in epistulam i ad Corinthios

He did not set this forth without purpose, but to show that it is God's will that all be called from Christ and that they be apostles. At the same time, as one well known to the Corinthians, he associates himself with them, and he checks the pride of those puffed up over eloquence. He joins together the division that had come about badly, calling them one church and God's; and he sets it forth in Christ Jesus, not in this man and that man. One must consider how in a few words he often mentions Christ Jesus, teaching from the very prefaces that it is fitting to be named from no other than our Lord Jesus Christ, and healing the wound from the divisions caused by different appellations by the constant remembrance of Jesus Christ. To those sanctified in Christ Jesus. It was not a man, he says, who sanctified you, but God in Christ. For if, he says, you call upon a man, be called from him; but if you call upon Jesus Christ, be named from him whom you call upon. And well does he say with all those who call upon him; for you are not alone, but all who believe everywhere call upon Christ and are named from him, not from men. Do not, then, be the only ones to introduce a strange and impious novelty. And he did not say with all who call the name, but with those who call upon him, showing the Son of God to be God; for one calls upon God. In every place, both theirs and ours. If every place is one that calls upon Jesus Christ, imitate the many, and do not alone do something strange beyond others. And the phrase both theirs and ours is joined to the Lord, meaning that both we who write and you who enjoy the writings have one Christ Jesus.

From him you have grace and peace; from him you are named. For the positions of these things, when received even before the preparation and the training of the contests, lead to the matter under inquiry. And this contributes no less to the correction of the matters at hand. For if grace is from our Lord Jesus Christ and not from men, it is fitting, he says, to be named from him. He persists in the same point. For if wealth is from him, if knowledge is from him, why do you attach to yourselves the name of one as a teacher, of another as a baptizer, of another as a leader, of another as a provider? Therefore, proceeding, he says: For what do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as though you did not receive it? In every word. Since there is a word of wisdom and a word of knowledge and many words of charisms, for this reason he says: in every word and all knowledge. Since there are also many distinctions of knowledge, and in all knowledge. It was written to Greeks who did not receive the old and the new together and who acquire knowledge from both sides: just as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you. Those who need confirmation are already imperfect. Therefore he showed that they need correction, giving thanks for what they received, but correcting what they did not fulfill. God is faithful through whom you were called. Since he said, God will confirm, he added: God is faithful—for God is true, who is able to provide these things—through whom you were called into fellowship of his Son, not into fellowship of a man, but into fellowship of his Son. Why, having abandoned being named from the Son into whose fellowship you were called, are you named from men?

But again, the phrase “through whom” is placed in relation to the Father, not only in relation to the Son. And it is no diminution of the Father, since it is through him that we are called into fellowship with his Son. For neither is it written in the letter to the Romans that “through him and from him and to him are all things,” so that God, on the one hand because of the “from whom,” is greater than himself, and on the other because of the “through whom,” is less than himself. Just as these things, then, being predicated of the same person, do not make the same person less and greater than himself, so neither does the “through whom” spoken of him diminish the Son. When he came to the contest itself, so as to persuade them not to be named after men, from the very beginning of the contests he makes mention of the name of Jesus Christ, from which all ought to be called. What is now said is not about doctrines, nor does he reproach them about this, but about what we have already stated, and he shows what follows. “Does Christ,” he says, “have co-heirs with those among whom he divided you who believe?” For he did not say, “Was Christ divided?” but, “Did Christ divide with you?” And the inference shows this; for he says: “Was Paul crucified for us?” Christ died for the salvation of the world, but none of us did. From this he shows that some wished to be named after the one who baptized them. This good thing, which the Savior also commanded and which brings salvation—he says—became a burden to me, if you were going to be called after me, the one who baptized. But how shall we understand “Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel”? Since even one who is not an apostle baptizes, but few had the dignity of apostleship, and without preaching and being baptized it was not possible to be baptized, he says:

I was sent to evangelize; for this is the primary thing, not to baptize. Therefore what is omitted here is “primarily”: I was not sent to baptize. So too elsewhere, when he says, “Does God not care about oxen?” Not because he does not care—for in the law Moses speaks about oxen, truly about those who serve farmers. And David also says, “You will save humans and cattle, Lord, as you have multiplied your mercy, O God.” And Solomon also says, “A righteous man has compassion on the souls of his cattle”—and how much more does God? But what does he say? What is it? That primarily God does not care about oxen. And here too it is by ellipsis, as also “Christ did not send me to baptize.” 228 1 Moving on to another accusation and coming to another correction, not having set aside the first entirely, he has used the second as a preface; for “Christ did not send me to baptize” belonged to the first accusation—the one that each of you says, “I am of Paul, and I of Apollos”—while “not in wisdom of word” belongs to the beginning of another arrangement. He has therefore placed “to evangelize” as the end of the first matter and the beginning of the second. So that the cross of Christ not be emptied. For if the proclamation is ascribed to human understanding and learning, the power of the cross is not shown. The word of the cross. He does not mean the utterance nor the pronunciation, but the power; for the deed appears to be weak, but the cause, when sought, is shown to be a great mystery. But to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

Since some wish to take “Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God” as referring to the word of God, it must be observed from this point that he calls the word of the cross the power of God. For it is written: I will destroy the wisdom of the wise. Even if the apostle is trustworthy when he teaches on his own authority—for he had Christ speaking within him—nevertheless he also makes use of the testimony of the old covenant, producing a stronger assurance for his disciples. And having used the testimony, “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,” he then proceeds as though the matter were already agreed, saying: Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? The wise man of the Greeks, and the scribe of the Jews. He mentions two kinds of wisdom: one, the harmony observed in created things; the other, the wisdom by which men, being rational, are found to be prudent. Since, then, he says, through the understanding that is present in us we did not know God, nor through the wisdom observed in created things, God was pleased through the foolishness of the preaching to save those who believe. What he says is great, though it is not shown to those who merely skim past it; for in this way he demonstrates what is possible and all-wise in God. The greatness and beauty of the world, he says, being immeasurable and unattainable, did not persuade you to know God, but you abandoned the Maker and worshiped those things through which you ought to have known their Maker. God, showing you of his own

the surpassing greatness of power—those whom creation did not persuade but even struck—he enlightened the world through the acknowledged weakness of the cross. For demonstrating the absurdity of those who have confidence in eloquence and think to adorn piety through fine speaking, he says that not only should one not answer the Greeks when they seek wisdom, but neither should one give signs to the Jews when they ask. And indeed the signs belong to the Spirit, but the wisdom of words belongs to external education. But if it was not fitting to give even the wonders of the Spirit to those who ask, how much less the things of external wisdom—for they do not give to those who test, but to those who ask in faith—yet the word has been cast out entirely as plotting against the glory of the cross. But we proclaim Christ crucified, and the rest. Clearly he says that Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God according to the word of the cross, as above: for the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. And the following words show this more clearly; for after saying, “to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God,” he added: “because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.” But who could say that the divine Word was called the weakness of God, and that what is said about Christ crucified is the foolishness of God?

God the Word is powerful as the Father, not a power that is a complementary part of the Father's essence, and likewise wise. For since what the visible creation could not accomplish—neither angels nor archangels descending from heaven, patriarchs and prophets, the law given through Moses, the voices carried from the midst of the fire to the people—because of the unwillingness of those who were disobedient, this the foolishness of the cross accomplished. For this reason Christ crucified is God's power and God's wisdom, more effective than the whole economy and more trustworthy than all creation. And this too is the power of him who ordered and accomplished it, in that he saved human beings by nothing and led them to faith in him. Since the Jews test the Spirit of God, but he grants to those who believe, nor indeed must one answer the Greeks who think to adorn piety by their eloquence, then he teaches how the proclamation seems to be foolishness: for those seek signs and wisdom, but we proclaim Christ crucified, God's power and wisdom, and from the crucified one we promise salvation to those who believe. One must not say that the weakness of God refers to God the Word, but to the cross of Christ; for the Word is powerful as the Father, not a power as a part completing the Father's essence. And so too the Son is wise as the Father.

But since what angels could not accomplish, nor law, nor prophets—because God permitted the will of the disobedient—this the apparent foolishness of the cross accomplished: Christ crucified is proclaimed as God's power and wisdom, having shown himself stronger and more effectual and having saved those who believe. He added "according to the flesh" to distinguish it from the spirit, and likewise the following phrases, applying them in common. "That no flesh may boast before him"—that is, so that they might not ascribe the success of the preaching to their own advantages. And he said "flesh" and not "soul," disparaging human boasts. And why "before him" and not "before men"? Because boasting in God was set against boasting in our own advantages; for what they ought to have ascribed to God, they ascribed to men. For this reason he said "before him"; for the boast was impious, being made before the one who sees all things. And that he did not say "before him" in reference to his presence, the whole argument shows; for he is speaking of those who boast in words and boast in baptizing, and he makes his argument about certain other things as well. "And you are from him." All alike say that this is now said with respect to being saved, not with respect to the principle of creation, as he says elsewhere: "who are not from

not of bloods nor of the will of the flesh, but were born of God. If, then, they are from him, how shall we boast in our own advantages? But the "in Christ Jesus," who became for us wisdom and sanctification and redemption: not the wisdom of men saved—for it was led astray—but he himself became wisdom for us unto the knowledge of God; not the understanding of men snatched us away, but Jesus crucified. Not men redeemed, so that the boast should be from the one who saved, not from those who were saved. I was always afraid lest you be puffed up by external learning; for this reason I did not use persuasive wisdom. "In weakness," he says, "from persecutions"—for this is his custom everywhere, to say—"in weakness and in fear and in trembling," the weakness from the things for which I was persecuted. I displayed the fear and the trembling concerning you; I was humble in all things, so that you might be taught by this and not be puffed up. Since he said, "my word," lest it seem that he sets the opposite alongside it—that is, eloquence—he says: "and my preaching was not in persuasive words of wisdom," since there is a wisdom not of words but of divine knowledge, of spirit and power. For since it also supplies a word of wisdom, and the Holy Spirit also works miracles, he said, "in demonstration of spirit and power"; for what is merely spoken is not yet a demonstration, but the miracle has the demonstration. He shows that he did not preach trusting in any human power; for he was in weakness and fear and trembling and such things, as one who was in persecutions and afflictions.

For since by speaking alone he would have surpassed none of those who relied on wisdom and trusted in their own eloquence, but by performing mighty works he showed the power of God, and from that source came the preaching, he rightly added: but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, so that your faith might not be in the wisdom of men but in the power of God. This means not in those who are eloquent, but in those who are perfect in godliness. He said "in those who are perfect," yet not "to those who are perfect," because one who speaks to just anyone often meets with contradiction, whereas one who introduces the saving word to the perfect and devout, as it were depositing and treasuring up his words in their souls, does not speak [to them in the same way]. If it had been hidden, it is clear that discovering it was not a matter of human reasoning, but truly it was God's to reveal. And the proof of their not understanding is equivalent to saying: for if they had known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. He calls "rulers" those around Pilate and Herod, and "Lord of glory" the God who became flesh. This citation is not found in these exact words in the Old Testament, but in other expressions conveying the same meaning; for Isaiah says: Lord, who has believed our report? And to whom was the arm of the Lord revealed? And who will declare his generation? And Moses: the hidden things belong to the Lord God. But what is hidden from God—clearly it escaped both eye and heart. One must not, however, think that God without judgment revealed the mystery to some and allowed others to perish in ignorance, but one must know and be persuaded that by his foreknowing power he measured out to each according to worth what was beneficial and provided it.

For he foreknows each person's choice even before he comes to be. He called the depths of God his deepest and most hidden dispensations that escape us. By these words he shows that he searches, not as one who is ignorant but as one who knows. But since some now say that the Father was meant by "the Spirit," and others the Son, one must speak to both views. It is impossible that the Father was meant; for he says, "We did not receive the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is from God," and no one is from himself; for if this had been said of God, from whom is God? That the Son is suspected is admissible, but that he is the one of whom the word speaks is not possible; for who would say that the Word of God searches in order to learn the things of God? And if they should say that the Son is taught, how did they not understand from what follows that just as the spirit of a man knows the things in him, so also the Spirit of God. Apart from this, throughout the whole passage the Holy Spirit is shown. But one must observe that he says the Holy Spirit is from God, whereas he did not say the unclean spirit was from the world but of the world; for the one...

The Paraclete is not a part of God, just as the devil, in respect of his having come to be, is a part of creation. But the Holy Spirit is from God. Not so as to show that, just as our spirit within us is greater than we are, so also the Spirit within God is greater than he—he says this at once: "For who among men knows the things of a man except the spirit that is in him?" But what is "the things that are of God"? For the one within him is a part that completes the whole man, but the other, being from him, he shows to be the cause. And it must be observed that God and the Holy Spirit are two persons, but a man and the spirit within him are not two persons but one man. Therefore, demonstrating the exact identity of the knowledge of the Father and the Spirit, he compared the knowledge of the spirit within us to the knowledge of the Father and the Spirit, so that it might be shown that, just as in us, in the one and the same spirit—that is, in the soul and the mind—there is no discord of unity, but we know what we know, so also in the Father and the Holy Spirit there is no discord of knowledge but identity. "So that we may know the things graciously given to us by God," the Spirit having given them, the mind having grasped them. "Which things we also speak." Again he shows something else: not only, he says, do we not find in our reasonings the things revealed to us, but we also proclaim them, not adorning them with words but comparing spiritual things with spiritual things, understanding that one's revelations by the power of the Spirit and proclaiming them in order. "Comparing spiritual things with spiritual things.

For when the second revelation is an interpretation and clarification of the first, those who receive the revelations, comparing the second with the first and finding them the same, gained greater assurance of the truth revealed. God and the Holy Spirit are two persons, but a man and the spirit within him are not two persons but one man. But this is what he means: just as in a man there is no disagreement of knowledge, so also in the case of the Father and the Spirit the knowledge is one, so that in this respect the Spirit would not have searched as though ignorant. Then again, in the case of man he said "the spirit within him," but in the case of the Holy Spirit he did not say "the spirit in God" but "the spirit from God." And there is a great difference between "in him" and "from God": for what is in him is a constituent part of the whole man, whereas what is from him shows the cause. Accurately did he call the Holy Spirit "from God" as a living and subsistent substance, but the unclean spirit of the world as a constituent part of its substance; for the devil is a part of creation in respect of his having come to be. Nevertheless, we do not find by our reasonings how to embellish the things revealed to us, but we compare spiritual things with spiritual, whenever the second revelation becomes an interpretation and clarification of the first teaching or vision or miracle; for the second are compared with the first and are found the same. We receive the greatest assurance of the truth from their agreement. And this too the phrase "comparing" makes clear—by way of contrast—and this too "distinguishing" and "separating"; but the former is better. The natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit.

He calls "psychic" the one who follows his own reasonings. For to him it is foolishness. So great is the depth of the spiritual revelation that it appears as foolishness to the wise of this world; thus the revelation of God is incomprehensible to them. For the grace of the Holy Spirit, displaying its power, refuted the skilled man—not skillfully, but by the strength of the wonders. The spiritual do not overturn reasonings with reasonings, but receiving the mind from God and the revelation from there, they converse, so that the one who opposes does not refute reasonings, but opposes the knowledge of God. Therefore he says: For who has known the mind of the Lord, who will instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ, that is, the knowledge. He calls "psychic" the one who follows his own reasonings, or the one who is sick in the reasonings of the soul and not strong in the knowledge of the truth, just as he also calls "fleshly" the one who is sick regarding fleshly desires and a slave of pleasures. Thus, then, the psychic man cannot be receptive of the truth, but his soul has been so corrupted as to regard the dispensation of God and grace as foolishness. And he is not able to know that he is judged spiritually. The psychic man, seeking skillful reasonings, rejects the preaching of the cross as foolish and disobedient, and not looking to the wonders of the Spirit, he can no longer understand, because he opposes the truth, being refuted by the power and wonderworking of the Spirit; for "he is judged" signifies "he is refuted precisely and exactly.

But the spiritual man, who has obtained the Spirit through the signs he shows, refutes all the things that are wrongly refuted by others, while he himself is refuted by no one. Then, confirming his word, he sets forth the things from the old covenant and says: "He will instruct; he will correct." We have the mind of Christ, our God. But if men cannot grasp to know the mind of God, then neither can they know ours—we who have the mind and wisdom of God. The unbelievers follow miracles more; therefore I spoke a word to you, yet not the perfect wisdom that is hidden, the economy concerning the passion, which only the perfect, believing, receive. Further, the teaching concerning moral matters and believing through signs he calls "milk" figuratively, and "food" the proclamation of divine doctrines. But "milk" can also be the light commandments—honor father and mother, and you shall not commit adultery, and the like, and "come, follow me." Then, having said, "You are fleshly, and walk according to man," he means this: you honor the things among men and do not seek the things of God. Instead of "equal in ministry." Some things were said by him as concerning farming, others as concerning building. But he said that he planted and gave the beginning and laid a foundation of God. He exhorts those who build after him upon the foundation, so that they do not make the building carelessly. He calls the foundation the faith and the proclamation. Christ is not said to be the foundation of creation, as the Arians falsely insist, but of the faith; for Christ was proclaimed, and the whole building is upon this foundation.

And those who teach proclaim one faith and announce the gospel way of life, but it is up to us to make ourselves either precious stones or wood or hay or stubble. When, then, he says, "But let each one see how he builds upon it," not according to his life, but according to what? "For no one can lay any other foundation besides the one that is laid." The one who teaches proclaims Christ and gives his commandments; thereafter it remains to become like either gold through purity, or hay through weakness. If, then, he commands that "each one should see" and the rest, it is directed at those who wish to be named after those who baptize or teach. If anyone's work remains, which he built upon it, you see that the one who builds builds well; but that work does not remain when his intention changes at times to something worse. If anyone's work will be burned up, he will suffer loss, but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire. This is a hyperbaton; for it must be read thus: if anyone's work will be burned up, he will suffer loss, yet so as through fire—instead of: thus he will be burned up and suffer loss as through fire, but he himself will be saved; for the turning toward the worse did not come about by his own doing. It has been said by hyperbaton, so that it means thus: if anyone's work remains, he will receive a reward, and he himself will be saved. If anyone's work is burned up, he will suffer loss and will be burned up as through fire. But how will he himself be saved, if his work which he built is burned up? Thus, as through fire, while he is being judged, lest he has omitted any of the things that lead to correction or to the reminder of those who sin, according to Ezekiel. Again he turns to those who are confident in their own wisdom.

That he calls the believers temples of God, and says that whoever destroys the temple of God—those who take confidence in words—the following words will make clear. If anyone seems to be wise among you in this age, let him become foolish. Why, then, does the one who trusts in outward wisdom destroy the temple? If you are a temple of God, you ought to have him as your teacher and revealer; but if you abandon the one who dwells in you and rely on your own understanding, you no longer make the temple a temple but destroy it. If anyone seems to be wise among you—referring to those who are struck and harmed by outward learning; for he made the distinction by saying "among you." Those who have been instructed and have received the word of knowledge within themselves and have not been shaken from the teaching, he calls temples of the Holy Spirit and immovable houses of the Spirit who dwells in them; but those who have done something worthy of the Spirit's working, these he calls spiritual, just as we call those rhetorical and skilled who have made a display of their craft and rhetoric. Those, then, who accept another teaching from outward wisdom—these have destroyed their own reasoning, adulterating the faith, the temple of the Spirit. Therefore he threatens that they will be destroyed by God, because, abandoning the teacher who dwells in them, they have wandered off after outward wisdom, which is sufficient as provision for deception. By these words he forbids the wisdom of this world, which is sufficient for deception, and he made a distinction for those struck by the rebuke. Having commanded them not to accept outward wisdom, he teaches them not to boast in wise men either.

For this boasting is of little account, since all things are yours, and the apostles—for they were sent for the sake of those who are benefited—and the world is yours, for whose sake it was made for enjoyment, and life is yours as of those being saved, and death—for if the things of death were not fearful, the things of the life to come would not have been preferred—for by the same reasoning both things present and things to come have been spoken of; for those who despise things present as temporary obtain the things to come. All things, then, that have been said before are yours, because you also have become Christ's, and those who are closely joined to Christ are pleasing to God. All things are under you. How and in what manner? Because you also have become Christ's, and in order to show that those who are closely joined to Christ are pleasing to God, he added: And Christ is God's. It is enough for us to be honored as servants of Christ, but for some to be named after us is burdensome. You see us as servants of God, but do not you yourselves seek who is a faithful servant—for this is put at risk among you—and it is not fitting for teachers to be judged by their disciples. But why does he say these things? Because he perceived that some of the teachers were being honored though unworthy, while the worthy were being overlooked, whence he also foresaw that schisms would arise among them. Therefore he also reproaches them more sharply, hastening to restrain the passion. But so that he may not seem, as though despised, to be saying these things out of arrogance, he says almost this very thing: do not suppose that I am sending these things on my own behalf; for I do not conduct myself in such a way as to be examined by you; for I consider this unworthy, both in relation to you and to every man.

He calls man a human day, revealing the temporary and ephemeral nature of human life. Then, since it seems a great thing to say, "I am conscious of nothing against myself," he added, "but I am not thereby justified"; for it is possible for one who has stumbled through ignorance that his conscience is not smitten. Then it is not the not doing of evil that justifies, but success in virtue that perfects. And it is likely that he said this also from moderation of feeling: therefore do not think more highly than you ought, but wait for the judge. Throughout he holds to his aim, admonishing those who wish to be named after one man and not to be named after another; for this belongs to those who judge both the worthy and the unworthy. Therefore do not think more highly than you ought, but wait for the judge; for it is possible for a molded character to deceive you, but nothing hidden could escape the one who brings to light the hidden things of darkness. And he said these things because many things were happening among them through deceit and unworthy men were being honored. Those who were honored were not altogether good, but they maintained virtue only as far as appearance, while those who were good by nature were overlooked; for otherwise he would not have said these things. He brings in himself and Apollos, having passed over in silence

The persons of those who demand to be honored and to have the disciples named after them, so that you might receive from us a pattern and a sequence for conducting yourselves modestly toward teachers. And do not think beyond what is written concerning us, but consider us as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God, and do not dishonor some of the teachers while honoring others. In these words he exposed their disposition more clearly; for the one who is named after a certain person while disregarding that person was puffed up on his behalf, but against him he had his puffing up. You who wish to be called after this one or to abandon that one—who judges you? Do you not await the judge? You who obey await the judge, and do you subject the teacher to your own judgment? You, the layman—who judges you in what you think or do, that you dare to judge others, and these teachers? Is it not the Lord? If, then, you, the disciple, await the Lord as judge, how do you subject the teacher to your judgment, calling one worthy and another unworthy? Why do you think you have a privilege that you neither have nor have received? He means the surpassing understanding by which it is possible both to judge teachers and to test them. Even if you received understanding from God, you must bring glory to God who gave it, and not rather think great things of yourself and be exalted as though putting forward a privilege of your own. Not that this was so in their case, but he shows that they were so disposed, holding false opinions about themselves, and thought they had been filled with all knowledge, so as to judge even teachers.

Already the gifts have come to be with you and are not always desired. But the phrase "without us" shows that you have anticipated reigning before we have reigned; and the "would that indeed" placed in between reveals his disposition concerning this. Then, having said "that we also might reign together with you," he makes clear that he reckons their successes as his own good. It is not unreasonable also to read "you have reigned" and "you have become rich" as in the form of a question, so that what is said may be in the character of one who has already been adorned. "For as I see," if you have become rich and reigned without us, then we have become last and doomed to death, we who have endured all things. To men, he says, as those who see our evils, and to angels as those who marvel at our constancy. These things are similar. Those who teach you are in contempt and worthlessness, so as even to be considered fools by the world, but you who are taught wish already to be in wealth and honors of Christ. He says these things showing that in spiritual gifts a disciple is not above his teacher. We endure all things for Christ and until now humble ourselves. And how is it possible for you, living in the flesh, to be preferred by God over those who labor, those who are persecuted, those who are reviled, those who are buffeted? Through all these things he instructs how a Christian ought to be and to humble himself. Instead of "scrapings." Just as sweepings and dung taken from a house that has been cleansed, so we have become, being made worthless by all, and we are the refuse of all, subjecting ourselves to all men for Christ.

Peripsema" is the name for the cloth that wipes away the sweat of the sick man and wipes off the affliction that lies upon him. Having sharply attacked them through the first things, through these he comforts them, so that through the astringent and the sweet he might blend the power of salvation. Rebuking, turning them about. Having called himself a father, and them pedagogues, from whom they were called, he shows that he has a more genuine disposition toward them than the others, and that as being admonished by a father they ought not to be indignant. In not thinking highly of certain ones and being puffed up, "be imitators of me," and in not being called from anyone but from Christ. You see that those things said to them—"we are weak, you are strong," and all the rest—were said with a view to certain ones being puffed up and lifted up. "But I will come to you quickly, if the Lord wills, and I will know not the word of those who are puffed up but the power." By these words he both rebukes them strongly, and himself testifies to their fitness for correction by threatening his own presence; for as if he would appear to those being humbled, he promises his presence, correcting them by his word before his presence. Nevertheless he added the phrase "if the Lord wills"; for by indignation he was hurried to say "I will come," but by reverence he was reminded to add the most beautiful addition, "if the Lord wills." And here what he previously said in a veiled way, so as not to seem to rebuke too violently, he uncovers; for the kingdom of God is not in word—that is, in the well-instructed man; for the apostles did not teach and preach without reason.

It is clear also from these words that "we are weak, but you are strong," and the rest, was said to reprove certain people for being puffed up. He promises his coming, so that if they should first correct themselves. Therefore, on account of his indignation he was compelled to say "I will come," but on account of his caution he added "if the Lord wills." It became clearer also from these words that he is indignant at those who boast greatly in the wisdom of this world; for he does not wish to discredit the common rational faculty. And this he proclaimed to them in the presence of all. Since correction is twofold—in one way through admonition for the obedient, in another through force and compulsion for the stiff-necked—he has, in a humane manner, left the choice of these to them, so that by changing their minds they might correct themselves. And he called "rod" the compelling power of the Spirit, which Paul used against Elymas, and which God used against Paul himself. Not because that man had a wife in the manner stated, but because he was eloquent, and they were not mourning that he had his father's wife, but were puffed up because he was well-educated; for their mourning either separated the fornicator who persisted, or banished the absurdity of the matter and brought him back. Not simply "having done" but "having wrought" it; for he did not fall by being carried away, but made use of the evil as a deed. And he says "to be present in spirit," concurring and condemning together—and by "spirit" he means the grace-gift—when they are gathered together with the power of Christ. Those who were puffed up over the fornicator because of his eloquence were part of the whole, and he calls all to be gathered together for the condemnation of the fornication.

They said "the spirit," not the soul, but the gift. So that he might not seem to be moved unreasonably, he also adds the reason for his anger: that not only sexual immorality but even such a thing is heard among you as is not even among the Gentiles. And you are proud because you have been adorned with the wisdom of the world. You ought to mourn over him, because he has dared a sexual immorality not even customary among others. For this mourning either separated the one who had committed sexual immorality, if he remained in the sexual immorality, or it separated the very outrage and brought the man himself back, so that the spirit might be saved. He did not say "having worked" but "having wrought," even in this to make clear that by much persistence he worked the evil, and was not carried away and sinned so as to have an excuse. And the apostle alone was sufficient to condemn that man, but he wishes the Corinthians also to be fellow-judges with him, so that in this way they might be corrected, being separated from fellowship with the lawless man, and especially those puffed up over their education. He does not do this as handing him over to the authority of Satan—for in doing this he would have gladdened Satan—but since we are accustomed to attribute to Satan all the harsh things of life, such as diseases, griefs, mournings, and other afflictions, as the apostle himself also says somewhere: "A thorn of Satan was given to me, that it might buffet me." In this way, then, he now commands that he be handed over to Satan, that is, to the difficulties of life. He hands him over to the afflictions of life.

For this is what is unto the destruction of the flesh, not unto the perdition of the soul, so that, stirred up by the things that happen to the body, he might repent and the spirit in him might be saved, which is the gift. For he does not here mean the soul, as though the flesh were not raised but only the soul saved. You see that they were boasting over that one, not attending to the absurdity of the transgression, but being puffed up by his eloquence. For they were boasting over him, not attending to his transgression but being puffed up by his learning. He commands that he be cast out, so that the rest also who associate with him might not rush shamelessly into sinning. He calls sin old leaven, with which the old man was leavened. He transfers the type to the truth; for the unleavened bread among the Jews, not mixed with old leaven, prefigured new men not mixed with the sins of the old man. The lamb sacrificed among the Jews indicated the passion and the mystical fulfillment of the economy of the cross. And he says the following, since leaven is somewhat more meddlesome, but unleavened bread is simpler. He persisted in the turn of phrase as if he were saying: not in an evil and wicked life, but in a life having no admixture of that old leaven; for this is what "in unleavened bread of sincerity and truth" means. Not in another letter, but in this one he wrote. And for this reason he does not forbid associating with those outside, since if they turned away from all such people, the preaching would be hindered; for all those among the Gentiles, so to speak, were such as happened to be benefited from the association of the believers.

He therefore shows that they are to rebuke those of their own household who sin, and to encourage those who have gone astray. The phrase "I wrote" belongs not to another letter but to this one, for he says: "But now I wrote to you." And the phrase "you shall remove the evil one from among yourselves" is the voice of Moses, which Paul repeats. He recalls a saying that lies in the old covenant, showing that not only are they themselves benefited, as if they had been freed from some plague, but that such a thing is no innovation, but that this also seemed right to the lawgiver—namely, that such people be cut off. He said this reasonably, for he becomes a judge of those of his own household, not of strangers. But God is the judge of all, since he is the master of all. He charges them because, when there were holy men able to judge them, they were being judged by unbelievers. Having said above, "You judge those who are inside, but God will judge those who are outside," now he subjects the whole world to the judgment of the saints. For here they examine the life of the faithful for their correction, but there they are entrusted with the judgment of the world, not for the correction of sinful ways, but for the conviction and condemnation of them. The twelve apostles, then, will judge the twelve tribes, as Jews judging Jews, from whom they themselves believed even the prophets. But if they disbelieved and for this reason rejected Christ—while the other holy ones, that is, the Gentiles, will condemn those who did not turn away from idols and believe in the true God. So there is no disagreement between the evangelist and the apostle—for in both it was Christ who spoke—for it is written: "The queen of the South will rise up and will condemn this generation, and the men of Nineveh will rise up and will condemn you.

He did not say, "And the world is judged by you"? But now he calls "angels" not the angels by nature, but the ministers, the priests, the teachers of the people, who are likely to be judged by the saints as those who teach falsely about Christ. For when he said, "Is it not so with worldly matters?" he showed that he was not speaking about angels by nature, but about those who hold the angelic rank and handle spiritual matters. But if he spoke of angels in the strict sense, he clearly meant those who revolted and fell away from God. Indeed, the priests were called angels according to Malachi, who says: "The lips of a priest shall guard knowledge, and they shall seek the law from his mouth, because he is an angel of the Lord of hosts." These priests, then, we judge—those who led the people astray, and likewise those who became leaders of heresies and perverted the teaching of Christ. Better than an unbeliever is the least of the church. Nevertheless, the apostle seems to have passed over this, which is clear: that the greater offenses must be guarded against by the perfect. You appear to have been defeated by the devil, not only by being judged before unbelievers, but also by having judgments with

of one another. He said that the working of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is one in the righteous, teaching the oneness of the substance. He does not speak of a person, but of a thing, from the phrase "by someone"; for the discourse is about these things: foods for the belly, and the belly for foods; but God will bring to nothing both this and these. He does not speak of a person in the phrase "by someone," but of an unseemly thing and a passion. And speaking about himself, he urges others to self-control. And knowing that their greed has the belly as its cause—for many dare all things for the pleasures of the belly—he teaches that it is inexpedient to be a slave to the belly. We know that foods are for the belly. It too has been set apart for these, but nevertheless these things are temporary and God will put a stop to them; for after the resurrection, when immortality is given, the need of foods is superfluous. Why then do you busy yourselves about temporary things, from which come fornications and unseemly pleasures? That foods and eating are temporary is clear. The body, however, is set apart not for fornication but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body; and the body would not be temporary, but it will be raised to everlastingness according to the type of Christ. He calls the body and members of Christ—the body of those who have believed and been baptized. Whatever a person does for the feeding or clothing of the body, he also does to adorn it and to fulfill its need and for the honor of the body; but the one who cleaves to the prostitute, making his own body one body with her, outrages it and dishonors it. Garments and adornment are outside the body;

Therefore the one who does these things sins outside the body, since the one who reviles or even lies harms and plunders others, and one commits adultery with another's wife, but the fornicator outrages himself, the harm from the deed not passing over to anyone else. So whatever a man sins, he has sinned, yet not against his own body, nor has he dishonored his own flesh as the fornicator has. And indeed the murderer, defiling his hand with blood, sins against his own body, and the reviler, as it were staining his tongue with revilings; but the fornicator, he says, baptizes his whole self in the mire of fornication. Paul, then, accommodated himself to the common supposition, saying that the other sins are outside the body. But others say that this passage has this meaning: that the fornicator sins against his own body, that is, against the constitution of his own body and, so to speak, against the very making of the man and against the principles of our generation, as if he were saying: Cease thus, through unlawful intercourse, to outrage the workshop of nature from which your own body too has sprung. But others say that it was Paul's earnest endeavor to show that the sin of fornication is worse than pardon. And having said above, Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ, and the rest, and having shown from this that the fornicator trespasses against the members of Christ, he thus adds, Every sin, and the rest. For the reviler or the robber or the covetous man trespassed against a man whom he reviled or wronged, but the fornicator sins against his own body, which is the members of Christ.

For when through adoption by the Spirit one is brought to completion into the body of Christ, he will be charged not only with fornication but also with impiety, as making the members of Christ members of a prostitute, and as outraging his own body as if it were the temple of Christ. Therefore he also adds: Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and so on? For by the sin of fornication you sin against the body as against a temple of God, and it drives out the Holy Spirit—not that the rest of the sins are blameless (for all of them involve exclusion from the kingdom), but because he was eager, with respect to the matter at hand, to show that fornication is more grievous than all, wishing to pull the passion up by the root, as being committed more impiously than by the Corinthians; for altogether, he says, it is heard that there is fornication among you, and so on. The one who has fornicated is also liable for impiety; for having outraged his own body, he has defiled the temple of the Holy Spirit. And he says these things because some were fornicating contemptuously, considering fornication a small fault or no fault at all, since not even Moses mentioned it in his Decalogue. But the saving blood of Christ is an honor, which he gave as a ransom for us. Glorify God, therefore, not only in the gift but also in the body, so that both nature and free will and the gift may glorify God. Glorify God, then, in your body and in your spirit. Not only in the gift but also in the body, so that both nature and free will and grace, through their harmony, may glorify the Benefactor. But others have understood the spirit to be the soul. These things he wrote in reply to the lot.

For it was also being written by him to the apostle. He therefore forbade fornication as unlawful, but he allowed the sharing of marriage as pious and a means of deliverance from fornication, and he praised continence as more perfect. He teaches that those joined in marriage are masters of each other rather than of themselves. It is a good debt for those who live together, when along with their other harmony they know how to pay this to each other as a debt. And the apostle used such great condescension by way of economy, in order to cut off fornication, that most evil disease, teaching that those joined in marriage are masters of each other rather than of themselves. Since he said that they are slaves of each other, he accordingly says that they must not deprive each other of themselves, except perhaps by pious agreement, so that they may neither become causes of fornication to each other, nor destroy their mastery over each other by separating against each other's will. Acknowledging the nature of the body, I say that you ought to come together again, since I do not say this absolutely, excluding your continence; for I wish all to be in continence as I myself also am. To widows and to unmarried men who have not practiced virginity he advises continence; but if they were defeated by the flesh, he showed that they should marry, because continence is great. Nevertheless he allows marriage as a good bond. That a woman should not be separated from a husband he would not have said concerning those who separate in order to renounce the world and devote themselves to Christ. Either let her be reconciled to her husband or let her remain unmarried—this is shown to concern those who are separated because of some quarrel. Above he spoke concerning separation for the sake of continence, but here concerning that which happens because of provocation. Then he said:

Not I but the Lord.” For there is something the apostle says of himself, but not everything does the Lord say through himself. And he says: “I command you” now the things the Lord commanded in the Gospels, speaking concerning those who have married: “What God has joined together, let no man separate.” And these things are also in agreement—the saying “But if she is separated, let her remain unmarried”—with what was said by the Lord: “If anyone marries a divorced woman, he commits adultery,” and she too if she marries another. He does not say “I, not the Lord,” as though legislating against him, but because some things the Lord said through himself, while some things are now said for the first time by the apostle concerning separation from an unbeliever, and he teaches that unbelief does not prevail over faith, but the faith of the one living with the unbeliever sanctifies even the unbeliever. He does not say “to take an unbeliever,” but “to endure an unbeliever.” The children are holy and clean and not defiled even by unbelief; for the faith of the parents prevails over unbelief in them. To the one God allotted to save, to the other to be saved, assigning to each what is worthy of him. But “to each as God has allotted” does not mean “to have an unbeliever,” but “to endure an unbeliever.” Circumcision is not good for its own sake, but because it is a commandment of God; and uncircumcision is a creation of God, not a reward of the uncircumcised. Then he says concerning the slave: do not be eager for temporary freedom, but even if you can, rather use your slavery; for the reward is greater when one, even while occupied with the slavery of men, does not neglect to please God. “Let each remain in that in which he was called,” and let the slave not be grieved in his slavery, and let the free man not be puffed up.

For there is no distinction with God. The faithful servant has nothing less in this respect than the free man; for with God even a servant is seen as free and has been set free by him. For this is what he means by “a freedman of the Lord is he,” that is, he has been set free by the Lord himself, and the one called free to the faith will have nothing more than the servant, but like him he is a servant of Christ. Instead of this: do not, because of your needs, live in a servile and illiberal manner, serving men while abandoning the true Master, by whose blood you were bought. Grace does not know the distinction of slavery and mastery. Do not then flee slavery as unworthy of the faith; for in this respect you have nothing less than any of those in the faith. But if it should be possible for you even to obtain freedom, let it be your concern rather how you may be able to use it more fittingly, having taken care for evil in freedom. And showing that neither the free man has more with Christ for this reason, nor indeed is the servant diminished, for this very reason he adds: “For the servant called in the Lord is a freedman of the Lord; likewise the free man called is a servant of Christ.” How, when he says in other places, “If you seek proof of Christ who speaks in me,” does he now say, “I have no command of the Lord”? And who would accept it, if indeed he says things the Lord did not command him? But it is clear that he does not say this—that he has no command to teach about virginity—but that he did not receive from God the command to enjoin you to practice virginity, but rather to give an opinion and advise that virginity is good and useful.

Therefore, as one giving advice, he says, “I think,” and calls it good, and he places the choice of choosing it with the hearers. But the matter is pleasing to God, as the Lord also said, that some have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom, calling virginity a eunuch-making because of its inactivity. He says, then, that it is not a command, but he conceded it to their judgment, saying, “Let the one who is able to receive it receive it.” Then, having called himself faithful, he shows that he both says faithful things and things worthy of a command. But he says “I think” not because he doubts that virginity is good, but to guard against its being thought a command. He showed that he introduces virginity not as an accusation of marriage, but that he recommends virginity for the sparing of the saints, since marriage fills the flesh with birth-pangs and labors. He showed that he introduces virginity not as an accusation of marriage, but as caring for release from worldly cares. Then, having said, “But I spare you,” he recommends virginity for the sparing of the saints, not as an accusation of marriage. He states another reason for which he prefers virginity, everywhere showing that he accuses marriage while preferring holiness; that the world is near its end, and one must know that what we have we do not have—for we let it go—so that even those who have may be as those who do not have. If it is good for those who have to have as those who do not have, how much more for the virgin not even to approach marriage? And those who use this world as not misusing it; by this he casts out immoderate enjoyment, yet leaves use.

For “the form of this world is passing away” shows that it is not the world that passes away, but the form of the present life that is changed—corruption into incorruption: cities, walls, laws, farmlands, crafts. For these lie upon this life like a kind of shape, and it is this that undergoes change. By this he makes clear the brief span of human life, so that they may come to repentance, as those who have anticipated the end of life and despised transient things. But if it is good for those who have [wives] to be as though they had none, how is virginity not better? This means: let neither the sorrows of this life cast you down, nor let the things that seem worthy of joy make you excessively glad; for all things here are transient and not lasting. A kind of shape and form of the world, as it were, are constitutions, laws, farmlands, crafts, commerce—the use of which is superfluous once corruption has been changed into incorruption. He shows, then, that it is not the world that passes away, but the present form of the world. He has shown why he said, “But I spare you”; so that you may not exhaust your concerns on things that do not remain. And what follows shows this more clearly. He has given the reason for which virginity is preferable to marriage.

Virginity: not because of the marriage bed or abstinence from the marriage bed, but because marriage is full of cares, so as to occupy the mind in godliness. “I want you to be free from cares,” so that you do not empty your cares into things that do not remain, being distracted by the necessities of life. Therefore virginity is preferable even to marriage, not because of abstinence from the marriage bed, but because it occupies the mind from godliness. Some think that he is saying that a certain man acts shamefully concerning himself, instead of: if anyone thinks he acts shamefully concerning his own virginity. But it is not so. And he shows what follows; for he says: “So that he who gives his virgin in marriage does well, but he who does not give her in marriage does better.” But no one gives himself in marriage, but is given by another. Better than this blessed state is to remain thus; for the one is a matter of bodily rest, but the other of more perfect godliness. This has been said by way of comparison; for she is blessed if she marries and has a man's protection, but more blessed if, looking to godliness, she does not marry, but occupies herself with God. Since the Corinthians were eating things sacrificed to idols, saying, “For us there is no such thing as food sacrificed to idols—for I sanctify them by the name of Christ and eat”—he himself shows that they alone do not know this as wise men, and he says: “We know that we all have knowledge.” So that what you know, I know; but what you suffer, I do not suffer. This, then, which you know and I know, one need not examine; but what I know—that one must not eat because of the weak—this you do not know, but I know. Why then are you puffed up by the knowledge that does not have as much as my knowledge? At any rate he adds:

If anyone thinks he knows something, he has not yet known as he ought to know. For instance, what I know, you do not yet know. But if anyone loves God, this one is known by him. Whatever we suppose we know as men, we do not yet know anything. What, then, is the blessed thing? To love God and to be known by him—not because he is ignorant of those who do not love him, but because he makes those who love him his own; for the term "knowledge" is also used of belonging, just as the term "ignorance" is used of estrangement, as in the saying of the Lord: "Depart from me; I never knew you." Since the Corinthians said, "No idol is anything, and therefore we do not account the things sacrificed to idols as anything; rather, eating them in the name of Christ, we are not harmed," he shows that not only they, as wise men, know this, but others also—that there is no such thing as a thing sacrificed to idols. So what you know, I know; but what you suffer, I do not suffer. Such knowledge, then, puffs up and harms, if you know your own concerns, but not the other matter—that love builds up; and for the sake of love for the weak brother you must not eat in an idol's temple, so that he may not be wounded. The one who thinks he knows something among you knows nothing; for he did not recognize that others are harmed by this knowledge of theirs. And even if we suppose we know something, we do not yet know anything. But the blessed thing is to love God and to be known by him—that is, to belong to him; for he is ignorant of no one, but the ungodly are said to be unknown to him. Having first said, "No god but one," lest he seem to exclude the Son from the Godhead, he added, "the Father"; for truly there is no other father but one.

Therefore neither is there another God who is a Son, except one. But if, when one Lord is spoken of, namely the Son, the Father is not a lesser Lord, it is clear that also, when one God is spoken of, namely the Father, the Son is not a lesser God. And the phrase "all things from him" does not indicate his essence—for created things are not from the essence of God—but it indicates the Father's will, "from whom." Then, having said "and we into him," he grants us to understand what is missing from the statement, namely "but to us one God, and we hope in him." Again, something is missing from the statement "and we through him"—for what is missing is "we have been called" or "we have been saved"—for he does not say this, that we came to be through him—for when he said "all things" he included "and we"—but he means all things that came to be, while we are those that have been ordered and are being saved. What is set right in you is nothing, but what harms the weaker is great. 1 12 What is it? That God is one and no idol in the world. The one who does not have this knowledge, that God is one and no idol in the world, thinking he is eating food sacrificed to idols

He is struck down. And your knowledge harms the weak man; for many even of those who have believed have not yet understood that an idol-sacrifice is nothing, and these are harmed by the believing man who eats. And what is gained by eating is not great, but what harms the weaker is heavy. I do not say this so that I may not eat an idol-sacrifice, but not even meat, if on this account the brother is scandalized, because neither in the things over which he had authority, such as in being supported by them, did he endure to burden anyone. And he establishes this through many arguments, and first he recalls his own dignity, in order to show the reasons that he was taking support reasonably, if indeed he wished to take it, just as also the others took from those things from which they took support. And I, he says, am an apostle and I have authority over myself, and I am not under anyone who compels me and prevents me from taking support; for even if the other apostles have something more than I do—namely, having been with Christ—yet I have not been deprived of this either. To those who ask me whether I am an apostle, this is my defense: your seal and teaching. Do I not give orders as an apostle? Do I not legislate for the churches? Am I under other teachers? At any rate I have authority, but I do not misuse it, so that I may not scandalize any of the little-faithful on my account. 256 1 9, The confirmation and the proof. He shows that it has been legislated that those who serve either at the altars or in the gospel should live by these things. Having said "a woman" and added "sister," he indicated what is fitting and chaste and pure about the woman who traveled with them, whether she was a wife or not, evidently because women also traveled together with Peter and the others, desiring their teaching.

He says these things not to slander—may it never be—but to show the excess of his own strictness in life, shaming the Corinthians not to live carelessly, so that they do not become a stumbling block to others. Or is it forbidden only to us to do these things that are also permitted to others? He brought in Barnabas as a co-worker, so that he might not seem to be proud, as though he alone were succeeding. I am not speaking my own words. Does not the law also say these things? He says, I did not write these things for this reason, that I might receive something from you—may it never be. It is no great thing if you abstain from idol-sacrifices for the sake of your brother; for I also enslaved myself to those to whom I am not subject, so that I might benefit many. He calls Jews those who are by nature of the race of Israel, and those under the law who are not of their race but use the law of the Jews and have become proselytes. He calls Greeks those who are not under the law of Moses. But he did not say to the Greeks, "I became as a Greek," since he did not endure to play the part of Hellenism. So he calls those from the nations who have believed "without law." I seemed to those from the Greeks to be not under the law, and I bore that reputation, so that I might rescue them from Jewish practices. So he yielded to all, at the beginning joining himself to them, so that, having been brought together with them, he might draw them to himself by a little; for men do not come to agreement with those who agree in nothing, but with those who agree with them in part. Since the gospel also seems not to use the law, I imitated its economy, administering what that gospel intends, so that in this very respect I might share in it. Since it also seems to use the gospel law, I imitated its economy.

For what he said there, this I administer. He does not say this: that one of us all is preferred—for otherwise people would have despaired of themselves, looking at what is hard to accomplish—but evidently the image is taken in relation to the nations spoken of by him. All, he says, contend as in a stadium in this life—Jews according to the law, Greeks according to error—and there is one word of truth, the one that conquers and receives the prize. Therefore run, so that you are not left behind with the others. What is great, he says, if you practice self-control in the flesh for the sake of the brother? Everyone who contends must practice self-control in everything—from anger, from vainglory, and from all the rest; those, then, so that they may receive a corruptible crown, but we an incorruptible one. He said this not without qualification, but correcting those who pretend to philosophize for the sake of gorging themselves, that the idol-sacrifice is not an idol-sacrifice. He said this not without qualification, but correcting those who, for the sake of gorging themselves, pretend in faith to eat the sacred offerings indifferently. The inspired Paul brings forward the types from the old covenant and the shadows from there that prefigure the truth to come, in order to discipline the Corinthians from the comparison of ancient things. For if, he says, those who were baptized into Moses, who was a type of Christ, in the cloud and in the sea, and who ate the manna, the spiritual food, and drank from the rock the spiritual drink, were laid low in the desert, having turned to drunkenness and fornication and idolatry, because they insulted the type and the shadow, what would they not suffer who sin against the truth itself? Since they were saying:

For me there is no idol; for I give thanks and eat—this, he says, is to tempt. For when you do what Jesus did not command as though believing in him, you are tempting rather than believing. He says this to those who say: For me there is no idol; for I give thanks and eat, which is to tempt. For when you do what the Lord did not command as though believing in him, you are tempting rather than believing. Into you, he says, has come the visitation of Christ, after which there will no longer be commandment, nor law, nor prophets; for he calls "ends" not the last generation in which will be the completion of the world, but the final way of life in Christ, upon which the completion of the ages will come. He did not pray not to be tempted, since an untempted man is unproven, but to be tempted in such a way as to bear it. From this he shows that those among them who believed endured certain unpleasantnesses from their fellow citizens. Then he did not pray that they not be tempted, since an untempted man is unproven, but that they be tempted in such a way as to bear it. 259 1 Do you see that all the things previously said by him were being prepared for this end? He came for the sake of what he was preparing; for all things whatsoever he foretold were said and prepared for the purpose of turning them away from idolatry. Do not look to their idols, which are nothing, but to the intention according to which they sacrifice to demons and not to God; for what is done becomes, as it were, a denial of God. Since it is written that God says to them through Moses: They provoked me to jealousy with what is not God, they provoked me to anger with their idols—and the Corinthians were eating things sacrificed to idols—for this reason he says: Or do we provoke the Lord to jealousy?—that is, do we provoke him to anger?

Are we not stronger than he? By this he showed that the Lord does not wish us to eat things sacrificed to idols. Do not, then, he says, wish what the Lord does not wish, as though you were stronger and wiser than he. Or do we provoke him to jealousy and stir him to anger? For it has been said by Moses: They provoked me to jealousy with what is not God; they angered me with their idols. He says this because the Corinthians were eating things sacrificed to idols. Since it was likely that they, being scrupulous, would no longer dare even to buy food for fear of hearing "You bought something sacrificed to idols," he reassures their fear. And he means conscience—not that of the one who knows that an idol is nothing, but that of the one who has seen the buyer of the idol-sacrifice and thinks that there is something in an idol-sacrifice. What you eat is the Lord's, since both the earth and all that it is filled with are his. Do everything with caution, so that through you they may glorify God and not be scandalized. Do not become the cause of stumbling to Jews and Greeks—by not, on the pretext of your evil conduct, making them flee from the faith—nor to the church of God, by not scandalizing the weak in faith. He now praises them, although they have gone astray, so that for the rest they may be persuaded by what he says. He speaks to exhort rather than to approve, so that he may then confirm his admonition among them: I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of a woman is the

a man, and the head of Christ is God. If one takes this impiously, it is according to the account of divinity; but if piously, according to the account of the economy. For the discourse now is not about his having been begotten—for behold, the man did not make the woman—nor does the order Paul used look to this, but to subjection alone; not because of any alienation of nature—and in general the divinity of the Only-Begotten is not now being taken up, but the economy, which is nearer to the man and the woman according to nature. Since the followers of Arius say: just as Christ is the head of the man because he is his maker, so God is the head of Christ as his maker, they seem to be ignorant of what follows: for the head of the woman is the man. And he is neither her maker nor is he of the same essence as she, and by the same account we are found to be of the same essence as Christ. Thus they babble everything to everyone. For "head" here is said in respect of rule, not in respect of making; so that the one who has Christ as his ruler and head, if he sins, insults his own ruler. According to this account, having been subjected to Christ, we are subjected also to God the Father, because God is also the head of Christ. 261 1 To prophesy he says means to interpret the prophets. Or in this is the difference between the prophets of old and the new, that the ancients prophesied more generally about the fall of the Jews and the calling of the Gentiles and the incarnate coming of Christ, while the others did so specifically, as Peter did in the case of Ananias. From these things it is evident that man is not the image of God according to the soul, nor according to the body.

For if she were [the image of God] in any one of these respects, then the woman too would certainly have been called an image of God, since she herself has the form of the body and possesses a soul such as the man has. But if the woman, having the same soul and flesh as the man, is not called an image, it is clear that the man is an image of God according to the principle of rule. For when the discourse is about irrational creatures, the woman too is an image of God; but when the examination is of man in relation to women, the man alone is the image, because male and female among humans rule over all things on earth, in the sea, and in the air, and the man rules the woman, but no one on earth rules the man. Therefore, just as no one among existing things rules God, so neither does anyone among earthly things rule the man. By nature we understand the truth of the things themselves. The man is an image of God, not according to body or soul, but according to the principle of rule; for along with other things he has the woman also in subjection, and just as no one among existing things rules God, so neither does anyone among earthly things rule the man. And just as the man, when he obeys well the Author of rule, is the glory and praise of God, so also the woman is the glory of the man when she is well subjected to him. The apostle, having observed the harsh and hard-to-yoke disposition of women, speaks, reminding us that God has also set angels over us. But some say that the priests of the church are called angels, and that because of them women are veiled, as not having received the freedom to rule. He said this perhaps because women also were prophesying from the Holy Spirit. But when the Spirit is at work, it is entirely necessary that the ministering angels be present, and for this reason the woman must be veiled.

He approved this not from ancient custom but from their own practice. And those who wore long hair in ancient times used to cut it partly, wearing it longer than they should; but for a woman, to be shorn was always disapproved. He calls "heresies" not those in doctrines but those in customs and practices. He brings a charge that when they came together as for the communion of the holy body, they did not wait for one another, but while some were occupied by poverty and were lacking, the wealthy, arriving first, did not wait for the others, but through gluttony they neglected the Lord's supper and hurried to their own private dinners, which they made lavishly in the church as if reproaching the destitution of those who had nothing, because while others were hungry they themselves were drunk; for arriving first, they enjoyed their own delicacies before the communion. He calls "spiritual things" now the workings of the Holy Spirit, which he distributes to each according to worth—for example, to one to evangelize, to another to prophesy, and to another something else. And by saying "you were led away to the idols," he shows the greatest difference between prophecy and divination. For in the case of idols, those possessed by the unclean spirit are not sober, but are led away by an unclean spirit, not walking by their own free choice; for this he indicates by "you were led away," that is, being carried off. He says, then: the working of the unclean spirit you know from what you suffered, but the working of the Holy Spirit is pure. Therefore the diviner is darkened in soul and does not know what he says, but the soul of the prophet becomes more luminous, and having learned what it did not know, it speaks the things revealed to it.

The demon, therefore, as an enemy, darkens the soul; but the spirit, as a benefactor, enlightens when it approaches the soul, which he shows and then adds. For all blasphemies against Christ are worked by the evil one who darkens the soul. He says this, therefore, to secure those who pretend to be inspired by God and yet speak against Christ. But since both the legion and the Pythian prophetess named the Lord Jesus, we do not say that the one who says this says it perfectly—for there are many who are called lords, righteous ones—but rather the confession of the lordship and dominion of Christ over all things. Perhaps also because they said this while testing him, as the devil did when he led him up to the mountain. Therefore he does not accept their testimony, as from the unworthy and the tempting. The word of wisdom is both to understand the things spoken in the wisdom of God in the prophets and evangelists and to present them to the hearers. The word of knowledge is the revelation of hidden things which one learns, not knowing them at first from grace, and then speaks. Faith is to believe only the proclamation; for to hear simply is not faith, but to receive faithfully the things spoken. The discernment of spirits, since divination has imitated prophecy in that it too seems to foretell by the Holy Spirit, and he has given the discernment of these things so that one may not be deceived. By the whole body composed of many members he represents Christ, signifying through Christ the church; for since Christ has been called the head of the church and the church the body of Christ, he named the church Christ, signifying the lesser by the greater.

He says this so that they may not overlook the more lowly in the church; for even if someone is lesser by nature, yet he contributes to the common good of the church. He did not say "members from members," but "many members from one member"; for the head is a member of the whole body. He did not say "from members," but "from a member"; for the head is one member, which is Christ, the head of the church. Since he has mentioned members and a body, he begins with the more honorable of the other members after the head, namely the apostles. And by "prophets" he means those in the church, not those under the law. Third, teachers. Do not be surprised that a teacher is placed before those who perform healings and mighty works; for signs exist so that knowledge may be believed, and knowledge is presented through those who teach. "Helps." He says this elsewhere: "the one who presides, with diligence." "Governings": the administrations of the church. Christ is the head of the church, and after him he calls the apostles the second members. He does not mean those under the law, but those of the church. For this reason he shows that they were proud about the gift of tongues, but also about the other gifts. He shows, then, that the greatest thing is love; for those things are gifts, given even to the unworthy for the building up of the church, but the achievement of love belongs to the devout. This, then, is what he says: desire the better gifts. And I show you a way that leads you to the enjoyment of the better gifts, and the way is love; for the one who loves fulfills the law. And the one who fulfills the law is approved. And the one who is approved receives a spiritual gift.

Since he saw that they were zealous for those who had the gifts, but were not warming to love, he teaches that love is the most excellent good; for those gifts were sometimes given even to the unworthy for the building up of the church, but the accomplishment of love is the peculiar possession of the pious. So he calls love the way that leads us to the enjoyment of the better things; for what is higher than the gift of love, which fulfills the whole law? And what is the tongue of angels, among whom there is no breast, no throat, no tongue, no voice? But since, as Moses says in Deuteronomy, God set the boundaries of the nations according to the number of the angels of God—and he set them, of course, at that time when he divided into tongues those who attempted to build the tower—for since they were no longer kept from concord by their sameness of speech, but were estranged from one another, as it were, by the exchanges of tongue, angels were appointed, so that each might guard the nation entrusted to him, and nothing might be squandered and perish. For this reason he calls the diversity of tongues "tongues of angels." But one must know that just as David speaks of "the bread of angels" not as though they eat, so too "tongues of angels" not as though they speak; for both that and this are spoken as of those who serve God's ordinance. The tongue of men, then, is the educated tongue—for this artistic tongue is imported alongside the natural one—but the tongue of angels is the natural one, divided into many. I have become a sounding bronze or a clanging cymbal. From this it is evident that he calls the exchange of tongues and the diversity "of angels.

For the one who speaks in other tongues among those who do not know them is like a cymbal, producing only sound and displaying no meaning. He calls the tongue of humans rhetoric, grammar, philosophy, thought, composition, craft, and disputation. But what sort of tongue is there among angels, who have no chest, no throat, no voice, nor anything else bodily? The tongues of angels are the differences of tongues over which the angels were set, according to the dispersion at the building of the tower, so that each might guard the nation entrusted to him. And just as we understand the bread of angels to be that which is provided through the command of angels—not that the angels ate, but that the angels were commanded to provide—so too the tongues of angels are the differences of tongues over which angels were set. He called the sound of bronze and the clang of a cymbal the differences of tongues; for when someone does not know what is being spoken in another tongue, he regards the speaker as an unmarked cymbal, producing sound but not manifesting meaning. He calls a mystery everything that is unknown but is revealed by the power of the Spirit. This is one mystery, as he also says elsewhere: for I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery; and again, behold, I tell you a mystery. A little later he teaches what love is, where he says: love is patient, and the rest. Therefore to show mercy is one thing and to love is another; nevertheless, both to give one's substance to the poor and to hand oneself over to martyrdom—if it does not yet happen for the sake of love, it escapes notice as it falls into vainglory and empty love of honor.

Therefore, even if we impart for the sake of love toward the one who receives, or because of God who commanded we must impart, and if we bear witness for the sake of love toward the Lord, this we must endure. Love never fails, that is, it never slips away into sin. The partial is abolished when complete knowledge is given; for we know few things while more still remain hidden. As, he says, when I was a child, I had the thoughts of an infant, but when I had come to be a perfect man, I had the mind, no longer knowing simply that the father is a father, but also in what respect he is a father; so too, that I now know in part, this I will learn in the perfect time. And what now I see dimly as in a mirror, this in due time I will know clearly. But he did not say, "then I will know mysteries," which would have followed, but "I will be known"; for the one who is known by God and made his own, this one also obtains the direct vision of the mysteries. Since all knowledge has not yet been revealed to us, it remains for us to believe that all knowledge will be revealed to us. And while they believe, leading to hope, hope requires love, so that we may not fall away from hope. Therefore he said: love is greater than this; for through

Love is the fulfillment of the law. For if one does not interpret, but only speaks in a tongue and does not make the meaning clear, as not having this gift of interpretation, he speaks mysteries—for the Spirit, clearly, is the one supplying the tongues—and he utters mysteries through the tongues, but he does not build up the church, which does not understand what is said. The one who speaks in a tongue builds himself up, knowing that he understood what he was uttering; it was the grace of the Holy Spirit within him, and he was being built up. Just as the one who speaks in tongues and also interprets is not less than the prophet. Zeal for, he says, the prophecy more than the other gifts. And he said this: for the gifts were given according to each person's manner of life, and among them was what they wished to be zealous for and to receive. But when some speak in tongues, no one who hears understands. Yet even if the things spoken are unclear to men, still the one who speaks in the Spirit speaks mysteries—for the Spirit, supplying tongues, utters mysteries—, but the one who prophesies benefits the hearers; for he speaks to them things that are clear. Greater is the grace if the one who speaks in tongues also receives the ability to interpret; for perhaps it was because he did not attain both. Just as the one who speaks in tongues and also interprets is not less than the prophet. What shall I benefit you, he says, if I cannot speak to you either about the things revealed to me by God, or about the things I myself knew and grasped, or about the things I understood in the prophets, or about the things I have determined to advise or teach you? If I speak about these things, but you do not understand, what shall I benefit you?

For observe, he says, that even in lifeless things—the flute and the lyre—if the sounds are not distinct, what is played on the flute or the lyre is confused. Nothing is voiceless—evidently meaning the human race. The various gifts of the Holy Spirit speak spiritual things. If, he says, I speak in some tongue that I do not know, not even knowing its meaning, I am convinced that I have a mind unfruitful, not having the meaning of what is said. Let him pray that he may obtain a double grace: both to speak in tongues and to interpret them. For praying in a tongue is an activity of the Holy Spirit, but it becomes unfruitfulness of the mind because no one can understand or be benefited by what is said. Therefore, he says, this is what I must do: make clear the things supplied to me through the Spirit for the edification of those who hear, so that the mind may not be unfruitful, not having the meaning of the words. Because no one can be benefited or understand what is said, if I give thanks in a tongue, the hearer does not give you the amen. He calls an outsider, as it were, the unenlisted man, the one not yet baptized. By clarity of mind and the customary tongue. Strive to become perfect, to understand the Scriptures. It must be noted that the Jews, when called to account, have nothing to show—since God spoke in many tongues among them and they disobeyed. But we show that when the Holy Spirit came and divided tongues, the disobedient Jews said, "They are full of new wine." So then, tongues are for a sign not to those who believe but to the unbelieving, while prophecy is not for the unbelieving but for those who believe.

So the tongues build up when the hearer learns that the speaker is speaking a tongue he does not know, yet he does not receive the building up of the benefit of spiritual teaching, because it is not understood and does not go forward. For prophecy concerns things to come, and the one who happens to be present does not believe what is said about these things, but the believer does. The unbeliever, however, has need of one who does not know the tongue he is using, and who shows that the Spirit of God is in him. So the tongue was a wonder, but prophecy is a wonder from its outcome, not in the speaking. Unbelief is spoken of in two ways in divine Scripture: both the true unbelief, that of the Greeks, and the little faith of the pious. He calls the Greek an unbeliever, and the private person one not yet baptized, the one not enrolled as a soldier; for at that time they were not called catechumens or unbaptized. He calls "law" also the writings of the other prophets, since they lived under the law. And what was said by Isaiah was then fulfilled, when the Spirit descended upon the apostles, and they spoke in tongues, and the Jews mocked. Evidently the tongues benefit when the hearer knows that the speaker is speaking in a tongue that he does not know nor learned from men; nevertheless the matter does not benefit the hearer, because it is not understood. But prophecy is given to the faithful, which speaks about things to come, which not just anyone believes but the believer. The sign is given to unbelievers, so that they may believe what they see; prophecy, so that they may receive what is said and bless the Lord. He calls the Greek an unbeliever, and the catechumen a private person. There are places where even the one of little faith is called an unbeliever.

Let each one build up the church through the grace he has from God. By saying "let him be silent," he taught that one who speaks by the Holy Spirit speaks when he wishes and is silent, just as the prophets also do—but not those possessed by an unclean spirit; for those speak even when they do not wish to, and things they do not know. Through these words he shows that the Holy Spirit revealed the mysteries to their souls, and those, having been enlightened, revealed them to men—not as in oracles, where the seer does not know what he utters. He has therefore returned to that first point he was making, that "when you were Gentiles, you were led away to mute idols, as you were led." Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others discern—those who have the gift of discerning spirits. But if a revelation is given to another who is seated, let the first be silent, since it is in their power sometimes to be silent and sometimes to speak. And the spirits of prophets are subject to prophets. Do not be afraid, he says, if you are silent, as though you were rejecting the Spirit; for the gifts know how to be subject to one another. Clearly those who have the gifts of discerning spirits. Do not be afraid if you fall silent, as though you were rejecting the Spirit; for the gifts know how to be subject to one another, so that the church too may receive building up and no confusion arise from all speaking at once. I am not, he says, declaring something strange, but what I preached. And it is not that I preached and you did not receive it, but what you also received. And you did not receive it in vain and without benefit, but in it you are being saved. And being about to say, "I made known to you that the Lord Jesus died for us," he says: and for what reason is this the gospel, so that the resurrection may be believed?

For Jesus is the firstfruits of the resurrection, having died for us. For if it had not been necessary for death to be abolished, the Savior would not have become man. "Unless you believed in vain," instead of "except that you believed in vain"; for I say that if you do not hold fast, it is evident that you believed in vain. The word of the gospel is the resurrection from the dead, of which the beginning is Christ's; for if God had not willed death to be abolished, he would not have become man. If, then, you do not hold fast to what you heard but have cast it away, it is clear that you believed in vain. And "unless" is instead of "except." "Among the first things" he said instead of "before all things I delivered this to you." "Among the first things," before all things. And I did not deliver my own invention but what I received from the Scriptures. And it was confirmed by eyewitness, that Christ died and rose and called him from heaven. How was he buried, if he did not have flesh, according to the heretics? Instead of "more than five hundred." 272 1 And a miscarriage is that which is cast out in the womb before it is formed and receives the time proper to it, which also cannot live. Since, therefore, infants are molded as in a womb, in the law the souls were pre-formed toward piety, and were reborn of water and Spirit; but Paul was persecuting the church, not being formed in the law to perfection—for he was persecuting—for this reason he called himself a miscarriage, and he adds this next: because I persecuted the church of God. Infants cast out before they are formed in the womb are called miscarriages.

Since, therefore, under the law the souls were being prefigured for piety, but were being reborn of water and Spirit, and Paul, as one not formed under the law, was persecuting the church, for this reason he reasonably calls himself an untimely birth. "The least among the apostles," since, when those others had not persecuted but had believed, I persecuted. By the foreknowledge of God, though a persecutor, he obtained so great grace; therefore he also labored more than the others. 1 15, b Not in vain did I receive abundant grace, but I used it for the preaching, having labored more than all of them. Instead of "not in vain did I receive grace"; for I have labored. It is not admissible that Christ indeed rose, but the rest no longer; but by common confession Christ died and rose for no other reason than for our resurrection. If Christ, he says, has not been raised, you believed in vain that your sins are forgiven, since he who forgives has not been raised. But if Christ has been raised, as indeed he has been raised, it is clear that sins are also forgiven, and the resurrection of the dead will be. For this reason they are pitiable, because we do not pursue the good things of this life; for if we despise the good things of the present life and willingly humble ourselves in poverty, in self-control, and in other things, hoping for other things, how are we not pitiable, pursuing the opposite of what we pray for? But by adding "only," he showed that piety is also good for the present life. We ask what sort of death they say the Savior endured, or what sort of resurrection. For if both were in appearance, the faith of Christians is in appearance; but if the death was real, and his resurrection is also real.

Let them say what death or what resurrection. Is death the taking on of flesh? Then the Lord had flesh; and if he had flesh, he also died. And if he died, he also rose, becoming Christ, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep; therefore our bodies also have been raised. But what death shall I reckon? Is it dying to sins? But he himself says: The ruler of this world comes, and he has nothing in me. And if he also died as one who sinned, even the death of sin, since he took away the sin of the world, by this account he has not risen to this day; for he is always a sinner by taking away the sin of the world. But what resurrection of the Lord does Paul mean? Is it the release from the flesh? Then he had flesh. But the release from sins? Then the same argument as before will be stated; and besides, if Christ is the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep, there is every necessity that whatever resurrection we grant to ourselves, we grant the same to the Savior. What resurrection, then, do we receive? Is it the release from the flesh? Then the Lord also had flesh. But the release from sins? Then the Lord also had sins from which he was released. Thus from every side the apostolic sayings are [shown to be] of consequence and power. If the resurrection is of the soul, and its resurrection is understood as either release from the flesh or from sins, how did those who have fallen asleep in Christ perish, if indeed they were righteous? For if they are in Christ, they are not sinners; and if it is release from the flesh, but the soul is immortal, it did not perish. Do you see that he speaks concerning our flesh, which sleeps in Christ when we die—may the departed one be kindly received. Having added "only," he showed also the present good life.

For in this life we are pious, but in that life we receive the rewards. 274 1 Let those who accept these words say through what man death came, or what death is. Is it through Adam? But the soul sinned, yet the body was condemned. Then: "Just as in Adam all die," and the rest. He speaks according to the verdict with respect to the matter: neither are all said to have died, but Enoch and Elijah live, and some are found living at the coming of the Savior. He said "all" because of the verdict and because of what is possible, since not all died as Enoch and Elijah did; but some will also be found living at his coming. "In Adam" he says instead of "because of Adam," just as also "in Christ" means "because of Christ." In Adam, then, we die, clearly as to the body, and in Christ they will be made alive, clearly as to the body; for if souls lived before Christ, and after Christ these alone live again, what is the excess of the dispensation? 1 25 He speaks of the rank of the righteous and the unrighteous, but not specifically of those of Christ here, those

He calls them faithful, but all, because all are Christ's. And at his coming there will be the resurrection of all, when also the end will be, namely the submerging of both death and the devil; for this is the end of the world. He says the kingdom, not his own, but the one which the evil one seized after casting down Adam and those from him. But in handing this over to the Father he will not be alien to it; for the Son reigns together with the Father. And "to reign" is indicative not of a fixed term but of intensification, just as if someone should say: I must live virtuously until I establish righteousness. For he does not say this, that once I have established it I will no longer live in righteousness, but that righteousness must be established by me through virtuous zeal. And in the prophets too the "until" is not altogether of a fixed term but of continuance, as also in the Old Testament where he says: I am I, I am until you grow old. For he does not say that the old age of the aged is a limit of his being, but that even if you grow old, I am, not growing old with you but always existing. So also now the "until" signifies a limit. And what he says is this: his kingdom will not be interrupted in between, nor will the faithful fail until what he purposed is established, and having established it he will also reign continually. If, he says, the bodies remain dead and do not rise, why are we baptized on behalf of these dead, as though they were rising and would be judged, receiving forgiveness of sins so as not to be judged? As far as it depends on man, he says, I fought with beasts, but God saved me. The Greeks object that a seed divided no longer sprouts.

Therefore also a man who has had his foot cut off or has been wholly mutilated in body no longer rises. They are ignorant that it is not nature that was set beside nature, but the power of the one who made it—that is, who gave the seed its sprouting nature and its seminal power? Was it not God? Who is it that makes the seed die first and then rise? Is it not God? Therefore the one who gave the grain of seed its seminal power has also given to our bodies the strength of the resurrection. Not as though I received a body like that of fruits and of men, but that I might set forth the creative power. Not as though the other fleshes rise; for he has used an example. And he calls the sun and the moon heavenly bodies, and shows the rest. So also is the resurrection of the dead. You see that the former things were an example; but now that of which it is the example has been given. And heavenly bodies are the sun and the moon. He calls the natural body that which has been put to death by the sin of the soul, and the spiritual body that which is raised by the power of the spirit, which will no longer live according to the weakness of the soul—which is not sufficient to preserve the constitution of the body—but according to the power of the spirit, which transfers it to immortality. This is what Moses says, that the man also became a living soul. The second man into a life-giving spirit. This is what the Gospel says: for that which is born in her is of the Holy Spirit. The man is from the earth by nature, but earthly by choice. But he says that Christ is from heaven; not by likeness, nor does eternity come from resurrection.

Those around Valentinus and Marcion, and those from Photinus and those of Apollinaris, rush upon this point, but the saying refutes them all. For I ask: did the earthly man from the earth have a soul, or not? They will not deny it. And the Lord from heaven had a body from the earth. Again I ask: why does he call the first man earthly from the earth, but the Lord from heaven? After this: "As is the earthly man"—and he no longer mentions earth, but that—"such are the earthly"? Or is it clearly because "from the earth" refers to nature, but "earthly" to disposition? Having come to "as is the earthly man," and accusing those who did not live rightly, he no longer mentions nature nor "from the earth," and he no longer calls the Lord "from heaven" but "heavenly." Again, the spiritual were also from the earth. "As is the earthly man, such are the earthly; and as is the heavenly man, such are the heavenly." And there is every necessity, if some deny that the Lord from heaven took on flesh, since he is from heaven and the heavenly ones, not to allow that he took on a body, since "as is the earthly man, such are the earthly," and thus this is nowhere understood otherwise than in this way: he spoke of nature, whence from the earth—from this are both the heavenly and those called earthly; but both are no longer earthly. One must therefore attend to this: that the Lord is said to be from heaven, but not the heavenly ones; and the heavenly ones are from the earth, but not the Lord from heaven. He calls the earthly conduct the image of the earthly man, and the heavenly citizenship the image of the heavenly man, meaning: we imitated the disobedience of Adam; let us also imitate the obedience of the Son of God by obeying.

Many of the heretics, in their great folly, draw this against the resurrection. For he did not say that flesh and blood does not rise, but that it will not inherit the kingdom of God. He excluded them from the kingdom of the Son of God, not the grace of the resurrection. What he says, then, is of this sort: that flesh, being flesh, does not inherit, and blood, being blood, does not inherit. For as long as the flesh is flesh, it is corruptible; but thereafter, having put on incorruption and laid aside the weakness of the flesh, it becomes something else, that is, incorruptible. He demonstrated what he said before this; for he calls the kingdom incorruption, and corruption the mortality in this age. Therefore the opposites do not become heirs of the opposites. He made clear that there are many trumpets; for having mentioned the last, he also included the first. And the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. If the dead are incorruptible, they themselves will also be changed, clearly. What need is there that we too shall be changed? Or certainly he said the incorruptible is common to all, but "we shall be changed" hints at the change to the better now; therefore he also said "we" concerning the righteous. Having said this and shown the body, he enclosed the heretics who say that there is no resurrection of the flesh but of the soul. For these also act impiously concerning the divine economy itself, thinking that Christ took flesh not in truth but in appearance, which is senseless. For if he did not have flesh, what was it that died and was buried and rose? But if these things were by appearance, then we too die by appearance.

The incorruptible, then, is common to those who will be raised, but being changed is proper to the saints alone, which indicates the change for the better. And "we" is superfluous, unless perhaps he wishes to signify concerning the saints, in place of "the righteous who are around us," as also elsewhere, when he said "we who are alive," he signified the saints who are around him. A "logia" is the contribution made by collection for the consolation of the poor.