1 Corinthians 14:26–40

Particular effort should be made to ensure that unlearned people will benefit. Nothing should be done to hide things from them because of their lack of learning.

[On whether the educated should submit to forms of worship — such as hymns — that they personally find aesthetically lacking, when those forms edify others]

I would agree that anything the congregation can do may properly and profitably be offered to God in public worship... If an improved hymnody — or even the present hymnody — does edify other people, of course it is an elementary duty of charity and humility for me to submit. I have never spoken in public against the use of hymns: on the contrary I have often told 'highbrow' converts that a humble acquiescence in anything that may edify their uneducated brethren (however frightful it seems to the educated 'natural man') is the first lesson they must learn. The door is low and one must stoop to enter.

"What is it then, brethren? When ye come together, each one hath a psalm, hath a teaching, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying."

Seest thou the foundation and the rule of Christianity? how, as it is the artificer's work to build, so it is the Christian's to profit his neighbors in all things.

But since he had vehemently run down the gift; lest it might seem to be superfluous, for with a view to pull down their pride and no more, he did this:-again he reckons it with the other gifts, saying, "hath a psalm, hath a teaching, hath a tongue." For of old they used also to make psalms by a gift and to teach by a gift. Nevertheless, "let all these look to one thing," saith he, "the correction of their neighbor: let nothing be done at random. For if thou comest not to edify thy brother, why dost thou come here at all? In fact, I do not make much account of the difference of the gifts. One thing concerns me, one thing is my desire, to do all things "unto edifying." Thus also he that hath the lesser gift will outrun him that hath the greater, if this be not wanting. Yea, therefore are the gifts bestowed, that each might be edified; since unless this take place, the gift will rather turn to the condemnation of the receiver. For what, tell me, is the use of prophesying? What is the use of raising the dead, when there is none who profits by it? But if this be the end of the gifts, and if it be possible to effect it in another way without gifts, boast not thyself on the score of the signs, nor do thou bewail thyself to whom the gifts are denied.

Let Marcion then exhibit, as gifts of his god, some prophets, such as have not spoken by human sense, but with the Spirit of God, such as have both predicted things to come, and have made manifest the secrets of the heart; let him produce a psalm, a vision, a prayer -only let it be by the Spirit, in an ecstasy, that is, in a rapture, whenever an interpretation of tongues has occurred to him; let him show to me also, that any woman of boastful tongue in his community has ever prophesied from amongst those specially holy sisters of his.

In antiquity, psalms too were composed by gift, and for teaching a gift was bestowed. By "revelation" he means prophecy, giving the genus the name of the species. He mentions the gift of tongues as well, lest they consider this gift entirely contemptible and not even belonging among the ranks of gifts. Let all these things, he says, be for edification. For the distinguishing characteristic of a Christian is to edify, to bring benefit. How then can one who possesses only the gift of tongues edify, bring benefit? In this way: if he comes together with one who has the gift of interpretation, and they exercise their gifts in concert.

Here he tells them how to use these gifts. In regard to this he does two things: first, he shows how they should act in regard to the use of these gifts; secondly, he concludes to his main proposition (v. 39). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he shows how orderly they should behave in the use of these gifts; secondly, he expresses their presumption (v. 36). In regard to the first he does three things: first, he shows in general how they should behave in all gifts; secondly, in regard to the gift of tongues (v. 27); thirdly, as to the gift of prophecy (v. 29).

He says, therefore: to prophesy is better than to speak in tongues. What then, brethren is to be done? This is to be done. For when you come together, it is obvious that one does not have all the gifts, and therefore none of you should use all the gifts, but that gift which he had more specially received from God and which is better for edification. For each one has some special gift: one has a psalm, i.e., a song to praise the Lord's name, or to explain psalms: "He makes me tread upon my high places" (Hab 3:19); another has a lesson, i.e., some preaching to instruct them in morals, or an explanation and a spiritual sense: "A man is known by his teaching" (Pr 12:8); another has a revelation obtained either in dreams or in a vision: "God is in heaven revealing mysteries" (Dan 2:28); another has a tongue, i.e., the gift of tongues or he reads prophecies: "And they began to speak in tongues" (Ac 2:4); another has an interpretation: "To another the interpretation of tongues" (1 Cor 12:10).

But these are so arranged, because they derive either from human talent or from God alone. If they are solely from human talent, they are either to the praise of God, and so he says, one has a psalm, or to the instruction of the neighbor, and so he says, one has a teaching. If they are from God alone, they are either inward secrets, and so he says, one has a revelation, or outwardly hidden, and so he says, one has a tongue. For manifesting these there is a third thing, and so he says, an interpretation. And, of course, all should be done for edification: "Let each of us please his neighbor for his good, to edify him" (Rom 15:2).

Paul does not want these people to take up the whole day and leave insufficient time for expounding the Scriptures.

"And if any man speaketh in a tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that in turn; and let one interpret. But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the Church; and let him speak to himself, and to God."

What sayest thou, tell me? Having spoken so much of tongues, that the gift is a thing unprofitable, a thing superfluous, if it have no interpreter, dost thou command again to speak with tongues? I do not command, saith he, neither do I forbid; as when he saith, "if any of them that believe not bid you to a feast and ye be disposed to go," he saith it not laying down a law for them to go, but not hindering them: so likewise here. "And let him speak. to himself and to God." If he endure not to be silent, saith he, but is so ambitious and vain-glorious, "let him speak by himself." And thus, by the very fact of so permitting, he greatly checked and put them to shame. Which he doth also elsewhere, discoursing of converse with a wife and saying, "But this I say because of your incontinency." But not so did he speak, when he was discoursing of prophecy. How then? In a tone of command and legislation: "Let the prophets speak, two or three." And he no where here seeks the interpreter, nor doth he stop the mouth of him that prophesies as under the former head, saying, "If there be no interpreter, let him keep silence;" because in fact he who speaks in a tongue is not sufficient of himself. Wherefore if any hath both gifts, let him speak. But if he hath not, yet wish to speak, let him do so with the interpreter's aid. For the prophet is an interpreter, but of God; whereas thou art of man. "But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence:" for nothing ought to be done superfluously, nothing for ambition. Only "let him speak to himself and to God;" i.e., mentally, or quietly and without noise: at least, if he will speak. For this is surely not the tone of one making a law, but it may be of one who shames them more even by his permission; as when he saith, "but if any hunger, let him eat at home:" and seeming to give permission, he touches them hereby the more sharply. "For ye come not together for this purpose," saith he, "that ye may show that ye have a gift, but that ye may edify the hearers;" which also he before said, "Let all things be done unto edifying."

I do not forbid speaking in tongues, but let it not be without interpretation. And let few speak in tongues, lest there be confusion and disorder; "and that in turn," that is, successively. But, in any case, there must be an interpreter.

Here the Apostle instructs them on how to behave in regard to using the gift of tongues, and he does two things: first, he shows how they should use the gift of tongues: secondly, when they should stop using it (v. 28).

First, therefore he says: the way the gift of tongues should be used among you is that if anyone speaks in a tongue, i.e., talks of visions or dreams, such speaking should not be done by many on account of so much time being devoted to tongues, there is not room for prophecies, and confusion is generated, but let there be only two, and if necessary, at most three; so that three should be enough: "On the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses" (Dt 17:6). But it should be noted that this custom is still partly observed in the Church. For we have readings and epistles and gospels in place of tongues, and therefore in the Mass only two are said, which pertain to the gift of tongues, namely, the epistle and the gospel. In Matins many are said, namely, three readings in one nocturn. For at an earlier time nocturnes were said according to the night watches, but now they are said at one time. Not only should order as to the number of speakers be observed, but also as to the method, and this is what he says: and each in turn, i.e., that those who speak follow one another, so that one speaks after the other. Or each in turn, i.e., interruptedly, namely, that one speak one part of the vision or of the instruction and explain it, and then another and explain it, and so on. This was the method followed by preachers, when they preach by interpreting to men of an unknown tongue; and therefore he says: and let one interpret.

The person who speaks in the Holy Spirit speaks when he chooses to do so and then can be silent, like the prophets. But those who are possessed by an unclean spirit speak even when they do not want to. They say things that they do not understand.

If he does not have an interpreter, let him not speak in the church, lest he appear as a foreigner uttering what is incomprehensible and unintelligible to many. But if he is so vainglorious that he does not wish to be silent, then let him speak to himself and to God, that is, without noise and secretly, to himself, so that his words are heard by God alone, and not by people. See how he seems to permit, yet at the same time forbids.

Then when he says: But if there is no one to interpret, he shows when tongues should not be used, saying that they should speak in parts and one should interpret. But if there is no one to interpret, one who has the gift of tongues, should keep silence in the church, i.e., should not speak or preach to the multitude in a strange tongue, because he is not understood by them, but should speak to himself or to God, because he understands himself; and this in silence by praying or meditating: "I will speak in the bitterness of my soul. I will say to God: Do not condemn me." (Jb 10:1).

Paul allowed others to ask questions about ambiguous matters, so that they might be elucidated by clearer discussion.

Neither must we prescribe this from custom, but overcome opposite custom by reason. For neither did Peter, whom first the Lord chose, and upon whom He built His Church, when Paul disputed with him afterwards about circumcision, claim anything to himself insolently, nor arrogantly assume anything; so as to say that he held the primacy, and that he ought rather to be obeyed by novices and those lately come. Nor did he despise Paul because he had previously been a persecutor of the Church, but admitted the counsel of truth, and easily yielded to the lawful reason which Paul asserted, furnishing thus an illustration to us both of concord and of patience, that we should not obstinately love our own opinions, but should rather adopt as our own those which at any time are usefully and wholesomely suggested by our brethren and colleagues, if they be true and lawful. Paul, moreover, looking forward to this, and consulting faithfully for concord and peace, has laid down in his epistle this rule: "Moreover, let the prophets speak two or three, and let the rest judge. But if anything be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace." In which place he has taught and shown that many things are revealed to individuals for the better, and that each one ought not obstinately to contend for that which he had once imbibed and held; but if anything has appeared better and more useful, he should gladly embrace it. For we are not overcome when better things are presented to us, but we are instructed, especially in those matters which pertain to the unity of the Church and the truth of our hope and faith; so that we, priests of God and prelates of His Church, by His condescension, should know that remission of sins cannot be given save in the Church, nor can the adversaries of Christ claim to themselves anything belonging to His grace.

But permit the prophets to make Thanksgiving as much as they desire.

"Let the prophets speak by two or three, and let the others discern."

No where hath he added, "at the most," as in the case of the tongues. And how is this, one saith? For he makes out that neither is prophesy sufficient in itself, if at least he permitteth the judgment to others. Nay, surely it is quite sufficient; and this is why he did not stop the mouth of the prophet, as of the other, when there is no interpreter; nor, as in his case he said, "if there be no interpreter let him keep silence," so also in the case of the prophet, "if there be none to discern, let him not prophesy;" but he only secured the hearer; since for the satisfaction of the hearers he said this, that no diviner might throw himself in among them. For of this also at the beginning he bade them beware, when he introduced a distinction between divination and prophecy, and now he bids them discriminate and spy out the matter, so that no Satanic teacher might privily enter.

Among the prophets, sorcerers also hid themselves. Therefore he says: let the others judge concerning them, so that a sorcerer might not secretly escape notice. For as was said above (1 Cor. 12:10), there was also the gift of "discerning of spirits" for distinguishing false and true prophets. He commands "two" or "three" to prophesy, for the sake of maintaining good order and so that sorcerers might not hide among a multitude.

Here the Apostle instructs them on how to use the gift of prophecy. In regard to the first he does two things: first, he shows how the gift of prophecy is to be used both as to number and to order; secondly, to whom the use of prophecy is prohibited (v. 34). In regard to the first he does three things: first, he teaches the order in which to use the gift of prophecy; secondly, the reason for this (v. 31); thirdly, he excludes an objection (v. 32). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he fixes on the number using this gift; secondly, he teaches the method or order of using it (v. 30).

In regard to the first it should be noted that the use of prophecy according to what the Apostle says here is to propose a word of instruction to the people, by explaining the Sacred Scripture. And because in the early Church there were many who had this gift from God and the number of the faithful was not very great, then in order to avoid confusion and boredom, the Apostle desires that not all who can explain a prophecy and Sacred Scripture should prophesy, but certain definite ones. And this is what he says: Let two or three prophets speak. As if to say: I do not want all who assemble, but two only or at most three, as the need to speak exists, should speak, i.e., exhort. This is in keeping with the Scriptures: "By the evidence of two or three witnesses" (Matt 18:16). Let the others, namely, those who should not prophesy, weigh the things proposed to them, whether something good or something bad has been said; approving what is good and making them retract what was wrong: "The spiritual man judges all things" (1 Cor 2:15).

"Seven thunders uttered their voices." The seven thunders uttering their voices signify, the Holy Spirit of sevenfold power, who through the prophets announced all things to come, and by His voice John gave his testimony in the world; but because he says that he was about to write the things which the thunders had uttered, that is, whatever things had been obscure in the announcements of the Old Testament; he is forbidden to write them, but he was charged to leave them sealed, because he is an apostle, nor was it fitting that the grace of the subsequent stage should be given in the first. "The time," says he, "is at hand." For the apostles, by powers, by signs, by portents, and by mighty works, have overcome unbelief. After them there is now given to the same completed Churches the comfort of having the prophetic Scriptures subsequently interpreted, for I said that after the apostles there would be interpreting prophets.

For the apostle says: "And he placed in the Church indeed, first, apostles; secondly, prophets; thirdly, teachers," and the rest. And in another place he says: "Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the others judge." And he says: "Every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered, dishonoureth her head" And when he says, "Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the others judge," he is not speaking in respect of the Catholic prophecy of things unheard and unknown, but of things both announced and known. But let them judge whether or not the interpretation is consistent with the testimonies of the prophetic utterance. It is plain, therefore, that to John, armed as he was with superior virtue, this was not necessary, although the body of Christ, which is the Church, adorned with His members, ought to respond to its position.

In particular, the higher-ranking person should give way to the lower. It is simply not the case that every privilege can be granted to a single individual. Nor can it be that anyone, however low in the hierarchy, should have nothing given to him. No one is without the grace of God.

But it happens, by a love of presumption and of obstinacy, that one would rather maintain his own evil and false position, than agree in the right and true which belongs to another. Looking forward to which, the blessed Apostle Paul writes to Timothy, and warns him that a bishop must not be "litigious, nor contentious, but gentle and teachable." Now he is teachable who is meek and gentle to the patience of learning. For it behoves a bishop not only to teach, but also to learn; because he also teaches better who daily increases and advances by learning better; which very thing, moreover, the same Apostle Paul teaches, when he admonishes, "that if anything better be revealed to one sitting by, the first should hold his peace." But there is a brief way for religious and simple minds, both to put away error, and to find and to elicit truth. For if we return to the head and source of divine tradition, human error ceases; and having seen the reason of the heavenly sacraments, whatever lay hid in obscurity under the gloom and cloud of darkness, is opened into the light of the truth. If a channel supplying water, which formerly flowed plentifully and freely, suddenly fail, do we not go to the fountain, that there the reason of the failure may be ascertained, whether from the drying up of the springs the water has failed at the fountainhead, or whether, flowing thence free and full, it has failed in the midst of its course; that so, if it has been caused by the fault of an interrupted or leaky channel, that the constant stream does not flow uninterruptedly and continuously, then the channel being repaired and strengthened, the water collected may be supplied for the use and drink of the city, with the same fertility and plenty with which it issues from the spring? And this it behoves the priests of God to do now, if they would keep the divine precepts, that if in any respect the truth have wavered and vacillated, we should return to our original and Lord, and to the evangelical and apostolical tradition; and thence may arise the ground of our action, whence has taken rise both our order and our origin.

"But if a revelation he made to another sitting by, let the first keep silence. For ye all can prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted."

What may this be which is spoken? "If when thou prophesiest," saith he, "and art speaking, the spirit of another stir him up, be silent thenceforth." For that which he said in the case of the tongues, this also here he requires, that it should be done "in turn," only in a diviner way here. For he made not use of the very expression, "in turn?" but "if a revelation be made to another." Since what need was there further, that when the second was moved to prophesy the first should speak? Ought they then both? Nay, this were profane and would produce confusion. Ought the first? This too were out of place. For to this end when the one was speaking, the Spirit moved the other, in order that he too might say somewhat.

So then, comforting him that had been silenced, he saith, "For ye all can prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted." Seest thou how again he states the reason wherefore he doeth all things? For if him that speaks with tongues he altogether forbid to speak, when he hath not an interpreter, because of the unprofitableness; reasonably also he bids restrain prophecy, if it have not this quality, but createth confusion and disturbance and unseasonable tumult.

Here he teaches good order and humility of mind. When, he says, the Spirit stirs up another, you, the first one, be silent. For if it had pleased the Spirit for you to speak, then "you can all prophesy one by one," that is, do not grieve, for both you, and another, and all can prophesy individually and in succession. For this gift is not confined to one person alone, but is given to all, so that the whole Church may be instructed and receive encouragement toward virtue.

The order to be observed in using this gift is that if one of those who sat and kept silence and judged had received a better revelation, then one who is exhorting and standing should sit down and the one to whom a better revelation has been made should rise and exhort. And this is what he says: If a revelation has been made to another sitting by, namely, by the Holy Spirit, let the first be silent and yield to him: "Anticipate one another with honor" (Rom 12:10).

It is a tradition of the synagogue which Paul is asking us to follow, whereby the people dispute while seated in chairs, on benches or on the floor, according to their rank. If a revelation has been given to someone sitting on the floor, he should be allowed to speak and not be despised because of his low rank.

Clearly the prophet builds up the church when through the function of his foretelling he makes wholly clear matters exceedingly vital which were unknown. Those who have been granted the ability to understand well and to interpret the divine Scriptures are obviously not excluded from the gift of prophecy.

This rule is still applied in the church today, in that preachers take turns to teach the people.

The reason for this is that according to this method you can successively prophesy one after the other, so that all, i.e., the greater, may learn and all, i.e., the lesser, may be encouraged. "The wise man may also hear and increase in learning" (Pr 1:5).

The Spirit is said to be subject so that he may facilitate the good efforts which he prompts.

"And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets."

Seest thou how he put him to shame earnestly and fearfully? For that the man might not strive nor be factious, he signifies that the gift itself was under subjection. For by "spirit" here, he means its actual working. But if the spirit be subject, much more thou its possessor canst not justly be contentious.

If the gift is subject to the prophets, how can it not also be subject to you, so that you may keep quiet when you are meant to?

Walk in them, and exhort your hearers that their repentance may be pure during the remainder of their life. Fulfil carefully this ministry which I now entrust to you, and you will accomplish much.

To be sure, an amender of that Gospel, which had been all topsy-turvy from the days of Tiberius to those of Antoninus, first presented himself in Marcion alone-so long looked for by Christ, who was all along regretting that he had been in so great a hurry to send out his apostles without the support of Marcion! But for all that, heresy, which is for ever mending the Gospels, and corrupting them in the act, is an affair of man's audacity, not of God's authority; and if Marcion be even a disciple, he is yet not "above his master; " if Marcion be an apostle, still as Paul says, "Whether it be I or they, so we preach; " if Marcion be a prophet, even "the spirits of the prophets will be subject to the prophets," for they are not the authors of confusion, but of peace; or if Marcion be actually an angel, he must rather be designated "as anathema than as a preacher of the gospel," because it is a strange gospel which he has preached.

And this is as a consolation to him who was commanded to be silent. These words have the following meaning: do not object, do not resist. For the Spirit Himself, that is, the gift that is in you, and the operation of the Spirit that is in you, is subject to the gift of another who has been stirred to prophecy; and if the Spirit is subject, then all the more you yourself, who have received the Spirit, ought not to object. Some, however, understood it thus: the pagan oracles, once a demon seized them, could not be silent even if they wished; but our holy prophets are not like that—rather, it depends on their own will whether to be silent or to speak. This is what the words mean: "the spirits of the prophets," that is, the gifts, "are subject to the prophets" and to the will of the prophets to be silent or not to be silent. Lest the one possessing this gift should say, "How can I, at your command, be silent when I speak by the impulse of the Spirit?"—he says that this Spirit who impels you is subject to you, and it is already within your power to be silent, and therefore do not appeal to the Spirit in vain.

If any should say: O Apostle, I cannot be silent while another prophesies or yield to one sitting from the time he began, because I cannot hold back the Spirit Who speaks in me, as it says in Jb (4:2): "Who can keep from speaking"? Therefore, the Apostle rejects this when he says: The spirits of prophets. As if to say: yes, he can easily be quiet and sit down, because the spirit of prophets, i.e., the spirit who gives prophecies (and he puts it in the plural on account of the many revelations inspired in them) is subject to prophets; some as to knowledge, because as Gregory says: "The spirit of prophecy is not always present to the prophets. Hence it is not a habit, as knowledge is. For then it would follow that even as to knowledge he would be subject to them and they could use it or not use it when they willed; but it is a force or impression from God inclining and teaching the hearts of the prophets and they know only when they are so touched. Hence, he is not subject to them." But this is not the way to understand the Apostle's words, but the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets as to declaring, namely, because it is in their power to declare when they wish or not to declare the things revealed. And so the excuse is worthless, because the Spirit does not compel you in such a way that you cannot keep silence.

Those who are called in peace ought to aim for patience, so that the laws of peace are not broken.

For you know undoubtedly that those that are by us named bishops, and presbyters, and deacons, were made by prayer, and by the laying on of hands; and that by the difference of their names is showed the difference of their employments. For not every one that will is ordained, as the case was in that spurious and counterfeit priesthood of the calves under Jeroboam; [1 Kings 13:33] but he only who is called of God. For if there were no rule or distinction of orders, it would suffice to perform all the offices under one name. But being taught by the Lord the series of things, we distributed the functions of the high-priesthood to the bishops, those of the priesthood to the presbyters, and the ministration under them both to the deacons; that the divine worship might be performed in purity. For it is not lawful for a deacon to offer the sacrifice, or to baptize, or to give either the greater or the lesser blessing. Nor may a presbyter perform ordination; for it is not agreeable to holiness to have this order perverted. For "God is not the God of confusion," [1 Corinthians 14:33] that the subordinate persons should tyrannically assume to themselves the functions belonging to their superiors, forming a new scheme of laws to their own mischief, not knowing that "it is hard for them to kick against the pricks;" [Acts 26:14] for such as these do not fight against us, or against the bishops, but against the universal Bishop and the High Priest of the Father, Jesus Christ our Lord. High priests, priests, and Levites were ordained by Moses, the most beloved of God.

The Church is a union of rational men united in harmonious and uniform adherence to divine peace. For the Church in return loves itself. And love is born of obedience to the Law. And so it is fitting that those who obey the Law be loving also. "By this will all men know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another." And the Apostle writes: "For God is a God of peace, not of disorder."

Then he signifies that this is pleasing also to God, subjoining and saying, "For God is not a God of confusion, but of peace, as [I teach] in all the Churches of the saints."

Seest thou by how many reasons he leads him to silence and soothes him, in the act of giving way to the other? By one thing and that the chief, that he was not shut up by such a proceeding; "for ye all can prophesy," saith he, "one by one." By a second, that this seems good to the Spirit Himself; "for the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets." Besides these, that this is according to the mind of God; "for God," saith he, "is not a God of confusion, but of peace:" and by a fourth, that in every part of the world this custom prevails, and no strange thing is enjoined upon them. For thus, saith he, "I teach in all the Churches of the saints."

What now can be more awful than these things? For in truth the Church was a heaven then, the Spirit governing all things, and moving each one of the rulers and making him inspired. But now we retain only the symbols of those gifts. For now also we speak two or three, and in turn, and when one is silent, another begins. But these are only signs and memorials of those things. Wherefore when we begin to speak, the people respond, "with thy Spirit," indicating that of old they thus used to speak, not of their own wisdom, but moved by the Spirit. But not so now: (I speak of mine own case so far.) But the present Church is like a woman who hath fallen from her former prosperous days, and in many respects retains the symbols only of that ancient prosperity; displaying indeed the repositories and caskets of her golden ornaments, but bereft of her wealth: such an one doth the present Church resemble. And I say not this in respect of gifts: for it were nothing marvelous if it were this only: but in respect also of life and virtue.

He shows that this is also pleasing to God, that the first should be silent; because God is not a God of disorder and confusion (and there would be confusion if no one were silent, but all prophesied), but of peace. This peace is observed in all the Churches among the saints, that is, the believers. For there are churches of the Hellenes and Greeks. Be ashamed, you too, to conduct yourselves differently than how all the churches conduct themselves.

That this is true he proves when he says, God is not a God of confusion. And he formulates this reason: God never compels one to something from which arise quarrels or dissension, because He is not a God of dissension, but of peace. But if the Spirit of prophecy compelled them to speak, he would be a cause of dissension, because He would always want to speak or not to teach or to be silent, while another is speaking something about which the others are disturbed. Therefore, the Holy Spirit does not compel men to speak: "May the God of love and peace be with you" (2 Cor 13:11). Yet because he could still object that he would not do this, because he commanded this only of them and not of the other Churches; and hence it could seem a burden, the Apostle says that he teaches this not only to them but to all the churches. And this is what he says: as in all the churches of the saints, namely, about the use of tongues and of prophecy: "Appeal to you that all of you agree" (1 Cor 1:10).

We do not permit our "women to teach in the Church," [1 Corinthians 14:34] but only to pray and hear those that teach; for our Master and Lord, Jesus Himself, when He sent us the twelve to make disciples of the people and of the nations, did nowhere send out women to preach, although He did not want such. For there were with us the mother of our Lord and His sisters; also Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Martha and Mary the sisters of Lazarus; Salome, and certain others. For, had it been necessary for women to teach, He Himself had first commanded these also to instruct the people with us. For "if the head of the wife be the man," [1 Corinthians 11:3] it is not reasonable that the rest of the body should govern the head.

Now, as to women's baptizing, we let you know that there is no small peril to those that undertake it. Therefore we do not advise you to it; for it is dangerous, or rather wicked and impious. For if the "man be the head of the woman," [1 Corinthians 11:3] and he be originally ordained for the priesthood, it is not just to abrogate the order of the creation, and leave the principal to come to the extreme part of the body. For the woman is the body of the man, taken from his side, and subject to him, from whom she was separated for the procreation of children. For says He, "He shall rule over you." [Genesis 3:16] For the principal part of the woman is the man, as being her head. But if in the foregoing constitutions we have not permitted them to teach, how will any one allow them, contrary to nature, to perform the office of a priest? For this is one of the ignorant practices of the Gentile atheism, to ordain women priests to the female deities, not one of the constitutions of Christ. For if baptism were to be administered by women, certainly our Lord would have been baptized by His own mother, and not by John; or when He sent us to baptize, He would have sent along with us women also for this purpose. But now He has nowhere, either by constitution or by writing, delivered to us any such thing; as knowing the order of nature, and the decency of the action; as being the Creator of nature, and the Legislator of the constitution.

That a woman ought to be silent in the church. In the first Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: "Let women be silent in the church. But if any wish to learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home." Also to Timothy: "Let a woman learn with silence, in all subjection. But I permit not a woman to teach, nor to be set over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve; and Adam was not seduced, but the woman was seduced."

The serpent is crippled and bound by the curse, while Eve's mouth is sealed with a silence that is beneficial, but she will also serve again as a harp to sing the praises of the Creator.

Having abated the disturbance both from the tongues and from the prophesyings; and having made a law to prevent confusion, that they who speak with tongues should do this in turn, and that they who prophesy should be silent when another begins; he next in course proceeds to the disorder which arose from the women, cutting off their unseasonable boldness of speech: and that very opportunely. For if to them that have the gifts it is not permitted to speak inconsiderately, nor when they will, and this, though they be moved by the Spirit; much less to those women who prate idly and to no purpose. Therefore he represses their babbling with much authority, and taking the law along with him, thus he sews up their mouths; not simply exhorting here or giving counsel, but even laying his commands on them vehemently, by the recitation of an ancient law on that subject. For having said, "Let your women keep silence in the churches;" and "it is not permitted unto them to speak, but let them be in subjection;" he added, "as also saith the law." And where doth the law say this? "Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee." (Genesis 3:16) Seest thou the wisdom of Paul, what kind of testimony he adduced, one that not only enjoins on them silence, but silence too with fear; and with as great fear as that wherewith a maid servant ought to keep herself quiet. Wherefore also having himself said, "it is not permitted unto them to speak," he added not, "but to be silent," but instead of "to be silent," he set down what is more, to wit, "the being in subjection." And if this be so in respect of husbands, much more in respect of teachers, and fathers, and the general assembly of the Church. "But if they are not even to speak," saith one, "nor ask a question, to what end are they to be present?" That they may hear what they ought; but the points which are questioned let them learn at home from their husbands.

Further, because they supposed this to be an ornament to them, I mean their speaking in public; again he brings round the discourse to the opposite point, saying, "For it is shameful for a woman to speak in the church." That is, first he made this out from the law of God, then from common reason and our received custom; even when he was discoursing with the women about long hair, he said, "Doth not even nature herself teach you?" (1 Cor. 11:14.) And everywhere thou mayest find this to be his manner, not only from the divine Scriptures, but also from the common custom, to put them to shame.

If this was the case, what are we to make of the fact that Philip had four daughters who prophesied? If they could do it, why can we not let our own prophetesses speak? We may answer this question as follows. First, if our prophetesses have spoken, show us the signs of prophecy in them. Second, even if the daughters of Philip did prophesy, they did not do so inside the church. Likewise in the Old Testament, although Deborah was reputed to be a prophetess, there is no indication that she ever corporately addressed the people in the way that Isaiah or Jeremiah did. The same is true of Huldah..

By the Romans, however, the rudiments of learning are wont to be called elements.

In precisely the same manner, when enjoining on women silence in the church, that they speak not for the mere sake of learning (although that even they have the right of prophesying, he has already shown when he covers the woman that prophesies with a veil), he goes to the law for his sanction that woman should be under obedience. Now this law, let me say once for all, he ought to have made no other acquaintance with, than to destroy it.

For how credible would it seem, that he who has not permitted a woman even to learn with over-boldness, should give a female the power of teaching and of baptizing! "Let them be silent," he says, "and at home consult their own husbands."

It is not permitted to a woman to speak in the church; but neither (is it permitted her) to teach, nor to baptize, nor to offer, nor to claim to herself a lot in any manly function, not to say (in any) sacerdotal office.

Having established good order in everything concerning the gift of tongues and prophets—namely, that few should prophesy, and from this no confusion or disorder should arise—he now eliminates the disorder that came from women, and says that they must be silent in church. Then he says something greater, namely, that it is more fitting for them to be in submission. For submission means silence from fear, as is the case with female slaves. By "the Law" he means the book of Genesis, in which it is written: "Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you" (Gen. 3:16). If the wife is appointed to be in submission to her husband, how much more so to the spiritual teachers in church.

Here the Apostle mentions the persons to whom the use of prophecy is forbidden. In regard to this he does two things: first, he shows to whom the use of prophecy is forbidden; secondly, he removes an objection (v. 35). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he mentions the command to forbid; secondly he gives a reason for this (v. 34b).

He says, therefore: I will that men use the gift of prophecy in this manner, but I do not want women to speak in the church, so that the women should keep silence in the church: "I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men" (1 Tim 2:12). And Chrysostom assigns the reason for this, saying: woman has spoken once and subverted the entire world. But on the other hand it seems that many women are recorded to have prophesied, as the Samaritan woman (Jn. 4:39) and Anna, the wife of Phanuel (Lk 2:36) and Deborah (Jg 4:4) and Huldah, the prophetess (2 Kgs 22:14) and the daughter of Philip the evangelist (Ac 21:9). Above, it also says (11:5): "Any woman who prays or prophesies with her head unveiled dishonors her head." The answer is that there are two things in prophecy, namely, revelation and its manifestation; but women are not excluded from revelation, for many things are revealed to them as to men. But manifestation is of two kinds: one is public and from this they are excluded; the other is private and this is permitted to them, because it is not preaching but manifesting.

He assigns the reason for this, saying: for they are not permitted to speak, namely, by the authority of the Church, but their function is to be subject to men. Hence, since teaching implies prelacy and presiding, it is not suited to those who are subjects. The reason they are subject and not in the forefront is that they are deficient in reasoning, which is especially necessary for those who preside. Therefore, the Philosopher says in his Politics that corruption of rule occurs, when the rule comes to women.

It is shameful because it is contrary to discipline for them to presume to speak about the law in the house of God, who has taught that they are subject to their husbands, when they know that men have the primacy there and that for them it is more fitting to be free to pray while holding their tongues. If they dare to speak in church, it is a disgrace, because they are veiled in order to appear humble. Moreover, women like this show that they are immodest, which is a disgrace to their husbands too. For when women are insolent, their husbands receive the blame as well.

I wish to see each man's earnestness and each woman's devotion. Burn out impiety from your mind, put your soul on the anvil and your stubborn infidelity under the hammer.… Then let the gate of paradise be opened to each man and each woman among you.

"And if they would learn any thing, let them ask their own husbands at home."

Thus, "not only, as it seems, are they not allowed to speak," saith he, "at random, but not even to ask any question in the church." Now if they ought not to ask questions, much more is their speaking at pleasure contrary to law. And what may be the cause of his setting them under so great subjection? Because the woman is in some sort a weaker being and easily carried away and light minded. Here you see why he set over them their husbands as teachers, for the benefit of both. For so he both rendered the women orderly, and the husbands he made anxious, as having to deliver to their wives very exactly what they heard.

The virgins of men go about, in opposition to the virgins of God, with front quite bare, excited to a rash audacity; and the semblance of virgins is exhibited by women who have the power of asking somewhat from husbands, not to say such a request as that (forsooth) their rivals-all the more "free" in that they are the "hand-maids" of Christ alone -may be surrendered to them. "We are scandalized," they say, "because others walk otherwise (than we do); "and they prefer being "scandalized" to being provoked (to modesty).

Lest someone say: if they will not speak, then how will they learn what they do not know? he answers that they must learn at home from their husbands. This will make them modest, and their husbands more attentive, since they will have to accurately convey to their wives, in response to their questions, what they heard in church. Note then that wives are not permitted to speak in church even about matters that are necessary and beneficial to the soul.

Perhaps they were showing off with spiritual conversations in the church; but he, on the contrary, says that this is inglorious and shameful for them.

Then when he says, if there is anything they desire to know, because some might say that at least they can ask the Church about their doubts, he excludes this and does two things: first, he removes an objection; secondly, he assigns the reason (v. 35b). He says, therefore: I say that women should be silent in the church, but if they wish to learn the things about which they doubt, let them ask their husbands at home: "Let women learn in silence" (1 Tim 2:11). The reason for this is that it is shameful for a woman to speak in Church and not only unbecoming; for in women the natural feeling of shame is commended. If therefore they ask and dispute in public, it would be a sign of shamelessness, and this is shameful to them. Hence it also follows that in law the office of advocate is forbidden to women.

Paul issued the Corinthians with this reproof because they were so elated with vanity. The suggestion was that if they did not obey the words of the faith, there would be no one who would believe.

But besides these things, he also shames them by consideration of what all agreed on, and what was every where prescribed; which topic also here he hath set down, saying,

"What? was it from you that the word of God went forth? or came it unto you alone?"

Thus he brings in the other Churches also as holding this law, both abating the disturbance by consideration of the novelty of the thing, and by the general voice making his saying acceptable. Wherefore also elsewhere he said, "Who shall put you in remembrance of my ways which be in Christ, even as I teach everywhere in all the Churches." (1 Cor. 4:17) And again, "God is not a God of confusion, but of peace, as in all the Churches of the saints." (1 Cor. 14:33.) And here, "What? was it from you that the word of God went forth? or came it unto you alone?" i.e., "neither first, nor alone are ye believers, but the whole world." Which also writing to the Colossians he said, "even as it is bearing fruit and increasing in all the world," (Col. 1:6) speaking of the Gospel.

But he turns it also at another time to the encouragement of his hearers; as when he saith that theirs were the first fruits, and were manifest unto all. Thus, writing to the Thessalonians he said, "For from you hath sounded forth the word of God," and, "in every place your faith to God-ward is gone forth." (1 Thess. 1:8) And again to the Romans, "Your faith is proclaimed throughout the whole world." For both are apt to shame and stir up, as well the being commended of others, as that they have others partakers in their judgment. Wherefore also here he saith; "What? was it from you that the word of God went forth? or came it unto you only?" "For neither can ye say this," saith he; "we were made teachers to the rest, and it cannot be right for us to learn of others;" nor, "the faith remained in this place only, and no precedents from other quarters ought to be received." Seest thou by how many arguments he put them to shame? He introduced the law, he signified the shamefulness of the thing, he brought forward the other Churches.

The speech is addressed to someone who has, as it were, objected to him. What are you saying, you resist and do not acknowledge it as good that wives should be silent in the churches? Is it not because you are teachers, and from you the preaching passed to the rest? Has the faith been established among you alone, and must you not accept what has been accepted by others? You are believers, but not the first, not the only ones. Therefore you too must willingly accept what is pleasing to the whole Church.

Then when he says: What? Did the word of God originate with you?, he answers those who contradict him. And because they could all contradict at once or at least the wise among them, he does two things in regard to this: first, he refutes them as to their entire church; secondly, as to the wise only (v. 37).

In regard to the first it should be noted that the reason the people were wont to contradict the Lord or a ruler is singularity. For singularity can be caused by either a priority in some good or excellence. Therefore, the Apostle, wishing to refute the contradicting Corinthians, first excludes priority from their church, when he says: Did the word of God originate with you? As if to say: if I made some rules in the church of the Jews against their rules, they could contradict, because they had the word of God before you, for the word of God did not originate from you. Secondly, he excludes excellence from them, saying: or are you the only one it has reached? As if to say: you are not the only ones who have believed, but others also. Hence you do not excel them: "Their sound went forth in all the earth" (Ps 19:5), and therefore, you ought to do as the others do.

Paul is alluding to the false apostles mentioned above, by whom they had been misled. They were teaching things which people wanted to hear but which were not of God. By saying that he was handing on nothing of his own, Paul was trying to indicate that what he was saying came from God and not from men. He therefore preaches consistently, with a clear conscience because he does not desire to please men but God.

Next, what is strongest of all he puts last, saying, "God ordains these things even at this time by me."

"If any man thinketh himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him take knowledge of the things which I write unto you that they are the commandments of the Lord. But if any man is ignorant, let him be ignorant."

And wherefore did he add this? Intimating that he is not using violence nor contention, which is a sign of them who wish not to set up their own things, but aim at what is profitable to others. Wherefore also in another place he saith, "But if any man seemeth to be contentious, we have no such custom." (1 Cor. 11:16) But he doth not this everywhere, but only where the offences are not very great, and then rather as putting them to shame. Since when he discourses of other sins, he speaks not thus. But how? "Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor effeminate, shall inherit the kingdom of God." (1 Cor. 6:9-10) And again, "Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye receive circumcision, Christ will profit you nothing." (Gal. 5:2.) But here, since his discourse was of silence, he doth not very keenly inveigh against them, by this very thing attracting them the more.

He placed at the end what is strongest of all, namely, that God commands this through me, and this is undoubtedly recognized by the one who among you is regarded as a prophet or as having some other spiritual gift, for example, the gift of knowledge.

Then when he says: If anyone thinks that he is a prophet or spiritual, he refutes the greater ones in particular. In regard to this he does two things: first, he refutes them; secondly, he answers a tacit objection (v. 38).

He says, therefore: Suppose that the entire Church does not contradict, except someone who seems to be a prophet. He says, seems, because, if he contradicts, he is not really a prophet or wise or spiritual, because many are spiritual who are not prophets, although all prophets are spiritual. He, I say, who so seems to be a prophet and spiritual does not contradict, but should know, i.e., should recognize that the things I am writing to you are commands of the Lord and not mine only. As if to say: From the fact that no one had dared to contradict the commands of the Lord, and the things I write are the commands of the Lord, no one should dare to contradict them: "Do you desire proof that Christ is speaking"? (2 Cor 13:3). And from this we can gather that the Apostle's words are from a familiar revelation of the Holy Spirit and of Christ and, therefore, are to be obeyed as commands of Christ. Hence the Apostle is careful to distinguish things he commands of himself, when he says: "About virgins I have no command of the Lord."

That is to say: I have spoken; whoever wishes, let him believe. Such a tone of speech shows a man who is not striving to fulfill his own desire, but who has in view the common benefit. This is what Paul usually does when it is not very necessary to argue. For what need has Paul to resist and insist that his words are commandments of God, when he is speaking to his own disciples, and has already said that whoever is spiritual will recognize their divine character? Obviously, everyone will hasten to call them divine, in order to appear spiritual.

But they could say: O Apostle, how am I to know that these are commands of God? I am unable to know this. The Apostle excludes this, saying: This is of no value to you, because you should not be ignorant. Why? Because anyone who does not recognize this, he is not recognized: "Amen, I say to you: I know you not" (Matt 25:12), from which it is clear that all are bound to know the things necessary for salvation, which he previously commanded, as well as the apostles and prophets. Or in another way: if anyone thinks he is a prophet, as confirmation of the preceding. As if to say: So I write; but you cannot recognize them on account of their difficulty and because you are simple; but in order that you may know that the things I write are just and honest, I wish to adduce the testimony of prophets and spiritual men, who live among you. And therefore he says: If anyone thinks that he is a prophet: "The spiritual man judges all things" (1 Cor 2:15). And lest anyone should say: we are not instructed in knowing such things, he adds that they are bound to know, because anyone who does not recognize this will not be recognized: "My people go into exile for want of knowledge" (Is 5:13); "They have neither knowledge nor understanding; they walk in darkness" (Ps 82:5).

Anyone who does not recognize that what the apostle says is from God will not be recognized on the day of judgment.

In order to console them after all his rebukes, Paul calls them brothers and encourages them to have a desire to prophesy, so that by frequent discussion and exposition of the divine law they may become better equipped to be able to learn that what the false apostles were teaching was perverse.

Then, as he is ever wont to do, unto the former subject whence he digressed to say these things, he brings back his discourse as follows:

"Wherefore, brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues."

For this too is his wont, not only to work out what is before him, but also starting from that to set right whatever seems to him in any way akin to it, and again to return to the former, so as not to appear to wander from the subject. For so when he was discoursing of their concord in their banquets, he digressed to their Communion in the Mysteries, and having thence put them to shame, he returns again to the former, saying, "Wherefore, when ye come together to eat, wait one for another." (1 Cor. 11:33)

And here, accordingly, having discoursed of good order in their gifts, and of its being a duty neither to faint in the lesser, nor to be puffed up on account of the greater; then having made an excursion from thence to the sobriety becoming women and having established it, he returns again to his subject, saying, "Wherefore, brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues." Seest thou how to the end he preserved the difference of these? And how he signifies that the one is very necessary, the other not so? Wherefore of the one he saith, "desire earnestly," but of the other, "forbid not."

Having spoken about the gifts, he inserted a word about women: now he speaks again about the gifts, and gives first place to the gift of prophecy, saying: "desire earnestly," and second place to the gift of tongues. He did not say: permit, but: "do not forbid." This is how we usually speak about matters that are not necessary, neither permitting nor forbidding.

Here the Apostle concludes the general admonition. In regard to this he does three things: first, he admonishes them to desire all the gifts, saying: therefore, to speak in tongues is good. But earnestly desire to prophesy. The reason for this, as it says in Pr (29:18): "Where there is no prophecy, the people cast off restraint." And "prophecy" is taken here as explained in this entire chapter. And yet, although you may desire to prophesy, do not forbid speaking in tongues, lest dissension arise.

Something is done decently when it is done peacefully and with discipline.

Those who make dissensions and disturbances in the church are the ones who seem to be what they are not. Letter , To Euodius.

Paul is referring to the decent and well-ordered way of life in the society of the faithful, where the relationship which obtains among the members of the body is maintained.

If we take a closer look at the origin of sin, I think that it is nothing else than the inordinate love by a rational creature of the things set in order by God.

Then, as in brief summary, setting all things right, he adds the words,

"Let all things be done decently and in order."

Again giving a blow to them who chose to behave themselves unseemly without cause, and to incur the imputation of madness; and who keep not their proper rank. For nothing doth so build up as good order, as peace, as love; even as their contraries tend to pull down. And not only in things spiritual, but also in all others one may observe this. Thus whether it be in a dance, or a ship, or in a chariot, or a camp, if thou shouldest confound the order, and casting the greater out of their proper place, shouldest bring in the lesser into their rank, thou destroyest all, and thus things are turned upside down. Neither let us then destroy our order, nor place the head below and the feet above: now this is done when we cast down right reason, and set our lusts, passions, and pleasure, over the rational part: whence violent are the billows, and great the confusion, and intolerable the tempest, all things being wrapt in darkness.

Therefore he wants all these to be set in order by you, nothing disordered, nothing restless, nothing indecent.… Therefore, now our true high priest, Christ, also wants his hands to be filled "with finely composed incense.".

For it is required of the man of God, that in all his words and works he be perfect, and that in his life he be adorned with all exemplary and well-ordered behaviour, and do all his deeds in righteousness, as a man of God.

Law and order come first. Let us also dedicate ourselves to this principle as members of the fellowship of the great Lawgiver.

As if correcting everything at once — both what pertained to those speaking in tongues, and what pertained to women speaking in church, and in general everything that was happening among them in a disorderly manner. All things will be done decently and in order when those speaking in tongues speak with interpretation and not like those who are possessed, when prophets yield to one another, and when women keep silent.

Secondly, he urges them to adopt the correct method, when he says: but all things should be done decently, namely, that when one is speaking, the others should be silent, and that women should not speak in the church, and so on: "Let us conduct ourselves becomingly as in the day" (Rom 13:13). Thirdly, he urges them to correct order, when he says: and in order, namely, that one speak and then another and by parts and the other things I have said: "From the heavens fought the stars, from their courses they fought against Sisera" (Jg 5:20).