NOTES for Luk 22:39-71

What happened was what had to happen, as Jesus had repeatedly foretold to His disciples. The world under the power of Satan could not endure its meeting with the Righteous One. It had either to die to sin itself, to change radically, to be reborn, or to pass a death sentence on this Man.

Having become disciples of Jesus, we must not forget this incompatibility of Christ and sin, not only in Him Himself, not only in our hearts, but also in the world. If we have truly found faith in Christ, then the choice inevitably stands before us: to die to ourselves and live with Him, or to join those who condemned Him to death two thousand years ago. Peter's denial shows that this choice does not change a person automatically, that his fears, weakness, and cowardice remain with him. Yet there is still an enormous difference between Peter, who wept bitterly over his denial, and the members of the Sanhedrin.

The events we read about in the Gospel of Luke today are familiar to everyone. We constantly encounter injustice and violence, cruelty and betrayal. Sin and suffering have penetrated human nature so deeply that they seem inevitable. And so, as we prepare for Great Lent, we read how God, having become man, drank this cup to the dregs. Unlike us, He accepted our suffering voluntarily in order to share it with us. We therefore seek an opportunity to honor His suffering through some spiritual effort. Last week we read the words of the apostle and evangelist John, who told us that this can only be an effort to love our neighbor, an effort to keep Christ's commandments. In the second half of the sixth century BC, the author of the second half of the book of Isaiah also conveyed God's words to us: “Is not this the fast that I choose: to loose the bonds of wickedness...” And the passages about Christ's way to the Cross that we read this week tell us that loving God and loving people means standing with the Mother of God at the foot of the Cross.

To whom are these lines addressed, and why were they written? They tell how Jesus was rejected by those who, it would seem, should have accepted Him: of the first disciple’s denial of the Teacher and the elders of the chief priests’ rejection of their Messiah. They could hardly have been intended to arouse hostility or hatred toward the Jews or to undermine the authority of a renowned apostle. Probably the reader, learning how many denials and betrayals Christ had to pass through and how He endured them, was meant to understand how little right he himself has to betray the Teacher and how impossible it is for him to take part in repeating this situation. Yet such a situation can arise at any time: when, under pressure from society, fear, or life’s circumstances, the words “I do not know this Man” rise unbidden to our lips; when what takes place is a denial not of an idea, a worldview, or a party, but of a Person, of God, of what is human and divine within you yourself...

Peter never imagined that he was capable of denying Christ. Humanly speaking, Peter behaved honorably and bravely - after all, by following the Teacher to the high priest's house, he took a risk. And as for his denying that he knew Him, that was an ordinary security tactic, one for which no one can be condemned... It is hard to object to such coherent reasoning, especially since, in times of persecution, many people have had to act exactly this way more than once. But then we read that Peter, feeling guilty, wept bitterly, and that means that something in his behavior did not fit within the acceptable rules of caution. We cannot condemn those who feel fear before persecutors; Jesus Himself did not condemn His secret disciples for not coming forward openly. But there is a time for everything, just as there is a time to gather stones and a time to throw them away. There are moments when every fear must be cast aside and we must bear witness to the One we know.

The trial of the Sanhedrin is preceded by mockery and beatings - in essence, it begins with them. The judges are not going to search for the truth: the verdict is already prepared. But the way the trial unfolds visibly shows us how the choice happens: Christ's testimony about Himself can either be accepted or rejected. Each person decides for himself, but those who reject Christ are troubled by His presence - they would like Him simply not to exist. Therefore rejection gives birth to the desire to destroy, to drag Him through the mud, to refuse to acknowledge the very reality of His existence. The desire to kill Christ did not arise on that day, but long before the trial, and it has not ended to this day. But until the end of time it will remain doomed to fail.

Everything was going so well. The court had gathered, and the verdict was ready... After all, everything was clear to everyone: this Son of Man had no place on earth. They had found a good charge (the way Al Capone would later be jailed for tax evasion!), and witnesses had been found, but no, it was not working; the accusation was falling apart, and everything was turning out awkwardly. Well then, all in: "Are You the Son of God?" Either He breaks and denies it, or He says "yes," and we declare that blasphemy.

Jesus' answer is admirable. On the one hand, it is a polite form of an affirmative answer, but on the other, as always with Him, it returns the question to the one asking it: "Think for yourself and make a responsible decision." What the "judges" say shows that they heard, but this does not affect the decision made in advance.

It is interesting that when our "unbelievers" doubt who Jesus is, they nevertheless call Him Christ, that is, God's Anointed One. So He answers them, as it were, silently: "You are saying who I am." And He leaves them the freedom to decide.

What caused Peter's betrayal? Apostasy? Fear? Hardly: after all, only recently he had promised Jesus that he would die with Him if necessary. Peter was certainly a passionate and decisive man, but he was far from a boy who would throw words around and make careless promises. And he was certainly not cowardly; everything we know about him from the Gospel accounts testifies to that. Then what was it? Perhaps the suddenness and paradox of everything that was happening? Peter had certainly promised to be with Jesus to the end, as had all His other disciples. But what were they expecting? Jesus had more than once told them about His coming suffering and death, as well as His resurrection. But the apostles, it appears, never fully understood Him; everything became more or less clear to them only after the Resurrection, and finally clear, it seems, only after Pentecost. Even on the day of the Ascension they expected that now, at last, their Teacher would restore the "kingdom of Israel" and become the "real Messiah," the King whom many were expecting then. And at that time, during and immediately after the Last Supper, they seem to have been absolutely sure that the uprising was about to begin, that their Teacher would of course be in mortal danger, and that they were ready to stay with Him to the end, whatever happened. And suddenly there is no uprising; their Teacher surrenders without resistance; everything is over, completely and disastrously over. What should they do next? It is no surprise that everyone runs away. If everything ended before it began, then what is there to remain faithful to? To a Teacher who, as it seemed, had renounced all His plans? Only Peter had enough resolve for that; he stayed to see what would happen to Jesus next. And suddenly: but you were with Him! From one side, from another, from a third... And now for Peter: whether I was or was not, what difference does it make? What does it matter now, when everything is over? "I was not! I know nothing and no one; leave me alone!" That was the first and entirely natural reaction. And immediately, like lightning, a flash lit up his consciousness: I betrayed Him! I denied Him! This is what He warned me about! And at once came deep, burning repentance. Repentance that restores hope.

The path to Golgotha began even before Gethsemane, with loneliness among the disciples who did not understand Him. Very little time would pass before the apostles became entirely different people, but for now they are causing the Teacher additional suffering.

Seeing this, Christ, who came to save us, does not reject the disciples. This is precisely the meaning of His words to Peter, which contain both a warning about his coming weakness and the commission to strengthen his brothers after his fall. Christ sees Peter’s weakness, just as He sees the weakness of each of us; yet He not only refrains from condemning or rejecting Peter and every one of us, but also strengthens us. Even in the words addressed to Judas, we hear not condemnation, but a sorrowful reproach capable of awakening the conscience.

If only we were ready to accept His support. Peter will be able to do so a little later, but Judas will not want to...

The name of the Mount of Olives makes us remember the oil used for anointing, including anointing to kingship. But Christ’s Kingdom is not of this world, and He goes toward His triumph not through ritual anointing, but through sacrificial suffering.

The carefree times are over. If earlier the apostles could preach without a penny of money and without bread in a bag, now not even a sword can save them and their Teacher. There is a time when God does not grant the prayer even of the most righteous person, and when one cannot trust even oneself. Jesus must drink His cup, and Peter deceives himself, assuring the Teacher of faithfulness to the grave.

What should one do when "the time of the lawless and the power of darkness" comes? If the apostles did not know, how can we know? All they have left are Jesus' words: "I prayed that your faith may not fail..." Faith that even in the darkness everything remains in God's hands...

The Mount of Olives is the beginning of Christ's glorification. It is His Entry into Jerusalem, the entry of the King. And He returns to the same mountain after He has eaten the Passover with the disciples. And again from the Mount of Olives begins Christ's glorification, now as Savior of the World.

And at the Passover meal Christ explains to the apostles what He Himself had been doing and what is being accomplished. He is the One who serves, and beside Him were people whose hearts had already changed. People to whom He promises a meal in the Kingdom of Heaven. And to whom, as witnesses of His deeds, He bequeaths the Communion of His Body and Blood. Communion in His death and imminent Resurrection. Communion in the glory of Christ, through which all Christians have been strengthened and saved from those days onward.