Widow's mite. James Tissot
Everyone knows the expression “doing your bit.” But how many people realize that its origin is catchphrase owes to the Gospel story about the widow who put two mites equal to one coin into the temple treasury? What kind of money was it, what did it look like, how much could it buy with it? Has at least one mite survived to this day?
During excavations that were carried out on the territory of Jerusalem over the past century and a half, many coins were discovered from the time of the Second Temple of Jerusalem - a period that also covered the Gospel events. Ancient currency units form an extensive collection, which is kept in the numismatic department of the Israel Antiquities Authority. According to the head of this department, Dr. historical sciences Donald Ariel, there is also money in this collection, mentioned in the Gospel as a widow's mite.
Expert comment:
Mepta - From the Greek word "lepton", which means "without peel." This was the name for extremely small bronze coins - they were thin, like petals, and therefore had irregular shape. Due to the poor quality of the material and coinage, the image on this money was erased, but still readable. The names of the rulers were displayed on the front side, and various symbols were displayed on the back side. For example, a wheel, a cornucopia, a star, an anchor, a flower, a pomegranate.
Along with the mite, there was similar money in circulation, in denomination of two mites - it was called pruta. These coins are completely identical to each other, the rod is only slightly larger and heavier, its weight should have corresponded to half of one barley grain.
In the first century, two mites could buy a small piece of bread, a branch of grapes, or several figs. A strong man could earn that amount in an hour. And a widow, who, according to Jewish laws, did not inherit her husband’s property, but found herself supported by relatives who received an inheritance from him, often found herself in a position where food purchased at the stake made up her entire daily ration.
But what exactly was depicted on the very mite that the widow from the gospel story put into the treasury? And for what reason did the Apostle Mark find it necessary to emphasize that two mites make a coin? Donald Ariel, head of the numismatics department of the Israel Antiquities Authority, tells the story.
Expert comment:
The history of Jewish coins dates back to the reign of the Hasmonean dynasty, that is, from the one hundred and thirty-fifth year BC. Rebelling against the rule of the Hellenes, who subjugated Judea to their Seleucid empire, among other freedoms, the Hasmoneans achieved the right to mint coins with the mark of the Jewish king. However, the Hellenistic influence still remained strong, so the Hebrew inscriptions on coins were also duplicated in Greek.
According to archaeological research, in the first half of the second century in circulation in Judea there were mainly mites and rods printed during the reign of the Hasmonean king Alexander Yannai, called Yohonathan by his compatriots. On the obverse of these coins there is an eight-pointed star, and between its rays there is a Hebrew inscription “King Yehonatan”, and on the reverse there is an anchor and an inscription in Greek “King Alexander”.
The Hasmoneans played a controversial role in the history of Judea. Having gotten rid of one invader - the Hellenes, they subjected the country to a new occupation. The sons of Alexander Jannaeus, Hyrcanus and Aristobulus, not sharing the throne, turned to the help of the Romans. As a result, this help resulted in Judea losing its independence and becoming a Roman province for a long time. This state of affairs also affected its monetary system. Jewish rods and mites became worthless compared to Greek and Roman money. It is not for nothing that the evangelist, when mentioning mites, gives the equivalent in the harder Roman currency - codrants.
The evangelical widow placed two mites into the temple treasury - thin bronze coins with uneven edges and erased designs. Whether it was actually mites or just one rod is not so important. One way or another, the appearance of this money was pathetic, and its purchasing power was negligible. However, Jesus Christ valued this sacrifice above all the rich contributions made from the abundance of the estate. The poor woman gave God everything she had, at the same time entrusting her very life to him - and this gift turned out to be more precious than any treasures in the world.
The first week of November turned out to be special in Novosibirsk. Real Siberian frosts hit, the traditional octave of prayers for all the departed faithful began and ended, which also included a “day of remembrance and sorrow” associated with remembrance tragic events November 7. But the most important thing that these days will be remembered for is, of course, the meeting of veterans of Catholic parishes of the Transfiguration Diocese, which took place at the Curial Center in Novosibirsk from November 3 to 5.
About fifty people previously expressed a desire to participate in the “gathering,” but in the end about forty came. Of course, believers of both sexes received the invitation, but it so happened that the “grandfathers” were never able to get to Novosibirsk due to health complications, and therefore the “veteran rally” became in reality a meeting of our “grandmothers.”
Its inspirer and organizer spoke about the goals and nature of the event, bishop during Sunday worship on November 8th. The Gospel of the 32nd Ordinary Sunday could serve as an excellent epigraph for everything that happened. “And Jesus sat opposite the treasury and watched as the people put money into the treasury. Many rich people put in a lot. Having arrived, one poor widow put in two mites, which is a coin. Calling His disciples, Jesus said to them: “Truly I say to you, this poor widow put in more than all those who put into the treasury, for they all put in out of their abundance, but out of her poverty she put in all that she had, all her food” (Mark 12, 41-44).
“I can’t help but see our grandmothers before my eyes,” Vladyka commented on this text, “who for the most part are also already widows and who gathered last week in Novosibirsk for their “pioneer rally.” One brought a three-liter jar of pickled vegetables from the Urals, another brought a huge pie, some collected donations and brought them... Today I would like to talk about this amazing meeting.
Various meetings have been taking place in our diocese for a long time. Back in 1994, the first pastoral conference was organized, which was attended by many elderly lay believers. But, of course, priests and monastics dominated. Therefore, we came up with the idea of convening only them - the older generation - in order, firstly, to thank them for bringing the light of faith to our time, despite all the persecution of the Church. And secondly, listen to what wishes they have for the Church today.
It seems to me that the Church experienced something similar in the first half of the 4th century. Then, after severe persecution, they were released Confessors of Christ, having undergone severe torture, with traces of wounds and suffering. Emperor Constantine invited the elders of the Church to the Ecumenical Council and at the same time personally kissed the sores and scars of the visiting delegates. And now we, Catholics of the 21st century, who have tasted the joy of religious freedom, should bow before the spiritual wounds and scars of our older generation, who professed their faith in the darkness of 70 years of atheistic persecution.”
“Their amazing past...,” the Lord continued his words, “in some cases, a legendary past! About 25 years ago in Lithuania, I heard from a priest who was on a missionary trip to Northern Kazakhstan that in the 50s, in the village of Zeleny Gai, they shot at a priest during Mass, but one woman covered him with her body and thus died herself . Now the daughter of that courageous woman was present at our meeting. She was 21 years old at the time, and in the 90s her family moved to Tomsk.”
A participant in the veterans’ rally, a parishioner of the Tomsk Church of the Virgin Mary of the Holy Rosary, recalls Teofiliya Ivanovna Levandovskaya: “I was born in 1934 in Ukraine, in the Khmelnitsky region. Our entire large family with six children, grandparents, was taken to Kazakhstan in 1936, and our first place of settlement was the village of Zeleny Gai, Akmola (later, Tselinograd) region. In 1952, my sister and I left, or rather escaped from collective farm slavery, and settled in the suburbs of Karaganda (satellite city of Saran), where I got a job and went to study. A year later, I managed to bring in the surviving family members (mom, dad, brother, sister), and a year later our father died. However, my eldest sister, who by that time had six children, remained in the village of Zeleny Gai. It was she who wrote to us that a Catholic community was organized in the village, there was a prayer house, and a priest came from Akmolinsk from time to time and held services. My mother was eager to attend Mass and go to confession. After all, we haven’t had such an opportunity for more than twenty years! Of course, we all continued to pray regularly at home. My mother taught me basic prayers. They managed to baptize me in a church in our native Ukrainian village, but my two little brothers, who died in exile in infancy, were baptized not by a priest, but by my grandmother at home.
It was then 1956, and Easter fell on April 1st. Mom left, we saw her off as a family, and after some time we received a telegram: come and bury your mother! Arriving in Zelenyi Gai, we learned from fellow villagers the terrible details of what happened. Mom was killed in the prayer house, at the end of the Easter service, when the priest had already begun to bless the Easter food. Mom stood with her little bundle right at the altar, a little to the side, and the priest moved a little further away. I was in that house, I saw that altar: it was decorated so beautifully, a ladder of boxes with evenly sprouted green wheat led to it... The shot was fired through a curtained window behind the altar. My mother was standing sideways, and therefore the first bullet hit her in the cheek, below the temple. As the doctor later explained, if she had fallen immediately, she probably would have remained alive. However, she turned around at the shot and received a second bullet in the chest, under the heart. This wound was fatal. They shot at believers, probably aimed at the priest, and even earlier, notes were thrown into the house of worship: “Get out of here!”, “Leave while you’re still alive!” and similar content.
Mostly elderly people gathered in the house, most were women, there were only two old people. And when they jumped out into the street, they saw a man running away, dragging a gun behind him. The house was at the very edge of the village, and further away there was a field and stacks. And the killer ran towards the stacks. Of course, they couldn’t detain him.
Mom’s body lay at the altar for almost a day, until a police squad arrived from the regional center (about 100 km) and examined the crime scene. And then they put the body in a coffin, tied the coffin with chains (our roads are terrible) and took it to the regional center for an autopsy. And we were driving towards us in the back of a truck, and halfway between Zeleny Gai and Akmolinsk we met our mother, who celebrated her last Easter in her life.
Of course, no one even thought about looking for the criminal, although we wrote to every authority we could. But it was precisely this terrible incident that strengthened my faith. It was from this time that I myself began to actively search for the Catholic community, a priest, and found what I was looking for, very close by - in Karaganda. However, in reality the ride was quite far: 25 km to Karaganda, and then even to its remote outskirts, which was popularly called “Berlin”, since exiled Germans lived there. This was the same semi-underground community in which our Vladyka Joseph was brought up - then a little boy, the same community about which he spoke so much and with such enthusiasm. In 1958, I got married and had my husband married in an “unofficial” house of worship, and in 1960 I baptized my son there. Could I have thought that in my old age I would be able to visit not a prayer house, but a real Catholic church, and do it quite openly!? That we will have priests, and not only old ones, but also modern, young ones!? I believe that our Church has a great future.”
This testimony is striking in its sincerity and tragedy. But how many other stories, somewhat similar, but each time sounding new, have we heard over these days! What trials, what difficulties befell our older generation! The fate of the children exiled to Siberian taiga or the Kazakh steppes with parents deprived of childhood, deprived of religious education and simply humane treatment from those in power. But, probably, the fate of those who at an early age completely lost their parents and ended up in an orphanage is even more tragic.
Tells Cheslava Petrushko (parish of Yekaterinburg): “I was born into a Polish Catholic family in a city belonging to the Lviv Voivodeship. At that time it was the territory of the Polish state. I represent those people whose childhood is forever imprinted by the experience of occupation. The war swept its tracks through our town three times: in ’39 the Red Army came, in ’41 – the German one, and in ’44 – the Soviet army again. I was born on August 12, 1939, and on September 1 the war began. But they still managed to christen me. I was the youngest, ninth child in the family. The difference with the oldest sister was 22 years. And so, this entire large and very friendly family was scattered and destroyed. At some point I was left only with my mother. My mother raised me until I was 5 years old, and my Catholic upbringing continued until 1947. I even managed to undergo some catechesis. After all, churches were still open then, there were priests... Religious life continued even during the occupation. My mother lost her husband and seven of her children during the war. She survived everything, and then her heart gave out. She died and I was left an orphan. I was sent to an orphanage on the territory of what was now Soviet Ukraine, near the Hungarian border. There were a lot of Polish children there. Catholic families had large families, and often 5-6 siblings, whose parents were killed, ended up in an orphanage at once. At first (and this was 1947-48) a priest was still allowed to visit us. But the day came when he did not come. The news was conveyed in whispers that he had been arrested. And then I was sent to an orphanage deep in Russia, and there was no question of any religious life. I went into the “inner underground”, into my inner world. And for many years, in an orphanage, and then in a student dormitory, I could pray exclusively to myself and while lying down, pretending to be asleep. I must say that at that time I had no hopes for the revival of our Catholic Church, or Christianity in general. And then I became a witness and participant in miraculous events in the second half of the 80s: the Catholic community rose from the ashes in Yekaterinburg, the city in which I lived and worked for many years. This city was then considered closed, and when we, believers, turned to various authorities with a request to register the community, we heard the answer: “Who are Catholics? Where did Catholics even come from here?” Meanwhile, many old-timers remembered the Church of St. Anna, which stood in the city center and was active until the 30s. However, in fairness, it should be noted that there was only one functioning Orthodox church in our city of one and a half million people, and that one was on the outskirts. But in 1990 we managed to register the Polish national society, and in 1992 – a Catholic parish. National revival then went hand in hand with religious revival. In the end, something happened that we had never even dared to dream about. The Church of St. was returned to the Catholic community. Anna, the temple in which I now pray and begin the Sacraments. I really hope that the day will come when my children and grandchildren will visit this temple.”
The meeting of veterans lasted three days, and each of them had their own theme. The theme of the first day was called: “A look into the past: years of persecution and persecution of the Church.” The organizers asked the grandmothers to exchange testimonies about how the faith was passed on to them, and about how they lived by faith in the terrible years of atheistic darkness.
The overwhelming majority of participants noted that the main and incomparable role in their religious upbringing was played by their mother, and sometimes by their grandmother. It was mom who made sure that all the children were baptized, it was mom who taught them prayers and prayed with them regularly, it was mom who took them to confession and Mass as soon as there was a priest nearby and such an opportunity arose, it was mom who sang religious songs, when she washed, ironed or cooked dinner, and thereby taught the children to do them. What about dads? Very often, a family lost its father and breadwinner early on: he died in a camp or was broken by the unbearable hardships of the labor army. In other cases, the father played a role similar to that of Joseph the carpenter in The Holy Family. He was a “silent Catholic” who provided financially for his family through his hard daily work. This was someone who did everything in his power, and even beyond his strength, so that the family could survive. And he, forcedly or deliberately, left the initiative of religious and religious education to his wife. And we should be, in our own way, very grateful to the “Catholic fathers”, who were likened to their heavenly patron Joseph the worker, the greatest of the saints, who provided the Virgin Mary and little Jesus with everything necessary for earthly life. But, nevertheless, the mother remained the actual head of the “home church” in most cases.
This is what she told me about her way to the temple Ekaterina Aleksandrovna Eliseeva(nee Gabel) from the parish of Ishim: “My mother was born into a large German Catholic family in the Volga region. When the persecution began, the family was forced to constantly move from place to place to avoid the arrest of its head. So my mother’s family ended up in one of the villages of the Ishim district of the Tyumen region. My mother once took catechism at the church and sang in the church choir. In the conditions of Siberia, when there was not a single Catholic priest for many hundreds of kilometers around, she became a real activist and the “soul of the community”: she gathered people for prayer, baptized babies, told young people about the sacrament of marriage... Mom got married, but her family was divided in the difficult forties. Her husband and my father died in Kazakhstan. One of my brothers also settled in Kazakhstan. And four more children remained with their mother in the Ishim district. One of my sisters lives in Altai, and one lives in Vorkuta. All children grew up believers, attended the Catholic Church at the first opportunity and began receiving the Sacraments. The closest Catholic community with a priest to us was in Karaganda. Our family sent donations there for Masses on behalf of our living and deceased relatives, and from time to time we ourselves made a “pilgrimage” there. In 1959, I, then an eleven-year-old girl, was sent to Karaganda to receive Baptism and First Communion there. Mom managed to pick me up a very beautiful light wax wreath in the store. And they attached a wax twig to my chest. I still have a memorable photo. I always remembered that large wooden house in which the service was held. I suspect that it was this house of worship that our bishop visited as a child. Of all the children in our family, I was the only one who was baptized by a priest during Mass. All my brothers and sisters were baptized by my mother and grandmother at home.
We were taught prayers early, and we prayed regularly, morning and evening, as a family. Mom watched this very strictly. We children really liked religious customs. With what joy we caroled on Christmas days! Of course, we sang all the carols in German, since there was nowhere to learn Russian carols at that time. And on Easter, my brothers and sisters and I left a hat in the hope that the Easter Bunny would come. In the morning we found colored eggs, sweets, cookies in our hats... This means that the hare did not go around our house!
But our religious life was by no means limited to customs alone. Mom prepared us for the holidays ahead of time and very seriously, reading us Bible stories from an old book (perhaps it was a children's Bible). How I remember this feeling: on a December evening you make your way along the snow-covered paths to your home, look at the starry sky and know that the good God and His angels live there, and they see you!
That childhood religious upbringing was enough for me throughout my life. Now we have religious freedom, there are priests, and there are not so few Catholic churches. What a pity that my mother and most of my dear, very religious aunts never lived to see these days, and are now unable to visit open temples. Once, even before the Catholic Church began to operate in our area, I accidentally met a very elderly man, a German Catholic. We called him “Uncle Sasha.” He admitted more than once that in his declining years he really wanted to attend a church service and really needed to confess. He read me prayers in German, which he had read many years ago before and after confession. I was so moved... Uncle Sasha died without ever going to confession. We, parishioners of the Catholic community of Ishim, regularly go to his grave, and every year on November 2, the day of remembrance of all dead, we put a candle on it and pray.”
However, there are no rules without exceptions. According to Ekaterina Mukhamedzhanova(Prokopyevsk) the main role in her religious upbringing she belonged not to her mother, but to “two fathers” - her physical father and her spiritual father, priest Vasily Rudka. “The first thing that kept us close to Jesus,” recalls Catherine, “was prayer. And the initiator of the prayer was my father. He constantly kept in touch with the priests and invited them to our home. It was, at first, about. Alexander Ben, then - Fr. Vasily Rudka. These priests baptized all the children in our family. Sometimes Holy Mass was celebrated in our house. We never had any doubts about the existence of God, although the persecution was very serious. My older brother was constantly insulted and called a “fascist” because of his German nationality. Even the school principal insulted and beat him. My brother was then in grades 5-6 and could not learn to speak Russian fluently; every now and then he stumbled into German. However, there were also kind, fair teachers who tried to avoid discrimination. I had a teacher like this. I really wanted to go to Mass on Christmas or Easter. But it was a normal day at school! And then the teacher told me: “Go, Katya. I'm letting you out of class. I know that you got sick today because it’s your holiday...” I still retain a grateful feeling towards my teachers, and my brother has no resentment towards his offenders, no anger towards them. And these are the fruits of Christian education.
Our religious life took place underground. The Mass was celebrated each time in a new place, and the priest himself often did not know until the last moment to which house he would be taken that day. It happened that the priest, as soon as he had accepted confession, baptized a child or celebrated Mass, would hastily hide through the window and leave through the gardens, like a partisan from the films of that time.
I have two most vivid memories from my early childhood. The first, when I was probably about five years old, and my dad and Fr. Vasily Rudka baked wafers for the Mass. It was an unusual situation, and therefore it was decided to try the product. Then they invited me, a little girl, as a “taster”. And then Fr. Vasily taught my dad and me to make rosaries from cherry pits. How many such rosaries have we made! People were very grateful to us and gave us symbolic donations of 2-3 kopecks. And then the technology improved, and we began to make rosaries from beads. We bought the starting material – cheap beads – at the store.
Later, when I grew up, Fr. became the most important authority in my life. Vasily Rudka. He was such an authority for my brother too. My brother might not say something at home, but he opened his soul to Father Vasily. And about. Vasily could always find advice, find a hint, find words that were appropriate in this particular case. Father Vasily was generally a holy man. Not only I, but also other parishioners saw in him a model of a Christian, and Furthermore- the image of an apostle, the image of an angel, or even Jesus Christ Himself. Some people even claimed that they saw something coming from Fr. Vasily's radiance. I didn’t see the radiance, but I can testify that only through Fr. Vasily understood what Christian love is. He never took money for Mass or for services. He assured that his salary was enough for him, although the salary was very small - he worked as a cloakroom attendant in the medical unit of one of the mines. When Mass was celebrated in our house, Fr. Vasily would quietly leave some amount of money somewhere behind the stove or under the pillow. I must say that our family was in great need at that time. I thought that o. Vasily gives these gifts only to our family, but then I found out that he provided the same help to other families in need. Believers invited Fr. Vasily at the cemetery to serve a memorial service. Everyone tried to quickly take the priest to the graves of their relatives, and he stopped at abandoned graves, which no one has visited for a long time, and prayed for a long time. By this example, he wanted to teach us that we need to pray not only for “our own people,” but for all people.
Thanks to the presence of Fr. Vasily, religious life in Prokopyevsk was very intense. The room in which the Mass was celebrated was always filled to capacity. We stood so close to each other that it was impossible to move. But our religious life was not limited to attending services. We copied and memorized religious poems from each other, sang religious songs, staged theatrical skits... We constantly had living Rosary groups.
I was very lucky to have people like my dad and Fr. in my life. Vasily Rudka.
1–12. The parable of the evil vinedressers. – 13–17. The Lord’s answer to the Pharisees and Herodians about tribute to Caesar.” – 18–27. The Lord's answer to the Sadducees on the question of the resurrection of the dead. – 28–34. The most important commandment. – 35–37. Christ is the Son and Lord of David. – 38–40. Speech against the scribes and Pharisees. – 41–44. Two mites poor widow.
Mark 12:1. And he began to speak to them in parables: A certain man planted a vineyard and surrounded it with a fence, and dug a winepress, and built a tower, and having given it to vinedressers, he went away.
Mark 12:2. And at one time he sent a servant to the winegrowers to receive from the winegrowers the fruits of the vineyard.
Mark 12:3. They grabbed him, beat him, and sent him away empty-handed.
Mark 12:4. Again he sent another servant to them; and they smashed his head with stones and released him in dishonor.
Mark 12:5. And again he sent another: they killed him too; and many others were either beaten or killed.
Mark 12:6. Having another son dear to him, he finally sent him to them, saying: They will be ashamed of my son.
Mark 12:7. But the vinedressers said to each other: This is the heir; Let's go, kill him, and the inheritance will be ours.
Mark 12:8. And they seized him, killed him and threw him out of the vineyard.
Mark 12:9. What will the owner of the vineyard do? He will come and put the vinedressers to death and give the vineyard to others.
Mark 12:10. Have you not read this in Scripture: “The stone that the builders rejected has become the head of the corner;
Mark 12:11. this is from the Lord, and it is marvelous in our eyes.”
Mark 12:12. And they tried to seize Him, but they were afraid of the people, for they realized that He had spoken a parable about them; and leaving Him, they went away.
“And he began to speak to them in parables”(verse 1). According to the Gospel of Mark, it turns out that the Lord spoke several parables to the high priests and scribes (“them”). And the Evangelist Matthew, indeed, reports three parables in the parallel section (). It is clear that if in the present case the Evangelist Mark gives only one, he does so due to a large reduction in the narrative. The parable he chose (the second in Matthew) is the most powerful. In the same way, of the servants that Matthew speaks about (), the Evangelist Mark mentions one that is probably the most important.
"And they threw him out"(verse 8). According to the Evangelist Matthew, they first took their son out of the vineyard and then killed him. And Mark uses the following expression (ἐξεβαλον αὐτόν), which is everywhere applied not to a corpse, but to a living person (cf. ; ; ). Thus, to this expression we must first add: “after first,” and the whole of verse 8 must be translated as follows: “and they took him and killed him, after they had first driven him out of the vineyard.”
“He will come and put you to death...”(verse 9). The evangelist Mark puts these words into the mouth of the Lord, while Matthew attributes them to the listeners of Christ. But in the Gospel of Mark these words can also be considered the answer of the listeners, placing in front of them the expression: “and they said.”
“And they tried to seize Him...”(verse 12). The chief priests and scribes (this is how the thought of verse 12 should be conveyed more accurately) used all means to capture Christ, but at that time they were gripped by fear of the possibility of a popular uprising because of Christ. The reason for their efforts was their understanding that the above parable was directed against them.
Mark 12:13. And they send to Him some of the Pharisees and Herodians to catch Him in the word.
Mark 12:14. They came and said to Him: Teacher! we know that You are fair and do not care about pleasing anyone, for You do not look at any face, but teach the true way of God. Is it permissible to give tribute to Caesar or not? should we give or not give?
Mark 12:15. But He, knowing their hypocrisy, said to them: Why are you tempting Me? Bring me a denarius so that I can see it.
Mark 12:16. They brought it. Then he says to them: whose image and inscription is this? They said to Him: Caesar's.
Mark 12:17. Jesus answered and said to them, “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.” And they marveled at Him.
Mark 12:18. Then the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to Him and asked Him, saying:
Mark 12:19. Teacher! Moses wrote to us: “If anyone’s brother dies and leaves a wife, but leaves no children, then let his brother take his wife and restore seed to his brother.”
Mark 12:20. There were seven brothers: the first took a wife and, dying, left no children.
Mark 12:21. The second one took her and died, and he left no children; also the third one.
Mark 12:22. Seven took her for themselves and left no children. After all, the wife died.
Mark 12:23. So, in the resurrection, when they rise again, which of them will she be the wife of? For seven had her as a wife?
Mark 12:24. Jesus answered and said to them, “Are you being led astray by this, not knowing the Scriptures or the power of God?”
Mark 12:25. For when they rise from the dead, then they will neither marry nor be given in marriage, but will be like angels in heaven.
Mark 12:26. And about the dead, that they will be resurrected, haven’t you read in the book of Moses, how at the bush he said to him: “I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob”?
Mark 12:27. God is not the dead, but the God of the living. So, you are very mistaken.
“Are you being led astray by this?”(verse 24). These words, quoted only by the Evangelist Mark, are better conveyed as follows: “Are you being led astray by what you conveyed above (the case depicted by the questioners), i.e. come to doubt the resurrection of the dead? But you can only go astray if you do not properly know the Scriptures, which are not at all intended to regulate relationships. future life, and not understanding that the power of God can establish all relationships between people in a future life in a completely different way than here on earth.”
Mark 12:28. One of the scribes, hearing their debate and seeing that Jesus answered them well, came up and asked Him: What is the first of all the commandments?
Mark 12:29. Jesus answered him: The first of all commandments is: “Hear, O Israel! Our Lord is one Lord;
Mark 12:30. and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength,” - this is the first commandment!
Mark 12:31. The second is similar to it: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” There is no other greater commandment than these.
Mark 12:32. The scribe said to Him: good, Teacher! You have spoken the truth, that there is One and there is no other besides Him;
Mark 12:33. and to love Him with all your heart and with all your mind, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself, is greater than all burnt offerings and sacrifices.
Mark 12:34. Jesus, seeing that he answered wisely, said to him: You are not far from the Kingdom of God. After that, no one dared to ask Him anymore.
Evangelist Mark differs somewhat from Matthew in this section. So, he says that one of the scribes came to the Lord, having listened to the debate that the enemies of Christ were having among themselves (Matthew calls him “a lawyer from the Pharisees”). The Evangelist Mark does not say that this questioner had tempting intentions (as Matthew reports). Perhaps, in fact, the scribe, who wanted to tempt Christ, soon abandoned his intention, which is why the Evangelist Mark did not consider it necessary to mention that intention. Further, Mark precedes the commandment to love God with the words of the famous Jewish prayer (“Shema”), which was a repetition of the words of Moses (). In the Evangelist Mark, these words of Moses are the basis for the demand for exclusive love for God: there is only one Lord or Master, therefore, all the love of an Israeli should belong to Him alone.
“The scribe said to Him: Well done, Teacher!”(verse 32). Better word“well” is attributed to the verb “said”, because in the Gospel of Mark nowhere is the address “Teacher” placed in second place.
"More than all burnt offerings"((verse 33; see ; )). This addition was very important for the readers of the Gospel of Mark, pagan Christians, who were embarrassed by the fact that they did not have such a temple and such a solemn cult as the Jews had before the year 70.
“Jesus, seeing that he answered wisely...”(verse 34). The reasonableness of the scribe’s answer was reflected not only in his agreement with the words of Christ, but also in his desire to accurately determine the abilities with which a person should serve God. Precisely (for a better reading, see Tischendorf, 8th ed.), he says that God must be loved with the heart, mind or understanding and strength: he thus places reason (ἡ σύνεσις) as the instrument of love for God, which really should be a completely meaningful feat, and not just a matter of feeling. However, recognition of the unity of God and the need for love for people is still not enough for entry into the Heavenly Kingdom. It is still necessary to fulfill this highest commandment: the scribe needs to approach Christ not only as a Teacher, but also as a Savior, Who alone can give him the strength necessary to fulfill that greatest commandment. But he obviously did not yet have faith in Christ as the Messiah.
Mark 12:35. Continuing to teach in the temple, Jesus said: How do the scribes say that Christ is the Son of David?
Mark 12:36. For David himself said by the Holy Spirit: “The Lord said to my Lord, Sit on My right hand, until I make Your enemies Your footstool.”
Mark 12:37. So, David himself calls Him Lord: how then is He His Son? And a multitude of people listened to Him with delight.
Unlike the Evangelist Matthew, Mark depicts the speech of Jesus Christ as monologue. Christ here speaks to the people about the scribes. But the scribes are undoubtedly present at this address of Christ to the people, because the Evangelist Mark says that the Lord here “answered” (ἀποκριθείς - verse 35; in the Russian translation it is not accurate - “continuing to teach”). But to whom did He answer? It is clear, to the scribes to whom, according to the Evangelist Matthew, He asked the question and who expressed their opinion about the Messiah to him.
Mark 12:38. And He said to them in His teaching: Beware of the scribes, who love to walk in long robes and receive greetings in public assemblies,
Mark 12:39. to sit in front in the synagogues and recline in the first place at feasts, -
Mark 12:40. these, who devour the houses of widows and pray for a long time for show, will receive the most severe condemnation.
From the extensive speech of the Lord against the scribes and Pharisees, which is reported by the Evangelist Matthew (), Mark cites only a few sayings that characterize the ambition, greed and hypocrisy of the Pharisees or, in fact, the scribes, about whom the Lord spoke, according to the Evangelist Mark. For the readers of the Gospel of Mark, the entire extensive description of Pharisaism given by Matthew was not of great interest.
"In long robes" Noble people usually went there.
"In the People's Assemblies"– in markets (ἀγοραῖς).
Mark 12:41. And Jesus sat opposite the treasury and watched as the people put money into the treasury. Many rich people put in a lot.
Mark 12:42. Having arrived, one poor widow put in two mites, which is a coin.
Mark 12:43. Calling His disciples, Jesus said to them, “Truly I say to you, this poor widow has put in more than all those who put into the treasury,
Mark 12:44. for everyone put in out of their abundance, but out of her poverty she put in everything she had, all her food.
The Evangelist Matthew does not have a story about a poor widow who put two mites into the temple treasury (Luke has this story -). Christ sat "against the treasury", i.e., probably in the women’s courtyard, at the church circle (the question of what the treasury is, γαζοφυλάκιον, has not yet been finally resolved by researchers of the Holy Scriptures). According to custom, those passing by the mug put donations into it for the needs of the temple, and the rich put large sums of money. But then a poor widow came up and put in “two mites,” i.e. the two smallest copper coins, which made up one “kodrant” (λεπτόν – Greek coin, κοδράντης – Roman quadrans; the cost of a kodrant is 1/2 kopeck; in Hebrew “mite” was called “pruta”). The Lord, having in mind the imaginary piety of the scribes - wealthy people - about which He had just spoken, did not fail to point out to His disciples the example of a widow who gave everything she had, and who therefore with her donation rose above the rich, who gave much more, but yet they sacrificed only the smallest part of their property.
Commentary on the book
Comment to the section
41-44 A hole was made in the outer wall of the Temple treasury for donations for the needs of the Temple.
42 During the Passover, the Jews made an annual donation to the Temple. Mite is a small copper coin.
1. John, who bore the second Latin name Mark, was a resident of Jerusalem. Ap. Peter and the other disciples of Christ often gathered in his mother's house (Actus 12:12). Mark was the nephew of St. Joseph Barnabas, a Levite, a native of Fr. Cyprus, who lived in Jerusalem (Actus 4:36; Colossenses 4:10). Subsequently, Mark and Barnabas were the companions of St. Paul on his missionary travels (Actus 12:25), and Mark, as a young man, was destined “for service” (Actus 13:5). During the apostles' trip to Perga, Mark left them, probably due to the difficulties of the journey, and returned to his homeland in Jerusalem (Actus 13:13; Actus 15:37-39). After the Apostolic Council (c. 49), Mark and Barnabas retired to Cyprus. In the 60s, Mark again accompanies St. Paul (Philemonem 1:24), and then becomes a companion of St. Peter, who calls him his “son” (1 Petri 5:13).
2. Papias of Hierapolis reports: “Mark, the translator of Peter, accurately wrote down everything that he remembered, although he did not adhere to the strict order of the words and deeds of Christ, because he himself did not listen to the Lord and did not accompany Him. Subsequently, however, he was, as said, with Peter, but Peter expounded the teaching in order to satisfy the needs of the listeners, and not in order to convey the Lord’s conversations in order” (Eusebius, Church History. Ill, 39). According to Clement of Alexandria, “while the Apostle Peter preached the gospel in Rome, Mark, his companion... wrote... a Gospel called the Gospel of Mark” (cf. Eusebius, Church. Ist. 11, 15).
St. Justin, quoting one passage from Mark, directly calls it “Memoirs of Peter” (Dialogue with Tryphon, 108). St. Irenaeus of Lyons reports that Mark wrote his Gospel in Rome shortly after the martyrdom of Peter, whose “disciple and translator” he was (Against Heresies, III, 1,1). An Peter was crucified in all likelihood in 64 (or 67), and, therefore, the Gospel of Mark must be dated to the late 60s.
3. Mark addresses pagan Christians living mainly in Rome. Therefore, he explains to his readers the geography of Palestine, often explaining Jewish customs and Aramaic expressions. He considers everything related to Roman life to be known. For the same reason, Mark contains far fewer references to the OT than Matthew. Most of Mark's narrative is similar to that of Matthew, and therefore the comments on parallel texts are not repeated.
4. the main objective Mark - to establish faith in the divinity of Jesus Christ among converted pagans. Therefore, a significant part of his Gospel is occupied by stories of miracles. In performing them, Christ at first hides His messiahship, as if expecting that people would first accept Him as a Wonderworker and Teacher. At the same time, Mark, to a greater extent than Matthew, depicts the appearance of Christ as a man (eg Marcum 3:5; Marcum 6:34; Marcum 8:2; Marcum 10:14-16). This is explained by the author’s closeness to Peter, who conveyed to his listeners a living image of the Lord.
More than other evangelists, Mark pays attention to the personality of the head of the apostles.
5. Plan of Mark: I. The period of the hidden messiahship: 1) The preaching of the Baptist, the baptism of the Lord and the temptation in the desert (Marcum 1: 1-13); 2) Ministry in Capernaum and other cities of Galilee (Marcum 1:14-8:26). II. The Mystery of the Son of Man: 1) Peter's confession, transfiguration and journey to Jerusalem (Marcum 8:27-10:52); 2) preaching in Jerusalem (Marcum 11:1-13:37). III. Passion. Resurrection (Marcum 14:1-16:20).
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 centuries). 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 (Matthaeum 24:14; Matthaeum 26:13; Marcum 1:15; Marcum 13:10; Marcum 14:9; Marcum 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 (Lucam 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 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
41-44 Uev. Matthew does not have a story about a poor widow who put two mites into the temple treasury (there is this story in St. Luke Luke 21:1-4). Christ sat opposite the treasury, that is, probably in the women's courtyard, at the church circle (the question of what the treasury was - γαζοφυλάκιον This word is made up of Hebrew. the words gas - treasure and Greek. φυλάκιον - storage. Perhaps the treasury consisted of a whole series of rooms, because in ancient times private property that belonged to widows and orphans was sometimes kept at the temple ( 2 Macc 3:10). ) - has not yet been finally resolved by scholars of Holy Scripture). According to custom, those passing by the mug put donations into it for the needs of the temple, and the rich put large sums of money. But then a poor widow came up and put in two mites, that is, the two smallest copper coins that made up one codrant (λεπτόν - Greek coin, κοδράντης Roman quadrans. The cost of a codrant is ½ kopeck. In Hebrew, a mite was called a prut). The Lord, having in mind the supposed piety of the scribes - wealthy people - about which He had just spoken, did not fail to point out to His disciples the example of a widow who gave everything she had, and who therefore with her donation rose above the rich, who gave much more, but yet they sacrificed only the smallest part of their property.
Biblical information about the personality of St. Brand. The proper name of the writer of the second gospel was John; Mark (Μα ̃ ρκος) was his nickname. The latter was probably accepted by him when Barnabas and Saul, returning from Jerusalem (Actus 12:25), took him with them to Antioch to make him their companion on missionary journeys. Why John adopted this particular nickname can be somewhat answered in the similarity of the initial three letters of this nickname with the three initial letters of the name of his mother, Mary.
For a long time John Mark was on friendly terms with the apostle. Peter. When this apostle was miraculously freed from prison, he came to the house of Mary, the mother of John, called Mark (Actus 12:12). Shortly before his death, the Apostle Peter calls Mark his son (1 Petri 5:13), showing by this that he converted Mark to faith in Christ. This conversion took place early, because Mark was a companion of the apostles Barnabas and Paul around Easter in the year 44. In the autumn of the same year he settled in Antioch and, perhaps, was engaged in preaching the Gospel. However, he did not stand out as anything special at that time - at least his name was not mentioned in the 1st verse of the 13th chapter. Acts, which contains a list of the most prominent prophets and teachers who were in Antioch at that time. Still, in the spring of 50, Barnabas and Paul took Mark with them on their first missionary journey, as a servant (υ ̔ πηρέτης - Actus 13:5). From the letter to the Colossians (Colossenses 4:10) we learn that Mark was Barnabas cousin(α ̓ νεψ ιός). But if the fathers of Barnabas and Mark were brothers, then we can assume that Mark belonged to the tribe of Levi, to which, according to legend, Barnabas belonged. Barnabas introduced Mark to Paul. However, in Perga, and maybe earlier, when departing from Paphos to the island. Cyprus, Mark separated from Paul and Barnabas (Actus 13:13). Probably, further participation in their “business” seemed difficult to him (Actus 15:38), especially the journey through the mountains of Pamphylia, and his very position as a “servant” under the apostles might have seemed somewhat humiliating to him.
After this, Mark returned to Jerusalem (Actus 13:13). When Barnabas, after the Apostolic Council and, it seems, after a short stay in Antioch (about the 52nd year Actus 15:35), wanted to take Mark again on a second missionary journey, which he undertook again with the apostle. Paul, the latter opposed Barnabas’s intention, considering Mark incapable of making long and difficult journeys for the purpose of spreading the Gospel. The dispute that arose between the apostles ended (in Antioch) with Barnabas taking Mark with him and going with him to his homeland - Cyprus, and Paul, taking Silas as his companion, went with him on a missionary journey through Asia Minor. But where did Mark stay in the interval between his return to Jerusalem and his departure with Barnabas to Fr. Cyprus (Actus 15:36), unknown. The most likely assumption is that he was in Jerusalem at that time and was present at the Apostolic Council. From here Barnabas, who had previously separated from the apostle, could have taken him with him to Cyprus. Paul precisely because of Mark.
From now on, Mark disappears from view for a long time, precisely from the year 52 to the year 62. When Paul, around the year 62 or 63, wrote from Rome to Philemon, conveying to him greetings from different husbands whom he calls his co-workers, he also names Mark (v. 24). From the same Mark he sends a greeting in the letter to the Colossians written at the same time as the letter to Philemon (Colossenses 4:10). Here he calls Mark “cousin” of Barnabas (in the Russian text, “nephew.” This is an inaccurate rendering of the Greek word α ̓ νεψιός) and adds that the Colossian church received certain instructions regarding Mark, and asks the Colossians to accept Mark when he will come. It is important that Paul here calls Mark and Justus his only co-workers for the Kingdom of God, who were his delight (Colossenses 4:11). From this you can see that Mark was with the apostle. Paul during his Roman imprisonment and helped him in spreading the Gospel in Rome. It is unknown when his reconciliation with Paul took place.
Then we see Mark together with the Apostle Peter in Asia, on the banks of the Euphrates, where Babylon formerly stood and where the Christian church was founded under the apostles (1 Petri 5:13). We can conclude from this that Mark actually went from Rome to Colossae (cf. Colossenses 4:10) and here somewhere he met the apostle. Peter, who kept Mark with him for a while. Then he was with the ap. Timothy in Ephesus, as can be seen from the fact that St. Paul instructs Timothy to bring Mark with him to Rome, saying that he needs Mark for ministry (2 Timotheum 4:11) - of course, for preaching service, and perhaps to become acquainted with the mood of the 12 apostles, whose representative, Peter, Mark was on the most friendly terms. Since 2 Timothy was written around the year 66 or 67, and Mark, according to Colossenses 4:10, was supposed to go to Asia around 63-64, it follows that he spent time away from the apostle. Paul for about three years, and, most likely, traveled with the apostle. Peter.
In addition to these, one might say, direct testimony about the life of Martha, in his gospel itself one can also find information about his personality. So it is very likely that he was the young man who followed the procession in which Christ was taken, taken in Gethsemane, and who fled from those who wanted to seize him, leaving in their hands the veil with which he had wrapped himself (Marcum 14:51). Perhaps he was present at Christ’s last Easter supper (see commentary on Marcum 14:19). There are also some indications that the evangelist himself was present at some of the other events in the life of Christ that he describes (eg, Marcum 1:5ff; Marcum 3:8 and Marcum 3:22; Marcum 11:16).
What does St. say? tradition about Mark and his Gospel. The most ancient testimony about the writer of the second Gospel is from Bishop Papias of Hierapolis. This bishop, according to Eusebius of Caesarea (Church history III, 39), wrote: “the presbyter (i.e., John the Theologian - according to the generally accepted opinion) also said: “Mark, interpreter (ε ̔ ρμηνευτη ̀ ς) of Peter Mark, through the compilation of his work, became the “interpreter” of Peter, that is, he conveyed to many what the apostle said. Peter became, as it were, the mouth of Peter. It is a mistake to assume that Mark is characterized here as a “translator”, whose services allegedly were used by the apostle. Peter and who was needed by Peter in Rome to translate his speeches into Latin language. First, Peter hardly needed a translator for his preaching. Secondly, the word ε ̔ ρμηνευτη ̀ ς in classical Greek often meant a messenger, transmitter of the will of the gods (Plato. Republic). Finally, at Blessed. Jerome (letter 120 to Gedibia) Titus is called the interpreter of Paul, just as Mark is the interpreter of Peter. Both of these only indicate that these co-workers of the apostles proclaimed their will and desires. Perhaps, however, Titus, as a natural Greek, was an employee of the apostle. Paul in writing his epistles; as an experienced stylist, he could give the apostle explanations of some Greek terms., accurately wrote down, as much as he remembered, what the Lord taught and did, although not in order, for he himself did not listen to the Lord and did not accompany Him. Subsequently, it is true, he was, as I said, with Peter, but Peter expounded the teaching in order to satisfy the needs of the listeners, and not in order to convey the Lord's conversations in order. Therefore, Mark made no mistake in describing some events as he recalled them. He only cared about how not to miss something from what he heard, or not to change it."
From this testimony of Papias it is clear: 1) that the ap. John knew the Gospel of Mark and discussed it among his disciples - of course, in Ephesus; 2) that he testified that St. Mark reported those memories that he retained in his memory about the speeches of the apostle. Peter, who spoke about the words and deeds of the Lord, and thus became a messenger and mediator in the transmission of these stories; 3) that Mark did not adhere to chronological order. This remark gives reason to assume that at that time a condemnation was heard against ev. Mark on the grounds that it has some shortcomings in comparison with the other Gospels, which were careful about "order" (Lucam 1:3) in the presentation of the Gospel events; 4) Papias, for his part, reports that Mark was not personally a disciple of Christ, but, probably later, a disciple of Peter. However, this does not deny the possibility that Mark is communicating something from what he himself experienced. At the beginning of the Muratorian fragment there is a remark about Mark: “he himself was present at some events and reported them”; 5) that Peter adapted his teachings to the modern needs of his listeners and did not care about a coherent, strictly chronological presentation of the Gospel events. Therefore, Mark cannot be blamed for deviations from a strictly chronological sequence of events; 6) that Mark’s dependence on Peter in his writing extends only to certain circumstances (ε ̓́ νια). But Papias praises Mark for his thoroughness and accuracy in the narration: he did not hide anything and did not embellish events and persons at all.
Justin Martyr in his Conversation with Tryphon (ch. 106) mentions the existence of “sights” or “memories of Peter”, and cites a passage from Marcum 3:16 et seq. It is clear that by these “attractions” he means the Gospel of Mark. St. Irenaeus (Against Heresies III, I, 1), also knows definitely that Mark wrote the Gospel after the death of Peter and Paul, who, according to the chronology of Irenaeus, preached in Rome from 61 to 66 - he wrote exactly as Peter proclaimed the Gospel. Clement of Alexandria (hypot. to 1 Petri 5:13) reports that Mark wrote his Gospel in Rome, at the request of some noble Roman Christians. In his Gospel, he outlined the oral sermon he heard from the apostle. Peter, who himself knew about the desire of Roman Christians to have a monument to his conversations with them. To this testimony of St. Clement Eusebius of Caesarea adds that the ap. Peter, on the basis of the revelation that was given to him, expressed his approval of the Gospel written by Mark (Church history VI, 14, 5 et seq.).
ABOUT future fate Mark Eusebius reports the tradition that Mark appeared as the first preacher of the Gospel in Egypt and founded the Christian church in Alexandria. Thanks to Mark's preaching and his strictly ascetic lifestyle, Jewish physicians were converted to faith in Christ (Marcum 2:15). Although Eusebius does not call Mark the bishop of Alexandria, he begins the number of Alexandrian bishops with Mark (Marcum 2:24). Having installed Anyan as bishop in Alexandria and made several persons presbyters and deacons, Mark, according to the legend of Simeon Metaphrast, withdrew to Pentapolis from persecution of the pagans. Two years later he returned to Alexandria and found the number of Christians here had increased significantly. He himself then begins to preach again and work miracles. On this occasion, the pagans accuse him of sorcery. During the celebration of the Egyptian god Serapis, Mark was captured by the pagans, tied with a rope around his neck and dragged out of the city. In the evening he was thrown into prison, and the next day a crowd of pagans killed him. This happened on April 25th (year unknown Prof.'s assumptions Bolotov “about the day and year of the death of St. Mark" (63 - April 4) (Christian Reading 1893 July and subsequent books) do not agree with what is obtained from familiarization with the biblical data about the death of Mark.). His body rested for a long time in Alexandria, but in 827 Venetian merchants took him with them and brought him to Venice, where Mark, with his lion symbol, became the patron saint of the city, in which a magnificent cathedral with a wonderful bell tower was built in his honor. (According to another legend, Mark died in Rome.)
At St. Hippolyta (refut. VII, 30) Mark is called fingerless (ο ̔ κολοβοδάκτυλος). This name can be explained by the evidence of an ancient preface to the Gospel of Mark. According to the story of this introduction (prologue), Mark, as a descendant of Levi, had the title of a Jewish priest, but after his conversion to Christ he cut off his thumb to show that he was not suitable for correcting priestly duties. This, as the author of the introduction notes, did not, however, prevent Mark from becoming the bishop of Alexandria, and thus Mark’s mysterious destiny to serve God in the priesthood was still fulfilled... One can, however, assume that Mark’s loss thumb occurred sometime during the torture to which he was subjected by his pagan persecutors.
The purpose of writing the Gospel of Mark. The purpose of writing the Gospel of Mark is revealed already from the first words of this book: “The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God” is an inscription that clearly indicates the content and purpose of the Gospel of Mark. Like ev. Matthew, with the words: “the book of Genesis (βίβλος γενέσεως according to Russian translation, inaccurately: “genealogy”) of Jesus Christ, the Son of David,” etc., wants to say that he intends to give the “history of Christ” as a descendant of David and Abraham, Who in His activities he fulfilled the ancient promises given to the people of Israel, and so did He. With the first five words of his book, Mark wants to let his readers know what they should expect from him.
In what sense? Mark here used the word “beginning” (α ̓ ρχη ̀) and in which - the word “Gospel” (ευ ̓ αγγελίον)? Last expression in Mark it occurs seven times and everywhere means the good news brought by Christ about the salvation of people, the announcement of the coming of the Kingdom of God. But in conjunction with the expression “beginning,” the word “Gospel” of Mark no longer appears. Ap comes to our aid here. Paul. In the last to the Philippians he uses this very expression in the sense of the initial stage of the gospel preaching, which he proposed in Macedonia. “You know, Philippians,” says the apostle, “that at the beginning of the gospel, when I left Macedonia, not a single church helped me with alms and acceptance, except you alone. "(Philippenses 4:15). This expression: “the beginning of the Gospel” can only have the meaning here that the Philippians then knew only the most necessary things about Christ - His words and deeds, which formed the usual subject of the initial preaching of the evangelists about Christ. Meanwhile, now, eleven years after the apostle’s stay in Macedonia, which he speaks of in the above passage, the Philippians undoubtedly stand much higher in their understanding of Christianity. So the Gospel of Mark is an attempt to give an elementary description of the life of Christ, which was caused by the special condition of those persons for whom the Gospel was written. This is confirmed by the testimony of Papias, according to which Mark recorded the missionary conversations of St. Petra. And what these conversations were - the apostle gives us a fairly definite concept about this. Paul in the letter to the Hebrews. Addressing his readers, Jewish Christians, he reproaches them for lingering for a long time at the initial stage of Christian development and even taking a certain step back. “Judging by the times, you were destined to be teachers, but you again need to be taught the first principles of the word of God and you need milk, not solid food” (Hebraeos 5:12). Thus the apostle distinguishes the beginnings of the word of God (Τα ̀ στοιχει ̃ α τη ̃ ς α ̓ ρχη ̃ ς τ . Χρ . λογ .) as “milk” from the solid food of the perfect. The Gospel of Mark or the sermon of St. Peter and represented this initial stage of the Gospel teaching of the facts from the life of Christ, offered to Roman Christians who had just entered the Church of Christ.
Thus, “the beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ” is a short designation of the entire contents of the proposed narrative, as the simplest presentation of the Gospel story. This understanding of the purpose of writing the Gospel of Mark is consistent with the brevity and conciseness of this book, which makes it look like, one might say, a “condensation” of the Gospel story, most suitable for people still at the first stage of Christian development. This is evident from the fact that in this Gospel in general more attention is paid to those facts from the life of Christ in which the divine power of Christ, His miraculous power, and, moreover, the miracles performed by Christ on children and youths are reported in quite detail, while relatively little is said about the teachings of Christ. It’s as if the evangelist meant to give Christian parents guidance for presenting the events of the gospel story when teaching children the truths of the Christian faith... It can be said that the Gospel of Mark, mainly drawing attention to the miracles of Christ, is perfectly adapted to the understanding of those who can be called “children in faith,” and, perhaps, even for Christian children in the proper sense of the word... Even the fact that the evangelist likes to dwell on the details of events and, moreover, explains everything in almost detail - and this may indicate that that he meant to offer precisely the initial, elementary presentation of the gospel story for people who needed this kind of instruction.
Comparison of the Gospel of Mark with the testimony of church tradition about him. Papias reports that the “presbyter,” i.e., John the Theologian, found that in the Gospel of Mark the strict chronological order in the presentation of events was not observed. This is indeed seen in this Gospel. So, for example, reading the first chapter of Mark Marcum 1:12.14.16, the reader remains perplexed as to when the “tradition” of John the Baptist occurred and when Christ’s appearance in public ministry followed, in what chronological relation to this appearance the temptation of Christ stands in the desert and within what framework the story of the calling of the first two pairs of disciples should be placed. — The reader also cannot determine when the Lord calls the 12 apostles (Marcum 3:13 et seq.), where, when and in what sequence Christ spoke and explained His parables (chapter 4).
Then tradition names John Mark as the writer of the Gospel and presents him as a disciple of the apostle. Peter, who wrote his Gospel from his words. In the Gospel of Mark we find nothing that could contradict the first message of the tradition, and very much that confirms the latter. The writer of the Gospel is obviously a Palestinian native: he knows the language as the Palestinian inhabitants spoke at that time, and he apparently takes pleasure in sometimes quoting a phrase in his own language, accompanied by a translation (Marcum 5:1; Marcum 7:34; Marcum 15:34, etc.). Only the most famous Hebrew words remained without translation (Rabbi, Abba, Amen, Gehenna, Satan, Hosanna). The entire style of the Gospel is Jewish, although the entire Gospel is undoubtedly written in Greek (the legend about the original Latin text is a fiction that does not have any sufficient basis).
Perhaps from the fact that the writer of the Gospel himself bore the name John, it can be explained why, speaking of John the Theologian, he calls him not just “John”, but adds to this in Marcum 3:17 and Marcum 5:37 the definition: "Brother of Jacob" It is also remarkable that Mark reports some characteristic details that define the personality of the Apostle Peter (Marcum 14:29-31.54.66.72), and on the other hand, omits such details from the history of the apostle. Peter, who could have too exalted the importance of the personality of the ap. Petra. Thus, he does not convey the words that Christ said to the apostle. Peter after his great confession (Matthaeum 16:16-19), and in the listing of the apostles he does not call Peter “first,” as St. Matthew (Matthaeum 10:2, cf. Marcum 3:16). Isn’t it clear from here that the Evangelist Mark wrote his Gospel according to the memoirs of the humble ap. Petra? (cf. 1 Petri 5:5).
Finally, tradition points to Rome as the place where the Gospel of Mark was written. And the Gospel itself shows that its writer dealt with pagan Latin Christians. Mark, for example, uses Latin expressions much more often than other evangelists (for example, centurion, speculator, legion, census, etc., of course, in their Greek pronunciation). And most importantly, Mark sometimes explains Greek expressions using Latin and specifically Roman terms. Rome is also indicated by the designation of Simon of Cyrene as the father of Alexander and Rufus (cf. Romanos 15:13).
Upon closer examination of Mark's Gospel, it turns out that he wrote his work for pagan Christians. This is evident from the fact that he explains in detail the Pharisees' customs (Marcum 7:3 et seq.). He does not have the speeches and details that the Evs have. Matthew and which could have meaning only for Christian readers from the Jews, and for Christians from the pagans, without special explanations, would even remain incomprehensible (see, for example, Marcum 1: 1 et seq., the genealogy of Christ, Matthaeum 17:24; Matthaeum 23 ; Matthaeum 24:20 ; nor on the Sabbath, Matthaeum 5:17-43).
The relationship of the Gospel of Mark to the other two synoptic Gospels. Blazh. Augustine believed that Mark in his Gospel was a follower of Ev. Matthew and shortened only his Gospel (According to Ev. I, 2, 3); There is undoubtedly a correct idea in this opinion, because the writer of the Gospel of Mark obviously used some more ancient Gospel and actually shortened it. Critics of the text almost agree on the assumption that the Gospel of Matthew served as such a guide for Mark, but not in its current form, but in its original form, namely the one that was written in Hebrew. Since the Gospel of Matthew in Hebrew was written in the first years of the 7th decade in Palestine, Mark, who was at that time in Asia Minor, could get his hands on the Gospel written by Matthew and then take it with him to Rome.
There were attempts to divide the Gospel into separate parts, which, in their origin, were attributed to different decades of the first century and even to the beginning of the second (First Mark, Second Mark, Third Mark, etc.). But all these hypotheses about the later origin of our current Gospel of Mark from some later alterator are shattered by the testimony of Papias, according to which already around the year 80, John the Theologian apparently had in his hands our Gospel of Mark and talked about it with his students.
Division of the Gospel of Mark according to content. After the introduction to the Gospel (Marcum 1:1-13), the evangelist in the first section (Marcum 1:14-3:6) depicts in a number of individual artistic paintings how Christ came out to preach first in Capernaum, and then throughout Galilee, teaching, gathering the first disciples around Himself and performing astonishing miracles (Marcum 1:14-39), and then, as the defenders of the old order begin to rebel against Christ. Christ, although in fact he observes the law, nevertheless takes seriously the attacks on Him by the followers of the law and refutes their attacks. Here He expresses a very important new teaching about Himself: He is the Son of God (Marcum 1:40-3:6). The next three sections - the second (Marcum 3:7-6:6), the third (Marcum 6:6-8:26) and the fourth (Marcum 8:27-10:45) depict the activity of Christ in the north of the holy land, mostly especially in the first period, in Galilee, but also, especially in the more late period, and beyond the borders of Galilee, and, finally, His journey to Jerusalem through Perea and Jordan as far as Jericho (Marcum 10: 1 et seq.). At the beginning of each section there is always a narrative relating to the 12 apostles (cf. Marcum 3:14; Marcum 5:30): narratives about their calling, their sending to preach and their confession on the issue of the Messianic dignity of Christ, the evangelist obviously wants show how Christ considered it His indispensable task to prepare His disciples for their future calling as preachers of the Gospel even among the pagans, although, of course, this point of view cannot be considered exclusive here. It goes without saying that the face of the Lord Jesus Christ, as a preacher and wonderworker, the promised Messiah and Son of God, is in the foreground here. - The fifth section (Marcum 10:46-13:37) depicts the activity of Christ in Jerusalem as a prophet, or rather as the Son of David, who should fulfill the Old Testament predictions about the future kingdom of David. At the same time, the increase in hostility towards Christ on the part of representatives of Judaism to its highest point is described. Finally, the sixth section (Marcum 14:1-15:47) tells about the suffering, death and resurrection of Christ, as well as His ascension into heaven.
A look at the gradual unfolding of the thoughts contained in the Gospel of Mark. After a short caption giving readers an idea of what the book is (Marcum 1:1), the evangelist in the introduction (Marcum 1:2-13) depicts the speech and work of John the Baptist, the forerunner of the Messiah, and, above all, his baptism of the Messiah Himself. Then the evangelist makes a brief remark about Christ’s sojourn in the desert and about His temptation there from the devil, pointing out that at that time angels served Christ: with this he wants to signify the victory of Christ over the devil and the beginning of a new life for humanity, which will no longer be afraid of everything the forces of hell (figuratively represented by the “beasts of the desert”, which no longer harmed Christ, this new Adam). Further, the evangelist consistently depicts how Christ subjugated humanity to Himself and restored people’s communion with God. — In the first section (Marcum 1:14-3:6), in the first part (Marcum 1:14-39 of the 1st chapter) the evangelist first gives a general image of the teaching activity of the Lord Jesus Christ (Marcum 1:14-15) , and at the end (v. 39) - His works. Between these two characteristics, the evangelist describes five events: a) the calling of the disciples, b) the events in the synagogue of Capernaum, c) the healing of Peter’s mother-in-law, d) the healing of the sick in the evening in front of Peter’s house and e) the search for Christ, who retired in the morning to pray, by the people and, most importantly, image, Peter and his companions. All these five events took place during the time period from the pre-dinner hour of Friday to Sunday morning (in Hebrew, the first day after Saturday). All events are grouped around Simon and his companions. It is clear that the evangelist received information about all these events from Simon. From here the reader receives a sufficient understanding of how Christ, who revealed His activity after taking John the Baptist into prison, carried out His ministry as a Teacher and Wonderworker.
In the second part of the first section (Marcum 1:40-3:6), the evangelist depicts the gradually growing hostility towards Christ on the part of the Pharisees and mainly those Pharisees who belonged to the scribes. This enmity is explained by the fact that the Pharisees see in the activities of Christ a violation of the law given by God through Moses, and therefore a number of, one might say, criminal offenses. Nevertheless, Christ treats all Jews with love and compassion, helping them in their spiritual needs and physical illnesses and revealing Himself at the same time as a being superior to ordinary mortals, standing in a special relationship with God. It is especially important that here Christ testifies of Himself as the Son of man, who forgives sins (Marcum 2:10), who has authority over the Sabbath (Marcum 2:28), who even has the rights of the priesthood, as similar rights were once recognized for His ancestor David (eating the sacred bread). Only these testimonies of Christ about Himself are not expressed directly and directly, but are included in His speeches and deeds. Here we have before us seven stories: a) The story of the healing of the leper is intended to show that Christ, in fulfilling the works of His high calling, did not violate the direct provisions of the Mosaic Law (Marcum 1:44). If he was reproached in this regard, then these reproaches were based on a one-sided, literal understanding of the Mosaic Law, of which the Pharisees and rabbis were guilty. b) The story of the healing of the paralytic shows us in Christ not only a doctor of the body, but also a sick soul. He has the power to forgive sins. The Lord reveals to everyone the attempt of the scribes to accuse Him of Blasphemy in all its insignificance and groundlessness. c) The history of the calling of the publican Levi as a disciple of Christ shows that the publican is not so bad as to become a helper of Christ. d) Christ’s participation at the feast organized by Levi shows that the Lord does not disdain sinners and tax collectors, which, of course, stirs up even more Pharisee scribes against Him. e) The relationship between Christ and the Pharisees became even more strained when Christ acted as a principled opponent of the old Jewish fasts. f) and g) Here again Christ appears as the enemy of the Pharisaic one-sidedness in relation to the observance of the Sabbath. He is the King of the Heavenly Kingdom, and His servants may not fulfill the ritual law where it is necessary, especially since the Sabbath law was given for the good of man. But such a speech by Christ brings the irritation of His enemies to the extreme, and they begin to plot against Him.
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 ( Matt. 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 authentic 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 héré sies, 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 is exactly what it is sure sign 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 man, 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 in writing 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. At the same time, the difference between weather forecasters should be explained for various purposes, which 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 ( Matt. 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 ( Matt. 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.
Mk., 57 credits, 12, 38-44The Lord said to His disciples: beware of the scribes, who love to walk in long robes and receive greetings in public gatherings, to sit in front in synagogues and recline in the first place at feasts - these, who devour the houses of widows and publicly pray for a long time, will receive the most severe condemnation. And Jesus sat opposite the treasury and watched as the people put money into the treasury. Many rich people put in a lot. Having arrived, one poor widow put in two mites, which is a coin. Calling His disciples, Jesus said to them: Truly I say to you, this poor widow put in more than all those who put into the treasury, for everyone put in out of their abundance, but out of her poverty she put in all that she had, all her food.
Many people listen to the Lord in the Temple. A little further away, under the beautiful colonnades, in the play of light and shadow, the solemn silhouettes of the owners of this luxury, high priests, elders, scribes, filled with the consciousness of their importance and their dignity, appear. Their attitude is especially disgusting in this place, where everyone must humble themselves in order to pay tribute to the greatness of God. The Lord reproaches them and warns everyone against such pride. Teachers like these cannot help people gain true faith. Hypocrisy is the norm in their lives, and one should beware of this perversion. The word of the Lord towards the scribes is extremely severe. And it contains a useful reminder to Christians: not a single community of believers is immune from producing a class of eminent people who serve not God, but themselves in the name of God. We must be constantly on guard against turning the most holy faith into a caricatured religion.
Scribes pretend to be some kind of great people. They walk in long flowing robes, like princes, like judges. It is not a sin to walk in such clothes, but the love of walking in such clothes reveals their pride. While those who serve God must have their loins girded. The scribes portray themselves as very pious. They pray for a long time. And they make sure everyone knows that they are praying. They do it for show so that everyone can see how much they love to pray.
In fact, they love “to be greeted in public assemblies, to sit in front in synagogues, and to recline in the first place at feasts.” What does it mean, given their complete inner emptiness, that they are respected by those who do not know what they are? They love to get rich. And they eat up the houses of widows. But in order to protect themselves from suspicions of dishonesty, they put on the guise of piety. So that no one gets the idea that they are the worst, they try to present themselves as the best. Let none of us say that prayers, and especially long prayers, are bad when they are offered sincerely and in humility. But wickedness having the appearance of godliness is double wickedness. And his fate is doubly terrible. “These will receive the most severe condemnation.”
“And Jesus sat opposite the treasury and watched as the people put money into the treasury.” This is a sacrifice for the Temple and for works of mercy. And in the Church of Christ from the very beginning, as we read in the book of Acts, prayer and almsgiving were inseparable from each other. It is good, says the Apostle, for everyone to put aside and save for himself as much as his fortune allows, so that, if necessary, he can be ready to make a sacrifice to charity (1 Cor. 16:2).
The gaze of Christ is turned to us when we approach the church circle. The Lord notices how we give to the Church and to the needs of the poor. Do we give generously or sparingly, is it to the Lord or to be praised by others?
“Many rich people put in a lot.” It's nice to see rich people full of generosity. It’s good when there are a lot of such people, and when they donate a lot. He who is rich must give richly. If God gives to us abundantly, He expects us to give abundantly. Although, according to church canons, not every rich offering can be accepted. Saint Serapion, famous preacher XIII century, so spoke with strongmen of the world this: “You, an insatiable beast, devour widows and orphans so that you can live in your bestial satiety.” Or as “Izmaragd,” a 15th-century manuscript, testifies about one preacher: “he does not spare the rich who light candles on all the temple lamps and think that the Lord will look upon their rich offering. Don’t you hear, he says, the sighs of widows and orphans, all the people oppressed and humiliated by you, shedding tears because of you? Their tears will extinguish all the candles that you light, and your standing in the temple will be your judgment and condemnation.” Saint Ephraim, Bishop of Novgorod, issues a decree that priests should not accept donations to the temple from those who oppress the poor, who starve others and torment others with nakedness.
There, in the Jerusalem Temple, there was one poor widow who, having come, put in two mites - the smallest coins. And our Lord brings her high praise. “Calling His disciples, Jesus said to them, “Truly I say to you, this poor widow has contributed more than all.” The Lord values this more than what everyone put together put in, than what the rich put in, for they “all put in out of their abundance, but out of her poverty she put in everything she had, all her food.” Many are probably ready to stop this poor widow - why does she give everything to others when she herself has nothing? Truly, there are few who will understand her, and, even more so, who will want to follow her example.
The rich who came to the Temple contributed huge sums, but their gift was small and discreet. They didn't risk anything. Moreover, with your life! Putting gold coins into the treasury, they did not forget to carefully calculate how much they had left for life, for a good life. But the Lord says: “Whoever wants to save his soul will lose it, but whoever loses his soul for My sake and the Gospel will save it” (Mark 8:35).
Wasn’t that another poor widow from Zarephath of Sidon, who said: “I have a handful of flour and a little oil in a jug. I will go and prepare this for myself and for my son; We’ll eat this and die.” And then she brought everything she had as a gift to the prophet. It is the gift that leads to death, the gift of all that is, the gift of oneself. That's what we're talking about. Two widows, risking their lives, dared to completely trust God. The first was wonderfully rewarded. The flour in her tub did not run out, and the oil in the jug did not decrease. The second was also rewarded no less miraculously: she earned the praise of Christ Himself. When we see these two women, how can we not think about what the Lord is doing? He, too, freely gives everything that He has, His entire life. “No one takes my life, I give it myself,” He says (John 10:18). In the Gospel of Mark, this meeting with the poor widow at the treasury is the last event in the Temple before the Passion of the Lord on the Cross. The gift of two poor widows proclaims the gift of the Son of God.
Where is our surplus? Where is what we need for life? This is the question of today's Gospel - for in the face of God the quality of our lives is measured by the quality of our gifts. Giving too much may mean giving nothing. Such a gift does not impress God. But the most modest gift becomes significant when we give what is necessary for us, something without which we may not be able to survive, when we give part of ourselves and all of ourselves. Behind Divine Liturgy we hear Christ say: “This is My Body.” The Lord gives Himself to us, gives His life for us. We partake of the Body and Blood of Christ - the highest gift on earth. But are we ready to give our lives to Him? Are we ready to give not the excess of our life, but our very life.
Archpriest Alexander Shargunov
Loading...
