Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians

[GREEK COLUMN] ^A …rant, will they not give punishment? And what is this to the benefactor? For he, in order that he might have mercy upon all, provided for all and benefited them. But if they were unbelieving, this is nothing to the benefactor. Nevertheless, even in this way, he will have mercy upon those who turn, and will not turn them away. Or in this way: The nations were once unbelieving, now the Jews are unbelieving, although it was fitting that those [the nations], seeing the Jews being benefited by such great wonders and signs, should not have been unbelieving, and that the Jews now, seeing greater things being wrought by wonders, should have come to the faith before the nations. But neither the nations then, nor the Jews now, chose what was better for themselves. So it is manifest that both the Jews then, and the nations now, were led by the hand to the faith and obtained salvation by the mercy and philanthropy of God. Or rather in this way. Since he said, "That they themselves also may obtain mercy," denoting the Jews, he says, "That he might have mercy upon all." That he might, he says, save some through the perversity of others. For before, when the Gentiles were unbelieving, he saved, as it is said, the Hebrews. Again, when the Jews became unbelieving under Christ, the Gentiles were saved. With the Gentiles saved, the Jews, being provoked to jealousy, are saved themselves also, and thus all obtain mercy: these through those, and those through these. ^B "O the depth!" That it is a depth, he knows, but what is the measure or quantity of it, he is ignorant. He calls goodness "riches." "Of the riches and wisdom and knowledge." Having considered the wise dispensation of God from the beginning, how he disposes opposites through opposites, and having nothing to say against it, he only marveled. "How unsearchable!" For not only can they not be known, but they cannot even be sought out. "His ways." He means his providences or dispensations. "For who hath known the mind of the Lord?" He is, he says, the only one who knows his own affairs, and no other. And being wise, he was not instructed by the counsel of another, but is himself sufficient unto himself. But he is also the source of all good things. "Or who hath first given to him?" He bestows benefits, he says, to no one out of an obligation of repayment, but he always is the first to bestow gifts. "Because out of him." He himself found the good things, he says. "And through him." He himself, he says, also created the things that are. "And into him are all things." He himself, he says, holds together created things as their sustainer. "To him be the glory for the ages." Since he had said great and unknown things, he only marveled ^C as was his custom, and ended in a doxology, that is, glorification.

CHAPTER XXVII

XII, 1, 2. I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, pleasing to God, your rational service. And be not conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is the good and pleasing and perfect will of God. They, he says, are the mercies of God through which he saves [those...].

who make intercession], that you may pass over to a manner of life worthy of them. ^A [Phot.] “To present your bodies.” He exhorts to two things: to the care of life, and to the zeal of faith. For through the words, “To present your bodies,” and what follows, he encourages [us] to be governed in the best way; while through the words, “your rational worship,” he demands that they pursue the uprightness of faith. He puts forth the matters of conduct first, since the discourse on piety is accustomed to follow a pure life. See also how he said both aptly and incisively: “For present, he says, your bodies [as] a sacrifice living, holy, acceptable to God.” ^B Then, not satisfied with these, he adds another. Which? “According to your rational worship,” he says; that is, according to the laws of that [worship], in agreement with it and according to it, disagreeing with it in nothing. For this it is to present to God as a living and holy and acceptable sacrifice in our body: to conduct [oneself] in nothing outside of what has been ordained for us according to the worship. For it is necessary for both—for faith to be in agreement with life, and life with faith. For just as he who has professed the right faith, but is crooked in his ways, convicts the confession of faith through what he does; so also he who displays good deeds, but professes an impious faith, is impious through [those things] by which he acts impiously, and debases and triumphs over his actions, [having] no spiritual fruit in them. It is necessary, therefore, to conduct oneself according to our rational worship. “Living.” Since he said, “a sacrifice,” ^C lest anyone think that we are commanded to slaughter ourselves, he added, “living.” But how will the body be a sacrifice? Let the eyes see things that are right. Let the tongue and the hand—the one be occupied in the hymnody of God, the other in the commandments—and for those who do these things, the body becomes a living sacrifice. “Holy.” Distinguishing this sacrifice from the Jewish one, he says, “Holy, acceptable, and rational.” For the Jewish [sacrifice], being corporeal, was not very holy or acceptable, inasmuch as it sacrificed irrational [animals]. “Rational worship.” The spiritual, he says, service, the manner of life according to Christ; as if he had said: Present your bodies as a sacrifice through rational worship, that is, of the immaterial [kind]. Or that “Offer a living sacrifice, and the rational worship,” taking “offer” from what is common. ^D “And be not fashioned to this world.” And how would one offer oneself a living sacrifice? How? “Be not fashioned,” that is, “Do not mold yourselves according to the fashion of this world; for it has nothing sound or permanent. Therefore he also calls it a 'fashion,' signifying that which does not remain. And in saying this, he indicates its transience. Or that “Do not change along with the times.” — Otherwise. [Phot.] Having said, “Be not fashioned to this world,” that is, “Do not change along with and let yourselves be translated along with the teachings of those who bring teachings from this world which flows and does not stand fast.” Having said this, [he does so] so that none of the Jews might say: “Is it thus the case that we must not at all be changed and transformed from the teaching handed down to us by the Law?” Through...

^A this he adds, “But be transformed,” that is, ^B that you ought to be changed according to the will of God. Great, however, is the difference between the teaching that is from the world and the wisdom that is according to the will of God. For the one destroys even the legal form itself, leading into another form of wickedness and corruption; the other, however, does not only not destroy the form of the Law (for it existed in shape and type and shadow of the Law), but it even improves it, completing and filling out the form and beauty that were remaining to it from the Law. Therefore, he rightly says, “Do not be conformed, but be transformed.” For the former is destruction, but the latter is salvation and perfection.

“But be transformed.” Calling this the form of the world, he calls [the other] the form of virtue, showing its natural beauty. “By the renewal.” Since it is not possible for one who is human not to sin, he says, renew yourself always through repentance. For nothing so makes the soul and body grow old as does sin. “That you may prove.” Or he says this: be renewed so that you might learn what is useful, and what is the will of God. “And acceptable.” He directs his speech to the Jews, who clung to the Law, saying that the Law, indeed, was the will of God, but it was not acceptable, nor perfect, but was permitted only on account of your weakness, he says. But the New Testament is perfect and acceptable.

XII. 3. *For I say, through the grace given to me, to every one who is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think so as to be sober-minded, as God has dealt to each a measure of faith.*

Having said above, “Through the mercies,” now he says, “Through the grace,” in no way considering himself worthy of belief for the sake of persuasion, out of humility. For this reason, sometimes he puts forward the mercies, and sometimes the grace. But by saying, “Through the grace,” he brings to mind the benefits of God. “To every one who is among you.” What he says, “To every one who is among you,” can be understood in various ways. Either I say to everyone who is among you—that is, I speak to all, I admonish all, and I have this authority from grace. Or, I say: Do not be puffed up in your mind through any gift or grace above anyone who is among you. (For the Greek words admit both meanings.) For this meaning is also indicated by what follows, in which he says, “As God has dealt to each,” etc. Most wisely and prudently, being about to admonish them not to be puffed up in their mind, he placed first, “Through the grace of God.” For since it happens to some that they admonish and command out of pride, by anticipating such thoughts he took care [to say]: It is not, he says, from my own impulse that I admonish you. Through the grace of God I do this. He himself commands. I fulfill his command. It is necessary, therefore, to obey and not to argue. “Not to think [of himself] more highly.” He urges [them] regarding humility, [saying] not to think beyond the measures. For this is a matter of folly or insanity, “But to think so as to be sober-minded.” For we have received understanding, not so that we might use it for insanity, and darken our

^A intellect. For he here calls it "sober-mindedness," not that which is distinguished against licentiousness. “As God has distributed.” How has he distributed? According to desire for honor? Far from it. But how? According to the measure of faith. But he does not speak of the faith that follows upon worship—for all the faithful and pious and perfect are clearly in that faith, namely those who have been accounted worthy of gifts—but he speaks here of the faith that accords with the gifts, just as it is also said in the Gospels: “Lord, increase our faith.” And again: “If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed.” For it is clear that this meaning of faith is different from that which is understood in the case of piety. There were some among them who had been accounted worthy of gifts, and some of these were thinking highly of themselves, and were acting insanely against others, while others were jealous. And he says: Why are you acting insanely? Or why are you jealous? If God has distributed, he has distributed perfectly well and for our benefit. Therefore, let each one be content with what he has. And let him not be puffed up (for it is a gift of God, and not your own achievement), nor let him be jealous. For God has distributed, and he knows what is fitting and suitable for each. “Measure of faith.” Each one, he says, let him remain ^B in this, and let him neither be jealous nor puffed up. But [he speaks] of faith, he says, that is, of the gift.

For just as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function; so the many are one body in Christ. But each is a member of others. Having gifts, however, according to the grace given to us, [they are] diverse: whether prophecy according to the proportion of faith, or ministry in the ministry, or he who teaches in teaching, or he who exhorts in exhortation. For you, he says, why do you think highly of yourself? And why are you jealous? Are we not all one body, and members of one another? And he did not say, "He who seems to have a lowly gift is a member of him who has the greater," but that even he who has the greater [is a member] of him who has the lowly, wishing through this examination both to keep the former in their place, and to console the latter. But all the members do not have the same function; to this very point the parable looks. Just as, he says, the members have been entrusted with a different function, so different gifts have been given by the Spirit.

Having Christ as head, we are members of one another. “Having gifts.” ^C This whole passage is formed in two ways, up to the point where it says, “Or he who exhorts in exhortation.” What are these? By that which is called “common to all,” and by the elliptical. For the word “having” is taken as common to all at each clause, for example, whether one has prophecy, or one has ministry. And this is called "common to all," and a *zeugma*, because it joins the plural to the singular, and the participle

^A with the verb. Thus, therefore, by the common sense, the expression "Having" according to the *zeugma* finally completes the sentence in that way and fills the places. Now it is figured again in a defective manner. For something is lacking for the perfection of the sentence itself; for example: "Let each remain in the gift which he received": or, "Let him be content"; or, "Let him proceed in that order," or something else of this kind; as if to say: "Whether one has prophecy or ministry, let each one remain—both he who has prophecy, and he who has ministry, and he who has teaching, and he who has exhortation—in short, let each one [remain] in the gift which he received." ^B And the use of such things is frequent in the divine Paul. And do not marvel if, being unlearned in these, he made use of them. For the grace which bestows greater things often grants the knowledge of humble things as well. Not that these are anything great. For what is it but toil and names of men, who are curious and anxious about expressions and syllables and the composition of them? He did not, therefore, make use of these as if they were something great, but to confound those who are highly puffed up by such things, and to win them over by recalling them to modesty of mind, so that they might obey his admonition. For Paul undertook all things diligently, provided that he might bring salvation to men. Therefore, he did not hesitate to bring forward also citations of poetic verses, and Greek histories, and countless things of this kind, if only he might hope to snatch some salvation for men through these. Oh, the greatness of such a soul and zeal! ^C But he also uses well such a kind of speech, and again, he does not depart from the apostolic and simple and noble and unlabored character. For if he had not used them at all, those who dare everything would have accused him of incapacity and ignorance, just as even now some, not understanding such things, suspect that he possessed an ignorance of such matters—matters which they themselves do not understand. But again, if he had used them perpetually, the apostolic character would be held among the abject. Prudently, therefore, and most wisely, he judged between both. For he used them in order to make it manifest that it is easy for one who wishes to use similar things, and that he was not ignorant of them. Yet he remained in the apostolic character, holding in honor the noble and unlabored and pure speech, and its proper nature. Why, therefore, did the others not intermix such things in their own discourses? This one [instance] is sufficient alone to show that it was easy for them also to do this had they wished; although in their epistles, too, such things—albeit more rarely—are to be found. But if, when it is said: "Having gifts," ^D one is by no means to rest until the passage, "Bless those who persecute you," another sense will emerge, and the composition of the sentence will indeed be of one figure, but the period [will be] too drawn out in spirit. "According to the grace": If God has given, why are you puffed up? For the gifts themselves are not your upright work: "It is the gift of God," he says. — "Diverse": Well the "Diverse," so that he might show that it is not that the one is great and the other small—for all are great—but various and appropriate. "According to the proportion of faith": Now he shows that for the gifts which appear greater, those who receive them are [the ones] responsible for receiving; for indeed it is grace, yet so much...

flows in as the vessel has made itself apt by faith. "Sive prophetiam" — whether we have prophecy according to the proportion of faith, he says, or if someone has received a ministry. Ministry is a general thing; for all gifts are given for ministry. But [the Apostle] also discourses on special ones. "Sive ministerium quis acceperit" — if someone has received ministry, let him remain in the ministry, he says. "Sive qui docet" — if one has received the gift of teaching; from the common sense, repeat "Let him remain." "Sive qui exhortatur" — if one has received the gift of exhortation, let him remain in the exhortation. ^B

"Qui impartit, in simplicitate: qui praeest, in sedulitate: qui miseretur, in hilaritate. Dilectio non sit simulata: sitis odio prosequentes malum: adhaerentes bono. Fraterna charitate ad mutuo vos diligendum propensi: honore alius alium praecedentes: studio non segnes: spiritu ferventes: Domino servientes: spe gaudentes: in afflictione patientes: orationi instantes."

[ΦΩΤ.] He shows subsequently that those who use the gifts poorly make them useless. "In simplicity." Since gifts demonstrate their efficacy either in giving, or in presiding, or in showing mercy, he says that one ought not to exhibit these just anyhow, but to give with simplicity and joy—not as something that causes damage, but as that which brings profit rather; and to preside not negligently, but as if one had concern for it as one's own; and to show mercy joyfully and with a ready mind, as if he himself were gaining some fruit from it. ^C But how shall these things be? If we have mutual love among ourselves—but love not feigned or in hypocrisy, but unfeigned and sincere and perfect, and truly love. "In sedulity." For it does not suffice just to preside. "In hilarity." Not as one receiving a loss should he be moved to show mercy, but as if he himself were gaining profit rather. For from this will hilarity come. "Let love not be feigned," he says, not a pretext of love, but sincere love. When this exists, the aforementioned things are attained. "Sitis odio prosequentes malum." Not only abstaining from evil, but also hating it exceedingly. For this is what the preposition implies. For he did not say "hating" (styountes). ^D Then he says: Do not only hate evil, but also cleave to what is good. The word "cleaving" indicates the disposition toward it. "Cleaving to that which is good." For it is possible for there to be love even for shameful things. For this reason he said, Hate the evil. How is it possible to cleave to the good? By brotherly charity, he says, that is, through brotherly charity. "For by this shall they know that you are my disciples, if you love one another." The disciple, by keeping the teachings, is cleaved and united to the Preceptor, who is properly the good and the good itself—our Lord Jesus Christ. But from where does brotherly charity spring? From where is it possible to possess this? From anticipating one another, he says, in honor. For truly, friendship takes its beginning [from hating evil]

^A from this: that one anticipates another in honoring their neighbor. "By brotherly charity," etc. For if you have brotherly charity, you will surely love one another, for you are brothers.

Then he says how brotherly charity is accomplished. If each person, he says, considers his neighbor worthy of honor. "Not slothful in zeal." For this also produces love, when we do not merely honor, but excel in our zeal. "Fervent in spirit." How, then, will this happen? If we live in good works, we shall have the Holy Spirit, fervent and penetrating within ourselves. "Serving the Lord." For through the things mentioned, it will come about for us to serve the Lord. Thus we shall truly appear serving the Lord through good works. This is true service. "Rejoicing in hope." But how would it be possible to be fervent in spirit? If you rejoice in hope, he says. For nothing makes one so prompt for everything as good hope. And if, he says, you endure afflictions, and if you have unceasing prayer. "Patient in tribulation." For ^B endurance produces proof. "Constantly in prayer." For if this helps, everything will be easy.

XII. 13-19. "Distributing to the necessities of the saints; given to hospitality. Bless them which persecute you: bless, and curse not. Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and weep with them that weep. Be of the same mind one toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own conceits. Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men. If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men. Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord."

"To the necessities of the saints." That is, in those things where they might be bound by necessity. He introduces almsgiving toward the saints; therefore he also kept it among the preeminent things. In the previous parts, he had spoken about universal almsgiving. "Distributing," he says. ^C For the matter itself is a kind of communion: for you contribute resources, but they contribute to you boldness toward God and countless other good things. "Given to hospitality." Do not wait, he says, until he comes to you, for he is ashamed; rather, you pursue him. "Bless them which persecute you." Having taught how one ought to behave toward brothers, he teaches how toward enemies as well. Observe, however, that he did not say, Do not take revenge, nor curse; but, which is greater, bless and pray on his behalf. "Rejoice with them that do rejoice." Not only, he says, in words do you bless, but also in deeds: indeed, rejoicing with those who rejoice, and weeping with those who weep. But it is a greater thing ^D to rejoice with those who rejoice, inasmuch as the happy success of others often becomes an occasion of envy for the wicked. "Be of the same mind one toward another." For instance, do you consider yourself great? Consider the same also

regarding your brother, even if he be poor, since there is no distinction of wealth or poverty before God. But how could this come to be for you? If you do not think high ^A things of yourself, but sympathize and associate with the humble, and descend to their lowliness. By these things, their inflation and vainglory are repressed. For it was likely that they, because of their city, were captured and held by this affliction. "Be not wise in your own conceits." That is, do not suppose yourselves to be wise and lacking no intelligence. For the Scripture says: "Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight." "Recompense to no man evil for evil." For if he who does evil is blameworthy and miserable, why do you not flee from the imitation of evil, but rather, by taking vengeance, render yourself liable and a companion in impiety? "Provide things honest in the sight of all men." He says this: see that you appear good, so as to give no occasion to anyone to blame you. Or, since he said above, "recompensing evil for evil," he added also, "Provide things honest," ^B as if saying, "It is not sufficient only not to return evil, but one must also provide for him who does us ill." For indeed, even above, he was not content with not cursing those who persecute, but he even commanded to bless. "If it be possible, as much as lieth in you." For there is a time when it is not possible, where the discourse is about piety. Therefore he said, "If it be possible." And, "as much as lieth in you," that is, do your part, and do not provide an occasion for enmity, neither to Greek nor to Jew. For this is "with all men," that is, both believers and unbelievers. "Avenge not yourselves." Since this is the consequence, that he who has been wronged seeks to obtain vengeance, he promises this very thing to you, he says: Do not avenge yourself, and God will avenge you. For, he says, "give place and room for the wrath of God to come." For if you do not avenge yourself, when the wrath of God comes, it will have no place to exert vengeance, because you have first avenged yourself. For if you do not defend yourself, the wrath will come. — [John.] Since, however, the one wronged most desires to see himself enjoying ^C vengeance, he grants this to him with great abundance. For if he himself does not take vengeance, God will be the avenger. Allow Him, therefore, to execute it. This is what "Give place unto wrath" means. — "For it is written." Consoling the wronged one even more, he brought forth the testimony. "Vengeance is mine," that is, vengeance belongs to me.

XII. 20, 21. "Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good." ^D Not only, he says, live in peace and do not take vengeance, but also do good, by feeding and giving drink. Then, because what was commanded was burdensome, he adds, comforting him who was wronged, saying: By doing this, you will heap fire upon his head. And at the same time

^B he warns him more loftily. For if you nourish him with such an intent, so that you might heap them upon him, you have not conquered evil, but have been conquered by it. I, however, want you, he says, to conquer evil. Therefore, do not do good with a malevolent intent. For what was said—that by feeding and giving him drink you will heap up coals of fire—was said for your consolation, not so that you should act in this way. For although, when you perform a good deed for your enemy, God, vindicating you, is angered against him, and turns the fire of temptations and afflictions, which he himself contrived against his neighbor, upon his own head, nevertheless, you must not wish to do him good with this end in view—that you might see him in such evils; for then you have been conquered by evil. And he, indeed, suffers no less what it was fitting for him to suffer, but you have lost your reward, having been conquered by evil. Moreover, if God sees you with such a mind, He does not vindicate you. For He vindicates the good and meek man who has been wronged, but not the man who has taken revenge upon himself by his own spirit and will, and who has acted wickedly through the performance of a good deed, simply to see the ruin of the one who had grieved him. Do good, therefore, that you may conquer evil, and that you may become a son, as the Lord says, of the Father who is in heaven.

XIII. 1, 2. Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God; and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore, he who resists the authority resists the ordinance of God; and those who ^C resist will incur judgment for themselves.

For he did not say that there is no ruler, but that there is no power except from God. ^A “And those that are,” he said with regard to the same. Having said, “There is no power except from God,” he says the same again: “And those that are, he says, powers, have been ordained by God,” as if to say, they have been brought into existence. God, he says, has ordained and administered them. Otherwise: Therefore, all powers have been ordained by God—that is, brought into existence—however you may look at it: whether the father’s toward the son, or the husband’s toward the wife, or all the others, and even those in animals, such as in bees, in cranes, in fish. “So that the one who resists…” Lest the servants of Christ think that by being subjected to rulers they are being cheapened, he shows that it is necessary to obey and not to resist, nor to be disobedient to rulers. For he who does this, he says, speaks against God who made the authorities. ^B “He has resisted the ordinance of God.” [Phot.] You will gain from this, he says, by being subjected, not only because you fulfill a commandment, but also because you honor God, honoring the power ordained and entrusted by Him. Blessed is he who in this way and for these reasons honors the power and is subjected, just as he who is not subject for these reasons is wretched—for he carries off a double judgment: first from God, because he despises the authority ordained and fixed by Him; second, from the despised rulers. See also the benefit from rulers: they restrain the wicked, they encourage the virtuous, by which they honor them and praise them into virtue. Therefore, it is necessary to receive them, and for this reason, too, because they are ministers of God, serving His will. And ^C third, because leaving aside their own matters, they care for common ones, applying themselves to the benefit of their neighbors; and, having set aside their own rest, they take up the toil on behalf of them. Who would not revere these, even if no fear were present, from the very conscience of judgment, and have them in the place of fathers and guardians? Blessed are such rulers. “They shall receive judgment.” Condemnation, he says, they draw down upon themselves from God.

XIII, 3-5 For rulers are not a fear to good works, but to evil. But do you want not to fear the power? Do the good, and you will have praise from it; for it is God's minister to you for good. But if you do the evil, fear. For not in vain does it carry the sword; for it is God's minister, an avenger for wrath to the one doing the evil. Therefore, it is necessary to be subject, not only because of the wrath, but also because of the conscience.

Why do you grieve, he says, at being subjected to the power? Why ^D do you fear it and tremble? For does it rebuke those who live well? Is it formidable to one who cares for virtue? “To good works.” That is, to those who do good things. “But to the evil.” That is, to those who do bad things. “Do you want, however, not to fear the power?” But if you want, he says, not only for the ruler to be gentle to you, but even to be one who praises you, do the good. “For it is God's minister to you.” To this [index: entries preserved]

^A he adds that he will also cooperate with you toward this, for fear becomes an occasion for you to live well. For this reason he said he is God’s minister for the good, because he moves according to the will of God, praising the good and punishing the wicked, just as God likewise does. Therefore, from this he pushes and urges you toward the good. This is what he says: “He is for you for the good.” [Photius] And to you, he says, he is a minister for the good, being clearly a minister of God. But how is he a minister to you? By restraining the wicked ^B and removing from you the harm that would result from them, and granting you freedom to do that which is good. He ministers to you for the good even when he strikes fear into you because of your wicked deeds, turning you back from them and urging you toward virtue. Furthermore, by honoring and accepting you, he urges you toward this same thing. “But if you do the wicked thing, fear.” The ruler is not the cause of fear, but the wrongdoing itself. “For he does not bear the sword in vain.” Do you see how he has both struck fear into the subordinate ^C and armed the ruler? For he is God’s minister. For the one who punishes those who live wickedly ministers to God unto wrath. Just as he ministers to God by praising the good, so by punishing the wicked he imitates God, who is angry with the evil and punishes them. For if he is a minister of God, if you are to have praise from him, it is necessary to be subject to him, not only because of the wrath which results from him against those who offend, but it is fitting ^D much more, both as a minister of God and as one who praises and encourages you toward virtue, to deem him worthy of honor. For even if no one were afraid of him, conscience nonetheless urges us to obey and be subject. Therefore it is necessary to be subject. It is necessary, therefore, he says, to be subject to the rulers, not only because of the wrath of God which comes upon those who are not subject to the authority, “But also because of conscience.” That is, so that you may not seem to be without conscience and ungrateful, by not being subject to the benefactor and to God’s minister. For the rulers greatly benefit us. For through them our life is maintained, as if they did not exist, everything would perish, with the more powerful devouring the less powerful, after the manner of fish. “But also because of conscience.” Because of the wrath, even the wicked are subject, even against their will; but because of conscience, the virtuous ought to be subject willingly and with alacrity.

XIII. 8. For this reason you also pay tribute. For they are God's ministers, attending continually to this very thing. Render therefore to all their dues: tribute, to whom tribute is due; custom, to whom custom; fear, to whom fear; honor, to whom honor. Owe no one anything, except to love one another.

And to that extent, he says, the powers provide a benefit, that for this reason you even pay tribute; as if offering a wage for their governance and providence. “For they are God’s ministers.” That is, they are subject to God and in this way ministering to God, so that He may care for us as God.

^A “To this same end.” That is, that they might have care for us. “Attending continually.” Neglecting their own affairs, he says, they are occupied with cares on our behalf. “Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due.” He shows that the matter is a debt. For this reason he said “debts,” and “Render,” as if it were a debt to those entrusted with various principalities—to him to whom the tribute is due, that is, the so-called poll-tax, pay the tribute. And to whom the tax is due, that is, the contribution for the land, the tax. And not only money, but also fear—that is, respect, reverence, and profound honor. He adds, therefore, “Honor to whom honor is due.” For fear is twofold. The one is that which those who have done wrong feel, which proceeds from an evil conscience, which the Apostle forbade above; the other, however, is that which those who love have toward those they love, that is, surpassing honor. As it is said, “There is no lack to those who fear Him.” For he denotes reverence here. “Except that you love one another.” He has come to the mother of all good things, love, showing it to be a debt and an obligation. ^B XIII. 9. “For he who loves another has fulfilled the law.” Since it is written: “You shall not commit adultery, you shall not murder, you shall not steal, you shall not bear false witness, you shall not covet,” and if there is any other commandment, it is summarized in this word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” ^C Then he shows what the gain of love is. That, he says, he who fulfills this, fulfills the whole law. And he says how. [Phot.] How he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law is evident from this. For one who loves would not ruin the marriage of the one loved, by plotting against this very crown of life and harming the one he loves; nor would he arm murderous hands against him; nor would he attempt to steal; nor in any other way, being set upon the desire of any of his things, would he take them away by violent stealth. For nothing of these things belongs to one who loves. Nor would he bear false testimony against his neighbor, nor would he swear a perjured oath. And how will he who loves his neighbor not love and honor father and mother exceptionally? And how will he who is of this sort not truly love and glorify the Divine with all his heart and with all his might? And he who has fortified himself with these things, what other virtue will he not increase and complete along with those already mentioned? So that he who loves his neighbor may be said to have fulfilled the whole law. Then, because men are accustomed to apply the name of love even to affections unworthy of this calling, he himself provides a description of that love which he said sums up the law and gathers together the multitude of virtues. ^D For love, he says, which I mentioned, so unites those who are neighbors to one another that each does not consider the one who is joined to him to be another, but thinks him to be his own self. From which it is evident that nothing of each...

^A is performed as an evil toward one's neighbor. Then, concluding, he repeats: “Love therefore is the fulfillment of the law.” This is: truly and justly have I said that he who loves has fulfilled the law. But when he says that he who loves fulfills the whole law, he shows how. For he says, all the commandments are fulfilled through love. But he did not say “are fulfilled” simply; rather, “are recapitulated.” That is: briefly and in a short word the whole thing comes to pass, and the whole work of the commandments is fulfilled in a short manner: “Your neighbor as yourself.” The expression “as yourself” signifies intense love.

XIII. 10. 11.

You see how love possesses both virtues, I mean the abstaining from evils and the doing of good? Behold the abstinence from evils: “Love, he says, works no evil to his neighbor.” Behold the performance of good: “The fulfillment, he says, of the law is love.” For he does good to his neighbor. And all the eagerness of the law desires this: the abstinence from evils and the beginning of good things. “Love works no evil to the neighbor. The beginning of good things and the end is to love one’s neighbor as oneself.” ^B “And this, knowing...” — [SEUIR] Fulfill, he says, the work of love, knowing the time is pressing and demands virtue. “Now is our salvation nearer than when we believed”; that is, now that we have learned the more beneficial of deeds, it has indeed become easier to be saved than when we were still being instructed in the principles of the faith. For not as soon as we believed in Christ did we obtain an exact grasp of what must be done. “Knowing,” he says, what is this? “The time,” he says. — [PHOT] “And this knowing.” To those things above is this attached, and to those points it is referred, indicating an intensity rather and an exhortation of the things aforementioned. To which ones above? “Let every soul be subject to the higher powers.” And, “Render to all their due.” And, “Owe no one anything, except to love one another.” These things, therefore, he says, do, both because of the aforementioned things and most especially for this. Because of what? Knowing the time, that the time of our life has been shortened; and it behooves us, who sleep as though we were doing nothing, to awake as quickly as possible, as if from sleep. For it is manifest ^C that now we are much closer to the end of our life than when we believed. He calls the end of life “salvation,” because then to those who are worthy, salvation and enjoyment are more fully revealed; for this reason he also calls it “day,” as it provides pleasure and illuminates, and makes manifest those things which previously were unknown in regard to experience and enjoyment, but were looked upon by hope alone. With good reason, however, he calls the present life “night,” in comparison to the coming day. For many things which in this time are hidden as if in the night, will there be made manifest as in a bright day; and many things which are unknown here as if in darkness, will there be known as in the light, with every veil taken away and every face

^A wiped clean, and the darkness which clouded the thoughts purged away. The night, he says, is shortened, that is to say, our life, and the end is drawing near; that is, the day of death and retribution is now approaching. Therefore, for this reason as well, it is necessary to perform every commandment with alacrity, to love one another, to pay all their dues, to be subject to the authorities. For the labor is now small; the contests, if there be any need to struggle, are not stretched out at length. For the stadium of our life has become very short. Let no one delay; let us all be eager. "It is the hour for us now." The end, he says, is near, and we must hasten to the work of good deeds. "To awake from sleep." To rise from sloth. "For now is our salvation nearer." For as the present life is gradually slipping away, the time of our resurrection and salvation becomes nearer than when we first came to the faith. "Salvation." If we are prepared as we ought to be, the day of judgment will be for us a saving one; if not, it will be destructive. But he designates that day from the more favorable aspects. "Than when we believed." It is likely that these people were fervent at the beginning, as those who were new to the faith, but subsequently grew languid. This, therefore, he now implicitly suggests, as if he were to say: "The nearer our salvation now is—that is, the day of saving judgment—the more diligent it behooves us to be, and not to become sluggish."

^B XIII, 12-14. "The night is far spent, and the day is at hand. Let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armor of light. Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying. But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfill the lusts thereof."

"The night is far spent." He calls the present life night. For the things that are in it differ in no way from dreams. But he calls the future time the day, because the hidden things are to be made manifest in it. "Let us therefore cast off the works of darkness." He calls evil deeds the works of darkness, but virtue the armor of light. For as armor, it protects a man; but as light, it illuminates. "As in the day, honestly." As though the day were already present, as though it were at hand, ^C as though being present to a degree never seen before, let us live honestly. But what "honestly" means, he himself interprets by adding: "Not in rioting," and so forth. And he says "honestly," sharply rebuking them, because even if there were no punishment laid up for those who sin, and no enjoyment for those who live uprightly, one ought to flee what is base and unbecoming and shameful, and cling to virtue. But since what has been mentioned follows upon both lives, what must we do? "Let us walk." Having said above that the day of judgment is in the future, he now brings it before the eyes, terrifying the hearer. And by saying "Let us walk," he makes the speech free from envy, including himself as well. "Not in ^D rioting and drunkenness." He does not forbid drinking, but being drunk. And a riot is the singing that follows after drunkenness and insolence, which is also called roistering. "And in wantonness."

^A He does not take away intercourse, but fornication. "Not in contention and emulation." By contention he speaks of anger; by emulation, of envy. "But put on the Lord Jesus Christ." For he who has put Him on possesses virtue in its entirety. How is he to be put on? If He be everything to us, appearing in us both inwardly and outwardly. And to never depart from Him, he calls a garment. "And the care of the flesh." Having said that one ought not to have care for the flesh, he adds, "unto fulfillings of desires," so that you might not think that we must not care for the flesh even in necessary things, such as in food and clothing. We must therefore care for it for existence, not for wantonness.

XIV, 1–4. "Him that is weak in the faith receive, not unto doubtful disputations. For one believeth that he may eat all things; another, who is weak, eateth herbs. Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him. Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand." ^B There were some who had believed from among the Jews, who, still clinging to the Law, abhorred many foods, such as swine's flesh: and so that they might not become manifest, they ate only herbs, so that it might appear to be an observance of temperance and not because they abhorred them. But there were also other believers from among the Jews who, having believed firmly, did not observe the foods. Addressing his discourse therefore to these sincere believers, he censures those who abhorred the foods, calling them weak in the faith. Observe, however, with me the prudence, the efficacy, and the providence of Paul; he kindly corrects the one who was discerning between foods: on one hand, so that if he were to direct his rebuke solely at him, he might recoil; on the other hand, so that he might not seem to be doing well if he remained uncorrected. Therefore he says: "Receive him, because he is weak." Do not judge him: why? Not because he is not acting poorly: but because he has another Master who judges him. By this, also, while consoling him (as we have said) regarding not condemning a neighbor, he gives him to understand again that even if this one does not judge him, nevertheless he who observes the foods is subject to judgment. Saying in effect: Although even this one does not judge you, you have a Master, however, who judges you; therefore you must abstain from such pettiness and squalor. He forbids, moreover, that one should judge another regarding foods: lest, contending and bickering about these things at the beginning of the faith, they might come into danger from this, and even fall out regarding what is joyful—and, concerning that which was the highest matter, namely faith in Christ, suffer loss. What then? If we now see one observing Jewish customs regarding foods, shall we not condemn him? Most certainly. How then does he say, "Judge not, that ye be not judged"? 54* This is not to be taken regarding the faith or those things which contribute to the faith. Far be it! Nor regarding those things that ^D

are absurdly committed; but concerning the works of this life, concerning those things which are under suspicion, concerning those things which, as the Master Himself said, are like a mote. ^A For concerning these and suchlike matters, one ought not even to open one's mouth, and especially those to whom He adds another point to the aforementioned chapter, saying that not only in the aforementioned case ought one not to judge and despise his neighbor, but also not in that which follows.

And it is this: Some used to eat on separate or discriminated days, while others ate on every day. He says, therefore, that not even in these matters should they judge and condemn one another; neither the one who eats, for the neighbor fasts and does well, doing so for God’s sake. Nor, again, should the one who fasts condemn the one who does not fast on separate days (that is, the one who eats on every day); for it is not a matter of a legal precept such that transgression brings judgment, but [it is a matter] of pure will. "Not to disputes of doubts." ^B He strikes them once when He says, "weak in the faith"; a second time, saying, "Receive," for He shows that they have need of much care; and a third time when He says, "Not to disputes of doubts." For He signifies that they were slipping to such an extent that even those who communicated with them in friendship were judging and separating themselves.

"One indeed believes he may eat all things." The one who, he says, sincerely believes and has no Judaic observance eats all things without abomination. He commends him from his faith. "But another," he says, who is "weak" in the faith, "eats herbs." In this, he also reproves him, because he ate herbs not from a praiseworthy abstinence, even if he made a pretense of this, but from an infirmity of faith. ^C "Let him who eats not despise him who does not eat." He did not say: "Let him correct," but, "Let him not despise," showing that he acts ridiculously. For one ought to admonish fraternally, and not despise as if someone were abominable. "Let him not despise." For just as those who through faith ate everything without distinction despised those who were observing [the law regarding] foods, so those others judged these as gluttons and slaves to their bellies.

See, however: having said concerning those who eat, "For God has received him," concerning those who were observing [the law], He said nothing of the sort. "For God," He says, "drew him to Himself, and freed him from all Judaic observance." ^D [SEVERUS] But the servant of Christ, whom Christ has received, is a stranger to the Law. Who, then, art thou that judgest from the Law him who is a stranger to the Law? "Who art thou that judgest?" To the sincere believer is this word addressed. From this it is manifest that they were not only despising, but also judging those who ate herbs. "To another's servant." He belongs to God, he says, and to God pertains his falling or his rising. Therefore, it is not because he does not do things worthy of condemnation that you should not judge him, but because he is another's servant. "But he shall be established." Again He strikes the weak and those who observe foods. For by saying, "He shall be established," He shows that they are wavering, and so much so that they have need of God who confirms them.

XIV, 5, 6. *One person judges one day as better than another, while another judges all days alike. Let each one be fully convinced in his own mind. He who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. He also who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while he who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God.* ^A It is probable that some who fasted or abstained continually at that time condemned those who did not abstain continuously; to these he forbids them to condemn or vehemently accuse others. For they had recently come to the faith, and he feared that excessive accusation might completely separate them from the faith, as they might be provoked to anger by the accusations. *"Let each one be fully convinced in his own mind."* Do not take the phrase, "Let each one be fully convinced in his own mind," to apply to all matters, ^B but only to fasting, and even this he says by way of condescension, because the Romans had only recently adhered to the faith. For if you take the aforementioned word to apply to the faith itself, you err entirely. But let each one be fully convinced according to his own mind: either that it is good to fast always, or that it is not good to fast always. *"He who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord."* This saying is not to be taken as referring to a dogma of the faith. Nevertheless, he himself said beforehand: For both this man and that man are using one aim, namely, honor toward God. For he who keeps the day thinks he is fulfilling the law of God; and he who makes no distinction regarding this has every day in equal honor as one created by God. ^C Another interpretation: The statement, *"He who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord, and he who does not observe the day, in honor of the Lord he does not observe it,"* is manifest to us from what has been said, that he means this: he who judges and considers it good to eat on every day, does so in the Lord—that is, he considers this in the Lord, and does it for the Lord's sake. And he who does not judge this, nor considers it good to eat on every day, judges and considers it good for the Lord's sake. For these things are, for him, the reason for the statement, *"Let each one be fully convinced in his own mind."* How do you say this, Paul? Well, he says, I spoke well, since both he who fasts over a day and he who eats every day do this for the sake of pleasing the Lord, and there is no need to judge one another at all on this account. Then he intensifies the reason and says: ^D For he who eats gives thanks to God while eating, because He has given humans the means and sustaining power of life. And he who fasts gives thanks that He has given humans endurance and patience and methods by which one might be able to overcome the passions of the flesh. But one who eats or fasts in any other way is subject to judgment, as were certain heresies. These things, therefore, are to be understood specifically regarding those who fast and those who eat, and not applied to any other matters. For this canon does not extend to all things, but, as we have said, it is specific and comprehends only this and other things of this kind. For it does not even fit the argument stated a little before, for instance in the case of one judged for food; for even he who does not eat, does not fail to eat for the glory of Christ, but as one weak and unestablished in the faith. But one must not judge him on account of the

occasion of the time, because it was the beginning of the preaching. But as for him who eats daily, or him who fasts on certain days, neither this nor the other ought to be perused with accusation: for both do what they do for the glory of God. And all the following things, whatever are turned toward that understanding concerning those fasting on certain days and those eating daily, are to be taken only in such a way, as is that: "But you, why do you judge your brother?" and that: "So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God."

^B Then, having taken an opportunity from this, and having reminded us that we have a Lord and Judge sitting at the tribunal, he turns his discourse to a general admonition. Why, he says, do I speak of this or that? It is necessary that you should be so disposed toward one another, that in nothing, as far as lies in us, should we bring upon one another an offense or a scandal. He said "to the brother," wishing to soften him even by the name. "Why," says he, "do you scandalize? He is your brother, he is your member, so that you have one Father, one Creator." If therefore scandals and offenses are taken away from you, much more will judging and condemning be taken away. Not only will judging and condemning on account of this or that be taken away, but simply and in total it will be taken away, that you do not judge and condemn one another at all. And then truly both he who is not judged will be thrice-blessed, and he who does not judge will be like him, when we shall have lived in virtue and holiness, and shall have taken away ^C every occasion for judging or condemning from many. O the voice of Paul! O the foundation of the architect! This, he says, you judge: that you do not place an offense or scandal for the brother; lay down this first foundation. If this foundation is established in you, the rest will be easy to build upon. "And he that does not regard the day." Or he says it thus: He who is concerned to fast or abstain daily, for the Lord he is so disposed; and he who is concerned not to fast daily, according to the Lord he is minded. But whatever is done for the Lord, it is good, he says. "For he gives thanks to God." If therefore, he says, it becomes a profitable work, that thanks be given to God through all things, why do you differ so vehemently about the fast? For the difference is small. He speaks thus condescendingly. Nevertheless, how can he who does not eat give thanks to Christ? For as if clinging to the Law, he does not eat. But he who eats, gives thanks to God.

XV, 7-9. "For none of us lives to himself, and no one dies to himself. For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord. Whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's. For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living."

We have, he says, a Lord to whom we live if we live, to whom also we die if we die. If therefore our life and death belong to the Lord, He Himself will dispose what concerns us, and there is no need to judge the

^A neighbor or to despise him. "For whether we live." For He alone has power over life and death. "For to this end Christ died." He brought forward the reasoning that we are Christ's both when we live and when we die. In addition to these things, He also shows this: that, he says, if He showed such great providence toward us as even to be crucified, He would by no means despise us. For if He cares for us even when we are dead, much more so when we are alive. He says this to those who condemn, so that they might realize that the weak in faith are cared for by God, because of His such great providence toward all; and he also admonishes the one who is small of faith, reminding him of God's benefits. "And He died and rose again." He deposited, he says, the proofs of our lordship, "that He might be Lord both of the dead and of the living." That is to say, of souls and bodies; for the former are immortal, but the latter are mortal. Thus also the holy Methodius in his book *On the Resurrection*. ^B

XIV, 10-13. "But why do you judge your brother? Or even why do you despise your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. For it is written: 'As I live, says the Lord, that to Me every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall confess to God.' So then each of us shall give an account of himself to God. Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather judge this, not to put a stumbling block or an occasion to fall in our brother's way."

Again, his address is to him who is small of faith. "Or even why do you despise your brother?" This address is directed to him who is firm in faith. But by the name of brother he resolves their contention. For it is written: "As I live," etc. While it seems that by the deduction of the prophecy he is also restraining the faithful man from despising the one who judaizes, nevertheless he spoke the whole passage, shaking the soul of him who still judaizes, here admonishing him by the memory of the judgment, and there by the benefits of Christ Himself. For if, he says, we shall all stand before Christ, and He Himself, and not the law, will demand an accounting from us, why do you cling to the law and not seize hold of Christ once and for all? "To Me every knee shall bow." He attests that the dominion of all is subject to Him. "And every tongue shall confess." Namely, one's own sins, out of one's own conscience, as to the Judge. — Another way. [OECUM.] It has been said concerning God the Father that He judges no one, but has given judgment to the Son. It is manifest, then, that it was said of the Judge by Paul, "shall confess to God," and "shall give an account to God." Therefore Christ is God, even if the impious do not wish it. "Therefore let us not judge one another anymore." Again he adheres to the first discourse, so that he may not appear to have made mention of the judgment through fear, but through a certain logical consequence of the discourse. "Not to put a stumbling block." This is fitting both for the sincere believer and for him who still judaizes. For even the perfect man was offended by the observance of foods

^A by the neighbor, and he who was refusing foods by the vehement rebuke of him who believed sincerely. Thus, with one piece of counsel, he corrects both, that they should abstain from these things which become an occasion of scandal to the neighbor.

XIV, 14–18. "I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that there is nothing common of itself, except to him who accounts anything to be common; to him it is common. But if your brother is grieved because of food, you are no longer walking in love. Do not destroy with your food that man for whom Christ died. Therefore, do not let your good be blasphemed. For the kingdom of God is not food and drink, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. For he who serves Christ in these things is acceptable to God and approved by men."

The discourse concerning the observation of foods continues for him. Since, therefore, he said, "I know and am persuaded that there is nothing common," so that he who still judaizes might not say, "What if you are persuaded, whereas the law teaches the opposite?", he adds, "In the Lord Jesus," showing that from Him he has learned these things and is fully assured, and that he does not speak of his own self. "That there is nothing common."

[ΦΩΤ.] From here he returns again to the matters concerning foods, and he exhorts those who are strong in the faith to support those who are weak, and he shows from what he says that it is good to try to correct him who judges among foods, but it is better, if he cannot be corrected in this, to overlook the defect ^B and to lead him by the hand in every way toward gaining and saving him.

[ΘΕΟΔΩΡ.] "There is nothing," he says, "common of itself." For so that they might not say, "Who are you to enact laws contrary to Moses?", he brings into the midst the Lord of Moses, teaching that He Himself brought the legal observances to an end, and allowed nothing to be reckoned an impure dish.

[ΣΕΥΗΡ.] For "By him" means by His evangelical legislation. "There is nothing common by him," that is, impure by nature. "By him," that is, by God. Because of the grace now given by Him, he says, nothing is common by nature, but it becomes common from the choice of the one who approaches it. Whence it also becomes common ^C to that person alone, and not to all. For he says, "To him it is common."

"But if your brother is grieved because of food." For the faithful were reproaching those who were still judaizing and therefore observing the foods. He does not want them, therefore, to be harshly stricken in matters that are not very great, fearing lest, perchance, having become fainthearted, they might fall away completely from the faith. If, therefore, there is nothing common in foods, he says, nevertheless abstain from the vehement reproach of your brother, acting in a discretionary way for the stated reason. See also the wisdom of the holy1 man: fully assuring the perfect man that there is nothing common, and likewise showing the man of little faith to be weak because of the observance, "No longer," he says, "are you walking according to love." For he wants love to exist, knowing that all things are accomplished ^D through it part by part. "Do not destroy that man with your food"

^A. You must not, because you eat all things being a believer, reproach him vehemently and cast him out completely from the faith. For indeed, Christ also died for him. Whence you ought in a dispensation-like manner to condescend to him. - [PHOT.] Here he also advises the faithful to abstain from foods for the sake of condescension to the weak in faith, as he also says later: "Therefore let not your good be blasphemed." For by accusing and always contending against him because of the keeping of foods, you not only make him more contentious, but you also give an opportunity to those on the outside to blaspheme our faith because of such fights. For the "good," he says, is faith. You teach well indeed, but the fight becomes a cause of blasphemy. "Therefore let not your good be blasphemed." For it is a good indeed, because through being established in the faith one does not judge in the matter of foods. But when you are disputing and contending vehemently against those who do judge, you cause your good to be blasphemed. ^B For those being rebuked are compelled to say to you, that you do not do this out of faith, but for the sake of healing the belly. If, therefore, there were no other cause to abstain from such contention, surely this very fact—that your good should not be blasphemed—ought to have been enough to persuade you to dissolve the contention into concord and love. For this is not to contemn the things of faith, but to honor them, by preventing the insults by which it would be affected. It is also likely that some of those estranged from the faith, hearing the contentions, mock and ridicule the dogmas of the Christians and heap insults upon them; for all these reasons it would be better, instead of untimely contention, to be harmonious concerning opportune things that conform to charity, and to cut off every pretext for slander and blasphemy. For these are the things that introduce one into the kingdom of heaven: peace in faith, ^C joy in the Holy Spirit, and righteousness. "For the kingdom of God is not food and drink." He wishes to restrain them from accusations. For, he says, we cannot enter the kingdom of God by means of food or drink. Otherwise. [PHOT.] By saying, "For the kingdom of God is not food and drink," he shows that their contention regarding foods was most vehement and beyond measure. And he implies that if the kingdom of God were food and drink, you would not have contended more vehemently; at the same time, he also urges shame, saying: If you do so for these things, what ought you to do for righteousness, and peace, and spiritual joy? "But righteousness." What, then, are the things that introduce one into the kingdom? Righteousness, that is, a virtuous life, peace toward one's brother, and joy derived from concord. And since there is peace and joy in base things, he adds, "in the Holy Spirit," as if he said: I speak of that peace and joy which are brought about in the Holy Spirit, that is, introduced through the Holy Spirit. "For he who in these things serves Christ." Doing these things thus, as a debtor and as one obliged to it, with fear and trembling, as a faithful servant of God. ^D For he who is puffed up

^A and arrogant in these matters, is neither serving God nor pleasing to Him. "And approved by men." Not only this, but men will admire you, seeing that you have peace and joy for the sake of justice; furthermore, you will eat flesh without discrimination.

XIV, 19-21. "Therefore let us pursue the things that make for peace, and for the edification of one another." Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. All things indeed are pure, but it is evil for the man who eats with offense. It is good not to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor anything by which your brother stumbles, or is offended, or is weakened.

Since these things are agreed upon, he says, and it has been shown ^B that this peace is good, let us practice these things by which the edification of all will come about. "Not for the sake of food." Not only, he says, do you not edify, but while you are always accusing him who has faith, you dissolve it, making them more contentious and utterly drawing them away from the faith. "The work of God." God, he says, built up through His passion, but you for the sake of food destroy His building. He calls the salvation of men the work of God. "All things are pure." By a great correction directed at those who had a sound judgment, he confirms the weak regarding the observation of food, and from henceforth he changes his speech toward them. All things are indeed pure, he says, but it is evil for the man who eats with an evil conscience. "By which he stumbles." ^C For if you are forced to eat, he says, you are not helped at all; for you have eaten with discernment. For eating does not make you pure, but rather clean intention with which you eat. "It is good not to eat flesh." Here he not only counsels the faithful one not to goad the weak one severely, but also that he should lower himself and yield to him, and not eat flesh, nor drink wine, nor do whatever else is required for the salvation of the brother. For he has a very great occasion for condescension toward the infirmity. "Nor anything by which your brother stumbles." See how he speaks to the believer about the one of little faith, in what matter he stumbles, which is a trait of the blind. And he is offended, which is a trait of those easily scandalized. He is weakened, which is a trait of those of little faith. ^D

XIV, 22-23. "You have faith; have it to yourself. Blessed is he who does not condemn himself in what he approves. But he who doubts if he eats, is condemned, because he does not eat from faith. And whatever is not from faith is sin."

He says "faith" here, referring to the matters in question—such as food—just as he said [elsewhere] about dogmas, [that it is] in the manifest [acknowledgment] that it is beneficial to all. "For everyone," he says, "who confesses Me before men," and so on. Here, furthermore, he insinuates that he who is puffed up and brings himself forward, saying, "Why do you boast of your virtue?" It is God who is the work. "Blessed is he, he says,"

who does not judge himself in what he approves." That is to say, in whatever matter he may approve of as being one way or another, such as eating this or not eating that. And how shall this be? From a pure conscience. For since he said, "Have faith before yourself," he says that even if everyone reproaches you for doing something ^B by way of dispensation, or for the sake of the salvation of your brother, if your own conscience does not condemn you, you are blessed. From these things he strikes at the weak one. For if the crown and happiness of the faithful is from the conscience, then clearly the condemnation is also. Do not then eat with "di-distinction"—that is to say, in a state of doubt—out of necessity. "He who does not judge himself." [ΦΩΤ.] He resolves the objection. What then, he says, if for the sake of the weak person I do not eat? Am I not compared to him? Do I not become like him? To this he says, almost, "God forbid!" For your faith remains pure and unadulterated before God. Then, why do I say that you receive no harm from this, and that your faith remains before God? You also procure for yourself a state of blessedness if, for the sake of the utility and salvation of your brother, you do not eat. "Blessed," he says, "is he who does not judge himself in what he approves," that is to say, he who has his conscience testifying to him. Not only in this, in which he abstains from foods for the sake of the salvation of his brother, but also generally in every matter which, after careful examination, he discerns to be good, and then acts upon it, having a conscience that testifies to him. ^C Such a one is blessed; so far is he from receiving any harm on account of this. "But he who doubts." This is again directed at the one who is healthy in faith. For why do you force him to eat, who is not yet firmly established? Do you not know that he who doubts, if he eats, is condemned? Because he does not eat from faith, but from necessity or out of shame; for he did not believe it to be pure, and yet he ate it. Why then do you become a cause of condemnation to him, forcing him to eat while he is being offended? Then at last, by a definite statement, he says that everything that one does not from faith, is sin. ^D XVI, 25-27. "Now to Him who is able to strengthen you according to my Gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, kept secret for eternal times, but now made manifest, and by prophetic Scriptures, according to the commandment of the eternal God, for the obedience of faith to all nations, to the only wise God through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory forever. Amen."

The hyperbaton is: "Now to Him who is able to strengthen you, glory forever. Amen." — "To strengthen you." He prays next for the weak. For they had need of prayer rather than counsel. By saying "strengthen," he signifies that they were wavering. Then he introduces the mode of strengthening. "According to my Gospel." He says that they should live in such a way as the Gospel dictates. — And otherwise. [OEKUM.] After the admonition, he is accustomed

^A always to pray, which he also does here, praying for the more imperfect: not only instructing by word, but also bringing help from God. The sequence of the coordination is such: "Now to Him who is able to strengthen you through Jesus Christ, [be] glory unto the ages. Amen." The article *ᾧ* (to whom), indeed, he puts superfluously, assumed because there was need of repetition. To Him who is able to strengthen you, the imperfect and the vacillating. How? "According to my Gospel." This is, that you should adhere to those things which I teach. Furthermore, "My Gospel" and "the preaching of Christ" are one and the same. For our dogmas are not ours, but His laws. "According to the revelation of the mystery." A sign of the greatest honor, that we have been made participants in the mystery: the matter being once defined, but now appearing through the prophetic Scriptures.

^B Why therefore do you fear, you weak person, lest by eating swine's flesh you might depart from the Law? Behold, for all the Scriptures preach this mystery, which introduces the indifference of foods, and [which is] according to the commandment of the eternal God. Therefore, it is not fitting to resist God, but to believe and to obey: for faith needs not curiosity, but obedience. Moreover, all the nations believe in this way; for it was made known to all. How then do you yourself still serve the Law? "To the only wise God," he said, for the sake of distinction from [the] angels and from us, or from the falsely named gods, not [from] the Son or the Holy Spirit. Far be it! For the Son is the wisdom of the Father. To Him, therefore, be glory, who made the mystery manifest, not to the law to which you still adhere, observing foods. That which he adds, moreover, "through Jesus Christ," can, as was said above, be joined to the preceding: "To Him who is able to strengthen you through Jesus Christ." For He Himself manifested the mystery to the nations, who sent out the disciples to teach all nations. The article *ᾧ*, that is, "to whom," is superfluous. "And the preaching of Jesus Christ." What then is the preaching of Jesus? "That they may know Thee," he says, "and Him whom Thou didst send, Jesus Christ." — "He who has seen Me, has seen the Father." — "I and the Father are one." And ^C as Peter says, that He is the Son of the living God. And that the Son has all judgment. And, "Go, teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit," and the like. "And the preaching of Jesus Christ." Who then is this Jesus Christ? He who from the beginning was indeed with the Father, but now has been manifested. And in what manner has He been manifested? By the mystery, he says, being revealed; for in eternal times it was silent; it was known only to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit: but now, the mystery having been revealed, Christ has been manifested to all the nations, [the fact] that He is the Son of God and God of the same substance. But how was He manifested? Through the prophets, through their Scriptures. And from whence did they speak and write? By the commanding and inspiring of the most holy Spirit: for this eternal God

he calls, that is, one who is not subject to time. What then is the work of the prophetic Scriptures, which they spoke through the Spirit? To make Christ known to all nations. How? By their obeying the faith, through those who announced it to them: of which task, the course of Paul and the Gospel accomplished the greatest part.

You have, therefore, here also the Trinity joined together. Through the words "to the wise God," you have the Father; through the words "Jesus Christ," it is evident you have the Son; and through the words "by the commandment of the eternal God," you have the holy Spirit who inspired the prophets. And observe the keen-sightedness of Paul’s sublime and truly heaven-bound mind. Since it is entirely clear to anyone that the Spirit is wise, but the fact that He is eternal is subject to the objections of many, he shifted these terms; and that which ^B some might have opposed, had not Paul cried it out, he places upon the Spirit, calling Him the eternal God. But that which was easy to grasp—so that, even if it were not testified of Him specifically, they might nevertheless conceive it of the Spirit—this he places upon the Father, calling Him wise, fearing nothing from this. For he did not fear that anyone would deprive the Spirit of His wisdom, or the Father of His eternity, and the same applies to the Son. The words "at times eternal" and "having been manifested" proclaim the eternity of the Son, taking care in advance regarding that over which some were going to stumble. Just as, therefore, when the Son and the Spirit are said to be eternal, the sequence of thought permits us to understand the Father also as eternal, so too, when the Father is said to be wise, the Son and the Spirit may deservedly be understood to possess an ineffable and divine wisdom; and neither can the eternity be taken away from the Father, nor can the Son or the Spirit be deprived of wisdom.

And the fact that the divine Paul, speaking here of the Father, joins the word "only" to the word "wise," was truly the work of the Spirit and of the mind which was granted to Paul by the Spirit. For he placed the word "only" in that passage in which it is ^C beyond doubt for everyone, even for those who are most contentious, that the Son and the Spirit are not deprived of it. Why did he do this? So that even in whatever other divine concepts and names you hear the word "only" attached, you might not understand the expression as a distinction of the Son and of the Spirit, but rather as a distinction from all other things, and as a union and connection of the monarchical Trinity. For he who clearly suggests that we should think this here, commands us to hold the same assumption regarding similar passages. Have you heard the Father called wise? Also concurrently understand the Son and the Spirit to be wise. Have I called the Son or the Spirit eternal? Understand the Father for me in the same way. Have I called the Father King, powerful, of great authority? So also must the Son and the Spirit be glorified. I said "only" well, so that I might reserve ^D the preeminent quality for the singular Trinity, not so that, by dividing it, I might strip it of its dignity. When I add "only," I separate all other things, but through the word "only" I rather unite the Trinity, not dividing that which is in its natural form indivisible, but binding together the unity in the minds of the hearers. "And the preaching of Jesus Christ." Christ Himself preached these things, he says; therefore, the laws are not of men

of the Gospel, but of Christ himself. He shows the credibility of them ^A both from the preaching and from the name. For it is called Gospel. But what is the preaching of Christ? Christ himself. "According to the revelation of the mystery." That which was given, he says, according to the revelation of the mystery. Which one? That which was kept silent indeed in the preceding eternal times, which is to many, but now has been manifested. Note that it is a gift of great honor, not only from Christ who preached it, and from its being called Gospel, but also from its having been manifested to us now as a free gift, even though it was pre-eternal. For the Son was from the beginning, but has now been known, having been unknown before. "And through the prophetic Scriptures." And how, he says, was it manifested? "Through the prophetic Scriptures," as the Father ordered it to be. In this way he urges the unbeliever to faith. For why do you fear to believe in him sincerely? The prophets spoke, God commanded it. "To the obedience of faith." For faith has need of obedience, so that no one may curiously investigate why it was manifested now, and why it was silenced long ago. "To all the nations." Do not fear, he says, not you alone believe, but also the whole inhabited world. "To the only wise God." By way of distinction from the falsely named gods, not of Christ, or of the Spirit — may it never be! "Through Jesus Christ." Having been made known among the nations through Jesus Christ, as he who also preached. Finally, by way of interpolation: "To the only wise God be glory." — Or thus: [OECUM.] "To him who is able to strengthen you, to the only wise God." And how to strengthen? "Through Jesus Christ, to whom is glory, he says, unto the ages. Amen." — "To whom be the glory." That, "to whom," is redundant. [PHOT.] That, "to whom be the glory," is to be understood of all three, as, "To him who is able to strengthen you, to the only wise God," and as, "According to the commandment of the eternal God," and as, "Through Jesus Christ." For the Trinity being revealed through these, he brought the glory to the Trinity.

CHAPTER XIX. On the imitation of Christ's patience.

^A And not to please ourselves, but "to our neighbor for the sake of ^B condescension." Is he mighty and faithful? Let the weak learn by experience of you through condescension. For it is necessary for each of us to please our neighbor; but since it happens that one can please even in evil, he added, "For good to edification." For by doing this, you will edify him and correct him. "For even Christ did not please himself." If, he says, Christ had wished to look to his own interest, he would not have suffered. For it was allowed to him not to be insulted, but he did not please himself, nor did he take thought for his own, but for our benefit. ^C — Otherwise. [OF JOHN.] It was allowed to him not to be insulted, not to suffer that which he suffered, had he looked to his own interest. But having looked to ours, he disregarded his own, and was insulted, and received an evil reputation among many. "But as it is written." There is nothing, he says, that has happened as a novelty, but they who in the Old Law cast reproaches and insulted you, O God the Father, these also came against your Son. "For whatever was written," and so forth, these things, he says, were written for our instruction, that we might imitate and endure. "That through patience." That, he says, comforted by the Scriptures, and strengthened by the patience written therein, we might remain in the hope of God. For patience is the producer of hope; and hope, in turn, of patience. ^D "Now the God of patience and of encouragement grant you to think the same thing among one another according to Jesus Christ, that with one accord you may with one mouth glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore receive one another, just as Christ also received us, to the glory of God. Now I say that Christ Jesus has become a minister of the circumcision, for the sake of the truth of God to confirm the promises made to the fathers." He shows that along with the Scriptures and the instruction and encouragement from them, there is also need of prayers to draw the help of God. "Grant you to think the same thing." He prays for mutual love for them, but since it is possible for love to exist even in evil, distinguishing this from that, he adds: "According to Jesus Christ, that with one accord." But what is the benefit of having love and of thinking the same thing with one another? The cause, he says, becomes this, that all with one accord and with one soul might glorify God. ^A "Therefore receive one another." Since these things are so, he says, "Receive one another," that is, be reconciled to one another among yourselves. And again he brings forward Christ as an example. But by doing this, you will glorify God through mutual love. "To the glory of God." It is a hyperbaton: "Receive one another to the glory of God." — "Now I say that Christ Jesus," and so forth. He reproves those who were still clinging to Judaism, and says: Christ coming cooperated with the Father, so that the promises given by Him to those around Abraham might reach their end. He cooperated by fulfilling the entire Law, and being circumcised. For this is what he calls "having become a minister—"

^A of circumcision—so that by this, too, He might confirm and fulfill the Law. "I say, for Christ Jesus," and so forth. — [PHOT.] For instance: How did Christ take you to Himself? In this way, he says: "The Jews, having been circumcised and having appeared in the flesh from their seed, by which He also cooperated with the Father to show His words to be true and to fulfill the promises."

For lest anyone say, "And what need was there for the Jews to be taken, who had long since been made familiar to the Father and were awaiting promises, which it was impossible not to see come to pass, since He who promised is entirely truthful?" he says these things: that even if the Jews had been taken, and even if they had received promises, if the Son, having been incarnate and circumcised, had not taken them to Himself, they would neither have been deemed worthy of the promises, having made themselves transgressors of the commandments, nor would the Father's oracle regarding the truth—immutable and ^B unknowing of repentance—have resulted in their benefit, since by their transgression they had placed an impediment so that it could not come to pass. Therefore, having taken them to Himself and been circumcised, He both cooperated with the Father's truth and helped the promises to be brought to an end and confirmed. But the Jews, in this way and for these reasons; but the nations, he says, why did He take them? For the sake of ineffable mercy, and so that the Father might be glorified the more. For if the fulfilling of the promises, and that the Father not be thought by some to have lied, contributes to His glory, how will it not contribute to the Father's immense glory to have promised nothing and given no pledges, but thus suddenly to have bestowed supernatural and unhoped-for good things? — OTHERWISE [BY THE SAME.] Christ alone fulfilled the Law, having set right all the commandments. But He was also a Jew ^C according to the flesh. For this is also signified by the circumcision. And those who were adopted by Him were multiplied like the stars of the heaven, and like the sand which is at the lip of the sea. So that He also cooperated with the Father toward the truth being established, and toward the promises to Abraham being fully fulfilled, having accomplished every commandment, and having been reckoned as the offspring of Abraham, and having filled the entire inhabited world through the believers. "Having become a minister of circumcision." One can also understand it this way: Christ became a minister of the Jews, that is to say, so that the Jews might come within the promises, so that the Father who promised these things might also be truthful. "To confirm the promises of the fathers." For the sake of the Father who promised being truthful, he says. But the Law was not able to confirm them. How, then, he says, is it not absurd to disregard Christ, the one who confirmed our promises which the fathers received, and to cling to the Law which was not able to preserve the promises for us? ^D

XV, 9-12. "But that the nations might glorify God for His mercy, as it is written: 'For this reason I will confess to You among the nations, and I will sing to Your name.'" And again he says, "Rejoice, O nations, with His people—"

^A And again, "Praise the Lord, all you nations, and praise Him, all you peoples." And again Isaiah says: "There shall be a root of Jesse, and He who shall arise to rule over the nations; in Him the nations shall hope."

The Jews, indeed, had at least received promises, although they had received no utility from them, unless Christ had confirmed them. "But you," he says, "O nations, ought to praise God for His benevolence alone, since you possessed no promises, but obtained mercy, with grace accomplishing the whole matter." Insofar, therefore, as you have obtained mercy through the grace of Christ, you are all the more debtors to God, so as to bear with those who, from among the Jews, are of little faith. For this is the glory of God: your concord and peace. For he is discoursing with those of the nations who were faithful, who were most insistent regarding the observance of foods. ^B [JOHN: on the whole passage, from the part: "Now I say that Christ Jesus..."] The promise had been made to Abraham, saying: "To you I will give the land," and, "In your seed shall all the nations be blessed." But after these things, all who were of the seed of Abraham became subject to punishment; for the law, when transgressed, worked wrath for them, and furthermore deprived them of that promise made to the Fathers.

Therefore, the Son coming forward cooperates with the Father so as to render those promises true. For by fulfilling the whole law, in which there was also circumcision, and by this path and through the cross, He liberated those who were under the transgression, and did not permit the promise to perish. When, therefore, he says "a minister of the circumcision," he says this: that when He had come and fulfilled the entire law, and had been circumcised and became the seed of Abraham, He dissolved the legal curse, appeased the wrath of God, and finally rendered those who were to receive the promise fit. ^C Lest, therefore, those who are accused should say: "How then was Christ circumcised, and why did He keep the whole law, if He on the contrary overturns it?" he says: For He did not do this in order that the law should remain, but in order that He might dissolve it, and liberate them from its curse. Then, lest those who were from the nations should turn this into arrogance, he says: "That the nations might glorify God for His mercy." But what he says is such: The Jews, indeed, had at least received promises; but you had not even that, but were saved by benevolence alone, although not even they would have had anything more eminent from the promise, had Christ not come. But the glory of God is that they are joined, that they bless Him unanimously, that they bear with the weaker. "For this reason I will confess to You among the nations." He brings forward the testimony, showing that the Jews ought to be joined to the nations. ^D *Another way.* But that, "I will confess to You among the nations, O Lord," is said in the person of Christ: that is, I will proclaim You, O Father, among the nations. "And He who shall arise to rule over the nations." The "and" is superfluous, so that it may be: "There shall be the root of Jesse—"

Gentibus. » The conjunction *and*, that is to say *and*, is superfluously inserted so that the sense may be: «There shall be a root of Jesse.» What is that? «Which shall rise,» he says, «to rule over the Gentiles,» that is, Christ. ^A

XV, 13, 14. «Now the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, that ye may abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost. And I myself also am persuaded of you, my brethren, that ye also are full of goodness, filled with all knowledge, able also to admonish one another.»

Again he comes to prayer, and says: God will deliver you from the fighting among yourselves, and from all the distress which arises from it. «The God of hope.» God, he says, is the God of our hope. ^B

Therefore I pray well for you. For I hope that the prayer will be effective, if you yourselves only wish it. In believing, however, that you may be filled with joy and peace, which is according to your reasonings (which I pray for you), you may also be abounding in hope, that is, being made rich and being abundantly affected. These things, moreover, take place through the grace and power of the most holy Spirit. — In another way: He prays for them that they may be filled with all joy; those who were from the Jews (for these were dejected, being confounded), and with peace, those who were from the Gentiles. For these seemed to have hostile feelings toward those who still adhered to the Law; but rather, let both be filled. «In believing.» For this is to be brought by us, namely, faith. From this indeed shall come to us the cause of all good things: hope toward God. Which he prays for with exceeding intensity. For he says, «That ye may abound,» which will not happen in any other way, unless by the power of the Spirit. He, therefore, who has the Spirit, has all things. «And I myself am persuaded.» I have no need, he says, to learn from others, but I have been made certain. ^C «Ye are full of goodness.» He calls goodness the perfect virtue. But «full,» indeed, is an intensive term. «Filled with all knowledge.» For what is it if someone loves his brethren, but is not able to use love to the purpose? For this reason he says: «With all knowledge.» «Able also to admonish one another.» Not only do you not need admonition, he says, but you even teach others.

CAPUT XX. Concerning his ministry of Paul in the regions of the East and West.

XV, 15, 16. «Nevertheless, brethren, I have written the more boldly unto you in some sort, as putting you in mind, because of the grace that is given to me of God, that I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the Gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.»

«More boldly in some sort.» That is, in a certain manner, and if someone does not see the whole sentiment, but examines the very words in part more curiously without understanding. If, therefore, he considers it in part, it will surely appear to him that I have shown myself harsher and rougher to you through these letters; but I, as one reminding you, have written.

^A And again, I had a necessity to write, because grace was given to me by God for preaching and teaching the Gentiles. For I am a minister of Christ, as it were a servant and attendant. And what do you perform? I minister, he says, his Gospel; that is, I offer this sacrifice to him, namely, his Gospel. And how is it possible to immolate and sacrifice the Gospel? By offering to him, he says, the Gentiles who believe through it, and that they may become acceptable and sanctified in the Holy Spirit. So he who leads them to the faith, performs the duty of the Gospel of God. Or the term "performing the sacrifice" should be understood more simply, as, working in a holy and diligent manner, and not as if by chance and negligently. ^B Therefore, either in this way, or rather in this way it should be taken: I have written to you somewhat more boldly in part, and as one reminding you as I wrote. For the necessity pressing upon me demands that I write both more vehemently and more accurately. But I have dared even to abate from that accuracy, and not to write as a teacher, but with much forbearance, and as one reminding you, although I ought to have written both more accurately and more vehemently. For to this end I have been set forward by grace, and for this I have been ordained to minister and serve; so that if anyone were to say: Perhaps in what I wrote I have touched upon you, and have seemed to some of you to have behaved more harshly toward you. But I am so far from doing this, that I even fear lest, having written with such forbearance and reticence, I should have to account for it, as having dared to perform a work less than the duty of a teacher requires. For I ought to have written greater and more things, as one who has been entrusted to teach; but now, as if doing something too boldly, by so much forbearance and so humbling myself, I have written. ^C In another way. The Romans were established in dignity, and they were puffed up in a wonderful way; therefore he conciliated them, saying that he had been bold: for this word breaks them greatly. Nor is this enough, but he added: "In part," that is, gently and briefly, and not as if teaching, but as reminding. "Brethren." For it was necessary to soothe those who had been more sharply rebuked. "As reminding." Gently, he says, how? As if by calling to memory admonishing, that is, reminding them a little. Such significance of the terms prevents them from appearing to be admonished in their entirety. Whence he does not say Teaching, but "Reminding," or calling to memory. ^D "Because of the grace which has been given to me by God." It is not my labor, he says, but it is the grace of God. And he shows that he would not have dared even to admonish, had not the Gentiles been entrusted to him; he uses much modesty. "Ministering the Gospel of God." Therefore it was just that I should be heard by you also. "Acceptable." Since, therefore, this duty and sacred ministry has been entrusted to me, it is my endeavor to bring the counsel of God into effect; and that is, that your offering may become acceptable. — And in another way. It is not that I might be glorified that I wrote even to you, but that you too, along with the other Gentiles, might be saved, and thus the offering of the Gentiles might become in its entirety acceptable. "In the Holy Spirit." But how shall you be acceptable and sanctified? If, he says, you have the Spirit. But how this...

will he approach? By an unblamable life. Those, therefore, who do not live rightly repel the Holy Spirit from themselves.

XV, 17-19. "I have therefore my boasting in Christ Jesus in the things which pertain to God. For I will not dare to speak of any of those things which Christ has not wrought through me, for the obedience of the Gentiles, by word and deed, through the power of signs and wonders, in the power of the Spirit of God: so that from Jerusalem and the surrounding regions even unto Illyricum, I have fulfilled the Gospel of Christ." ^A

I boast, then, not in myself, nor in my own zeal, but in Christ, in those things which pertain and return to the Father. Faith, therefore, in Christ pertains to the Father. At first, indeed, he used modesty, saying: "I have written more boldly," but now he raises himself up, yet in Christ Jesus. — Another way. ^B What then? Has the offering of the Gentiles been entrusted to you? Yes, he says. And I can boast in those things which I have wrought among them. But my boasting is not in me—that is, not in my strength or my power—but in Christ Jesus. For if I say anything or boast, I will dare to say nothing else than those things which Christ has wrought through me so that the Gentiles might obey and believe. What, therefore, did He work? He gave the word for preaching; He supplied signs and wonders for doing good and for persuading. Finally, He so increased and extended and established the faith preached through me that from Jerusalem, from which it first brought forth its shoot, and the surrounding regions even unto Illyricum, the preaching has struck roots and taken hold and filled such great lands of men. And so I have well written to you also and suggested to you regarding those things which were done among them, daring also to admonish you together with the Spirit regarding those things which are proposed and promised to you according to power and liberty. "For I will not dare to speak anything." After he said, "I have boasting," he adds that these things spoken are not of verbal arrogance; for, he says, I do not dare to speak anything of those things which have not been entrusted to me by Christ for the sacred administration of the Gentiles, and [I do not say] that the Gentiles might obey me, but rather the operations of signs and the demonstrations of wonders have been given to me. For now he lifts himself up, because in what preceded he had vehemently depressed himself, saying: "I have written more boldly to you," lest the speech of a base man should become rejected. ^C "Of those things which Christ has not wrought through me." He shows that nothing was his own, but everything was Christ's. "In the power of the Spirit of God." He speaks of the dignity of the Holy Spirit, saying: I have done these things—whether wonders or signs—by His power. "So that from Jerusalem and surrounding regions." Furthermore, the proof of these things that were said is the multitude of disciples. For this reason he said, "surrounding," so that you would not consider the straight road, but all the regions situated in the circuit. He did not say, "I have preached," but what was greater: "I have fulfilled." Illyricum, moreover, is the final part of that which is now called Bulgaria. ^D

^A Since he was so ambitious to preach the Gospel where Christ had not been named, so that he might not build upon another man's foundation, but as it is written: "They to whom it was not told concerning him shall see, and they that have not heard shall understand." For this reason also I was hindered many times from coming to you. But now, having no longer a place in these regions, and having had a longing to come to you for many years; whenever I go to Spain, I will come to you. For I hope that by passing through I will see you, and be sent on my way there by you, if first I be filled in part with you.

It was an ambition, he says, or rather a glory for me, to preach the Gospel where Christ had not yet been named. Why is this? So that, he says, I might not build upon another man's foundation. "Where Christ was not named." Not as though he despised the fellowship of the other apostles, but because he judged it contentious and unjust to steal away the glory due to the works of others. "Lest I should build upon another man's foundation." He calls the teaching of other preachers an alien foundation. "Alien," however, not because of any difference in the preaching, but according to the manner of reward and labor. ^B "But as it is written." He shows that by doing this, he was also fulfilling a prophecy. "Wherefore also I was hindered many times." He now provides the reason for what he had said at the beginning: "Many times I purposed to come unto you." For, he says, the instruction of the Gentiles hindered me. "Many times," that is, often. "Having no longer place." Do you see that he did not write this out of an appetite for their glory? Nor, as one might say, was he flattering them as if they were his masters. For he says almost exactly this: "Since I have finished the work and have nothing left to do, I wish to come to you."

"But I have a longing." Lest he seem to disparage them by writing, "Since I have nothing to do, I am coming to you," he adds, "Having a longing for many years," and I am eager to fulfill this desire. "Wherever I go to Spain." Lest it again be thought that he said "I have a longing for many years" as a form of flattery, he corrects the statement, saying that he wishes to come for this reason above all, so that he might travel to Spain. "For I hope to see you on my journey, and to be brought on my way by you." Then, lest they say, "You are making us a mere byproduct of your journey," he adds, "and to be brought on my way by you," so that he might again show his love. ^C But since this was not sufficient, he adds, "I be filled," which was the language of a father rather than a teacher. "I be filled in part." That is, in part. For no time, he says, can perfectly fill me with your love, nor induce in me a surfeit of your company, but it is enough for me if I be filled even in part.

"But now I am going to Jerusalem, ministering to the saints. For it has pleased Macedonia and Achaia to make a certain contribution for the poor among the saints who are in Jerusalem. It has pleased them indeed, and they are their debtors. For if they have shared in their spiritual things, the Gentiles owe ^D it also to serve them in fleshly things."

^A Since I have finished this, therefore, and have sealed to them this fruit, I will set out by way of you for Spain. I know, however, that when I come to you, I will come in the fullness of the blessing of the Gospel of Christ.

Since he had said, "Having no longer a place in these regions, I am coming to you," but was still intending to delay, lest they think they were being mocked, he states the reason for the delay that still held him: "Ministering to the saints." If Paul is a minister, grasp the magnitude of the matter. "For Macedonia and Achaia were pleased." He wishes not only to state the reason for the delay that still held him, but also to exhort them in like manner to others to send to those in Jerusalem. For this is what he wishes to signify to him, along with those who are sending. "They were pleased," that is, they took counsel. Those in Macedonia and likewise those in Achaia willed to perform an alms-deed. ^B "Some communion." He calls the alms-deed a communion, as though they themselves were sending money, while the saints were contributing in return their confidence toward God. "For the poor among the saints." The necessity of the distribution was twofold, both on account of poverty and on account of virtue. "And they are their debtors." Why, then, did they resolve to do this? They know, he says, that they are obligated to this.

Therefore, they do not send out of alms, but out of debt. "For if they have shared in their spiritual things." Subsequently, he says how they are their debtors: for their sake, he says, Christ especially came. For his discourse is concerning the believers from the circumcision, and theirs were the goods and the promises. Just as, therefore, the Gentiles shared in their spiritual things, so it is necessary that they also serve them in fleshly things. He no longer says "to share," but "to serve," placing them in the order of ministers who pay tribute to the saints as to kings. "And having sealed to them." As if it were about to be deposited in an asylum and a safe place (for he says he was about to deposit it in the heavens), and ^C sealed it. "This fruit." He calls the alms-deed fruit, showing that he who gives gains all the more. "For Spain." He mentions Spain again, showing the affection he has toward the Spaniards. "In the fullness," and so forth. That is, I know that when I come to you, I shall find you abounding in goods. For the phrase, "In the fullness of the blessing of the Gospel," signifies that they themselves possess all goods within them. So it is. [OECUMENIUS.] I know that when I come, I shall come to fulfill you with the blessing that is from the Gospel, because I shall urge you toward virtue and faith.

"I beseech you, brethren, by the Lord of us, Jesus Christ, and by the love of the Spirit, to strive together with me in prayers for me to God, that I may be delivered from those who do not believe in Judea, and that my ministry ^D which is for Jerusalem may be acceptable to the saints, so that in..."

^A joy I may come to you through the will of God, and be refreshed together with you. Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen."

As if he were not sufficiently qualified to persuade, he says, "I beseech you through Christ, and through the Holy Spirit." Observe that he has mentioned the Son and the Spirit, but no longer also the Father. This is said so that, whenever he mentions only the Father and the Son, you might not be troubled as to why he did not also mention the Spirit; for he speaks of the Holy Trinity in various ways. "That you strive together with me." He uses the greatest humility, in that he says he has need of their prayer. "That I may be delivered." He did not say, "That I may engage in conflict and overcome them," but "That I may be delivered," fulfilling the divine law which says: "Watch that you do not enter into temptation." "From those who do not believe." He signifies certain wicked men, and wolves rather than human beings, who were about to lay traps for him. "May be acceptable." And that, he says, my sacrifice may be acceptable before God, and that they themselves also with readiness and thanksgiving may receive what is brought by me. "That I may come in joy." For if I be delivered, he says, from those who do not believe, and my ministry be acceptable, I shall come in joy and not in sadness. "Through the will of God." What he said from the beginning, he says now also: "If somehow at last I might find a prosperous journey through the will of God to come to you." "And be refreshed together with you." Do you see how free he is from arrogance? For he did not say, "That I may teach you," or "Instruct you," but "Be refreshed," that is: You in me through the doctrine, and I in you through the increase of faith. This is what he said at the beginning also; it means to be mutually encouraged by the faith that is in each other. "Now the God of peace be with you all." It is his custom everywhere to set a prayer after the exhortation. ^B

XVI, 1-5. "I commend to you Phoebe our sister, who is a deaconess of the Church in Cenchreae, that you may receive her in the Lord, in a manner worthy of the saints, and that you may assist her in whatever business she has need of you. For she has been a succorer of many, and of myself also. Greet Priscilla and Aquila my fellow-workers in Christ, who for my life have laid down their own necks: to whom not only I give thanks, but also all the Churches of the Gentiles, and the church at their home."

Observe by how many titles he honors her. Since she was the one bearing the epistle, he commends her to them. He honors her by being the first to remember her, and by calling her "sister." And what is equal to being Paul's sister? "Receive her in the Lord." Either because of the Lord, or according to the Lord. "And in a manner worthy of the saints." In the way, he says, that it is proper to receive the saints. He has given a double occasion for caring for her: both that they should receive her for the Lord's sake, and that she herself is a saint. ^{C D}

^A “And assist her.” Do you see how far he goes to avoid being troublesome? He did not say, “Deliver her from the evils hanging over her,” but, “Assist her,” which is to say, “As far as lies within you, be kind and extend a hand.” “She has been a helper of many.” Great is the praise, and sufficient to urge them on. “And of me myself.” He has placed the greatest recommendation last, for truly blessed is the woman who was able to refresh the holy soul of Paul. “Of me myself,” that is, of the Apostle, the herald, the teacher of the inhabited world. “Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my fellow-workers.” They helped, he says, in teaching, in temptations, in dangers. This is of great praise. Some, however, have understood these fellow-workers to be such because they were themselves also tentmakers. “But also all the Churches of the Gentiles.” Either because of the teaching, or because of the contribution of ^B wealth to them. “And the Church in their house.” So approved were they, that they also made their house a church. Or it is said because all their household were faithful, so that the house itself was a church.

Greet Epaenetus my beloved, who is the firstfruits of Achaia unto Christ. Greet Mary, who toiled much for us. Greet Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen and my fellow captives, who are notable among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me. Greet Amplias my beloved in the Lord. Greet Urbanus our helper in Christ, and Stachys my beloved. Greet Apelles the approved in Christ. Greet those who are of the house of Aristobulus. Greet Herodion my kinsman. Greet those who are of the house of Narcissus, who are in the Lord. Greet Tryphaena and Tryphosa, who toil in the Lord. Greet Persis the beloved, who toiled much in the Lord. Greet Rufus the elect in the Lord, and his mother and mine. Greet Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermas, Patrobas, Hermes, and the brothers who are with them. ^C Greet Philologus and Julia, and Nereus and his sister, and Olympas, and all the saints who are with them. Greet one another with a holy kiss. The Churches of Christ greet you.

It is a great thing to be a beloved of Paul, who was accustomed to love by judgment and not for favor. He calls him “firstfruits,” either because he was the first to believe, or because he displayed greater piety than all the rest. And so that you might not think that this firstfruits was in worldly matters, he adds, “unto Christ.” “Toiled much.” He shows that besides teaching, she also labored for them in other ways. “For us.” Not only, he says, did she toil for herself, so that she might be saved, but also for us, fulfilling the office of an apostle and an evangelist. How then did he say, “I do not permit a woman to teach”? By restraining her from the public and common presidency, and from the teacher’s platform, not from the teaching of the word. “And my fellow captives.” The recommendation is ^D greater

for they suffered more bitter things than other captives, namely by enduring persecution and being affected by contumely and injury. “Insignes.” It is a great thing indeed to be apostles, but to be ^B distinguished among them is the greatest. “Who also were before me.” Behold the holy soul; he is not ashamed to say that “these believed in Christ before me.” “Our co-worker in Christ.” Great is the praise, Urban our co-worker. This is greater, that he worked with him in the teaching. “Apelles the approved,” as one irreprehensible. “Those from the household of Aristobulus.” Perhaps they were not like the first ones, and for that reason he did not mention them by name. “Who are in the Lord.” The praise is equal for all, because they were in the Lord, that is, they were faithful. “Who work in the Lord.” Concerning Mary he said above: “Who labored much.” Of these, however, he now says that they still labor; therefore the praise is greater. “Persis the beloved.” She was greater than Tryphaena and Tryphosa, both because she was beloved and because she labored much. “And his mother and mine.” A double good: that the son was without blame, and that the mother cultivated virtue. This is indeed what he signifies by adding: “And mine.” “And the brothers who are with them.” It was also a great thing for these to be brothers of Paul. “Philologus and Julia.” Philologus, whom they say was the first bishop of Sinope under Andrew. “And all the saints who are with them.” But if they are saints, their praise is not small. “Greet one another.” He now places them all together, so that no sadness might arise for those not mentioned by name. “With a holy kiss.” For it happens even with a kiss that is not holy. “They greet you.” No longer this one or that one, but he united them in common, saying “You.” ^C

XVI, 17-20. “Now I beseech you, brethren, note those who cause dissensions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which you learned, and turn away from them. For those who are such do not serve our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by smooth words and flattering speech deceive the hearts of the simple. For your obedience has become known to all. I am glad therefore on your behalf; but I want you to be wise in what is good, and simple toward what is evil. And the God of peace will crush Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.”

A new type of counsel. For he puts on the persona of a suppliant, and calls them brothers with much honor. “Note those who cause dissensions.” Search, he says, and learn thoroughly. He shows, however, their deceit and that they do not openly show themselves to be wicked. And it is for the greatest subversion of the Church that they are divided from one another. “And offenses.” For after dissension, a path is opened for offenses. But he interprets what offenses are: Sects, he says, introduced contrary to our doctrine. “But their own belly.” For all sects and offenses come from this, that men follow their passions and their belly. Therefore he says that ^D

^A such people do not serve Christ, but their own belly. And it seems he is hinting at the Jews. For all accuse the Jews as being devoted to the belly. “By smooth speech.” By word only, he says, they comply, but their mind is crafty toward you. And he calls this a common method of deception, that they first flatter them. “The hearts of the innocent.” He did not say, “yours,” but “of the innocent.” And that they are deceiving not you, but the innocent, is manifest from this, that your obedience and persuasion reached everyone. He sets up many witnesses for them, so that they might not be shameless regarding their evil teaching. “I rejoice therefore over you.” To those not deceived, he says, “wise indeed to be unto the good.” He hints that there were some from among them who were deceived. For I wish, he says, for you to be prudent in what is good, but inexperienced in evil. — [SEVERIAN.] That is, to be wise so as not to be wronged by others, but sincere so as not to plot against others. “But the God of peace.” Since there were dissensions, he invokes the giver of peace, that he might stop the offenses. “Will crush.” Which is much greater than just to subdue. “Satan.” Not only, he says, will he crush those who introduce offenses, but their leader, Satan himself. “Shortly,” he says. Constructing comfort from the time. “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.” He reminded them of the grace of God, which is always saving. And if, he says, he saved them when they were enemies, he will do so much more now. Do you see that we have need of grace along with works in order to be saved? For after testifying that there was obedience in them, only then did he pray for grace. ^B

XVI, 21-24. “Timothy my fellow-worker greets you, and Lucius, and Jason, and Sosipater, my kinsmen. I Tertius, who wrote the epistle, greet you in the Lord. Gaius, my host and host of the whole Church, greets you. Erastus, the treasurer of the city, greets you, and Quartus the brother. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.”

Do you see the commendation of Timothy? He was helping him in the Gospel. “And Sosipater, my kinsmen.” Kinsmen, he says, [meaning] those like him in piety. “Tertius, who wrote.” He placed it in the stead of great praise, that he was the amanuensis of Paul. “Gaius my host.” That is, the one who receives me into his home. And the praise is great, that he was able to provide hospitality to the whole Church, together with Paul, who would not have stayed with him rashly had Gaius not been entirely worthy. “Treasurer of the city.” He set down his rank, so that you might know that neither wealth nor dignity becomes an impediment to anyone for living rightly or believing. ^C “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ.” He mentions grace, reminding them of Christ’s benefits. “Be with all of you. Amen.” Thus he began with a prayer: “Grace to you and peace from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ,” and in such a fitting way he ^D

ends the discourse consistently with prayer. "The grace," he says, "of our Lord Jesus Christ." For he loves always to lay this as a foundation, and in like manner to lay it as a term. ^A

The end, with divine favor, of the Epistle to the Romans. It was written from Corinth by Phoebe, the deaconess of the Church of Cenchreae.

ARGUMENT OF THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS

^B He writes this from Ephesus in Asia, having already seen and taught them; and by this Epistle he reminds them. The occasion of the Epistle is this: the Corinthians, gathering together in contention, were divided in their opinions, and consequently there were schisms among them. And while there were schisms, they winked at him who had taken his stepmother as his wife. Others wished to abandon their own wives under the pretext of continence. Some, moreover, were eating in the temples of idols, holding the things offered to idols to be indifferent. Others, admiring those who spoke in tongues, despised the rest. Finally, they were also in error regarding the mystery of the resurrection, saying that this flesh is not raised. ^C All these things being stirred up at Corinth, the people nearby write to the Apostle; and now he writes back to each point. And first, indeed, he bears witness to their prudence and knowledge; but he does not accept those who were stirring up dissensions, rather he advises that virtue should not be considered to consist in word, but in work and power. Then, having rebuked him who had taken his stepmother, and having exhorted them not to have lawsuits and judgments among themselves, he consequently answers the things they had written; regarding marriage, teaching indeed that the union is indivisible, and that they should abstain only for a time, that they might devote themselves to prayer. But since they loved continence, he writes about virginity. "Not by necessity," he says, "but let this be done by counsel." Afterwards, concerning things offered to idols, that they should not abuse their knowledge, but conduct themselves in mutual love. He therefore prohibits the holding of banquets in the temples of idols, lest the little ones be offended. Then he writes concerning spiritual gifts, that they should not be at variance over the gifts: neither preferring the one who has this gift to him who has that. For he says all things are of the same Spirit. And finally, concerning the resurrection, he teaches that the flesh is raised, dying indeed in corruption, but rising immortal according to the grace of Christ. And he establishes the resurrection from the fact that Christ has risen. ^D

Finally, he writes exhortatory discourses on behavior, and gives instructions regarding the collection of alms for the saints, and thus concludes the Epistle.

COMMENTARY ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS

^BTHEODORET.

The demon, bearing ill that the city of Corinth, with so great a multitude of people and once given over to idolatry, should have believed in God, suborned some of the rich men and philosophers who were among them, who had appointed themselves to preside over the people in spiritual matters; so that thereafter many of the common folk attached themselves to the rich as being powerful, while they approached the philosophers as though they could teach something more excellent than the teaching of the Apostle, so that from this, dissensions and strifes were stirred up among them. They wrote, therefore, to Paul through Fortunatus, Stephanus, and Achaicus, concerning marriage and virginity, by whom he also wrote back to them, both concerning these things and concerning others, having sent Timothy along with them at the same time. Since, therefore, the rich and the philosophers, out of arrogance, had divided the people, he corrects the passion of arrogance at the very beginning.

CAPITULA OF THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS

1. That one ought not to dissent among one another on account of glory arising from human wisdom. 2. Against the unchaste and unchastity, and those who participate with them. 3. That there ought not to be lawsuits, and these before unbelievers. 4. Concerning marriage, widowhood, and celibacy. 5. Concerning the difference of foods, and abstinence from the worship of demons. 6. Concerning the order of men and women in prayers and prophecies. 7. Concerning a communion worthy of God, not for surfeiting. 8. Concerning the variety of gifts and their dispensation. 9. Concerning the universal resurrection of bodies.

FIRST EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS

PROEMIUM

^A 1, 1-3. "Paul, a called Apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Sosthenes the brother, to the Church of God which is at Corinth, sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, together with all who call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, in every place, both theirs and ours: grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ."

By the fact that he calls himself “called,” he corrects them. I myself, he says, did not constitute myself an apostle; how is it that you constitute yourselves as teachers? “Apostle of Jesus Christ.” Your teacher is Christ, he says; why have you made men your teachers? “By the will of God.” And this, so that the will of God might be preached through us, the apostles. “And Sosthenes.” For do not suppose that because I claim for myself the dignity of teaching, I am coming to purge you of the pride which is wont to arise from that. See, I join Sosthenes to myself and call him brother, and I write together with him, sharing what is mine. Why then do I oppose you? Because the pride that has arisen regarding doctrine is harmful to you. For since it profits you nothing, it also causes those who obey to wander from sound doctrine, and it divides the common body of the Church. “The brother.” Out of modesty, he joins himself to Sosthenes. “Church of God.” If you are the Church of God, how have you surrendered yourselves to men? “Sanctified in Christ.” That is, by the laver and faith of Christ, not by those who are now your teachers. “Called to be saints.” For even this very thing, that you have believed, is not your own; but you have been called to the faith by God. “Together with all who call upon.” Not only to you, Corinthians, he says, is grace and peace offered, but together with all who call upon Christ in whatever place they or you may be. Another point: Insofar as they were even divided among themselves, to that extent he strove to join them to those also who were far away; therefore, being about to wish them grace and peace from God, and having said, “Called to ^B

^A saints,” he immediately joined, “With all who call upon,” and so forth. And to you, he says, and to all, may there be grace and peace from God the Father. “Both theirs and ours.” Since, having said, “With all who call upon the name of the Lord,” he had added only, “Ours,” he is correcting himself, and showing that He is the common Lord and Master of all, he adds, “Both theirs and ours.” If He is the common Lord of all, and not just ours, but also of those who reside everywhere, why are you divided from one another, and why, by separating yourselves and acting injuriously, do you distribute the common lordship—from which you are cut off—to others? “And peace from God the Father.” What, he says, or toward whom do you have peace, or from whom do you receive grace? I, he says, desire that these things reach you from God. He is subtly rebuking their teachers. ^B

I, 4. “I give thanks to my God always for you on account of the grace of God which has been given to you in Christ Jesus, because in everything you were enriched in him, in all speech and in all knowledge, just as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you.”

“I give thanks.” Teaching us to be thankful, he adds this in every Epistle. “To my God.” With great love, he claims what is common as his own. “On account of the grace of God.” They were very puffed up about their gifts. Therefore, he hints at this meaning: If you did not receive the gift from your own good works, but by the gift of Christ, why are you puffed up? “In Christ Jesus.” Through Christ. For the Father gave through Christ. “In him.” Again, “in him,” that is, through him. If you were enriched in everything through him, and the wealth is from God, how, he says, did you attach yourselves to men? “And in all knowledge.” For there is speech without knowledge, like empty talk. There is also knowledge without speech, like that of the unlearned, who understand the thing, but are unable to express what they have conceived. But you, he says, have been enriched in both, both in speech and in knowledge. “Just as the testimony of Christ.” Just as, that is, through which. For through speech, he says, and through God-given knowledge, the testimony of Christ—that is, the preaching—was confirmed, having been entrusted to you. This happened to you not through your own natural talent or external wisdom, but through the grace of God. ^C Another reading [PHOT.]: How is it evident that you were enriched in speech and knowledge? From the fact that the preaching of the faith in Christ was confirmed in you. For the confirmation of this in you becomes a testimony of both speech and knowledge for you. “Testimony of Christ.” Either his voluntary and saving passion, and, to use a single word, the emptying and incarnation of the Word on our behalf; or the testimony of Christ is the grace and gift of signs. For these indeed are a testimony of the faith in Christ, and of his divinity and greatness. For the Corinthians were, indeed they were, wealthy in these things. Since, therefore, he says, these things are seen in you in abundance and confirmation, we have, he says, rightly said beforehand that you were enriched in every speech and all knowledge. For speech and knowledge are a part of the gifts; one is speech—in Christ, through Christ; in him, through him; just as, through which. ^D

enriched in every speech and all knowledge. For speech and knowledge are a part of the gifts; one is speech—in Christ, through Christ; in him, through him; just as, through which ^A it contributes to teaching, while knowledge contributes to understanding. And what follows: “to an interpretation.”

1, 7, 8. “So that you are not lacking in any ^A gift, waiting for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ, who will also confirm you to the end blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

It is asked in this place, since he had said before: “You have been enriched in all speech and in all knowledge,” and again now: “So that you are not lacking in any gift,” for what reason does he call them carnal in the following? “For you are still carnal,” he says, because both this and that were fitting for many. For in so great a congregation, not all could be perfect, nor again could all be imperfect or imprudent. “Waiting for the revelation.” So that you are not lacking in one gift for waiting for the revelation of Christ. For patience is necessary for waiting. Furthermore, he calls the second coming the revelation, showing that it exists even now, even if it is not seen with carnal eyes. “Who will also confirm you.” He indicates that they are wavering. But by saying “blameless,” he signifies that they are liable to blame. “In the day of the Lord.” By leading them away from human things, he terrifies them, having made mention of judgment.

1, 9. “God is faithful, by whom you were called into the communion of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.”

This is to say: true. And if he is true, he will certainly fulfill what he promised. “By whom you were called.” For no one comes to the Son unless the Father draws him. Just as no one comes to the Father unless the Son reveals him. “By whom you were called,” that is, from whom you were called, who called you. And understand how divine Paul puts “by whom” also in the case of the Father, and for what he puts it: so that when you hear the same thing about the Son, you may conceive not a change of substance, but an identity. “You were called.” For you did not come of yourselves, but by grace you were called. “Into the communion.” Amazing! What does he say? You were called into the communion, he says, of the Only-Begotten, so that we may also become his partners in the kingdom and in the glory; which he says elsewhere: “If we endure, we shall also reign together.” Called into the communion of Christ, why do you strive to tear yourselves away and cut yourselves off from that divine and salutary communion by establishing for yourselves others and yet others as preceptors and teachers?

CAPUT I

1, 10-13. “I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all say the same thing, and that there be no sects among you. But be fitted in the same mind and in the same judgment.” For it has been signified

vos, fratres, per nomen Domini nostri Jesu Christi, ut idem dicatis omnes, et non sint inter vos sectæ. Sitis autem compositi eadem mente eademque sententia. Significatum est enim ^A mihi de vobis, fratres mei, ab his qui sunt Chloës, quod contentiones sint inter vos. Hoc autem dico, quod unusquisque vestrum dicit: Ego quidem sum Pauli, ego autem Apollo, ego vero Cephæ, rursum ego Christi. Divisus est Christus I, inquit, who beseech you, am not sufficient to persuade you. Through Christ, therefore, I beseech you; that is, Christ himself, having been insulted, offers the entreaty and exhortation. ^B "And let there not be among you schisms." For the fact that you have been divided into many parts, he says, did not create many perfect parts, but rather tore asunder the perfect part, which is the Church. "Composed." That is, completed, perfect. "With the same mind." Since he had said above, "that you might say the same thing," lest they think that unanimity need only exist in words, he adds, "with the same mind," that is, be conformable in words, deeds, opinion, and thought. "For it has been told to me." Lest they deny it, he produces as witnesses those from Chloe. "My brethren." For even if the offense is manifest, he says, you are my brethren. The word "my" denotes affection. "By those of Chloe." It was a certain household so named, perhaps of some Chloe. He did not name those who reported it, so that they would not be subject to hostility. "That there are contentions." He calls the message from those who reported it "contentions," so as not to inflame them against the family of Chloe. But when he speaks of the occurrence in his own person, he calls them "schisms," that is, dissensions or factions, which is much worse than contention. "But I say this." For the sake of clarity he added, "But I say this," as if to say: For example, such are the things you do and say. They did not actually speak that way: "I am of Paul, I of Apollo," but he said it by way of example, hinting at the rich and wise men to whom they flocked; showing by this that if by saying such things they were not free from blame by claiming to be of Paul or Apollo, much more are they to blame for saying they are of the wise or the wealthy, whom they had set up as teachers for themselves. "And I of Cephas." Preferring Peter, he placed him last, since he is saying these things for the sake of accusing them. "Again, I of Christ." He does not blame them for saying "I am of Christ," but he is indignant that not all say this. "Is Christ divided?" You have cut up, he says, Christ; you have divided his body. The word is full of terror. Or in this way: "Has Christ divided the kingdom and the Church among men? Does Christ have any co-heirs, he says, so that one might share with him those who are being saved? Does he have associates who with him filled the world? Christ is the one who died for the world, none of you did. Is Christ divided?" That is to say, as if by lot, some have Christ, while others have others. Some have Cephas, others Apollo, who is said to have been the first bishop of the Corinthians. ^{C D}

I, 13-17. "Was Paul crucified for you? or were you baptized in the name of Paul? I give thanks to God,

because I baptized none of you but Crispus and Gaius, lest any man should say that I had baptized in my own name. And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other. For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made void."

Consequently, he removes the absurdity and brings the whole matter upon himself, so that he may not seem to mention the names of others out of envy. He did not say, "Did Paul make or create you?" but rather, which manifested his kindness much more, he brought the cross into the midst, and the baptism by which sins are purified; for through these have we obtained the kingdom of God. ^B From the beginning of the Epistle even to the end, he mentions the name of Christ in almost every verse, so that by the frequency of this saving appellation he might draw out and purge away the pride and the corruption of arrogance. "I give thanks to God." I baptized indeed, he says, but in the name of Christ. Why do you give thanks, Paul, that you baptized none of them besides those whom you have enumerated? Is baptism to be numbered among those things which are to be held in small regard? By no means, he says, but I give thanks for this double reason. First, because by not baptizing I did not give some an occasion to say that I baptized many for this reason: that by forming a choir of disciples for myself, I might acquire for myself the name of teacher and leader. But for a second reason: because I had not received from Christ a mission for this work. At the same time, he shows that if I, he says, who was sent by Christ to preach and proclaim His Gospel, baptized sparingly and rarely (although baptism is akin to and connected with the preaching), how do you, who were not sent at all, dare to show yourselves off as teachers? How do you even baptize, or at all do anything for which you have not received the gift or the apostolate?

^C "That I baptized none of you." Some were puffed up on account of those whom they had baptized. Therefore he says: Why are you puffed up, when I give thanks that I have not baptized? This, however, he says while purging their arrogance, not while disparaging baptism. God forbid! "Lest any man should say." For what reason do you give thanks that you baptized no one? "Lest any man should say," he says, "that I baptized in my own name." For if, when those abject and obscure men were baptizing, so great a dissension arose that they were designated by their names, what, I ask, would have happened if Paul had baptized everyone? "Besides, I know not." By this he shows that baptizing was not a matter of great eagerness/study for him, since he did not even remember. ^D He says this, however, rebuking the pride of those who were puffed up because they baptized. "For Christ sent me not to baptize." Why then did he baptize if he was not sent for this purpose? And we say that he was indeed sent to preach the Gospel, but the baptizing was not forbidden. He did this one as much as the other out of a sense of duty. "But to preach the Gospel." For this was arduous, and in need of an iron soul. For the one baptizes those who have already believed, but he who...

^A preached the Gospel to the unbelievers, among whom he was also exposed to dangers. "Not in wisdom of speech." He did not say, "Not in wisdom of knowledge," but "Not in wisdom of speech." Well said; for he was indeed preaching the Gospel in the wisdom of knowledge. Hence, he also says elsewhere: "Though I be rude in speech, yet not in knowledge." For what is wiser, or better and more brilliant in terms of knowledge, than to learn and to teach that death has been brought to an end by the cross and by death, and that our human race has been freed from the long and most harsh tyranny of the devil? "Lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect." That is, so that the cross might not suffer harm or depreciation. For if the apostles had preached in the wisdom of speech, some might have thought that men had been persuaded by the persuasiveness of their words, not by the power of the preached Christ, which would have been a harm to the preaching and to the cross. But now, that the world has believed through illiterate and unlearned men declares the power of Christ. For the cross of Christ—that is, His voluntary passion ^B for our sake—is made of none effect and is treated as something cheap by those who try to demonstrate its greatness and divinity through the wisdom of speech and persuasiveness. For how is it possible for that which is above speech and nature to be demonstrated by words and some kind of art? And what need is there for words and persuasion, when signs and miracles cry out more strongly than any voice, and guide everyone who is willing toward piety and the preaching?

The word of the cross, to them indeed that perish, is foolishness. But unto us who are being saved, it is the power of God. For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this world? Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?" ^C It is likely that there were unbelievers among them who disparaged the cross. Therefore he says: "Let nothing seem strange to you." For to those who are perishing, the things given by God for salvation seem to be foolishness.

[PHOT.] He shows, therefore, that it was not even possible for some to be brought to the preaching by a word of wisdom. For the word concerning the cross not only does not persuade, but even seems to be foolishness to them that perish. If this is so, what could anyone say about the preaching, when grace does not provide everything for it? "But unto us who are being saved, it is the power of God." For those of us who have not shrunk back, but have the hope of salvation, recognize from this precisely the power and the wisdom of God: power, because by death He dissolved death; ^D and wisdom, because by this very means He saved those who were lost. "Where is the wise?" Having taken boldness from the Scripture, he then attacks them: "Where is the wise?"—speaking of the Greeks; "Where is the scribe?"—of the Jews; "Where is the disputer?"—that is, those who entrust everything to reasonings and investigations. For all these, as if he were saying, were not able to rescue anyone from error. Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?

^A For all who seemed to be wise have been made foolish, in that they were unable to find those things which have been proclaimed and believed by fishermen and unlettered men. But how did He make it foolish? That is to say, He refuted it as being foolish, in that it had no strength to find the truth. — Another. [ΘΕΟΔΩΡ.] He calls the wisdom of the world "eloquence"; for even of this God is the bestower. For He Himself divided the languages, and distributed to each its own characters. And so, He also gave brilliance to the Greek tongue. But they, not having used it as they ought, have rendered it an enticement to deception, and have made the mythology of error persuasive. He accuses, therefore, not eloquence, but the readiness for deception hidden within it.

1, 21-23. « For seeing that in the wisdom of God the world knew not God through wisdom, it pleased God by the foolishness of the preaching to save them that believe. For Jews ask for signs, and Greeks seek after wisdom: but we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness. »

^B « In the wisdom. » That is, which shone forth in creation, namely in heaven and on earth. Since, he says, the world did not know God through such wisdom of His as is viewed in created things, it pleased God to save those who believe through the cross, which seems to be foolishness to the unbelieving and those who are perishing. He calls "wisdom" also human intelligence and eloquence, or the very sweetness of doctrine, so as to show that God is the creator of the mind and the bestower of prudence and eloquence, even if some have used them for things they ought not. By "foolishness of the preaching" he means the simplicity of the words. For the divine disciples were unlettered as regards speech, but rich in knowledge.

« And Jews ask for signs. » If, he says, we say to a Jew, "Believe," he immediately asks for signs and wonders to take place for the confirmation of the preaching. But we preach Christ crucified. Which is not only no demonstration of signs, but rather of weakness, as far as what is apparent is concerned. And yet, although this appears weak, and is the opposite of what they require, they are nevertheless led to faith, which shows the great power of God. Again, the Greeks seek wisdom from us, but to them also we preach the cross, which, according to appearance, seems to be foolishness—to preach God crucified—but yet they are convinced. Are these not the greatest marvel that they are persuaded by things that are contrary to what they require? Or it may be understood in this way: Since, he says, both Jews ask for signs and Greeks seek wisdom, both find in Christ what they seek. How? To the unbelieving Jews it is a stumblingblock, and to the unbelieving Greeks it seems foolishness. ^C But those, he says, who are the called and elect among them, find Him to be the power and wisdom of the Father. For what do you say, O Jew? Do you seek signs? Behold Christ, He is the power of God, which is the maker of signs. And what do you say, O Greek; do you seek wisdom? You have Christ, who is the wisdom of the Father. Since, therefore, signs and w

demand wisdom? You have Christ, who is the wisdom of the Father. Since, therefore, signs and wisdom are required of us, we preach Christ, who is both to those who have been called, who, finding what they seek, believe—whereas the unbelievers deem worthy of offense and folly things that deserve great admiration. And what is surprising? Since even this sensible sun appears dark to those whose sight is dimmed. “Unto the Jews a stumbling block.” Which at first glance seems a stumbling block. For who among the unbelievers would not be offended and be led to disbelief? “Unto the Greeks, however, foolishness.” Just as it seems to be, to preach that He who was crucified is God.

“Unto those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.” ^B It seems, he says, to be a stumbling block and folly; yet to these very same people, he says, Christ and His sufferings appear to be the power of God and wisdom. Is this not to be wondered at? “Unto those who are called.” He calls those “called” whom God has summoned, for the reason that they were worthy. “Because the foolishness of God.” For the Cross appears to be something foolish, yet it is wiser than men. How? Since the wise and the philosophers were occupied with cold and senseless things, whereas the Cross saved the world. Or in this way. Do you wish to learn that the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness stronger? From this very call alone it is easy to understand this. For look, I pray you. Were there not many who were wise with worldly wisdom? Were there not many who were powerful with this power? Were there not many who were noble with temporal nobility? What, then? Did Christ make these His own disciples and through them choose you? ^C By no means. But just the opposite. Rather, He chose that which was foolish according to the world, and the weak and the ignoble and the despised—namely, men who were fishermen, poor, and unlettered. And through them He accomplished the calling of you all—both the wise and the simple, and the poor and the rich, and the weak and the strong—and He put to shame the noble, the strong, and the wise. For that which they themselves would not even have dared to attempt—to transform the whole world—this the weak and the foolish manifestly accomplished. Are those who seemed to be wise and powerful not put to shame by this? Is it not clearly demonstrated that the foolish and weak thing of God is wiser and stronger than men? For when unnumbered [people] had attempted to extinguish the name of Christ, not only was it not extinguished, but it flourishes all the more through the Cross, which, though it seemed to be weakness, vanquished the strong. Other. Not only because all human intelligence is a kind of error if it be compared to the firmness and immobility of the divine and most perfect intelligences, but [also] because it is habitual for theologians to meet human-

-^A aspirations by way of negation. Thus, too, they say the invisible Light—which nonetheless illumines all things—is unutterable and many-named, unnameable and nameless, yet present to all and found in all things; they call Him incomprehensible and impossible to investigate.

1, 26-29. "For you see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise according to the flesh, not

^A many mighty, not many noble are called," those who thought themselves to be something, when they were nothing. "That no flesh should glory in His presence." Shall we then, he says, not glory? Certainly, he says, you who are faithful ought to glory; for you are not flesh, but have been born of Him through regeneration, and you are wise: not that you possess wisdom in yourselves, but that you possess Him who is Wisdom, who redeemed you from tyranny; and not only this, but also sanctified you through baptism, and not only this, but also justified you through gifts. We, therefore, ought to glory because of these things; yet we should glory, not because we were made worthy of these by any achievement of our own, but in the Lord, because all such benefits and advantages which we enjoy are of His gift and the philanthropy He has shown toward us.

1, 30-31. "But of Him are you in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification and redemption: that, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord."

"But of Him are you" — namely, of God. That is to say, God, having taken you away from arrogance, has made you His own children through Jesus Christ. Therefore, we too ought to flee from arrogance, which is an enemy to God. "Who," he says, "Christ became for us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification and redemption." That ^B is to say, He who has made us both righteous and holy, having redeemed us from those things which are contrary to these. For since He chose the foolish, He made them wise and righteous and holy. "Who became for us wisdom from God." He did not say, "He made us wise," but showing the ineffable gift, he says, "He became for us wisdom"; that is, He gave Himself to us. Having said great things concerning the Son, such as wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, redemption, he adds, "from God," lest you should suppose Him to be unbegotten. "And redemption." See how he proceeds in order. For first, by making them wise, He freed them from error, and then rendered them righteous and holy by the visitation of the Holy Spirit, and thus liberated them from all evils; for this is redemption. "That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord." All these things, he says, have come to pass so that no man should consider himself to be anything, nor glory in himself, but in God. He subtly points to them; for there were some who were proud and elevated. ^C

II, 1-2. "And I, when I came to you, brethren, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring to you the testimony of God. For I determined not to know anything among you save Jesus Christ and Him crucified."

Having said that wisdom was made foolish, and those who seemed wise were chosen as fools, he adds: "And I myself," the herald and preacher, did not come prepared with syllogisms and human wisdom, he says. "Of speech or of wisdom." For what, someone might say, even if he had wished, could he have been able to occupy himself with wisdom? He himself, indeed, would not have been able, but Christ could have made him wise if He had willed it. "The testimony of God." For he went about preaching the death ^D

^A of Christ. Therefore, he calls Him a testimony. "For I determined." For I also tested this (since Christ also did), namely, to preach without eloquence. "Except Jesus Christ." I did not need, he says, external wisdom, but I preached only Christ, and Him crucified; and yet, he says, I shut the mouths of all the wise.

II, 3-5. "And I was with you in weakness and in fear and in much trembling. And my speech and my preaching were not with the persuasive words of human wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, that your faith might not be in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God."

For how was he not weak, being persecuted by so many magistrates? He is as if saying: Why do you attach yourselves, some to the wise, others to the powerful? Do these things, the apparent wisdom and wealth and power, contribute anything to the preaching? Consider how I came preaching to you. Was it in wisdom? But you could not say this. Was it in power? And yet, trembling and full of fears and threats, thus I preached among you. Why then, forgetting these things, do you seek out wise and wealthy and powerful men, and present them to yourselves as instructors and teachers? ^B "And in fear." Not only, he says, did I not need wisdom to preach, but even when I was in much fear and trembling because of the persecutions, I nevertheless preached in such a way—which shows the great power of the cross—that it prevailed while being preached in simplicity and fear. He humbles those among them who were wise, showing how many were the obstacles preventing the preaching from being believed, and yet it was believed. "Not with persuasive words." For the preaching was not adulterated by external eloquence or learning. "But in demonstration of the Spirit." For through the Holy Spirit and the signs and virtues which are from Him, we demonstrate openly that we speak the truth, and through the power that exerts itself in us. "That your faith might not be." For if it had been through human wisdom, perhaps there could have been a suspicion that it had prevailed through eloquence; but now, since it is through signs and virtues, it provides certainty to the faith. For the demonstration through works and signs is more certain than that from words. When he had previously called the princes of this age the wise men of the Greeks, now he calls the wise men of the Jews. ^C

II. 6-8. "But we speak wisdom among those who are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this age, nor of the princes of this age, who are abolished: but we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, which is hidden, which God ordained before the ages unto our glory: which none of the princes of this age knew."

After he once demonstrated that what seems to men to be wisdom is foolishness, and that the wisdom of God, which seems foolishness to those who are perishing, is the true wisdom, he then, having taken courage, calls it wisdom itself. And by wisdom he means the preaching about Christ, and that the creation which is under heaven has been saved through the cross. ^D "Among those who are perfect"

^A — that is, among the faithful; for they are wise and perfect, who have despised human things as weak, and have surrendered themselves to God. "Of this age." He says "of this age" because of their temporal nature, in that they subsist along with this age, but do not proceed into the future. "Which are being brought to nothing." For indeed they cease along with the present life. But not so the righteous; rather, they flourish then even more than they do now. He calls them "rulers," covertly designating the philosophers, historiographers, and rhetoricians who were among them, who also became leaders of the people. "In a mystery." He calls the preaching concerning Christ a mystery, because no heavenly power knew it before it came to pass, and because we see one thing and believe another. Seeing Christ, I worship him as benevolent and humane; hearing that he became a servant, I adore him for the sake of the dispensation. "Which has been hidden." For even now it is hidden; to the unbelievers, indeed, utterly so, but to the faithful, not so much. "Which God foreordained." He says that the Father foreordained the wisdom concerning the providence toward us, showing it to those who were to receive it, so that he might glorify us through it. The phrase, "before the ages," denotes [it was] coeternal with the Father. "Which none of the rulers." One may understand this as referring to Pilate and Herod, for they were ignorant. But it also refers to the chief priests and scribes, who were ignorant of the dispensation brought about through the cross of Christ and his death. Having said above "rulers of this age" meaning the wise men of the Greeks, he now ^B speaks of the wise men of the Jews.

II. 8, 9. "For if they had known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory; but, as it is written, Things which eye has not seen, and ear has not heard, and which have not entered into the heart of man, are what God has prepared for those who love him."

Since the cross seems to be a disgrace to the senseless, see how, having mentioned Christ, he calls him "Lord of glory," showing that not only was he not damaged in his glory by the cross and death, but rather he was glorified even more because of his philanthropy. — Another. [OF OECUMENIUS] If you understand "of the rulers of this age" as referring to Herod and Pilate, you will understand what follows more simply: "For if, he says, they had known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory." For they were not so insane, provided there was no envy involved. If, however, you interpret it for the high priests and scribes, who knew him to be the Christ (and it is clear from what the vine-dressers said: "This is the heir; come, let us kill him and the vineyard will be ours," but they were blinded by envy), then you will understand what is lower down [in this way]: If they had known, he says, that such great salvation for the nations would come from the cross, they would not have come to crucify him, choosing rather to waste away from envy than that the nations should be saved and they be driven out and others substituted in their place. — Another. [JOHN] Opportunely he called him "Lord of glory." For since the cross is a dis- ^{C D}

- ^A honor, he shows that it is a great glory: "What God hath prepared." But what did God prepare for them that love Him? Christ, namely, and the salvation which was effected through the Incarnation. The Scripture calls those who believe "them that love Him." But how, he says, did ear not hear, and did it not ascend into the heart of man, when the holy prophets previously heard the mystery? And we say that it is one thing to hear as a man, and another to hear as a prophet. For Isaiah also says: "He hath added to me an ear to hear," not because he previously lacked a man's ear, but because he had received the ear of a prophet. ^B "But to us God hath revealed it through His Spirit." For the Spirit searcheth all things, even the deep things of God. For who of men knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of a man which is in him? Even so the things of God knoweth no man, save the Spirit of God. If therefore no one knew, you, he says, how have you learned? Because, he says, God has revealed it to us through the Spirit, not through human wisdom. For the latter was not deemed worthy to see the mysteries. For the Spirit searcheth all things. Then he shows what is most important in such learning. For if the Spirit, he says, who [also] knows the deep things of God, had not taught us, we could by no means have known them; for this mystery was ^C among things ineffable, and therefore we stood in need of the Spirit as a teacher. But what he says, "he searcheth," is not indicative of ignorance, but on the contrary, of exact knowledge. St. Gregory understands it thus: "Not as one investigating curiously, but as one delighting in contemplation." "Even the deep things of God." — [SEVERUS] By the "deep things of God" he means His most profound and hidden dispensations towards us. — Otherwise. [CYRIL] The "deep things of God" are the hidden and sequestered knowledge of the holy Scriptures, which the Spirit, knowing, reveals to the souls of the saints, manifesting a certain divine mind in them. "Except the spirit of man which is in him." For just as, he says, no one of ^D men knows the things of man, except his own spirit, so too no one knows the things of God, except the Spirit of God. 12, 13. "But we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is from God, that we may know the things that are given us by God: which things also we speak, not in the learned words of human wisdom, but in the learned words of the Holy Spirit, comparing spiritual things with spiritual." By "spirit of the world," he calls, as I think, human wisdom and learning, which, he says, we have not received, as one that obscures the cross, lest the cross be made void, as he foretold. But we have received the Spirit of God, that we may know what has been given to us by God: that is, the things done by Christ according to the dispensation. "Not in the learned words of human wisdom." By so much, he says, are we wiser than the men of the world, in as much as we use a wiser teacher, [seeing that they have Plato and Pythagoras as]

^A preceptors, but we have the Holy Spirit. "But by those whom the Holy Spirit teaches." There is, therefore, no need anywhere for human wisdom. For all things are spiritual. "Comparing spiritual things with spiritual." This is what he says: when a spiritual question is investigated, we bring forward comparisons and solutions from spiritual examples; for instance, if Christ rose on the third day, I bring forward the proofs and testimony from Jonah: if the Lord was born of a Virgin, the solution is taken from the barren women, Anna and Elizabeth. ^B

II, 14-16. "But the natural [animalis] man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ."

He calls that man natural [animalis] who attributes everything to the reasonings of the soul, and receives nothing by faith, nor thinks that he has any need of help from above. Because, not being able to understand the doctrines of the Spirit through the thoughts of the soul, and not wishing to believe without arguments, he thinks everything that belongs to the dispensation of the Lord is foolish. — Otherwise. ^C [JOANNES]. The natural man is he who lives according to the flesh, and has not yet had his mind illuminated by the Spirit, but possesses only that innate and human intelligence which the Creator implants in the souls of all. — Otherwise. It means: When anything is spiritual and ineffable, we bring testimonies from spiritual things; for instance, to the fact that Christ rose, I bring the testimony of Jonah: to the fact that He was born of a Virgin, I bring forward the birth and generation of the barren. The natural man, however, is one who attributes every matter to the considerations of the soul, and thinks there is no need for any aid from above. — Otherwise. [PHOTIUS]. The natural man has need of judgment, examination, and spiritual learning, in order to accept the things of the Spirit. But because he is too arrogant to submit himself to this, and thinks it sufficient to be content with human reasoning, he not only does not grasp anything of what he is ignorant, but on the contrary, being plunged into greater ignorance, he imputes his own passion and infirmity to the laws of the Spirit, and considers them foolishness, whereas he ought to blame himself, who has attempted to measure things supernatural ^D and exceeding human reason with humble and human measures. The spiritual man, however, has no need of judgment, but, testing and judging all things spiritually and with divine wisdom, he is perfected by the knowledge of the Spirit. Wherefore he is judged by no man. By the faithful, indeed, because he does not differ or dissent from them; but by the unbelievers, because he is far superior to their judgment, and because he not only does not need this, but knows exactly, while judging, that for those who use it, this is a very great obstacle to being spiritually judged and to receiving the things of the Spirit. Therefore, these men also lack the mind of the Lord, that is, the instructions...

of the law which go forth from thence, ^A which corrects them and rouses them to the apprehension of spiritual questions. For those commands of the Lord themselves confirm us and bring us back to Him, and render us fit for the divine doctrine and intelligence which is supplied from thence to those who are worthy. Wherefore, when we have disposed ourselves to these things, we deservedly have the mind of Christ. For, feeling and understanding those things which are of Christ, we are no longer overwhelmed, wavering in human and carnal reasoning, enduring a storm from winds blowing from both sides; but, having become solid and firm in the heavenly and divine mind, we attain to the apprehension of truth. "And he cannot know." He is ignorant, he says, because he himself is foolish. For he cannot understand that in such matters there is need of faith alone, since human reasonings are deficient. For this is what it means: "they are spiritually judged," namely, that through faith and the Spirit they have the demonstrations of those things which are divine. "He judges all things." The spiritual man, he says, faithfully beholds all things and understands all things, both his own and those of the unbelievers; but his own things the unbelievers cannot know. "For this is what it is: 'but he himself is judged by no one.'" How then does the believer know all things? Because he knows indeed the things present, that they are transitory and fragile, but he knows the things to come, namely, that they are stable and eternal. But the unbeliever neither knows the things present (for he magnifies them although they are nothing) nor the things to come, for he does not even believe that they exist. "For who hath known the mind of the Lord?" Why does the unbeliever know nothing? This is what it means: "Who," that is, no one among the unbelievers, knows. Because, he says, he "hath not known the mind of the Lord." ^B Therefore, he will not reconcile him to himself, that is, he will not appease him or bring him into friendship; for God will by no means reveal Himself to an enemy. But why do the faithful and the spiritual know? Because, he says, "we have the mind of Christ," that is, the Spirit of Christ, and the things that we know, we have been taught by the Holy Spirit. Those therefore deservedly are ignorant, having God turned away from them; but we, he says, know, having used the Spirit as our teacher. ^C [PHOTIUS.] But "For who hath known the mind of the Lord?" is a hyperbaton. For it ought to be joined sequentially to: "He cannot know, because they are spiritually judged." However, it is possible for the passage to be understood even without the hyperbaton, as the phrasing stands: "But we have the mind of Christ." [GREGORY, OECUMENIUS.] Those who, by imitation of that mind—which the Christ, our God, assumed according to our humanity—have purified their own minds, these have the mind of Christ. Another interpretation: Or he calls the Father the mind of Christ. "We have," he says, "the Father of Christ in ourselves," according to that which is written: "I will dwell in them and walk among them." For it is common for the saints to call the Father the Mind, as Gregory does: "In Mind, Word, and Spirit, in one connatural divinity." And again: "First, He considers the angelic and heavenly powers, and the concept was the work of the Mind, completed by the Word, and perfected by the Spirit." ^D "We have the mind of Christ." That is, the things which are in the mind of Christ;

and thus we know what he himself wills and has revealed. [Joann., Theod.] He rightly confirms, by the authority of God, the one who is a partaker of a spiritual gift, so that he has no need of another’s teaching, and is himself capable of teaching others. "For it is not possible," he says, for one who is able to understand the counsels of God to bring any improvement to Him. We, however, having received understanding from Christ through faith in Him, promise to teach others as well.

1 Cor. III, 1-3. "And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to carnal, as to infants in Christ. I fed you with milk, not with food; for you were not able, neither are you able now. For you are still carnal. For whereas there is among you jealousy and strife and factions, are you not carnal and walking according to the manner of men?" ^B "I could not speak to you as to spiritual men." Having cast down their pride, which was based on human wisdom, he now wishes to cast down that which claimed to be in spiritual things, showing that they could not even hear anything perfect. He rightly says, "I could not," meaning "I would not," lest he should seem to have spoken out of envy. "But [I had] to speak as to carnal men." But how were they carnal, who were even performing signs? We say that they were, in a way, such—and not such. For it is possible both to perform signs and to be carnal, as were those who said, "Lord, did we not do this and that in your name?" and heard, "I do not know you." ^C "As to infants in Christ." Infants, as far as the laws of Christ are concerned. "I fed you with milk." By milk, he means the still imperfect teaching, but by food, the perfect. "For you were not yet able." Because, he says, you did not wish to. For this he shows as he proceeds, that it was because of their own fault that they were not able—a thing which lacks pardon, or rather, strips them of it. "For whereas there is among you jealousy and strife." Do you see that it is their own depravity? And when they ask, "How are we carnal?" he gives the cause that brings this about; and although he could have accused them of other things, he insists upon that which is pressing, namely, the factions and the jealousy that arose from them, and the strife simultaneously. "And walk according to the manner of men." You do not live according to God, he says, but you conduct yourselves according to man—that is, carnally. ^D III, 4-8. "For whereas one says, I indeed am of Paul; and another, I of Apollos; are you not carnal? Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers through whom you believed, and as the Lord gave to each? I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth. So then, neither is he who plants anything, nor he who waters, but God who gives the growth. But he who plants and he who waters are one. And each shall receive his own reward according to his own labor." Again, he reproves their leaders who were wise and rich and provided the occasion for faction. "Who..."

then, is Paul?" ^A Oh, the marvelous wisdom! He lowers both himself and Apollo to achieve this. If we, he says, are nothing, what could anyone say about the teachers who are among you? "But ministers." It is indeed a great thing to be ministers of the faith, but when compared to the archetype and root of all good things—Christ—they are but a small part of the message. For he who provides the good things is the benefactor, not he who ministers. Because to be a minister is greater than being an evangelizer, since one proclaims words, but the other also confirms them with works. "And to each as the Lord gave." We do not have even this small thing, the ministry, from ourselves, he says, but we have received this also from the Lord. This is why he says, "And to each as the Lord gave." ^B "I planted." I, he says, was the first to sow the proclamation, and Apollo, by his own encouragement, did not allow the seed to wither by the heat of temptations; but the whole is of God, who gives the increase. "Neither is he that planteth anything." See how he makes the debasement of their wise and rich leaders unburdensome, by belittling both himself and Apollo in appearance, and showing that one must attend to God alone and refer all the good results to Him. "He that planteth, he says, and he that watereth are one," in this regard, that they are able to do nothing more without God who gives the increase.—Otherwise. [Phot.] Since he ran through much concerning the teachers, saying, "Who is Paul, and who is Apollo?" and again, "So that neither is he that watereth anything, nor he that planteth." He did this desiring to calm the inflammation of those who were vainglorious concerning their teaching and who were dividing the people of Christ into quarrels and factions. Since, therefore, he thought he had sufficiently leveled their pride—because he had lowered both himself and Apollo—lest some should say, "Then you teach in vain, and you bear the toils on behalf of the preaching in vain," he added the following, countering such objections: ^C "'Each shall receive his own reward according to his own labor,'" saying all but: "Let no one who teaches well be disheartened." For though it is forbidden to divide the people of Christ and to claim them for oneself, and to be puffed up among them as a teacher, yet one will receive a reward, and not simply, but according to one's own labor. Then, raising the matter even further and confirming that there will indeed be a reward, he says, "For we are God's fellow workers," simultaneously, as I said, glorifying the work of teaching and again indicating that the work is God's, so that one must not claim it for oneself or cut it up, but rather connect and unify it (for this is what fellow-workers do), whereas claiming it for oneself and dividing it is the work of enemies and foes. Then he insists on this, using the same rule of demonstration: that one must not divide the people by persons at all. "You are God's field, he says, God's building." Why do you demean yourselves, having it within you to be God's, by attributing yourselves to fellow slaves? "According to his own labor." ^D Since it was likely that those who had labored more for the sake of their faith might become more slothful, hearing that all would be rewarded even if someone had contributed only a little or a great deal, he at once corrects this.

^A They are one, he says, in terms of not being able to do anything more without God, who gives the increase; for as far as the requital is concerned, he says, each shall have his reward according to his own labor.

For we are God’s fellow-workers; you are God’s husbandry, God’s building. According to the grace of God which is given to me, as a wise master builder, I have laid the foundation. And another builds upon it. But let each one look how he builds. For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

We, however, who have preached to you the doctrines concerning salvation, are "God's fellow-workers." For we have labored together for the aim of God, who wills that all should be saved. But it is not so with those who now divide you ^B and have become an occasion of faction for you.

"God's husbandry." You are God's husbandry and God's building; and if you are God's husbandry and building, you ought to be called by the Lord, not by those who now preside over you. For they were saying, "I am of this one," and "I am of that one," citing the names of the wise and the wealthy.

"As a wise master builder." He calls himself a wise master builder, not to praise himself, but wishing to show that it is the mark of a wise master builder to lay such a foundation, that is, Christ. And that the statement is not one of self-aggrandizement, he says, "According to the grace which was given to me." He says that becoming wise was not his own achievement, ^C but of God who granted it.

"And another builds upon it." He has arrived at the exhortation concerning conduct, calling the actions of each person a "building." And let each one look how he builds upon the foundation, that is, possessing faith and Christ himself, in order to perform good works.

"For no other foundation." Do not, therefore, pay attention to those who divide you, he says, for there is no other foundation than Christ, whom I have proclaimed. Let us hold to Him; let us cling to Him as a foundation; upon Him let us build the buildings of good conduct.

III, 12-15. "But if anyone builds on this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, each one’s work will become manifest. For the Day will declare it, ^D because it is revealed by fire; and the fire will test each one’s work, of what sort it is. If anyone’s work which he has built endures, he will receive a reward. If anyone’s work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire."

For after faith there is need of works and building. Now, the righteous, like gold and silver and transparent stones, build their own actions upon the faith, but sinners [build with] wood which is easily ignited and worthy of the fire to come.

Otherwise: Teachers teach divine things; but the hearers, according to the choice of their knowledge, choose what is to be done. But on the day when the Savior appears, there will be a testing, and an exact dis-

of the Savior, a trial and examination shall be [the] day. And those indeed who have lived well, like gold and silver, the fire shall render more brilliant; but those who are workers of wickedness, like wood and hay and stubble, it shall consume. ^A But the teacher who has taught the things that are proper shall not be required to pay penalties, but shall be deemed worthy of salvation. For this, he says, is what is meant by, "But he himself shall be saved," namely, the teacher. "But the work shall be burned up," that is, those who have constructed for themselves a wicked work. Thus, we who read carefully shall accurately discover the meaning of the scriptures: "If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss; but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire"; that is, his work shall have been burned by the fire. But he himself shall be saved, namely, that teacher; for he was not the cause of their turning to the worse. For he himself brought forward the proper teaching. But if anyone does not wish to apply the phrase, "yet so as by fire," to the work, but to the teacher, let him understand it this way: that for those others he shall not be required to pay penalties, but he himself shall also be saved, being tested by fire, if indeed he has his life consistent with his teaching. ^B "Gold," [signifies] faith in Christ; "silver," [signifies] those who are even inferior, for there are many mansions with the Father. "For the day shall declare it," he calls the day of judgment. "And he says that the works are to be revealed in fire," that is, to become manifest, what their nature is—whether gold, whether silver; and of such things, he says, the fire is the examiner. "If any man's work shall be burned." If any man's work, he says, shall not bear the impact of the fire, but shall be proved and convicted of being wicked and shall be burned up, he shall suffer loss, he says. Does then a right faith avail nothing without works? [OECUMENII.] Can we also understand it in this way? They, indeed, who have built the highly flammable material are cast out entirely. For they have been deprived of all their labors. "But he himself shall be saved." Who? He who has built gold and silver and precious stones. For having said concerning him that he shall receive a reward, now he says what reward—that is, salvation. ^C But he himself shall also be saved painfully, as is likely for one passing through fire, and being cleansed of the slight defilement remaining in him. For it is God’s alone to be perfectly free from sin. But men, even if they are as righteous as possible, are not perfectly pure. For it has been said that "in many things we offend all," and "there is no one pure from sin, not even if his life be but one day." And it has also been said by Malachi that as a fire in a furnace and as the herb of fullers, God shall wash and purify some. "But he himself shall be saved." ^D [PHOT.] The words "he shall be saved," mean that he shall not be destroyed, nor shall he pass into nothingness, as do his wicked actions. For these, until that time, seemed to have existence and were being done. But when that day and the fire arrived, these have passed away, so as neither to be

^A permitted to exist or be done. Yet the man who has committed them is not destroyed or consumed with them, but remains and is saved, paying the penalty through fire. For this reason, having said, "He shall be saved," he added, interpreting how he shall be saved: "Yet so as through fire," that is, he remains and is saved for this purpose, to be punished in the fire for the age. In his interpretation of Isaiah, the holy Basil, having mentioned this passage a second time, accepted it as referring to purification. "As through fire." He said everything metaphorically; but observe: not as if the wood, once burned, will pass into nothingness, will the man himself, but what? "Yet he himself shall be saved," calling his salvation the life which is always lived in the fire, and his being preserved within it. For see what he added. Even so, he says, "as through fire," that is, he shall be saved in this way, as one preserved in fire, that is, being burned, but not consumed. For lest, upon hearing "salvation," you might, through the auspicious meaning of the word, think the punishment lasts only until the works are burned up, he needed this addition: *he himself shall be saved, being burned through fire always*; for this is what "as" signifies. ^B

III, 16-19. *Do you not know that you are the temple of God, and the Spirit of God dwells in you? If anyone profanes the temple of God, God will destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which you are. Let no one deceive himself. If any one of you seems to be wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God.*

He wishes next to turn the discourse against him who was fornicating with his stepmother, and see what a fitting prologue he uses, speaking to them with the concern he has for them. "And the Spirit of God dwells in you." He increases the severity of the sin by the gift, that is, by the indwelling of the Spirit. ^C [OECUMENIUS.] If we are the temple of God, since the Spirit of God dwells in us, therefore the Spirit is God. "God will destroy him." That is, He will bring him to ruin. And this is not the word of one cursing, but of one predicting what is to come. "For the temple of God is holy." Therefore, since the temple is holy, having a holy Indweller, the fornicator cannot be the temple of God. But who is the temple of God? You, he says, if you remain pure. "Let no one deceive himself," he says, by thinking there is anything else other than what has been said. "If any one seems to be wise." He calls those who possess human wisdom "wise" here. "Let him become a fool." He becomes a fool in this age who has despised human wisdom and knows that nothing of true benefit is gained from it. For this brings him the wisdom from above. For just as poverty according to God is wealth, and dishonor is glory, so foolishness according to God is wisdom. But observe that he did not say, "Let him throw away wisdom," but, indicating that there is a need to despise it greatly, he said, "Let him become a fool and an unlearned person," teaching us not to be ashamed of being considered unlearned among our own people. For it brings us faith, not allowing the mystery of the proclamation concerning Christ to be handed over to human reasonings, such as, for instance, searching into how it is clear that Christ is the Son of God, or how He became incarnate. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with ^D

^A God. For it not only contributes nothing toward true and real wisdom, but it even hinders it, in that it supposes itself to know and disdains to learn. For this is what the inflation of human wisdom does. For it is written: *He who catches the wise in their craftiness.* And again: *The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.* Therefore, *let no man glory in men.* Through their own weapons, that is to say, craftiness, God catches them. How? For because, through their craftiness—which is to say, their cleverness regarding worldly things—they think they know everything and have no need of teachers, He caught them by means of that very thing, showing through the facts that they know nothing of what is necessary.

[ΦΩΤ.] But how did He catch the wise in their craftiness? They thought that by means of the human knowledge present in them, they would grasp the power of the mystery according to Christ; but they not only did not attain what they hoped for, having entrusted themselves to human reasonings, but they even hastened toward the opposite; the matters of craftiness turned back upon them, ^B with greater ignorance and perplexity, as the weakness of their reasonings laid hold of them. *The Lord knows the thoughts.* If, therefore, the Lord knows, who will now contradict? If, therefore, the thoughts of men are vain, and the wise are caught in their craftiness rather than having any profit from it, it is plain that neither human wisdom nor the sharpness of reasonings has any power or contributes toward the teaching and learning of spiritual things. If none of these contributes to these things, how could anyone who teaches boast, when it has been demonstrated that those things which appear to be something among men have no power to contribute to benefit? For it is plain that if anyone teaches anything, it is a matter of grace and of the gift from above, but not the work of one’s own wisdom or of the sharpness of the understanding. For we do not receive gifts so that we may be puffed up by them, but for the common benefit of men. *That they are vain.* For how could it be otherwise? They think they have need of nothing, but that they are sufficient for themselves for the apprehension of the truth. *Therefore let no man glory in men.* He is directed again against their teachers, who were very puffed up over the fact that they had received certain gifts of teaching and other things. And why, he says, must the teachers not glory, but you say, *Let no man glory in men?* Because, he says, all the gifts they have, they received for your sake, for the people, that they might benefit you. Why, then, do they glory in those things which they received not through their own labors, but for your sake and your salvation? *Let no man glory,* ^C either in the teachings (for they possess nothing of themselves) or in human reasonings. For it is not possible through them to comprehend the truth; rather, the former exposition is more fitting both to the wording of the passage and to what follows. ^D

^A III, 22, 23. *All things indeed are yours, whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all things are yours, and you are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s.*

Again he places himself, Peter, and Apollos [before them], signifying their teachers, showing that they had even received gifts for their sake, and that teachers had been appointed [for them]. This powerfully humbles the pride of the teachers. Furthermore, he implies this: If I, he says, and Cephas and Apollos are yours, then surely the teachers ought much less to exalt themselves. “Or the world.” The world itself, he says, and life are for your sake and were created, and death itself has come about for your correction. “Or things present.” He shows that all things were made for them, both the present and the coming things. “All things are yours,” as benefits and gifts. “But you are Christ’s,” as creations and creatures. “And Christ is God’s,” as a germ and Son. Rightly did he add this. For since he had said, “All things are yours, and you are Christ’s,” lest they stop there and think the Son to be unbegotten and without cause, he added, “And Christ is God’s.” Not as we are Christ’s, is Christ God’s—far be it! But we are Christ’s as being his work and creature; but Christ is God’s as a pre-eternal germ and Son, and as one having the Father as a cause.

^B IV, 1-4. *Let a man so consider us, as ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God. But as for the rest, it is required in stewards that one be found faithful. But to me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you, or by a human day. But neither do I judge myself. For I am conscious of nothing to myself, yet I am not by this justified; but he who judges me is the Lord.*

By saying “us,” he signifies the teachers who were among them. “As ministers of Christ.” Since he had vehemently cast down the teachers, he now gently exalts them, calling them ministers of Christ and stewards. Nevertheless, he says, even if this is so, no one, having left the Master, takes his name from the ministers. “And stewards.” He calls them stewards of the mysteries, showing that it is not right to deliver the mysteries to just anyone simply, but to the worthy. “That one be found faithful.” A steward, he says, ought to be faithful, and not say that the Lord’s things are his own, but to administer them as a steward. And in this way, he humbles their pride. ^C

[PHOT.] This, he says, is the thing required and needing to be guarded in every way by the stewards—to be faithful, and to consider themselves ministers, and not to claim and appropriate the things of the Master as their own. Or in this way: Let a man consider us—both the other things I mentioned, he says, and that which is laid down for the stewards, let him consider that of us too, so that the word “consider” might be taken from the common [context]. And what is this thing required among the stewards? That one, he says, be found faithful. Then, [anticipating] those who were about to be shameless and try to say, “What then? Are you such a person?” he responds in advance,

^A saying: “But to me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you.” He says this not to exalt himself, but to maintain the dignity appropriate to the preaching and the teaching. For if they were to scrutinize and examine him, and hold him in doubt, they would hardly have accepted the things preached and taught by them. Reasonably, therefore, and wisely, and for the sake of their own salvation, he pre-emptively checks, binds, and persistently removes such a presumption and fall. Then, so that he might not appear to have said these things for reasons other than the preaching and the common benefit, but [rather] as one boasting and exalting himself, he adds: “But I am not justified by this.” For even if it is not permitted for you to judge me—nor, indeed, for other men at all—but rather, as believers who have no hesitation regarding me, you ought to derive benefit and instruction from the preaching, and to do so as faithfully and doubtlessly as those who know that I cannot even judge myself, which is the greatest and most incontrovertible testimony of virtue, since no one knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man that dwells in him; still, even if these things are in me, he says, ^B “I am not justified by this.” For I still have need of the common Judge, and since He has not yet departed from the cause, I am in a struggle and in fear as one not yet justified. But for this reason, it is not fitting for you who receive the preaching to be hesitant toward me, or to presume to judge and examine me—things which belong only to the common Judge—and to seize for yourselves the time of judgment, disregarding Him and preemptively grasping it for yourselves. ^C But if the phrase, “Seek,” is taken as an imperative, and the agreement, as is clear, [is taken] as nothing obscure, the meaning is readily apparent: “But to me it is a very small thing.” In order that they might not, by this pretext, come to hold Paul himself in doubt as to whether he is a faithful steward or not—which would be a subversion of their faith—he guards his own person, saying: “I consider it unworthy,” he says, “to be judged by anyone.” He says this not out of pride, but, as I said, fearing lest he make their faith doubtful. “Or by human day.” By adding this, he showed that he does not ask not to be judged only by them (for that would have been of little value to him), but not even by anyone else; this is what is signified by his addition, “Or by human day.” “But I do not judge myself.” That is to say, he claims that not even he himself is sufficient for the exactness of such a judgment, since “I know nothing against myself, yet I am not justified by this.” Lest you should think that what was said is a matter of boasting, he adds: ^D “But I am not justified by this.” I do not have, he says, the assurance unless God justifies me. For what if I have sinned? Am I to be thought to have sinned against you? Whence he adds: “He who judges me is the Lord.” The true judge.

IV, 5. Therefore, do not judge anything before the time, until the Lord comes, who will also bring to light the hidden things of darkness,

^A and will manifest the counsels of the hearts, and then will the praise be from God. If, then, the Lord judges even the man who is conscious of nothing in himself, insofar as He himself is the truly true and just judge, why on earth do you judge your brothers? For this malady also existed among them, which he is trying to correct.

Another point. He admonishes them not to consider it a noble thing to avenge themselves, nor to judge those who seem to have sinned, nor to be troubled by the things that are hidden from the sight of mortals at the present time; since the Lord himself, who presides over all, will shed light on the hidden things of darkness for the impious, but for the righteous who are in the world, who through modesty and genuine actions worship God and are hidden from the multitude, He will manifest the counsels of their hearts. To whom, he says, the praise will also be from God. “Who will ^B also light up.” Who, he says, will manifest the things hidden within us. By "darkness" he speaks of the hidden evil deeds. For often someone does some good work according to outward appearance, but the intention, which is hidden, is convicted of error. “And will manifest the counsels of the hearts.” For all things are naked and laid bare before Him, and no mask of piety can help the one who possesses it. “And then the praise will be from God.” He moves toward a more auspicious subject. For it was indeed secondary to say, "Then there will be punishment or praise," but he turned the discourse toward what is beneficial.

IV, 6. *These things, however, brothers, I have transferred to myself and Apollos for your sake, so that in us you may learn not to think beyond what is written, so that no one of you may be puffed up on behalf of one against another.*

[PHOT.] Why did I transfer these things to myself and Apollos? “For your sake,” he says, “so that I might not grieve you by rebuking you by name.” For he was eager to correct them, but he took care not to grieve them. ^C Through this figurative transfer, he says, both will be achieved for you who wish it: both the correction, and the ability to hear the rebukes made for the sake of correction without grief. He was doing this also so that by not subjecting specific persons to his rebuke, he might not appear to be acting out of some human partiality or resentment, favoring some and attacking others. Furthermore, he did this so that, in such a division, he might not drive those he reproached into despair, or kindle in them greater anger and contention, while filling those whom he did not mention in his rebukes with rather more pride and arrogance. Therefore, he did not rightly rebuke them by name, but by transferring the rebuke figuratively to himself and Apollos, he made his admonition pure, accessible, and common to all. “For your sake.” That is, so that by listening specifically to the persons of your teachers, you might not reject the message. “So that in us you may learn.” He is directing this toward the teachers. So that, he says, through our person you may learn to think as it is written. And it is written: “He who wishes to be first, let him be the last of all.” — “So that no one of you may be puffed up on behalf of one.” As if... ^D

to say, it is the disciples who are puffed up by the names of their teachers. “May be puffed up.” Having left the teachers behind, he directs his discourse to the people; for the people were indeed puffed up on account of their teachers. Whoever had this teacher against another who had a different disciple, he was puffed up and acted proudly. ^A And he rightly called this “puffing up,” as if it were a swelling, using a metaphor from a body that is either producing bad humors or has received an evil spirit.

IV, 7-8. *Who indeed makes you distinct? And what do you have that you did not receive? Now if you did indeed receive it, why do you glory as if you had not received it? Are you now satisfied? Are you now rich? Have you begun to reign without us? And I wish indeed that you had reigned, so that we might also reign with you.*

As if he were saying: Who has judged and approved you, O teacher and doctor, as worthy of praise? Is it men? But their judgment is not upright. “And what do you have that you did not receive?” But you will say that the judgment of men regarding you is upright, and that you are truly praiseworthy in your teaching. Do not think so highly of yourself. For the accomplishment is not your work, but the gift of God. But he who glories and boasts does not glory as one who has received the gift, but as one having acquired it by his own labors. “But if you did indeed receive it, why do you glory as if you had not received it?” He says this as a question, so that it may be understood in this way: Why do you glory? Is it ^B as if you did not receive it, but had it from your own store? And yet you have received it. “Are you now satisfied?” He confounds them by the time, saying: Have you been satisfied so quickly, and do you need nothing? “Are you now rich?” And are you in need of nothing? For your boasting indicates that you have arrived at the very peak of knowledge, and you need nothing from anyone. “Have you begun to reign without us?” The discourse has proceeded morally. And first, their folly and lack of sense is demonstrated. For, he says, having been deemed worthy of such great gifts, you do not wish to make us partners and participants in those things which have been given to you. ^C I say these things, he says, while grieving. But this discourse is ironic, where he says, “You have begun to reign; I wish indeed that you had reigned,” he says, “but you have not.” Then, so that it might not seem that he spoke ironically the words, “And I wish indeed that you had reigned,” he shows that he earnestly desired it. How? Because, he says, your kingdom would be mine. For it is a glory to the teacher when his disciples have grown rich in faith. If you are satisfied, if you are rich, if you have begun to reign, it is our glory, as we have begun to reign together with you. You are already wise in Christ, and strong, and glorious. For these are the words of one speaking ironically, ^D and you are prudent and strong and illustrious. For these are (ironic words).

IV, 9-11. *For I seem to see that God has set forth us the apostles as the last, as if destined for death; because we have become a spectacle to the world, and to angels, and to men. We are fools for Christ’s sake, but you are prudent in Christ; we are weak, but you are strong; you are illustrious, but we are dishonored, up to the present hour.*

Of one grieving, or rather of one turning to shame...

^A and of one causing confusion, he speaks the words. For as I see, he says, even from what you are doing, we the apostles have been shown by God to be the last of all, as though we were some condemned men and those appointed to death, that is, easily available to all to be slaughtered. We, for our part, are set forth to suffer misery, but you have already begun to reign. For from the fact, he says, that you have begun to reign so quickly—as I think (by this he means the "I think")—we know that we are condemned to suffer misery as the last. But it is also possible to take the statement affirmatively and directly: I think, he says, that God has set us apostles as the last heralds and your teachers, after whom no one ought to welcome others appearing from elsewhere. For they could not say that they too were sent by God. For it is we who have been sent as those appointed to death. Moreover, "those appointed to death" could be understood in two ways: either because other disciples who were present in their own time were condemned to death (and he counts himself among the other disciples, and names all of them from the plurality); or that "appointed to death" should be taken metaphorically, as those who are certain, true, after whom there are no others, as in the phrase ^B "appointed to death testaments"—that is, firm and final testaments; for they are firm and immovable. For those before them are moved, while those after them are forged, counterfeit, and rejected by law. And "I think" is not a sign of hesitation, but of his character. Next, from where, he says, is it clear that we are the last and final ones, after whom there are no others to be shown preaching? "We have been made a spectacle to the world," he says. The world itself, he says, and the inhabited earth bear witness to this, and not only men, but also the orders of angels above. How, then, are you, as leaders of new teaching and instructors, becoming puffed up and prideful? For if you have received what you teach from us, you are disciples and have been puffed up in vain. But if [you teach] something other than what you have received, know that we are those whom God has shown to be the last and final and "appointed to death" apostles. From where, then, did you receive what you teach? For if we are the ones whom God has shown to be the last and "appointed to death" apostles, it is clear that if you have received any good teaching or achievement, it has come to you from our labors and our teaching. I would that you had become rich in these things, I would that you had reigned, so that we too, having cast for you the seeds of the knowledge of God and of virtues, might reign with you. But I fear that your affairs are not so. "The apostles." There is great emphasis in the phrase "Us the apostles," ^C that is, those who have suffered so many things for Christ. "We have been made a spectacle." How, he says, do I think that we are the last? Because we have been made a spectacle to the world, that is, suffering misery not in one corner, but everywhere on earth: and you are already dreaming of a kingdom? From the fact that he says these things about the apostles, he shows their conceit to be vain and false. "And to angels." Such, he says, are our struggles, that they are worthy even of angelic contemplation. ^D

^A "We are fools for Christ's sake." This also is said to put them to shame. We, he says, as I see it, are fools, in that we endure such things. "But you are wise." You have so ordered your own affairs that you already reign in Christ—that is, in matters concerning Christ. Then he adds that we are also weak and dishonored and in need of necessities, while you are the exact opposite, attempting thereby to establish that it is we rather than you who ought, as those who have labored and grown weary, to be enjoying good things—you who have not labored at all. If, then, we do not yet enjoy these, but are still suffering, how can you, as if you had already enjoyed a reward through [spiritual] gifts, and as if you already held the kingdom of heaven in your hands (which he designates above by saying, "You have come to reign"), think so highly of yourselves and boast? ^B "We are fools for Christ's sake." That is, we appear as fools because we suffer; but you, suffering nothing, in your own opinion seem to possess the kingdom of Christ. Furthermore, right to the end of the sentence, his speech proceeds by way of irony. "Even to this present hour." I omit, he says, the past; I refer only to the present state in which we are situated.

IV, 11-13. "We are hungry and thirsty, and are naked, and are buffeted, and wander about without a sure dwelling-place, and we toil, working with our own hands; being reviled, we bless; being persecuted, we endure; being defamed, we entreat: we are made as the filth of the world, and are the offscouring of all things until now."

To those who were basking in luxury, he says, "We are buffeted"; to those who were puffed up, "We wander about without a sure dwelling-place," that ^C is, we are persecuted and have no stable place to settle. "Working." These things are directed toward those who approached the preaching for the sake of gain and profit. We, he says, toil working with our own hands. Being reviled, being persecuted, being defamed, we do not feel resentful, but we rejoice; and therefore we also bless. "Being persecuted, we endure." This is what it means to be a fool for Christ's sake. For those who suffer these things and do not retaliate, but rather recompense with kinder words, are accounted fools by men. "As the filth [of the world]." That is, as dung, as dishonored, becoming people to be avoided. Then, lest they think he is hinting at them (for he had suffered much in Corinth), he says, "Of the world," not of you. ^D "Filth." That is, we are made as husks and sweepings, or offal, such as is commonly spoken of. We are held in low esteem by all, and we are the offscouring of all, subjecting ourselves to all people for Christ's sake. "The offscouring of all things." As if he were saying, I feel gratitude to all. But he uses the words of one who is deeply grieved, so that he might persuade them not to think too highly of themselves. For if we, he says, the apostles, are in these straits, why do you boast of the gifts you have received, as if you were already something great? "Offscouring" (*peripsema*) is the name given to the towel which wipes away the sweat of the one who is laboring. "Until now." That is to say, for not even now, he says, have those who harass us ceased.

^A

IV, 14, 16. "Not as shaming you do I write these things, but as my beloved children I admonish you. For even if you have ten thousand tutors in Christ, yet not many fathers. For in Christ Jesus through the Gospel I have begotten you. I exhort you, therefore, be imitators of me."

Not this, he says, have I written that I might shame you, but that I might admonish you. For if I love them as children, it is also consistent that I do whatever is for your benefit. For I do not have concern for you as for students, but as for children. "For even if ten thousand [tutors]." He directs these remarks toward their teachers, showing that he loves them much more than the teachers who at that time had leapt upon them and divided them. And this, he says, is clear even from the titles themselves; for they are tutors, but I am a father. "You have in Christ." Not even them did he strike, adding "tutors ^B in Christ." "For in Christ Jesus." Not to myself, he says, do I attribute this, but to Christ. "I have begotten you." Therefore, even your teachers have learned from me what they are saying to you. And in saying, "I have begotten," he uses names of nature, indicating his love, or saying that through the preaching, he says, I have begotten you in baptism. "I exhort you, therefore, be imitators of me." It is reasonable, therefore, for you to imitate me as a father. He does not say this to boast of himself, but to show how easy it is for them to imitate him. For if I, he says, imitate Christ, how can you not imitate me?

IV, 17-20. "For this reason I have sent to you Timothy, who is my beloved and faithful son in the Lord, who will remind you of my ways which are in Christ, as I teach everywhere in every Church. Now some are puffed up, as though I were not coming to you. But I will come to you shortly if the Lord wills, and I will know not the speech of those who are puffed up, but the power. For the kingdom of God is not in speech, but in power."

"For this reason I have sent to you Timothy," since I care for you as for children. "Who is my son." He reveals the love he had for Timothy, and he prepares them to look upon him with reverence. Not in a common way, he says, faithful for bodily works, but in the Lord, that is to say, in those things that pertain to Christ. "Who will remind you." He did not say: He will teach, lest they be distressed that they were to be taught by Timothy, who was young; whence he says, "My ways," that is, let him say nothing of his own, but what is mine. Ways, he says, are the dispensations, the preaching, the perils, the apostolic customs, and the divine laws in which I walk, he says. "Which are in Christ." ^C Then, elevating the discourse, he says, the ways which are in Christ, which have nothing human in them; he will tell you nothing new, but my teachings, which I teach in every Church. "As though I were not coming to you." Since he said, "I send Timothy," lest they become more indolent as if he were not going to come, he corrects this, adding: "I will com^D

Church. "As though I were not coming to you." Since he said, "I send Timothy," lest they become more indolent as if he were not going to come, he corrects this, adding: "I will come." ^A "Inflated are some." There were some, as is likely, who had promoted themselves, behaving arrogantly either on account of knowledge, or on account of their life, or on account of anything else pertaining to spiritual matters. Thus, from this, empty glory and inflation had supervened. For in the absence of the master, with no one to reprove and correct, they were puffed up. "But I will come." The statement, "I will come to you quickly," is that of one threatening and striking fear, preparing them to be sober and remain in their duty. "And I will know." Perhaps even they were boasting as if they were some kind of perfect and spiritual men; but, he says, when I come, I shall be able to know whether you are boasting about yourselves. For boasting alone without works is worth nothing; what matters is if the works are as worthy as the words. For there is no need for words, but for one to perform spiritual work. For words without works could not bring one into the kingdom of the heavens, which is what he says regarding the kingdom of God, but [it is attained] in power, that is, in the demonstration of works. ^B

CHAPTER II

IV, 21. — V, 1, 2. "What do you wish? Shall I come to you with a rod, or in love and a spirit of gentleness? It is absolutely heard that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not even named among the nations, so that one has his father’s wife. And you are inflated, and have not rather mourned, that he who has done this deed might be removed from your midst."

For it is, he says, situated in your power to do these things: either, by becoming slothful, to provoke me to anger and vengeance, just as Ananias did Peter, and Elymas did me myself; or, by acting studiously and vigilantly, to stir me to charity and gentleness. "With a spirit of gentleness." For there can also be a spirit of severity and vengeance. "It is heard among you." He makes the accusation common to all, lest they become slothful as if they were strangers to the transgression. "Among you," he says. That is, among the faithful, who have enjoyed such great benefits. And he did not say, "It is being committed," but out of abundant caution, "It is heard." "Nor even among the nations." He reproaches the faithful by the example of the gentiles, that is, the unbelievers. For if it is not even named among them, what will anyone say when it is actually committed here? "So that one has his father’s wife." Perhaps a stepmother. ^C If things that are among the nations, even if only heard of among you, bring great opprobrium, then shameful acts that are performed among the nations, if these same things are done among you, will render the accusation all the greater. And if this is so, if things are done among you that are not even perpetrated among them, what depravity could surpass this? But what he says, "It is absolutely heard," is like the expression of one stunned and incensed by the rumor. O unworthy deed! "It is absolutely," he says, "heard." These things are absolutely circulating in the tongues of some concerning you. "And you are inflated." For the transgression of that man should have brought common shame to you, but now you are inflated, in that each appears to himself to be acting rightly. ^D

^A If you had considered it your own personal affliction, as a part of your own body, you would surely have mourned, since the damage has extended to the common good of the Church. “That he may be removed.” Why then ought we to have mourned? As if from the contrary position. Why? Not so that you might expel him, but so that you might take him away as if he were a pestilence; as if he had said, Prayers and mourning are necessary so that a plague of this kind may be removed. “He who has done this deed.” He does not express the name, which we are accustomed to do in cases that are entirely absurd, as if avoiding the mention of it as something infectious.

^B V. 3, 6. *Siquidem ego tanquam absens corpore, præsens autem spiritu, jam judicavi tanquam præsens, ut is qui hoc ita patravit, in nomine Domini nostri Jesu Christi, congregatis vobis et meo spiritu, cum virtute Domini nostri Jesu Christi, tradatur Satanæ ad interitum carnis, ut spiritus salvus sit in die Domini Jesu. Non est bona gloriatio vestra.*

He is in a hurry to expel him, and does not wish them to wait for his bodily presence. “Present in spirit.” He shows himself to be present in spirit, fearing that they might deliberate on something else regarding his expulsion, and he says: “I have already judged.” Let no one, therefore, delay: my judgment against him is already established. “That he who has done this deed.” Others have read it thus: That him who has done this deed in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ—that is, who has been injurious to the name of Christ, and after having been deemed worthy of the name of Christ has dared such things—you deliver to Satan. “When you are gathered together.” So that his expression “I have already judged” might not seem to be the result of a headstrong spirit, he assumes them as partners, while he says: “When you are gathered together, and my spirit,” that is, my invisible presence. Then he adds: “In the name of the Lord Jesus.” This is to say, gather and judge according to God; do not be restrained by human shame or honor toward him, for he feared they might judge otherwise. “And my spirit.” Again he has set himself before them, and not only that, but Christ as well, so that when they judge, as if Christ and Paul himself were present, they might bring forth an uncorrupted verdict. “For the destruction of the flesh.” He sets a limit for Satan, that he may touch only the body, not the soul as well. Similar is that which God says concerning Job: “But do not touch his soul.” But he rightly says “for the destruction of the flesh,” that is, that he might macerate him with illness. For since concupiscences proceed from the body and from nourishment, he wishes the body to be punished and put to death. He therefore called it the destruction of the flesh, setting a boundary for the ^D devil and not allowing him to proceed further. “That the spirit may be saved.” In this way, the body too will be saved. And in another sense, “that the spirit may be saved” means that the Holy Spirit may be saved for him, and not depart as if from an impious person. This, however, belongs rather to one who is providing...

^A his salvation, rather than one who is punishing him. "Your glorifying is not good." He hints that they had not allowed him to repent, because they were boasting in him. For perhaps this man was one of those considered wise among them.

1 Cor. 5:6-8. Know you not that a little leaven corrupts the whole lump? Purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new paste, as you are unleavened. For Christ our pasch is sacrificed for us. Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

He takes care of them as well. For, he says, evil that is neglected infects the rest of the body of the Church, because others also imitate it. For just as leaven, though it be small, leavens the whole batch and diffuses itself into everything, so, he says, this man's sin draws many to itself. "Purge out the old leaven." This means those who commit such things. He calls them the "old leaven," either because they have rotted through sin, or because all in Christ are a new creation, but sin alone is old. ^B

By saying "Purge out," he signifies an exact cleansing. "That you may be a new paste." For Scripture recognizes as a "new" man him who is righteous, but as "old" him who is impious. Furthermore, he indicates that there were not many sinners among them. "That you may be a new paste." That is: outside of that old leaven concerning which I spoke, as you are unleavened. You must, he says, be unleavened. And where is it clear that we ought to be unleavened? It is evident from the same passage. For "Christ our pasch is sacrificed for us." Therefore, just as those who lived under the Law, when the temporary and irrational lamb was sacrificed for them, were unleavened for seven days (for it was not permitted to them either to have leavened bread in the house or to eat it); so too we, because the eternal ^C and rational Lamb who takes away the sin of the world has been sacrificed for us (for this is our Pasch), ought always to be without leaven and to be a new paste, carrying nothing of the old leaven—that is, of sin—into ourselves. See how consistently and familiarly he remains in the metaphor. For since he had called the sin of the one who had committed fornication "leaven," showing that from this, unless it be purified, another mass or paste is easily prepared, he adapted the following points—namely, the old leaven, the new paste, and the azymes or breads void of leaven—designating virtues and vices by these names. "For Christ our pasch." The conjunction is causal, and is thus placed causally: "For Christ our pasch is sacrificed for us." ^D Since indeed the Law commands that after the sacrifice of the firstborn in the Pasch, one ought to eat unleavened bread for seven days, he says that those unleavened breads were a figure so that we might not have any vices within ourselves, concerning which he says, "Christ is sacrificed," in the figure of the lamb.

^A Again, he remembers the benefits. "Therefore let us keep the feast." For it is necessary to celebrate the feast on account of the great gifts. "Not with old leaven." He remains with the metaphor, as if to say: Not in a vicious and evil manner of life, but in a life that does not have the admixture of that old leaven, sour and putrid, that is, in a pure and unadulterated life. For this is what he means: "With the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth" (that is, in breads without leaven, which are sincerity and truth).

V, 9-11. "I wrote to you in an epistle not to keep company with fornicators; and not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or with extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must you needs go out of the world. But now I have written to you not to keep company." ^B

[PHOT.] Where did he write? In those places where he says: "And you are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you," not this one or that one, but whoever is of such a sort. And again: "Purge out the old leaven," not this one or that one, but the whole old leaven. For, having taken an occasion from the one who had committed fornication, he raised his discourse to the common, that is to say, to every fornicator. And from there, making the discourse more general, he again subjoins the same precept for those who commit similar offenses, such as the covetous, idolaters, and whatever else is similar. "With the fornicators of this world." Lest they should think they were required not to keep company with the fornicators of the Greeks—which would be impossible for those who inhabit a city—he corrects it. The word "altogether" here is placed for that which is acknowledged. "For then must you needs." Along with the possible, he is anxious to show that the commandment is also easy. Do not judge, he says, the fornicators of this world—that is, the idolaters—for then you would have been obliged to go out from them, but judge and discern the believer who is a fornicator. ^C

"If any man that is named a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner: with such an one no, not to eat. For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person."

[PHOT.] Some link the word "named" to the preceding phrase, desiring to signify through it that he is indeed named a brother, and holds communion only by the name, while in reality, through his works, he is an enemy and stands aloof. But to me it seems it might be well taken if one were to join it to what follows, so that the word "named" or "nominatus" would no longer signify that benevolence, but rather the contrary: namely, one who is named by everyone according to his own works, because of his now manifest works. For this word, like many other words, is divided in two ways. Sometimes, as we said, it signifies the one who only ^D[is named].

dictions: when, that is, it signifies, as we have said, one who has association only in name; but at times it signifies one who has progressed to the extreme of his work, so that he has drawn the common appellation upon himself, so that he is recognized and named by this more than by his own name. Such a one, therefore—a fornicator, or a greedy man, or a reviler, or a drunkard—that is, one who is so public and manifest that he is recognized and called by all—he commands us to avoid, and neither to eat food with him, nor to speak with him, nor to converse with him; but not one who is merely whispered about or reviled by some. ^B Therefore, with great wisdom and effectiveness, he has joined the reviler together with the other absurd workers, so that, knowing he will have the same punishment as the fornicator or the idolater, insofar as he is to be shunned by all as a detestable person, he may bridle his tongue and restrain it, and not loosen it to gnaw at the lives of his neighbors.

He seems to me to have numbered the idolater in this place for this reason: that he might teach and provide assurance that, although it is a great crime and one of the most absurd of which some accuse a man, if it has not come to light, it is not right to avoid such a person on mere suspicion. For if this were the way, men, stirred up by mutual suspicions and calumnies, would change their way of life into that of enemies, or rather, of wild beasts. But it is necessary to drive away and separate from oneself that person who has become manifest both by his deeds and by the appellation by which he is called by all.

"Or an idolater." And how can he who is a brother, that is, a believer, be at the same time an idolater? This points to one "called a brother," because some had believed and yet still clung to idols. Therefore he says, "called a brother." For in truth, such a man is not a brother. "For what have I to do with judging those who are outside?" Consequently, he gives the reason why he does not forbid association with the fornicators or greedy men or others among the Greeks: Because, he says, judgment concerning them must be left to God. We, however, correct our brothers, by judging and condemning their life for the sake of correction, for we have separated ourselves from them. "But those who are outside, God judges." Then, lest you think that the sinning Greeks will be immune from punishment, he has assigned a more terrible and more fearsome tribunal to them, namely that of God.

"And search out the wicked man from among you." He brought the testimony, showing that this was legislated from above, and that it is not a novelty that has now come to pass, to search out the wicked man from the midst. But the phrase, "from among yourselves," ^C shows that they themselves are also helped if the wicked are removed. If God is to judge these, separate yourselves from them.

CHAPTER III.

That one ought not to have disputes and lawsuits.

VI, 1-3. Does any one of you, having a matter against another, dare to be judged under the unjust, and not rather under the saints? Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is judged by you, are you unworthy of the smallest judgments?

^A Observe that he brings this accusation as if regarding matters already acknowledged, and immediately from the outset he shows indignation, calling the act a "daring" and a "transgression of the law." — [PHOT.] These things being so, he says, and being in a fitting state, and whereas you have the authority to judge the brethren who are among you, but are not permitted to do this toward those who are outside, does anyone dare to call those outside to be judges for himself among you, and is he not ashamed even to conceive this in his thoughts? Will the faithful set up the unbelievers as judges for themselves? Will they choose the unjust in place of the saints? And he says this vehemently, protecting himself on all sides, that they might restrain themselves and not give the unbelievers a handle in anything, neither when being judged, nor when they are perpetrating any other things that are not seemly and peaceful. ^B For by this means he brought it about that the name of God might not be blasphemed because of them, and he moved the others toward love of the religion and the inspiration of piety. "To be judged under the unjust." What the one being judged first wishes to obtain, namely just judges, this he shows he is not obtaining; for, he says, they are unjust. Nevertheless, it must be noted that this is said regarding Greek judges. "And not rather under the saints?" Does any one of you dare to do such a thing—that when he has to be judged with a brother, he is not judged under the saints, but under the Greeks? He has declared their trustworthiness by calling them saints; and further, he exalts them even more, saying: "For they will judge the world," not, he says, by themselves sitting and judging—far from it (for the Lord shall judge)—but by condemning the world. How? When they, being themselves human, subject to the same passions as we, nevertheless believed and demonstrated a virtuous way of life. Will they not therefore be the accusers of those who have not become such? For they refute us, that we sinned not because of the weakness of nature, but because of sloth. ^C Which, indicating this, he subjoins: "And if the world is judged among you." He did not say "by you," but "among you," that is, "by you." "Because the saints..." From the very names themselves he makes the difference in the judgment, calling the others "unjust," but these "saints." "You are unworthy of the smallest judgments." It is a shame, he says, for you, who are to judge the world, to be judged in the abject and unjust courts of the unbelievers. "That we shall judge angels?" By "angels" he means the demons, just as Christ also said: "To the devil and his angels" (Matt. xxv, 41). But how shall we judge them? When they—being incorporeal—are found to be inferior to us who bear flesh, they are the more condemned. And if we are to judge angels, how much more so mundane matters? — Another [interpretation]. [PHOT.] If we judge, that is, reprove, the angels who have fallen from their own order through the depravity of their own will, we—who, although we are with a body, [yet] because they, being without a body, did not keep their own law... ^D

have lived according to the laws given to us by the Lord. If, then, we shall judge them and establish their sin as inexcusable, how much more are we capable of resolving worldly contentions and the lawsuits and quarrels among ourselves? But if you are not yet persuaded by what has been said, but you still think that the tribunal of the faithful is weak and incapable of resolving the lawsuits and contentions among you, yet even if the faithful were weak, ^A base, and incapable of perceiving a just judgment, it is better to have these sit as judges when you have need of worldly judgments, than to surrender yourselves to be judged by the unbelievers. "I said 'abject' or 'base' ones," he says, "to confound and shame you, for there are many among you capable of resolving lawsuits and contentions." For it is a matter of the greatest shame and reproach if there is not one wise man among you who can judge justly between dissenting brethren. He sets forth various proofs that one ought not, having abandoned the faithful, to approach the tribunal of the unbelievers. First, because we who are faithful do not now judge them, since they are unbelievers. "For," he asks, "what am I to do with judging those who are outside?" How great a reproach it is, therefore, for the faithful to be judged by ^B unbelievers! Second: If those are unjust, but these are saints, what madness it is, having left the saints, to run to the unjust, and this while wishing to obtain what is just! Third: If the saints will judge the world and make their cause inevitable, in that, being of the same nature and practicing the same virtues, they did not have those whom they rebuke as imitators, how much more potent are they to act as arbitrators and judges between two parties! Fourth: If we are capable of judging the angels—that is, the bodiless demons—how much more so those who are of the same nature and way of life? Fifth: Even if the believers were not able to resolve a lawsuit, it would nevertheless be better to be judged by them than under the infidels. Furthermore, "If we judge the world," he says, "is it not unworthy ^C that you should be judged by the unbelievers?" For this is what he signifies when he says: "And if the world is judged by you, are you unworthy of the smallest judgments?" Having set forth these many proofs that one ought not to be judged by unbelievers, he brings his discourse to what is more perfect, and says: "What do I say, that you ought not to be judged by unbelievers? It would be better [not to be judged] even by the faithful, but far better [to have] no lawsuits among yourselves at all." For the very fact of accusing and complaining against one another is a downfall for you. It would be best, therefore, that no one should inflict injury, or even be affected by injury; for thus would the virtue and salvation of ^D all be common. But if it is necessary that the one or the other should occur, it is more desirable to suffer injury than to inflict it. For the latter casts one out of the Kingdom, while the former conciliates it. But if you not only do not choose to accept injury, but you even inflict it, and that against brethren and those of the same faith, how much punishment will that cost you!

^A VI, 4-6. “If then you have worldly judgments, appoint those who are contemptible in the Church to them. I say this to your shame. Is it so that there is not even one wise man among you who will be able to judge between his brother and his brother? But brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers.” [BY THE SAME.] That is to say, if you have need of them, if it is necessary that these things exist among you, if it is necessary to establish them. And this is indeed a ready meaning and arrangement; but it is possible also, by dividing the expression more deeply, to discern and unfold the meaning. “Those who are contemptible in the Church.” He wishes abundantly to withdraw us from external courts, and he says: Can anyone at all say that there is not some wise man in the Church or congregation who is able to judge? For even if, according to your word, there is no wise man, appoint as arbitrators or judges those who are rather the contemptible ones of the Church, that is, the lowest ones, rather than unbelievers. “I say this to your shame.” To put you to shame, he says, and to remove your pretexts abundantly, I said it was necessary to appoint the contemptible ones, since, he says, there is such a scarcity of wise men among you that it is necessary to appoint the contemptible ones as judges. “Between his brother.” He added “of the brother,” signifying this, that, he says, in the case where the lawsuit is against a brother, there is no need for ^B much variety and knowledge in the mediator, since brotherly affection contributes much toward the resolution of the contention. “Brother with brother.” It is a double evil. For if the very act of a brother being judged by a brother is an evil, how much more if you are judged even before unbelievers? VI, 7, 8. “Therefore, this is now altogether a defeat for you, that you have lawsuits with one another. Why do you not rather suffer injury? Why do you not rather receive damage? No, you yourselves inflict injury and cause damage, and that to brethren.” After he referred to the judges what concerned them; he next blames the very act of being judged at all, calling the thing itself a defeat, and rightly so; for he is defeated and conquered by anger who pursues the one by whom he has been affected by injury. In that, he says, you have lawsuits, you are conquered by the affect of anger and contention, whether you have lawsuits under these [judges] or under those. “Why do you not rather suffer injury?” The crime is multifold. First, that you do not bear one who inflicts injury. Second, that you yourselves inflict injury; third, that you also inflict injury upon a brother. — [OECUMENIUS.] As if he said, It is good, indeed, not to inflict injury nor to be injured, but in the choice, it is better to be injured. ^C Or do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor the effeminate, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and in the Spirit of our God. ^D

^A He concluded the discourse with a threat in saying, "The unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God." "Do not be deceived." He hints here that there were some among them who said: "God is philanthropic and forgives all, and introduces even sinners into the kingdom of heaven because of the abundance of His goodness." Therefore he says, "Do not be deceived" by saying and hoping these things. For it is truly a deception to hope for good things while seeking things that are other. "Nor fornicators." He hints at that fornicator mentioned previously; for that reason he placed "nor fornicators" in the first position.

"Nor drunkards, nor revilers." For what reason did he place drunkards and revilers after adulterers, idolaters, and those who lie with males? First, because Christ also declared that the one who says "You fool" is liable to hell; and the Jews also came to idolatry through gluttony and drunkenness. Then, he says that all these, for the time being, fall from the kingdom of heaven. Furthermore, we shall come to know the difference in punishments hereafter. "And such were some of you." These things, he says, many of you had, and you were some of those possessing these things. "But you were washed." He then proceeds to recount the benefits of Christ. For you were, he says, the things mentioned, but Christ made you clean. And not only this, but He also sanctified, and not only this, but He also justified. "In the name of the Lord Jesus." And these things, he says, were all granted to you in the name of Christ and in the Holy Spirit—that is, through Christ and the Spirit. Not through this one or that one, again hinting at their leaders, the wise and the wealthy.

^C "All things are lawful for me, but not all things are expedient. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any. Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats, but God will destroy both it and them. Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. And God both raised up the Lord, and will also raise us up through His power."

He moves to another passion and inveighs against the gluttons. It is lawful for me, he says, to eat and drink, but it is not expedient to do this with intemperance. "But I will not be brought under the power of any." I am the lord, he says, of eating and drinking; but if I surrender myself to these intemperately, I shall be found a slave to them instead of being lord, and I shall serve them. "Whose God is the belly," he says. Therefore I will not be brought under ^D the power of any of these. "Meats for the belly." By "meats" here he means gluttony; and by "belly," gastrimargia (voracity of the stomach), not the stomach itself.

Otherwise: [PHOT.] If one must interpret "meats" simply as food, and "belly" as the receptacle of victuals, it is better to receive what follows as a prophecy of the future—for instance, "But God will destroy both it and them," which is to say: But these things will be idle and useless at the resurrection, as God transforms us into incorruption, so that we have no need of food,

nor of a belly prepared for the reception of food. And the thought might also be, "Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats," ^A in such a sense: they are, he says, provocative and seeking of one another. For the appetite in the belly seeks after food, and in turn, the food irritates and excites the appetite that is within us. But God, he says, will demonstrate both to be idle and useless in the resurrection. It is not, therefore, necessary to be too anxious about the things that are to be useless in the future. But if, by "meats," we have understood the insatiability of food, and by "belly," the insatiability of the belly (for nothing prevents these things from being signified by the terms), the passage that follows does not provide a sense of prediction, but rather of a curse and a sentence. God, he says, will destroy these; He will drive these away from us; He will banish gluttony and belly-madness, and will show us to be free from these evils. If, however, we bring curses upon them, and pray to be freed from them, how shall we not loathe them? "And the belly for meats." As if he had said: Gluttony has an affection for belly-madness, and that [belly-madness] for the former, and these cannot lead us to Christ, ^B but rather send to each other those who obey them—the one to the other, and that one back to this. And both this and those He will destroy. He does not speak of the gut, but of the excess; neither of food, but of luxury. What then is, "He will destroy"? Some say it is a prediction of the future age, that there is no eating and drinking there. But if that which keeps within measure has an end, much more so does that which lacks measure. Others say that he has sealed the exhortation with a prayer, as if to say: Would that God might indeed destroy this, namely the excess, and these, namely the luxury! "But the body is not for fornication." Lest you might think that he blamed the body when he mentioned the belly, he shows that the body is not under accusation, but rather the belly-madness. For the body, he says, was not fashioned for this purpose, ^C that it should live in luxury and from this fall into fornication, but that it should follow Christ as being its head, and that Christ should preside over it. And it was logical to say, "But the body is not destined for luxury and belly-madness," but having passed over this in silence, he mentioned the fornication that is born from these, showing the result of belly-madness, that, he says, it is fornication. "And God raised up the Lord." Since they were still as infants, it was necessary to condescend and speak to their infancy. Do not be troubled upon hearing that God raised up Christ. For he does not say this because He was not able to raise Himself. For He was the one saying, "Dissolve this temple, and in three days I will raise it up," and, "I have power to lay down my life and to take it again." And in the Acts he says, "To whom He also presented Himself living." ^D But the Apostle attributes the things of the Son to the Father, and those of the Father to the Son. For what the Father does, these the Son also does. And He will raise us up. If, therefore, we are members of Christ, as indeed we are, once the head is raised...

the rest of the body will also be raised. ^A “By His power.” He confirms by the power of God that which in the discourse was difficult to believe, which He did not posit regarding Christ’s resurrection (for that had already occurred), but regarding our own resurrection, so that we might not disbelieve, and that He might stop the mouths of those who contradict.

VI, 16-18. *Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I therefore take the members of Christ and make them members of a harlot? God forbid. Or do you not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body with her? For the two, He says, shall become one flesh. But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit. Flee sexual immorality. Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body.*

He returns to the aforementioned exhortation, which was against sexual immorality. Observe, however, that he did not say: "Shall I join the members of Christ to a harlot?" but what was more horrific, namely, to take the very members of Christ away from Christ, and cause them to be members of a harlot: “For the two, He says, shall become one flesh.” He brings forward the Old Testament as testimony. How, then, will they be or become one flesh? Because the union does not allow two to be two, but makes them one. Since the man who is united ^B to a harlot is a member of Christ, he unites himself to her and defiles the members of Christ. For if they are also united in true marriage—the two into one flesh—yet it happens in the same way in shameful sexual immorality. “But he who is joined to the Lord.” Observe how, by the bare names of the harlot and of Christ, he brings forth the accusation, making it more severe. “Is one spirit.” Such a person, he says, even if he is surrounded by a body, becomes spirit, solely by doing nothing carnal. — Otherwise. [OECUM.] Or because through the medium of the Holy Spirit he is joined to Christ, being glued to Him through spiritual works. — Otherwise. [PHOT.] He is of a single kind; he becomes wholly spiritual by the union with the Lord. He is not dragged along by carnal passions, nor is he split into a duality, serving God and mammon, ^C but he is entirely unified and wholly spiritual, brought into the unity of the spirit. “Every sin that a man does is outside the body.” In the case of sexual immorality, he says, the whole body is defiled. Whence it is also the custom for those who have committed sexual immorality to run to the baths. The murderer, however, and the robber defile only their hands. The phrase “Flee sexual immorality” signifies eager avoidance. — [OECUM.] Or that the other sins also proceed from a passion of the soul, such as anger in the murderer, or vainglory in those who desire to become rich. But sexual immorality has its sources of desire from the body itself. ^D He wished to excise the matter, since the exhortation before him is about it. For sexual immorality is not entirely worse than everything in regards to wickedness. The blessed Severian has given many interpretations of this matter in the fifty-seventh volume, in the third discourse, in the nineteenth chapter, stating this same thing of Chrysostom’s, and another: that, he says, the one committing sexual immorality, against his own constitution, and

^A harming it, is insulting the workshop of our body. And another: that human beings are the body of Christ and members of Christ. Therefore, he who sins against his own body sins against Christ, who is our head, of whom the body is also a temple. Along with all these, accept this one too, if you wish: wishing to remove the sin of sexual immorality, he sets forth a certain scope, that the fornicator is worthy of ten thousand punishments. For he who does not spare the defilement of his own body, how would he spare another’s? For he who is evil to himself, to whom will he be good?

And otherwise. It is written concerning the husband and the wife: “The two shall become one flesh.” He, therefore, who is not joined by law and divine marriage, ^B but is engaging in sexual immorality, when he ought to have an honorable marriage and an undefiled bed, insults marriage and his wife through his sexual immorality and the uncleanness arising from it. And he who does this sins against his own body by sinning against his wife, who is one body with the husband. And she is the body of the husband, in that she is his rib and was taken from him. I think the last is the most beautiful; for it preserves the meaning of the word without anything missing. For it is found thus: Every sin that a person commits is apart from debauchery and uncleanness in intercourse with a wife. But he who commits sexual immorality sins against his wife, filling her with uncleanness and shame.

And there is also an interpretation by the holy Athanasius, in addition to all these, in his book *On Honorable Marriage*, and in addition to all these, he interpreted it as follows: Writing to those who are delicate and voluptuous, Paul used their own love of flesh as a collaborator for the rejection of sexual immorality, saying this: that other sins damage the soul and transmit their harm only to it, but he who commits sexual immorality ^C damages the body along with the soul, corrupting and weakening it, and destroying its psychic and vital vigor, as if he had said: Spare at least your own body which you cherish and pamper, and for which you have the greatest concern. — [Of the same.] What then? Does envy, he says, not wear away the body? Why, then, do you say that only sexual immorality does this? The Apostle spoke very cautiously. For he says: “Every sin that a person commits is outside the body;” but envy does not originate from us, but is worked into us; for we suffer envy, but we do not commit it, and it is a passion, not an action, and the Apostle is speaking now about action, for he says, “Every sin that a person commits,” and not about a passion. — Otherwise [Phot.]. It divides his own body, and he demonstrates injustice against himself, not against another, which is a thing not to be found in any of the other sins. For all others sin by harming others, ^D but he who commits sexual immorality sins by harming and maltreating himself.

Otherwise. The deduction demonstrates the meaning of the word prescribed before it:

In his own body he sins, which is to say, into the body of the Lord himself. For he adds: "Or do you not know that your bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit?" and again: "And you are not your own"; and a little before: "Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ?" and again: "Shall I then take the members of Christ...?" Thus, he who commits fornication sins against his own members, which are Christ's, and against his own body. What then, he says, do those who commit other sinful acts not also sin against the body of Christ according to this account? And we say that this is not so. For even if he who steals or commits murder performs the sin through some member, he does not perform the evil against that member, but outside it and against some other person. But he who commits fornication shows, through his members—just as they do—that he works the damage and injustice against his own members and his whole body. ^C Otherwise. He did not say "he sins through the body"—which many, assuming this, provide trouble for the interpreters—but "he sins into his own body," as he falls into it, defiles it, and renders it abominable. As if someone were to say: "Such a one insults himself while thinking he is insulting someone else." For now the discourse of the Apostle does not look toward the punishment which follows the sin later, but toward the violation—that is, the defilement—which happens to the body in the act itself from the sexual union. For the one who commits murder kills someone else, but he who commits fornication insults himself. And he who sees other transgressions performs them against others, but he who commits lewdness shames himself and defiles himself. Whence they also wash themselves, when they understand the defilement and loathe the absurdity. For other transgressions also look toward the person who is being wronged, but this one looks toward the one doing the wrong. The other acts are outside the body of the perpetrator, but this one defiles the perpetrator himself. And in other matters he wrongs others; in fornication, however, himself.

If, however, you wish for a second door to be opened to you, consider that since we often say, while exhorting a man laboring under a defect or a sin that is worthy of pardon: "Brother, depart from this disease which is worse than all others"—not because it exceeds all others, but because we wish him to be separated from that one as well—perhaps the Apostle also said this regarding fornication, and desiring to make the one who had committed fornication among the Corinthians chaste, he erupted into this utterance. ^D Si vero et tertium, intellige quod sicut is qui triticum aut aliud semen in mare projicit, in semen peccat, prohibens ipsum ne ad generationem procedat: ita et qui suam semen in scortum projicit, in proprium corpus peccat; scortum enim non solum interimit quod peperit, sed impedimentum etiam ponit ne pariat.

Quod si etiam quartum, intelligere oportet quod ea parte qua agit, etiam patitur. Siquidem nisi passus esset, non defluxisset; quod si defluxit, corruptus est: si autem corruptus est, injuriam accepit. Denique in nulla alia operatione quam in

^A viri cum muliere commistione, dicitur eos esse corruptos qui virginem aut adolescentulum aggressi sunt.

If you seek a fifth, consider that for the one who joins with a harlot, if a child is born, it is reared for harlotry, and the observer will say thereafter: "Truly that man did himself an injury." For behold, the seed—or rather, his own body—commits fornication.

If you seek a sixth, note that if anyone happens to associate with a slave girl, that which is born will be a slave. How then does he who strives to beget a slave not sin against himself?

If you seek a seventh, see that even the child born is wronged, being called a bastard and becoming dishonored everywhere. Whether he needs to enter a council or a court of law, he is cast out. Through him, the one who planted him also shares in the shame, for he has left behind a memorial of his own lust.

If you seek an eighth, examine what is to be said: since he who fornicates becomes one with the harlot, making his own members the members of a harlot, he truly sins against himself. For some have indeed used murder well, as Moses and Phinees, and wrath, as Peter and Paul, but no one has ever used fornication well. ^B

If you seek a ninth, consider this: since the Church is one body, and individual ^C members belong to one another, he who fornicates sins against all. For his lapse runs through even to the fullness of the Church, from which he marked himself out to be cut off until he should repent.

If you desire a tenth, it may be said that, since those who come together by the law of honorable marriage become one body ("For they shall be," he says, "two in one flesh." Therefore, "the wife has not power of her own body, but the husband; and likewise also the husband"), justifiably the man who fornicates against his wife—that is, against his own body—sins. Likewise also the wife; for regarding this sin alone did Christ set a law, if they should separate from one another. "He sins against his own body." That is, he renders his own body impure.

VI, 19, 20. "Or know you not that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own? For you were bought with a price. Glorify God therefore in your body and in your spirit, which are God's."

He strikes fear by the greatness of the gift and the dignity of the Giver. For the Spirit is the gift, and you have this from God. For it is God who gave it, and who dwells in the temple of God; that is, in your body. "And you are not your own." He does not take away free will itself, but restrains it from evil deeds. He says: You have a Master, and you have nothing of your own, not even your body itself. "For you were bought with a price," namely by the blood of His Son, when you had been reduced ^D

under the power of Satan. “Glorify now God.” Since you were bought by God, glorify Him through good works. He says, “So that seeing your good works, they may glorify your Father who is in heaven.” — “And in your spirit.” By saying this, he shows that it is not enough to flee fornication with the body alone, but also with the spirit, that is, the soul, so that it may not be defiled even in thought. For, he says, “Whoever looks at a woman to desire her, has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” — “Which are God’s.” He frequently calls to mind that we are not our own, but are subject to a Master. This is indicated by, “Which are God’s,” and not your own.

CHAPTER IV. Concerning marriage, widowhood, and celibacy.

VII, 1. “Now concerning the things whereof you wrote to me; it is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own

^A wife, and let every woman have her own husband.”

Let one not be continent, he says, if the other is unwilling, lest continence become the cause of fornication for the other party. “For a time.” That is, at the appropriate time. The opportunity for abstinence is fasting and prayer. This, he says, does not mean forbidding those who are joined to a wife from praying or fasting, but rather that fasting and prayer should be done more zealously. For abstain, he says, so that you may have leisure for fasting and prayer, since the occupation of intercourse does not cause impurity, but this refers to intercourse with a lawful wife. “For your intemperance.” In order that you may learn that the devil alone is not the cause of fornication, but also our own intemperance, he adds, “For your intemperance,” showing from this that enticements arise more from ourselves than from the devil. “Not by way of commandment.” — [OECUM.] For it is not as in the case of, “You shall not commit adultery, you shall not murder,” that the command not to defraud one another is a commandment, such that one who does so is praiseworthy as if fulfilling the law. ^B By way of permission, he says, I said this, condescending to your weakness, I do not command. Do not defraud, but blessed is he who is continent. Yet by saying “by permission,” he showed that he does a thing that is also condemned, the one who abstains only during fasting and prayer. “That I myself am.” Where he imposes a difficult matter, he brings himself forward as an example. “But everyone has his own gift from God.” Since he had vehemently accused them by saying, “Lest Satan tempt you because of your intemperance,” he now hastens to console them. Paul was a virgin, and because he had said, “I wish all were as I am,” he said that remaining a virgin is a gift from ^C God; not because the matter does not require our own effort—for in order to be deemed worthy of the gift, one labors much—but as has been said, he consoles them regarding the reproach. “One indeed in this way, another however in that way.” The one indeed abstains entirely from intercourse, the other however so, that he does not approach any other than his wife.

“But I say to the unmarried and to widows, it is good for them if they remain as I am. But if they do not contain themselves, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn.” [THEOD.] He showed himself again to be of the company of the unmarried. For no one could justly class him among the widows; for while still a young man, he was deemed worthy of receiving the call. And let no one think that he is decreeing celibacy only for men, and abstinence after marriage only for women, because he said, “to the unmarried,” that is, to men, and “to widows,” that is, to women. For he instructs both genders in both: both in celibacy, and in ^D abstinence in widowhood after marriage. “But if they do not contain themselves, let them marry.” Behold the wisdom; he shows that continence is better, and he does not force him who does not attain it, fearing lest a greater offense occur. “Than to burn.” He disclosed how great the tyranny of desire is. If, he says, you endure much violence and burning, it is better to marry than to fall into the fire of fornication.

^A

VII, 10, 11. *But to the married I command, not I, but the Lord: a wife should not be separated from her husband. But if she is even separated, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband. And let a husband not dismiss his wife.*

Since he is about to speak of a law explicitly established by the Lord, he therefore says: “Not I, but the Lord.” And what is the law? That there should be no division, except for the cause of fornication. And while indeed the things mentioned before were not stated by the Lord explicitly, yet they seem to accord with the Lord himself, speaking either by himself or through the mouth of Paul. But because the Lord openly handed down the word concerning separation, for this reason he says, “Not I, but the Lord.” Thus, the expressions “I” and “Not I” have this distinction: that “Not I” serves what the Lord said, while concerning the other he says “I.” And lest you think that what is his own is merely human, he adds below: “But I think that I also have the Spirit of God.” ^B “But if she is even separated.” It is better, he says, not to be separated. But if she is even separated, let her remain having her husband, if not by intercourse, yet by affection, so that she does not bring or join to herself another man. “Let him not dismiss his wife.” Unless something has occurred in the cause of fornication. For this is the law of Christ.

VII, 12, 14. *But to the rest I say, not the Lord: if any brother has an unbelieving wife, and she consents to live with him, let him not dismiss her. And a wife who has an unbelieving husband, and he consents to live with her, let her not dismiss him. For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through the wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through the husband.*

Lest marriages be torn apart, and thus piety be judged by the common people to be the cause of confusion and disturbance and the overturning of homes, for this reason he forbids those who have acquired unbelieving spouses from being divided in their cohabitation. For he does not lay down the law concerning those who have not yet contracted a marriage, but concerning those who have already arrived at marriage. For he did not say, “If anyone wishes to take an unbelieving spouse,” but, “If anyone has.” ^C For it happened in a marriage that one believed, while the other remained in unbelief. “Has an unbeliever.” What then? If a wife is caught in fornication, it is permitted to dismiss her; but if she is an unbeliever, is it no longer allowed? Yet unbelief is worse. It is indeed worse, but in an adulteress the malice is overt, whereas in an unbeliever ignorance is present rather than malice. It was also probable that she would cease, and that she would abandon her unbelief (for Paul himself also says: “For what do you know, O wife, whether you will save your husband?”), if she at least consents to cohabit. “And she consents.” If she wishes, he says. For what disadvantage is there if, with the faith of one part remaining sincere, there be a good hope that the unbeliever will, in time, be changed so as to believe? ^D “Let him not dismiss her.” If he who is joined to a harlot becomes one body, then clearly he who is joined to an unbeliever also becomes one body.

How is it, then, that he forbids the former but not the latter? We say that while one body is indeed formed even with an unbeliever, the purity of the faithful part overcomes the uncleanness of the unbeliever. How so? In the case of a harlot both are unclean, both the harlot and the one who approaches her to commit fornication. But in the case of an unbelieving wife, she is indeed unclean insofar as she is an unbeliever, but the one who approaches her is not, for he does not approach her to perform any forbidden act, but utilizes the permitted union of marriage.

^A And again, the unbeliever is unclean in one respect—namely, according to piety—yet in another respect shares with the faithful part, namely in the commingling of bodies. In the case of a harlot, however, the communion occurs in that very respect in which she is unclean, namely in the body. “For the unbelieving man is sanctified.” Let not the faithful part fear to cohabit with the unbeliever as though they were rendered unclean by that cohabitation; note how he repels the fear. He is sanctified, he says, by the abundance of the purity, implying that uncleanness is overcome by the arrival of purity; not that the unbeliever becomes holy—for he did not say that—but “he is sanctified,” consoling the faithful part and leading the unbeliever toward the love and desire for faith.

^B This very fact, namely that the unbeliever tolerates the faithful one and does not withdraw from cohabiting, is something akin to directing one’s mind toward piety. But perhaps someone might say: “Therefore, considering this same thing, we could say that the believer tends toward impiety.” To which we reply that it is not the same thing, nor at all necessary. For the believer, in cohabiting with the unbeliever, fulfills the commandment and law of the faith, so that in this way he is even more reconciled to the faith and further removed from unbelief. The unbeliever, however, bound only by affection towards the one with whom he lives, does not dissolve the union; he is not fulfilling the law of his own unbelief but, following the one with whom he lives with affection, he will ^C at some point be led by him toward his own faith. To love him, indeed, belongs to pious legislation and not to impiety. Thus, in this respect too, he is close to being pious and has been sanctified through the cohabitation of the believer.

*Else your children would be unclean, but now they are holy. But if the unbeliever departs, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases; but God has called us in peace.*

For if the unbelieving part were not overcome by the purity of the faithful part, he says, there would be nothing left but for the children born to be unclean, or at least only half-pure. Which, he says, is not the case—for they are holy—repelling the fear abundantly through the expression of holiness. This is what he means: “Else your children would be unclean,” if it were not so; but now they are holy, by the abundance of holiness. “But if the unbeliever departs, let him depart.” That is to say, if he commands you to share in his unbelief, or if, because you are not doing this, he ^D separates, let him be separated, he says; for it is better for the marriage to be dissolved than for piety to be.

^A “A brother is not under bondage.” If he fights and contends every day, wishing to draw you to his own unbelief, then also be separated. For you have not, he says, been brought into bondage in such matters so as to have to endure even one who is fighting. And it is clear that he speaks of a fight that is occurring, from the fact that he adds: “But God has called us in peace,” that is, so that we may live in peace, and that there may not be discord or fighting among you. Since, therefore, he is fighting, it is for this reason good to be rid of it. “A brother or sister is not under bondage in such cases.” A believer, he says, whether man or woman, is not under such necessity in the case of unbelievers as is imposed upon him in the case of believers. For in that case, in every way, except for the reason of fornication, those who have been joined are not permitted to be separated from one another; but here, if the unbelieving party agrees to dwell with the believer, one must not dissolve the union. But if he stirs up discord, and he brings about the dissolution, the believer is not under bondage so as not to be separated, but is free, once the other has dissolved the marriage, to stand apart himself as well. Yet, he says, even if one is free to dissolve the union because of the unbeliever’s discord, one will do much better if, having resolved the strife through peace and noble conduct, he does not dissolve the marriage. “For,” he says, “God has called us in peace.” For this, he says, is also a sign of the calling from God—that we should be peaceable toward all, as far as lies within us. And the part that follows, “For what do you know, O wife,” and so on, accords with this interpretation by its very sequence. “For what do you know, O wife, if you will save your husband? Or what do you know, O husband, if you will save your wife or not? As God has distributed to each one, as the Lord has called each one, so let him walk. And so I ordain in all the churches.”

Again, he moves on to one who wants to remain and does not stir up discord, and he says: If he does not stir up discord against you, remain with him. For it is likely that in time you will also save him by your counsel, and you will make him a believer. See, however, how he did not demand that this must necessarily occur, so that he might not impose a heavy burden, but by the uncertainty of the future he took away the necessity, and ensured that this necessity should not lead to despair or cause one to become sluggish. “Or not.” As far as the word “or not,” make a complete stop, so that the sense is: Or what do you know, O man, whether you will save your wife or not? That is, whence do you know if you will save her or not save her? For the future is uncertain; and since it is uncertain, one must not dissolve the marriage. For if you do not save her, you suffer no harm; but if you do save her, you receive benefit. “As God has distributed to each one.” For He alone knows what is useful, and whether it was more beneficial for the believer to have been joined from the beginning to an unbeliever or to a believer. For in some cases it was beneficial for a believer to dwell with and be joined to a believer, and so it happened; and in some cases, for a believer to be joined to an unbeliever, and it happened in that way. And no one is capable of discerning the reasons for these things, except for Him who has thus ordained and

divided, and the Lord who called. If, then, God and the Lord ordained such unions and divided them according to the benefit of each, the believer who is joined to an unbeliever ought not to be distressed, or seek anxiety and release, but as each was called, in this he should remain and walk together. For Severianus stated it thus: for if you do not punctuate it this way, he said the syntax is incoherent. Thus, he says, God divided you and thus He has called you, with an unbelieving wife or husband; therefore, cherish the marriage, and do not dissolve the faith. “So I ordain in all the Churches.” He adds this, so that by the fact that they have others as partners and other Churches, they might become more ready for obedience. ^B

VII, 18-20. “Was anyone called while circumcised? Do not let him draw out the foreskin; was anyone called in uncircumcision? Do not let him be circumcised. Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God. Let each one remain in the calling in which he was called.” Again, he says, you were called circumcised; do not draw it out. — [PHOT.] The holy Epiphanius says this, that through some medicinal treatment someone can cause him who is circumcised to become uncircumcised, and that the first inventor of this notion was Esau. For this reason, God says: “I have hated Esau.” — “Was anyone called in uncircumcision? Let him not be circumcised.” — [OECUM.] For it is likely that by some treatment one could return the circumcision to its former state, and run back to it and boast. In uncircumcision, he says, you were called; remain what you are. For neither does circumcision contribute to salvation, nor does uncircumcision do harm. For there is need of one thing only: to fulfill the commandments. — [PHOT.] And the benefit is gained through the keeping of the commandment equally for both the circumcision and the uncircumcision. For of the deeds among humans, some have their usefulness in themselves, even if they are not bound to a divine commandment, such as justice and similar things; others exist for the sake of the commandment alone, as most of those in the Law. ^C

“Were you called while a slave? Do not let it be a concern to you; but even if you are able to become free, rather make use of it. For he who is called in the Lord while a slave is the Lord’s freedman. Likewise, he who is called while free is a slave of Christ. You were bought with a price; do not become slaves of men. Let each one in what he was called, brothers, in this remain before God.” Again, the same advice: to be in the same states in which one was called. If you were called while being a slave, do not be troubled; slavery does not do harm to the faith. And it does not do such harm that, even if you are able to be set free, it is rather better for you to serve. Thus, there will not even be one obstacle for you from slavery. — Otherwise. [PHOT.] So that slavery might not be thought by slaves to be an obstacle to piety, he says expressly that this is so far from being an obstacle that there is not even a need to be anxious about it. “For let it not be a concern to you,” he says, “but even if you are able, through some diligence and ^D

^A to become free, use that opportunity, and use your slavery all the more. Yet even so, you are in no way inferior to your master. For you are a freedman, just as he is, of the common Lord. For you are a servant of the common Lord, just as he is, and a freedman again, just as he is. Why, then, are you concerned about physical slavery, which neither diminishes you nor adds anything greater to the one being served, but which, on the contrary, hinders neither of you at all from attaining the same rewards? “For he who was called in the Lord is a servant.” He says that in matters regarding Christ, you and your master are equal. For he, too, is a servant of Christ. But you, he says, perhaps have even more: for you are a freedman of Christ. For He Himself liberated you from all spiritual slavery. Nevertheless, by the abundance of his words, he wishes to show the equality of servant and master, since we are all freedmen of Christ, in that He liberated us from the tyranny of Satan, and servants of Christ, since, having liberated us from there, He brought us under His own kingdom. “You were bought with a price,” namely, with the blood of His Only-begotten; for God and Father bought us. “Do not become servants of men.” Above he said, “If you are also able to become free, use it all the more,” but here he says, “Do not become servants of men.” For this applies both to the free and to the servants. For he who does not yield to a master who ^B commands impious and absurd things does not become a servant of men, even if he is under the yoke of slavery. Such was Joseph. But he who, for the sake of gifts or the satisfying of the belly, subjects himself to men for absurd services, is a servant of men, even if he appears to be free. This is the slavery he forbids, not that which is customary and according to human laws. For he exhorts one to be subject and obedient in that slavery everywhere.

VII, 23-28. Now concerning virgins, I have no commandment from the Lord, but I give an opinion as one who has obtained mercy from the Lord to be faithful. I consider, therefore, that this is good because of the present necessity, that it is good for a man to be so. Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek a release. Are you released from a wife? Do not seek a wife. But if you should marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin should marry, she has not sinned. Yet such will have affliction in the flesh; but I am sparing you.

Since he is coming to a higher philosophy, he is afraid to command it purely and in bare words, fearing the possible failure of those who might undertake it. Therefore, he does not give it as a commandment, but as a counsel. ^C But these things concerning the virgins have been interpreted more studiously, as one who has discussed this matter more exactly in an entire volume, and take note there. I, however, have written what I have reached by the grace of God. “As one who has obtained mercy from the Lord.” He says he has obtained mercy that he might be faithful, as it were a herald and an adviser. “I consider, therefore, that this is good.” See again how he tempers the commandment that arose from necessity. “I consider,” he says. What? That it is good to be without marriage, because of the difficulties which are in it and the evils of marriage. “Because of the present necessity.” — Otherwise. [Photius] I think he calls the persecution the "present necessity" here, that which is threatened by the unbelievers against the believers. ^D

and the other insults and afflictions which they were suffering. For it is consistent that he should call this the "present necessity." For since he wished to provide a lofty and great exhortation, it seemed good to him to introduce it in view of the circumstances. "Good, he says, is virginity," and this because of the current onset of temptations. For we shall bear this more easily and with less labor than if we had wives and children dragged along with us in persecutions and myriad miseries. For since the soul is divided into many affections, it is necessary for a man to be submerged in an unbearable evil; but if he is alone, and not torn apart by the afflictions of others, it is easy to endure the storm of evils. Then, lest anyone say, "Must it not be, then, that one who has already attained to the sharing of marriage would do better to dissolve the marriage?" he added, "God forbid." For he makes this clear by saying, "Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not a loosing." But as he says, just as the one who is bound ought not to seek a loosing, so neither ought he who is loosed ^B plan a bond for himself. And the phrase, "Art thou loosed," can be taken in two ways: either that you were never bound at all, or that you have been loosed from the bond by which you were bound, and you ought not to be bound again to another wife's bond. "Seek not a loosing." Since he spoke about virginity, fearing that they might be disturbed as being unstable, he runs through the topic of marriage. And it is in harmony with what was said above. For he does not mean by "loosing" here abstinence from intercourse by mutual consent, but rather, contrary to judgment and without a sufficient reason of fornication, the dissolution of the contract; but it is good to remain in virginity while the husband and wife are together. "But and if thou marry." He corrects this, fearing the weakness of the listeners, as though they could not grasp virginity.

Otherwise. [Photius] The phrase, "But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned," and what follows, should be construed with what was said above by way of hyperbaton, as for example: "It is good for a man to be so. But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned," and so forth. For he ought not to join it to, "Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife. But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned." For, first of all, the meaning taken in that way is inconsistent. For what would it be appropriate to say to one who is already married and has been dissolved, "But and if thou marry?" For this is appropriate for those who have not yet married. ^C And, furthermore, it is a great sin for one who has been loosed from a wife to marry another; so it is not possible to join the passage in that way, but as was said before. For even a little before he says, "But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried." Therefore, because of both what was said before and what is said now, so that he may not appear to say things contrary to himself, it must be construed by way of hyperbaton. But if you take "Art thou loosed" not as addressed to those who were joined and then dissolved, but simply to those who have not entered at all into the communion of marriage, but are loosed from such a bond, the syntax is possible word for word. "And if the virgin marry, she hath not sinned." By virgin here he says not the one consecrated to God, ^D

but the unmarried girl. For one who is consecrated to God, if she marries, renders the one to whom she is wedded an adulterer against Christ. ^A "Such shall have affliction in the flesh." Those, he says, who contract marriage will have affliction because of the sorrows that are in marriage. "I spare you," as my children, and I wish you to be free and without sorrow. For you are, for the time being, in bonds. "For you are bound," he says, "to a wife." Furthermore, they are not their own masters, as he said above. But the unmarried maiden—since she is dedicated to God, if she marries, she brings an adulterer upon Christ, to whom she is betrothed. ^B "But they shall have affliction in the flesh." "Those who marry" [I Cor. 7:29-31]. "But this I say, brethren, that the time is shortened henceforth, that both those who have wives be as though they had none, and those who weep as though they wept not, and those who rejoice as though they rejoiced not, and those who buy as though they possessed not, and those who use this world as though they used it not. For the fashion of this world passeth away."

Since he said that "they shall have affliction in the flesh," lest someone might say, "But they shall also have pleasure," he attempts to cut off pleasure by way of the shortened time. For this reason he says: I say that they have affliction, since they cannot even have pleasure, because the time is so shortened and presses toward dissolution. For the kingdom of Christ has already drawn near, and we are commanded henceforth to migrate unto Him. ^C "As though they had none." In what way could they be as though they had none? In the way of not obeying them in the foolish desires of the world. — [ŒCUM.] Or that he also wishes them to be continent regarding sexual union. "And those who weep." On account of the shortness of the time, we should consider all things that exist for some in great concern as if they did not exist, both having a wife, and rejoicing, and grieving. For when death is near, what need is there to linger here, and to think that there is marriage, or buying and selling, or using the world at all? "And those who use this world as though they used it not." To use it excessively in worldly enjoyment, such as luxury, wealth, and power, he calls abuse—meaning, that is, not using it as one ought. For we were not brought into the world to do these things. For we were created for good works. He, then, who leaves behind those things in which he was formed, and uses the world in another way, "abuses it." ^D "For the fashion of this world passeth away." The world that is now seen passes away, he says, and shall have an end. What, then? Is it necessary to cling to that which is being dissolved? He said "fashion" to show that the things of the present world are only for a time, and do not have anything durable or firm.

"I wish you to be withoutCare." [I Cor. 7:32-34]. "He who is unmarried cares for the things of the Lord, how he may please the Lord. But he who is married cares for the things of the world, how he may please his wife. The married woman and the virgin are different. The unmarried woman cares for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit; but she who has married cares for the things of the world, how she may please her husband."

^A How then could we be without care if we were unmarried? For who is ignorant of worldly cares? “He who is unmarried cares for the things of the Lord.” See how he exhorts them to virginity through the difference in care. For to care for the things of the Lord is not to be anxious, but it is salvation. Whence he says above, “I want you to be without care.” “The wife and the virgin are divided.” [OECUM.]—Divided, that is, they do not have the same care, but they are divided in their pursuits. For the virgin, he says, cares for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy in body and in spirit; holy in body through purity, and in spirit through intimacy with God and the indwelling of the Paraclete Spirit. “But she who is married cares for the things of the world,” for she wishes to please her husband. Perhaps she wishes also to be fair of appearance and a housekeeper, and not stretch out a philanthropic hand even to the needy. And by "woman" he means her who is married.

This I say for your own profit, not that I may cast a snare upon you, but for that which is comely and for your being devoted to the Lord without distraction. But if anyone thinks that he is behaving unseemly toward his virgin, if she is past the flower of her age, and thus it must be, let him do what he wills; he does not sin; let them marry. ^B I moved the words concerning virginity, he says, knowing that this is profitable for you, not that I might force you, willing and unwilling, to live in virginity. For he calls necessity a snare. Do you see how he fears to command something perfect as a necessity? “But for that which is comely.” For what is more comely than a virgin and such a manner of life and conversation? “And for being devoted to the Lord.” For I do not say these things, he says, that I may cast a snare and necessity upon you, but wishing to bring you to be devoted to the Lord comely and without distraction and indivisibly. And “devoted” is being one who remains easily or continuously, without distraction and without care. “But if any man thinks it unseemly.” It proceeds from the weakness of human nature that one should think it unseemly if he keeps his own daughter a virgin and dedicates her to God. (PHOT.) If any man, he says, thinks it brings upon him a form of unseemliness to keep his daughter at home unmarried while she is living in virginity, and thinks that it ought rather to be done so, as for instance to give her in marriage, “Let him do what he wills.” ^C For marriage is not forbidden (far be it!), even if virginity be higher. Therefore, if they wish, let them give them in marriage, he says. But if anyone stands firm in this resolve, that is, in the mind not to give her in marriage, not doing this as if from necessity and as though forbidden by the law (for he who does it in such a way errs greatly); if, therefore, anyone does this not as having necessity, but as being master of either counsel by the law, and himself judging it more eligible not to give her in marriage, even this man does well, keeping his own daughter a virgin and without care. But that which is said, “Not having necessity,” can be understood in another way no less properly, that is: He who is not forced by his daughter to do the contrary by the ^D

^A impulse and judgment of her own will. For virginity ought to be voluntary and not forced; for if it were joined to coercion, it might decline into something worse, granting indulgence to himself, but referring the cause of the absurd crime to him who had forced her to preserve her virginity. Or else this saying, “Not having necessity,” can signify that he has no necessity to do this—either because he has previously consecrated and dedicated her to God, or because his daughter does not force him to do so. For to him who has a necessity from one of the aforesaid reasons not to give her in marriage, it is not permitted either to persuade otherwise, nor to meditate another opinion in his heart; and indeed, not as much praise is attributed to him who performs it, as condemnation is assigned to him who does not perform it, and that ^B multiplied. But he who has decided in his heart to do this without necessity: if he keeps her a virgin, he has performed an excellent deed; but if he gives her in marriage, he has not sinned at all. “Let him do what he wills.” Whether he gives her in marriage, he says, or keeps her a virgin, he does well, for neither is a sin. However, it is more pleasing if he keeps her a virgin, as he says in the progress: “I desire you to be without care,” that is, virgins.

“VII, 37, 38. But he who stands firm in his heart, not having necessity, but has power concerning his own will, and has decided this in his heart, to keep his own virgin, does well. So then both he who gives her in marriage does well, but he who does not give her in marriage does better.”

489 Vides quomodo statim ab initio eum admiratur qui servat suam virginem? ^C “Qui stat firmus,” he says, “in his heart.” For he who, on account of the indecorum—as it seemed—omitted his intention and gave her in marriage, did not stand firm in the work of God. “Not having necessity.” He who has no necessity, he says, of not elocating her. For otherwise, he would by no means be so much to be admired if he did not elocate her, for his work would be attributed to necessity and not to himself. But now the whole matter is to his glory and to his pious election as a worshipper of God. For if someone keeps his virgin unwillingly and of necessity, what grace is that to him? But he who, out of desire for Christ, having no necessity, but being able to do what he wills, has kept her—he is to be admired. ^D “And has decided this in his heart.” He brings forward a certain firm man, whom that which is esteemed among men as indecorous—to keep daughters as virgins—could not move. “He does well.” He praises him for the firmness of his mind. “And he who elocates, does well.” For that is also good; for it is not a sin to elocate [her] to be married, but everything that is not a sin is honorable. But he who does not elocate [her] performs a certain excellent work, which is better. Consider, moreover, that from the judging of these things, he persuades one not to elocate.

VII, 39, 40. A wife is bound by the law as long as her husband lives; but if her husband has fallen asleep, she is free to marry whom she will, only in the Lord. But she is more blessed if she remains thus...

to marry whom she desires, only in the Lord. But she is more blessed if she so remains, according to my judgment. And I think that I also have the Spirit of God. ^A He speaks of the law concerning adulteresses, by which she is restrained from being joined to another. Therefore he said, “She is bound.” And by saying, “She is bound,” he shows that he who does not give her in marriage does better, freeing her from the bond. “She is free to marry whom she desires.” For she is freed from the first bond and law, and released. But having said that she is released, he exhorts her not to marry again and be bound. “Only in the Lord.” Yet with modesty, he says, and with propriety, in a lawful marriage, for the sake of procreation and protection, not through the passion of desire. “According to my judgment.” So that you may not think the matter to be a necessity, he says, “According to my judgment.” As far as I know, he says, according to my exhortation and advice, not according to any necessity of legislation. Then, so that no one might say, “If then there is no legislation, why should anyone at all act according to your exhortation?” he added that ^B even these things we exhort by the Holy Spirit, even if we do not, because of your weakness, close [or: limit] this counsel to the necessity of law. “And I think that I also have the Spirit of God.” So that no one might think such counsels are Paul’s and therefore human, he adds that “I have the Spirit of God,” showing that these are legislations of the Paraclete, not mine. He evinces great humility by saying “I think,” that is, I suppose, I deem. ^C

CHAPTER V

Concerning the diversity of foods, and abstinence from the worship of demons.

VIII, 1, 3. Now concerning things sacrificed to idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love edifies. And if anyone thinks that he knows anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know. But if anyone loves God, this person is known by Him.

The cause of the rebuke concerning the things that had been sacrificed to idols was this: Some who were perfect in the faith, and knowing that things which enter do not defile or ^D pollute a man (Matt. 15:11), and that idols, being of wood and stone, are nothing—of no importance—used to enter indifferently into the unholy houses of idols and were participants of the tables which were set there, and tasted of the things sacrificed to idols. But this also harmed the perfect themselves. For they were participating in the tables of demons, and they were harming the more imperfect. For they did not examine with what intention they were doing these things, but seeing only the act, they were taking an occasion to sacrifice to idols, as if the perfect were participating in the tables set there in honor of the idols. “We know that we all have knowledge.” They were puffed up, as having the knowledge of God. Therefore they thought that things sacrificed to idols should not even be avoided. He calls this knowledge common to all, saying, “For we all have this knowledge.” By saying this, he casts down their pride, “Knowledge puffs up.”

In another way also he casts down their pride, showing that knowledge without love not only does not help, but even harms. For, he says, it puffs up, but love, on the contrary, builds up the members that had been rejected and torn apart by the pretext of the swelling caused by knowledge. “As he ought to know.” Again, in another way he restrains them. He says that not only is knowledge common and, being without love, does not puff up, but it is not even perfect as it ought to be. As if he were to say: You do not yet know anything perfectly, although you seem to know; why then are you so puffed up? And this applies not only to the matters proposed, but to every matter; there is no perfect knowledge now. By saying, “But if anyone loves God,” he shows that perfect knowledge is born from love. “For if anyone,” he says, “loves God.” And observe: he did not even say, “He knows God,” but, “is known by God” (by this he makes perfect knowledge impossible to attain, and thereby destroys their conceit), or that he who is known by God is deemed worthy of revelation, as he himself says while speaking of himself, “And he heard ineffable words, which it is not lawful for a man to speak,” signifying by this that to the one who has love, a more perfect knowledge is revealed. ^B

VIII, 4, 7. Therefore, concerning the eating of things offered to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no other God but one. For even if there are those who are called gods, whether in heaven or on earth, as there are many gods and many lords, yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things and we in Him, and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and we through Him; but knowledge is not in all.

Why do you lift your crests? Such knowledge—that idols do not even exist, that is, that they are nothing and of no importance—is not yours alone. For what would wood and stones be? We all know this, and not you only. ^C In the world, an idol is nothing; this means that nothing of the things that exist in the world is an idol, but it is an invention of empty thought and a representation. Therefore, the existence of idols is established only in the minds of these people, as they can have no existence in anything else. “And that there is no other God.” This is said to those who imagined that the very wood and stones of the idols had some power. “Except one.” This is directed at those who supposed that certain divine powers attended the wooden statues of idols. “For even if there are those who are called gods.” Since he said, “There is no other God,” and yet they were considered by the Greeks to be such, lest he appear to be openly contradicting the opinion of the Greeks (which, although erroneous, had nevertheless prevailed), see what he says: “Who are called.” Well said, “Who are called”; for they do not exist. For they are in heaven, such as the sun and the moon; and on earth, those among them who are heroes. For even if the Greeks have many gods and lords in heaven and on earth, yet for us there is one God. “Gods.” For he says, the angels ^D

are called gods by grace. Just as Principalities, Powers, Dominions, and Thrones are named, so too are gods. ^A “As there are many gods.” Repeat from the common sense the words “who are called.” For he says, there are among the Greeks those who are called gods and lords, but for us there is one God, and one Lord. “But for us there is one God, the Father.” Since he said, “One God, the Father, and one Lord, Jesus Christ,” do not suppose that the term “God” is exclusively assigned to the Father, and “Lord” to the Son. For the Scriptures frequently call the Father “Lord,” as in the text, “The Lord said to my Lord,” and they call the Son “God,” as in, “Therefore God, your God, has anointed you,” and, “Of whom is Christ,” as it pertains to the flesh, “who is over all, God blessed.” But if someone says that the term “God” is suited to the Father alone, because it says, “One God,” will it then also be suited to the Son alone, because it says, “One Lord Jesus Christ”? But this is not so. For the word “One” is said for the sake of distinction against the falsely named gods and lords. Many, however, inquire why he did not mention the Holy Spirit. And we say that his discourse was directed toward the Greeks, who claimed there were many gods and lords. Therefore, he feared to mention the Spirit, lest they might think that there is polytheism among us as well. For this reason, he mentioned the Father and the Son so securely: calling the Father one God, so that they would not think there were two gods, and the Son one Lord, so that they would not think there were two lords. ^B For if he had said God and God, the Greeks, out of their ignorance, would have thought of polytheism; or if he had said Lord and Lord, they would have imagined a plurality of lordships. Thus, this is the reason why he now says God the Father and Lord the Son. For he had promised that there is one God among us. If, therefore, he had called both the Father and the Son God or Lord, he would again have been found to be contradicting his own promise relative to the Greeks, and would have been introducing into the appearance either polytheism or a plurality of lordships. Therefore, by calling the Father God and the Son Lord, he adapts himself to the infancy of the Greeks. For it is demonstrated that Scripture uses such names indiscriminately. “From whom are all things.” For He himself is the cause of all things that exist. For ^C “From whom are all things” signifies creation, and the leading forth from non-being into being. “And we to Him.” He speaks of the manner of our faith and intimacy, that is to say, we are attached to Him. “And one Lord.” The Father is someone else; for this reason, “One” is added as well. “And we through Him.” In a twofold sense: first, by our coming from non-being into being, and secondly, by our being turned from error to the truth through Him. “But knowledge is not in all.” Not all, he says, know that there is one God and one Lord, and not many. Nor do all know that idols are nothing. But some, with the conscience of the idol, until now, ^D VIII, 7, 8. Some, however, with the conscience of an idol

^A eat as if it were sacrificed to idols, and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. But food does not bring us before God. For neither if we eat do we abound, nor if we do not eat do we lack.

Saying "some," he does not reveal them, so as not to put them to greater shame. "Until now." Do you see that not everyone knows that idols are nothing? Indeed, even until now some, that is, even after believing, eat things sacrificed to idols as if they were sacrificed to idols—that is, with the same opinion as the Greeks, as if they supposed idols to be something. Since, therefore, they have a weak and feeble conscience, they are defiled by eating, even if they would not have been defiled otherwise. But why are those who do not have a weak conscience not defiled? Because idols are not anything at all; they are nothing, worthy of nothing, useless. "But food does not bring us before God." Lest they should say—as is likely—"I eat with a pure conscience, and what do I care if someone else is scandalized due to weakness?" he shows that even the act of eating, as if in contempt for idols, is not something noble. For even if the brother who is weak were not harmed, he says, not even so would you be doing any of the things that are praised, or things capable of leading into the kingdom of God and presenting one there. For what is it to eat or not ^B to eat? "For neither if we eat do we abound." That is, we are not well-pleasing before God as if we had done some great thing, and we do not abound in praise. For those people were puffed up over this, and he shows that they are doing nothing. "Nor if we do not eat do we lack." That is, we are not inferior in praise.

VIII, 9-12. But see that this power of yours does not become a stumbling block to those who are weak. For if someone sees you who have knowledge reclining in an idol's temple, will not his conscience, since he is weak, be built up to eat things sacrificed to idols? And the weak brother will perish because of your knowledge, for whom Christ died. But by sinning in this way against the brothers, and striking their weak conscience, you sin against Christ.

The speech is of one who is terrifying. "Lest by any means this power." He did not say "knowledge," or "perfection," but "power," which is of impetuousness and rather of arrogance. "Become a stumbling block," that is, an offense and a ruin. But by saying ^C "to those who are weak," he accuses them, because they do not even spare the brothers who are weak, to whom they ought also to have extended a hand. "You who have knowledge." You who, as you say, are perfect. "Will not his conscience." Will he not, he says, take an occasion to eat things sacrificed to idols, while still thinking that idols are something? But by saying "it will be built up," he shows that his weakness will be increased to a greater extent. "And the weak brother will perish." And your perfection will become an occasion of ruin for another. "For whom Christ died." And indeed Christ, he says, did not refuse to die for him, but you do not even condescend to abstain from foods ^D so that you do not...

offend him. ^A "And wounding their weak conscience." He did not say: "Causing offense," but the harsher term: "Wounding." For what is more cruel than one who strikes the weak? "You sin against Christ." How do we stumble against Christ when we sin against the brethren? How? Because He, as Lord, regards the things of His servants as His own and claims them as His; and because they who are struck are reckoned as His body. And what He advanced through His own slaughter, you dissolve through a meal: what could be more absurd than this?

[VIII, 13; IX, 1, 2] "Wherefore, if food is an occasion of stumbling to my brother, I will never eat flesh, lest I cause my brother to stumble. Am I not an apostle? Am I not free? Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? Are not you my work in the Lord? If to others I am not an apostle, yet at least I am to you; for you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord." ^B

It is the mark of an excellent teacher to instruct by his own deeds. You, he says, do not even abstain from things offered to idols, which are otherwise forbidden, so as not to cause a brother to stumble. But I—what do I say of things offered to idols? I would not touch any other meat either, if anyone took offense because of it. And my renunciation will be eternal: "I will never eat flesh," he says. Since, then, he had said, "If food causes my brother to stumble, I will never eat flesh," lest anyone might think that this was only a boast of words (for he would not have fulfilled these things in deed), he is compelled thereafter to show how he abstained even from things that were permitted so as not to cause anyone to stumble. What do I say, he says, about things offered to idols? ^C When Christ commanded that he who preaches should live of the Gospel—that is, receive nourishment from those who are taught—I chose, if necessity arose, to perish by hunger, and to receive nothing from you; not because you offend by providing for me, he says, but that you might be more edified, seeing me preaching to you without expense. Therefore, although the divine law permits me to receive, for your edification I decided to receive nothing from you, but labored with my hands, working and supporting myself. Observe how, for the time being, he proves that he tells the truth and performs what he says.

But he further prepares another point. Since I, he says, have acted thus, you do not even abstain from things offered to idols, so as not to be an occasion of stumbling to the weak brethren; nay, you even destroy them. ^D The meaning of this passage encompasses many verses and extends to the point where he says: "For though I was free from all." "Am I not an apostle?" Then, lest they should say, "Even if you wished to receive, it was not permitted to you, and for this reason you did not," he asks, "Why, would it not have been permitted to me? Are the other apostles not nourished from the Gospel?" Truly. "What then? Am I not an apostle as they are? Am I not free?"—that is, "Am I subject to anyone who might forbid me to receive?" Then, lest they should say that the other apostles have something more—namely, to have seen Christ and to have associated with Him—he adds, "Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord?" So that not even in this does he have any less than the rest of the apostles.

He says indeed, "Last of all, as to one untimely born, He appeared also to me." ^A "Am I not my work in the Lord?" Then, so that they might not say, "Even if you are an apostle, you have shown no work," he says, "Am I not my work? Are not you my work in the Lord?" That is to say: Did I not show an operation worthy of an apostle in converting you? Which I performed in the Lord through Christ. ^B "If to others I am not an apostle." Although, he says, it is permitted to me to say that from Jerusalem and in the surrounding places as far as Illyricum I have fulfilled the Gospel of Christ, yet for the time being I do not say it; have I not become your apostle? For if I am not to others, at least I am to you. Yet I have received nothing from you. To this, indeed, he looks for his result: "Whence," he says, "you are the seal of my apostolate." That is, if anyone wishes to learn if I am an apostle, I propose you as proof. For I have demonstrated everything belonging to an apostle in your midst, having performed signs, and taught the faith, and endured dangers, and shown a blameless life. For these and such things mark and delineate and demonstrate an apostle.

Ⅸ. 3, 6. My defense to those who question me is this. Have we not the power to eat and to drink? Have we not the power to lead about a sister, a wife, as also the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas? Or do I only and Barnabas not have power not to work?

To those, clearly, who seek to know in what I have shown the signs of an apostle, or the fact that I preached the Gospel without expense, I propose ^C you for testimony and demonstration: for this is what he says: "My defense to those who question me is this," namely, the apostolate to you or the mission toward you. Had I not, he says, the power to eat and drink from those who were being taught? For Christ commanded this. Yet, however, I abstained from this, that no stumbling block might be provided to you. "Have we not the power to lead about a sister, a wife?" Wealthy women who had believed followed some of the apostles, contributing to their necessary needs, so that they, being henceforward free from care about this matter, might be occupied only with the preaching. See, moreover, that he has placed the chief of the apostles last, hinting at this: And what, he says, do I say regarding the others? Does not Peter himself do this? "And the brothers of the Lord." He calls "brothers of the Lord" those who were considered His brothers; for since they were so called, he himself ^D spoke according to the common opinion. They were the sons of Joseph, because of his betrothal to the Theotokos: namely, James the bishop of Jerusalem, Joseph, named the same as his father, Simon, and Jude. "I and Barnabas." Knowing Barnabas to be his associate in this zeal and diligent observance, namely, that of preaching without expense, he did not conceal it. "Have we not the power to"

not to work?" That is, to have those things sufficient for food and self-sufficiency provided to us from preaching? But yet, having the power, we do not use the power, so that we might benefit you by preaching the Gospel without expense. If this is clear, that even if I were aware that you were being scandalized on account of meat-eating, although it is not forbidden, I would never eat it for an eternity, so that I might not become a cause of scandal to a brother; how much more does it behoove you to keep yourselves from things offered to idols, by which not only are the brothers scandalized, but they also pollute their consciences? Now, "Or do I alone and Barnabas not have the power not to work?" is more accurately understood from the text in this way: The other apostles, he says, have the power not to work, and not to toil with their hands, but to be fed by those who minister to them; but I and Barnabas, as it appears, he says, do not have the power not to work, but by necessity toil with our hands, so as to provide ourselves with what is necessary for our needs. ^B

IX, 7. "Who ever goes to war at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard, and does not eat of its fruit? Or who shepherds a flock, and does not eat of the milk of the flock?" Who, he says, when serving as a soldier, is fed from home, and not from the military service? And he says this, "At his own expense." ^C He has rightly placed the soldier's example first. For this is appropriate to the apostolate because of the dangers in it, and the war against intellectual enemies. "Who plants a vineyard?" All these examples show that a teacher ought to be fed by those who are taught, just as the soldier from his military service, and he who has planted a vineyard from its fruit, and the shepherd from the milk of the flock. Yet nevertheless, he says, although even justice requires this, and the Lord has so commanded, I preached to you without expense, so that I might not be an offense to you. I therefore even abstained from those things that were permitted, for the sake of your edification: but you do not even abstain from things offered to idols, so as not to injure the brothers. For this is his entire purpose in this whole passage. "Who plants a vineyard?" By the vineyard, he signifies the labor that is in the apostolate. "Or who shepherds a flock?" By the flock, he signifies the teaching and the providential guidance that is in the apostolate. ^D

IX, 8, 10. "Do I speak these things according to man? Or does the law not also say these things?" For in the law of Moses it is written: "You shall not muzzle the ox that treads out the grain." Does God care about oxen? Or does He say it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, indeed, it was written, because he who plows ought to plow in hope, and he who threshes should be a participant of his hope in hope. Since he has demonstrated that one must be fed by those who are taught, and that this is the common custom of the other apostles, he consequently wishes to confirm this also from the testimony of Scripture, and he says:

^A “Do I say these things according to man?” That is, does this seem so to men only, or do I have to establish this by human examples? Does not the Law also say these things? “Is it for oxen that God is concerned?” So that no one might say: And what do oxen have to do with the matter at hand? He says: “Is it for oxen that God is concerned?” For He is indeed concerned even for brute animals, but not in such a way that He would establish the law for their sake. But through this, He wishes to instruct us that those who labor should not labor in vain, but should be fed from their labors. Since, therefore, I too who labored was worthy to be fed. “Or does He speak entirely for our sake?” “Entirely,” he says, as if regarding a conceded point; that is, in all ways. “That he who plows ought to plow in hope.” He persists in the trope of the oxen. For the teacher, he says, ought to have a reward for his labors, not that he will enjoy no further retribution, but that he has the hope, after this temporal and brief enjoyment, of attaining also to eternal and supernatural goods. For this is what is signified by what he adds: “And he who threshes, to be a partaker of his hope in hope.” For the apostles had the hope that they would obtain from those being taught the service by which food might be supplied, and they did obtain it. Yet this was not for them the final hope; but, enjoying this hope, they were still awaiting and hoping for greater things. And he says this, that the enjoyment of the service supplied by those being taught concerning food in no way hindered the hope and retribution of future goods; and from this, he indicates that although there was nothing hindering from the enjoyment of being fed by the disciples, nevertheless, I did not choose [to do so]. And he establishes that it was permitted by many arguments, both on account of what was said, and so that, by himself abstaining, he might not seem to cast into calumny those who were using it. ^B “And he who threshes, of his hope.” The same trope again. “And he who threshes, he says, to participate of his hope in hope.” For since he who plows plows in hope, he who subsequently threshes ought also to enjoy this hope, which he hoped for while plowing. And what is the hope? Clearly, to share in the fruits. Then he adds, “In hope.” For so that no one might say: Is this the reward for the many labors which the apostles endure, namely, to eat? He added “In hope.” That is, the apostles toil in the hope of future goods, but there must also be, from here, the solace of the provision from those being taught. And this signifies that, in addition to the future hope, one must have a share of another hope, that is, of food and other things. ^C IX, 11, 12. "If we have sown spiritual things for you, is it a great thing if we reap your carnal things? If others share in this power over you, do we not rather? Yet we have not used this power: but we endure all things, so that we may give no hindrance to the Gospel of Christ." ^D Then he also says something else, to show that the teacher ought to be fed. For you do not, he says, provide things similar to those you have received. For if we have sown spiritual things among you, that is, we have provided them, is it a great thing if [we reap your carnal things?]

^A Carnal, meaning food. «If others of this power.» He points to certain impostors who held them, and not only ate among them but also exercised power over them. If they, he says, have a share of power in ruling over you, are we not more entitled to do this? «But we have not used this power.» Do you see where he renders the conclusion of the thought? For although, he says, there was power for me to receive from you, as has been demonstrated both from the fact that the other apostles do these things, and from the examples I have set forth, and from the Law of Moses; nevertheless, I have received nothing, fearing that some might stumble at this regarding the faith. If therefore I, he says (for this is what the thought intends), even abstain from things that are permitted, so as not to offend some, how is it that you do not abstain even from things offered to idols and things that are altogether forbidden, so as not to offend the weaker brothers? "By this power." That is, I have received nothing from anyone. "But we endure all things." For lest anyone say, "Because you were not in need, for this reason you did not receive," he adds, "But we endure all things," namely hunger, thirst, and nakedness, only so that no offense may arise; that is, that no hindrance might be put in the way of the Gospel and the preaching. ^B Do you not know that those who perform sacred duties eat from the temple? Those who attend the altar share in the altar? So also the Lord ordained, that those who proclaim the Gospel should live from the Gospel. But I have used none of these.

Not satisfied with the first points, he adds others, showing that it was lawful for him to receive from the disciples, and says: "Those who perform sacred duties." That is, those who remain in the temple and perform the ministrations in it, both priests and Levites. "Eat from the temple." He did not say, "From those who offer," so that he would neither disparage those who receive nor puff up those who give, but, "From the temple," he says. "Those who attend the altar." By those who perform sacred duties he means the Levites, who received the tithes. By those who attend the altar, the priests, who had the portions that were taken from the sacrifices. "Share in the altar." Again, here too he spoke in the same way. For he did not say, "They receive from those who sacrifice," but, "From the altar." For after it has been offered, it is no longer the property of the one who offered it, but of the temple and the altar. The word "Share" is well used. ^C For indeed the burnt offerings were consumed, and belonged to the altar alone. And of the sacrifices, the blood was poured out at the altar, and the fat was burned. But the priest would receive a certain portion of the meat, such as the right shoulder and the breast and the stomach. "So also the Lord." Thus, he says, I have done nothing strange, but following the Old Covenant, I have introduced nothing novel. ^D See, indeed, he has placed the greatest point last. "To live from the Gospel." Just as there he did not say, "From those who offer," but, "From the temple and from the altar," so also here he did not say, "From the disciples," but, "From the Evan-

^A Gospel." And he rightly says "to live," showing that it is permitted to accept nothing but food and clothing. "I have used none of these." Which of these? The examples that I have mentioned, of the law, of the commandments of Christ, that it is necessary for teachers to receive and to live from those who are taught.

IX, 15-18. "Although I have not written these things so that it may be done in my case. For it is better for me to die, than that someone should render my boasting void. For if I preach the Gospel, I have nothing to boast of, for necessity is laid upon me. For woe is me if I do not preach the Gospel. For if I do this of my own accord, I have a reward; but if not of my own accord, a stewardship is committed to me. What then is my reward? That when I preach the Gospel, I may make the Gospel of Christ without charge, so as not to abuse my power in the Gospel."

Lest they think that he wrote these things because he now wanted to accept for the future, he corrects this. I did not write, he says, these things, that it should be done in my case, ^B as the examples require, as the Lord’s commands ordain—namely, that I should accept. "For it is better for me to die." See with what great vehemence he shrinks from accepting. It is better, he says, for me to die—namely, of hunger—than that the boasting which exists concerning this matter should become empty and vain. For let no one say that since he does not accept, he is saddened and takes it hard that he does not accept, for he calls the matter itself his boasting, showing his joy and alacrity of soul concerning what was being done. For who would be someone who would render Paul's boasting empty? He who provides something to him for the Gospel. "For if I preach the Gospel," he says, ^C "I have nothing to boast of." What then is it that you boast in? someone could say to him. He adds: That I may achieve this, that the Gospel be without charge. What then? Is this greater than preaching the Gospel? By no means; but it was determined that I should be fed from the preaching of the Gospel; but that I do this without charge is a work of my own generosity. "I have nothing to boast of." For he says this is his boasting, that he himself performs it out of his own generosity; for, as a faithful servant, he does not consider it to be his own glorious deed to fulfill the Lord's command. For he heard the Lord saying, "When you have done all things that have been commanded you, say: We are ^D unprofitable servants; we have done what we ought to have done." * What then is the boasting if that which ought to be done has been done? "For necessity is laid upon me." Since Christ commanded it. "Woe is me if I do not preach the Gospel." For I would be transgressing the Lord's commandments. "For if I do this of my own accord"—what? to offer or preach the Gospel without charge—"I have a reward," because when the Lord permitted me to accept, I did not accept. Or in this way: For if the preaching of the Gospel were entirely a matter of my own generosity, and no necessity of a Divine commandment lay upon me regarding this, I would rightly have hoped for a great reward for this, and it would have been permitted to me as a private

* Luke xvii, 10.

work of excellence to boast. But if, as a ministry entrusted to me, and with the necessity of serving incumbent upon me, I do this, it no longer follows that there is a similar reward, nor is it permitted to boast in this. In what, then, is the bright reward and the boasting? In the fact that ^A although I have preached the Gospel as I was commanded, I have received nothing from the preaching, not even enough to live upon, but have performed the ministry without expense and gratuitously. "But if I preach unwillingly." He says "unwillingly" because the ambition of the preaching is not his own work, but Christ’s commandment. He did not say, "I have no reward," as he said earlier, but "A stewardship has been entrusted to me," showing that this too is a reward—namely, to preach without expense—though not like the other.

Or, to put it another way: [OECUM.] If I do this willingly—to present the Gospel without expense—I have a reward. And if I do it unwillingly, not even then do I go wrong. Why so? Because a stewardship has been entrusted to me. And as for those to whom such a stewardship has been entrusted, it is permitted to them to take. For the Lord commanded those who preach the Gospel to eat from it. ^B Between "willingly" and "unwillingly," this is the difference: "willingly" is where the mind consents, and one bears it without burden and rejoices in what is being done; but "unwillingly" is where one does this by the compulsion and necessity of reason. "What then is my reward?" Since he had spoken obscurely, he interprets himself as to what his boasting is: "That I might not abuse my power." He says "power" everywhere, showing that not even those who take [payment] are going wrong, for they have the power to take. But observe his exactness and diligence, in that he calls the mere use, that is, taking it at all—which is truly sinless for others—an *abuse*; he deems it harmful to himself, not because it is harmful, but because he diligently examines himself. He added "in the Gospel," showing that he who teaches ought to receive [payment], namely he who labors, not he who is idle. ^C

"For though I was free from all, I made myself a servant to all, that I might win the more. And to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews; to those who are under the law, as under the law, that I might win those who are under the law; to those who are without law as without law (not being without law before God, but under the law of Christ), that I might win those without law. To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. Now I do this for the Gospel's sake, that I may be a partaker of it." He says something even more, that not only did I not receive [payment], although I had the power, but also, being free and subject to no one, ^D I willingly made myself a servant, that I might save many. This is what he signifies by "the more," when he says, "That I might win the more." Do you see his love? He considers the salvation of others to be his own gain. "And to the Jews I became as a Jew." Consequently, he tells the manners of his servitude. He did not say, "I became a Jew," but "As a Jew," to show that it was a stewardship that was being performed. And when did he become as a Jew? When he circum-

- ^A cised Timothy, when, having been purified, he entered into the temple with those who had the vow. For in order that he might bring over those who were truly Jews to the faith, he became as a Jew. How? For if he had not circumcised, and had not been purified, and had not persuaded the Jews that he adhered to the Law, they would by no means have approached him; indeed, they would not even have shared in speech with him as with an apostate who had abandoned his own law. But how could he have saved those who would not even approach him and would not hear his teaching, but rather considered him a defilement? — Otherwise. [ISIDORE.] He became to the Jews as a Jew, when he was purified in the temple and offered sacrifices, and by circumcising Timothy, he sent a teacher to the Jews, by circumcision annulling circumcision. Therefore he did not say "A Jew," but "As a Jew." ^B "To those without law as without law." When he was speaking to the Athenians, he did not discourse from the prophets, nor from the Law, but he formed his exhortation from the altar, leading them by their own dogmas, when he found on the altar, "To the unknown God." Therefore he did not say, "Without law," but "As without law." But the phrase, "Being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ," perhaps he said as though it were a matter of indifference (for regarding one essence there is no difference), or if you think this is forced, I think he means this: that he lived not only according to the law which is ascribed by some to the Father, and for the sake of the habit of those who were learning—not for the dignity of Him who gave it, being more suited to infants—but also according to ^C the heavenly and perfect law of Christ. Not without law as far as the old law [is concerned]; but also under the law as far as the Gospel [is concerned]. Not outside the law, but also in grace. I did not commit adultery because of the law; and I did not even look lasciviously because of the Gospel. I did not murder because of fear, but I also conquered anger because of love. For he who kept the old was not without the law of God; and he who keeps the new is also under the law of Christ. Yet he says these things, not attributing the law to the Father and the Gospel to the Son, but looking towards the suspicion and opinion of the many. For all things that are the Father’s are also the Son’s, and what are the Son’s are also the Father’s. — Otherwise. [THEODORE.] By "Jews," I think, he calls those who had not yet believed; but by "those under the law," he calls those who had indeed received the Gospel, but were still ^D bound to the observance of the law. For it was for the sake of both these and those that he endured legal purification in Jerusalem, and circumcised Timothy in Lycaonia, and performed other countless things in a certain stewardship. — Otherwise. "To those who were under the law." By "under the law" he says those who had believed out of the Jews, but were still clinging to the law. And when did he become as one under the law? When James said to him: "You see, brother, how many myriads there are who have believed, and all are zealous for the law." For then he was purified for their sake. Note how everywhere "as" is added, so that he may show that these things were done by way of stewardship.

^A Another way. "To those without law as without law." He calls those "without law" who were not under the law of Moses, those from the nations, to whom he himself used to go, and he would descend to their weakness, and many of the great doctrines he did not reveal, knowing they could not bear them. Thus, he says, I became to them as one not under the laws of Christ. For when he was haranguing the Athenians, he did not speak clearly of the things of Christ as if of God, but as of a mere man. For they were not capable of hearing any such thing. For they would have suspected him to be one of those apotheosized among them, such as Heracles, Asclepius, and the rest. "While not being without law to God." Then, that you might not imagine a change of mind had occurred, he adds, "While not being without law to God," that is, without the laws of God, "but under law to Christ," that is, being under the law of Christ. It is to be noted that the text says, "I am not without law to God, but under law," and instead of saying "of God"—for this would be the sequence—he said, "of Christ." Therefore Christ is God. "To the weak as weak." And he says he did not stop even at these, but also to those who were weak regarding the faith, he likewise became weak. For how was it not so when, while speaking, he did not clearly mention the Son and the Spirit as being God? And in the Epistle to the Romans, when some were judging it necessary to abstain from meat because of the observance of certain meats, by descending to their weakness, he not only did not rebuke these, but forbade others from causing them trouble. "I have become all things to all men." And to speak briefly: I have become to all men what they were, not expecting to save all—for it would not have been so admirable if that were the case—but so that I might save even a few. The word "all" is also set down as an exhortation to those who preach. For just as, he says, it is difficult to save all, so also it is not easily possible that none should be saved. "And this I do for the sake of the Gospel." He calls those who are saved through the Gospel "the Gospel," just as he said above, "to live from the Gospel," that is, from those who have believed through him. This I do for the sake of those who have believed through the Gospel. That I might be able, he says, to share with them in the goods hidden away for them, I have done and do everything. See the greatness of his humility. ^B He said these things, not because he was doing them for some reward, but that he might draw them in, so that they might do everything for the edification of their brothers, just as he himself was doing.

^C "Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but one receives the prize? So run, that you may apprehend. Everyone who competes is temperate in all things. Now they do it that they may receive a corruptible crown, but we an incorruptible one. I therefore so run, not as uncertainly; so I box, as not beating the air, but I discipline..." ^D

^A my body and bring it into subjection, lest by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.

After he has shown that one ought to condescend to the weak, saying, "I became as a Jew, as without law, as weak," in order that I might thus save those who are in truth such as these, he henceforth discourses more sharply with them. He set forth this example, not wishing to show that only one out of all will be saved—far from it!—but showing that it is not sufficient merely to believe, just as for them it is not sufficient to run, but one must be diligent and sedulous, right up to the reception of the prize, that is, the crown. For although you have knowledge, he says, of the faith, if you do not join it with the love of the brethren, it will benefit you nothing. For he exercised this argument above as well. "So run, that you may attain." They had not, then, yet attained. ^B "And every man who strives." He teaches also the manner in which one might attain. "He is temperate in all things," he says; that is, he does not resist in one thing and not in another. For this is to strive truly: to be an observer of all virtues and commandments, and to abstain from all evil and contrary things. For this is the true pugilist. "That they may receive a corruptible crown." By comparison to that which is lesser, he increases the matter. If those who strive in the stadium, he says, are temperate in all things, that they may not waste their strength, desiring a corruptible crown, how should we, who expect an incorruptible one, not much rather abstain from all harmful things? "I therefore thus run." He afterward brings himself forward as an example; and this is the best mode of teaching, to find examples from oneself. I therefore, he says, run with knowledge, not uncertainly, that is, not in vain and to no purpose, as you do, who run in vain. For what profit ^C is there to you, he says, from showing off your supposed perfection in eating things sacrificed to idols, when this your perfection harms your brother? But I do not act thus, he says, but I use the occasion in time and condescension, that I may by all means save some. "As not beating the air." Thus I box and strive, not that I may beat the air. For I have someone to beat—the devil. But you, running by faith, and acting as pugilists with blows, you are not using them for any necessary end. "But I discipline my body." I do not give, he says, the reins to my belly or my body, but I restrain it and subdue it. For this is what it means: I discipline and bring into subjection; that is, I tame and lead it as a slave. For it does not profit me, he says, to preach only, if I do not also perform those things which can be done by me. While saying these things, he hints that they are also gluttons, and that it is not sufficient for you to have believed only, ^D just as it is not for me to have preached, unless I and you alike subdue the body and its lusts.

X, 1-4. For I would not have you ignorant, brethren, that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea. And all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink.

For they drank from the spiritual rock that followed them. And the rock was Christ.

He enumerates, then, of how many gifts the Jews were counted worthy by God, and shows that even after these gifts, the many did not please God. He says these things, persuading [them] that just as it did not profit those to have enjoyed so many gifts, since they did not possess the [virtues] within themselves, so neither will faith and the being endowed with spiritual mysteries profit you, if you do not also show yourselves worthy of God’s grace. "For our fathers all." In these things, by the comparison with the ancients, he wishes to instruct them in what is appropriate, showing that they too were counted worthy of equal [gifts] as in a type. For in this way, with a suitable example proposed, it was found that he could rightly exhort them not to commit similar transgressions, ^B so that they might not suffer similar [punishments].

That they were under the cloud was a manifestation of the grace of the Spirit. For the cloud, overshadowing them, delivered them from the injury of the Egyptians, and the grace of the Holy Spirit delivers us from demonic malice. But their passage through the sea resembles our own in this respect. For what their passage through the sea provided for them—completely delivering them from their enemies and granting them firm liberty for the future—this, the baptism, has become for us against our enemies, the demons. And the phrase, "They were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea," signifies that, just as they, having obtained these things, pledged to live according to the Mosaic laws, so also we, in baptism, receiving the spirit of adoption, enter into covenants and agreements to live according to the commandments of Christ, just as the Jews also said to Moses after the crossing of the Red [Sea]: "If God says anything to us, we will do it."

"Under the cloud." For David says: "He spread a cloud for a covering for them, and fire to enlighten them by night." "Into Moses they were baptized." That is to say, they shared with Moses in the baptism. For since baptism makes us share in the death of Christ, he calls the shared participation of the Jews in the miracles I spoke of a "baptism." For he wishes to bring the type close to the truth. Therefore, he also used the same word, calling the passage through the sea a baptism.

[GREGORY THE THEOLOGIAN.] Moses baptized also before this in cloud and sea. But it was a type, as also seems to Paul, the sea of water, the cloud of the Spirit, the manna of the bread of life, the drink of the divine draught.

[PHOTIUS.] Looking to him, he says, and trusting, they allowed themselves to be baptized by the sea-stream. Then, being likewise overshadowed by the cloud following him, they were covered. For even if they were not covered by the water, yet in that space of water ^C they walked, in which it is necessary for those passing through to be baptized—that is, submerged—by the total waters, the water retaining its own nature.

"They were baptized into Moses," he says. For having beheld the dividing of the sea, they entered in, ^D...

imitated him; just as Moses became their leader in this. "In the cloud and in the sea." For they were overshadowed together with Moses by the cloud, and they walked through together with Moses, the sea having been divided. "The same spiritual food." [THEODOR.] He calls both the food and the drink spiritual, as though the Spirit through Moses provided both according to His ineffable power. He speaks of the manna and the meats, and of the water: "They ate." As if to say, the manna, just as we partake of the body of Christ. "Spiritual drink," as if to say, the water that gushed from the jagged rock, just as we partake of the blood of Christ. For although the things provided to them were sensible, they were nonetheless provided spiritually. For the giving of them did not follow the order of nature, but of spiritual grace. "Of the spiritual rock that followed them." [B] The rock that gushed forth water for the Israelites was, of course, sensible, but it did not gush this forth by its own nature, but by the power of the spiritual rock that was present with it through efficacy, and that followed it for the need of those who were thirsty: that is, it changed and transformed all things for their salvation and benefit, and followed their volition; and at times it solidified the water for them as a way, like stones; at times it cultivated the sky into abundant food and nourishment for them; at other times it opened the rock into a source of waters. Therefore, they could worthily be said to drink from a spiritual rock. For this was what dissolved that sensible rock into fountains of waters. But what, he says, was that spiritual rock that followed all of them, and that changed and transformed the natures of things for the need of each time? What? He says: clearly Christ, who even now demonstrates ^C similar and greater things toward us. But "following" can also be interpreted in another way. For the intelligible rock, that is Christ, not only bestowed upon them the aforementioned benefits miraculously, but also followed and accompanied them in subsequent events, affecting the Israelite with things similar to these and even greater. But He also follows us believers now, so that it is a consequence that the wonderful works and benefits bestowed in both the Old and New Testaments are of the same providence, and of the same God and Lord. "From the spiritual." Since he had said "spiritual drink," which nevertheless had nothing different, just as the manna had, but was common water, he therefore now confirms from the manner of the gushing forth that it was spiritual; for the rock did not produce it by its own nature. For if it had been so, it would have been necessary for it to produce it even before that time: but some other spiritual rock was working the whole thing, which, he says, was Christ. "That followed them." ^D Moreover, by saying "followed," he implies that the Spirit of Christ was always present and working all miracles.

the whole thing, which, he says, was Christ. "That followed them." Moreover, by saying "followed," he implies that the Spirit of Christ was always present and working all miracles. ^A "But with most of them God was not well pleased; for they were overthrown in the wilderness. Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted. Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play. Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand. Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents. Neither murmur ye, as some of them also murmured, and were destroyed of the destroyer."

All the wonderful things and gifts of which I have spoken they were deemed worthy to receive; but, he says, God did not have good counsel regarding them in all things. For this is what "was well pleased" means. ^B And yet they had been deemed worthy of great gifts. See then, he says, lest in any way God should not have good counsel regarding you, even if you have been deemed worthy of many gifts, if you do not provide a life worthy of them. All the Jews perished. How then, he says, was He not pleased with most of them? So that he may not seem to be prophesying total destruction for them, or because of Joshua and Caleb, and the young ones of the children of the Jews, and because Moses acted as mediator regarding the calf-worship (except for the twenty-three thousand). "Overthrown." The word "overthrown" signifies their sudden and greatest destruction. "Were our examples." For just as the baptism and the food and the drink were our examples, so also their perdition was an example for us, ^C so that we, by doing the same things, do not suffer the same things. "As they also lusted." And David says: "And they lusted a lust in the wilderness." For sitting down, the Jews wept and said: "Who shall feed us with flesh to eat? We remember the fish, which we did eat in Egypt freely, and the cucumbers, and the melons, and the leeks, and the onions, and the garlic. But now our soul is dried away: there is nothing at all, besides this manna, before our eyes." "Neither be ye idolaters." By this, he quietly censures those who eat of things sacrificed to idols, showing that they too came to idolatry from gluttony. And you, he says, eat them rather from gluttony than from perfection, just as those people, having set up dances around the calf, were playing and dancing before it, and saying: "These are thy gods, O Israel, ^D which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt." But some have understood "to play" as meaning "to commit idolatry." "Neither let us commit fornication." Here he mentions another sin, born of gluttony. It is written in the book of Numbers: "And Israel abode in Shittim, and the people were defiled in committing whoredom with the daughters of Moab: and they called them unto the sacrifices of their idols: and the people did eat of their sacrifices, and bowed down to their idols. And Israel joined himself unto Baalpeor: and the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel. And the Lord said unto Moses, Take all the heads of the people, and make them an example..."

unto the Lord before the sun, and the anger of the Lord’s fury shall be turned away from Israel. And Moses said unto the tribes of Israel, Let each one kill his own neighbor who has been initiated into Baalpeor. Then Phinehas the son of Eleazar likewise ran through Zambri and the woman Chasbi, and those who died in the plague were twenty-three thousand. Some ancient writers, however, have set the figure at twenty-four thousand. ^B « Neither let us tempt Christ. » He indicates that they sought signs, tempting Christ, just as the Jews did at Mount Hor; for having circled the land of Edom, they spoke against God and against Moses, saying: « Why did you lead us up out of Egypt to kill us in the desert, where there is no bread nor water? And our soul is loathsome with this light bread. And the Lord sent among the people venomous serpents, and they bit the people; and a great multitude of the children of Israel died. » « Neither murmur ye. » He implies that in temptations they did not conduct themselves bravely, but with murmuring. For it is not only a great thing to suffer for Christ, but also to suffer with thanksgiving, like Job. The Jews also murmured at Marah because the water was bitter. Again, they murmured when there was no water, at the time Moses and Aaron were ordered to bring forth water from the rock; and having struck it, Moses said: « Must we bring forth waters from this rock? » Again, they murmured when some of the people were sent to explore the land of Canaan. Again, they murmured when Moses ordered the people to make silver trumpets so that by them they might give a signal. And at the time when the ark was being raised, the people murmured, and immediately a part of the camp was burned; and the place was called Temptation, or Incense; and Moses prayed, and the punishment ceased—which the great Paul also calls destruction, that is, a certain punitive power. ^C

« Now all these things happened to them in figures: but they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come. Wherefore he that thinketh himself to stand, let him take heed lest he fall. No temptation hath taken hold on you, but such as is human. And God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that which you are able: but will make also with temptation issue, that you may be able to bear it. »

He calls them figures, showing that these men are to be punished more severely. For just as in the matter of gifts the truth is greater than the figure, so, absolutely, in the matter of punishments as well. « Upon whom the ends of the world are come. » And by the end now imminent for them, and by the eternal punishments to come, he terrifies them all the more. For he says: The ends of the world have already arrived, ^D and clearly the day of punishment. For not only were they punished once and for all at that time, but behold, the final day has also reached you. The ends of the world have arrived, that is, the day of punishment. For if those men were punished at one time, behold, the day has reached you also.

the end. And "hath reached," that is, hath overtaken. ^A "Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth." Again, he hints at those who think highly of themselves concerning knowledge. For if you think you stand, he says, be careful lest you fall. For that very confidence that you stand is not even standing; and if you do stand, the fall from pride is easy. "There hath no temptation taken you." Since he frightened them by saying, "Let him take heed lest he fall," and they had already endured many temptations, so that they might not say, "Why do you frighten us? When many temptations and dangers have occurred to us, we have not fallen; and are we about to fall now?" He says: No great temptation has taken you, except a small one. For he calls that which is small "human." "But God is faithful." That is, truthful. For He promised, saying: ^B "Come unto me, all ye that labour and I will give you rest," meaning those who are being tempted. "Above that ye are able." “Proportionally,” he says, “to your strength, He permits the temptation to come”; or rather, every temptation is greater than us if Christ does not help. "But will with the temptation also make..." [Photius] This can be understood in two ways: either that by permitting the temptation to approach, He immediately also dissipates and stops it, so that you are able to bear it, because it is troublesome to you only for a short time; or that along with the temptation He will also bring about the outcome in patience and endurance, that is, He will make us immediately enduring and capable of waiting, so that nothing from the temptation harms you, but rather you gain much. "And the outcome." By outcome he means the completion and cessation, because you are able to bear it; as if he were to say: He who will make the temptations quickly come to an end, because you are able to bear them. ^C Wherefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry. I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say. The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we being many are one bread and one body. For we are all partakers of that one bread. Behold Israel after the flesh. Are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar? ^D He then heals them, after having rebuked them for many things. Mark, however, that he no longer forbids them to eat things offered to idols solely on account of the harm to weaker brethren, but he also blames the act of eating in itself, calling the matter idolatry. "I speak as to wise men." Since he took away the eating of things offered to idols, calling the matter idolatry, and for this reason rebuked them, he subsequently endeavors to heal the harshness of his speech and says: Being wise, judge the matter, and you will be able to find that it is idolatry. By doing this he constitutes those who are the accused as judges, showing that very

^A strongly he trusts in his own words as being true. And furthermore, he proves that those who eat things sacrificed to idols are idolaters and partakers of idols. "The cup of blessing." He calls the cup of blessing the cup of the blood of Christ. "Which we bless." Which, having in our hands, we bless Him who graciously bestowed His blood upon us, that is to say, we give thanks. Or perhaps [we mean] that by blessing we make it ready.

[OECUM.] Do you know what I am saying? "Is it not the communion of the blood of Christ?" For His blood joins us to Christ, even as members to the head, through the partaking. "The bread which we break." As for the fact that the Lord did not suffer this upon the cross (for it is said, "Not a bone of Him shall be broken"), He endures this for our sake, being broken, that He might join us to Himself. Otherwise. [PHOT.] What follows is a demonstration of what was said. For how, he says, is it evident that the bread which we break is the communion of the body of Christ? That is to say, how is it evident that it gathers us into the communion of the body of Christ? Because we all are, and are called, one body, being joined to Christ, as to the head of the common body. If, therefore, we were not gathered into communion with His body and blood, by what ^B other thing would we be and be called one body? "For we being many are one bread." Since he said, "The communion of the body of the Lord," it seems that the thing which communicates is different from that with which it communicates. Now he wishes to show that we do not [merely] communicate, but we all are the very body of Christ, just as, of course, the remaining body is called the body of the head. For just as, he says, one bread comes to be from many grains, so also we, he says, being many, become one body of Christ. "For we all partake of that one bread." Then he also adds reasoning [on] how we become the body of Christ. For what is the bread, he says? Clearly, the body of Christ. And what do those who partake become? Clearly, the body of Christ; for, by partaking of the body of Christ, we also become that, since Christ is one bread. For from many grains, for example, the bread is made, and we the many, partaking of that same one, become one body of Christ. For since our old flesh was corrupted by sin, we had need of new flesh. "Behold Israel after the flesh." For you, he says, are Israel according to the spirit. "Are not those who eat the ^C sacrifices?" Read this as a question. Since a certain portion of the victim, such as the fat, was burned on the altar, he called those who eat of the same victim partakers, not of the victim, but of the altar. What then do I say? That an idol is anything? Or that an idol sacrifice is anything? But that the things which the nations sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons and not to God.

Do I say this, he says, as though idols or the things sacrificed to them have any power, and thus can either benefit or harm? No, he says, they are worthy of nothing, they are nothing. Since he had spoken earnestly concerning idols, he was afraid lest they might think that they have some power. "That an idol is something." [PHOT.] Not that the things which exist are themselves...

idols, do I therefore forbid the tasting of idol-meats. For it has been said before that they are of those things which are not, and are non-existent in substance, and have the power to cause neither harm nor benefit to anyone. But I forbid it for this reason, because through the idols, the sacrifice is offered to demons. How, then, would it not be an abominable thing to be avoided, to partake of a demonic sacrifice, and through it to come into communion with them themselves? Furthermore, by the comparison and juxtaposition of the Lord's table and the Lord's cup, he proves more strongly the absurdity of the actions of those who taste of idol-meats. And see his wisdom: at the beginning, he touched upon his arguments in a rather gentle way, but as he proceeds, as he does here, he attacks more sharply. "The things which the Gentiles offer." I do not say that idols have any power, but that, he says, the sacrifices are offered not to God, but to demons. Therefore, do not run to those things which are hateful to God. For if you were a participant in a royal table, and, leaving this, you ran to the tables of prisoners, would you be acting well? Not because that table would cause harm or benefit, but because you were insulting the royal table.

"I do not want you to become partners of demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot be participants of the table of the Lord and of the table of demons. Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than He?" For if those who partake of the mystical table have communion with Christ, those who partake of the table of demons clearly have communion with demons. "You cannot drink the cup of the Lord." Since he had spoken by way of exhortation, "I do not want you to become partners of demons," so that the exhortation might not be despised, he now placed it by way of a decree, saying: "You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons. You cannot be participants of the table of the Lord and of the table of demons." From the mere names of the Lord and the demons, he established the prohibition. "Or do we provoke the Lord to jealousy?" He posed this in a manner fit to strike fear. Do we test and provoke God, [to see] if He can punish us? Then, transitioning, he shows that this leads to that which is absurd: "Are we stronger than He," that we should test and provoke Him?

"All things are lawful for me, but not all things are beneficial. All things are lawful for me, but not all things edify. Let no one seek his own, but each one the things of another. Eat everything that is sold in the meat market, asking no questions for the sake of conscience. For the earth is the Lord's, and all its fullness." Lest anyone say to him, "Because I eat with a pure conscience, I have the authority to do this," he adds: Yes, he says, everything is indeed lawful for you, since you were created by God having free will, but it is not to be done recklessly, as if eating were beneficial to you. For as one progresses along the way, ^D

^A you might develop an affection for idols by sharing in their tables. "But not all things edify." He says this on account of those brothers to whom harm is brought. For even if it is lawful for you, he says, you do not edify your brother by doing this, but rather you ruin him. "Let no one seek his own." For he says this not only that you should seek whether you are eating with a pure conscience, but whether what is happening benefits your brother. "Whatever is in the meat market." Since he has extended his discourse at length regarding food sacrificed to idols, he draws them away from such fear, lest they, as is likely, might henceforth avoid even those things that were for sale in the market, fearing that they were ^B perhaps sacrificed to idols.

Otherwise. [ΦΩΤ.] He resolves what seems to be a contradiction. For since he had attacked food sacrificed to idols with vehemence, and rebuked those who were eating it, lest anyone might say: "What then? Are we therefore obliged to abstain also from the meats exposed for sale in the market? Or would we have to walk around the markets and inquire and investigate, lest it perhaps be food sacrificed to idols? Shall we confine and drive our life into such straits?" In order, therefore, that some might not have such things to object, he anticipates and provides the solutions, and says that it is neither necessary to reject what is in the market, nor to investigate and inquire whether it is sacrificed to idols or not, but that one ought to abstain only from those things about which someone has previously informed you that they are food sacrificed to idols. "Everything that is sold in the butcher shop," he says, "eat, doubting nothing because of conscience," neither hesitating nor inquiring for its sake, so that you might cure it, being as it is doubtful. For he did not want to make the participation of food difficult for them, lest from this, having become careless, they might abandon the whole observance, as if the command toward exact diligence were impossible. "Asking no questions." Not judging those who sell, whether it is perhaps food sacrificed to idols, as if goaded by conscience and wishing to purify it. But, he says, eat what is in the market without searching. "Asking no questions because of conscience." That is, asking no questions on its account. For those who eat ought to have that conscience pure and unwavering, and not have need of other certainty of mind that would come from an investigation. "For the earth is the Lord's." For if the earth is the Lord's, it is manifest that what is in it is also His, such as meat and fruits. If, therefore, they are the Lord's, why do you judge?

^C "If any of the unbelievers invites you, and you want to go, eat whatever is set before you, asking no questions because of conscience. But if anyone says to you, 'This is food sacrificed to idols,' do not eat, because of him who informed you and for the sake of conscience; for the earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof." He says well: "And you want to go." For he did not wish to command, nor to forbid. "Asking no questions." Why? So that, he says, you might not be thought to be fearing the idols through excessive over-enthusiasm. "Because of conscience." As wishing, he says, to keep your conscience pure. ^D

^A "If anyone says to you." Why do we no longer eat? He says: Truly all things are the Lord's, just as the earth itself from which these things proceed; but if you eat, you are a source of harm to the conscience of the one who informed you. For he will take offense, wondering why, after hearing this, you do not abstain. [ΘΕΟΔΩΡ.] He says this, fearing lest they might think that the prohibition comes about as if the idols had any power. "For the earth is the Lord's." You indeed know that the earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof, and you despise the weakness of the idols. But that man, enslaved by error, derives harm from this, thinking that you are partaking of meat sacrificed to idols. For the things that follow teach this. "For why is my liberty judged by another's conscience?" calling the grace of faith "liberty." If I partake with grace, why am I blasphemed for that for which I give thanks? It is not holy, he says, to injure another for the sake of my own perfection.

^B Otherwise. [ΦΘΤ.] Since above he did not forbid eating things sold in the meat market, he added: "The earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof," that is, all things that are in it. For these are the things that fill it, fruits and animals and the like. Then, proceeding, he says: "But if anyone says to you that this is sacrificed to idols, do not eat," so that no one might say: What then? Is the earth and what is in it now not the Lord's? But when you were permitting eating, it was the Lord's, and now it is not? So that it might not be permitted to anyone to say this, he puts the same thing again and says: The earth and what is in it is the Lord's, which I said before, but because of the one who informed you, and his conscience, you must not taste of those things sacrificed to idols. ^C For if the earth and the fullness thereof is the Lord's, He will make you lack nothing, even if you abstain from this feast sacrificed to idols on his account. Or, since the earth and what is in it is the Lord's, much more so is the man who is in it. Therefore, for the sake of this one who informed you, who belongs to the Lord, and perhaps also for others who heard the one informing so that they might not be harmed, do not eat. For the earth and what is in it is the Lord's, and one must care for those in it as fellow-servants. For it is not the case that when one ought to eat, one should think this, and when one should not eat, one should disregard it, but one should always be the same; and then, while eating, give thanks that the Lord provided these things to us for food, and now, deservedly, not eat, as if being careful not to be an offense to the servants of the Lord, our own fellow-servants. ^D I mean "conscience," not one's own, but that of another. "For why is my liberty judged by another's conscience? And if I partake by grace, why am I blasphemed for that for which I give thanks? Whether therefore you eat, or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God."

"Conscience." That is, of the Greek or Gentile who informed, so that he may not be harmed. "For why is my liberty judged?" So that no one may say: We are well forbidden to eat for the sake of the conscience of the brothers who are being harmed.

But concerning the Greeks and their conscience, he says, there is no need to be concerned. For what necessity is there that my liberty—that is, my freedom and immunity from the observation of foods—should be judged by another's conscience? That is, condemned by the conscience of a Greek? For he will say, as is likely: "The things of the Christians are fables; they seem to abhor idols, yet they eat with a ready mind those things which are sacrificed to them." ^A "But if I partake with grace." Because of the grace of God, which has rendered my soul so lofty, that I am persuaded that I am defiled by no such thing; trusting therefore in the grace of God, I eat. If you, he says, have been made perfect by the grace of God, so that you know that idols are nothing, and you have, as you say, a soul so mature that it receives no harm even if you should wish to partake of idol-meats, why do you make yourself subject to blasphemies, and through yourself the faith and God Himself? And that too regarding the very thing for which you ought rather to give thanks, being mature in your mind? He fashioned the discourse about himself, by which he might render the accusation more modest. Then he subjoins, "Whether you eat," etc. For where he had restrained them by ^B arguing, now, having dissolved the transformation he had assumed against himself, he admonishes them directly, saying: "Whether you eat," etc. "For which I give thanks." I, he says, eating, give thanks for the grace of God, which has granted me a soul lofty and undefiled. Therefore he says: "Partaking, I give thanks." Why then, for that for which I give thanks—that is, for the grace of God—am I blasphemed by the Greeks? For they will say that we are certain impostors and liars, who indeed avert our eyes from idols, yet still share in the tables that are set up there. "Whether therefore you eat." Thus, he says, do all things, that you may provide occasions for glorifying God, so that those things which now take place ^C with ignominy and infidelity may be brought to the faith, as it has been said. 521 X, 32, 33; XI, 1. "Be without offense, both to the Jews, and to the Greeks, and to the Church of God, as I also please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit, but that of many, that they may be saved. Be imitators of me, as I also am of Christ." "Providing no offense." This is, providing no occasion for anyone to find fault. This, however, will be, if we be an offense neither to the Jew, nor to the Greek, nor at all to the brothers; for these are the Church of God. Observe, however, that he placed that which is greater in the last ^D position. For it is fitting to attract others also to the faith, and not to drive away those who are already brothers. And by these words he designates all who were offended by the fact that they ate idol-meats. "As I also." Then, because he had commanded a difficult thing—for he had made them liable for the harm of the Jews and Greeks—he set himself as an example, inducing by this means that the word be easily accepted. "In all things I please all men." As if he had said: I please all in all things; which he also said in the preceding: I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. "Not seeking my own." As when he said: "I could wish to be anathema from Christ for my brothers and my kinsmen." For this is indeed mim-

from the Christ for the sake of my brothers and my kinsmen.” ^A This is indeed an imitation of Christ, not to seek one’s own, but to care for the neighbor—not your own, but that of the many. “But the many,” he says—the advantage of the many, he means, rather than my own. Since some seek the advantage of the many, others do so to win their favor by that which is profitable to themselves, while others do so in order to be praised by them, or to achieve some other such thing, he himself shows for what purpose he has been eager to please them, and says that it is for their advantage—and not just any advantage, but more clearly, he says, so that they may be saved.

CHAPTER VI

^B I praise you, brothers, that you are mindful of me in all things, and that you keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you. But I want you to know ^C that the head of every man is Christ, the head of the woman is the man, and the head of Christ is God. Every man praying or prophesying having something on his head dishonors his head. Every woman praying or prophesying with her head uncovered dishonors her head; for it is one and the same as if she were shaven.

He blames them because the women were praying and prophesying with their heads uncovered, while the men were wearing their hair long and had their heads covered during prayer and prophecy—which were indeed Greek customs. He suggests also that he had discoursed to them about these things when he was present among them. Some of them had been persuaded, whom he therefore praises; but others had not, to whom he speaks later when he says: *But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom.* “That you are mindful of me in all things.” And yet, his discourse was about not wearing long hair, and not having the head covered in prayer and prophecy. How then does he say, “You are mindful of me in all things”? Having taken a reasonable pretext, he lifts them up with praises. For his discourse is directed to those who had obeyed, not to those who had not. “But I want you to know.” Conversing with those who had been persuaded by this plea, he corrects those who had not believed, that one must not pray with a covered head. He also brings forward the cause: “Of every man.” Of a believer, clearly. For they are members of Christ, and Christ is their head, but not the head of the unbelievers. Christ is the head of us who are faithful, as those who are members of the same body and partakers of the same nature through the communion of his body and blood. For through these, having all been designated as one body, we have him as our head.

Christ’s head, meanwhile, is God and Father, as his begetter and producer, and of the same substance as him. “And the head of the woman is the man.” Who is also himself his producer...

^A and of the same substance as her. For if you were to interpret the phrase “Every man” as also including the unbelievers, the understanding will be correct if you speak according to the mode of creation. For God, having allowed man to rule over all other things, permitted him to remain solely under His own power and authority, not setting over him any other master or sovereign. “And the head of the woman is the man,” because he rules over her and has authority over her. ^B “And the head of Christ is God.” This is so for the sake of the cause alone. For one must not interpret the things said about the head in the same way for Christ. But Christ is the head of men according to the creative principle, while the Father is the head of Christ because He is the cause. Unless, perhaps, God is also said to be the head of Christ in this way, just as He is said to be our God, insofar as He is also considered man, according to that which says, “My Father is greater than I,” and “I ascend to my Father and your Father, and my God and your God.” “Every man praying.” He does not forbid a man to have his head covered always, but only in time of prayer and prophecy. “Having something on his head.” He did not say openly, “He who has his head covered,” but “having something on his head,” removing in this way not only the covering of a hat, but also of hair. For he who nourishes hair also has something on his head, namely, his hair. “Dishonors his head.” For God made us men free, that is, subject to none of those who are on the earth, but ruling over all. Therefore, those who are not subject to the power of any of those on the earth ought not to have power over their head. ^C For to have the head covered is to place a certain power over one’s head. For the covering of the head is in place of authority, which is customarily placed upon the woman, signifying the authority of the man, inasmuch as she is subject to him. He, therefore, who places authority over a free head justly dishonors his own head, which is Christ. “Dishonors her head.” How? Because it is the same as if she were shaven, and because she proves her head to be a sort of runaway and a fugitive from the authority given to her by God, namely, the man. For it is one and the same. How is it one and the same with her who is shaven, since the one who is shaven does not even have her natural covering, that is to say, the hairs, while this one does? And we shall say that the uncovered woman, insofar as it pertains to her, has shaken off even the natural covering, that is to say, the hairs. ^D “For if the woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. For a man indeed ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God, but the woman is the glory of the man.” By adding this, he signified that she ought not to be covered in prayer and prophecy only, but always. For just as to be shaven is unseemly not only in prayer and prophecy, but also always, so likewise to be uncovered [is unseemly]. “For a man indeed ought not to be covered as to his head, for he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of the man.”

^A Instructively he advances the argument, then gives the reason why a man ought not to be covered as to his head—not the first reason, that he has Christ as his head, but another one: “For he is the image and glory of God.” Man is the image of God, not according to the body, nor according to the soul, but solely according to authority. Since, therefore, he has been entrusted with the rule over all things upon the earth, he is called the image of God. But the woman, as one existing under the authority of the man, is the man’s glory, and as it were an image of an image. For she does indeed rule over other things, but she is commanded to be subject to the man. “Being the glory of God.” That is, being an authority of God, and existing under the authority of God alone. It is necessary, therefore, that he who is under none of those things which are on the earth, but is himself the ruler of all things that are on the earth, and of the woman herself, should approach God with the symbols of freedom, that is, with an uncovered head. For out of glory to God, the man ought to be subject to God, and out of glory to the man, the woman to the man. And what is “to the glory”? It is to do with readiness and willingly, with joy, the things that are pleasing to God. Likewise, the woman also [ought] to do the things that are pleasing to the man. Just as he who acts under compulsion and unwillingly and discontentedly is not subject to the glory of God; likewise, neither is the woman to the glory of the man. So it is necessary to approach God readily and uncovered, and for the woman likewise to be covered. “Glory of God.” The most precious thing of his rule and authority. For more because of him than for any other thing in the world is He glorified, and the excellence of His goodness and philanthropy is manifested. Likewise, the woman is the glory of the man. For she is the most precious thing among his rule and power, through whom, more than through anything else over which he rules, it is permitted to him to take pride and be glorified. “But the woman is the glory of the man.” That is, the rule of the man, and under the rule of the man. It is necessary, therefore, for her to be always with some sign of subjection. ^B

XI, 8–13. “For man is not from woman, but woman from man. For man was not created for the woman, but woman for the man. For this reason the woman ought to have authority over her head because of the angels. However, neither is man without woman, nor woman without man in the Lord. For as the woman is from the man, so also is the man through the woman; but all things are from God. Judge for yourselves; is it proper for a woman to pray to God uncovered?” ^C He enumerates the prerogatives of the man, because of which it is given to him to rule. “For this reason she ought.” For the reasons mentioned, he says, she ought to have authority, that is, a covering, so that it may be manifest that she is under authority. For the covering causes one to look downward, which is a sign and indication of her being ruled. “The woman ought to have authority.” That is, she ought to have the authority and dominion of the man to which she is subject, and to display it upon her very head. ^D And how is this accomplished? By

^A covering herself. Therefore, this very covering, too, may deservedly be called authority, because it is demonstrative and representative of the man’s authority and lordship.

But as to what he adds, “Because of the angels,” this appears to me to signify the following: Since he assigns the reason why the woman ought to be subject to the man—namely, that man was not created for the sake of the woman, but the reverse, and that for this reason she must have a covering, which attests to the man’s authority over her—by adding “Because of the angels,” he shows that if she is not willing to do this out of shame before men, she should at least be ashamed before the angels, who have been witnesses and spectators of her subjection. For they, even if they are not men, were onlookers when the man did not receive the principle of his generation from the woman, but she received it from the man.

“Because of the angels.” Clement, in the third book of his *Outlines*, says the angels are the just and virtuous men. Let her, therefore, be covered, lest she be a stumbling block to them leading to fornication. For the angels who are truly in heaven also look upon her even when she is covered. If you despise the authority of the man, he says, at least revere the angels, so that you may not appear before them as one shorn, and as one resisting the authority that has been placed over you by God.

“But neither is the man without the woman.” Since he had greatly lowered the woman by saying that she is from the man, and was made for his sake, and is under his authority, he now moderates that: “Do not,” he says, “bring before me those things that happened in the first creation, but come to the things that are happening now.” For if you seek the present, each has need of the other in order to remain in existence. Then he adds, “In the Lord,” that is, because of the Lord, since He Himself created them to be causes for one another. For the first cause is the Lord Himself.

“And the man by the woman.” Observe the wisdom of Paul; he did not say, “out of the woman,” but, “by the woman,” meaning clearly that the man himself is the cause of the man being by the woman, as the pre-initiating cause. For at first the woman was from the man, not the man from the woman. But in the present order, even if the man is by the woman, nonetheless, the man is the principle by way of the woman. Therefore he did not say, “from the woman,” but, “by the woman,” in order to make the man the principle once again. Since, therefore, he described them as producing each other, and has consoled the woman a little, he adds, “But all things are from God.” For God is the archetypal and first principle.

1 Cor. 11:14-16. Does not nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him? But if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? Because the hair is given to her for a covering. Yet if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the Churches of God.

^D “Therefore,” he says, “he who does not obey is at war even with nature itself.” “Because the hair is given for a covering.” Since, therefore, she has from nature a covering of hair, she ought also to be covered, so that she may not overturn natural laws. “Is given.” That is, it is had from nature. Observe: when he had said that the man has his head uncovered

the man to have his head, he ought not to wear his hair long, ^A but to have it free, how he allows the woman to wear her hair long in sign of subjection. “But if any man seems to be contentious.” Since he was writing to those who wished to appear wise, who by syllogisms built up and tore down everything, he says: It is not now the time for being contentious. For if anyone is shameless toward the things said, we, he says, and the Church, do not have such a custom. What custom? That of being contentious. But rather, that of obeying the commands of the teachers without resisting. — Or: It is not the custom among us that the man should have long hair and have his head covered, while the woman does the opposite.

CHAPTER VII.

“Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's supper.” (1 Cor. xi. 17-20).

Declaring, he says, I praise you not, that you have brought me entirely to the necessity of such a declaration. For it was fitting for you not to have need of admonition in this regard. I do not praise you, he says, for coming together, although it was worthy of praise, but you yourselves have made it the cause of blame and accusation. At the same time, he also puts them to shame, because in those things for which it was appropriate for them to be praised, they had instead brought upon themselves a command and a lack of praise. ^B And why does he not praise the coming together? Because you do not come together for the better, as you ought, but for the worse: that is, for despising and putting to shame the brethren, and for displaying your arrogance and gluttony. “For you come not for the better.” Why do you not praise it? Because, he says, you do not come together for the better, but for the worse. For whereas you ought to be advancing toward virtue, you yourselves have destroyed even that which you had. “For first of all, when you come together.” The cause of the current chapter was this. Among them, Lord’s suppers took place, and they came about in this way. On prominent or festive days, after the participation in the holy mysteries, common suppers took place, with the wealthy preparing them and calling together the poor. This was a pretext for charity and humility. ^C Since, therefore, the cause of these good things was being corrupted, it was necessary for the Apostle to write: “I hear that there be divisions among you.” He did not proceed immediately to the discussion of the Lord’s supper, but cuts away the evil from the beginning. For indeed, even the failure to understand and to feast together with the poor was a division. “And I partly believe it.” That is, I believe it in a small measure. He says this in order not to make them too shameless. He did not say, I do not believe, lest he appear to rebuke in vain. But he says, I believe a little; “For there must be also heresies.” Heresies here, he says, not those regarding doctrine, those concerning the faith, but those concerning

^A the tables. For the rich, preferring the rich, would leave the poor. ^B “That they which are approved may be made manifest.” The word “that” is not causal, but declarative of the outcome of things. For the statement, “There must be also heresies, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you,” signifies this: Since you who are rich are divided, overlooking the poor, the result is that the poor, through patience, are found to be approved. “May be made manifest among you.” For those who are solid shine all the more in such times. He indicates the poor, those who bear the arrogance of the rich nobly, and those who still observe the custom. “When you come together.” The gathering, he says, shows love, yet it does not reach the work.

“It is not possible to eat the Lord’s Supper.” He calls it the Lord’s own, in imitation of that fearful and mystical one, when the Lord ate with the disciples; as if to say, that which was arranged and ordained by the Lord. You indeed come together to eat the Lord’s Supper, but you do not perform it. [THEODORE] This signifies the “It is not possible.” He calls the Lord’s Supper the Lord’s mystery; for all partake of it in the same way, both those who live in poverty and those who abound in riches, both servants and masters, and both those who rule and those who are ruled. It was necessary, therefore, that the common tables also be common, and imitate the Lord’s [table], which is set before all equally. But now you do not do so. For each one takes his own supper in eating. He calls the meal itself “supper” according to the custom of that time. ^C

XI, 21, 22. “For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not.”

That which is the Lord’s, he says, you have made private, taking away from it this most beautiful and saving name. Then he also calls them gluttons. “He taketh before other,” he says, “in eating,” and does not call the poor, as if fearing that he might not have his fill. “And one is hungry, and another is drunken.” He proclaims two of their faults: both that they despised the poor, and that they themselves were getting drunk. For in general, he says, if you do not have common tables when you eat, why do you not eat in your own houses? “Or despise ye the church of God?” For he who holds private suppers in church both insults the holy place and does not celebrate the Lord’s Supper. But indeed he also puts the poor to shame. “And shame them that have not?” For he says it is not so much that they care that they are hungry, as it is that they are despised, overlooked, and not invited, ^D or because they are shamed, being convicted for not having. “What shall I say to you?” Then, after the demonstration of the fault, he discourses with them more gently. For when...

it would have been appropriate to say: Are these not worthy of ten thousand deaths? he says: “Shall I praise you in this? I do not praise.” What seems to you? Did I speak to you unreasonably even at the beginning of this argument that I do not praise? Did you not also learn from the very sequence of events that, in a praiseworthy matter—the Lord’s Supper—you have performed actions worthy of blame and not of praise? Thus I, he says, justly do not praise, even though the work in itself is most praiseworthy. ^A

XI. 23-25. “For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night in which He was betrayed took bread, and having given thanks, He broke it and said: Take, eat, this is My body, which is broken for you. Do this in remembrance of Me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying: This cup is the new covenant in My blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in My remembrance.” ^B

Although Paul was not present then. How does he say, “I received from the Lord”? But now he is present. For even now, the Lord sets before us a table like that one. Or: “I was taught these things by the Lord,” so that “I received” is taken for “I was taught.” “That the Lord Jesus on the night in which He was betrayed.” These things, he says, which I delivered to you, He commanded, as if to say: Did our Lord deem worthy of a common table not only the holy disciples, but even the betrayer himself, the enemy, the most wicked one, and do you disdain to dine with the poor? And when He was about to be crucified, He left us this final mystery, but you have corrupted it. ^C

In another way. If the Lord, he says, did not disdain to let you commune of His own body and the mystical table, how do you disdain your fellow servant regarding your own things? Or also in this way. If the Lord sets before you and the poor person alike the table of His own body and blood and the cup, you dare to separate and despise this person from your table? If He gave thanks while dividing and giving His own body, do you not much more, by giving thanks and with the greatest joy for those things gifted to you by God, receive the poor as partners and fellow guests? “And having given thanks.” The Lord, having given thanks, broke and gave to the disciples. If, therefore, you also come with thanksgiving, do you do nothing unworthy of the thanksgiving, when you are intoxicated and are destroying the poor person with hunger and insult? “Take, eat.” He Himself, he says, gave to all in common, but you separate yourself from the poor and from the body of the Church. “Likewise also the cup.” For there were also cups in the Old Testament in which they poured libations, and after sacrificing, they received the blood of irrational animals in the cups and poured libations. Therefore, instead of the blood of irrational animals, the Lord gives His own blood. And it is well that it is in a cup, so that He may show that the old covenant was already foreshadowing this. For this reason He says: “The new covenant is in My blood.” ^D

not that of irrational animals. In My blood, I say, not in the blood of irrational animals, as in the old covenant. ^A

XI, 26-28. “For as often as you eat this bread, and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until He comes. Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup.” ^B

He who proclaims the death of the Lord, proclaims at once every gift, all kindness and humanity, and all our salvation. “Until He comes,” that is, at the second coming. As for the words “until He comes,” they must be understood by hyperbaton [transposition]. That is to say: as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, until He Himself comes in His second advent, until that time you proclaim His death. For after that time we shall no longer partake of these holy mysteries, having been led into a more perfect and mystical way of life and enjoyment. “Therefore whoever eats in an unworthy manner.” He censures them, showing them to be unworthy, because they neglected the poor. Since you approach, he says, the participation of the Lord’s body unworthily, for this reason many maladies, afflictions, plagues, and deaths occur. But whence does the unworthy approach arise? From the other sins which you commit, and from the fact that, when coming together for the Lord’s supper, you despise the poor, for whose sake it was ordained that you should come together. For by this very thing, you make that which is the Lord’s ^C your own, injuring the afflicted, and you dishonor the church in which you come together to celebrate the Lord’s supper, setting before yourselves a table of gluttony therein, and not a Lord’s supper; and you put the poor to shame. Therefore, on account of these things, you render yourselves unworthy of the body and blood of the Lord. “Will be guilty.” The phrase “guilty of the body and blood of the Lord” indicates that just as Judas betrayed Him, and the Jews raved against Him, so do they bring ignominy upon Him who receive His most holy body with impure hands, just as the Jews held Him then, and bring Him to an accursed mouth. And by the fact that he frequently says, “of the body and blood of the Lord,” he makes manifest that it is not a mere man who is being sacrificed, but the Lord Himself and Creator of all, as if to terrify them through these words. “And of the blood of the Lord.” As if He Himself had poured it out. For they indeed murdered Him, but he who is unworthy now appears to murder Him. “But let ^D a man examine himself.” His discourse was indeed about the Lord’s supper, but since he fell into a discussion about the mysteries by a certain sequence of words, he corrects what is proposed. For this was Paul’s custom, to correct all matters that fall in the way.

^A “A man himself.” Not another judging another (for that is what to judge is), but he himself is to judge himself. For he who eats and drinks unworthily, eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord. For this cause many among you are weak and sickly, and many are asleep. For if we judged ourselves, we would not be judged. But when we are judged, we are chastened by the Lord, that we may not be condemned with the world. Therefore, my brethren, when you come together to eat, wait for one another. And if any man hunger, let him eat at home, that you come not together unto judgment. And the rest I will set in order when I come.

He speaks this not because of the nature of the mysteries, but because of the unworthiness of those approaching. ^B “Not discerning the body of the Lord.” That is, not examining nor considering the magnitude of the things proposed. For if we were to learn who it is that is proposed, we would not have need of another impulse, but this very thing would prepare us to be sober and modest. “For this cause many are weak, and many are asleep.” For this cause, what cause? Because they approach unworthily. What then, someone might say, do those who grow old not sin, since they do not die prematurely? Yes, he says, but this is not the only recompense for those who approach unworthily—to die before their time—but there are also most grievous punishments hereafter. And the word *ikanoi* (sufficient), some have understood instead of *polloi* (many), that is, “Sufficient numbers have died for this.” “For if we judged ourselves.” He did not say, “If we punished ourselves,” but only, “If we judged,” that is, if we only condemned ourselves when we sinned, we would have been released from both the punishments here and those hereafter. For he who condemns himself as he should, would not often fall into the same sin. “But when we are judged by the Lord.” Since, therefore, we do not perform what is so light—that is, to condemn ourselves—God does not use us so mercilessly, but chastens us here, so that He may show mercy there. “We are chastened.” For instance, we are admonished. For he did not say, “We are punished,” but ^C “We are chastened,” as if an admonition and correction were taking place. “That we may not be condemned with the world.” He calls those who are in unbelief and sin the world. And he says that believers and worshippers of God are punished here for their sins, so that they may not pay the penalty there with the rest. “He returned to the former discourse.” And see, he did not say, “Give to the poor,” but that which is more solemn, “Wait for one another,” as if the food brought there were common, for he says that he who does not do this is unworthy of the mystical participation. “Therefore, my brethren, wait for one another.” ^D [PHOT.] Wherefore? That you may not be shown to be unworthy, participating in the Master's body and blood, becoming guilty of the slaughter of His body and the shedding of His blood, such that you might have an inescapable judgment, so that by falling into such a judgment, you might be consumed by diseases and sufferings and death, lest, if you do not make payment for these, you be surrendered to endless punishment along with the unbelievers.

dgment, you might be consumed by diseases and sufferings and death, lest, if you do not make payment for these, you be surrendered to endless punishment along with the unbelievers. ^A “And if anyone is hungry.” He condemns their gluttony; and he deals with them as with children who are indignant and cannot brook delay, sending them away from the church to their own homes. “That you may not come together for judgment.” That is, that you may not come together for your own punishment, doing injury to the Church and despising the poor. For you come together for the suppers for the sake of charity; but if this be present, it is better for you to take your meal at home. And he says this while drawing them along: “And the rest I shall set in order when I come.” Either he says this concerning this very matter—that is, the Lord’s Supper, as needing correction on other points—or it concerns some other matter that does not require words, but his own presence.

CHAPTER VIII

On the variety of gifts and their administration.

XII, 1-3. *Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant. You know that when you were Gentiles, you were led away to dumb idols, however you were led. Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking in the Spirit of God says 'Anathema Jesus,' and no one is able to say 'Jesus is Lord' except in the Holy Spirit.*

This is regarding the divine gifts. The argument of this passage is as follows: Among the Corinthians, those who had believed were endowed with spiritual gifts; and some spoke in tongues, others prophesied, and others obtained other things. These gifts became for them an occasion of double dissension, since they were lacking in wisdom. For he who had received the greater gift was puffed up against those who had smaller ones, while he who had received the lesser was inflamed with envy against him who had been gifted with the greater. Furthermore, there were also prophets among them, and false prophets; nor was it manifest to them who was prophesying by the Holy Spirit and who was prophesying by a demon. Since, ^B therefore, this also troubled them, he sets forth the signs of the seer, i.e., of the divine and the prophet; and he arranges whatever it was that was taking place among them. “You know that when you were Gentiles.” He speaks of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, wishing to show what the diversity is of those who are moved by the spirit compared to the seers, and from what source they are to be distinguished, and he says: *You know*—that is, that you have no need to learn from me. “When you were Gentiles,” that is, you were numbered among the unbelievers and the Gentiles. ^C When, therefore, you were Gentiles, or numbered with the Gentiles, you were led away to idols as you prophesied. And he says well, “*However you were led*,” that is, in whatever way it might happen, neither moved by any inner prudent reason, nor going forth of your own will, but being led away with violence, unwillingly, and driven by a frenzy and foaming at the mouth. But they were led away by the demon that was in them, having nothing of modesty, but all things full of madness. “*That no one speaking in the Spirit of God [says 'Anathema Jesus'].*” One difference, indeed, between the prophets and the false prophets is that the former, being of sound mind and especially sober, foretell things to come. The false prophets, however, act as if beside themselves and mad, and as if led by the ^D violence of the demons moving them. The second...

is that the former speak nothing execrable or blasphemous, but rather discourse excellently concerning God and carry everything with gravity, whereas these latter belch forth blasphemous and absurd utterances. ^A “And no one can say that Jesus is Lord, except by the Holy Spirit.” He stated the sign of a diviner, namely, that they are dragged by force to idols while beside themselves, and pretend to foretell things to come. He also states the sign of a prophet. What is this? That no one who has the Spirit of God anathematizes and insults the Lord. And again, no one can call Him Lord unless he has the Holy Spirit.

“Now there are divisions of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are divisions of ministries, and the same Lord. And there are divisions of operations, but it is the same God who works all things in all.”

Having come to the discourse concerning gifts, he says, “Now there are [divisions]”—and, as it were, portions—“of gifts.” By saying “of gifts,” he instructs the one who thinks he has a lesser gift not to grieve. For if you have been gifted, he says, be grateful for what you have received at all, and do not grieve for what you have received in lesser measure. ^B Again, by adding, “But the same Spirit,” he brings further consolation. For even if your gift is lesser, he says, it is nonetheless a gift of the one Spirit—both the small things and the great.

Otherwise. [PHOT.] He calls them “gifts,” showing the generosity of the giving; but “ministries,” teaching those who have been deemed worthy of them not to be puffed up, but to be with reserve and humility—as those called to the service and ministry of their neighbors—and thus to deal with those who come to them. And again, by “operations,” he indicates the action itself.

Observe precisely how he clearly proclaimed the all-holy Spirit to be both Lord and God. For having said, “Now there are divisions of gifts, but the same Spirit,” and again having added in regard to the matter, “And there are divisions of ministries, and the same Lord,” and then, remaining in the same line of thought and saying, “And there are divisions of operations, but it is the same God,” he then appends, saying, “But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for what is profitable,” ^C demonstrating that he has attributed both “God” and “Lord” to the Holy Spirit. For he gathered everything he mentioned previously into the hypostasis of the Spirit, not only by saying, “But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit,” but also through the enumeration of the gifts that follows. For he maintains that all things are given through the Spirit. And summarizing again, he says, “But all these things one and the same Spirit works.” So it is evident that the divine Paul here brilliantly and expressly theologizes that the all-holy Spirit is Lord and God. But if someone were to take “Spirit” as referring to the Holy Spirit, but “Lord” and “God” as referring to the Son and the Father—and even so, the lordship and divinity are ^D nonetheless

^A the Holy Spirit will be testified by these very things. How and in what manner? First, that having said the all-holy Spirit distributes gifts, he says that the Lord and God do this same thing. So that what the Spirit works, the Lord also works by lordship, and God by divinity. Reasonably, therefore, the same things being worked by the Spirit, the lordship of the Son and the divinity of the Father belong to Him. So that the Spirit is both Lord and God. And it seems to me that the divine Paul for this reason used the personal name for the Spirit, but for the Son and the Father used the common ones, so that it might be permitted to those who look closely, from the identity of the operation, to infer the identity of the substance; and to understand the names "Lord" and "God" themselves as applied to the Spirit because of the identity of substance. Nor is the lordship and divinity of the Spirit demonstrated only from what has been said, but also from the summary compilation that follows. For here he says again more clearly: ^B "All these things works one and the same Spirit, distributing to each one individually." How? By His own sovereign power. For he says, "As He wills." So if whatever the Father and the Son work, the Spirit also does these things, and does them divinely and sovereignly (for as He wills, so He does. And He wills, clearly, just as the Lord and God do; for there is no contrary will, God forbid), it is manifest that the Spirit would also be Lord and God. For He performs the works of the Father and the Son sovereignly, and does them as Lord and God, and does all things. ^C And it must also be noted, as this appeared in the manner of a corollary, how, while declaring that the same Spirit works all things, at one time he uses the preposition *kata*, that is "according to," at another time *dia*, that is "through," and sometimes also *en*, that is "in," showing that for him the use of prepositions is indifferent. For he says "according to Him," and "through Him," and "in Him," discussing the same Holy Spirit. And he uses these to refute those who weave slanders regarding what is said: "Through Him, and of Him, and in Him," and because of the difference of the little words are carried away into blasphemous thoughts. ^D "But the same Spirit." It is not possible for one who is moved and works by the divine Spirit to define Christ as alien to the divine nature, but neither, conversely, is it possible for one to confess Him perfectly and sincerely to be mighty God, unless he is illuminated by that grace. "And there are divisions of ministries." Lest, having heard only of gifts, he who had received a lesser gift should be distressed as having been slighted regarding the endowment, he adds "of ministries," showing that some laborious mystery had also been given to them. If therefore he has more, he has something more in a laborious matter. "And there are divisions of operations." Operations, that is, gifts. For gift, ministry, and operation have the same force, because equal also are the things bestowed by the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. "And the same is God." He set forth the passage very dogmatically. For having enumerated the Holy Trinity separately, he joins them without confusion. For the sam

same is distinguished in persons and conjoined in essence, as Gregory the Theologian says, namely three in persons, but one in divinity, so that the induction may be exact. "But the same God who worketh all things." For what the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit work, that also God works. For in these persons is the Godhead, or rather, they are the Godhead.

^B XII, 7-10. "But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal. For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; to another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; to another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues."

He calls the signs the manifestation of the Spirit; for through the signs, the assistance of the Paraclete was demonstrated. "To profit withal." Lest, upon hearing of the gifts, he who has the lesser gift should be distressed and say, "What is it to me even if God is one and the same, if I have the lesser one?" he adds, "to profit withal," showing that it is also profitable for him to have received the lesser gift. "For to one by the Spirit." He enumerates the gifts, showing that all proceed from the same source of the Spirit, so that neither he who has received the lesser [gift] may be grieved, nor he who has the greater may be lifted up, since both these and those are from the same Spirit. "Word of wisdom." A word, he says, of such wisdom as Paul, Peter, and John possessed, and those who were in their time; therefore he placed this in the first rank. The word of knowledge, however, is that which simple believers possess, who indeed know, but are unable to teach others. "To another faith." He speaks here not of the faith which concerns dogmas, but that which concerns signs, for which the apostles asked, saying, "Increase our faith." For it is not that the apostles lacked faith, but because they had heard, "If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain," they asked for this faith for the performing of miracles.

^C Otherwise. [THEODORE.] He named faith not as the common one, but as the particular gift (since there is also a gift called faith), faith [which is also] that of dogmas. "Gifts of healing." He calls gifts of healing the running of the lame, the health of the infirm, the resurrection of the dead, and whatever things correspond to these. But the workings of miracles [he calls] the blindness of Elymas, the death of Ananias and Sapphira, and those delivered to Satan that they might be taught not to blaspheme. "Workings of miracles." He who had the gift of healings used to heal the infirm; but he who had the workings of miracles was able both to heal the infirm and to punish the unbelievers and those who were corrupting others. "Discerning of spirits." This is knowing who is a prophet and who is ^D

^Ae Spirit manifests himself, and it is the ^Bsame Lord, and the same God. The false prophet is also, he says, to be distinguished: one must discern who is a prophet and who is a false prophet, who is spiritual and who is not such, since in that time there were also prophets or diviners who deceived men. "Kinds of tongues." The Corinthians thought this was greater than all things, because the apostles received this before everything else. "Interpretation of tongues." Either because while some spoke in tongues, these interpreted, or because they could also interpret while they spoke, which those who only spoke in tongues were unable to do.

XII, 11, 12. "All these things worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will. For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ."

Mark the passage for the sake of those who fight against the Spirit. For they impiously assert that the Holy Spirit is also made by the Father. But see from this that the Holy Spirit is not of those things which are made, but of those which make, and this authoritatively, divinely, and by His own power. He says something similar elsewhere: "The Spirit bloweth where he listeth." "For as the body is one." From the example concerning the body, he wishes to show that we are all one, even if we have different gifts. If, therefore, we are one, how then will it be reasonable for anyone to err or make claims regarding the diversity of gifts? "Being many, are one body." For all the members contribute to the body being one and complete. "So also is Christ." So, he says, Christ has many members, namely, the individual believers, but one body, to wit, the communion of the Church. For it is composed of many, from which it is a body, having Christ as its head, so that the Church and Christ are one self-complete body. ^C

XII, 13-20. "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. For the body is not one member, but many. If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling? But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him. And if they were all one member, where were the body? But now are they many members, yet but one body."

"In one," that is, "by one," which is to say, "all into one body." Then he also adds what has made all to be one body, namely, that there is one Spirit, and that all were baptized by one Spirit into one body: that is, to the end of making all one body. But for ^Dnow, by these two things he consoles...

same ^A truth regarding the entire holy Trinity is to be understood; for there is no difference in the coessential and all-praised Trinity. But if all things were one member, where would the body be? He takes that very thing which was to them an occasion of faintheartedness—namely, that there are diverse gifts—and turns it into an occasion for unity. For if you did not have, he says, diverse gifts, you would not even be a body. ^B For a body is not one member, but many. And do not be surprised, he says, if being so many we are one body, since even in the human body it is found that one body is constituted from many members. He speaks these words, which are appropriate to them, as if from the person of the members, wishing to show that even if someone has a lesser gift, he is not on that account cast out from being a member of the body. For even in the human composition, both that which is lowlier and that which is more honorable contribute to the completion of one body. ^C

"If the foot shall say." If it says this—that "I am not of the body"—it does not on account of saying "I am not" already depart from the body. So neither do you, because you have this gift and not that one, cease from being a body together with the others. "If the whole body were an eye." Since he mentioned the eye and the foot, and by this gave them pain, intimating that they were in some way inferior, just as he shows in the members, now he shows it to be advantageous that there are diverse gifts. For just as the body is for this reason a body, because it is constituted from diverse members, so also the body of Christ, that is to say, the Church, is made such a body by the diversity of gifts and ministries. ^D

"But now hath God set the members." Observe also here how clearly and without any ambiguity he proclaimed the Spirit to be God. For having said a little before that the Spirit works all these things, now, speaking of the same things again, he says: "God hath set the members, every one of them as it hath pleased Him." For he called those who had received the diverse gifts from the Spirit "members." And there he was saying: "He works, dividing to every man as He will," but here: "He hath set every one of them in the body as it hath pleased Him." If, therefore, God has so willed, it is absurd to be anxious about those things which God has willed to come to pass. But the phrase "as it hath pleased Him," he had spoken of above regarding the Spirit: "In one Spirit were we all baptized," and "We have all been made to drink into one Spirit." And since we are all in one Spirit, and it is the Spirit's will, and the Spirit is God, you may understand this of the whole holy Trinity. For there is no difference in the coessential and all-praised Trinity. But if all were one member, where is the body? That very thing which was to them an occasion of faintheartedness—the fact that there are diverse gifts—he himself takes as an occasion for unity. For if you did not have, he says, diverse gifts, you would not even be a body. A body

^Ae, if you were not a body, you would not be equals in honor. For equality of honor and unity proceed from the unity of the body.

"But the eye cannot say to the hand, I have no need of thee: or again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. Nay, much more those members of the body which seem to be more feeble are necessary: and those members of the body, which we think to be less honorable, upon these we bestow more abundant honor; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness. For our comely parts have no need."

Even if one wishes to say, "I have no need of you," the nature of the matter is not so. Having persuaded those who possessed lesser gifts in the preceding sections not to be discouraged, he now calls back to modesty the pride of those who had the greater ones. For just as the eye cannot say to the other members, "I have no need of you" — for if one is missing, the whole body limps — so neither can those who have received greater gifts be exalted against those who have lesser ones, as though they did not need them. For the rejection of one makes the body of the Church limp, since those who possess the greater gifts are not alone sufficient to build it up. "Nay, much more." Now he wishes to show that perhaps those who have received what seem to be lesser gifts are even more necessary. Well did he say, "which seem," showing that the inferiority exists only in opinion, and by no means in truth. "Those members of the body which seem to be more feeble." Some say that he spoke this regarding the eyes, which indeed are feeble if you compare them to the other members, yet they contribute something great to the body, even if they seem to be feeble. Therefore, if you judge yourselves to be feeble, do not be grieved. You are necessary. That you are not really feeble, but that those who have a high opinion of themselves are rather so, is manifest from this, he says. "And those members of the body which we think to be less honorable, upon these we bestow more abundant care and help," and so forth. "And those which we think to be less honorable." Everywhere he adds "we think," showing that this is a human opinion. But as to what he says, "less honorable," or more undignified, some say that he spoke this regarding the feet, which have indeed taken the lower place, yet they are warmed and cared for by us almost more than the other members. For the whole body is supported upon them; or take this to refer to the genital members, which indeed seem to be uncomely and dishonorable, yet one would rather have the whole body naked than these. Therefore he adds, "upon these we bestow more abundant honor, and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness."

^D [Phot.] This can also be understood more appropriately in this way: It does not come to pass, he says, that you are inferior from the fact that you have chanced to receive a lesser gift. For it is not necessarily the case that if someone has chanced to receive a greater gift, he is already greater. Since many who have received [gifts] are inferior to those who have received nothing at all. And what do I say "inferior"?

^A acceperunt. And why do I say inferior? Indeed, they are utterly miserable, like those who said, "Lord, did we not do this and that in your name?" To whom the Master replied that he had never even known them. For they had not used the gift well, but he commanded them to depart from him, of such a sort as he was who did not follow Christ and yet worked signs, such as was Judas himself. He, however, does not recount these things for now, but from these things which were said by him in the manner of bodily things, he confirms this too: that it is necessary not to consider those to be greater who are thought to have received a greater gift, nor, conversely, are they sometimes lesser. For he says that to those who are less comely among us, we bestow more abundant comeliness, and to those who are less honorable, more abundant honor. But are they for this reason more honorable and more comely than those who are more honorable and more comely? Thus, he says, God also sometimes gives a greater gift to him who is in want, and a lesser one to him who is self-sufficient and has enough to direct himself. Therefore, you must not be dejected if you seem to have a lesser gift, since we ourselves also, in the case of those members of ours which appear more comely and honorable, as they do not need much comeliness, leave them to remain in the ornament and comeliness which they have, and we add honor and comeliness to the less honorable and less comely ones. Hence, from the fact that one has received less, one can be of a stronger mind and give thanks that God our Lord created him from the beginning (He who does all things wisely and without any defect) in such a way that he needed fewer things for his own sufficiency and perfection. ^C He says these things both to console those who appeared to have less from sorrow, and to draw back those who appeared to have received more from pride. Why do you puff yourself up, you who seem to have received more? It is a testimony of your weakness, namely that you needed more. Why are you dejected in spirit, you who seem to have less? Yet this is an argument of your strength, namely that God showed that you needed fewer things. And observe how he began little by little to show them equal because of necessity, although they appeared to have attained unequal goods. Then, however, he exalted even more those who appeared to be inferior. For those who are afflicted and grieving have more need of consolation than the arrogant have of slight and moderate rebuke. Then, having said these things, he joins them again to equality of honor and concord, "That there may be, he says, no schism in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another," and so on. "But those among us which are comely." So that no one may say, "And what sort of discourse is this, to provide for the uncomely and dishonorable, but to despise those which are comely?" We do not despise them, he says, but they have no need of anything from us, inasmuch as they have natural comeliness; by this, again, he comforts those who had the lesser gifts. ^D "But God has tempered the body, giving more abundant honor to the one who was lacking, so that there might be no schism in the body, but that the members might have the same care for one another." XII, 24-26. "But God has together tempered the body: giving more abundant honor to the one who was lacking: so that there might be no discord in the body, but the same solicitude...

^A And whether one member suffers, "all the members suffer together; or one member is glorified, all the members rejoice together." If He has tempered it, then He has also made it one; for that which is mingled together becomes one. "To the one who was lacking." See, He no longer says, "to the dishonored," or "to the unseemly," but, "to the one who was lacking," showing that they are not by nature unseemly or seemly, that is, honorable or dishonorable. "Giving more abundant honor." In the case of the body, one might see this; but in the case of human beings, how is it possible to find the more dishonorable and weak ones enjoying greater care? And we say that God provides more for the weaker ones. And see the thief who entered into Paradise before the apostles, and the sheep lost from the hundred, which was also found and carried upon the shoulders, and the laborers who came at the eleventh hour, and receive their reward first, because God bears the weak more and condescends to them. Therefore He also says, "giving more abundant honor," so that by this He might comfort those who have the lesser gift. "That there may be no discord in the body." For to be a body at all causes [the parts] not to be rent asunder, as if it were rent asunder, the whole has perished. He says this, however, ^B both fearing those who have the great gifts and restraining them. For the departure and schism of those who are lesser in gifts will injure even those very ones [who have much], running the risk of no longer being the body of Christ. So, He says, there must be provision and care for one another; "for in union we have our being." "And whether one member suffers." For if the members must be exactly united and care for one another, it is evident that what happens, whether sufferings or successes, must be common. For the tearing away of the lesser ones, He says, injures you also, the greater one, just as a foot that is amputated [injures] the eyes, or the lesser part of the body [injures] that which seems to be superior. "Or one member is glorified." The head is crowned, and glory and joy accrue to all the members.

XII, 27-30. "Now you are the body of Christ and members individually. And ^C God has appointed these in the Church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then powers, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, diversities of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all powers? Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?" Then, lest they say, "And what does the example of the body have to do with us?" He shows that they themselves are also the body of Christ. And if it is not right for the human body to foster discord (for discord is a cause of dissolution),

^A much less is it right for the body of Christ. "And members in particular." All the faithful everywhere are the body of Christ, but you, Corinthians, are members in particular. For you are not alone the whole body, but you are members, and not all things, but in part. By this he shows that the Gospel and the faith were already dispersed throughout the greater part of the world. "And God hath set some." And God, he says, has set and made these apostles in the Church. He does well, however, to place apostles first, for they are the leaders of the faith. He calls the prophets second, not meaning the ancients, but those who were prophesying in that Church at that time, such as Agabus and many others. If then there were prophets, how does the Lord say, "The law and the prophets were until John"? We reply that the Lord is speaking of those ancients who prophesied of His coming. ^B "Second prophets." The great Apostle calls them prophets, not those from before the time of Grace, but those who were after grace, among whom was Agabus and those who prophesied at Antioch, and the divine Apostle himself. "Thirdly teachers." For these also are of the greatest use, and are deservedly placed immediately after the prophets. "Then miracles." (By Gennadius.) Meaning clearly the workings of the powers. The powers were both healing the sick and punishing those who contradicted, as Paul did to Elymas and Peter to Ananias. Those who had the gifts of healings, however, were only healing. For this reason he also prefers the powers. "Helps." The assisting of the infirm and the protecting of them, which he calls a gift, even if it also requires our own labors. And that which follows, governments, is the same as helps or something similar. "Diversities of tongues." The Corinthians had been deemed worthy of this gift, and they were very proud of it. Therefore, to check their arrogance, he placed it last. "Are all apostles?" Then, lest he should cause grief to all who have lesser gifts by this order and by making known the greater and lesser gifts, hear what he says: Are all apostles, or prophets? For if you were all one, you would not be diverse members. If all, he says, were prophets, where would the apostles be? If all were apostles, where would the teachers be? So this order is both useful and more beneficial, that each one might have need of his neighbor. ^C But covet the better gifts, and I show unto you a yet more excellent way. If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal. And if I have prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. And if I distribute all my substance to feed the poor, and if I deliver my body to be burned, but have not love, I am profited nothing. ^D

^A He gently hints at them. You yourselves, he says, are the cause of not receiving great gifts, because of your sloth. For this is what “Zealously desire” signifies. But he did not say “Great gifts,” but “The better ones,” that is, those which are more useful and more able to benefit the Church.

^B Another way. “But zealously desire the gifts.” It seems to me that he did not say this by way of exhortation and declaration. For how could he have done this, having so often said that everyone received a gift as it was expedient, and having so often demonstrated that he who seemed to have the greater gift in no way excelled him who had the lesser? But it seems to me that it was spoken by the divine Paul as a question: “Do you zealously desire,” he says, “the better gifts,” and have I not yet persuaded you not to be disheartened because of the lesser ones, but you are still lovers and zealots of the greater ones? Therefore, I also show you, in addition to what has been said, a shortcut and a way, through which, without having need of any of these greatest gifts, you might appear by way of excellence greater and truly more perfect than the others. What then is this? It is simple and effortless, and comes about with the greatest ease. What then is it? What else, but love? For he who has taken this in purity surpasses all, excels all. But he who does not have it has fallen from all, is destitute of all. But if we have love, we shall neither contend anxiously with one another about gifts nor speak words, nor will any other of those things which are not fitting touch us.

“And yet a more excellent way.” If at all, he says, you are zealots for the better gifts, I show you a more excellent gift, indeed he is about to show love. And see that he did not say: I show you an excellent gift, but, “A way,” signifying that love is the way which leads to all ^C the gifts. And he who has acquired this will travel through it even to the rest.

Another way. Some read this as a question; that is, Do you desire the greater gifts at all? If you desire them at all, I will readily guide you to them. For he adds this: “And I show you a yet more excellent way”; that is, I show the way towards the gifts that are more excellent.

“If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels.” By saying “the tongues of angels,” he does not attribute bodies to the angels, but from the vocal organ known to us, he signifies the converse of the angels among themselves. For they too have a certain signification by which they converse with each other, or signify their concepts, just as he says elsewhere that every knee of things in heaven and on earth shall bow before Christ. “But have not love.” What then is this way? It is love, he says, without which no gift brings any utility. And he begins first from the gift of tongues, which was held in esteem ^D among them, and says: If I speak with the tongues of men, nay, even of the angels, without love, I speak rashly and in vain and with no utility, just as [non-living things emit sound...]*

*Note: The final phrase of the Latin column is cut off by the page break; the translation reflects the anticipated completion based on the Greek text provided in the next page sequence.*

that they are nothing without love. For when he had said above, “If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels,” which was the greatest thing among them, he now does the same regarding prophecy. For if I have prophecy, he says, not just any kind, but the one that is most sublime, which possesses both mysteries and knowledge, without love, I am nothing. For this he explains further down. “All faith.” By faith now, he does not mean the common and general faith of believers, but the gift of faith. For there was a certain kind of gift which was called by the same name as faith, which was granted to many of the faithful at that time for the manifestation of the presence of the Spirit. Regarding this gift, the Lord also says in the Gospels: “If you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you shall say to this mountain, ‘Be removed and cast into the sea,’ and it shall be so for you.” ^B For the Lord was not speaking these things to them as to unbelievers regarding the common faith, but His discourse was directed to His own disciples, that is: If you have the gift of faith. And what the Lord said in the Gospels is the greatest—the moving of mountains through faith—this He says is nothing without Love. “I am nothing.” He did not say, I am most small and vile, but, “I am nothing.” — “And if I bestow to feed.” He rightly said, “bestow to feed,” signifying along with the gift one’s own ministry also. Consider also that he says, “all my goods,” not a part of them. “That I may be burned.” He speaks of the most cruel kind of death, which is indeed endured for God. ^C

XIII, 4-8. “Charity is long-suffering, is kind; charity does not envy; charity is not self-important, is not puffed up, does not act unseemly, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil, does not rejoice in injustice, but rejoices with the truth. All things it bears, all things it believes, all things it hopes, all things it endures. Charity never falls away.”

Then, consequently, he goes through the marks of love, showing that it not only uproots the passions that have sprouted, but does not even allow them to grow at all. See, moreover, he has placed patience first—the root of all Christian philosophy. “Is kind.” Since there are some who do not use long-suffering for philosophy, but for breaking down those who are bothersome and trying them all the more, he speaks to them more morally, saying, “Is kind,” that is, it uses patience and uses kindness not to ignite the anger of those who are bothersome, but to soothe it. “Does not envy.” ^D Oh, what a thing it is not to envy, that is, not to be jealous of those who do well. “It is not self-important.” It is not arrogant, it is not puffed up and does not think highly of its own accomplishments. Or it does nothing rashly. For *perperos* is [rash/self-important]. “Does not act unseemly.” He says that it not only does not think highly of itself, but it does not even [commit] the most shameful...

acts ^A nor, for the sake of the beloved, does it consider the matter a disgrace. Or thus: “Does not act unseemly,” that is, it does not attack those who do injustice [to it] violently. Or that it does not refuse to do any of the base or humble things for the sake of the benefit of the brethren, as if it perhaps suspected the action to be unseemly. “Does not seek its own.” He says the manner in which it does not act unseemly, [namely] that it does not seek its own interest, but that of its neighbor, and considers this a shame, if it does not deliver the neighbor who is acting unseemly. “Is not provoked.” Suffering all things, it is not provoked to anger. And not only does it not do evil, but it does not even plot it. “Does not rejoice in unrighteousness.” It does not exult, that is, it does not rejoice in those who suffer evils, [but] he says, it rejoices together with those who are well-regarded. “Bears all things.” For this is what long-suffering grants it, that is, to bear, concerning which long-suffering he spoke. “Believes all things.” Whatever the beloved may say, and it neither speaks anything deceitful nor imagines that the one speaking [does so]. “Hopes all things.” It does not despair, he says, of the ^B beloved, but hopes that he will advance toward what is better. And if, even having hoped, he should fail, with that one remaining in his wickedness, it bears his shortcomings bravely. “For it endures all things,” he says. “Never fails.” — [PHOT.] It is not dissolved, he says, nor broken, that is, it never fails, nor does it fail of good repute, but it always finds good and noble opportunities for itself, through which it holds those who use it in love and connection to their neighbors, that it might remain and not be interrupted even if they should dissent and provide causes for drawing back. For it makes [one] bear and separate and endure the one who has sinned against it.

XIII, 8-10. “Whether prophecies will be abolished, or tongues will cease, or knowledge will be abolished. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be abolished.”

Having enumerated the sprouts of love, he extols it again in another way, by saying that both prophecy and tongues and knowledge will have an end, but that love is permanent, stable, and endless. For if both prophecies ^C and tongues are for the sake of the knowledge of the faith, with the faith having been spread everywhere, they will naturally cease as superfluous; this will be [true] both now and much more in the future. “Whether knowledge.” Perhaps he speaks of the knowledge of teaching. For with piety and faith being expanded, teaching will be idle. “Will be abolished.” What then shall be? For he spoke of the future time regarding the abolishing of knowledge. Shall we then dwell in ignorance? God forbid! But it is said by him concerning the present knowledge, which is in part, that it will be abolished. For since the present knowledge is in part, when perfect knowledge arrives, this which is in part will have an end, being abolished by the perfect knowledge. Understand the same thing for me also concerning prophecy. For in part ^D

^A we know, for the word "for" is used so that the sense might be: the reason for why they are to be abolished and to cease is because they are imperfect. ^B XIII, 11, 12. "When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I felt as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see through a glass in a riddle, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know even as also I have been known." Since he said that when perfect knowledge arrives that which is in part will have an end, he also confirms the discourse with an example. "When I was," he says, "an infant or a boy in age, I had everything of a child, the speaking, the feeling, and the thinking. But when I became a man, I put away the things of childhood." So too in spiritual matters, he says: "Now our knowledge is childish, since we also are children. When therefore we become perfect," which is in the time to come, "we shall put away all childish things." For the present knowledge and prophecy and way of life are like childhood, if compared to the future one. "As a child I spoke." As regards tongues, "I spoke"; as regards prophecies, "I felt"; as regards knowledge, "I thought" or "I considered." "For now we see through a glass." He explains what was said concerning the child, and wishes to show that our current knowledge is somewhat dim, but then it will be clearer. "For now we see, he says, through a glass." Then, because a glass shows more distinctly the imitation of the thing appearing, he added, "in a riddle," ^C indicating that what now seems to be the most perfect knowledge is even more slight and obscure than the thing appearing in the glass. "Face to face." Not that God possesses some bodily or sensible face, but by the word "face" he figuratively designates a clearer and more manifest knowledge. Or understand this for me as referring to the Son of our Lord Jesus Christ, that he is speaking of him. "But then I shall know." Now, he says, I know him in part, but then I shall thus know him and desire him, just as he now knows me. For now we did not know him, but he knew us and drew us to himself; but then we shall know him and will run to him, taking a clearer experience of his sweetness. ^D By saying this, he removes the pride they had concerning knowledge, showing both that the knowledge we now have is in part, and that we do not have this itself from ourselves, but that it comes to us freely from God, and without our labors. For he himself, he says, both knew us and drew us to himself. "As also I have been known." That is, exactly and perfectly. For to this end I was known from the beginning, that I also might know, as far as is possible for a man, perfectly and exactly the Master who knew me. Now there remain faith, hope, charity, these three. But the greatest of these is charity. Pursue charity, and be zealous for the spiritual gifts, but rather that you may prophesy. For he who speaks in a tongue, does not speak to men, but to God. For no one hears, pursue; yet you be zealous for the spiritual gifts...

he speaks mysteries. He who prophesies, speaks to men for edification, and exhortation, and comfort. He who speaks in a tongue, edifies himself; but he who prophesies, edifies the Church.

^A There are indeed tongues and prophecies and knowledges now, even if they are faint; but regarding the statement, “But now there abides,” you shall understand that these three virtues—or rather, gifts—namely faith, and hope, and love, are more permanent than the others. And of these same ones again, love is greater, since it extends even to the future time. “Faith, hope, love.” Faith and love not only remain in the present age, when other gifts cease, but even “much more in the future.” For then, for the saints who are truly peaceful and mutually loving, all things will be pure and free from sedition. And likewise also regarding faith. For then it will be possible to delight more clearly and more perfectly in the contemplation of the One whom they desired. One might perhaps say that hope is still present then, as the things hoped for are now present, and it has not deceived those who hoped; for the object of truth is an eternal possession. ^B

Another way. “But now abides faith.” But it is not thus, he says. For the expression “now” in this place is not indicative of time. Therefore, he says, it is not the case that one should view faith and hope and love in the same way as the other gifts: seeing that the other gifts, which were also enumerated, will cease in the future—as those things which are more perfect come upon us then—and they will even fail and cease in the present, as divine worship is explained and dilated to all. “For they shall know me,” he says, “from the small even to the great.” ^C For most of the other gifts were given so that men might be led by the hand and brought to faith. But once they have been brought and have believed, they will certainly cease. But it is not in that way with faith, hope, and love. For these will extend through the whole of human life and will remain; and they will shine more brightly then, when the others cease. For then they will dominate more, and their use will be greater, when all practice piety and have believed; for then there will be a greater use for hope, and they will hope, and for love, and they will love. Therefore, as the other gifts cease, these will shine forth more. “These three.” For this reason, these three are more permanent than the rest, as, for instance, than prophecy and tongues and knowledge, since once the faith has been poured out, the prophecies and tongues that were practiced at large were destined henceforth to be idle. And the knowledge which was among the Corinthians was also destined to have an end, being dimmer than the knowledge which is now in the world by the grace of Christ. ^D “Pursue love.” Since, therefore, love has been shown to be such a great thing, pursue it. But see that he did not simply say, “Follow it” or “Acquire it,” but “Pursue it,” that is, follow it with great zeal, showing that it has fled

^A from us and that we still need to run a great course to overtake it, so far off is it. “Pursue spiritual things.” Lest they should think that by this he had spoken the words about charity in order to cast aside the gifts, he adds: “Pursue spiritual things,” that is, the gifts along with charity. — [PHOT.] That is, “Do not neglect those either.” For while charity is greater, and it is this that one must pursue, one must not neglect the other gifts, and especially the gift of prophecy. “But rather that you may prophesy.” He then makes a comparison between prophecy and tongues, and shows prophecy to be more useful, while lowering the importance of tongues. For they were greatly puffed up because of them, because the apostles were considered worthy of that first gift. “For he who speaks in a tongue.” By this he shows that the usefulness ^B of tongues is not great: for, he says, he edifies none of those who hear. For he speaks to God, not to men; since no one understands what is being said, he says this, “For no one hears.” Then, lest he should show them to be altogether useless, he adds: “but in the Spirit he speaks mysteries.” That is, either with his own spirit—as if he were conversing with his own soul—or that he is in the Holy Spirit, that is, he speaks through the Holy Spirit. But even if he speaks in the Spirit, it is less than prophecy, insofar as the usefulness is also lesser. “But he who prophesies.” From common benefit he shows prophecy to be superior. For, he says, he edifies men, and exhorts them to faith, and comforts them in the temptations that are to come. “He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself.” He is speaking about those who know what they are saying, but ^C do not know how to interpret it to others. “But he who prophesies, he says, edifies the Church.” As great, therefore, as the difference is between benefiting one person and benefiting the Church, so great is the difference between tongues and prophecy. “I desire you all to speak in tongues, but rather that you may prophesy. For greater is he who prophesies than he who speaks in tongues, unless he interprets, so that the Church may receive edification. Now, brothers, if I come to you speaking in tongues, what will I benefit you, unless I speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophecy, or by doctrine? Even lifeless things giving sound, whether pipe or harp, if they do not give a distinction in the tones, how will what is piped or harped be known?” Then, because many among them spoke in tongues, lest he be thought to belittle tongues out of envy, he says: “I desire you all to speak in tongues,” not one or two, “but I wish you rather to prophesy.” Because he who prophesies is greater, ^D because he benefits the many, “unless he interprets.” Since he had declared the prophet greater, he adds: “unless he interprets.” That is, the prophet is greater, unless that man both speaks in tongues and interprets what he says. For such a one is equal to a prophet. For in the same way he brings common benefit to the Church. “Now, brothers, if I come to you”

speaks in tongues and interprets what he says. For such a one is equal to a prophet. For in the same way he brings common benefit to the Church. “Now, brothers, if I come to you ^A speaking in tongues,” and so on. But having first represented this in his own person, proceeding further, he demonstrates these same things in the others themselves. But even there, when he is about to say something harsher, he takes this upon himself, as when he says: “I shall be a barbarian to him who speaks,” and if there is anything similar. “If I come to you speaking in tongues.” Wishing to show in his own person the need and the lowliness of tongues, he says: “Even if it is granted to me to speak in tongues, I will nevertheless profit you nothing by this.” For unless I speak to you by revelation or manifestation, that is, something manifest, clear, and understood, or by knowledge or cognition, that is, so that you may know what I say, “or by prophecy” (for they understood this when it was expressed in the common mode of speaking) “or by teaching” (for he who teaches strives that those who are learning may understand what is being said), I shall not, he says, be useful to you. “Or by revelation.” He sets forth the kinds of gifts that are in speech. These are: to interpret tongues and to reveal or manifest what is said by them, or both at the same time: to speak in tongues and to explain, which he also calls knowledge, because he speaks and as one who knows interprets what he says; “or to prophesy” (and it is manifest what this signifies); “or to teach.” This is a gift other than those which have been mentioned. He says, therefore: If I come having indeed the gift of speaking in tongues, yet not having any of the four aforementioned gifts, what will be the use for you? “Yet even inanimate things giving a sound.” And why, he says, do I say among you, suppose, that which is understood is useful, but that which is not understood is useless? For indeed, in inanimate instruments ^B this can also be found. Since it is not appropriate to produce what is said in a confused manner on a cithara or on pipes; otherwise they would in no way delight anyone. If, therefore, in these trifling things, clarity and manifestation itself is great, how much more so in spiritual things? For it is necessary to strike the instruments in an orderly and articulate manner, which signifies that is, distinction or difference and change of melody.

XIV, 8-11 “For indeed, if the trumpet gives an uncertain sound, who will prepare himself for war? So also you, unless by the tongue you give a manifest word, how will that which is said be understood? For you will be speaking into the air. There are so many, if the matter requires it, kinds of sounds in the world, and none of them is without sound. If, therefore, I do not know the power of the voice, I shall be a barbarian to him who speaks, and he who speaks, etc.”

He shows from examples what the power and utility of manifestation is, and says: Not only pipes and a cithara, but even a trumpet if it gives an uncertain sound, there will be no one who is prepared for war (for “who” is put for “none”), when obviously that which is trumpeted is unknown. Then, lest they say, And what are these examples to us? he subjoins: “So also you, unless you give a manifest and”

^A intelligible word, you will be, he says, speaking into the air,” that is, in vain and to no purpose and uselessly. And if the gift of tongues is useless, why were they receiving these in the form of a gift? So that he who possessed and spoke them might receive benefit alone. But if it were to be useful to others as well, there was need of interpretation, which those who were more purified received. For according to the proportion of faith and purification, gifts were also given. “There are, if it so happen, so many kinds of sounds.” ^B “So many,” that is, many, he says, as it happens, there are kinds of sounds, both animate and inanimate, for instance, of men, of animals, of birds. And of inanimate instruments, for instance, a musical lyre, a flute, and others. But, he says, from none of these could anyone receive benefit, unless he should know the power of the sound. Therefore, neither from your tongues will any benefit pass to others, unless one knows the power of what is being spoken. And this will be if you interpret while speaking in tongues. And you will interpret if you obtain a more blameless life and a faith that is fervent and ignited. — [PHOT.] The phrase, “There are so many kinds of sounds,” and so forth, can be taken in two ways. And one must understand that none of these kinds is soundless; — or that there are many kinds of sounds, but none is obscure and unknown to those of the same kind. For the word “soundless” (ἄφωνον) can be found to signify two things: both that which is completely soundless, and that which is merely obscure and unknown. If, then, we take it as was said before, the sense of the Apostle could be such: ^C There are many kinds of sounds, and of these kinds, none is soundless. But what gain is it to us from those sounds, if we understand nothing of them? For if I do not know what the sound signifies, I will be a barbarian to him, and he to me. And if we take it as was said later, the meaning will also be this: There are many kinds of sounds in the world, and none of these is obscure and unknown to those who are of the same kind among themselves. How then do you, speaking into the air, and uttering things obscure to those of your own kind, exalt yourselves as if you had accomplished some great thing? But do you not rather strive and exert yourselves so that, having also received the interpretation of tongues, you may use the gift for common benefit? For he who speaks only with tongues, when the sound is obscure and unknown to the listener, instead of benefiting him, will be a barbarian to him, and the listener likewise will be considered a barbarian ^D to the one who speaks. And what is the gain from that? “If, therefore, I do not know the power of the sound.” There are, therefore, a myriad of sounds in the world. If, therefore, I do not know the power of the sound, that is, if I do not know what is being spoken, we will be barbarians to one another, not because of the imperfection of the sound, but because of our own ignorance. “So also you.” So, in what way? Just as those who speak and are not understood, and for this reason are barbarians to themselves, so also you; for “so” means, for this reason also you. For what reason? So that you may not be barbarians to one another. For this reason, therefore, you also, since you desire gifts, strive to attain those through which the benefit and edification of the Church will be accomplished. But he, “So that you may abound,” says...

^A He says, "That you may abound," that is, that you may have more than you now have, since you currently only speak in tongues and do not interpret. — Or: "That you may abound the more," instead of "speaking in tongues." For other gifts exceed those of tongues, as they provide greater utility.

1 Cor. XIV, 12-14. ^B "Since you are zealous for spirits, seek to abound for the edification of the Church. Therefore, let him who speaks in a tongue pray that he may interpret. For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is without fruit."

Having ceased from citing examples, he exhorts them more plainly. Since you altogether emulate and desire the gifts (for spiritual things are called so), desire and seek those that can edify and benefit the Church. "Seek to abound." He did not say, "Seek to acquire gifts," but "Seek to abound," that is, that you may possess them with great abundance. "Therefore, he who speaks in a tongue—" Then he also lays down the manner in which they might possess the gifts which benefit the Church. For he says: "Let him who speaks in tongues pray that he may also receive the power to interpret." Therefore, they themselves are the cause of their not receiving the greater gift, as they do not ask for what is greater. "For if I pray in a tongue—" For he says, if I speak in a tongue, but do not also interpret, my spirit—namely, the soul itself insofar as it concerns itself—is benefited; but my mind will be found without fruit, by reason of its not benefiting others as well. For the fruit of the mind is to devise utility for one’s neighbors through manifold and diverse thoughts. "My spirit prays"—that is, my spiritual gift, namely, the very act of speaking in tongues. ^C [Phot.] He uses "I pray" and "he prays" in place of speaking something good and excellent in tongues. For prayer is also a certain kind of discourse. He says, therefore, that if I speak something of those things which are necessary and good, but do not interpret it for the listeners, I indeed benefit myself (for this is what "My spirit prays" means, that is, I alone enjoy that necessary and good thing), but another is not benefited, so that my mind might reap therefrom the fruit of their utility. He posits that the mind is deprived of such fruit and, on the other hand, enjoys it, because that [part of the soul] is more of a lover of the neighbor's utility than the powers within us, inasmuch as it is not easily stirred by passions as is the irascible or the concupiscible part, nor easily transformed from its own natural virtue. And that [mind] is more "without fruit" when it is ^D conscious [of neglect], and conversely, it rejoices abundantly when it has attained the fruit.

Then he says: "What then is it?" that is, what is to be done? How shall it come about that we are not without fruit? How? By caring through virtue that he who speaks in tongues should speak both in spirit and in mind: that is, to speak for the sake of one's own benefit and so that the mind may mutually enjoy the fruit; and this [latter] is the utility of one's neighbors. And this will be if in tongues

^A speaking, we receive the gift so that we may also interpret. Since he took the name of prayer in reference to the speaking of something good and honorable, he continued using it, so that you might not think that the discourse is primarily about prayer, and not about every necessary and suitable discourse spoken in tongues, he transitioned to singing psalms. As if saying, that whether in prayer, or in psalmody, or in any other matter of necessary and good discourse, in all cases it is necessary for one to benefit both oneself and one's neighbor equally. Then he brings in an example, showing that one who speaks in tongues alone without interpretation lacks and falls short in many things. For if, he says, you bless in the spirit—that is, you alone understanding and benefiting yourself with the things you bless—but the hearer does not understand what you say, what will he answer to you? How will he say "Amen," if this is the occasion when it is necessary for him to answer, knowing nothing at all of what you say? For you indeed bless or give thanks well and for your own benefit, if it happens, or do any other of the things that are required. For he wishes the discourse to be heard in general, and not in any specific kind. Therefore sometimes he puts "To sing psalms," at other times "To bless," and after that and instead of it he puts "To give thanks," showing that his exhortation and endeavor concerns every necessary and suitable thing spoken in tongues in general. But, as I was saying, you, he says, speaking in tongues for your own benefit, bless or give thanks or say something else, but the hearer gains nothing, is benefited in nothing by you. ^B "But my mind is unfruitful," that is, it did not have the fruit that is gathered and harvested for it from the hearers; the mind of the speaker did not profit it, it did not enjoy such fruit, it appeared destitute of the fruit, it is unfruitful.

XIV, 15-19. "What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray also with the mind: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing also with the mind. For if you bless with the spirit, he who fills the place of the unlearned, how will he say 'Amen' upon your thanksgiving, since he does not know what you are saying? For you indeed give thanks well, but the other is not edified. I thank my God, speaking in tongues more than you all; but in the Church I would rather speak five words with my mind, that I may instruct others also, than ten thousand words in a tongue."

What is this that he says we ought to ask of God? What? To pray with the spirit, that is, with the soul, which contributes to one's own benefit alone; but also to pray with the mind, which reaches even to the edification of one's neighbors, according to the aforementioned prescription. And likewise also to sing psalms. "I will sing with the spirit." He calls the spiritual gift the spirit, but the mind the clarity and interpretation of the things that are spoken. ^D He says that it is fitting for one speaking in another tongue, whether in psalmody, or in prayer, or in teaching, either to interpret it himself and understand what he says for the

^A benefit of the hearers, or to take someone else along who is able to be a co-worker in teaching. "For if you bless with the spirit." For if you alone, he says, know what you are blessing, or what you are praying, and your soul says this in the spirit, but the others are ignorant because you do not know how to interpret, or rather, since you do not know the power of what is being spoken, he who stands in the rank of an "idiot" will not be able to say "Amen" to your prayer; for he does not know what you are saying, nor does he know when he ought to say "Amen" to you. "The place of the idiot." He calls an "idiot" one who is established in the lay order, for they are accustomed to call those who are outside the military service this way. He says this, that while chanting and praying, interpret the things being said both for yourself and likewise for those who hear you, so that they may say "Amen" (or "Let it be so"), since otherwise they do not know what you are saying. He says this: "I will pray with the spirit, I will pray also with the mind," that is, I will understand, and I will interpret also for those who hear. "For you indeed give thanks well." Then, also preserving the praise worthy for the gift of tongues, he says: "You indeed give thanks well, but the neighbor receives no profit. I speak in tongues more than you all." Afterwards, in order that he might not seem through this to vilify and cast down, or to render as less, the gift of tongues, because he himself does not possess it, he says: "I speak in tongues more than you all." Yet, about to say this, he first gave thanks to God, signifying that he has the gift from Him. "To speak five words with my mind." That is, to understand so as to interpret myself, and to explain to the hearers so that they might be profited, "rather than ten thousand words in a tongue," not being able to interpret them. For in this way the utility will remain for me alone. — ^B [PHOT.] "Through my mind," that is, for the sake of my mind, so that it might not be fruitless for them, but that they might enjoy the fruit of their being profited.

XIV, 20-22. "Brethren, do not be children in understanding; but in malice be children, but in understanding be perfect. In the law it is written: By strange tongues and with strange lips I will speak to this people, and not even so will they hear me, says the Lord. Therefore tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe, but to the unbelievers: whereas prophecy is not for the unbelievers, but for those who believe."

After he shows prophecy to ^C be greater, he afterwards uses more stinging speech. "Do not be children," he says. For it is of children to admire small things, such as tongues, but to despise the great things, that is, prophecy. "But in malice be children." When some injustice or sin is proposed, then be children. To be a child is not to know how to do evil or to sin. The perfection of understanding, however, both flees vice and pursues virtue, and knows how to distinguish the greater and more useful from the lesser gifts. "In the law it is written." And yet Isaiah says this, but the divine Paul calls the whole Old Testament "the law." He brings forward the testimony, ^D quietly showing that the gift of tongues is not very useful, since even to the unbelievers

"not even so will they hear me." Why then would he speak if he knew he would not be heard? To ensure that God might do what is His own, and through all things show the providence He has regarding us, and conquer while He is judged, and remove every excuse. [OECUMENIUS] Or also, the phrase "and not even so will they hear me" is spoken as referring to the common condition, and that not all will hear, since it happens that not even one might hear. "So that tongues are for a sign." Do you see how he subordinates tongues to prophecy? "For they are for a sign," he says. But a sign does not necessarily teach or benefit, since it often even harms, as he says further on, where he says: "Will they not say that you are mad?" "Not to those who believe." For the faithful do not need signs, since they are already believers. "But prophecy is not for the unbelievers." Prophecy, he says, is useful for the faithful, for it instructs them; but not also for the unbelievers, as they are incurably sick—unless, as he says ^B further on, it benefits them also. For, being convicted, he says, and judged by all, he will say that God is truly among you. See how great the difference of prophecy is. For tongues make the unbelievers laugh. "For they will say," he says, "that you are mad." But prophecy benefits the faithful in all ways. And there are times when it benefits even the unbelievers, by convicting them and preparing them to fall on their face and worship God. For this is what he says further on: "But to those who believe, for benefit, which is teaching." ^C "If, therefore, the whole Church has gathered together at one place, and all speak with tongues, and there enter in those who are uninstructed or unbelievers, will they not say that you are mad? But if all prophesy, and there enters some unbeliever or uninstructed person, he is convicted by all, and thus the secrets of his heart become manifest, and thus falling on his face he will worship God, announcing that God is truly among you." He wishes to show that even speaking in tongues is a source of harm. Then, lest he appear to blame the gift, he adds: "If you all enter and speak in tongues, and there enter also those who are uninstructed or unbelievers," so that the blame is ^D of their lack of instruction and unbelief, not of the grace, yet even so it is a source of harm to the uninstructed and unbelievers, which you will not find in the case of prophecy. "Will they not say that you are mad?" Because they were arrogant in that they spoke in tongues, he shows them suffering harm from those very tongues. For you receive, he says, the appearance of madmen, which is contrary to your zeal and your action. But in the case of prophecy he says the opposite. For it even draws in the shameless of the unbelievers by convicting them and judging them and manifesting the secrets of their hearts. "And so the secrets." That is, what they have in their soul, and these things will be brought out into the open, and will be made manifest; and so, through the fact of being judged,

^A they bow down and worship God. "Falling on his face." For the event will cause even those who are extremely shameless to feel shame.

XIV, 26-28. "What then is it, brethren? When you come together, each one of you has a psalm, has a teaching, has a tongue, has a revelation, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification. If anyone speaks in a tongue, let it be by two or at most three, and by course, and let one interpret. But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the Church, and let him speak to himself and to God."

What then, he says, must be done by you? For behold, you have heard the differences of the gifts. And consequently he says: "Each of you, whether he has a psalm (for from a gift they also composed psalms or canticles), or has a teaching; for instance, if he is able to teach and bring benefit; or a prophecy (for this is what "revelation" signifies), or has a tongue (he does well also to mention tongues. For because he had strongly devalued them in the preceding passages, now he mentions them again, since it might have seemed that the [gift] of tongues was not even a kind of gift at all), or has an interpretation, and is able to interpret the tongues, ^B let him look to one end: to edify the Church. As if he were saying: Whatever gifts I have mentioned—psalm, teaching, that is to say revelation, tongue, interpretation—let them be for the benefit of the people and for edification. "By two, or at most three." Do not many speak in a tongue, nor confusedly, lest disorder occur; but two or three at most, and by course; that is, let one speak after another, and let another interpret. "And let him speak to himself and to God." What he says, "Let him speak to himself," is not a permission, but neither is it a prohibition. As if he said: If he does not have an interpretation, let him keep silent. But if he cannot restrain himself from being silent (and this is a fault), let him speak to himself, that is, noiselessly and quietly, so that God alone may hear, and not men. Observe how, while he seems to permit it, he prohibits it.

XIV, 29-33. ^C "Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the others judge. And if anything be revealed to another that sits by, let the first hold his peace. For you may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted. And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all the Churches of the saints."

There were among the prophets also soothsayers or diviners who remained hidden; therefore he says, "Let two or three speak, and let the others judge." This is, let them judge, lest in some way a soothsayer be thought to be a prophet. Therefore, then, two or three, so that on account of the multitude the false prophets may not lie hidden. "And if anything be revealed to another that sits by." If, he says, while you are prophesying, the Holy Spirit moves another, you be silent, so that there may not be confusion by ^D two prophesying at the same time. For on account of this, he says, while you are prophesying, another was inspired, it being the will of the Spirit that something be said through him.

^A «For you can all prophesy one by one.» Since he ordered the first to be silent, he consoles him: Do not, he says, be vexed that you are ordered to be silent; for you can also prophesy, and so can another—or rather, all of you—if each one prophesies one by one. That is, the time will not fail for all who fill the Church both to learn and to be exhorted and guided in the faith. «And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.» By “spirits of the prophets,” he means the spiritual gift itself. Then, lest anyone should say, “And how can I keep silent? For the Holy Spirit Himself, who inspires me, compels both the willing and the unwilling to speak,” he says: It is not so. For the gift is subject to the prophet—that is, it is within his power both to speak and to keep silent. This is clearly the case, or else it is contrary to the way diviners or oracles speak. For they, after the frenzy has been sent into them, even against their will, speak what they do not desire, as if agitated by a demon. ^B If, therefore, the gift is subject to the prophets, how great an absurdity it would be for you not to submit to the common good, so that when the time for silence comes, you keep silent! «For God is not the author of disorder.» Then he shows that this also seems good to God—that the first should keep silent—because God is not the author of disorder, but of peace; for otherwise there would be disorder and confusion. This law of peace, moreover, is in all the churches of the saints. And well does he say, «of the saints,» since there were also churches, or assemblies, of Greeks and other unbelievers.

XIV, 36. «Let your women be silent in the churches; for it is ^C not permitted for them to speak, but to be subject, as also the law says. And if they want to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home. For it is shameful for women to speak in church. Did the word of God go forth from you? Or did it reach you only?»

Having legislated for silence in every way—from the fact that no more than three should speak in tongues, and that this should be done *ana meros*, that is, in parts, or one after another or in turn, and from the fact that he who is first prophesying should give way to the second—he comes consequently to the troublesome chatter of women. «Let women be silent; for it is not permitted,» or rather, it is not allotted, «for them to speak.» And he did not say only to be silent, but also to be subject, which is more than observing silence. ^D For subjection denotes silence with fear, as though performed by some handmaidens. «As also the law says.» And what does the law say? For he calls the Old Testament “the law.” «Unto your husband, he says, shall be your turning, and he shall rule over you.» If, therefore, she is subject to her husband, much more so to spiritual teachers and to the common fullness and perfection of the Church. «And if they want to learn anything.» If, therefore, they do not speak, someone might ask, how can they learn what they do not know? At home, he says, let them learn from their husbands. Observe, however, that he did not permit them to speak in church even about those things which are profitable to them. And this also renders the men more attentive, since they know that they will be questioned by the women about the things in the Church.

those things which are profitable to them. And this also renders the men more attentive, since they know that they will be questioned by the women about the things in the Church. ^A “For it is shameful for women to speak in the church.” Then, since it was to be expected that the women were priding themselves on their supposed spiritual conversations, he refutes this with a declaration, saying: “For it is shameful.” ^B “Or did the word of God come from you?” The discourse is framed as if toward those who were contradicting him. Why, he says, do you contradict, and do not think that it is good that women should be silent in the congregation? Are you the only believers in the world? You are neither the only believers, he says, nor the first. This is what he is saying: Either, did the word of God go out from you? Therefore, what is approved by the world must also prevail among you. ^C “If anyone thinks that he is a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is a command of the Lord. If anyone is ignorant, let him be ignorant.” Therefore, brothers, strive to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. Let all things be done decently and in order.

Having taught in many ways that women ought to be silent, he now adds this too, that this also seems good to God. For if anyone, he says, is a prophet, or otherwise possesses a spiritual gift for understanding the things written by me, let him know that what I am writing are the commands of God, and that I am not moved to write these things of my own accord. ^D But if anyone is ignorant that they are the commands of God, let him be ignorant. That is to say: I have spoken what is expedient; whoever wishes, let him obey; but whoever does not wish, let him do as he pleases. To speak in this way is the mark of a man who does not desire to have his own ideas upheld at any cost, but aims at the common good. He is accustomed to use such a form of discourse where the offense that has occurred is not great. For what is so great about them being ignorant that it is a command of God that women are to be silent? “Strive to prophesy.” He has returned again to where he started, and shows that prophecy is greater by saying, “Strive,” while the gift of tongues is lesser. “For speaking in tongues,” he says, “do not forbid.” Then he summarizes the first points: “Let all things,” he says, “be done decently and in order.” This will happen if those who speak in tongues speak by two or three, and in turn, and the prophets yield to one another, and the women are silent in the churches.

CHAPTER IX. Concerning the universal resurrection of bodies.

XV, 1, 2. “Now I make known to you, brothers, the Gospel which I preached to you, which you also received, in which you also stand, through which you also are being saved, in what word I preached to you, if you hold it fast, unless you have believed in vain.”

He approaches the discourse on the resurrection. But he says, I will say nothing new to you, but what has already been made known to you, yet has fallen into oblivion. For “I make known,” that is, I bring to remembrance. By calling them brothers, he at once softens them and reminds them of the gifts of Christ. For through his coming in the flesh, we have all been made brothers. “Which also”

^A you have received. As a kind of deposit. For they had not received it by word alone, but also through signs and manifold powers. Observe the wisdom of Paul; they were being shaken, and yet he says that they are standing, pretending not to know, lest he should put them to greater shame. Then, laying out the profit of standing, he says, by which you are standing, regarding the Gospel, and are being saved. “By what word I proclaimed the Gospel to you, if you hold fast.” He says this ^B as if intending to say that if they were only seeking the manifestation, they would not at all be hesitating about the resurrection. “By what word I proclaimed the Gospel to you.” This is to say, in what manner it was said that the resurrection came to pass; as if he were saying: I could not say you are wavering about the dogma itself, but that you are seeking the rationale of it. Therefore, he says, I am reminding you of the word concerning the resurrection, as to in what manner it is said to have come to pass. Then, so as not to ^C make them sluggish, he testifies to them regarding their standing, saying, “If you hold fast.” For apart from holding fast to the dogma concerning the resurrection, you have believed in vain, that is, to no purpose. Otherwise: I am reminding you of the way in which the word of the resurrection was manifested to you, if you hold fast to this word of the resurrection. For if you do not hold fast to this dogma, you have believed in vain; and if you are outside of this, your labor is in vain, as the summary of the faith consists in this.

Chapter IX

^A Cepha. » And yet the Gospel says that Christ first appeared to Mary; but among men, he first appeared to Peter, as the primary leader of the venerable choir of the disciples. « Then to the twelve. » And yet Matthias was introduced in place of Judas after the Lord’s assumption; how, then, does he say: « Then to the twelve »? We say either that it was a lapse of the writer, or that the Lord, knowing with the eye of foreknowledge that Matthias was to be numbered with the eleven, appeared to him also, so that not even in this respect would he be inferior to the other apostles. John also implies something of this sort, nowhere saying that he appeared to the eleven; but speaking even of Thomas, he says: « Thomas, one of the twelve. » For we might better say that grace numbered Matthias with the others according to foreknowledge. Or else he still numbered Judas [with them] after the betrayal and the hanging. « By more than five hundred brethren. » The adverb *above* (which, with the other interpreters, we have translated as *more than*), some say is meant to mean *from heaven*, so that he might show them also his own assumption. Others, however, have interpreted it as *more*, that is, « more than five hundred. » — « Of whom more remain until this day. » I have, he says, still living witnesses. « But some also have fallen asleep. » Through the word « fallen asleep, » he laid the first foundation of the resurrection. For he who sleeps also rises. « He was seen by James » — by the bishop of Jerusalem, who was surnamed the brother of the Lord. « Then by all the apostles. » For there were also other apostles from among the disciples, in imitation of those twelve, such as Paul and Barnabas and Thaddaeus. ^B XV, 8, 11. « And last of all, as by one born out of due time, he was seen also by me. For I am the least of the apostles, who am not fit to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the Church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am; and his grace which was in me was not in vain, but I labored more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which is with me. Wherefore whether I or they, so we preach, and so you believed. » An expression of a modest mind. Yet Paul is not on this account in any way inferior because he was seen by him last of all. For neither was James inferior to those five hundred because he was seen by him after them. ^C Yet by a certain dispensation he lowers himself, so that when he says that great word, « I labored more abundantly than they all, » he may be believed. An abortion, or *ectroma*, is an imperfect embryo and fetus not yet formed in the womb. Paul, though perfect in all things, despite being so great and such a man, since he was not formed in the faith of Christ from the beginning, calls himself an abortion because of the excellence of his modesty of mind. « For I am the least of the apostles, » he finally pronounces concerning himself. See, he did not say ^D

^A only of the twelve, but of all the apostles. Then he also mentions the cause: « For, » he says, « I persecuted the Church of God. » ^B — « But by the grace of God I am what I am. » Observe his gratitude: he counts his sins as his own, but attributes his accomplishments to the grace of God. « And his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain. » He said this also with modesty. For he did not say: « I have done things worthy of the grace, » but rather, « The grace, » he says, « was not found to be empty in me. » How so? « Because, » he says, « I labored more abundantly than all the apostles. » Observe also here how modestly he has set this down. For he did not say, « I struggled, » or, « I preached, » or, « I was in danger, » but, « I labored, » cutting short the praise of himself with this expression. Yet he came to these points out of necessity. For it is necessary that a teacher be trustworthy. « Yet not I, but the grace of God which is with me. » Then, as if fearing that the achievement might be credited to him, he attributes it to the grace of God. « Whether therefore I or they, » we all agree, he says, concerning the preaching. And he did not say: « If you do not believe me, believe them. » For he would have been disparaging himself and would not have shown himself to be a trustworthy witness of the truth. But what does he say? « We all agree together. » And by saying, « We preach, » he demonstrates the truth of those things spoken. For we do not speak of these things in a hidden place or in a corner, but openly even until now. For this is what is preached. And thus, he says, you believed along with the others, and he calls that very faith of theirs a witness of the truth. For you would not have believed false and deceptive words so easily, he says, if you had not been persuaded that the things being preached were true.

« But if Christ is preached that he has been raised from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not raised. And if Christ is not raised, then our preaching is vain, and your faith is also vain. And we are found to be false witnesses of God, because we have testified against God, that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise, if therefore the dead do not rise. »

He reasons against them excellently. For having first demonstrated that Christ has been raised, from his resurrection he also establishes the common resurrection, as the whole always and in every way follows the part, and the rest of the body follows the head. « How say some among you. » Observe how ^C he does not level the accusation against all, that he might not make them more shameless. « But if there is no resurrection of the dead. » That they might not say that Christ indeed has been raised, but there will not be a universal resurrection, he establishes it from the opposite. ^D If resurrection, he says, is not, neither has Christ been raised. For each, he says, happens to be the constructive and demonstrative proof of the other. « But if Christ is not raised. » He did not say, « Is not incarnate, » but, « Is not raised, » showing that the incarnation also is joined to the resurrection, and for this reason

^A he was incarnate, that he might accomplish the resurrection. « Vain is also our faith. » As if he had said: All has perished and become vain, both our preaching and our faith. « False witnesses of God. » And it is not only vain, he says, but also otherwise impious to slander God by saying we bear witness that he did something which he did not do.

XV, 16-19. « For if the dead are not raised, neither has Christ been raised; and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is vain; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in this life only we have our hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. »

He bases faith upon reason. Therefore, he says, he rose, that he might establish a universal resurrection; but if there is no resurrection, then certainly he himself did not rise. « You are still in your sins. » For if he too was held by death, how would he have freed all the others from the death which came about on account of sin? ^B Consequently, neither has sin been destroyed by Christ's cross; for if it had been destroyed, the death that proceeds from it would also have been destroyed. And if this had happened, it would have been necessary in any case for the one who freed others from death to have been the first to rise, and to have become a guide to the others unto resurrection. « Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. » By the name of "sleep" he insinuates the resurrection. Those, he says, who died for Christ, who have undergone many labors and endured countless dangers, have perished; which would be an absurdity, namely, that those who died on his account have perished. For everywhere he proceeds to show the absurdity of the conclusion. « If in this life only. » If this, he says, is the extent of our life, and it is only in this life that our hopes are locked up, we are wretched. For we have lost everything, having lost the future. And why, he says, do I speak of the fact that hoping in this life makes one miserable? For even if we hope in Christ in this life only, we are still ^C wretched. For if, after such labors and dangers, we are to have only the goods of this life as the recompense for our labors.

XV, 20-24. « Now, however, Christ has risen from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have slept. For since by man came death, by man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, then those who belong to Christ at his coming. Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when he destroys every principality and every authority and power. »

After having asserted the resurrection in many ways, he consequently speaks definitively: « He has become the firstfruits of those who have slept. » But if he has become the firstfruits ^D

of the resurrection, it is manifest that the others also will rise with him. For they are called firstfruits when one thing out of many does this or that, which the rest are also about to do. « For since by man came death. » He adds the reason for what has been said. For it was necessary, he says, for the human nature, which had been defeated, to win—for the fallen man to fight again and conquer, and to receive the prize. « For as in Adam. » He interprets what has been said: As, he says, death entered into the world through a man, so also it was necessary for the resurrection to be introduced through a man. « But each in his own order. » Because he said, « They shall be made alive, » to prevent anyone from thinking that sinners also are to be saved, he adds: So far as the resurrection is concerned, he says, all shall be made alive, but each in his own order, and among those with whom he deserves to be. « Christ the firstfruits. » Christ, he says, has become the firstfruits and the way of the resurrection. After him, those who belong to him, the first, shall rise. By « his, » that is, Christ’s, he means the righteous, according to the principle of belonging. For it was necessary that the righteous should possess a privilege even in the rising itself. For since they are about to be snatched up into the air to meet the Lord, they are raised beforehand, so that they may arrive in time to meet him. For what need was there for the sinners to be raised beforehand, who are about to wait ^B for the judge below? Then after this comes the end of all things and of the resurrection itself, in that the rest are finally raised. For as human affairs did not remain in their place when Christ rose, so it will not be then, but all things will reach an end. « Christ the firstfruits. » Christ rose from the dead first unto immortality. For all who have experienced a resurrection, either through Christ himself or through the prophets and apostles, have died again. « Then those who are Christ’s at his coming. » That is, when he appears from heaven in glory, first the faithful and the righteous, and those who have hoped in him, and have received his coming in the flesh, will rise. « Then the end. » After the resurrection of the righteous and the snatching up in the clouds to meet the Lord, then is the end. That is to say, the resurrection of those who have died from the foundation of the world will take place, and they will be delivered to judgment. « When he shall have delivered the kingdom to God and the Father. » He delivers it, but not as one who is himself deprived of it. For it is utter folly even to suppose this: as if he possessed it while it was full of ^C rebellion, but having rid it of this through his own labors, was deprived of it; rather, he delivers it, that is to say, he makes the Father, as it were, a partner in his own achievement. For all things belonging to the Trinity are common. For even if the Son has become incarnate, it is yet by the good pleasure of the Father and the cooperation of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, the accomplishments which the Son wrought, having become incarnate and having been crucified and having risen, are also common. He says well, therefore: He delivers the kingdom, that is to say, he makes it common, and he gladdens him with his achievement. For just as the Son, having received the kingdom while it was full of rebellion, did not take it away ^D from the Father, so now he delivers

it, and he himself will not be deprived of it. ^A Yet one might say, and not go wide of the mark, that he delivers it not because he does not possess it, but because he no longer needs to struggle over it, and because he no longer needs to fight on its behalf, nor to undergo changes, nor to do any of those other things which, in part before his passion, and in part after the resurrection as the Son of God become man, he demonstrated for our sake. He delivers it, therefore, as we have said, not because he does not have it, but because he no longer needs to perform any of the aforementioned actions regarding it. For just as he had received it—not because he did not have it (for he had it, just as the Father does), but so that by his own labors he might deliver it from rebellion and tyranny. "When he delivers the kingdom." When is this, O Paul? "When," he says, "he delivers the kingdom to God and the Father." He delivers it, that is to say, he presents it once it has been rendered perfected. This will come to be when the demons have been defeated and have ceased to perform their works. For then Christ will reign over us perfectly, we being no longer divided between God and the prince of this world; nor will we be obedient to God in some things and to the passions in others. What then? Will he deliver the kingdom to God and the Father? Yes. For he wishes to show that the mind of the holy Trinity is one. For he says that Christ, who has brought the war to a conclusion, will not keep the kingdom for himself alone like some tyrant, but that which is done is performed also for the Father and the Spirit. "To God and the Father." He said this because he is his principle. ^B Saint Cyril, in the fourth book of his work *Against Julian*, near the very end, says: "When he delivers the kingdom," that is, having liberated it, as if snatched away by a tyrant, he brings it forth and leads it to his own Progenitor. "When he shall have abolished all rule." He shall have abolished it, that is, he shall have defeated and brought it to an end. For now the evil and apostate powers are active, but then they shall be active no longer, being delivered unto punishment. The Psalmist says something similar: "In the shadow of thy wings I will hope, until iniquity pass away." For it will pass away at that time, when the principalities and powers have been abolished and remain without efficacy. ^C The Father always had the kingdom of men, and indeed of the angels as well. But the kingdom of the angels was free from rebellion, while that of men was full of rebellions, held captive by the passions, and tyrannically oppressed by the machinations of demons. But the Son, by his own passion, which he assumed having become flesh, invalidated all tyranny and rendered it most weak, and he humbled that which took us captive and took it captive. Nevertheless, for those men who live indolently, certain sparks of vice are rekindled and inflamed through our negligence. But after the end, the passions being quieted, the demons having been delivered to punishment, and the righteous living in paradise without any disturbance, the Son delivers to the Father the kingdom as one which he has brought to perfection, free from tyranny and free from rebellion. "For he must reign, until ^D he puts all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy is destroyed, death."

For he has put all things under his feet. But when he says that all things are put in subjection, it is manifest that he is excepted who put all things under him. And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all." ^A

To "reign" here is not taken in the vulgar sense, but as exercising the works of one reigning; that is, to war against enemies, to aid one's own, those to overthrow, these to deliver. "Until he puts..." and so forth. For after these things, there will be no need of any of the things mentioned. For the kingdom will henceforth be free from rebellion. "Until he puts"—he does not set a limit to the kingdom when he says "until he puts," but he is making what has been said credible and encouraging confidence, as if he were saying: do not, because you have heard, whoever you are, that he will destroy every principality and every power and death itself, fear as if he were going to fail from exertion. For until he has done all things, he reigns; not saying this to mean that after he has done them he will not reign, but showing that even if these things do not happen now, they will certainly happen. ^B For his kingdom prevails, he says, and does not fail until he brings all things to completion. And that which prevails until all things are accomplished will prevail much more after they are accomplished. "And of his kingdom," he says, "there shall be no end." The words "until" and "as long as" do not denote a temporal limit, but signify the same thing as "always." Just as when he says: "I am with you all the days, even unto the consummation," and: "Sit at my right hand, until I put your enemies," and: "He took his wife and knew her not until she had brought forth." It is necessary for him to reign always, both before he puts his enemies under his feet, and after he has put them there. And he calls all enemies, that is to say, the demons, the devil, death, the unbelievers. The defeat of death is the removal of the dead from it by the resurrection. "For he must reign always," and this is what signifies "until." ^C For he will put the enemies under his feet. If, therefore, he was reigning before he put them under, he will reign much more after he has put them under. "For he has put all things under his feet." Since he said that all things happen through the Son, that the kingdom is brought to completion, that powers are destroyed, that all things lie under the feet, he feared lest the Son be thought greater than the Father, and so he refers all things back to the Father, "saying, he has put all things under his feet," showing that the power resides in the Son from the beginning from the timeless source. "But when he says," David, he says. For that man says, "The Father has put all things under his feet, sheep and oxen all," from whom he also takes the testimony. Observe, then, how manifest it is that he had this fear, lest the Son be thought greater than the Father, because he confirmed it again. ^D And the fear was just. For he was writing to men who had believed from the Greeks, who glorify Zeus for rising up against his own Father to thrust him out of his kingdom. It was a concern, therefore, that they might suspect something of the sort among us.

^A “Then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who subjected all things to him.” That is to say, then he is shown to be truly and in a manner worthy of God subjected, because he has fulfilled the Father’s will, having rendered the kingdom free from all rebellion and tyranny.

— Another way. ^B Then, lest anyone say that even if the Father is not subjected, nothing prevents the Son from being greater, he adds these words, showing unanimity and concord, and that the Father is the origin and source of all good things, who has begotten a Son so powerful. Hearing of subjection, he received what was said in a divine manner, not as some slavery or involuntary subjection, but as is fitting, that the Son who is God is subjected to the Father who is God, as honoring the source; furthermore, so that by the addition of the word “subjection,” those impious dogmas might be understood which propose that the Son is greater.

“That God may be all in all.” By these things he declares the destruction of wickedness. For when sin has been wiped away, it is clear that then God will be all in all, as we are no longer divided between God and the passions. Others have interpreted it thus: It will be, he says, that all things are brought back to the Father as to the source, so that you do not suspect two conflicting principles. For when his enemies lie prostrate under the feet of the Son, and the Son does not rebel against the Father, but as is fitting for the Son who is God, he is subjected to his own Father, the Father is all in all. ^C [OECUMENIUS.] For the Father claims as his own the things of the Son, and whatever the Son can do, this is referred back to the Father. For he himself is the cause of his being able to do it, he who begat him timelessly. — [BASIL.] If the Son will be subjected to the Father in a divine manner, he was subjected from the beginning, from the time that he was God. But if he was not subjected, but will be subjected later, it will be done in a human manner for our sake, and not in a divine manner for his own sake.

XV, 29-33. “Otherwise, what will they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead do not rise at all? Why then are they baptized for the dead? Why do we also endanger ourselves every hour? I die every day: by your boasting which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord. If according to man I fought with beasts at Ephesus, what is the profit to me, if the dead do not rise? Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die. Do not be deceived; evil company corrupts good morals.”

He returns to the discourse on the resurrection and says: If there is no resurrection, what will they do who are baptized for the dead? This is as if for those who do not rise. For it is manifest that we are baptized believing in the resurrection of the dead, as if he were saying: What will they do who, ^D trusting that the dead indeed rise, have both believed and been baptized, but having been deceived in their hope, have found something other than what they expected? How much, he says, will they grieve and lament, and revile the faith in Christ as a lie? He says this, “What will they do?” That is to say,

^A what they will do is precisely what I have described. You see to what point he has brought the matter? [Phot.] Since, he says, what will they do, those who are baptized, so as not to be dead forever and kept in Hades—for example, if there is no resurrection, those who are baptized with such hopes, so as to rise according to death, what will they do? “If the dead are not raised at all.” If the dead are not raised at all, why are they even baptized, that they might rise? He speaks, however, more sharply: “For the dead,” he says—that is, those whom you, by your own opinion, have declared to be dead forever, declaring both others and yourselves to be dead, dead eternally, why are you baptized for yourselves, since according to your opinion you are never to rise, but are to be dead always? He carries the argument forward under other persons, and not under them themselves, lest by rebuking them too harshly he provoke them to despair. “And why are we in danger every hour?” If there is no resurrection at all, he says, why are we apostles always in dangers? For he means by “every day,” always. A very great proof, however, of the resurrection is to see the apostles themselves, even to the point of death, being in dangers— “I die every day,” in readiness and in being prepared for him, or as regards the afflictions and temptations brought upon us, and the daily expectation of death. “By your boasting.” [Phot.] Either he swears, saying, “By your boasting,” or he says, “I die for the sake of your boasting,” meaning their progress; for the boasting of the teacher is the advancement of the disciples. “Which I have in Christ Jesus.” Because he had said a great thing, he attributes it to Christ himself: For the sake of your progress, he says, which I have through Jesus Christ. “If I have fought with beasts after the manner of men.” So far as men are concerned, he says, I have fought with beasts, instead of, “as much as was possible for me.” But what profit is this to me, if there is no resurrection? Or in this way: If I have not fought with beasts because of the future hope and retribution, but because of human glory, what have I gained? And he calls “fighting with beasts” the controversy he had with the Jews and with Demetrius the silversmith. For how did they differ from beasts? “If the dead are not raised.” If the dead are not raised, then there is no retribution of good and evil. And since this does not exist, it is necessary to eat and drink before one dies, since these are the only things gained by us. This is a word mocking the folly of those who say there is no resurrection. “Do not be deceived.” [Phot.] Having finished the arguments that led to an absurdity, he came to an exhortation, quietly and as if rebuking the foolish—for this is what “Do not be deceived” signifies. “Evil communications corrupt good morals.” A Laconian and ancient proverb. Isaiah also mentions this. He says, moreover, that constant associations with the wicked corrupt even good morals. For even a drop, falling continually, hollows out a stone. And through this he warns them to turn away from the conversation of wicked men, and not to trust in themselves that they will not be harmed, being good men themselves, by keeping continuous company with them, and ^D of the damage caused by them, quietly

^A and little by little to be filled. He calls them "good" in a polite sense, meaning they are easily deceived, indicating that others drag them into these things.

XI, 34-38

^A « And that which you sow, not the body. » We said above that they were disputing two points regarding the resurrection: whether those who have been dissolved are raised at all, and in what body they are raised; where it was interpreted: « But someone will say, How are the dead raised up? And with what body do they come? » Therefore, the proof that they are indeed raised he set forth above, where he said: « That which you sow is not quickened, unless it dies. » Behold now also the second proof. For he shows that the very same body, as being of the same substance, is raised; this is what he means: « But God gives it a body, » and that more brilliant and more becoming, just as, indeed, the ear of corn is more becoming than the bare grain. For no one sows the ear of corn itself, but the bare grain. « But God gives it a body. » If, therefore, God gives a body, why do you still curiously inquire with what body we are raised, and distrust the resurrection? For God raises the body that was dissolved, but it is more becoming, indeed more spiritual. For this is also possible to find in the seeds, that it rises more becoming than what was cast into the earth. « And to each of the seeds its own body. » This stops the mouths of the heretics who say that the same body is not raised in the resurrection, but another.

^B « Not all flesh, » the same flesh, « but there is another flesh of men, and another flesh of cattle, and another of fishes, and another of birds. And there are celestial bodies, and there are terrestrial bodies. But one is the glory of the celestial, and another that of the terrestrial. There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars. For star differs from star in glory. »

Then, so that you, having heard about the wheat, might not think that just as with it all the ears of corn rise in the same honor, so also in the resurrection all will be in the same honor, he wishes to show that there is a difference among those who are raised, and he says: « Not all flesh is the same, » but there is a difference, and for a while he speaks concerning sinners. For even among them there is a difference of punishment. Whence he says: « Another of men, and another of cattle and fishes, » by this way signifying the difference that exists there. And he went through the discourse as in an example, as if he had said: Just as there is here a difference of men and cattle and fishes, so there will be there also a difference of the sinners themselves in their punishments. « But another of men... » This whole difference is spoken by him concerning sinners. For he makes a distinction concerning the just ^C there, when he enumerates the celestial bodies. « And there are celestial bodies. » Then, will the resurrection extend only to the difference of sinners? By no means. For there are also celestial bodies, that is, those of the just, which abound in the light of the Paraclete. And clearly there are also terrestrial ones, that is, those of the sinners, which are marked with earthly dispositions, namely, of cattle and birds. But another, he says, will be the glory of the celestial, and another of the ^D

^A terrestrial; for there will be no glory for sinners. You must not, therefore, understand it in such a way that when he says, "one is the glory of the just, and another of the sinners," the meaning is "there is no glory, but only a manner of life." Then he proceeds to mention the difference among the just, just as he had indeed mentioned it a little earlier regarding sinners. For just as all heavenly bodies are indeed bright and conspicuous, yet there is even among them a difference between the sun, the moon, and the stars, so also the just will possess a difference among themselves. Observe, moreover, how skillfully he has employed the whole concept by way of example. Regarding the glory of the just and sinners, however, he did not treat it by way of comparison, but by showing that there is no glory for sinners.

^B XV, 42-46. "So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption: it is sown in dishon

dishonor, and it is buried in the earth. ^A This mortal body, therefore, is psychic, because it served psychic passions. "For no one is clean from filth, not even if his life exists for but a single day." For all physical actions indeed have their source and origin from the soul, so that the mortal body of man might justly be called psychic. It is sown, therefore, as psychic; it is raised, however, as immortal, which is spiritual. And it is spiritual because it will no longer serve psychic passions—not the bodies of the just, nor indeed even those of sinners. Rather, they will even have great, although foolish, remorse for the things they served. Since he said "it is sown" often, and "it is raised" likewise, but did not say what it is that is sown or raised, for this reason he added also this afterward, saying: "It is sown a psychic body," which I said is sown in corruption, dishonor, and weakness; "but it is raised a spiritual body," which will be raised in glory, power, and incorruptibility. For that which is immortal, according to its own rationale, is also glorious, honorable, and incorruptible, even if it becomes a cause of shame and dishonor for sinners ^B because of their own wickedness. "There is a psychic body." So that no one might say: "Whence do you bring in different bodies for us, and call them psychic and spiritual?" he says: "There is a spiritual body, and there is a psychic body." Therefore, I do not say these things by my own authority and imagination, he says, but they have been spoken even before us. From where is it manifest? he says. It is so written: "The first man Adam became a living soul." So there is a psychic body. Then the last man [became] a life-giving spirit, so there is also a spiritual body, which fits the life-giving Spirit. But from where is this manifest? That the second man [became] a life-giving spirit. From where is it manifest? From the very operation of the things. Furthermore, this also is written: "For the words," he says, "which I speak, are spirit and life," ^C so that they even give life to those who hear and obey them. And if this is so, it is clear that they also will have a spiritual body in the resurrection, no longer able to be turned into a psychic one, as sometimes happens while they are still in the present life. "The first man Adam became a living soul." And do not disbelieve, he says, that our now psychic bodies will then be spiritual. For we already have proofs of this. For Adam had a psychic body, but Christ had a spiritual body, which received the entire presence of the Holy Spirit. And the dove remaining upon Him makes this clear. For insofar as the Lord is and is understood to be man, He had the operation of the Paraclete; and as His own proper Spirit, insofar as He is and is understood to be God. Note also that the Spirit is life-giving. Although the sequence requires one to say: "Into a living spirit," as he said ^D psychic.

^A [METHODIUS.] A body is called spiritual, not because it is fine-grained and airy, as some say—that souls will receive such a body in the resurrection, of whom one is Origen—but that is called spiritual which receives all the operation and participation of the Holy Spirit, just as a vessel that receives them is called a wine-vessel or an oil-vessel. Analogously, therefore, he also called it psychic, because it is governed by the soul and not by the Holy Spirit. ^B Otherwise: He calls it a spiritual body when it no longer falls under the heavy burdens of corruption, but is adorned with incorruptibility and glory. Therefore, the same flesh rises with the same form, no longer bearing the pathic mind, but that of the Spirit, changing toward a more glorious and higher state, and, as has been said, the lowliness of corruption being consumed by the brilliance of incorruptibility. "The last Adam [became] a life-giving spirit." This is not written, but he says what follows as if it were written. "But not first [is] the spiritual." But the spiritual did not come into being first, but the psychic. For the fall and transgression of the psychic became the occasion for the incarnation, and for God the Word to be united to a body, whom he also calls spiritual. ^B 1 Cor. xv. 47. "The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven. As is the earthy, such are also the earthy; and as is the heavenly, such also are the heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption."

Having completed the discourse on the resurrection, he comes to an exhortation to live studiously, and says: "Adam was from the earth, therefore he was also earthy," that is, earthly and heavy. "But the second Adam is the Lord from heaven." For God the Word is heavenly. For even if His body is of the same substance as ours, yet because of the superior part, that is, the divinity, he calls it heavenly. Otherwise: The first man was earthy, not that he was produced from the earth (for so all are earthy, and further, no one could be accused for having been produced from earth), but he says "he is from the earth," that is, earthy and carnal, and thinking of things below. But the second is entirely aloft and heavenly, and weighed down by no stain of earthly things. Therefore, such as he was, whose earthly self he fashioned through the things he thought and did, such will also be those who live in imitation of him—that is, earthy, and suffering what it is natural to suffer, those who have attached themselves to the earth. And such as was he who established his manner of life on earth as something sublime, heavenly, and pure, such will also be those who, according to their ability as humans, have lived in imitation of that heavenly conduct.

^A “As is the earthly, such are they who are earthly.” Such, he says, as the earthly Adam is, such will all the earthly be—that is, those who are wholly of the earth and cling to it; they will die the intellectual death which is through sin. But those who become imitators of Christ, according to Paul, will be as the heavenly one, so far as it is possible for human beings. “For we know,” say the Catholic Epistles, “that if he appears, we shall be like him.”

“And as we have borne.” That is, as we have done evil deeds (for these are the image of the earthly), so let us also bear the image of the heavenly Christ—that is, by doing good works and by becoming his imitators as far as is permitted. As he himself also says elsewhere: “Be imitators of me, as I also am of Christ.”

“The image of the earthly.” The image of the earthly Adam is that saying: “You are earth, and to earth you shall return.” The image of the heavenly Christ is the resurrection from the dead and incorruption. Thus, the blessed Methodius in his discourse *On the Resurrection* expresses it: “We shall bear also the image of the heavenly.” If the reading is *phoresomen* (φορέσομεν), written with the short ‘o’ (ο), it is a prediction taken from the consequence of what is to come, and at the same time it fulfills the force of an assertion; that is, “We shall certainly bear the image of the heavenly, just as we have borne the image of the earthly.” And the image of the earthly could be death, ^B and the image of the heavenly could be the resurrection and incorruption. For Adam is represented through death; for he himself was also the first of others, the cause of dying. And the Master Christ, again, is represented through that resurrection and incorruption. For he himself was the first to rise in the flesh, having conquered death, and brought resurrection and incorruption to the whole human race.

If, however, the reading is *phoresomen* (φορέσωμεν), written with the long ‘o’ (ω), it is an exhortation and counsel toward virtue and a divine manner of life. “Let us bear,” he says; “let us put on the image of the heavenly, that we may inherit the heavenly kingdom.” And in this case, the image of the earthly might be taken as those wicked actions which abound towards earthly and carnal affections. For these shape and characterize the sinner, who is earthly. But the image of the heavenly is that which is high and transcendent in one’s manner of life, and the acquisition of heavenly virtues.

He speaks, therefore, at the same time also by way of rebuke. ^C Let us bear the image of the heavenly; let us acquire a manner of life that lifts us up toward heaven. For are you not ashamed, nor do you hide your faces, that while we have borne the image of the earthly with such readiness—even though it dragged us down and rendered us unworthy of the kingdom of God—we still hesitate and delay regarding the image of the heavenly? Let us be eager to put this on; let us be zealous for this heavenly manner of life. For there is no other way to attain the heavenly kingdom.

y regarding the image of the heavenly? Let us be eager to put this on; let us be zealous for this heavenly manner of life. For there is no other way to attain the heavenly kingdom. ^A

"But I say this, brethren." ^B For this reason, he says, I spoke these things, that you might learn that flesh and blood, that is, wicked actions, cannot inherit the kingdom of God. [PHOTIUS] Regarding the phrase, "But I say this, brethren," it is to be understood in view of the various interpretations of the preceding text: "As we have borne the image of the earthly, let us bear—or we shall bear—also the image of the heavenly." For it is a matter of exhortation and counsel; that is, for this reason I advise and exhort you to do these things, that you might inherit the kingdom of heaven, because the carnal and those who follow their own passions shall not inherit the kingdom of God. For it is neither natural nor reasonable that he who has corrupted himself and defiled himself with impurities should inherit the rewards of those who are free from passions and have not been corrupted by them.

If, however, we accept the cause of this as being a doctrinal explanation—that is, that the resurrection will absolutely happen—this also will have a great consistency. For the phrase, "But I say this," more logically serves to establish the resurrection. The phrase "how" belongs to the broader discussion. "They cannot inherit." What dies is inherited; what lives inherits. Therefore, the dying body does not inherit incorruption and the kingdom of heaven, but is itself inherited by these things, so that it might become incorruptible and capable of receiving the kingdom. "Neither shall corruption inherit incorruption." By corruption he means wickedness, as it corrupts the nobility of the soul. Corruption, therefore, shall in no way inherit the incorruptible, nor the goods of the kingdom which remain ever the same. ^C

"Behold, I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at

sse dicunt. « In puncto temporis, in momento oculi. » An ne etiam hoc modo intelligere licebit? Sed pauca ante intellectum narranda sunt. Evangelista Joannes, inquit in Apocalypsi ^A that the end is not brought upon men all at once, but little by little by the mercy of God, so that as the former perish, those who are left behind may come to repentance through fear of those already consumed. He speaks this doctrine concerning the solution of the seventh seal of the book. Since these things are so, you must understand what is said: "In an instant, and in a moment of an eye," to have been spoken in a common way, and to be adapted or referred to both, so that the sense may be this: We shall not all sleep—that is, we shall not all die—in an instant, in the twinkling of an eye, because the end is brought about piece by piece, according to the word of the Apocalypse; yet we shall all be changed, in an instant, in a moment of an eye, at the last trumpet. ^B For the first seven trumpets, according to the Apocalypse, do not raise the dead, but finish and destroy men; but the final trumpet will raise and change those who have already risen in an instant and in a moment of an eye together with the creation. For the creation itself will be changed from corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God, as he said in the Epistle to the Romans. "In an instant." He also calls it a marvelous thing that such great miracles will occur in an imperceptible amount of time, together with the sound of the trumpet.

— Question: Since, according to certain manuscripts, these words of the Apostle are held: "We shall all sleep, but we shall not all be changed." But according to some: "We shall not all sleep, yet we shall all be changed," I pray to be taught which of the editions one ought to choose, and what is signified by these things.

— Response: I think that according to either edition—since the ancient manuscripts contain both—if one receives them piously, one will not fall away from the intention of the Apostle. And so, according to that one, "We shall all sleep, but we shall not all be changed," ^C one must understand it as meaning that we shall all indeed endure sleep and slumber through death; but we shall not all be changed unto glory and freedom; which the Apostle himself sets forth elsewhere, saying more clearly: "If indeed, being clothed, we shall not be found naked." But according to this one: "We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed," it must be received in this way: that we shall not sleep with a lasting sleep, so that we need a tomb and a dissolution unto corruption, but those who are found at that time will undergo a brief death; they will not need a lasting sleep, because of the resurrection that happens suddenly; yet all shall be changed, that is, they shall put on incorruption.

"For it shall sound." Then, showing the trustworthiness of the things that will happen, he says: "For that ^D tremulous trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall rise," changed, clearly, and incorrupt; "and we," that is, we who are found living at that time—for he speaks of them, not of himself—"and we therefore shall be changed." For in their case there will be no raising, since they have not slept, but only a changing. The dead who died before will rise incorrupt; but how will those who are alive at that time rise? Only in that they will be changed in a moment. 580 The dead, indeed, who previously died

tui, 580 [Col. 894] exsurgent incorrupti. Mortui quidem qui antea mortui, exsurgent incorrupti, viventes autem tunc quomodo exsurrgent? Quomodo, nisi in momento oculi immutabuntur ^A *Oportet enim corruptibile hoc.* He interpreted what is meant by "change." He says it is to be altered from corruptible to incorruptibility, and from mortal to immortality.

57. *But when this corruptible shall have put on incorruptibility, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall come to pass the word that is written: Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, who hath given us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.*

When these things shall have come to pass, he says, then the Scripture of Hosea shall be fulfilled. For since he has spoken of wondrous and truly mysterious things, he subsequently confirms his argument with the testimony of Scripture: "Death is swallowed up in victory," which means unto an end—that is, it has perished, it has disappeared, nor is any hope of return left to it. Since it is possible for death to be "swallowed up" to the destruction ^B of those who swallow, just as it is possible for poison to be swallowed to the ruin of those who use it, for this reason he added, "in victory," implying not that it destroys the one who swallows, but that it itself is destroyed and defeated with such crushing force that not even a trace of the struggle or a shadow of disturbance is left behind. Furthermore, "swallowed up," being spoken with the addition of the preposition, signifies its powerful destruction. It has been completely, he says, swallowed up in victory, so that nothing of it may ever again remain. "O death, where is thy sting?" As though seeing these things happening, and as though trampling upon death as it lies upon the ground, he boasts against it, saying, "Where is ^C thy sting?" Where is your victory against all men, O death and grave? It has perished, it has disappeared, it has an end. "The sting of death is sin." For by this, death grew strong, as though using it as a power and a sting. For just as a scorpion is in itself a lowly little creature, yet has its strength in its sting, so also death, apart from sin, was powerless and insubstantial. "The strength of sin is the law." How is the law the strength of sin? Because without the law, sin was weak, being committed in ignorance. But the law, by manifesting it, condemned us all the more, and made it active and strong against us—not by its own nature, ^D but by our wickedness. Do not therefore doubt, O man, concerning the resurrection, when you see the sting of death, namely sin, taken away, and the strength of sin, namely the law, dissolved. For with sin taken away—that is to say, the sting—through the cross of Christ, it is manifest that death also will be taken away at the same time. "But thanks be to God, who hath given us the victory." Christ, he says, raised the trophy, but we are partakers of the crowns. Let there be grace to the Father for having begotten the Son, who has accomplished such great things for us. — Otherwise. Since he called the law the power of sin, lest some should think that the law, as being burdensome, has ceased, and might slander the lawgiver, he adds: "But thanks be to God..."

^A that is, thanks be to God, the Lawgiver and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. For He Himself gave the law, useful in its own times, and when we had abused it for the power of sin and had confirmed sin, He Himself again, through His Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, gave us against that very sin sure strength and undoubted victory.

XV, 1-4. "Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your labor is not in vain in the Lord." Since you know, he says, that these things are so, and that there is a resurrection and a retribution for the good and the bad, stand fast. For they were wavering concerning ^B the mystery of the resurrection, and were neglecting their life, as if there were no resurrection. Then he says also: "And abounding in the work of the Lord," not only working in it, but also abounding in good actions. "Your labor is not in vain in the Lord," in which you now work, he says, but its reward will be from God. And as for what he says, "In the Lord," you shall understand it either as the labor which is in the Lord, or that the labor will not be deemed vain by the Lord.

XVI, 1-4. "Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have directed the churches of Galatia, so you also do. On the first day of every week, each of you is to put something aside and store it up, as he may prosper, so that there will be no collecting when I come. And when I arrive, whomsoever you approve by your letters, I will send them with letters to carry your gift to Jerusalem. If it is ^C fitting for me to go also, they will go with me." Having finished the discourse concerning dogmas, he comes to the sum of the virtues, namely, almsgiving. He calls it a "collection," making the matter light at the outset. For what is contributed by many into one is light for each individual. Then he leads them to emulation by the narration of those things which had been rightly done by others; for he says: "As the Galatians have done." But see how he shows the necessity of what is being done. "As," he says, "I have directed." For he did not say, "I admonished" or "I counseled," but "I have directed," declaring by his command with authority the inescapable and necessary nature of the matter. "On the first day of the week." ^D By "first day of the week," he means the Lord's Day, and from that very day he exhorts them to almsgiving, making mention of the mysteries that were accomplished on it. "Let each of you put it aside." Very providently. For he did not say, "Let him bring it immediately," lest he who has very little should be ashamed, but "first gather it up with yourself, and when it is worth considering, then bring it." "And store it up, as he may prosper," that is, whatever God shall send, and he shall have the means for. "So that there will be no collecting when I come." So that, he says, when the time of gathering arrives, one does not begin then building it up. And by saying, "When I come," he makes them more ready for the collection, as if that which is gathered in one place were to be examined upon his arrival. "Whomsoever you approve." Well said is "Whomsoever you approve," for the collection...

^A is by avoiding everywhere that some should be offended, as if he himself also wanted to take something from those things which were being gathered. "To carry your grace." He said "grace," for the term alms was a miserable one and unworthy of the saints who were about to receive it. He also signifies that they themselves would in turn receive grace, namely, their prayers. "If it be worthy." By these words he exhorts them to liberality. If it be, he says, so great that the matter requires my ministry as well, I will come. Everywhere he wishes to have them also as witnesses, that he himself will take nothing from them. Therefore he says, "They will travel with me."

XVI, 5-9. I will come to you when I have passed through Macedonia. For I am passing through Macedonia. But perhaps I will remain, or even winter with you, that you may conduct me wherever I go. For I do not want to see you now in passing, but I hope to remain for some time with you, if the Lord permits. But I am staying in Ephesus until Pentecost. For a great and effective door is opened to me, and there are many adversaries.

"When I have passed through Macedonia." He did not say, "When I have set out for Macedonia," but "When I have passed through," comforting them as though he were going to arrive directly. And note the preference: concerning the others he said, "I am passing through," but concerning you, "I will remain." For indeed there were more believers in Corinth; therefore they are preferred by him. "But with you." The "but" is redundant here. "But with you." This is common in Holy Scripture, but it is also found among secular writers; indeed, such usage is frequent, and especially among the Atticists. "Perhaps I will remain." ^C He well adds "perhaps," that is, possibly or perchance. For he did not know at all whether this was granted by the Spirit or not. But it is a proof of his love that he should remain with them and be conducted by them. "That you may conduct me," etc. He said these things for their exhortation and consolation, namely: "That you may conduct me," or "send me on my way," and "I do not want to see you now in passing," and "I hope to remain for some time with you." Now the fact that he adds, "If the Lord permits," is an interpretation of what was said above, that is, why in the phrase "But perhaps I will remain with you" he added "perhaps." Because, he says, I do not know if the Lord will permit; but it is my desire to remain with you. "But I am staying in Ephesus." It was the mark of one who loved vehemently both to state where he was staying and how long he would stay there. "Until Pentecost," he says. And why? "For a door is opened to me." That is, many are prepared to receive the faith. There is, therefore, an entrance for me to them. This is also the mark of one who is confident that the preaching is spreading everywhere in the world from here on. "For a door is opened to me, great and effective." The mind of those who are about to come to the faith is flourishing, he says, having nothing slack or deceitful; for that reason there are also many adversaries. For by as much as the devil sees himself being despoiled, by so much the more is he troubled, and he stirs up those who stand in opposition.

^A XVI, 10-12. "Now if Timothy comes, see that he may be with you without fear; for he is doing the work of the Lord, as I also am. So let no one despise him. But send him on in peace, that he may come to me; for I am waiting for him with the brethren. Now concerning our brother Apollos, I strongly urged him to come to you with the brethren, and it was not at all his will to come now; but he will come when he has opportunity."

He does not say "without fear" for the reason that someone among the wealthy or those confident in their own wisdom—about whom he spoke at the beginning as drawing away the disciples—might plot against him, for Timothy was prepared to endure all things, but rather that those who plot might not do any harm. Well, then, he says "among you." For he says, "Do not offer me Greeks, while I seek such things as can be provided by you." "For he is doing the work of the Lord." Then, by the work of teaching and preaching, and by placing him on an equality with himself, he exalts the man. "So let no one despise him." For he was both young and alone, and had been entrusted with the care of such a great multitude—all of which provided occasions for contempt. "Send him on in peace." Do not provide him with battles and contentions, nor allow him to suffer plots from anyone. Furthermore, the clause "I am waiting for him" is that of one who inspires fear, so that knowing that [Timothy] will report everything to him, they might not afflict him in any way; at the same time, he also makes Timothy worthy of trust by saying that Paul, although having things to do, stays waiting for him. "Now concerning our brother Apollos." Apollos was both older than Timothy and a learned and prudent man. Therefore, lest they say, "Why then did you not send him?" and lest they think that Timothy was preferred, he handles both matters by saying that he urged him to go, but did not persuade him. For he says, "it was not the will of God." "But he will come." Lest they think that these were excuses and pretexts, he says that he will come.

XVI, 13-16. "Watch, stand fast in the faith, be brave, be strong. Let all that you do be done with love. I beseech you, brethren, you know the household of Stephanas, that it is the firstfruits of Achaia, and that they have devoted themselves to the ministry of the saints; that you also be subject to such, and to everyone who helps and labors."

^D As if speaking of those who are sleeping, and being tossed about, and becoming soft, and sluggish, is the speech when it says, "Watch," and, "Stand fast," and, "Be brave," and, "Be strong." "Let all that you do be done with love." Whether someone teaches, or someone leads, or does anything else, love and charity should take precedence, he says. "I beseech you, brethren." This is anastrophe (or hyperbaton): "I beseech you, brethren, that you also be subject to such." To which ones? To those who have devoted themselves to the ministry of the saints, and not only to them, but also to everyone who helps and labors in the needs of the saints. "You know the household of Stephanas." You yourselves, he says, know how they labor, and there is no need for you to learn from me. And he calls the house "firstfruits" because they were the first to believe, or because they hold the first place.

^A *Aparche* (first fruits) signifies what is chief and excellent. "The first fruits of Achaia," that is, of Greece, whence also the Achaeans are called Greeks. "And for the ministry to the saints," that is, for receiving the saints and ministering to them. And "they have determined," that is, they have marked out, they have chosen this way of life. "Be subject to such as these." Aid them, both in the expenditure of money and in bodily service, and in all things obey them; for this is subjection. And in order that it might not seem that he is showing favor to Stephanas, he adds: "And to everyone helping and laboring."

XVI, 17, 18. "I rejoice at the coming of Stephanas and Fortunatus and Achaicus, for that which was lacking to me on your part they have supplied; for they have refreshed my spirit and yours. Therefore acknowledge such as these." ^B These are the men who reported to him the division and discord that was among the Corinthians, and through these men those who were of the household of Chloe were made known. Since, therefore, it was likely that the Corinthians were stirred up against them, he brings them forward and says: "That which was lacking to me on your part they have supplied," that is, they came instead of all of you, and for your sake they undertook such a journey. "For they have refreshed my spirit and yours." He taught that it was for their own benefit that the spirit of Paul was refreshed; for, he says, by refreshing my spirit, they refreshed your own—meaning, by refreshing me, the teacher, they refreshed you, my disciples. "Therefore acknowledge such as these." Hold them in honor, because they have labored for your sake.

XVI, 19-24. "The churches of Asia salute you. Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house. All the brethren greet you. Greet one another with a holy kiss. The salutation of me Paul with my own hand. If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema, maranatha. The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with you. My love be with you all in Christ Jesus. Amen." ^C

Through the greeting, he unites the members into one. "Aquila and Priscilla." Remaining with these, because they were of the same trade, he worked at the art of tent-making. And behold their virtue, that they had made their own home a church. "With a holy kiss." The mention of the holy kiss is added here alone, because they were much divided among themselves, saying: "I indeed am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas." He calls it "holy," meaning not feigned, but that which proceeds from love. "The salutation of me Paul with my own hand." He wrote the greeting in the epistle with his own hand. "If any man love not the Lord." ^D With one word he struck terror into all: those who were called by the names of men, the fornicators, those who put stumbling blocks before the brethren by eating things offered to idols, those who disbelieved in the resurrection. For those who do such things do not love the Lord. Maranatha.

This means, "The Lord has come." He says this to confirm the dispensation and the resurrection, and to put them to shame because the Lord died for us, while you provoke Him by doing abominable things. He uses the Hebrew expression, showing that He not only does not turn away from the unrefined, but even glories in it. For to speak in Hebrew seemed to them—who thought themselves wise—to be unrefined. He does this to destroy the pride of the wise. ^A — Otherwise. [OECUM.] Some have suspected that this is not a Hebrew, but a Syriac word. It is translated, "The Lord has come." He put this word there, lowering the pride of the Corinthians who boasted in their eloquence, and teaching them that they have no need of erudition but of faith. "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with you." This is the way of a teacher, not only to exhort, but also to pray. Then, since he has rebuked them for many things, he now consoles them and prays for them. For, he says, may my love be with you. But how will this come to pass? If you walk rightly. Then, so that they might not think the saying is mere flattery, he adds, "In Christ Jesus." I have, he says, nothing human or carnal; for my love will be with you in Christ. ^B

The end, with God’s help, of the First Epistle to the Corinthians. It was written from Philippi by Stephanas and Fortunatus, and Achaicus and Timothy.

ARGUMENT OF THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS

He sends this from Macedonia. The occasion for the Epistle is as follows. Having received the former Epistle, the Corinthians were pierced to the heart over the sin of him who had taken his father's wife, and were grieved as those who had overlooked such a sin. ^A Then they were led astray by some who were creating pretexts for divisions, so as to rely upon the letter of the law and to consider the grace given by Christ as unnecessary, and to pay more attention to those who boasted in the dignity of their person. They were also properly concerned about the collection for the saints. To these things, therefore, the Apostle writes in reply. And first of all, he commends those who had cast out the transgressor; then he pleads with them in their opinion, and commands that the one who has repented be received. In this same Epistle, he teaches about the law, weighing the letter, and shows that it is not

^A merely the words of the law that one must take, but one must search for the understanding within the letter. (For the law is not only a verbal utterance, but within the spoken words there is also the mind of the Spirit.) Then, [he teaches] that when Christ came a new creation came to be, and one ought not to live according to the old, but as in a new creation, to be renewed in all things, and that circumcision henceforth is idle. He also commends them regarding their ministry and exhorts them to make it more abundant. Accusing those who boasted in the gravity of their own person, he recounts all the things he suffered for the sake of the Lord. And he narrates the visions he had seen, both into Paradise and into the third heaven, where he was caught up. Finally, having commanded them not to sin, but rather that those who sin should repent, he concludes the Epistle with thanksgiving. The whole argument, therefore, of the Epistle is about himself, and about the Corinthians, and about the false apostles. And from this subject matter, he proceeds both to those things which are of the grace of God, and to [the topic of] a good way of life, according to a good conscience and the striving [of the soul], and freedom from the love of money, and regarding the virtue of almsgiving, and regarding the arrogance and wickedness of the false apostles. ^B

THEODORET

CHAPTERS OF THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS

Narrative of his own struggles and purpose, and of the grace that was in him, so that he might not yield to the counterfeit Corinthians.

OF THE APOSTLE PAUL, THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS.

CHAPTER I.

Thanksgiving for divine help, in which he says he was confident.

^B1, 1, 2. "Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timothy our brother, unto the church of God which is at Corinth, with all the saints which are in all Achaia: Grace be to you and peace from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ."

Since he had sent Timothy there with the former Epistle, and now had received him back, he joins him to himself. Consider, however, that sometimes he calls him son: "For as a son with the father, he hath served with me," he says; and sometimes a fellow-worker: "For he worketh the work of the Lord, as I also do," he says; but now he calls him brother, making him trustworthy in all things. Note well the preposition "by" (διά), and that it is applied to the Father. "With all the saints." He calls them saints, indicating that if anyone is earthly, he is outside of this greeting. It appears that these men had all floundered together; for this reason he also provides a common healing. He does this also when writing to the Galatians and Hebrews. "Grace be to you and peace." He wishes his customary salutation for these as well. ^C

1, 3, 4. "Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort; who comforteth us in all our tribulation, that we may be able to comfort them which are in any trouble, by the comfort wherewith we ourselves are comforted of God."

"Blessed be God." Here one must place a punctuation mark. "And the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." For He is our God, but the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord Himself taught us this distinction. For in the holy Gospels He said: "I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth," ^D