|
1 COR. VIII. 1.
Now concerning things sacrificed to idols: we
know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge
puffeth up, but love edifieth.
IT is necessary first to say what the meaning
of this passage is: for so shall we readily
comprehend the Apostle's discourse. For he
that sees a charge brought against any one,
except he first perceive the nature of the
offence will not understand what is said. What
then is it of which he was then accusing the
Corinthians? A heavy charge and the cause of
many evils. Well, what is it? Many among
them, having learnt that (St. Matt. xv.
11.) "not the things which enter in defile
the man, but the things which proceed out,"
and that idols of wood and stone, and demons,
have no power to hurt or help, had made an
immoderate use of their perfect knowledge of this
to the harm both of others and of themselves.
They had both gone in where idols were and had
partaken of the tables there, and were producing
thereby great and ruinous evil. For, on the
one hand, those who still retained the fear of
idols and knew not how to contemn them, took
part in those meals, because they saw the more
perfect sort doing this; and hence they got the
greatest injury: since they did not touch what
was set before them with the same mind as the
others, but as things offered in sacrifice to
idols; and the thing was becoming a way to
idolatry. On the other hand, these very
persons who pretended to be more perfect were
injured in no common way, partaking in the
tables of demons.
This then was the subject of complaint. Now
this blessed man being about to correct it, did
not immediately begin to speak vehemently; for
that which was done came more of folly than of
wickedness: wherefore in the first instance
there was need rather of exhortation than of
severe rebuke and wrath. Now herein observe his
good sense, how he immediately begins to
admonish.
"Now concerning things sacrificed to idols, we
know that we all have knowledge." Leaving
alone the weak, which he always doth, he
discourses with the strong first. And this is
what he did also in the Epistle to the Romans,
saying, (Rom. xiv. 10.) "But thou,
why dost thou judge thy brother?" for this is
the sort of person that is able to receive rebuke
also with readiness. Exactly the same then he
doth here also.
And first he makes void their conceit by
declaring that this very thing which they
considered as peculiar to themselves, the having
perfect knowledge, was common to all. Thus,
"we know," saith he, "that we all have
knowledge." For if allowing them to have high
thoughts, he had first pointed out how hurtful
the thing was to others, he would not have done
them so much good as harm. For the ambitious
soul when it plumes itself upon any thing, even
though the same do harm to others, yet strongly
adheres to it because of the tyranny of
vain-glory. Wherefore Paul first examines the
matter itself by itself: just as he had done
before in the case of the wisdom from without,
demolishing it with a high hand. But in that
case he did it as we might have expected: for
the whole thing was altogether blameworthy and
his task was very easy. Wherefore he signifies
it to be not only useless, but even contrary to
the Gospel. But in the present case it was not
possible to do this. For what was done was of
knowledge, and perfect knowledge. Nor was it
safe to overthrow it, and yet in no other way
was it possible to cast out the conceit which had
resulted from it. What then doeth he? First,
by signifying that it was common, he curbs that
swelling pride of theirs. For they who possess
something great and excellent are more elated,
when they alone have it; but if it be made out
that they possess it in common with others, they
no longer have so much of this feeling. First
then he makes it common property, because they
considered it to belong to themselves alone.
Next, having made it common, he does not make
himself singly a sharer in it with them; for in
this way too he would have rather set them up;
for as to be the only possessor elates, so to
have one partner or two perhaps among leading
persons has this effect just as much. For this
reason he does not mention himself but all: he
said not, "I too have knowledge," but, "we
know that we all have knowledge."
This then is one way, and the first, by which
he cast down their pride; the next hath greater
force. What then is this? In that he shews
that not even this thing itself was in all points
complete, but imperfect, and extremely so.
And not only imperfect, but also injurious,
unless there were another thing joined together
with it. For having said that" we have
knowledge," he added, "Knowledge puffeth
up, but love edifieth:" so that when it is
without love, it lifts men up to absolute
arrogance.
"And yet not even love," you will say,
"without knowledge hath any advantage."
Well: this he did not say; but omitting it as
a thing allowed by all, he signifies that
knowledge stands in extreme need of love. For
he who loves, inasmuch as he fulfils the
commandment which is most absolute of all, even
though he have some defects, will quickly be
blest with knowledge because of his love; as
Cornelius and many others. But he that hath
knowledge but hath not love, not only shall gain
nothing more, but shall also be cast out of that
which he hath, in many cases falling into
arrogance. It seems then that knowledge is not
productive of love, but on the contrary debars
from it him that is not on his guard, puffing
him up and elating him. For arrogance is wont
to cause divisions: but love both draws together
and leads to knowledge. And to make this plain
he saith, "But if any man loveth God, the
same is known of Him." So that "I forbid
not this," saith he, "namely, your having
perfect knowledge; but your having it with
love, that I enjoin; else is it no gain, but
rather loss."
Do you see how he already sounds the first note
of his discourse concerning love? For since all
these evils were springing from the following
root, i. e., not from perfect knowledge, but
from their not greatly loving nor sparing their
neighbors; whence ensued both their variance and
their self-satisfaction, and all the rest which
he had charged them with; both before this and
after he is continually providing for love; so
correcting the fountain of all good things.
"Now why," saith he, "are ye puffed up
about knowledge? For if ye have not love, ye
shall even be injured thereby. For what is
worse than boasting? But if the other be
added, the first also will be in safety. For
although you may know something more than your
neighbor, if you love him you will not set
yourself up but lead him also to the same."
Wherefore also having said, "Knowledge
puffeth up," he added, "but love edifieth."
He did not say, "Behaveth itself modestly,"
but what is much more, and more gainful. For
their knowledge was not only puffing them up but
also distracting them. On this account he
opposes the one to the other.
And then he adds a third consideration, which
was of force to set them down. What then is
this? that although charity be joined with it,
yet not even in that case is this our knowledge
perfect. And therefore he adds, Ver. 2.
"But if any man think that he knoweth any
thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to
know." This is a mortal blow. "I dwell
not," saith he, "on the knowledge being
common to all. I say not that by hating your
neighbor and by arrogance, you injure yourself
most. But even though you have it by yourself
alone, though you be modest, though you love
your brother, even in this case you are
imperfect in regard of knowledge. "For as yet
thou knowest nothing as thou oughtest to know,"
Now if we possess as yet exact knowledge of
nothing, how is it that some have rushed on to
such a pitch of frenzy as to say that they know
God with all exactness? Whereas, though we
had an exact knowledge of all other things, not
even so were it possible to possess this
knowledge to such an extent. For how far He is
apart from all things, it is impossible even to
say.
And mark how he pulls down their swelling
pride: for he said not, "of the matters before
us ye have not the proper knowledge," but,
"about every thing." And he did not say,
"ye," but, "no one whatever," be it
Peter, be it Paul, be it any one else. For
by this he both soothed them and carefully kept
them under.
Ver. 3. "But if any man love God, the
same," he doth not say, "knoweth Him,"
but, "is known of Him." For we have not
known Him, but He hath known us. And
therefore did Christ say, "Ye have not chosen
Me, but I have chosen you." And Paul
elsewhere, "Then shall I know fully, even as
also I have been known."
Observe now, I pray, by what means he brings
down their high-mindedness. First, he points
out that not they alone knew the things which
they knew; for "we all," he saith," have
knowledge." Next, that the thing itself was
hurtful so long as it was without love; for
"knowledge," saith he, "puffeth up."
Thirdly, that even joined with love it is not
complete nor perfect. "For if any man thinketh
that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing as
yet as he ought to know," so he speaks. In
addition to this, that they have not even this
from themselves, but by gift from God. For he
said not, "hath known God," but, "is known
of Him." Again, that this very thing comes
of love which they have not as they ought.
For, "if any man," saith he, "love God,
the same is known of Him." Having then so
much at large allayed their irritation, he
begins to speak doctrinally, saying thus.
Ver. 4. "Concerning therefore the eating of
things sacrificed to idols, we know that no idol
is anything in the world, and that there is no
God but one." Look what a strait he hath
fallen into! For indeed his mind is to prove
both; that one ought to abstain from this kind
of banquet, and that it hath no power to hurt
those who partake of it: things which were not
greatly in agreement with each other. For when
they were told that they had no harm, in them,
they would naturally run to them as indifferent
things. But when forbidden to touch them, they
would suspect, on the contrary, that their
having power to do hurt occasioned the
prohibition. Wherefore, you see, he puts down
their opinion about idols, and then states as a
first reason for their abstaining the scandals
which they place in the way of their brethren;
in these words: "Now concerning the eating of
things sacrificed to idols, we know that no idol
is anything in the world." Again he makes it
common property and doth not allow this to be
theirs alone, but extends the knowledge all over
the world. For "not among you alone," says
he, "but every where on earth this doctrine
prevails." What then is it? "That no idol
is anything in the world; that there is no God
but one." What then? are there no idols? no
statues?
Indeed there are; but they have no power:
neither are they gods, but stones and demons.
For he is now setting himself against both
parties; both the grosser sort among them, and
those who were accounted lovers of wisdom.
Thus, seeing that the former know of no more
than the mere stones, the others assert that
certain powers reside in them, which they also
call gods; to the former accordingly he says,
that "no idol is anything in the world," to
the other, that "there is no God but one."
Do you mark how he writes these things, not
simply as laying down doctrine, but in
opposition to those without? A thing indeed
which we must at all times narrowly observe,
whether he says anything abstractedly, or
whether he is opposing any persons. For this
contributes in no ordinary way to the accuracy of
our doctrinal views, and to the exact
understanding of his expressions.
Ver. 5. "For though there be that are
called gods, whether in heaven or on earth, as
there are gods many and lords many; yet to us
there is one God, the Father, of Whom are
all things, and we unto Him; and one Lord
Jesus Christ, through Whom are all things,
and we through Him." Since he had said, that
"an idol is nothing" and that "there is no
other God;" and yet there were idols and there
were those that were called gods; that he might
not seem to be contradicting plain facts, he
goes on to say, "For though there be that are
called gods, as indeed there are;" not
absolutely, "there are;" but, "called,"
not in reality having this but in name: "be it
in heaven or on earth:--in heaven," meaning
the sun and the moon and the remainder of the
choir of stars; for these too the Greeks
worshipped: but upon the earth demons, and all
those who had been made gods of men:--"yet to
us there is One God, the Father." In the
first instance having expressed it without the
word "Father," and said, "there is no God
but one," he now adds this also, when he had
utterly cast out the others.
Next, he adduces what indeed is the greatest
token of divinity; "of Whom are all things."
For this implies also that those others are not
gods. For it is said (Jer. x. 11.),
"Let the gods who made not the heaven and the
earth perish." Then he subjoins what is not
less than this, "and we unto Him." For when
he saith, "of Whom are all things," he means
the creation and the bringing of things out of
nothing into existence. But when he saith,
"and we unto Him," he speaks of the word of
faith and mutual appropriation (oikeiwsews),
as also he said before (1 COR. I. 30.),
"but of Him are ye also in Christ Jesus."
In two ways we are of Him, by being made when
we were not, and by being made believers. For
this also is a creation: a thing which he also
declares elsewhere; (Eph. ii. 15.)
"that He might create in Himself of the twain
one new man."
"And there is one Lord, Jesus Christ,
through Whom are all things, and we through
Him." And in regard to Christ again, we
must conceive of this in like manner. For
through Him the race of men was both produced
out of nothing into existence, and returned from
error to truth. So that as to the phrase "of
Whom," it is not to be understood apart from
Christ. For of Him, through Christ, were
we created.
Nor yet, if you observe, hath he distributed
the names as if belonging exclusively, assigning
to the Son the name Lord, and to the Father,
God. For the Scripture useth also often to
interchange them; as when it saith, (Psalm
cx. 1.) "The Lord saith unto My Lord;"
and again, (Psalm xlv. 8.) "Wherefore
God Thy God hath appointed Thee;" and,
(Rom. ix. 5.) "Of Whom is Christ
according to the flesh, Who is God over
all." And in many instances you may see these
names changing their places. Besides, if they
were allotted to each nature severally, and if
the Son were not God, and God as the
Father, yet continuing a Son: after saying,
"but to us there is but One God," it would
have been superfluous, his adding the word
"Father," with a view to declare the
Unbegotten. For the word of God was
sufficient to explain this, if it were such as
to denote Him only.
And this is not all, but there is another
remark to make: that if you say, "Because it
is said 'One God,' therefore the word God
doth not apply to the Son;" observe that the
same holds of the Son also. For the Son also
is called "One Lord," yet we do not maintain
that therefore the term Lord applies to Him
alone. So then, the same force which the
expression "One" has, applied to the Son,
it has also, applied to the Father. And as
the Father is not thrust out from being the
Lord, in the same sense as the Son is the
Lord, because He, the Son, is spoken of as
one Lord; so neither does it cast out the Son
from being God, in the same sense as the
Father is God, because the Father is styled
One God.
Now if any were to say, "Why did he make no
mention of the Spirit?" our answer might be
this: His argument was with idolaters, and the
contention was about "gods many and lords
many." And this is why, having called the
Father, God, he calls the Son, Lord. If
now he ventured not to call the Father Lord
together with the Son, lest they might suspect
him to be speaking of two Lords; nor yet the
Son, God, with the Father, lest he might be
supposed to speak of two Gods: why marvel at
his not having mentioned the Spirit? His
contest was, so far, with the Gentiles: his
point, to signify that with us there is no
plurality of Gods. Wherefore he keeps hold
continually of this word, "One;" saying,
"There is no God but One; and, to us there
is One God, and One Lord." From which it
is plain, that to spare the weakness of the
hearers he used this mode of explanation, and
for this reason made no mention at all of the
Spirit. For if it be not this, neither ought
he to make mention of the Spirit elsewhere, nor
to join Him with the Father and the Son. For
if He be rejected from the Father and Son,
much more ought He not to be put in the same
rank with them in the matter of Baptism; where
most especially the dignity of the Godhead
appears and gifts are bestowed which pertain to
God alone to afford. Thus then I have
assigned the cause why in this place He is
passed over in silence. Now do thou if this be
not the true reason, tell me, why He is ranked
with Them in Baptism? But thou canst not give
any other reason but His being of equal honor.
At any rate, when he has no such constraint
upon him, he puts Him in the same rank, saying
thus: (2 Cor. xiii. 14.) "The grace
of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of
God and the Father, and the fellowship of the
Holy Ghost, be with you all:" and again,
(ch. xii 4.) "There are diversities of
gifts, but the same Spirit: and there are
diversities of administrations, but the same
Lord; and there are diversities of workings but
the same God." But because now his speech was
with Greeks and the weaker sort of the converts
from among Greeks, for this reason he husbands
it (tamieuetai) so far. And this is what the
prophets do in regard of the Son; no where
making mention of Him plainly because of the
infirmity of the hearers.
Ver. 7. "But not in all is knowledge,"
saith he. What knowledge doth be mean? about
God, or about things offered in sacrifice to
idols? For either he here glances at the
Greeks who say that there are many gods and
lords, and who know not Him that is truly
God; or at the converts from among Greeks who
were still rather infirm, such as did not yet
know clearly that they ought not to fear idols
and that "an idol is nothing in the world."
But in saying this, he gently soothes and
encourages the latter. For there was no need of
mentioning all he had to reprove, particularly
as he intended to visit them again with more
severity.
"But some being used to the idol eat as of a
thing sacrificed to an idol, and their con
science being weak is defiled." They still
tremble at idols, he saith. For tell me not of
the present establishment, and that you have
received the true religion from your ancestors.
But carry back your thoughts to those times,
and consider when the Gospel was just set on
foot, and impiety was still at its height, and
altars burning, and sacrifices and libations
offering up, and the greater part of men were
Gentiles; think, I say, of those who from
their ancestors had received impiety, and who
were the descendants of fathers and grandfathers
and great-grandfathers like themselves, and who
had suffered great miseries from the demons.
How must they have felt after their sudden
change! How would they face and tremble at the
assaults of the demons! For their sake also he
employs some reserve, saying, "But some with
conscience of the things sacrificed to an idol.
"Thus he neither exposed them openly, not to
strike them hard; nor doth he pass by them
altogether: but makes mention of them in a vague
manner, saying, "Now some with conscience of
the idol even until now eat as of a thing
sacrificed to an idol; that is, with the same
thoughts as they did in former times: 'and
their conscience being weak is defiled;'" not
yet being able to despise and once for all laugh
them to scorn, but still in some doubt. Just
as if a man were to think that by touching a dead
body he should pollute himself according to the
Jewish custom, and then seeing others touching
it with a clear conscience, but not with the
same mind touching it himself, would be
polluted. This was their state of feeling at
that time. "For some," saith he, "with
conscience of the idol do it even until now."
Not without cause did he add, "even until
now;" but to signify that they gained no ground
by their refusing to condescend. For this was
not the way to bring them in, but in some other
way persuading them by word and by teaching.
"And their conscience being weak is defiled."
No where as yet cloth he state his argument
about the nature of the thing, but turns himself
this way and that as concerning the conscience of
the person partaking. For he was afraid lest in
his wish to correct the weak person, he should
inflict a heavy blow upon the strong one, and
make him also weak. On which account he spares
the one no less than the other. Nor doth he
allow the thing itself to be thought of any
consequence, but makes his argument very full to
prevent any suspicion of the kind.
Ver. 8. "But meat doth not commend us to
God. For neither if we eat are we the better,
nor if we eat not are we the worse." Do you
see how again he takes down their high spirit?
in that, after saying that "not only they but
all of us have knowledge," and that "no one
knoweth any thing as he ought to know," and
that "knowledge puffeth up;" then having
soothed them, and said that "this knowledge is
not in all," and that "weakness is the cause
of these being defiled," in order that they
might not say, "And what is it to us, if
knowledge be not in all? Why then has not such
an one knowledge? Why is he weak?"--I
say, in order that they might not rejoin in
these terms, he did not proceed immediately to
point out clearly that for fear of the other's
harm one ought to abstain: but having first made
but a sort of: skirmish upon mention of him, he
points out what is more than this. What then is
this? That although no one were injured nor any
perversion of another ensued, not even in this
case were it right so to do. For the former
topic by itself is laboring in vain. Since he
that hears of another being hurt while himself
has the gain, is not very apt to abstain; but
then rather he doth so, when he finds out that
he himself is no way advantaged by the thing.
Wherefore he sets this down first, saying,
"But meat commendeth us not to God." See
how cheap he holds that which was accounted to
spring from perfect knowledge! "For neither if
we eat are we the better," (that is, stand
higher in God's estimation, as if we had done
any thing good or great :) "nor if we eat not
are we the worse," that is, fall in anyway
short of others. So far then he hath signified
that the thing itself is superfluous, and as
nothing. For that which being done profits
not, and which being left undone injures not,
must be superfluous.
[10.] But as he goes on, he discloses all
the harm which was likely to arise from the
matter. For the present, however, that which
befel the brethren is his subject.
Ver. 9. "For take heed," saith he,
"lest by any means this liberty of yours become
a stumbling-block to the weak among the
brethren." (tpn agelfpn not in rec. text.)
He did not say, "Your liberty is become a
stumbling-block," nor did he positively affirm
it that he might not make them more shameless;
but how? "Take heed;" frightening them, and
making them ashamed, and leading them to disavow
any such conduct. And he said not, "This
your knowledge," which would have sounded more
like praise; nor "this your perfectness;"
but, "your liberty;" a thing which seemed to
savor more of rashness and obstinacy and
arrogance. Neither said he, "To the
brethren," but, "To those of the brethren
who are weak;" enhancing his accusation from
their not even sparing the weak, and those too
their brethren. For let it be so that you
correct them not, nor arouse them: yet why trip
them up, and make them to stumble, when you
ought to stretch out the hand? but for that you
have no mind: well then, at least avoid casting
them down. Since if one were wicked, he
required punishment; if weak, healing: but now
he is not only weak, but also a brother.
Ver. 10. "For if a man see thee who hast
knowledge, sitting at meat in an idol's
temple, will not his conscience if he is weak,
be emboldened to eat things sacrificed to
idols?"
After having said, "Take heed lest this your
liberty become a stumbling-block," he explains
how and in what manner it becomes so: and he
continually employs the term "weakness," that
the mischief may not be thought to arise from the
nature of the thing, nor demons appear
formidable. As thus: "At present," saith
he, "a man is on the point of withdrawing
himself entirely from all idols; but when he
sees you fond of loitering about them, he takes
the circumstance for a recommendation and abides
there himself also. So that not only his
weakness, but also your ill-timed behavior,
helps to further the plot against him; for it is
you who make him weaker."
Ver. 11. "And through thy meat he that is
weak perisheth, the brother for whose sake
Christ died."
For there are two things which deprive you of
excuse in this mischief; one, that he is weak,
the other, that he is thy brother: rather, I
should say, there is a third also, and one more
terrible than all. What then is this? That
whereas Christ refused not even to die for him,
thou canst not bear even to accommodate thyself
to him. By these means, you see, he reminds
the perfect man also, what he too was before,
and that for him He died. And he said not,
"For whom even to die was thy duty;" but what
is much stronger, that even Christ died for his
sake. "Did thy Lord then not refuse to die
for him, and dost thou so make him of none
account as not even to abstain from a polluted
table for his sake? Yea, dost thou permit him
to perish, after the salvation so wrought,
and, what is still more grievous, 'for a
morsel of meat?'" For he said not, "for thy
perfectness," nor "for thy knowledge," but
"for thy meat."
So that the charges are four, and these
extremely heavy: that it was a brother, that he
was weak, and one of whom Christ made so much
account as even to die for him, and that after
all this for a "morsel of meat" he is
destroyed.
Ver. 12. "And thus sinning against the
brethren, and wounding their weak conscience,
ye sin against Christ."
Do you observe how quietly and gradually he hath
brought their offence up to the very summit of
iniquity? And again, he makes mention of the
infirmity of the other sort: and so, the very
thing which these considered to make for them,
that he every where turns round upon their own
head. And he said not, "Putting
stumbling-blocks in their way," but,
"wounding;" so as by the force of his
expression to indicate their cruelty. For what
can be more savage than a man who wounds the
sick? and yet no wound is so grievous as making
a man to stumble. Often, in fact, is this
also the cause of death.
But how do they "sin against Christ?" In
one way, because He considers the concerns of
His servants as His own; in another, because
those who are wounded go to make up His Body
and that which is part of Him: in a third way,
because that work of His which He built up by
His own blood, these are destroying for their
ambition's sake.
[11.] Ver. 13, "Wherefore, if meat
make my brother to stumble, I will eat no flesh
for ever." This is like the best of teachers,
to teach in his own person the things which he
speaks. Nor did he say whether justly or
unjustly; but in any case. "I say not,"
(such is his tone,) "meat offered in
sacrifice to an idol, which is already
prohibited for another reason; but if any even
of those things which are within license and are
permitted causes stumbling, from these also will
I abstain: and not one or two days, but all
the time of my life." For he saith, "I will
eat no flesh for ever." And he said not,
"Lest I destroy my brother," but simply,
"That I make not my brother to stumble."
For indeed it comes of folly in the extreme that
what things are greatly cared for by Christ,
and such as He should have even chosen to die
for them, these we should esteem so entirely
beneath our notice as not even to abstain from
meats on their account.
Now these things might be seasonably spoken not
to them only, but also to us, apt as we are to
esteem lightly the salvation of our neighbors and
to utter those satanical words. I say,
satanical: for the expression, "What care
I, though such an one stumble, and such
another perish?" savors of his cruelty and
inhuman mind. And yet in that instance, the
infirmity also of those who were offended had
some share in the result: but in our case it is
not so, sinning as we do in such a way as to
offend even the strong. For when we smite, and
raven, and overreach, and use the free as if
they were slaves, whom is not this enough to
offend? Tell me not of such a man's being a
shoemaker, another a dyer, another a brazier:
but bear in mind that he is a believer and a
brother. Why these are they whose disciples we
are; the fishermen, the publicans, the
tent-makers, of Him who was brought up in the
house of a carpenter; and who deigned to have
the carpenter's betrothed wife for a mother;
and who was laid, after His swaddling clothes,
in a manger; and who had not where to lay His
head;--of Him whose journeys were so long
that His very journeying was enough to tire Him
down; of Him who was supported by others.
[12.] Think on these things, and esteem
the pride of man to be nothing. But count the
tent-maker as well as thy brother, as him that
is borne upon a chariot and hath innumerable
servants and struts in the market-place: nay,
rather the former than the latter; since the
term brother would more naturally be used where
there is the greater resemblance. Which then
resembles the fisherman? He who is supported by
daily labor and hath neither servant nor
dwelling, but is quite beset with privations;
or that other who is surrounded with such vast
pomp, and who acts contrary to the laws of
God? Despise not then him that is more of the
two thy brother, for he comes nearer to the
Apostolic pattern.
"Not however," say you, "of his own
accord, but by compulsion; for he doeth not
this of his own mind." How comes this? Hast
thou not heard, "Judge not, that ye be not
judged?" But, to convince thyself that he
doeth it not against his inclination, approach
and give him ten thousand talents of gold, and
thou shalt see him putting it away from him.
And thus, even though he have received no
wealth by inheritance from his ancestors, yet
when it is in his power to take it, and he lets
it not come near him neither adds to his goods,
he exhibits a mighty proof of his contempt of
wealth. For so John was the son of Zebedee
that extremely poor man: yet I suppose we are
not therefore to say that his poverty was forced
upon him.
Whensoever then thou seest one driving nails,
smiting with a hammer, covered with soot, do
not therefore hold him cheap, but rather for
that reason admire him. Since even Peter
girded himself, and handled the dragnet, and
went a fishing after the Resurrection of the
Lord.
And why say I Peter? For this same Paul
himself, after his incessant runnings to and fro
and all those vast miracles, standing in a
tent-maker's shop, sewed hides together:
while angels were reverencing him and demons
trembling. And he was not ashamed to say,
(Acts xx. 34.) "Unto my necessities,
and to those who were with me, these hands
ministered." What say I, that he was not
ashamed? Yea, he gloried in this very thing.
But you will say, "Who is there now to be
compared with the virtue of Paul?" I too am
aware that there is no one, yet not on this
account are those who live now to be despised:
for if for Christ's sake thou give honor,
though one be last of all, yet if he be a
believer he shall justly be honored. For
suppose a general and a common soldier both
present themselves before you, being friends of
the king, and you open your house to both: in
which of their persons would you seem to pay most
honor to the king? Plainly in that of a
soldier. For there were in the general, beside
his loyalty to the king, many other things apt
to win such a mark of respect from you: but the
soldier had nothing else but his loyalty to the
king.
Wherefore God bade us call to our suppers and
our feasts the lame, and the maimed, and those
who cannot repay us; for these are most of all
properly called good deeds which are done for
God's sake. Whereas if thou entertain some
great and distinguished man, it is not such pure
mercy, what thou doest but some portion many
times is assigned to thyself also, both by
vain-glory, and by the return of the favor,
and by thy rising in many men's estimation on
account of thy guest. At any rate, I think I
could point out many who with this view pay court
to the more distinguished among the saints,
namely, that by their means they may enjoy a
greater intimacy with rulers, and that they may
find them thenceforth more useful in their own
affairs and to their families. And many such
favors do they ask in recompense from those
saints; a thing which mars the repayment of
their hospitality, they seeking it with such a
mind.
And why need I say this about the saints?
Since he who seeks, even from God, the reward
of his labors in the present life and follows
after virtue for this world's good, is sure to
diminish his recompense. But he that asks for
all his crowns wholly there, is found far more
admirable; like that Lazarus, who even now is
"receiving" (St. Luke xvi. 25.) there
all "his good things;" like those Three
Children, who when they were on the point of
being thrown into the furnace said, (Dan.
iii. 17, 18.) "There is a God in
heaven able to deliver us; and if not, be it
known unto thee, O king, that we serve not thy
gods, nor worship the golden image which thou
hast set up:" like Abraham, who even offered
his son and slew him; and this he did, not for
any reward, but esteeming this one thing the
greatest recompense, to obey the Lord.
These let us also imitate. For so shall we be
visited with a return of all our good deeds and
that abundantly, because we do all with such a
mind as this: so shall we obtain also the
brighter crowns. And God grant that we may all
obtain them, through the grace and
loving-kindness of our Lord Jesus Christ,
with Whom, to the Father and the Holy
Spirit, be glory, power, honor, now,
henceforth, and for everlasting ages. Amen.
|
|