Homilies on First Corinthians 3

Now I beseech you, brethren, through the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you;

but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgement.

That which I have always said—that rebukes must be administered gently and little by little—this Paul also does here.

For being about to enter upon a matter fraught with many dangers, and one able to uproot the Church from its very foundations, he employs a gentler tone in his discourse.

For he says that he beseeches them, and beseeches them through Christ, as though he himself alone were not sufficient to make this supplication and to persuade them.

And what is it, 'I beseech you through Christ'? I take Christ as my ally, and His name that has been wronged and outraged as my helper;

very reprovingly, so that they might not act shamelessly;

for sin makes men brazen.

For this reason, if you rebuke sharply at once, you make a man harsh and shameless;

but if you fill him with shame, you bend down his neck, you draw down his boldness, you make him look downward.

This too Paul is preparing, and for the present he beseeches through the name of Christ.

And what is it that he beseeches?

That ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you.

The very emphasis of the word 'division' is itself an accusation; the name alone is quite enough to lay hold of them.

For it was not that many whole parts came into being, but even the one that existed perished.

For if there had been whole Churches, there would have been many organized bodies;

but if divisions, then even the one was destroyed.

For the whole, when it is divided into many, not only does not become many, but even the one is lost.

Such is the nature of divisions.

Then, since he had touched them severely by the appellation of 'division,' he again smooths and softens it, saying:

But that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgement.

For since he had said, 'That ye all speak the same thing,' 'Do not suppose,' he says, 'that I meant the concord to consist only in words;

for it is the agreement that springs from the mind that I seek;

since it is possible to say the same thing from the mind, yet not in all matters, for this reason he added this also, 'But that ye be perfectly joined together.'

For he who is united in one thing, but at variance in another, is no longer perfectly joined, nor fully knit together into unanimity.

And it is possible, while agreeing in thoughts, still not to agree in judgement;

as, for example, when, though holding the same faith, we are not joined together according to love.

For thus, according to our thoughts we are united (for we think the same things), but according to judgement we are no longer so;

which indeed was also what happened then, one choosing this man, another that.

For this reason he says that one must agree both in mind and in judgement.

For the divisions did not arise from their being at variance in faith, but from their judgement being divided by human contentiousness.

But since the one accused, so long as he has no witnesses, behaves shamelessly, observe how, not permitting them to escape into denial, he brought forward witnesses.

For it has been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of Chloe's household.

And he did not say this at once, but first laid down the charge, which was the mark of one who trusted those who had informed him;

for if this had not been so, he would not have brought the accusation;

for Paul would not have believed it lightly.

So then he neither said at once that it had been declared to him, lest he should seem to be accusing on the strength of those men, nor did he keep silent, lest he should seem to be speaking merely of himself.

And again he names them brethren.

For even though the sin be manifest, nothing hinders him from still calling them brethren.

But observe his discernment, how he did not set down the person separately, but a whole household, so as not to arm them against him who had spoken;

for thus he both shielded that man, and freely uncovered the accusation.

For he had regard not only to their interest, but also to that of these.

'It has been declared to me by certain persons'—but he also made the household plain, so that it might not be thought that he was fabricating.

What was declared? That there are strifes among you.

When, therefore, he rebukes them, he says:

That there be no divisions among you;

but when he reports the affairs of others, he reports it more mildly, saying, 'For it has been declared to me that there are strifes among you,' so as not to bring the informants into collision.

Then he also states the kind of strife.

'I indeed am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas.'

'I do not mean strifes,' he says, 'about private matters, but the more grievous ones.'

For the corruption was preying not upon a part, but upon the whole of the Church.

And yet they were saying nothing about himself, nor about Peter, nor about Apollos;

but he shows that if one ought not to lean upon these, much more not upon others.

For to show that they were not speaking about these men, he says as he proceeds:

'These things I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos, that in us ye might learn not to think beyond what is written.'

For if it was not fitting to fasten upon themselves the names of Paul and Apollos and Cephas, much more the names of others.

If it was not right to inscribe oneself under the teacher, the first of the apostles, who had catechized so great a multitude, much more under those who were nothing.

Being eager, therefore, to draw them away from the disease with the utmost care, he sets down these names.

And in another way too he makes his discourse less burdensome, by not mentioning by name those who were dividing the Church, but concealing them, as it were, behind certain masks, under the appellations of the apostles.

'I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas.'

It was not out of preferring himself to Peter that he placed the latter last, but rather, exceedingly preferring Peter to himself.

For he advanced his discourse in an ascending order, lest he should be thought to do this out of envy and to be robbing them of their honor through spite.

For this reason he also placed himself first.

For he who first rejects himself does this not from any love of honor, but from utterly despising such glory.

He himself, then, receives the whole brunt of the assault, and only then does he place Apollos, and only then Cephas.

It was not, therefore, to exalt himself that he did this, but in matters where it was not right for such things to happen, he makes the correction first through his own person.

But that those who assigned themselves to this one and to that one were sinning, is plain.

And he rightly rebuked them, saying that 'You do not well in saying,'

'I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas.'

But for what reason did he add, 'And I of Christ'? For if those who assigned themselves to men were sinning, surely those too who dedicated themselves to Christ were not.

But he was not charging them with this, that they were fastening the name of Christ upon themselves, but that not all did so alone.

But I think that he added this also from himself, wishing to make the accusation weightier, and thus to show that Christ too was being given over to a single portion, even though those men were not doing this in that manner.

For that he was hinting at this, he made plain by what follows, saying,

'Is Christ divided?' Now what he means is this:

You have cut Christ in pieces and divided His body.

Do you see the indignation, do you see the rebuke, do you see the words full of displeasure? For when he does not argue a point but only asks a question, he does this as though the absurdity were already granted.

But some say that he was hinting at something else too by saying this,

namely, that he distributed among men and portioned out the Church, taking one share for himself and giving the other to those men.

Then he proceeds to the destruction of the absurdity, saying,

'Was Paul crucified for you, or were you baptized in the name of Paul?' Behold a mind that loves Christ, how he now refers the whole matter to his own name, showing abundantly that this honor belongs to no one.

And lest he should seem to be saying these things moved by envy, on this account he continually turns the matter back upon himself.

For he did not say, Did Paul make the world? Did Paul bring you from non-being into being? but he sets down only those things that were the special privileges of believers and of great care for them—the cross and baptism, and the good things that come from these.

For the creation of the world also shows the love of God toward man, but most of all the condescension through the cross.

And he did not say, Did Paul die for you? but, Was Paul crucified?—setting down also the manner of the death.

'Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?' And he did not say, Did Paul baptize you? for he did baptize many;

but this was not the point in question, by whom they were baptized, but into whose name they were baptized.

For since this also became a cause of divisions, namely being called after those who baptized, he corrects this too, saying, Were you baptized in the name of Paul? For do not say, he means, Who baptized? but, Into whose name? For it is not the one who baptized, but the one into whom the baptism is called, that is sought;

for it is He who forgives sins.

And having stopped his discourse at this point, he does not go on to what follows.

For he does not say, Did Paul promise you the good things to come? Did Paul promise you the kingdom of heaven? Why then does he not add these things too? Because it is not the same thing to promise a kingdom and to be crucified.

For the former carried neither danger nor shame;

and in another way too he establishes those things from these.

For having said, 'He who spared not His own Son,' he added, 'How shall He not also with Him freely give us all things?' and again, 'For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved.'

For this reason he did not add those things;

and because the one set of things they did not yet possess, but of the other they had already had experience, and the one lay in promises, while the other had already come to pass.

'I thank God that I baptized none of you, except Crispus and Gaius.'

Why do you think highly of yourselves over baptizing, when I even give thanks that I did not do this? And in saying these things he takes down the swelling pride over this in a considerate manner—not the power of baptism, God forbid, but the arrogance of those who thought highly of themselves for baptizing: first by showing that the gift is not theirs, and second by giving thanks to God on this account.

For great indeed is baptism, but it is not the one who baptizes that makes it great, but the one who is called into baptism;

since to baptize is nothing so far as human labor is concerned, but far less than to preach the gospel.

For great indeed is baptism, I say again, and without baptism it is impossible to obtain the kingdom;

but even a man not very distinguished is able to perform it, whereas the other—

to preach the gospel requires much labor.

And he states also the reason why he gives thanks that he baptized no one.

What then is this? 'Lest anyone should say,' he says, 'that you were baptized into my name.'

What then? Was he saying this concerning those men? By no means;

but 'I fear,' he says, 'lest the disease should advance even to this.'

For if, when men of no account and worthy of no mention were baptizing, a heresy arose, if I, who proclaimed baptism, had baptized many, it would likely be that they, forming factions, would not only be called after my name, but would also fasten the baptism itself upon me.

For if from lesser causes so great an evil arose, perhaps it would have advanced to something far more grievous from the greater.

Having therefore put to shame those who were corrupted in this way, and having added, 'And I baptized also the household of Stephanas,' he again draws down their conceit, saying,

'For the rest, I do not know whether I baptized any other.'

For from this he shows that it was not a matter of eager concern to him to enjoy the honor arising from this at the hands of the many, nor did he come to this for the sake of glory.

And not by these things only, but also by what follows, he greatly abates their inflammation, saying,

'For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel.'

For that which was more laborious and required much toil and a soul of iron, and which held all things together—this was it.

Wherefore Paul too was entrusted with it.

And why, though not sent to baptize, did he baptize? Not in contention with Him who sent him, but doing this out of superabundance.

For he did not say that 'I was forbidden,' but that 'I was not sent for this, but for the most necessary thing.'

For to preach the gospel belongs perhaps to one or two, but to baptize belongs to everyone who possesses the priesthood.

For to take a man who has been catechized and persuaded and to baptize him belongs to anyone whatsoever;

for the choice of the one who approaches henceforth accomplishes the whole, together with the grace of God;

but when unbelievers must be catechized, there is need of much labor, much wisdom;

and then there was also danger attached.

For there the whole thing has been accomplished, and the one about to be initiated has been persuaded, and it is no great matter to baptize one who has been persuaded;

but here there is much labor, so as to change a person's resolve, and to transfer his judgment, and to prise up error, and to plant in the truth.

But he does not say these things in this way, nor does he argue and assert that to baptize involves no labor, but to preach the gospel does;

But in the comparison with the wisdom that is from without he strains vehemently, where he could have employed language more forcibly disparaging.

It was not, then, in opposition to Him who sent him that he baptized;

but just as in the case of the widows, when the apostles said, 'It is not fitting that we should leave the word of God and serve tables,' yet he ministered—not in opposition to those men, but doing so out of his abundance;

since even now we entrust this task to the simpler of the presbyters, but assign the work of teaching by word to the wiser;

for it is there that the toil and the sweat lie.

'Let the presbyters who rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially those who labour in word and teaching.'

For just as to instruct the wrestlers belongs to a noble man and a skilful trainer, but to place the crown upon the victor belongs even to one unable to wrestle—though indeed the crown makes the victor more illustrious;

so also is it in the case of baptism;

for it is indeed impossible to be saved without it, yet he who baptizes does nothing great, since he receives a purpose already prepared.

'Not in wisdom of word, lest the cross of Christ be made void.'

Having brought down the pride of those who thought highly of themselves because of baptizing, he now shifts over against those who boasted in the wisdom that is from without, and arms himself against them more vehemently.

For against those puffed up over baptizing he said, 'I thank God that I baptized none of you,' and 'Christ sent me not to baptize;'

and he used language neither vehement nor elaborate, but having hinted in few words at what he wished, he passed on;

but here from the very outset he deals a grievous blow, saying,

'Lest the cross of Christ be made void.'

Why then dost thou pride thyself on that for which thou oughtest rather to hide thy face? For if

this wisdom wars against the cross and fights against the Gospels, one ought not to boast in it, but rather to sink out of sight for shame.

For this was the reason that the apostles were not made wise—not from any weakness of the gift, but that the preaching might not be injured.

It was not, then, those men who were establishing the word, but rather even marring it;

whereas the unlearned were the ones confirming it.

This it is that knows how to chasten arrogance, this to allay inflammation, this to persuade a man to be moderate.

And if it be 'not in wisdom of word,' why then, one asks, did they send Apollos, who was an eloquent man? Not because they trusted in the power of words, but because he was mighty in the Scriptures, and confuted the Jews.

And besides, the point at issue was that those who took the lead and began to sow the word should not be eloquent men.

For these were the ones who had need of much power, so as to thrust away error from the very outset; and then, at the very entrance itself, much strength was required against it.

He, then, who at the outset had no need of well-instructed men, if afterwards he received eloquent ones, did this not as needing them, but as not discriminating against them.

For just as He had no need of wise men to accomplish what He wished, so neither did He cast out those who were afterwards found, on that account.

But do thou show me this—whether Peter was eloquent, and Paul;

for they were unlearned men, and without letters.

Just as Christ, therefore, when He sent the disciples into the world, having first shown them His power in Palestine, and having said, 'When I sent you without purse and scrip and shoe, did ye lack anything?' then at length permitted them to have both scrip and purse;

for the point at issue was that the power of Christ should be displayed, not that those who came should be excluded from the faith on account of the wisdom that is from without.

Whenever, therefore, the Greeks accuse the disciples of being unlearned, let us accuse them of it yet more than they do.

And let no one say that Paul was a wise man;

but exalting on the score of wisdom those who are great among them and those admired for eloquence, let us declare that all among us were mere unlearned men.

For not in a small degree shall we in this respect also cast them down;

for thus will the trophies of victory be illustrious.

These things I have said because I once heard a certain Christian conversing ridiculously with a Greek, and both in their mutual contest overthrowing their own positions.

For the things the Christian ought to have said, these the Greek was saying;

and the things which it would have been fitting for the Greek to say, these the Christian put forward.

For the inquiry being concerning Paul and Plato, the Greek was endeavouring to show that Paul was ignorant and unlearned;

while the Christian, out of simplicity, was zealously endeavouring to make out that Paul was more eloquent than Plato.

And thus the victory fell to the Greek, this argument prevailing.

For if Paul were more eloquent than Plato, many would probably contend that he prevailed not by grace but by eloquence.

So that what was said by the Christian told in favour of the Greek;

and what the Greek said told in favour of the Christian.

For if Paul was uneducated, and yet prevailed over Plato, as they were saying, the victory has become illustrious.

For the unlearned man, taking that other's disciples, persuaded them all, and drew them over to himself.

Whence it is plain that not in human wisdom did the preaching prevail, but by the grace of God.

In order, then, that we may not suffer the same things, nor be laughed at for conversing thus with the Greeks, whenever we have a contest with them let us accuse the apostles of being unlearned;

for this accusation is a praise.

And whenever they say that the apostles were rustics, let us add on our part, and say that they were also unlearned and unlettered and poor and mean and unintelligent and obscure.

This is no blasphemy against the apostles, but even glory, that such men should appear more illustrious than the whole world.

For these unlearned and rustic and untaught men so overcame the wise and the powerful and the tyrants, and those who boasted in wealth and glory and all outward things, as though they were not even men.

Whence it is plain that great is the power of the cross, and that these things came to pass not by human strength.

For the things that came to pass had not the nature of ordinary things, but were above nature.

And whenever anything comes to pass above nature, and above nature by far, together with what is fitting and profitable, it is quite evident that these things come about by some divine power and co-operation.

The fisherman, the tentmaker, the tax-collector, the unlearned, the unlettered, coming from Palestine, a land lying far off, thrust away from their own homelands all the philosophers, the orators, the men skilled in speech, and themselves prevailed over these in a brief span of time amid many perils—with peoples and kings resisting, with nature herself fighting against them, with time's long-established custom and deep-rooted habit vehemently wrestling in opposition, with demons in arms, with the devil marshalled in battle-array and stirring up all things—kings, rulers, peoples, nations, cities, barbarians, Greeks, philosophers, orators, sophists, historians, laws, courts of justice, tortures of every kind, deaths ten thousandfold and of every sort.

And yet all these things were thus refuted and gave way at the voice of the fishermen, like fine dust unable to withstand the onset of mighty winds.

Let us learn, then, to converse with the Greeks in this way, that we may not be as beasts of the field and cattle, but may be prepared concerning the hope that is in us.

And for the present let us practise this head, which is no small one, and let us say to them:

Whence did the weak prevail over the strong, the twelve over the whole world, using not the same weapons, but fighting naked against men in armour? (5)

For tell me: if twelve men inexperienced in warlike affairs, leaping into a countless and armed battle-line of soldiers, being not only unarmed but also weak in body, suffered nothing at their hands, nor were wounded though pelted by ten thousand darts, but having the darts fixed fast in their naked bodies struck all down, using no weapons but smiting with the hand, and then slew some and led others away captive, themselves not even receiving wounds—would anyone say that what happened was of man? And yet the trophy of the apostles is far more marvellous than that.

For far more paradoxical than that a naked man should not be wounded is that the unlearned and unlettered fisherman should prevail over so great a formidableness, and be hindered neither by his fewness, nor by his poverty, nor by the dangers, nor by the custom which had prepossessed men beforehand, nor by the great austerity of the things which they enjoined, nor by the daily deaths, nor by the multitude of those deceived, nor by the dignity of the deceivers.

In this way, then, let us cast them down, and fight against those men, and, before our words, strike them with awe through our manner of life.

For this is the great battle, this is the irrefutable syllogism—the one that is through deeds;

since even though we philosophize ten thousand things by words, yet if we do not present a life better than theirs, the gain is nothing.

For they attend not to the things spoken, but scrutinize the things we do, and they say:

'Do thou first obey thine own words, and then exhort others.'

But if thou sayest that there are ten thousand good things in the world to come, yet appear so nailed to things present as though they had no being, thy works are more to be believed by me than thy words.

For whenever I see thee snatching the goods of others, mourning immoderately over the departed, committing many other transgressions, how shall I believe thee that there is a resurrection? For even though they say not these things, yet they think them, and revolve them in their mind.

And this is what hinders the unbelievers from becoming Christians.

Let us therefore win them over through our own manner of life.

Many men, even untrained and unlearned, have so confounded the understanding of the philosophers, precisely by displaying the philosophy that consists in deeds, and by sending forth through their conduct and their wisdom a sound more resplendent than any trumpet;

for this is mightier than the tongue.

But when I say that one ought not to bear a grudge, and then I do the Greek countless injuries, how shall I be able to lead him in by my words, while I drive him away by my deeds? Let us therefore hunt them by our manner of life, and by our souls;

of these let us build up the Church, and of these let us gather together our wealth.

There is nothing of equal worth to a soul, not even the whole world.

So that even if you should give countless sums of money to the poor, you will accomplish nothing so great as he who turns back a single soul.

For 'he that brings forth the precious out of the vile shall be as my mouth,' says the Lord.

For to have mercy on the needy is indeed a great good;

yet there is nothing so great as to deliver a man from error;

for he who does this becomes like Paul and Peter.

For it is possible for us to take up their preaching—not that we should face perils as they did, and endure famines and pestilences and the rest (for the present time is one of peace), but that we may display the zeal that comes from a ready will.

For it is possible even while sitting at home to carry on this fishing.

If anyone has a friend, or a kinsman, or a member of his household, let him do these things, let him say these things;

and he shall be like Peter and Paul.

And why do I speak of Peter and Paul? He shall be the mouth of Christ;

for 'he that brings forth the precious out of the vile shall be as my mouth,' says the Lord.

Even if you do not persuade him today, you will persuade him tomorrow;

and even if you never persuade him, you will have your reward complete;

and even if you do not persuade all, out of many you will be able to win a few;

since even the apostles did not persuade all the men who were, yet nonetheless they discoursed to all, and they have the reward that is over all.

For God is wont to appoint the crowns, not according to the outcome of the good deeds accomplished, but according to the purpose of those who accomplish them.

Even if you cast in but two mites, He accepts it;

and what He did in the case of the widow, this also He does in the case of those who teach.

Do not therefore, because you cannot save the whole world, despise even the few; nor by the longing for great things drag yourself away from the small.

Even if you cannot win a hundred, take care of the ten;

and even if you cannot win ten, do not despise even the five;

and even if you cannot win five, do not overlook the one;

and even if you cannot win the one, do not even so lose heart, nor withhold what lies in your own power.

Do you not see that in commercial dealings too, those who are occupied in such matters make their profits not only from gold but also from silver? For if we do not yet despise the small things, we shall lay hold also of the great;

but if we overlook the small things, neither shall we easily lay hold of those great ones.

Thus each man becomes rich, gathering together both small things and great;

so let us also do, that being rich in all things we may attain the kingdom of heaven, through the grace and loving-kindness of our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom and with whom to the Father, together with the Holy Spirit, be glory, might, and honor, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.