Editorial Notice on the Homily "I Withstood Him to the Face

^A Likewise, let those who are conscious of their own diligence accept the eulogy of prayer and become more diligent through these praises; let those who are conscious of their own sloth accept the rebuke in turn, and cast off their negligence. But we know neither the one nor the other; and this ignorance is useful for both. In what way? I shall say. He who heard the eulogies of prayer, and is conscious of his own diligence, if he had many witnesses to the praises, would have slipped into arrogance; but now, having received the praise secretly, he is set free from all vanity. Again, he who is conscious of his own sloth, having heard the accusation, became better from the accusation, having no one ^B cognizant 1 of the rebuke—but this itself benefited him not as chance would have it. For because of being fluttered by the opinion of the many, as long as we think we are hidden as evil, we are diligent to become better; once we become manifest to all, and lose the consolation that comes from being hidden, we become then more shameless and more slothful. And just as wounds, when bared and frequently exposed to the cold air, become more grievous; so also a soul that has sinned, if it is censured in the midst of many regarding those things in which it has transgressed, becomes more shameless. In order then that this might not happen, the discourse has healed you secretly. And so that you might learn that this hidden medicine possesses much gain, hear what Christ says: *If thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone* (Matt. 18.15); and He did not say, between thee and the city, nor between thee and the public, but, *between thee and him alone*. Let the accusation be without witnesses, He says, so that the change toward correction might be easy. It is therefore a great good to make an admonition not public. The conscience suffices; that judge, the impartial one, suffices. You do not so much rebuke the one who has sinned as his own conscience does (that accuser is more bitter), nor know the transgressions more accurately. Do not, therefore, add wound to wounds by making known the one who has sinned, but make the admonition without witnesses. ^C This, therefore, we also do now, what Paul also did, making the accusation of the one who had sinned among the Corinthians without witnesses. And hear how: *For this cause, brethren*, he says, *I have in a figure transferred these things to myself and Apollos* (1 Cor. 4.6). And yet neither he himself, nor Apollos were the ones who split the public and rent the Church asunder; but nonetheless he shrouded the accusation, and as if with some masks, by his own name and that of Apollos, having concealed the faces of those responsible, he gave them authority to change from that wickedness. And again, *Lest, when I come, my God will humble me, and I shall bewail many which have sinned already, and have not repented of the uncleanness and lasciviousness which they have committed* (2 Cor. 12.21). See how even here he speaks of those who have sinned indefinitely, so that by not making the accusation manifest, he might not render the soul of those who have sinned more shameless. Just as, therefore, we make rebukes with so much sparing, so, I pray, do you also accept correction with all diligence, and pay attention to what is said with precision.

6. We discoursed to you yesterday concerning the power of prayer. ^D I showed how the devil then lies in wait, being a malefactor. For since he sees that the greatest gain is being made by us from prayer, then he attacks most—in order that he might strike us out of the petition, in order that he might send us home with empty hands. And just as with rulers, when those of the rank and those who are around the ruler himself are hostile to those who are petitioning, they drive them far away with rods, preventing them from approaching and lamenting and obtaining philanthropy; so also the devil, when he sees them approaching the judge, drives them far away, not with a rod, but with sloth. For he knows, he knows clearly, that if they approach soberly, and say the things wherein they have sinned, and lament with a burning soul, they depart having received much forgiveness; for God is a lover of mankind; and for this reason he anticipates, and leads them away from the petition, in order that they might not obtain any of the things they need. But the soldiers of the rulers drive away the petitioners with force; but he [does so] not with necessity, but by deceiving us and casting us into sloth. For this reason we are not worthy of pardon, depriving ourselves of good things of our own volition. Prayer is a light of the mind and soul, a light unquenchable and continuous. For this reason, he casts into our minds myriads of heaps of considerations 2, and things which we have never considered, collecting these at the time of prayer he pours them into our souls. And just as winds often falling upon us from an opposite direction, having fanned a lamp being kindled, have extinguished it; so also the devil, when he sees the flame of prayer being fanned in us, does not depart until he has extinguished the light that is being kindled, with myriads of cares from here and there. But let us do what those who light those lamps do. And what do they do? When they see a strong wind approaching, having placed a finger at the opening of the lamp, they wall off the entrance to the wind. For as long as it may strike from without, we shall be able to stand our ground; but when we open to it the doors of the mind, and receive the enemy within, no longer in the future are we able to stand against him even a little; but having extinguished our memory from everywhere, like a smoking lamp, he allows the mouth to utter empty words. But just as they place the finger at the opening of the lamp, thus let us place our faculty of reason at our mind; let us fence off the entrance of the wicked spirit, so that it may not extinguish our light of prayer. Remember both of these examples, both that of the soldiers and the ruler, and that of the lamp; for for this reason we say these things, so that even after departing from here and at home, we might take remembrance of the things said from the matters we have at hand. Prayer is a great weapon, and a great security.

6.

On the three children and Isaac, and that prayer conquers nature.

[LATIN COLUMN]

their nature, as they broke the power of fire, so here the sterile woman dissolved the bonds of nature. And learn how she did this. He besought, it says, for his wife, since she was sterile (Gen. xxv, 21). These things were read to you today: yesterday a sermon was held concerning prayer, and today again the demonstration of the power of prayer occurs. Do you see how it happened by the providence of the grace of the Spirit, that things consonant with what was said yesterday were read today? He besought, it says, for Rebecca his wife, because she was sterile. ^A First of all, it is worth asking for what cause she was sterile. A glorious life and one full of great chastity belonged both to her and to her husband. We cannot carp at the life of the saints and say that sterility was the effect of sins. Nor was she alone sterile, but also his mother, Sarah, who bore him; nor indeed was his mother only sterile, nor his wife, but also his daughter-in-law, the wife of Jacob, Rachel. What does this crowd of sterile women signify? All were just, all were living in virtue, all were approved by the testimony of God. For of them He had said: I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob (Exod. iii, 6). Concerning them, Paul also speaks thus: For which cause God is not ashamed to be called their God (Heb. xi, 16). Many of their praises are in the New, many of their praises in the Old Testament; they were in every way bright and illustrious, and all had sterile wives, and lived without children for a long time. When, therefore, you see a man and his wife living according to the precept of virtue, when you see them religious, studious of piety, and yet bereft of children, do not think that childlessness is by any means a retribution for sins. ^B For many are the reasons of God's providence that are hidden to us, and for all things thanks must be given, and only those are to be called miserable who live contaminated by vices, not those who lack children. Often God does this usefully, but we are ignorant of the reasons for what happens. Therefore, it is right to praise His wisdom everywhere, and to render glory to His ineffable benevolence.

On the fact that no one should despair of himself

is able to teach us; but the cause must also be touched upon, for which those women were sterile. For what then was the cause? That, when you see a virgin bringing forth our common Lord, you might not refuse to have faith. Train your mind, therefore, on the womb of the sterile women: so that when you see an unfruitful and bound womb opened by divine grace to beget children, you may not wonder when you hear that a virgin has brought forth. Nay, rather both wonder and be astonished, yet do not refuse to believe the miracle. When the Jew says to you, How did a virgin give birth? you say to him, How did a sterile woman, and one burdened with old age, give birth? Two impediments existed then, advanced age, and inapt nature: but in the virgin there was one impediment, that she had not known marriage. Therefore, the sterile woman paves the way for the virgin. And so that you may understand that the sterile went before, so that the birth of the virgin might be believed, hear with what words Gabriel explained it to her. For when he had come, and had said to her, Thou shalt conceive in the womb, and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Jesus (Luke i, 34), the virgin was astonished, and wondered, and said: How ^C shall this be, seeing I know not man? (Ib. v. 34). What then the angel? The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee (Ib. v. 35). Do not seek the order of nature, he says, when that which is being done is above nature: do not look around for marriages and the pains of childbirth, when the mode of generation has been above marriages. How shall this be, she says, seeing I know not man? And yet for this reason it shall be, because thou dost not know man. For if thou hadst known man, thou wouldst not have been accounted worthy to serve in this ministry. So believe on this very account, for which you refuse to have faith. Furthermore, you would not have been held worthy to serve in such a ministry, not because marriage is an evil, but because virginity is better: for it was necessary that the entry of the Lord be more august; for it was royal: and the king enters by a more august way. It behooved him both to share in common generation, and to differ from ours. Therefore, both these things are ordained. For to be born from the womb is common with us: but to be born without marriage exceeds our condition. And to be carried and conceived in the womb is human nature; but that conception happens without intercourse is narrower than human nature. For this reason both things happened, so that you might learn both how much more superior to you is He who is born, and how much He shares of your nature. ^D that they are done, shines forth. Neither did that superiority injure the likeness and kinship by which He is joined with us; nor did our kinship obscure His superiority, but both were declared in all things; and one part had what was ours intact, the other, however, diverse from us. But as I was saying, the sterile women went before for this reason, that the birth of the virgin might be believed, that she might be led as if by the hand to have faith in the promise and that pledge which she heard the angel say, The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: thus, he says, thou art to bring forth. Look not to the earth; from heaven comes the efficacy. The grace of the Spirit is what is being done, do not seek from me the nature and laws of marriages. But because these words exceeded her capacity, he wishes to provide also another demonstration. But you consider how the sterile woman leads her to have faith in this matter. For because that demonstration exceeded the mind of the virgin, hear how, letting down his discourse to lower things, he leads her as if by the hand through things subject to the senses. For behold, he says, Elizabeth thy kinswoman, and she hath also conceived a son in her old age; and this is the sixth month with her, who is called sterile (Luke i, 36). Do you see that she is sterile for the sake of the virgin? Why else did he bring forward the kinswoman’s birth into the middle? For what cause did he say: In her old age? Why did he add, She who is called sterile? Doubtless, by all these things he was inciting her to have faith in the annunciation. Therefore he related both age and the weakness of nature: therefore he also bade her watch the time elapsed from the day of conception.

for he did not herald it to her immediately from the beginning, but waited for the barren woman to reach the sixth month, so that the swelling of the belly might henceforth guarantee the pregnancy and become an indisputable proof of conception. And observe for me again the wisdom of Gabriel. He did not remind her of Sarah, nor of Rebecca, nor of Rachel; although they too were barren, and they too were aged, and what happened was a miracle, yet those were ancient tales. But as for ancient things, new and recent ones happening in our own generation are wont to lead us more surely to faith in miracles. For this reason, leaving those aside, he proposed from the kinswoman herself, Elizabeth, that which concerned her, so as to lead her from that woman to her own most awesome and most holy birth. For the place of the barren woman was halfway between ours and the Master’s—lesser than that of the Virgin, yet greater than ours. For this reason, as if by a bridge, Elizabeth being in the middle, he leads the mind from the pangs according to nature to those beyond nature of the Virgin.

9. On Isaac's Prayer

^B 10. Do we not then feel shame, nor are we covered in confusion, seeing the righteous man persisting for twenty years and not withdrawing; while we, after a first or second request, often give up and become indignant? And yet he had great boldness before God, and still he did not fret at the postponement of the gift, but kept on enduring; but we, filled with countless sins, living with a wicked conscience, displaying no affection toward the Master, if we are not heard before we have even spoken, we are agitated, we are vexed, we withdraw from the request—for this reason we always depart empty-handed. Who has besought God for one thing for twenty years, like this righteous man? Or rather, who has remained for twenty months? Yesterday, indeed, I was saying that there are many who pray with listlessness, and yawning, and stretching, and turning about constantly, and using all manner of neglect regarding their prayers; today, however, I have found another injury even more destructive than that which additionally attends prayers. For many, casting themselves prone, and striking the earth with their forehead, and pouring forth hot tears, and groaning bitterly from within, and stretching out their hands, and displaying great zeal, use this very heat and eagerness against their own salvation. For they are not beseeching God for their own sins, nor asking for forgiveness for the faults committed by them, but they stir up all this zeal against their enemies, doing the same as if someone, having sharpened a sword, were not to use the weapon against the enemies, but to thrust it through his own throat. Thus also do these not use their prayers for the forgiveness of their own sins, but for the punishment of their enemies; which is to thrust the sword against themselves. The wicked one has devised this also, so that we might destroy ourselves from every side, both through sloth and through zeal. For some provoke God by their neglect regarding prayers, displaying their contempt through their sloth; others, because they display zeal, display the zeal again against their own salvation. So-and-so, he says, is slothful; it is enough for me that he obtains nothing; this one is zealous and vigilant; what then should be done? I cannot quench the zeal, nor cast him into neglect; I will circumvent his destruction in another way. How? I will prepare him to use the zeal for transgression; for to pray against enemies is unlawful. He shall depart, therefore, not only having gained nothing from his zeal, but having suffered even greater harm than that which came through sloth. Such are the machines of the devil: he destroys some through sloth, and others through zeal itself, whenever it is not performed according to the laws.

11. But it is also worth hearing the very words of the prayer, and how the words are of a childish mind, how of an infantile soul. I am ashamed, indeed, as I am about to say them, yet it is necessary by all means to speak and to mimic that untaught tongue. What then are the—

words? "Vindicate me from my enemies; show them that I too have a God." You do not learn that we have a God, O man, when we are indignant, and enraged, and take things badly; but rather when we are modest, meek, and humane, and practice every kind of philosophy. Thus also God said: *Let your light shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven* (Matt. 5.16). Do you not perceive that you do an injury to God, when you ask God against your enemies? By what method, tell me, do you do an injury to God? Because He Himself said: *Pray for your enemies* (Matt. 5.44), and introduced this divine law. When therefore you ask the lawgiver to violate his own laws, and you urge him to pass laws contrary to his own, and you entreat him who forbade you to pray against enemies, that he might hear you praying against enemies: you are not praying, while doing this, nor are you exhorting, but you bring insult upon the Lawgiver, and you are insolent toward Him who was about to give you good things, which occur by the occasion of prayers. And by what method, I ask, is it possible that you should be heard while you pray, if you irritate Him who is to hear? For while you do these things, you drive your own salvation into an abyss, and you rush into a precipice, while you cast your enemy under the feet of the King. For although you do not do this with your hands, yet you strike Him with your words; which you do not dare to perform toward fellow servants. Therefore, should you dare to do this while a magistrate is watching: even though your deeds were innumerably right, you would altogether be led away to death immediately. Therefore, if you do not dare to treat an equal with insult before a magistrate: why, I ask, do you not tremble, do you not fear, when you do this before God, and when you so grow angry and savage at the time of prayer, showing yourself to be wickedness greater than him who was demanding the hundred denarii? For since you bring a greater injury than that man, hear how history testifies to this. Someone owed ten thousand talents to the lord; then, as he did not have wherewith to repay, he begged that he might be patient with him, so that by selling his wife, home, and children, he might pay the debt to his lord (Matt. 18.24 sqq.). But when the lord saw him lamenting, he was moved with compassion, and forgave him the ten thousand talents. That one, having gone out, when he had found another fellow servant who owed him a hundred denarii, choking him, he demanded them with much cruelty and inhumanity. Having heard these things, the lord cast him into prison, and what he had previously forgiven, the debt of ten thousand talents, he imposed upon him again, and that man paid the penalty for his cruelty toward his fellow servant. Consider, you who pray against enemies, what you are doing. That man did not ask the lord to demand a hundred denarii, but he himself was demanding the hundred denarii: but you urge the Lord to an impudent and forbidden demand. And that man indeed did not do this in the eyes of the lord, but outside, choking his fellow servant: but you do this standing before the King in the very time of prayer. But if that man, since he was not urging the lord to demand, and only did this after he had gone out, did not obtain any pardon, you who drive the Lord to this forbidden resolution, and do these things in His sight, with what punishment, I ask, will you not be smitten? But your mind is inflamed with rage from the memory of enmity, and it bloats, and the heart is stirred, and while you remember the injury received, you cannot repress the swelling of your soul? But you, oppose to this inflammation the memory of your own sins, and the fear of future judgment. Remember of how many things you are guilty before the Lord, and that you are liable to the penalties of all these things, then that fear will altogether overcome that irascibility, since this passion also is far more powerful than that. Remember the hell of punishments and torments at the time of prayer, and not even the enemy will come into your mind. Crush your spirit, humble your mind by the memory of your own transgressions, and anger will not even exhibit any trouble. But this is the cause of all evils, that in the sins of others we truly inquire diligently, but our own we pass by very negligently. The contrary ought to have been done: we ought to forget our own, but never ought we to revolve the affairs of others in our mind. If we do this, both God will be propitious to us, and we will cease to pursue a neighbor with immortal hatred, and we will never have an enemy. And if we should have one at some time, we will quickly put aside the hatred, and we will obtain swift pardon of our sins. For just as he who is mindful of injuries received from a neighbor, by no means permits the punishments to be dismissed which he will reap for his own sins: so he who is immune from anger, will quickly also be immune from sins. For if we, wicked and serving anger, through the command of God despise all sins committed against us: much more the benign and good Lord, since He is pure from every perturbation, will ignore our offenses, and will reward the kindness and humanity shown to a neighbor with the remission of our own sins. Which may it come to pass that we all attain, by the grace and benignity of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be glory and empire, forever and ever. Amen.

NOT TO DESPAIR, NOR TO POUR FORTH PRAYERS AGAINST ENEMIES, NOR TO FAIL IN SPIRIT, ALTHOUGH ONE WHO PRAYS DOES NOT RECEIVE; AND TO HUSBANDS REGARDING PRESERVING PEACE TOWARD WIVES.

The boundary of malice. I give great thanks to you, because with alacrity of mind you have received the sermons held about prayers, because you have rendered me blessed.

^A For when I was exhorting you not to curse your enemies, and was saying that by doing this we provoke God and legislate against Him—for He said, "Pray for your enemies," but we, by cursing our enemies, demand that He revoke His own law—when I was saying these and such-like things, I saw many among you beating their faces and breasts, groaning bitterly, stretching their hands to heaven, and asking for forgiveness concerning such prayers. And then I too, having lifted my eyes to heaven, gave thanks to God, because so quickly the word of instruction brought us fruit. ^B For such is the condition of spiritual seed: it does not need years, nor seasons, nor days, but if it takes hold of a noble soul, it immediately shows the ear of corn flourishing and completed. Even that which happened yesterday at your hands. I cast a word of compunction, and a groan of confession sprouted—a groan that held the great wealth of good things. For if that publican, in order to say, while beating his breast, "Be merciful to me a sinner," went away justified beyond the Pharisee, how much confidence should we expect to gain, having displayed such compunction in a short time?

And yet, there is nothing worse than a publican; for this is the final boundary of malice; which Christ also, indicating, brings forth the harlots and the publicans as an example of the worst evils. For it is a life of unrestrained violence, of unrebuked plunder, of shameless mode of greed, of trade having no account, of unfair exchange; ^C but yet he who lived with such evils had the strength, from bare footsteps, to cast off his reproaches, and to receive more than he asked. For he himself asked, saying, "Be merciful to me the sinner"; but God was not only merciful but also justified him above the Pharisee. Therefore Paul says, "To Him who is able to do all things far more abundantly than what we ask or think" (Eph. 3:20). And yet the Pharisee prayed, and stood in the temple, and called upon the same God, and said more words, and made the beginning of the prayer from thanksgiving. Whence, then, did he lose the good things he had, while this man gained confidence which he did not have? Because the mode of prayer was not the same. For the one was filled with arrogance and pride and folly, but this one with much gratitude; for this reason the one, having countless burdens of sins, put them all away and received righteousness; but the other, having brought a ship full of achievements—and of alms, and of fasting—having run aground as if on some reef by the disposition of vain-glory and folly, suffered shipwreck in the very harbor; ^D for to be impoverished in prayer is to suffer shipwreck in the harbor. But this did not happen contrary to the nature of the prayer, but contrary to his own choice.

2. DOST THOU SEE

Let us not, therefore, curse our enemies, but let us not even remember our own achievements, so that we do not suffer what the Pharisee did. For just as it is good to remember sins, so it is good to forget achievements. For what reason? Because the memory of achievements raises us to arrogance, but the memory of sins composes the mind and humbles it; and the former makes us more slothful, while the latter makes us more earnest. ^B For those who think they have nothing good become more eager to acquire good things; but those who think they have stored up much merchandise for themselves, trusting in the abundance of this, would not display much zeal to acquire more again.

3. DO NOT, THEREFORE, REMEMBER YOUR ACHIEVEMENTS,

Non est opus valentibus medicum, sed male habentibus. (Matth. IX, 12.) The publican was ailing; therefore [Christ] quickly stretched out His hand to him. But Isaac was stronger; therefore He left him, that He might increase his endurance. But these things have been said by us by way of superabundance. But why the wife was barren, it is worth while to explain: so that when you see a Virgin becoming a mother, you may not refuse to believe; and so that when the Jew says to you, "How did Mary give birth?" you may say to him, "How did Sarah give birth, and Rebecca, and Rachel?" For when a wondrous and great thing is about to happen, many ^A figures run before it. And just as when a king enters, soldiers run before him, so that he may not be received suddenly by the unprepared, so too, because an unusual miracle was about to happen, figures precede it, so that we, having been exercised and prepared beforehand, may not be suddenly astonished, nor terrified at the sight of a thing beyond expectation, and be struck dumb. This is so even in the case of death. Jonah anticipated it, and exercised our mind. For as the whale vomited him forth after three days, because it had not found in him its own proper and suitable nourishment—for the proper and suitable nourishment of death is the nature of sin; from thence it is born, from thence it is strengthened, from thence it is even nourished—so therefore in our case, if we ever swallow a stone imprudently, the force of the stomach at first attempts to digest it; but when it finds a food not at all proper to itself, where it has applied its force of digestion to it for a long time, it does not corrupt it, but loses its own power; whence it cannot even contain the former food, but, having become weary, it vomits out that too along with it, not without great pain; even so it happened regarding death. It swallowed ^B the cornerstone, and could not digest it; all its power grew weak; therefore it cast out the remaining food which it had, along with it, while it vomited out human nature as well. For it will not be able to contain it unto the end. Therefore barren women also preceded [the event], so that faith in the birth might also be produced; or rather, not only that faith in the birth might be produced, but if we wish to examine it accurately, we shall find that barrenness was a figure of death itself.

^D 4. But pay close attention to what is to be said: for we are about to say how the barrenness of Sarah’s womb leads us by the hand to faith in the resurrection. In what way, then, does it lead us by the hand? Just as she, when she was dead, was brought to life by the grace of God, and Isaac’s body brought forth life, so when Christ was dead, He rose again by His own power. And that our exposition is not forced, hear how Paul testifies [to it]. For when he had said concerning Abraham: "He considered not the deadness of Sarah’s womb, but was strengthened in faith, giving glory to God, most ^C fully knowing, that whatsoever He had promised, He was able also to perform" (Rom. IV, 19-21)—that is, to bring it about that a living son should be born from dead bodies: then, from that faith, in order to lead us to this one, he added: "It was not written only for his sake, that it was reckoned to him; but for ours also" (Rom. IV, 23-24). For what? "To whom it shall be reckoned," he says, "if we believe in Him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead." That which he says is of this sort. He raised Isaac from dead bodies; so also He raised His own Son who had died. Do you wish to know that barrenness was a figure of another thing? The Church was to bring forth a multitude of the faithful; so that you might not refuse to believe how an unfruitful, sterile, barren woman could give birth, she who was barren by nature preceded her, who might pave the way for the barren will, and Sarah became a figure of the Church. For as that woman, when she was barren, gave birth in old age; so also this one, when she was barren, brings forth in the last days. And that this is true, hear how Paul testifies: "But we are children of the free woman" (Gal. IV, 31). For since Sarah is a figure of the Church, who is free, therefore he added, "of the free woman." Others are [children of the handmaid]. And again: "So, brethren, we are children of Isaac according to the promise" (Gal. IV, 28). What is "of the promise"? As nature did not give birth to him, so neither did nature give birth to us, but the grace of God. And again: "But the Jerusalem which is above is free, which is our mother" (Gal. IV, 26), which is the Church. "For you have come," he says, "unto Mount Sion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and the Church of the firstborn" (Hebr. XII, 22-23). Therefore the Jerusalem above is the Church. If then the Jerusalem above is the figure of Sarah, as he said, "these are the two, one indeed bringing forth unto bondage, which is Agar; but the Jerusalem which is above is free, which is our mother" (Gal. IV, 24-26); it is manifest that the Jerusalem which is above is a figure of Sarah, by reason of the birth and the barrenness.

5. I know that what has been said is deeper; but if we give heed, none of the things which are said will escape us. These, therefore, are more mystical and dogmatic discourses; but if you wish, we will also present those more adapted to morals. Sarah was a barren wife, that you may know the chastity of her husband; for he did not cast her out, even though no law at that time forbade it, nor did he introduce another, having taken a wife besides the free woman—which many do under the pretext of seeking children, so that they may satisfy their own licentiousness, and they cast out these and introduce those; others also inflame concubines against them, and fill their houses with infinite fights and quarrels. But not so that just man; rather, he was quiet, content with the wife given to him by God, and to the Lord of nature he made his prayer, that He might loose the bonds of nature, and he did not reproach his wife. And whence is it evident that he did not reproach her? From the Scripture itself. If he had reproached her, the Scripture would have said this too, and would not have been silent; for it commemorates both the glorious deeds and the vices of the just, so that we may flee from the latter and emulate the former. When, therefore, Rachel, the daughter-in-law of his son, was lamenting, and he scolded her, it expressed both, and the Scripture did not hide it. For when she had said, "Give me children; and if not, I shall die," what does he say to her? "Am I God, who has deprived you of the fruit of the womb?" (Gen. XXX, 1-2). A womanly demand, and alien to reason. Do you say to your husband, "Give me children," and pass over the Lord of nature? Therefore he too, when he answered her with a rebuke, repressed her absurd demand, and taught her from whom one ought to ask. But not so that man, nor did he ever say any such thing, nor did she complain or lament before him. What the aforesaid teaches us, is that from sorceries and from—

enchantments, and from those superfluous, useless, and harmful things which destroy the soul, he took no part; but rather, leaving all these things behind, and mocking all human concerns, he ran only to the Master of Nature, who alone was able to heal these things.

6. Hear these things, O husbands; be instructed, O wives; let us all imitate the righteous one. Let nothing be more precious to a wife than her husband, nor to a husband than his wife. This holds together the life of us all, this harmony of wife with husband; this holds together the whole world. For just as when the foundation is shaken, the whole building falls, so too when marriages are in discord, our life is overturned. Look, for the world consists of cities, cities of houses, and houses of men and women. If, therefore, war enters in between men and women, conflict has entered into the houses; and when these are troubled, the cities also are thrown into confusion; and when cities are in conflict, it is necessary that the whole world be filled with turmoil, war, and fighting. For this reason, God has given much providence to this matter; for this reason, He does not permit the casting away of a wife, except for adultery alone. What then, you say, if she be quarrelsome, if she be wicked and extravagant, and possess a myriad of other failings? Bear everything with nobility, and do not cast her away because of these failings, but correct the failings. For this reason, you hold the place of the head, that you may know how to heal the body. For even our body, if it has a myriad of wounds, we do not cut off the head. Do not, therefore, cut off the wife from yourself; for the wife is to us in the order of the body. For this reason, even the blessed Paul said: “Husbands ought so to love their wives as their own bodies.” And toward the wives, too, the same law is for us: O wife, love your own head as your own; and if you honor it, thus honor your husband; for it is not in vain that we make such a great argument about this matter. I know of what blessings it is the cause, that a wife not be in discord with her husband; I know of what evils it is the source, when these disagree with one another. For then neither wealth, nor good children, nor many children, nor power and dominion, nor glory and honor, nor luxury and extravagance, nor any other prosperity could ever gladden a wife or a husband, when they are at odds with one another.

7. Let us be zealous for this before all other things. Does the wife have failings? Do what Isaac did: pray to God. For if he, by the endurance of prayer, loosed the infertility of nature, much more shall we be able to correct the failings of the will by continually beseeching God. If God sees you enduring for the sake of His law, and bearing nobly the sins of your wife, He will join you in the teaching, and will give you a reward for your endurance. For what do you know, O husband, if you shall save your wife? Or if you know, O wife, if you shall save your husband? Do not grow weary, he says, nor despair. For it happens that she may even be saved; but if she remains uncorrected, you have not lost the reward of your endurance; but if you cast her away, you have sinned first in casting aside the law, and in being judged an adulterer before God. For whoever, He says, shall cast away his wife, except for the cause of adultery, makes her to be committed adultery. And often, having taken another worse than the former, you have worked sin, yet have not enjoyed rest. And if you should take a better one, she does not allow your pleasure to be whole from the second, because of the dismissal of the former, as adultery is reckoned to you—for it is adultery to send away the former. Whenever, then, you see some difficulty having occurred, either in marriage or in any other station of life, implore God; for this alone is the best solution of the ills that happen to us. For the weapon of prayer is indeed great. This I have often said, and now I say it, and saying it I will not cease: even if you are a sinner, look at the publican, who did not fail, who washed away such great sins. Do you wish to learn how great prayer is? Friendship with God does not accomplish as much as prayer. And the word is not mine; for I would not have dared to make such a pronouncement from my own opinion; hear from the Scriptures how, what friendship did not accomplish, prayer accomplished. Which of you, He says, shall have a friend, and coming shall say to him: Friend, lend me three loaves; and he answering shall say to him: The door is locked, the children are in bed; do not give me trouble. I say to you, if he will not give to him because he is his friend, yet because of his persistence he will give to him as many as he needs (Luc. 11: 5-8). Do you see how what friendship could not avail, this, persistence availed? Since he was his friend—lest you think that it was for this reason that he accomplished it—He said: Even if he will not give to him because he is his friend, yet because of his persistence he will give to him. If friendship will not work this, He says, yet persistence will work it, as much as friendship did not avail. And where did this happen? With the publican. For the publican was not a friend to God; but he became a friend; so that even if you are an enemy, by persistence you will become a friend. Look also at the Syrophoenician woman, and hear what He says to her: It is not good to take the bread of the children, and to give it to the dogs. And how did He do it, if it is not good? By persistence, the woman made it good; that you might learn that the things of which we are not worthy, we become worthy of through persistence.

8. These things I have said so that you might not say: "I am a sinner, I am without confidence, I have no prayer." He has confidence who does not think he has confidence; just as he who thinks he has confidence has lost that confidence, like the Pharisee; but he who thinks himself cast away and without confidence, this one most of all will be heard, like the publican. Look how many examples you have, the Syrophoenician, the publican,

the one who was asking for three loaves in the parable, who obtained what he wanted not so much through friendship as through persistence. If any of these had said, "I am a sinner," and had been suffused with shame, and for that reason had thought he ought not to approach, he would not have gained anything more. But because each of them looked not at the magnitude of his own sins, but at the riches of God's kindness, he was confident and bold; and though a sinner, he asked beyond his own worth, and each attained what he wished. Let us, therefore, keep all these things in mind, and let us pray constantly, with vigilance, with confidence, full of good hope, and with much zeal. ^A With as much zeal as others offer prayers against their enemies, with that same zeal let us offer prayers for our enemies and for our brothers, and we shall surely obtain everything that is in our interest. For He who bestows is kind, and we do not desire to receive as much as He desires to give. Knowing all these things, then, even if we were to have fallen into the lowest depths of wickedness, let us not for that reason despair of our salvation, but let us approach with good hope, and let us persuade ourselves that we will certainly obtain what we seek, if we seek according to the rule of the laws laid down by Him. To Him who is able to do all things superabundantly beyond what we ask or think, be all glory, honor, and adoration, together with the Father, who is without beginning, and the most holy and life-giving Spirit, now and always, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

NOTICE REGARDING THE HOMILY ON THIS PASSAGE

Chrysostom delivered this discourse at Antioch after the reading of the Epistle to the Galatians had been completed. ^B Fearing that the disagreement which appears here between Peter and Paul, the pillars of the Church as he calls them, might disturb the minds of the pious, he endeavors to explain that passage in a long discourse. He immediately explains at length how many inconveniences would follow if Paul had truly and with the intention of rebuke confronted the leader of the apostles while many were present. From this he opens up two opinions concerning this passage, and immediately refutes them: the former is that the Peter who is in question here is not the prince of the apostles, but another man of the same name; the latter asserts that the rebuke was real, but that it was done in simulation. Then, truly, he brings forward his own opinion: namely, that the apostles Peter and Paul came to this pious simulation prepared and medicated; and by agreement and covenant...

HAVING HELD AN ASSEMBLY WITH THE BISHOP IN THE NEW CHURCH IN THE PRECEDING GATHERING, HE DELIVERED THIS SERMON IN THE OLD CHURCH ON THIS PASSAGE OF THE APOSTLE: "BUT WHEN PETER WAS COME TO ANTIOCH, I WITHSTOOD HIM TO THE FACE" (Gal. 2. 11): AND HE SHOWS THAT THE THINGS WHICH WERE THEN HAPPENING DID NOT PROCEED FROM CONTRARY INTENTIONS, BUT FROM COVENANT AND COOPERATION (a).

For a whole year I had been separated from you, and I remained so sad and downcast. And that these things are true, you yourselves know from the things that have happened to you. For just as a nursing infant torn from his mother's breasts, wherever he may be taken, turns himself frequently here and there and looks for his mother; so I too, having been moved far from my mother's bosom, was frequently looking around and searching for your sacred assembly everywhere. But this matter consoled me enough, that while I was obeying my most loving father, this happened to me, and the reward of obedience wiped away the sorrow conceived from the separation. ^C For this is more illustrious to me than any diadem and more glorious than a crown: to travel everywhere with my progenitor. This is my ornament and my security: an ornament, indeed, because I have so bound him to me and lured him to my love that he does not want to appear anywhere without his son; and a security, because while he sees me present and struggling, he may supply us with the help of his own prayers. And just as the hands of the pilot, the rudder, and the blasts of the westerly winds lead a ship safely into port; so also his benevolence, along with the help of his prayers, directs our discourse better than any west wind or pilot or rudder. ^D And it escapes me...

now, not just from hearsay but from experience itself, that those who conveyed these things to us and from these remnants we have reckoned the wholeness of the feast. I have praised the host, and I marveled at the lavishness and the wealth; I have called you blessed for your good will and for the precision, that you hold what was said with such custody that you have been able to convey it to another. For this reason we too speak toward your love. ^A For he who scatters seeds here does not drop them along the path, nor pour them into thorns, nor sow them upon the rock; so fat and deep-soiled is your furrow, and receiving everything into its own folds, it multiplies the seeds. But if ever you have provided eagerness and much diligence toward the hearing, just as you have always provided, this is the favor I ask you to grant me today. For the discourse is not about trivial things for us, but about great matters. Therefore I need eyes that see sharply from everywhere, a mind stirred up, a spirit standing erect, thoughts being tightened, and a soul awake and vigilant. For you all heard the apostolic reading; and if anyone attended sharply to what was read, he knows that great struggles and sweats lie before us today. For when Peter came, he says, to Antioch, I withstood him to his face.

2. Does this then disturb each of you who hear it, that Paul withstood Peter, that the pillars of the Church clash and fall upon each other? For indeed they are pillars, holding up and supporting the roof of the faith, and pillars, and bulwarks, and eyes of the body of the Church, and springs of good things, and treasures, and harbors, and whatever one might say, one will not yet reach their worth; but however great their praises may be, by so much is the struggle greater for us. ^B Awake, therefore, for the discourse is on behalf of our fathers, so as to refute the charges brought against them by those on the outside and by those alien to the faith. "When Peter came to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was condemned." Then also the cause of the condemnation: "For before some came from James, he ate with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those from the circumcision. And the rest of the Jews also dissembled with him; so that even Barnabas was led away by their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they did not walk straightly according to the truth of the Gospel, I said to Peter before all." And he says above, "To his face"; and here, "Before all." Observe this, the saying, "Before all." "If you, being a Jew, live like a Gentile, and not in the Jewish manner, why do you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?" Perhaps you praised Paul for ^C his boldness, that he was not ashamed of the rank of the person, that he did not blush before those present at the truth of the Gospel. But if this is a eulogy for Paul, it becomes our dishonor. For what if Paul did well? But Peter also did well, if indeed he was walking straight. What profit is there for me if one horse of the yoke-team goes lame? For the discourse is not to me now against Paul, but against those on the outside. For this reason I also ask you to pay attention. For I increase the accusation, making it greater, so that I may heighten your eagerness. For he who struggles is sober, and he who fears for a father pays attention; he who hears the accusation desires to see the defense. If, therefore, ^D I begin to increase the accusation, do not think the things being said are from my own opinion. For I am deepening your mind with my discourse, I am digging through the intellect, so that by laying the thoughts in the depth, I may make their keeping inviolable. But the things to be said are also a eulogy for your city. For it received the struggle, it received the battle, or rather not the battle, but what seemed to be a battle, but was more useful than any peace. For our members are not so tightened toward each other by the girding of the nerves, as the apostles were knit to each other by the bonds of love.

3. Have you praised Paul? Hear then how the things said are an accusation of Paul, if we do not hunt out the meaning hidden in the steps. What are you saying, O Paul? Did you rebuke Peter when you saw him not walking straightly toward the truth of the Gospel? Well done. For what cause then "To his face"? For what cause "Before all"? Was the reproof not supposed to be without witnesses? And you, how do you make the court public, and make many witnesses of the accusation? And who would not say that you do this out of hostility, and envy, and contention? Was it not you who said, "I became to the weak as weak"? And what is, "To the weak as weak"? He says, condescending and covering up their wounds, and not allowing them to fall into shamelessness. Then, being so caring and humane toward the disciples, did you become inhumane toward your fellow apostle? Did you not hear Christ saying, "When your brother sins, go, rebuke him between you and him alone"? And you both rebuke publicly and think highly of the matter. "For when Peter came," he says, "to Antioch, I withstood him to his face." And you do not rebuke in public only, but also, just as on a pillar, having carved the battle in writing, you make the memory immortal; so that not only those present then, but all the men who inhabit the world might learn what happened through the epistle. Did the apostles do this to you in Jerusalem, when you went up after fourteen years to lay the Gospel before them? Do you not say, "After fourteen years I went up and laid before them the Gospel, but privately to those who were of reputation"? What then? Did they, desiring you to lay it before them privately, hinder you and bring you into the middle, and make it manifest to all? It is not possible to say so. Then you lay it before them privately, and no one speaks against you; but you drag the apostle out into public display? Did you then enjoy this good will only at that time?

^B Indeed, was there ever a time when there were so many myriads of Jews, and they were all performing those rites with the same wisdom? And did they tell you, not as if they had taken the counsel for themselves, "You see, brother, how many myriads there are of Jews who have come together; and they are all zealous for the law, and they have been instructed concerning you, that you teach departure from the law. What then is it? Do what we tell you. There are men among us who have a vow upon them; take these and go, purify yourself along with them, that they may learn that those things which they have been told about you are nothing." Do you see how they are concerned for your reputation? How they hide their own dispensation under a mask, and shield you with sacrifice and purifications? Why do you not show the same care yourself?

^C

The dispute at Antioch

So tell me, is he timid and unmanly, who, with such fear and such dangers hanging over him, and with such great boldness, approached those canine men, fed on blood, burning with rage, still breathing out slaughter, and said that the One who had been crucified by them had risen from the dead, and is in the heavens, and sits at the right hand of the Father, and overwhelms His enemies with thousands of evils? Would you not rather, I ask, admire him and exalt him to heaven, because he alone was able to open his mouth, to open his lips, to stand, and to appear among those who had crucified Him? For what word, what mind could express the boldness which he displayed on that day, and his freedom of speech? None at all. For if, before the passion, the Jews had conspired that if anyone confessed Him to be the Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue (John 9:22), after the passion and the burial, hearing him not only confessing Christ, but also preaching the whole dispensation with such great constancy—how did they not tear him apart, and divide him limb from limb, at the very first sight of him, ^D before they were destroyed by his madness?

576. For this is indeed a great thing, that Christ did not confess Him, but that he confessed Him boldly before everyone else, while they were then still puffed up with rage. Just as, therefore, in war and in battle, when the phalanx is compacted, we praise him most of all who leaps out before the others and breaks through the front—for he is rightly said to have been the cause not only of this, but of all the brilliant deeds which the others performed, since he was the author of the beginning and of the entry—so too must one reckon concerning Peter, since he was the first to enter, and broke through the front of the Jewish cohort, and held that long appeal, and in like manner is to be called the one who opened the way for the other apostles. Although John, although James, although Paul, or anyone else thereafter may have done some noble deed, this man excels them all, who paved the way for the others with his confidence, and opened the entry, and permitted them, like a river flowing with great force of waves, to enter confidently, and to drag those who opposed them along with them, and to water the souls of those who listened with benevolence. Was he, therefore, such a person after the cross? Was he not more fervent than all others before the cross? Was he not the mouth of the apostles? Was he not speaking when all others were silent? "Whom do men say that I, the Son of man, am?" (Matt. 16:13) says Christ; and some said Elijah, others Jeremiah, others one of the prophets. "But whom do you say that I am?" (v. 16) He says. Then Peter, answering, said: "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." "You," He said, and he spoke on behalf of all. For just as the mouth speaks for the whole body, so Peter was the tongue of the apostles, and he himself answered for all. Was he, therefore, such a person only then, and does he elsewhere slacken in this zeal? By no means: but in everything, and in all things he showed the same ardor. For when Christ had said, "They shall deliver up the Son of man, and they shall scourge Him, and crucify Him" (Mark 10:33, 34), he himself says, "Merciful to you, Lord; this shall not be" (Matt. 16:22). For this is not to be understood by us as him being inconsiderate in his reply, but as proceeding from an exceptional and fervent love. Again, He ascends the mountain, and is transfigured: meanwhile Elijah and Moses appeared there, speaking with Him. Again, Peter is there too: "If You will, let us make here three tabernacles" (Matt. 17:4). 578. 6. See how he respects the Teacher, and observe his precision and prudence. For because, at the time when he had answered rashly, his mouth was closed, here he submits the matter to the Teacher’s authority, saying, "If You will." It was possible, he says, that even now I might speak inconsiderately, moved by love. Lest, therefore, he be struck with the same reprimand, "If You will," he says. That banquet was again holy and tremendous; and at that time, when Jesus was saying, "One of you shall betray Me" (Matt. 26:21), again, Peter, because of that rebuke which had preceded, did not dare to ask the Teacher; but, because of the love with which he was burning, he could not be silent; but he urged himself to learn, and so as not to appear rash and inconsiderate.

^A

How, then, did he fulfill both — that is, his desire and the securing of his own safety? It was so that, on the one hand, by wishing to learn, he might show his unquenchable yearning, and, on the other hand, by not doing this through himself, but by putting forward another, he might demonstrate his reverence and his complete moderation. For, "We are hemmed in on all sides," he says; "the discourse is about the Lord's betrayal; the danger is great, the warning comes from both sides. If I keep silent, anxiety devours my soul; if I speak, I fear lest I receive another rebuke." He therefore took the middle path, and he who always outran the others looked then for the boldness of John, in order to learn what was being said. For he breathed nothing else, and had it perpetually in his soul, but the Teacher alone. Because of this, he later braved prisons and ten thousand deaths, and mocked at all this present life. Because of Him, having received lashes, and bearing the welts upon his back, he was saying to those who had brought these things upon him: "We cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard" (Acts 4. 20). Do you see a soul unsubjugated? Do you see an unconquerable boldness? Do you see a soul full of heavenly yearning and love? How, then, do you dare to say that he was withdrawing and separating himself, fearing those from the circumcision? And many other things could be said about Peter, showing his warmth, and his courage, and the love which he had for Christ; but, so that we do not needlessly prolong the discourse, what has been said is sufficient. For today our task is not to deliver an encomium of him, but to solve what appears to be a problem, and bring it to a conclusion.

7. But you, consider also from another side how the accusation is not plausible. For then, indeed, at the beginning, when he was saying, "This Jesus, whom you crucified, God has raised up, having loosed the pangs of death" (Acts 2. 24), he was among enemies, still murderous, still boiling with rage, still wanting to tear the disciples apart. For their passion was still at its height, and their mind was seething with anger. But now, when Paul was writing these things, the preaching had already reached its seventeenth year. For having said, "After three years I went up to Jerusalem" (Gal. 1. 18), he says again that "after fourteen years I went up to Jerusalem" (Gal. 2. 1). ^B Therefore, he who at the beginning of the preaching did not fear, now, after such a long time, does he fear? He who did not fear in Jerusalem, does he fear in Antioch? He who, when enemies surrounded him, was not then struck with terror, does he now, with no enemies present, but only brothers and disciples, fret and fear and walk not uprightly? And how could these things make sense — that he would brave the trial when the fire was being kindled and rising to a height, yet fear and tremble when it had been extinguished and had become ash? If Peter were cowardly and unmanly, he would have feared at the beginning of the preaching, in the metropolis of the Jews, where all his enemies were, not after so long a time in a most Christian city, and with friends and kinfolk present. So neither the time, nor the place, nor the quality of the persons allows us to believe what is said, and to condemn Peter for cowardice. Did you understand what was said? Although at the beginning you were admiring Paul, and were struck by his boldness; but lo, the argument has turned the accusation around. But just as I said at [the] beginning, it is of no use to us if, while Paul is doing well, Peter is shown to be doing ill (for the accusations and the shame for us remain, even if this one or that one happens to have been at fault), so now I say the same thing again, that it is no use to me if, after Peter has cleared himself of the accusation, Paul appears to be boldly and inconsiderately accusing a fellow apostle. Come, then, let us absolve him also of these charges. What then? Is Peter *this* kind of person, but Paul not that kind? And what could be more fervent than Paul, who died every day for Christ? ^C But now our discourse is not about courage (for what does this have to do with the matter at hand?), but whether he was hostilely disposed toward the apostle, or if this conflict was born of some vainglory and contentiousness. But neither is this possible to say; may it not be! For not only was Paul a servant of Peter, the chief of those holy men, but he was also simply a servant of all the apostles, and this, indeed, surpassing all in labors; yet he always accounted himself the last of all. "For I am," he says, "the least of the apostles, who am not worthy to be called an apostle" (1 Cor. 15. 9); and not only of the apostles, but of all the saints simply. "For to me," he says, "the least of all the saints, this grace was given" (Ephes. 3. 8).

8. Do you see a contrite soul? Do you see how he places himself lower than all the saints, not just the apostles? He who was so disposed toward all, knew also how much preeminence Peter ought to enjoy, and he needed him more than any man, and just as he was worthy, so he was disposed toward him. And this is clear from what follows. The whole world was looking toward him, the cares of the Churches of the earth everywhere were hanging upon his soul, ten thousand matters surrounded him every day: cares, administrations, corrections, counsels, exhortations, teachings, the management of a thousand affairs; and leaving all those things, he went away to Jerusalem, and there was no other pretext for the journey, but only to see Peter, just as he himself says: "I went up to Jerusalem to visit Peter" (Gal. 1. 18); so much did he honor him, and hold him before all others. What then? After seeing him did he immediately depart? By no means; but he remained with him for fifteen days. If, then, you were to see some general, tell me, noble and wonderful, when the war is joined, the battle line is drawn, the fight is raging, and ten thousand affairs are calling him from all sides, abandoning the battle line to go off to visit some friend, pray, do you seek any greater proof than this, tell me, of his goodwill toward that man? I, for one, would not. Consider this, therefore, in the case of Paul and Peter too. For here, too, a bitter war was joined, and a battle line existed, and a fight, not against men only, but against the principalities, against the powers, against the ^D world-rulers of the darkness of this age (Eph. 6. 12), and a battle for the salvation of men; yet—

^A he revered Peter so much that, when such great necessity loomed and pressed, he hastened to run to Jerusalem to see him, and when he had remained with him for fifteen days, then at last he returned. You have learned the fortitude of Peter, you have learned the courtesy of Paul towards all the apostles, and towards Peter himself; it is now necessary that we come to the solution of the question itself. For if on the one hand this one loved Peter, and that one was not timid or lacking in vigor, and that contention and opposition was not undertaken from the soul, what does this narrative mean? Or for what reason was this arrangement taking place? Attend diligently, so that you may understand a clear defense. For it would be absurd for me, who am tilling the earth, to endure such great labor, while you, who are going to see gold without any trouble, should pass over such great gain on account of excess of sloth. It is necessary, however, that we repeat the beginning of the discourse further back, so that we may render a clearer doctrine for you. For after Jesus returned to the heavens, having fulfilled the dispensation which he had undertaken for our sake, he left the word of doctrine to his own apostles, as Paul says, And he has placed in us the word of reconciliation; and again, We perform the embassy for Christ, as though God were exhorting through us (2 Cor. 5. 20). When, therefore, they were preaching through the entire inhabited world, there was no heresy; but the entire human nature had these two dogmas, one correct and sound, the other corrupted and depraved. For the inhabitants of the world were either Gentiles or Jews: there was no Manichæan, nor Marcionite, nor Valentinian, nor any other at all: for what is the point of enumerating all the heresies? Since against the wheat, tares were then sown, which is truly the corrupting influence of all heresies. And Christ therefore committed the Jews to Peter, but he set Paul over the Gentiles. And I do not say this of myself, but it is permitted to hear the words of Paul himself: For he who worked in Peter unto the apostleship of the circumcision, he worked in me also among the Gentiles (Gal. 2. 8): calling the nation itself the circumcision in this place. But from where is this confirmed? From that which is added. For when he had said, He who worked in Peter unto the apostleship of the circumcision, he worked in me also among the Gentiles, he indicated by this, of course, that he spoke of 'circumcision' to distinguish them from the Gentiles. But to the distinction of the Gentiles belong not circumcision, but Jews, whom he indicated by means of the circumcision: as if to say, He who worked in Peter unto the apostleship of the Jews, worked in me also among the Gentiles. For as a wise king, who knows each of the capable men well, entrusts the command to one for the cavalry, but to another for the infantry: thus indeed did Christ also divide his army into these two parts, and committed the Jews to Peter, but the Gentiles to Paul. And although the armies are different, the King is one. For as there the difference of the armies consists in the equipment of weapons, not in the nature of the men: so indeed here the difference is perceived in a slight configuration of the flesh, not in a diversity of substance.

^B As therefore I was saying, both were appointed over these armies. And unless the discourse seems too long, if you are not exhausted, I will also bring forward another reason for you, for which these were entrusted to the Jews, and those to the Gentiles. Since it is a matter not unworthy of investigation, for what reason is it that he who had learned the ancestral law so exactly, who had lived for a long time at the feet of Gamaliel, who had walked irreproachably according to the righteousness which is in the law, is not entrusted with the care of the Jews, but that of the Gentiles; while the mandate of the Jews was entrusted to the fisherman and illiterate Peter, who had known nothing of the sort? For it contributes something to the solution for us, that which is said, if we can express it rightly. For it is not permitted to make this the cause, that when he saw Paul shrinking and drawing back, he did not wish to use force and compel him to refuse the leadership of his kinsmen. Nay, he had offered the contrary. For not only did he not refuse the leadership of the Jews, but he was the first to offer himself, and when Christ commanded that he go to the Gentiles, he himself asked that the care of the Jews be committed to him: and when he had carried countless evils brought upon him by them, and the province of teaching the Gentiles had been entrusted to him, he does not cease to intercede for them, saying now, I wished to be anathema for my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh (Rom. 9. 3): and now, Brothers, my will and prayer to God is for them for salvation (Rom. 10. 1). Why then, when he himself wished and desired to teach them, did he not permit him to preach to them, but instead sent him as a teacher to the Gentiles? Let us hear Christ himself saying it, and Paul narrating the whole thing: It came to pass for me, he says, while praying, to be in a trance of mind, and to see Christ saying to me: Hasten, and go out quickly, because they will not receive your testimony concerning me (Acts 22. 17, 18). And he told the cause of the journey; they will hate you, he says, and reject you: therefore they will not bear you while you teach. And yet this very thing was suitable for conciliating faith to him while teaching among them, and for persuading them that that change had not been human. For a man could not have changed in the midst of his very rage, and him who was breathing ire, and who believed in Christ working miracles, nor even in his apostles who were raising the dead, and could not have bent him such that he would bear the vehement affection which he previously bore against the preaching of the word, entirely—or rather, a greater one—on behalf of the confession of Christ: but that conversion and change of his existed as a work of truly divine power. ^C ...his leadership to be deferred to him, he was objecting while addressing Christ: Lord, they themselves know, that I was putting in prison, and beating those who believed in your name; and when the blood of Stephen, your martyr, was being shed, I was consenting to his slaughter (Acts 22. 19, 20). And that immense madness shows that the change made so suddenly was not human, but divine, and took its origin from the heavens. What then did Christ do? Go, because I will send you far to the Gentiles (Acts 22. 21). Was it not therefore,

^A you blessed Paul, sufficient if you examine the very nature of the things? But the Jews are the most senseless of all; they do not examine the nature of things, nor do they consider what is likely, reasonable, or necessary, but they look only to one thing—how they might satisfy their own spirit of contention. And you look to the sequence of events, but God knows the secrets of their minds. For this reason He says: “Go, for I will send you far to the Gentiles,” so that even by distance He might soften their ill-will. For this reason, in writing to all the others, he adds his name in the preface of his epistles, but when writing to the Hebrews, he did nothing of the sort, but began simply—not saying who he was, or to whom he was writing, as was his custom—in this manner: “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spoke in times past unto the fathers” (Hebr. 1. 1). And this is truly the wisdom of Paul. For that the letter might not share in the hatred, he hid himself, as if behind a mask, by the omission of his name, and thus insensibly applies the medicine of exhortation to them. For when we are ill-disposed toward someone, even if he says something sound, we do not receive what is said readily or with pleasure; therefore, that this might not happen in that case, he removed his own name from the epistle, so that this might be no obstacle to the hearing of the epistle. For it was not only the unbelieving Jews, but even those who had believed who hated and turned away from him. When, therefore, he went up to Jerusalem, hear what James and all the others say to him: “You see, brother, how many myriads there are of Jews who have come together; and all these are zealous for the law, and they have been instructed concerning you, that you teach apostasy from the law.” For this reason they especially hated and turned away from him.

12. Such, then, is the cause why he was not trusted by the Jews, but only by those from the Gentiles. But when he was finally trusted, he did not guide them to the faith in the same way as Peter, nor by the same path, but by another. And when you hear "another," do not think there was a difference in the preaching. For both preached the same things to both Jews and Greeks: for instance, that Christ is God, that He was crucified and buried, and rose again, and is at the right hand of the Father, that He is about to judge the living and the dead, and whatever things were like these, Paul and Peter preached alike. In what, then, was the difference? In the observance of foods, in circumcision, in other Jewish customs. For Peter did not dare to say clearly and explicitly to his own disciples that they must depart from these once and for all. For he feared that, by wishing to uproot this habit before the time, he might uproot the faith in Christ along with them, since the soul of the Jews was not yet able, because of its long-standing preoccupation with the law, to hear these words. For this reason the blessed Peter endured their Judaizing. And just as a skilled husbandman, having ^B planted a young shoot next to a withered tree, does not dare, nor can he endure to pull up the withered tree, fearing lest, when those roots are pulled up, the newly planted shoot might also be pulled up with them, but waits first for that one to pass away well, and to be rooted down in the very folds of the earth, and then pulls up the ancient one with safety, fearing nothing more for the new plant; so also the blessed Peter did: he waited for the faith, being a new plant, to be well-rooted in the souls of the hearers, so that when that was rooted, he might then safely pull up the whole Jewish preoccupation. But not so Paul; for he was freed from all this necessity, preaching to Greeks who had never shared in the law, nor were accustomed to Jewish observances. For that they did not do these things as though contradicting one another, but by condescending to the weakness of the disciples, one can see even Paul, in the same way as Peter, granting these same things, and not only granting them, but himself also cooperating; and Peter again legislating the same freedom that Paul was preaching to all the Gentiles. And where, he says, is it possible to see both of these things? In Jerusalem itself. For this one, the teacher of the Gentiles, even shaved his head, and offered a sacrifice, and completed a purification. For the time required this, and the presence of many Jews. “For you see,” he says, “brother, how many myriads there are of Jews who have come together, and they have been instructed concerning you, that you teach apostasy from the law.”

13. Therefore, he Judaized, being compelled to condescend; but what was done was not of conviction, but of economy. Again, Peter, the teacher of the Jews, and everywhere granting circumcision and Jewish observances because of the weakness of the disciples, when he saw a time that released him from this necessity, and it was no longer safe to employ such condescension, but it was a time for doctrine and laws, hear what he says. For since those around Paul and Barnabas came up from Antioch to learn the truth about these very things, and there was much discussion, Peter arose and said: “Men and brethren, you know that from ancient days God chose among us, that the Gentiles should hear the word of the Gospel by my mouth, and believe.” Then, having said other things in the middle, he added, saying: “Why then do you tempt God to put a yoke upon the neck of the Gentiles, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, in the same manner as they.” You see that when it was a time of condescension, even Paul Judaized; but when it was not a time of condescension, but it was necessary to dogmatize and legislate, even Peter, released from that condescension, hands down sincere and pure doctrines; and when these were said, Paul was present and heard them, and having himself received the letter, he distributed it everywhere, and it is not possible to say that he was ignorant of the apostle’s judgment. For what reason, then, does he now complain of such things, saying that it was because he was afraid of those of the circumcision?

14. But that you may also see the history of these things, I will narrate it to you from a little further back; but pay attention, I beseech you, for we have arrived at the very depth of the solution. James, the brother of the Lord, ^C

^A at that time oversaw the Church in the beginning, the one in Jerusalem, and he presided over all the Jews who had believed. Now it happened that there were in Antioch also some Jews who had believed in Christ, because they lived far from Jerusalem, and seeing those from the nations who had believed living confidently and without Judaic observances, they were slowly and gradually being led to abstain from Judaic custom and to retain the pure and unadulterated doctrine of the faith. When, therefore, Peter had descended and saw that there was no need for condescension, he thereafter lived as a Gentile. Now Paul calls this "living as a Gentile," namely, living without Judaic observance, keeping none of those legal rites—for instance, circumcision, the Sabbath, or anything of that sort. Since, therefore, Peter was living in this way, there came down certain Jews from James—that is, from Jerusalem—who, because they had always dwelt in the metropolis and had never seen anyone living in such a manner, still held to that preconceived Judaic opinion and brought with them many of those observations. When Peter saw these men who had come down from James and Jerusalem, and who were still ^B weak, fearing that if scandalized they might fall away from the faith, he changed again, and leaving aside the Gentile manner of life, he returned to the previous condescension and kept the observations regarding food. When the Jews, therefore, who were residing in Antioch, saw him doing this, and did not understand his intent—with which he was doing this—they themselves were also led astray, and on account of their teacher, they were compelled to Judaize. And this is what Paul reproves. But, so that what I am saying may become clearer, I will recite to you the apostolic words themselves: "When Peter came to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed. For before certain came from James—that is, from Jerusalem—he ate with the Gentiles," that is, with those who were in Antioch. "But when they came from Jerusalem, who were experts in the law, Peter withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision." Which ones? Those who had come down from James; "and the other Jews were led away with him." What Jews? Those who, before the Jerusalemites had descended, were dwelling in Antioch ^C and keeping no Judaic observance; "so that Barnabas also was led away by them into that simulation." And this is, indeed, what appears to be the reproach.

If, however, you wish, when I have first set forth the defenses devised by others, I will then also attempt to express my own opinion, and I will give you the choice, so that from the things said, you may choose what seems best to you. How, therefore, did some solve this question? "Peter," they say, "was not here the first of the apostles, to whom the sheep were entrusted by Christ, but some other nobody, a vile and abject man from the common crowd." Whence is this established? When he had said that the rest of the Jews were led away with him, he added, they say, "So that Barnabas also was led away with them into that simulation." But the fact that he said, "So that Barnabas," indicates that the fact that Barnabas was led away was much more wondrous than that Peter was led away. For he spoke in such a way as to seem to deem him the greater one; "not only Peter," he says, "but also Barnabas"—although Barnabas was not greater than Peter. ^D However, the matter is not so; it is certainly not so. For he does not marvel all the more simply because Barnabas was greater; but for what reason? Because, surely, the one was sent to the circumcision, but Barnabas was preaching to the nations with Paul, and was everywhere coupled with Paul; as, therefore, he says elsewhere, "Or is it only I and Barnabas who do not have authority not to work?" (1 Cor. 9:6); and again, "I went up to Jerusalem with Barnabas" (Gal. 2:1); and you see him everywhere teaching with Paul. Not, therefore, because he was greater than Peter does he marvel that he too was led away; but because he who was always preaching with him, and for whom there was nothing in common with the Jews, but was teaching among the nations, was himself also led away. Furthermore, that it is Peter of whom he says all these things is manifest both from what precedes and from what follows. For that he says he withstood him to his face, and holds that to be a great thing, signifies nothing else than that he did not in the least revere the dignity of his person; furthermore, if he had said that he had withstood some other [man] to his face, he would by no means have held this to be a great thing. Besides, if some other Peter had been [the one], his change would not have had such power as to attract the other Jews as well. For he did not exhort, nor did he advise, but only withdrew and separated himself; and that withdrawal and separation was able to attract all the other disciples on account of the dignity of his person.

Why Paul rebuked Peter

he would have scandalized the disciples. Again, if Paul had directed this speech to them, they would not have paid attention, nor would they have endured the listening. For those who, even without this, hated him and turned away from him because of such a rumor, would have fled away all the more if they had heard these things from someone advising them. What then happens? No one of these Jews was rebuking those from James, but Peter receives the rebuke from Paul, so that, being accused by his fellow apostle, he might henceforth have legitimate boldness to rebuke the disciples as well; and Peter indeed is rebuked, but the disciples are corrected.

This occurs also in secular transactions. For when some owe certain arrears of public taxes, then those who are about to exact them, being ashamed and blushing to behave more harshly, and wishing to obtain more cause and authority for harshness against them, prepare others of their fellow soldiers to strip them, to revile them, and to inflict ten thousand other terrible things upon them while they look on, so that, these things having happened, they might no longer seem to be attacking them more harshly by their own hand, nor from their own source, but from the necessity induced by others; and the insult of others becomes for them an apology before those who are responsible to them.

^A 17. This also happened in the case of Paul and Peter. For the Jews were lacking certain "arrears." What are these? To depart entirely from Judaism. Peter wished to exact these arrears more harshly, and to collect the faith pure from them. Wishing, therefore, to obtain more power and cause for such a collection, he prepares Paul to rebuke him with superabundance, and to chide him, so that this counterfeit rebuke might provide him with a legitimate cause and pretext for boldness against them. For this reason, he begins by saying, *I withstood him to the face*; ^B and here again, *I said to Peter before all*. For if he had wished to correct the apostle, he would have done this in private; but since this was not the objective (for he knew the intent with which he was doing all these things), but rather he was eager to establish those who had been wavering for a long time, for this reason he makes the rebuke before all. And Peter endures, and is silent, and does not contradict. For he knew the intent with which Paul was rebuking; and Peter brought the whole matter to completion by his silence. For his silence became a teaching to the Jews that they were no longer to be held by the legal ordinances. For the teacher would not have been silent, he says, if he had not known that Paul was rebuking justly.

But if it seems good, let us also listen to the rebuke itself. *I said to Peter before all*, he says, *If you, being a Jew, live like a Gentile.* Consider the wisdom: he did not say to him that you do badly by living in a Judaic manner, but he examines his earlier behavior, so that the admonition and the advice might not appear to be introduced from Paul’s own judgment, but from Peter’s judgment which had already taken place. For if he had said, "You do badly by keeping the law," the disciples of Peter would have rebuked him: "You do well." ^C But now, having heard that this admonition and correction was not Paul’s judgment, but that Peter himself lived in that way, and had these dogmas in his soul, they remained quiet, willing or unwilling. For this reason, neither does Peter introduce the judgment, but endures being refuted by another—by Paul, I mean—and is silent, so that the teaching might be easily accepted.

18. And it is possible to see the wisdom of Paul not only from this, but also from what follows. For he did not say, "If you, being a Jew, live like a Gentile, and not in a Judaic way," but rather, *You live*: so that even now you have the same judgment; and that which is full of much wisdom is what follows. For having said, *You live like a Gentile, being a Jew*, he did not add, "Why do you force the Jews to judaize?" But how? *Why do you force the Gentiles to judaize?* so that, under the pretext of claiming his own disciples and a pretense of care for the Gentiles, he might persuade the Jews to depart from their old habit. ^D For that the accusations are fabricated is evident from the things themselves that were said. For having said above, *The rest of the Jews were carried away with him*, here he says: *Why do you force the Gentiles to judaize?* And yet, he ought to have said, "Why do you force the Jews to judaize?" For those who were carried away were not those from the Gentiles, but Jews. But if he had said this, the speech would have appeared harsh and irrelevant to him—for he was the teacher of the Gentiles; but now, under a pretext of care for his own disciples, he makes the rebuke unanswerable and free; and so that you may learn that the things said were not a rebuke against Peter, but an admonition and teaching for the Jews in the form of a rebuke against Peter, listen to what follows: *We are Jews by nature, and not sinners from among the Gentiles* (Gal. 2:15). For these things are now the words of one teaching, and he no longer directs the whole thing unto Peter, but makes the discourse common. For if he had entered in as teaching from the beginning, the Jews would not have endured it; but now, having taken the beginning from a rebuke, and having seemed to be making a righteous rebuke against Peter, as he was drawing those from the Gentiles, he proceeds henceforth without fear into admonition and advice, as the sequence leads him toward that which concerns the observation of legal rites. For so that no one, having heard that *you force the Gentiles to judaize*, might think that it is not permitted for only those to judaize, but that it is allowed for the Jews, he directs the discourse unto the teachers themselves. What do I say, he says, regarding the Gentiles, or the rest of the Jews? But even we, the teachers, we, the apostles. And he says not only this justification, that "we are teachers and apostles," but that we who are Jews from ancestors have utterly departed from the Law. What defense, therefore, do we have, if we constrain others to this? You see how he secretly attacks the Jews, and composes the teaching as a unified whole? For having said, *We are Jews by nature, and not sinners from among the Gentiles*, he also sets forth a reasonable cause, for which they departed from Judaism: *Knowing that a man is not justified from works of the Law, except through faith in Jesus Christ; and we believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified from faith in Christ, and not from works of the Law; because a man is not justified from works of the Law, except through faith in Jesus Christ.*

19. You see how he continually mentions both the weakness of the Law and the righteousness that is according to faith? And he frequently turns the names, which is not the act of one who is rebuking, but of one who is teaching and advising. But, as I was saying...