight disagreement between them frees them from all suspicion. For what they say differently regarding time or place does not in the least harm the truth of their narrative. In the main thing, which forms the basis of our life and the essence of preaching, not one of them disagrees with the other in anything or anywhere - that God became a man, worked miracles, was crucified, resurrected, and ascended into heaven.” (“Conversations on the Gospel of Matthew”, 1).

Saint Irenaeus also finds a special symbolic meaning in the fourfold number of our Gospels. “Since there are four countries of the world in which we live, and since the Church is scattered throughout the entire earth and has its confirmation in the Gospel, it was necessary for it to have four pillars, spreading incorruptibility from everywhere and reviving the human race. The All-Ordering Word, seated on the Cherubim, gave us the Gospel in four forms, but permeated with one spirit. For David, praying for His appearance, says: “He who sits on the Cherubim, show Yourself” ( Ps. 79:2). But the Cherubim (in the vision of the prophet Ezekiel and the Apocalypse) have four faces, and their faces are images of the activity of the Son of God.” Saint Irenaeus finds it possible to attach the symbol of a lion to the Gospel of John, since this Gospel depicts Christ as the eternal King, and the lion is the king in the animal world; to the Gospel of Luke - the symbol of a calf, since Luke begins his Gospel with the image of the priestly service of Zechariah, who slaughtered the calves; to the Gospel of Matthew - a symbol of a person, since this Gospel mainly depicts the human birth of Christ, and, finally, to the Gospel of Mark - a symbol of an eagle, because Mark begins his Gospel with a mention of the prophets, to whom the Holy Spirit flew, like an eagle on wings "(Irenaeus Lugdunensis, Adversus haereses, liber 3, 11, 11-22). Among the other Fathers of the Church, the symbols of the lion and the calf were moved and the first was given to Mark, and the second to John. Since the 5th century. in this form, the symbols of the evangelists began to be added to the images of the four evangelists in church painting.

Mutual relationship of the Gospels

Each of the four Gospels has its own characteristics, and most of all - the Gospel of John. But the first three, as mentioned above, have extremely much in common with each other, and this similarity involuntarily catches the eye even when reading them briefly. Let us first of all talk about the similarity of the Synoptic Gospels and the reasons for this phenomenon.

Even Eusebius of Caesarea, in his “canons,” divided the Gospel of Matthew into 355 parts and noted that 111 of them were found in all three weather forecasters. In modern times, exegetes have developed an even more precise numerical formula for determining the similarity of the Gospels and calculated that the total number of verses common to all weather forecasters rises to 350. In Matthew, then, 350 verses are unique to him, in Mark there are 68 such verses, in Luke - 541. Similarities are mainly noticed in the rendering of the sayings of Christ, and differences - in the narrative part. When Matthew and Luke literally agree with each other in their Gospels, Mark always agrees with them. The similarity between Luke and Mark is much closer than between Luke and Matthew (Lopukhin - in the Orthodox Theological Encyclopedia. T. V. P. 173). It is also remarkable that some passages in all three evangelists follow the same sequence, for example, the temptation and the speech in Galilee, the calling of Matthew and the conversation about fasting, the plucking of ears of corn and the healing of the withered man, the calming of the storm and the healing of the Gadarene demoniac, etc. The similarity sometimes even extends to the construction of sentences and expressions (for example, in the presentation of a prophecy Small 3:1).

As for the differences observed among weather forecasters, there are quite a lot of them. Some things are reported by only two evangelists, others even by one. Thus, only Matthew and Luke cite the conversation on the mount of the Lord Jesus Christ and report the story of the birth and first years of Christ’s life. Luke alone speaks of the birth of John the Baptist. Some things one evangelist conveys in a more abbreviated form than another, or in a different connection than another. The details of the events in each Gospel are different, as are the expressions.

This phenomenon of similarities and differences in the Synoptic Gospels has long attracted the attention of interpreters of Scripture, and various assumptions have long been made to explain this fact. It seems more correct to believe that our three evangelists used a common oral source for their narrative of the life of Christ. At that time, evangelists or preachers about Christ went everywhere preaching and repeated in different places in a more or less extensive form what was considered necessary to offer to those entering the Church. Thus, a well-known specific type was formed oral gospel, and this is the type we have in written form in our Synoptic Gospels. Of course, at the same time, depending on the goal that this or that evangelist had, his Gospel took on some special features, characteristic only of his work. At the same time, we cannot exclude the assumption that an older Gospel could have been known to the evangelist who wrote later. Moreover, the difference between the weather forecasters should be explained by the different goals that each of them had in mind when writing his Gospel.

As we have already said, the Synoptic Gospels differ in very many ways from the Gospel of John the Theologian. So they depict almost exclusively the activity of Christ in Galilee, and the Apostle John depicts mainly the sojourn of Christ in Judea. In terms of content, the Synoptic Gospels also differ significantly from the Gospel of John. They give, so to speak, a more external image of the life, deeds and teachings of Christ and from the speeches of Christ they cite only those that were accessible to the understanding of the entire people. John, on the contrary, omits a lot from the activities of Christ, for example, he cites only six miracles of Christ, but those speeches and miracles that he cites have a special deep meaning and extreme importance about the person of the Lord Jesus Christ. Finally, while the Synoptics portray Christ primarily as the founder of the Kingdom of God and therefore direct the attention of their readers to the Kingdom founded by Him, John draws our attention to the central point of this Kingdom, from which life flows along the peripheries of the Kingdom, i.e. on the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, whom John portrays as the Only Begotten Son of God and as the Light for all mankind. That is why the ancient interpreters called the Gospel of John primarily spiritual (πνευματικόν), in contrast to the synoptic ones, as depicting primarily the human side in the person of Christ (εὐαγγέλιον σωματικόν), i.e. The gospel is physical.

However, it must be said that the weather forecasters also have passages that indicate that the weather forecasters knew the activity of Christ in Judea ( Mf. 23:37, 27:57 ; OK. 10:38-42), and John also has indications of the continued activity of Christ in Galilee. In the same way, weather forecasters convey such sayings of Christ that testify to His Divine dignity ( Mf. 11:27), and John, for his part, also in places depicts Christ as a true man ( In. 2 etc.; John 8 and etc.). Therefore, one cannot speak of any contradiction between the weather forecasters and John in their depiction of the face and work of Christ.

The Reliability of the Gospels

Although criticism has long been expressed against the reliability of the Gospels, and recently these attacks of criticism have especially intensified (the theory of myths, especially the theory of Drews, who does not recognize the existence of Christ at all), however, all the objections of criticism are so insignificant that they are broken at the slightest collision with Christian apologetics . Here, however, we will not cite the objections of negative criticism and analyze these objections: this will be done when interpreting the text of the Gospels itself. We will only talk about the most important general reasons for which we recognize the Gospels as completely reliable documents. This is, firstly, the existence of a tradition of eyewitnesses, many of whom lived to the era when our Gospels appeared. Why on earth would we refuse to trust these sources of our Gospels? Could they have made up everything in our Gospels? No, all the Gospels are purely historical. Secondly, it is not clear why the Christian consciousness would want - as the mythical theory claims - to crown the head of a simple Rabbi Jesus with the crown of the Messiah and Son of God? Why, for example, is it not said about the Baptist that he performed miracles? Obviously because he didn't create them. And from here it follows that if Christ is said to be the Great Wonderworker, then it means that He really was like that. And why could one deny the authenticity of Christ’s miracles, since the highest miracle - His Resurrection - is witnessed like no other event in ancient history (see. 1 Cor. 15)?

Bibliography of foreign works on the Four Gospels

Bengel - Bengel J. Al. Gnomon Novi Testamentï in quo ex nativa verborum VI simplicitas, profunditas, concinnitas, salubritas sensuum coelestium indicatur. Berolini, 1860.

Blass, Gram. - Blass F. Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch. Gottingen, 1911.

Westcott - The New Testament in Original Greek the text rev. by Brooke Foss Westcott. New York, 1882.

B. Weiss - Weiss B. Die Evangelien des Markus und Lukas. Gottingen, 1901.

Yog. Weiss (1907) - Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments, von Otto Baumgarten; Wilhelm Bousset. Hrsg. von Johannes Weis_s, Bd. 1: Die drei älteren Evangelien. Die Apostelgeschichte, Matthaeus Apostolus; Marcus Evangelista; Lucas Evangelista. . 2. Aufl. Gottingen, 1907.

Godet - Godet F. Commentar zu dem Evangelium des Johannes. Hanover, 1903.

De Wette W.M.L. Kurze Erklärung des Evangeliums Matthäi / Kurzgefasstes exegetisches Handbuch zum Neuen Testament, Band 1, Teil 1. Leipzig, 1857.

Keil (1879) - Keil C.F. Commentar über die Evangelien des Markus und Lukas. Leipzig, 1879.

Keil (1881) - Keil C.F. Commentar über das Evangelium des Johannes. Leipzig, 1881.

Klostermann - Klostermann A. Das Markusevangelium nach seinem Quellenwerthe für die evangelische Geschichte. Gottingen, 1867.

Cornelius a Lapide - Cornelius a Lapide. In SS Matthaeum et Marcum / Commentaria in scripturam sacram, t. 15. Parisiis, 1857.

Lagrange - Lagrange M.-J. Etudes bibliques: Evangile selon St. Marc. Paris, 1911.

Lange - Lange J.P. Das Evangelium nach Matthäus. Bielefeld, 1861.

Loisy (1903) - Loisy A.F. Le quatrième èvangile. Paris, 1903.

Loisy (1907-1908) - Loisy A.F. Les èvangiles synoptiques, 1-2. : Ceffonds, près Montier-en-Der, 1907-1908.

Luthardt - Luthardt Ch.E. Das johanneische Evangelium nach seiner Eigenthümlichkeit geschildert und erklärt. Nürnberg, 1876.

Meyer (1864) - Meyer H.A.W. Kritisch exegetisches Commentar über das Neue Testament, Abteilung 1, Hälfte 1: Handbuch über das Evangelium des Matthäus. Gottingen, 1864.

Meyer (1885) - Kritisch-exegetischer Commentar über das Neue Testament hrsg. von Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer, Abteilung 1, Hälfte 2: Bernhard Weiss B. Kritisch exegetisches Handbuch über die Evangelien des Markus und Lukas. Göttingen, 1885. Meyer (1902) - Meyer H.A.W. Das Johannes-Evangelium 9. Auflage, bearbeitet von B. Weiss. Gottingen, 1902.

Merx (1902) - Merx A. Erläuterung: Matthaeus / Die vier kanonischen Evangelien nach ihrem ältesten bekannten Texte, Teil 2, Hälfte 1. Berlin, 1902.

Merx (1905) - Merx A. Erläuterung: Markus und Lukas / Die vier kanonischen Evangelien nach ihrem ältesten bekannten Texte. Teil 2, Hälfte 2. Berlin, 1905.

Morison - Morison J. A practical commentary on the Gospel according to St. Matthew. London, 1902.

Stanton - Stanton V.H. The Synoptic Gospels / The Gospels as historical documents, Part 2. Cambridge, 1903. Tholuck (1856) - Tholuck A. Die Bergpredigt. Gotha, 1856.

Tholuck (1857) - Tholuck A. Commentar zum Evangelium Johannis. Gotha, 1857.

Heitmüller - see Yog. Weiss (1907).

Holtzmann (1901) - Holtzmann H.J. Die Synoptiker. Tubingen, 1901.

Holtzmann (1908) - Holtzmann H.J. Evangelium, Briefe und Offenbarung des Johannes / Hand-Commentar zum Neuen Testament bearbeitet von H. J. Holtzmann, R. A. Lipsius etc. Bd. 4. Freiburg im Breisgau, 1908.

Zahn (1905) - Zahn Th. Das Evangelium des Matthäus / Commentar zum Neuen Testament, Teil 1. Leipzig, 1905.

Zahn (1908) - Zahn Th. Das Evangelium des Johannes ausgelegt / Commentar zum Neuen Testament, Teil 4. Leipzig, 1908.

Schanz (1881) - Schanz P. Commentar über das Evangelium des heiligen Marcus. Freiburg im Breisgau, 1881.

Schanz (1885) - Schanz P. Commentar über das Evangelium des heiligen Johannes. Tubingen, 1885.

Schlatter - Schlatter A. Das Evangelium des Johannes: ausgelegt für Bibelleser. Stuttgart, 1903.

Schürer, Geschichte - Schürer E., Geschichte des jüdischen Volkes im Zeitalter Jesu Christi. Bd. 1-4. Leipzig, 1901-1911.

Edersheim (1901) - Edersheim A. The life and times of Jesus the Messiah. 2 Vols. London, 1901.

Ellen - Allen W.C. A critical and exegetical commentary of the Gospel according to st. Matthew. Edinburgh, 1907.

Alford N. The Greek Testament in four volumes, vol. 1. London, 1863.

In the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.

Today's Gospel tells us about the mystery of thanksgiving. Ten lepers were healed. And one of them returns to give glory to God and bring thanks to Him. Why didn’t everyone return to Christ, thanking God for this miracle? Why not nine out of ten? Where are the others?

Aren’t thousands of people receiving healing every day, but only a few dozen are standing in church praying? Doesn't God give sunshine to everyone - but only a few hundred come with thanksgiving? Do not many people have love and earthly success, and wealth, and wisdom, and fun, and friends, and children? Where are they? Only one in ten thanks God for everything.

This is a general spiritual leprosy - ingratitude to God and people. And, obviously, this disease is the cause of all external disasters, including death. But maybe this common misfortune can unite everyone? We know nothing about the ten lepers; the Gospel says that one of them was a Samaritan. We remember that the Samaritans, according to the Jews, were people who could not be saved - outcasts whom the Jews tried in every possible way to avoid. And because one of the ten, as the Gospel emphasizes, was a Samaritan, the remaining nine, in all likelihood, were Jews. The barrier that separated the Jews from this despised Samaritan disappeared, because they were all struck by a common misfortune. It no longer matters who is of what nationality, who occupies what position in society, if everyone is sentenced to death. A terrible disease united all the lepers together.

God's providence guides humanity in this way, and guides us in this way, so that when we are visited by disasters, we can all be united into one. So that everyone stands together and, out of their common misfortune, raises their voice to the Lord: “Master Jesus, have mercy on us!” However, this united cry for mercy can be born from a united faith in the One who has the power to heal from any deadly ulcer.

From a medical point of view, the situation of the ten lepers was absolutely hopeless. Only a miraculous intervention could heal them and return them to communication with healthy people. There was no one in the world who could give them any hope. Anyone who has experienced the fear of death, the horror of absolute isolation, despair, abandonment by all people, knows that a cry for mercy can sometimes come from blind hope: someone somewhere, incomprehensibly why and how, will say one wonderful word, and suddenly a clearing will open. in hopeless endless human grief. Ten lepers turned to Christ, their cry was heard.

The Lord told them to go and show themselves to the priests. And they believed the word of Christ. But the healing happened only when they were on the way to the temple. As they walked, they were cleansed, says the Gospel. Oh, if we realized today that all existing human means for our salvation have already been exhausted, and literally, like lepers, we would stand before Christ God, asking Him only for mercy! If, overcoming the devilish darkness of unbelief and despair, everyone would flow to the temples of God to show themselves to the priests, then a miracle would happen along the way: everything would change on our land, as the Monk Silouan of Athos constantly talks about this.

But the miracle would not help if nine out of ten accepted healing like the Gospel lepers - as something for granted, with the thought that eventually, sooner or later, God, if He exists, had to give them deliverance. Did they suffer justly? They didn't deserve this suffering. If there is any ultimate justice in the world, this healing had to happen. And then it happened. They are happy that they got what they asked for. But it never even occurs to them to bring praise to the Giver of this good. Only one, an outcast Samaritan, stopped in amazement before the wonderful, healing, saving God, and rushed to praise Him. Nine out of ten found healing and lost the Healer.

It seems that He served them to achieve their earthly goals, but now why do they need Him? It is good for us if today, having reached the last line, we trust only in the miracle of God. But woe to us if we are looking only for healing from our external sorrows, deliverance only from the trouble in which we find ourselves, and are not looking for the only miracle - Christ Himself, without Whom life is equally not wonderful - equally dull, rotting before our eyes. It doesn't matter whether we are prosperous or unlucky.

The Lord Himself and through His countless saints gives us many miracles. And in every miracle, the mercy of the Living God, the One who was born for us, clothed himself in our flesh, taking upon Himself the burden of our guilt and sin, our entire disfigured life, and carried it to the Cross to give us not temporary relief from our suffering, but new life of His Resurrection.

God expects our thanksgiving to Him not because He needs it, but because we need it, because through thanksgiving we can truly share in Him and everything that He has. Gratitude is a bright and jubilant force in religious feeling. Gratitude reveals the infinite depth of confession of the human heart, ready to sing, praise and thank the Ineffable God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, to thank Him for all “known and unknown, manifest and unmanifest blessings that have been upon us.” Before God are “thousands of archangels and darkness of angels, cherubim and seraphim, six-winged, many-eyed, towering pernatium.” They continuously sing to Him “Hosanna...”. With these blessed powers, we, sinful people, must sing: “Holy art thou, and most holy art thou, and thy only begotten Son, and thy Holy Spirit...”. Perhaps what we most need today is to learn, in response to Christ’s love on the cross, to glorify God for everything, and above all for the great sorrows and illnesses with which He now visits us, because thanks to them we are not able to stop at any point. than earthly. And thanks to sorrows, we begin to better understand that there is simply no other adequate response to God’s mercy other than offering ourselves to Him in thanksgiving.

One Russian philosopher and poet Turgenev has a prose poem called “The Feast of the Supreme Being,” where the gospel thought is figuratively presented. The Supreme Being, at his feast, arranged for all known virtues, introduces to each other the two virtues of beneficence and gratitude. Both virtues were indescribably surprised: since the world stood, they met for the first time. What a shining example of our life.

N.V. Gogol wrote in his will: “We will try to ensure that all our activities are aimed at glorifying His Name and that our whole life will be an incessant hymn to Him.” And Saint John Chrysostom chose the words as the motto of his suffering life: “Glory to God for everything!”

Let us always combine prayers of petition with prayers of thanksgiving and praise to the Heavenly Father, whose love and mercy, despite our inconstancy, never change. Amen

Archpriest Alexander Shargunov (sermon edited and supplemented)