1 Corinthians 15:29–38

It seems that some people were at that time being baptized for the dead because they were afraid that someone who was not baptized would either not rise at all or else rise merely in order to be condemned.

And when the Apostle said, "Else what shall they do who are baptised for the dead?"... For, he says, the angels of whom we are portions were baptised for us. But we are dead, who are deadened by this existence, but the males are alive who did not participate in this existence.

"If the dead rise not why, then, are we baptised?" Therefore we are raised up "equal to angels," and restored to unity with the males, member for member. Now they say "those who are baptised for us, the dead," are the angels who are baptised for us, in order that when we, too, have the Name, we may not be hindered and kept back by the Limit and the Cross from entering the Pleroma. Wherefore, at the laying on of hands they say at the end, "for the angelic redemption" that is, for the one which the angels also have, in order that the person who has received the redemption may, be baptised in the same Name in which his angel had been baptised before him. Now the angels were baptised in the beginning, in the redemption of the Name which descended upon Jesus in the dove and redeemed him. And redemption was necessary even for Jesus, in order that, approaching through Wisdom, he might not be detained by the Notion of the Deficiency in which he was inserted, as Theodotus says.

Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for the dead? Why do we also stand in jeopardy every hour? As if he said: Since we are baptized mystically for our dead bodies, being submerged in the holy water and emerging therefrom, thus imitating death and resurrection, from the hope and promise of the resurrection from the dead, why, he says, do we perform these acts in vain by not walking in accordance with them? And why, besides, do we stand in jeopardy every hour, proclaiming these things to so great a multitude, and fighting against the prejudices which prevail in the world?

It also seemed good that the Eucharist should not be given to the bodies of the dead. For it is written: "Take, Eat," but the bodies of the dead can neither "take" nor "eat." Nor let the ignorance of the presbyters baptize those who are dead.

The Marcionites baptize the living on behalf of dead unbelievers, not knowing that baptism saves only the person who receives it.

In turn this Cerinthus, fool and teacher of fools that he is, ventures to maintain that Christ has suffered and been crucified but has not risen yet, but he will rise when the general resurrection of the dead comes.

Now this position of theirs is untenable, both the words and the ideas. And so, in astonishment at those who did not believe in the coming resurrection of the dead, the apostle said, 'If the dead rise not, then is Christ not raised;' [1 Cor 15:16] 'Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die' [1 Cor 15:32] and, 'Be not deceived; evil communications corrupt good manners.' [1 Cor 15:33]

Again, he likewise gives their refutation to those who say that Christ is not risen yet by saying, 'If Christ be not raised, our preaching is vain and our faith is vain. And we also are found false witnesses against God, because we testified against God that he raised up Christ, if so be that he raised him not up.' [1 Cor 15:14-15] For in Corinth too certain persons arose to say there is no resurrection of the dead, as though it was apostolic preaching that Christ was not risen yet and the dead are not raised (at all).

For their school reached its height in this country, I mean Asia, and in Galatia as well. And in these countries I also heard of a tradition which said that when some of their people died too soon, without baptism, others would be baptized for them in their names, so that they would not be punished for rising unbaptized at the resurrection and become the subjects of the authority that made the world.

And the tradition I heard of says that this is why the same holy apostle said, 'If the dead rise not at all, why are they baptized for them?' [1 Cor 15:29] But others explain the text satisfactorily by saying that, as long as they are catechumens, the dying are allowed baptism before they die because of this hope, showing that the person who has died will also rise, and therefore needs the forgiveness of his sins through baptism.

Some of these people have preached that Christ is not risen yet, but will rise together with everyone; others, that the dead will not rise at all.

Hence the apostle has come forward and given the refutation of both these groups and the rest of the sects at once on the subject of resurrection. And in the testimonies that he gave in full he produced the sure proof of the resurrection, salvation and hope of the dead

6:8 by saying, 'This corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality,' [1 Cor 15:33] and again, 'Christ is risen, the first fruits of them that slept.' [1 Cor 15:20] This was to refute both kinds of sects at once and truly impart the unsullied doctrine of his teaching to anyone who wanted to know God's truth and saving doctrine.

"Else what shall they do" He resumes his enumeration of the absurdities, which follow from the error under which the Corinthians labored. He had set himself in the outset to do this, but he introduced instruction and consolation, by means of which he interrupted in some degree the thread of his discourse. To this he now returns. In the first place he brings forward this objection — that the baptism which those received who are already regarded as dead, will be of no avail if there is no resurrection. Before expounding this passage, it is of importance to set aside the common exposition, which rests upon the authority of the ancients, and is received with almost universal consent. Chrysostom, therefore, and Ambrose, who are followed by others, are of opinion that the Corinthians were accustomed, when any one had been deprived of baptism by sudden death, to substitute some living person in the place of the deceased — to be baptized at his grave. They at the same time do not deny that this custom was corrupt, and full of superstition, but they say that Paul, for the purpose of confuting the Corinthians, was contented with this single fact, that while they denied that there was a resurrection, they in the mean time declared in this way that they believed in it. For my part, however, I cannot by any means be persuaded to believe this, for it is not to be credited, that those who denied that there was a resurrection had, along with others, made use of a custom of this sort. Paul then would have had immediately this reply made to him: "Why do you trouble us with that old wives' superstition, which you do not yourself approve of?" Farther, if they had made use of it, they might very readily have replied: "If this has been hitherto practiced by us through mistake, rather let the mistake be corrected, than that it should have weight attached to it for proving a point of such importance."

Granting, however, that the argument was conclusive, can we suppose that, if such a corruption as this had prevailed among the Corinthians, the Apostle, after reproving almost all their faults, would have been silent as to this one? He has censured above some practices that are not of so great moment. He has not scrupled to give directions as to women's having the head covered, and other things of that nature. Their corrupt administration of the Supper he has not merely reproved, but has inveighed against it with the greatest keenness. Would he in the meantime have uttered not a single word in reference to such a base profanation of baptism, which was a much more grievous fault? He has inveighed with great vehemence against those who, by frequenting the banquets of the Gentiles, silently countenanced their superstitions. Would he have suffered this horrible superstition of the Gentiles to be openly carried on in the Church itself under the name of sacred baptism? But granting that he might have been silent, what shall we say when he expressly makes mention of it? Is it, I pray you, a likely thing that the Apostle would bring forward in the shape of an argument a sacrilege by which baptism was polluted, and converted into a mere magical abuse, and yet not say even one word in condemnation of the fault? When he is treating of matters that are not of the highest importance, he introduces nevertheless this parenthesis, that he "speaks as a man". (Romans 3:5; Romans 6:19; Galatians 3:15.) Would not this have been a more befitting and suitable place for such a parenthesis? Now from his making mention of such a thing without any word of reproof, who would not understand it to be a thing that was allowed? For my part, I assuredly understand him to speak here of the right use of baptism, and not of an abuse of it of that nature.

Let us now inquire as to the meaning. At one time I was of opinion, that Paul here pointed out the universal design of baptism, for the advantage of baptism is not confined to this life; but on considering the words afterwards with greater care, I perceived that Paul here points out something peculiar. For he does not speak of all when he says, "What shall they do, who are baptized?" etc. Besides, I am not fond of interpretations, that are more ingenious than solid. What then? I say, that those are "baptized for dead", who are looked upon as already dead, and who have altogether despaired of life; and in this way the particle ὑπέρ will have the force of the Latin "pro", as when we say, "habere pro derelicto"; — "to reckon as abandoned" This signification is not a forced one. Or if you would prefer another signification, to be "baptized for the dead" will mean — to be baptized so as to profit the dead — not the living, Now it is well known, that from the very commencement of the Church, those who had, while yet catechumens, fallen into disease, if their life was manifestly in danger, were accustomed to ask baptism, that they might not leave this world before they had made a profession of Christianity; and this, in order that they might carry with them the seal of their salvation.

It appears from the writings of the Fathers, that as to this matter, also, there crept in afterwards a superstition, for they inveigh against those who delayed baptism till the time of their death, that, being once for all purged from all their sins, they might in this state meet the judgment of God. A gross error truly, which proceeded partly from great ignorance, and partly from hypocrisy! Paul, however, here simply mentions a custom that was sacred, and in accordance with the Divine institution — that if a catechumen, who had already in his heart embraced the Christian faith, saw that death was impending over him, he asked baptism, partly for his own consolation, and partly with a view to the edification of his brethren. For it is no small consolation to carry the token of his salvation sealed in his body. There is also an edification, not to be lost sight of — that of making a confession of his faith. They were, then, baptized for the dead, inasmuch as it could not be of any service to them in this world, and the very occasion of their asking baptism was that they despaired of life. We now see that it is not without good reason that Paul asks, what they would do if there remained no hope after death? This passage shows us, too, that those impostors who had disturbed the faith of the Corinthians, had contrived a figurative resurrection, making the farthest goal of believers to be in this world, His repeating it a second time, "Why are they also baptized for the dead?" gives it greater emphasis: "Not only are those baptized who think that they are to live longer, but those too who have death before their eyes; and that, in order that they may in death reap the fruit of their baptism."

He takes in hand again another topic, establishing what he said at one time from what God doeth, and at another from the very things which they practice. And this also is no small plea for the defence of any cause when a man brings forward the gainsayers themselves as witnessing by their own actions what he affirms. What then is that which he means? Or will ye that I should first mention how they who are infected with the Marcionite heresy pervert this expression? And I know indeed that I shall excite much laughter; nevertheless, even on this account most of all I will mention it that you may the more completely avoid this disease: viz., when any Catechumen departs among them, having concealed the living man under the couch of the dead, they approach the corpse and talk with him, and ask him if he wishes to receive baptism; then when he makes no answer, he that is concealed underneath saith in his stead that of course he should wish to be baptized; and so they baptize him instead of the departed, like men jesting upon the stage. So great power hath the devil over the souls of careless sinners. Then being called to account, they allege this expression, saying that even the Apostle hath said, "They who are baptized for the dead." Seest thou their extreme ridiculousness? Is it meet then to answer these things? I trow not; unless it were necessary to discourse with madmen of what they in their frenzy utter. But that none of the more exceedingly simple folk may be led captive, one must needs submit to answer even these men. As thus, if this was Paul's meaning wherefore did God threaten him that is not baptized? For it is impossible that any should not be baptized henceforth, this being once devised: and besides, the fault no longer lies with the dead, but with the living. But to whom spake he, "Unless ye eat My flesh, and drink My Blood, ye have no life in yourselves?" To the living, or to the dead, tell me? And again, "Unless a man be born again of water and of the Spirit, he cannot see the kingdom of God." For if this be permitted, and there be no need of the mind of the receiver nor of his assent while he lives, what hinders both Greeks and Jews thus to become believers, other men after their decease doing these things in their stead?

But not to prolong fruitless toil in cutting asunder their petty spiders' webs, come let us unfold unto you the force of this expression. What then is Paul speaking of?

But first I wish to remind you who are initiated of the response, which on that evening they who introduce you to the mysteries bid you make; and then I will also explain the saying of Paul: so this likewise will be clearer to you; we after all the other things adding this which Paul now saith. And I desire indeed expressly to utter it, but I dare not on account of the uninitiated; for these add a difficulty to our exposition, compelling us either not to speak clearly or to declare unto them the ineffable mysteries. Nevertheless, as I may be able, I will speak as through a veil.

As thus: after the enunciation of those mystical and fearful words, and the awful rules of the doctrines which have come down from heaven, this also we add at the end when we are about to baptize, bidding them say, "I believe in the resurrection of the dead," and upon this faith we are baptized. For after we have confessed this together with the rest, then at last are we let down into the fountain of those sacred streams. This therefore Paul recalling to their minds said, "if there be no resurrection, why art thou then baptized for the dead?" i.e., the dead bodies. For in fact with a view to this art thou baptized, the resurrection of thy dead body, believing that it no longer remains dead. And thou indeed in the words makest mention of a resurrection of the dead; but the priest, as in a kind of image, signifies to thee by very deed the things which thou hast believed and confessed in words. When without a sign thou believest, then he gives thee the sign also; when thou hast done thine own part, then also doth God fully assure thee. How and in what manner? By the water. For the being baptized and immersed and then emerging, is a symbol of the descent into Hades and return thence. Wherefore also Paul calls baptism a burial, saying, "Therefore we are buried with Him by baptism into death." By this he makes that also which is to come credible, I mean, the resurrection of our bodies. For the blotting out sins is a much greater thing than the raising up of a body. And this Christ declaring, said, "For whether is easier to say, Thy sins are forgiven, or to say, Take up thy bed, and walk?" "The former is the more difficult," saith He, "but since ye disbelieve it as being hidden, and make the easier instead of the more difficult the demonstration of my power, neither will I refuse to afford you this proof." Then saith He to the paralytic, "Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thy house."

"And how is this difficult," saith one, "when it is possible to kings also and rulers? For they too forgive adulterers and homicides." Thou art jesting, O man, who sayest these things. For to forgive sins with God only is possible. But rulers and kings, whether it is adulterers whom they forgive or homicides, release them indeed from the present punishment; but their sin they do not purge out. Though they should advance to offices them that have been forgiven, though they should invest them with the purple itself, though they should set the diadem upon their heads, yet so they would only make them kings, but could not free them from their sin. It being God alone who doeth this; which accordingly in the Layer of Regeneration He will bring to pass. For His grace touches the very soul, and thence plucks up the sin by the root. Here is the reason why he that hath been forgiven by the king may be seen with his soul yet impure, but the soul of the baptized no longer so, but purer than the very sun-beams, and such as it was originally formed, nay rather much better than that. For it is blessed with a Spirit, on every side enkindling it and making its holiness intense. And as when thou art recasting iron or gold thou makest it pure and new once more, just so the Holy Ghost also, recasting the soul in baptism as in a furnace and consuming its sins, causes it to glisten with more purity than all purest gold.

Further, the credibility of the resurrection of our bodies he signifies to thee again from what follows: viz., that since sin brought in death, now that the root is dried up, one must not after that doubt of the destruction of the fruit. Therefore having first mentioned "the forgiveness of sins," thou dost next confess also "the resurrection of the dead;" the one guides thee as by hand on to the other.

Yet again, because the term Resurrection is not sufficient to indicate the whole: for many after rising have again departed, as those in the Old Testament, as Lazarus, as they at the time of the crucifixion: one is bid to say, "and the life everlasting," that none may any longer have a notion of death after that resurrection.

These words therefore Paul recalling to their minds, saith, "What shall they do which are baptized for the dead?" "For if there be no resurrection," saith he, "these words are but scenery. If there be no resurrection, how persuade we them to believe things which we do not bestow?" Just as if a person bidding another to deliver a document to the effect that he had received so much, should never give the sum named therein, yet after the subscription should demand of him the specified monies. What then will remain for the subscriber to do, now that he hath made himself responsible, without having received what he admitted he had received? This then he here saith of those who are baptized also. "What shall they do which are baptized," saith he, "having subscribed to the resurrection of dead bodies, and not receiving it, but suffering fraud? And what need was there at all of this confession, if the fact did not follow?"

For if "as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive," [1 Corinthians 15:22] their vivification in Christ must be in the flesh, since it is in the flesh that arises their death in Adam. "But every man in his own order," because of course it will be also every man in his own body. For the order will be arranged severally, on account of the individual merits. Now, as the merits must be ascribed to the body, it must needs follow that the order also should be arranged in respect of the bodies, that it may be in relation to their merits. But inasmuch as "some are also baptized for the dead," [1 Corinthians 15:29] we will see whether there be a good reason for this. Now it is certain that they adopted this (practice) with such a presumption as made them suppose that the vicarious baptism (in question) would be beneficial to the flesh of another in anticipation of the resurrection; for unless it were a bodily resurrection, there would be no pledge secured by this process of a corporeal baptism. "Why are they then baptized for the dead," he asks, unless the bodies rise again which are thus baptized? For it is not the soul which is sanctified by the baptismal bath: its sanctification comes from the "answer." [1 Peter 3:21]

Let us now return to the resurrection, to the defence of which against heretics of all sorts we have given indeed sufficient attention in another work of ours. But we will not be wanting (in some defence of the doctrine) even here, in consideration of such persons as are ignorant of that little treatise. "What," asks he, "shall they do who are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not? " Now, never mind that practice, (whatever it may have been.) The Februarian lustrations will perhaps answer him (quite as well), by praying for the dead. Do not then suppose that the apostle here indicates some new god as the author and advocate of this (baptism for the dead. His only aim in alluding to it was) that he might all the more firmly insist upon the resurrection of the body, in proportion as they who were vainly baptized for the dead resorted to the practice from their belief of such a resurrection. We have the apostle in another passage defining "but one baptism." To be "baptized for the dead" therefore means, in fact, to be baptized for the body; for, as we have shown, it is the body which becomes dead. What, then, shall they do who are baptized for the body, if the body rises not again? We stand, then, on firm ground (when we say) that the next question which the apostle has discussed equally relates to the body.

The Marcionite heretics, when someone among them dies without baptism, hide a living person under the bed of the deceased, approach the bed and ask the dead man whether he wishes to be baptized; the one hidden under the bed answers from there that he does, and thus they baptize him in place of the deceased. Then, when they are accused of this, they say in their own defense that the apostle said so, and they cite, the fools, this saying. But this is not so. Then how is it? Those wishing to be baptized all recite the Creed, and in it there are also these words: "I believe in the resurrection of the dead." So he says: those who believed in the future resurrection of dead bodies and were baptized in such hope—what will they do when they have been deceived? Why, after all, do people even get baptized for the sake of the resurrection, that is, the expectation of the resurrection, if the dead do not rise?

951. – Having shown the resurrection of the dead from the resurrection of Christ, the Apostle then shows the resurrection of the dead from the life of the saints. In regard to this he does two things: first, he proves his proposition; secondly, he adds an admonition (v. 33). He proves his proposition by leading to three incongruities: first, it is incongruous that men's devotion to baptism be frustrated; secondly, that the laborers of the saints would be frustrated (v. 30); thirdly, that there would be given the occasion to enjoy pleasure (v. 32b). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he presents the first incongruity; secondly, he explains it (v. 29b).

952. – First, therefore, he says: I have said that the dead rise, otherwise, namely, if there is not resurrection of the dead, as we preach, what do people mean by being baptized on behalf of the dead. This can be understood in two ways: in one way so that by "dead" the works of sin are understood. They are dead, because they lack the life of grace and lead to death: "The blood of Christ will purify your conscience from dead works" (Heb 9:14). And according to this the words are plain. What do people mean by being baptized on behalf of the dead? i.e., for washing away their sins, if they are not to have the life of grace? In another way, because some at that time wanted men to be baptized: first, in order that they might obtain for themselves the remission of sins; and they were baptized again for some dead relative, so that he too would be freed from sins after death. And according to this the text reads: what do people mean by being baptized for the dead, namely, their relatives, for whose salvation they were baptized, if there is no resurrection of the dead. But they can be commended in something, namely, in the fact that they seemed to have faith in the resurrection. But in something they can be reprehended, in the fact that they believed that one can be baptized for another.

953. – But then there is a question: If one's prayers profit another, why not his baptism? To this there are two answers: one is that works performed by the living do profit the dead on account of the union of charity and faith. And therefore, they benefit only those who die with charity and faith. Hence, neither prayer nor the baptism of the living profit unbelievers; yet prayer can help those in purgatory. Another answer and better is that good works help the dead not only in virtue of charity but also from the intention of the one who performs them. Just as if I should say the psalter for someone who is in purgatory and was bound to say it to satisfy for him, it will be profitable indeed as to satisfying only for the one for whom I say it. It must be said according to this that baptism has no value from our intention but from the intention of Christ. But the intention of Christ is that baptism should benefit those who are baptized in the faith of Christ.

954. – Then he explains that incongruity, saying: If the dead are not raised at all. And this explanation seems to agree more with the second explanation given above. As if to say: Why are they baptized for them, i.e., for the dead, if they do not rise. But if it is explained according to the first explanation, then it can be said: if the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf, i.e., for their sins, since they are not forgiven.

The theme here is that unless there is such a fact as the resurrection of the dead, all this is pointless.

If the soul is not immortal, if the body does not rise from the dead, there would be no point taking risks on behalf of the faith.

"Why do we also stand in jeopardy every hour? I protest by that glorying in you which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily."

See again whence he endeavors to establish the doctrine, from his own suffrage: or rather not from his only, but from that also of the other apostles. And this too is no small thing; that the teachers whom you produce were full of vehement conviction and signified the same not by words only, but also by very deeds. Therefore, you see, he doth not say simply, "we are persuaded," for this alone was not sufficient to persuade them, but he also furnishes the proof by facts; as if he should say, "in words to confess these things haply seems to you no marvel; but if we should also produce unto you the voice which deeds send forth, what can ye have to say against that? Hear ye then, how by our perils also day by day we confess these things?" And he said not "I," but "we," taking along with him all the apostles together, and thereby at once speaking modestly and adding credibility to his discourse.

For what can ye have to say? that we are deceiving you when we preach these things, and that our doctrines come of vain-glory? Nay, our perils suffer you not to pass such a sentence. For who would choose to be in continual jeopardy to no purpose and with no effect? Wherefore also he said, "Why do we also stand in jeopardy every hour?" For if one should even choose it through vain-glory, such his choice will be but for once and again, not all his life long, like ours. For we have assigned our whole life to this purpose.

"I protest by that glorying in you which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily:" by glorying here, meaning their advancement. Thus since he had intimated that his perils were many, lest he might seem to say this by way of lamentation, "far from grieving," saith he, "I even glory in suffering this for your sake." And doubly, he saith, he takes delight in it, both as being in jeopardy for their sakes and as beholding their proficiency. Then doing what is usual with him, because he had uttered great things, he refers both to Christ.

But how doth he "die daily?" by his readiness and preparation for that event. And wherefore saith he these words? Again by these also to establish the doctrine of the resurrection. "For who would choose," saith he, "to undergo so many deaths, if there be no resurrection nor life after this? Yea, if they who believe in the resurrection would scarcely put themselves in jeopardy for it except they were very noble of heart: much more would not the unbeliever (so he speaks) choose to undergo so many deaths and so terrible." Thus, see by degrees how very high he mounts up. He had said, "we stand in jeopardy," he added, "every hour," then, "daily," then, "I not only 'stand in jeopardy,'" saith he, but "I even 'die:'" he concludes accordingly by pointing out also what kind of deaths they were.

"And why," he inquires, "stand we in jeopardy every hour? " -meaning, of course, through the flesh.

If you do not accept as proof of the resurrection the verbal confession which those being baptized make, then you have witness in deeds as well. For all of us, the apostles, constantly suffer afflictions. And if there were no resurrection, for what reason would we endure afflictions? For what pleasure? For if someone resolves to endure afflictions even out of vainglory, he resolves to do so once. But the hourly endurance of afflictions, as we endure, serves as the greatest proof of confidence in the resurrection.

955. – Why am I in peril every hour? Here he presents the second incongruity. In regard to this he does two things: first, he mentions the incongruity in general; secondly, in special.

956. – He says, therefore: Not only are some baptized in vain for the remission of sins, but we also are afflicted in vain, if there is no resurrection of the dead. And this is what he says: Why are we also, the holy apostles, in peril, i.e., endure dangers, every hour: "In danger at sea, in danger from false brethren" (2 Cor 11:26). For it is clear that the saints expose themselves to tribulation and afflict themselves on account of the hope of eternal life, as it says in Rom (5:11): "Not only so, but we also rejoice in God through the Lord Jesus Christ." Therefore, if there no resurrection of the dead, hope utterly vanishes. Therefore, they have afflicted themselves in vain, if there is no resurrection. Nor is that conclusion hindered by saying that the separated soul will be rewarded, because, as has been proved above, it cannot be proved that the soul would be immortal."

There are two kinds of self-hatred which look rather alike in their earlier stages, but of which one is wrong from the beginning and the other right to the end... The Christian must wage endless war against the clamor of the ego as ego: but he loves and approves selves as such, though not their sins. The very self-love which he has to reject is to him a specimen of how he ought to feel to all selves... The wrong asceticism torments the self: the right kind kills the selfness. We must die daily: but it is better to love the self than to love nothing, and to pity the self than to pity no one.

But to surrender a self-will inflamed and swollen with years of usurpation is a kind of death. We all remember this self-will as it was in childhood the bitter, prolonged rage at every thwarting, the burst of passionate tears, the black, Satanic wish to kill or die rather than to give in. Hence the older type of nurse or parent was quite right in thinking that the first step in education is "to break the child's will". Their methods were often wrong: but not to see the necessity is, I think, to cut oneself off from all understanding of spiritual laws. And if, now that we are grown up, we do not howl and stamp quite so much, that is partly because our elders began the process of breaking or killing our self-will in the nursery, and partly because the same passions now take more subtle forms and have grown clever at avoiding death by various "compensations". Hence the necessity to die daily: however often we think we have broken the rebellious self we shall still find it alive. That this process cannot be without pain is sufficiently witnessed by the very history of the word "Mortification".

That we receive more as the reward of our suffering than what we endure here in the suffering itself, The blessed Apostle Paul proves; who by the divine condescension, being caught up into the third heaven and into paradise, testifies that he heard unspeakable words, who boasts that he saw Jesus Christ by the faith of sight, who professes that which he both learnt and saw with the greater truth of consciousness, and says: "The sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the coming glory which shall be revealed in us." Who, then, does not with all his powers labour to attain to such a glory that he may become the friend of God, that he may at once rejoice with Christ, that after earthly tortures and punishments he may receive divine rewards? If to soldiers of this world it is glorious to return in triumph to their country when the foe is vanquished, how much more excellent and greater is the glory, when the devil is overcome, to return in triumph to paradise, and to bring back victorious trophies to that place whence Adam was ejected as a sinner, after casting down him who formerly had cast him down; to offer to God the most acceptable gift-an uncorrupted faith, and an unyielding virtue of mind, an illustrious praise of devotion; to accompany Him when He shall come to receive vengeance from His enemies, to stand at His side when He shall sit to judge, to become co-heir of Christ, to be made equal to the angels; with the patriarchs, with the apostles. with the prophets, to rejoice in the possession of the heavenly kingdom! Such thoughts as these, what persecution can conquer, what tortures can overcome? The brave and stedfast mind, founded in religious meditations, endures; and the spirit abides unmoved against all the terrors of the devil and the threats of the world, when it is strengthened by the sure and solid faith of things to come. In persecutions, earth is shut up, but heaven is opened; Antichrist is threatening, but Christ is protecting; death is brought in, but immortality follows; the world is taken away from him that is slain, but paradise is set forth to him restored; the life of time is extinguished, but the life of eternity is realized. What a dignity it is, and what a security, to go gladly from hence, to depart gloriously in the midst of afflictions and tribulations; in a moment to close the eyes with which men and the world are looked upon, and at once to open them to look upon God and Christ! Of such a blessed departure how great is the swiftness! You shall be suddenly taken away from earth, to be placed in the heavenly kingdoms. It behoves us to embrace these things in our mind and consideration, to meditate on these things day and night. If persecution should fall upon such a soldier of God, his virtue, prompt for battle, will not be able tO be overcome. Or if his call should come to him before, his faith shall not be without reward, seeing it was prepared for martyrdom; without loss of time, the reward is rendered by the judgment of God. In persecution, the warfare,-in peace, the purity of conscience, is crowned.

France has always been at the point of dissolution. She has found the only method of immortality. She dies daily.

Here Paul outlines both the magnitude of the problems he faces and the greatness of God's providential care for him.

In the words "we are in danger" (1 Cor. 15:30), he pointed to dangers, but here he puts forward something even greater, namely daily death. How then did he die every day? By his resolve and readiness for it, and by enduring such afflictions that brought death upon him. "I protest by your boasting," that is, I testify by your progress, in which I boast: for the progress of disciples constitutes a boast for the teacher. Then, referring this to Christ, he says: "which I have in Christ Jesus." For this is His work, not mine. Very wisely he reminds them of this: just as I boast in your progress, so I will be covered with shame if you remain in doubt to the end and do not believe in the resurrection.

957. – Then when he says: Every day I die for your glory, he enumerates the dangers in special: first, as to the person; secondly, as to the place (v. 32).

958. – Therefore, he manifests the dangers as to his own person; hence he says: Every day I die, i.e., I suffer not just any dangers, but even those of death, because I die daily, i.e., am in danger of death: "For thy sake we are slain all day long" (Ps 44:22). And the Apostle shows that this was said in the person of the apostles: "Always carrying in the body the death of Jesus" (2 Cor 4:10). For your glory, i.e., that I may acquire the glory I await from your conversion to the faith: "You are my glory and my joy" (2 Th 2:20), which I have i.e., hope to have, in Christ Jesus our Lord, i.e., through the charity of Christ. Another text has, by the glory, and then "by the glory" is an oath. As if to say: By your glory which you await, which is God. As if to say: I swear by God, Whom I have in hope in Christ Jesus, i.e., by His passion. From which it appears that even the Apostle swore, and that among those who are perfect, swearing is not a sin.

If all hope of the resurrection is lost, let us eat and drink and lose not the enjoyment of the things present, for we have none to come.… The Epicureans say they are followers of pleasure because death means nothing to them, because that which is dissolved has no feeling, and that which has no feeling means nothing to us. Thus they show that they are living only carnally, not spiritually. They do not discharge the duty of the soul but only of the flesh. They think that all life's duty is ended with the separation of the soul and body.

For there are some widows which esteem gain their business; and since they ask without shame, and receive without being satisfied, render the generality more backward in giving. For when they ought to be content with their subsistence from the Church, as having moderate desires, on the contrary, they run from one of their neighbours' houses to another, and disturb them, heaping up to themselves plenty of money, and lend at bitter usury, and are only solicitous about mammon, whose bag is their god; who prefer eating and drinking before all virtue, saying, "Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die;" who esteem these things as if they were durable and not perishing things. For she that uses herself to nothing but talking of money, worships mammon instead of God,-that is, is a servant to gain, but cannot be pleasing to God, nor resigned to His worship; not being able to intercede with Him continuously on account that her mind and disposition run after money: for "where the treasure is, there will the heart be also." For she is thinking in her mind whither she may go to receive, or that a certain woman her friend has forgot her, and she has somewhat to say to her. She that thinks of such things as these will no longer attend to her prayers, but to that thought which offers itself; so that though sometimes she would pray for anybody, she will not be heard, because she does not offer her petition to the Lord with her whole heart, but with a divided mind.

You see how even to the prophets of the Greeks he attributes something of the truth, and is not ashamed, when discoursing for the edification of some and the shaming of others, to make use of Greek poems. Accordingly to the Corinthians (for this is not the only instance), while discoursing on the resurrection of the dead, he makes use of a tragic Iambic line, when he said, "What advantageth it me if the dead are not raised? Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die. Be not deceived; evil communications corrupt good manners."

They who sing thus, and sing in response, are those who before hymned immortality,—found at last wicked and wickedly singing this most pernicious palinode, "Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die." But not to-morrow in truth, but already, are these dead to God; burying their dead, that is, sinking themselves down to death. The apostle very firmly assails them. "Be not deceived; neither adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers," and whatever else he adds to these, "shall inherit the kingdom of God."

From Syria even unto Rome I fight with beasts, both by land and sea, both by night and day, being bound to ten leopards, I mean a band of soldiers, who, even when they receive benefits, show themselves all the worse. But I am the more instructed by their injuries [to act as a disciple of Christ]; "yet am I not thereby justified." May I enjoy the wild beasts that are prepared for me; and I pray they may be found eager to rush upon me, which also I will entice to devour me speedily, and not deal with me as with some, whom, out of fear, they have not touched. But if they be unwilling to assail me, I will compel them to do so. Pardon me [in this]: I know what is for my benefit. Now I begin to be a disciple. And let no one, of things visible or invisible, envy me that I should attain to Jesus Christ. Let fire and the cross; let the crowds of wild beasts; let tearings, breakings, and dislocations of bones; let cutting off of members; let shatterings of the whole body; and let all the dreadful torments of the devil come upon me: only let me attain to Jesus Christ.

"If after the manner of men I fought with beasts at Ephesus, what doth it profit me?"

What is, "if after the manner of men?" "As far as pertains to men I fought with beasts: for what if God snatched me out of those dangers? So that I am he who ought most to be in care about these things; I, who endure so great dangers and have not yet received any return. For if no time of recompense is at hand, but our reward is shut up in this present world, ours is the greater loss. For ye have believed without jeopardy, but we are slaughtered every day."

But all these things he said, not because he had no advantage even in the very suffering, but on account of the weakness of the many, and to establish them in the doctrine of the resurrection: not because he himself was running for hire; for it was a sufficient recompense to him to do that which was pleasing to God. So that when he adds, "If in this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all men most pitiable," it is there again for their sakes, that he might by the fear of this misery overthrow their unbelief of the resurrection. And in condescension to their weakness, he thus speaks. Since in truth, the great reward is to please Christ at all times: and apart from the recompense, it is a very great requital to be in jeopardy for His sake.

"If the dead are not raised, let us eat and drink for to-morrow we die."

This word, be sure, is spoken in mockery: wherefore neither did he bring it forward of himself, but summoned the prophet of loftiest sound, Isaiah, who discoursing of certain insensible and reprobate persons made use of these words, "Who slay oxen and kill sheep to eat flesh and drink wine; who say, Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die. These things are revealed to the ears of the Lord of Hosts, and this iniquity shall not be forgiven you, till ye die." Now if then they were deprived of pardon who spake thus, much more in the time of Grace.

He feeds on cruelties; he is punished by abstinence; he hates fasts, and his ministers preach, to that effect, as he declares them to be superfluous, having no hope of the future, and echoing that sentence of the apostle, in which he says, "Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we shall, die."

But even if the apostle had abruptly thrown out the sentence that flesh and blood must be excluded from the kingdom of God, without any previous intimation, of his meaning, would it not have been equally our duty to interpret these two substances as the old man abandoned to mere flesh and blood-in other words, to eating and drinking, one feature of which would be to speak against the faith of the resurrection: "Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die." Now, when the apostle parenthetically inserted this, he censured flesh and blood because of their enjoyment in eating and drinking.

A third saying let them add, "Let us eat, and drink, and marry, for to-morrow we shall die; " not reflecting that the "woe" (denounced) "on such as are with child, and are giving suck," will fall far more heavily and bitterly in the "universal shaking" of the entire world than it did in the devastation of one fraction of Judaea.

"Well, who on earth and in the flesh is faultless? "What "martyr" (continues to be) an inhabitant of the world supplicating? pence in hand? subject to physician and usurer? Suppose, now, (your "martyr") beneath the glaive, with head already steadily poised; suppose him on the cross, with body already outstretched; suppose him at the stake, with the lion already let loose; suppose him on the axle, with the fire already heaped; in the very certainty, I say, and possession of martyrdom: who permits man to condone (offences) which are to be reserved for God, by whom those (offences) have been condemned without discharge, which not even apostles (so far as I know)-martyrs withal themselves-have judged condonable? In short, Paul had already "fought with beasts at Ephesus," when he decreed "destruction" to the incestuous person. Let it suffice to the martyr to have purged his own sins: it is the part of ingratitude or of pride to lavish upon others also what one has obtained at a high price.

If the prophets were pleasing to such, my (prophets) they were not. Why, then, do not you constantly preach, "Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we shall die? " just as we do not hesitate manfully to command, "Let us fast, brethren and sisters, lest to-morrow perchance we die.

How much, he says, was possible for men, I fought with beasts; but what of it, that God snatched me out of danger? What benefit is it to me, if there is no resurrection? By fighting with beasts he means the struggle with the Jews and the silversmith Demetrius (Acts 19:23–24 and following). For how did they differ from beasts?

If the dead do not rise, and there will be no blessedness there, then let us at least enjoy the good things in this present life; let us eat and drink. For in this alone is profit. He brought these words from the prophet Isaiah (Is. 22:13) in mockery of the foolishness of those who do not acknowledge the resurrection.

959. – The when he says, What do I gain, he specifies the dangers as to place. Here it should be noted that this is read in Ac (chap. 19), which says that when St. Paul had converted many to the faith at Ephesus, some stirred up the people against him, so that he would not dare to go out into the theatre, and that he endured many dangers. Therefore, perhaps he mentions this, because he had suffered from a neighboring town. He says, therefore: What do I gain, if humanly speaking, i.e., according to reason, from which man is man, by disputing about the resurrection, I conclude that man does not die as the beast. I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, with men living in a beastly manner at Ephesus. Or if I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, and I say this not from divine revelation but humanly speaking, i.e., from human instinct, if I have endured such perils.

960. – Then when he says, Let us eat and drink, he presents the third incongruity, which is: if there is no resurrection of the dead, occasion would be given for enjoying pleasures. As if to say: If there is not another life, we are foolish, if we afflict ourselves, but let us eat and drink, i.e., use the delights and enjoy the pleasures: "No one has been known to return from Hades" (Wis 2:1); "Come, let us enjoy the good things that exist (v. 6). For tomorrow i.e., soon, we die; for we shall totally fail, if the dead do not rise.

[On how "evil communications corrupt good manners": the gradual moral corruption of otherwise decent men by the seemingly harmless invitations of an "Inner Ring" of insiders]

To nine out of ten of you the choice which could lead to scoundrelism will come, when it does come, in no very dramatic colours. Obviously bad men, obviously threatening or bribing, will almost certainly not appear. Over a drink or a cup of coffee, disguised as a triviality and sandwiched between two jokes... the hint will come. It will be the hint of something which is not quite in accordance with the technical rules of fair play ... but something, says your new friend, which "we always do". And then, if you are drawn in, next week it will be something a little further from the rules, and next year something further still, but all in the jolliest, friendliest spirit. It may end in a crash, a scandal, and penal servitude: it may end in millions, a peerage and giving the prizes at your old school. But you will be a scoundrel. Of all passions the passion for the Inner Ring is most skilful in making a man who is not yet a very bad man do very bad things.

But for the rest, let our most beloved brethren firmly decline, and avoid the words and conversations of those whose word creeps onwards like a cancer; as the apostle says, "Evil communications corrupt good manners." And again: "A man that is an heretic, after one admonition, reject: knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself." And the Holy Spirit speaks by Solomon, saying, "A perverse man carrieth perdition in his mouth; and in his lips he hideth a fire." Also again, he warneth us, and says, "Hedge in thy ears with thorns, and hearken not to a wicked tongue." And again: "A wicked doer giveth heed to the tongue of the unjust; but a righteous man does not listen to lying lips." And although I know that our brotherhood there, assuredly fortified by your foresight, and besides sufficiently cautious by their own vigilance, cannot be taken nor deceived by the poisons of heretics, and that the teachings and precepts of God prevail with them only in proportion as the fear of God is in them; yet, even although needlessly, either my solicitude or my love persuaded me to write these things to you, that no commerce should be entered into with such; that no banquets nor conferences be entertained with the wicked; but that we should be as much separated from them, as they are deserters from the Church; because it is written, "If he shall neglect to hear the Church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican." And the blessed apostle not only warns, but also commands us to withdraw from such. "We command you," he says, "in the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us." There can be no fellowship between faith and I faithlessness. He who is not with Christ, who is an adversary of Christ, who is hostile to His unity and peace, cannot be associated with us. If they come with prayers and atonements, let them be heard; if they heap together curses and threats, let them be rejected. I bid you, dearest brother, ever heartily farewell.

Yet let not the excessive and headlong faithlessness of many move or disturb us, but rather strengthen our faith in the truthfulness which has foretold the matter. As some have become such, because these things were predicted beforehand, so let other brethren beware of matters of a like kind, because these also were predicted beforehand, even as the Lord instructs us, and says, "But take ye heed: behold, I have told you all things." Avoid, I beseech you, brethren, men of this kind, and drive away from your side and from your ears, as if it were the contagion of death, their mischievous conversation; as it is written, "Hedge thine ears about with thorns, and refuse to hear a wicked tongue." And again, "Evil communications corrupt good manners." The Lord teaches and warns us to depart from such. He saith, "They are blind leaders of the blind; and if the blind lead the blind, they shall both fall into the ditch." Such a one is to be turned away from and avoided, whosoever he may be, that is separated from the Church. Such a one is perverted and sins, and is condemned of his own self. Does he think that he has Christ, who acts in opposition to Christ's priests, who separates himself from the company of His clergy and people? He bears arms against the Church, he contends against God's appointment. An enemy of the altar, a rebel against Christ's sacrifice, for the faith faithless, for religion profane, a disobedient servant, an impious son, a hostile brother, despising the bishops, and forsaking God's priests, he dares to set up another altar, to make another prayer with unauthorized words, to profane the truth of the Lord's offering by false sacrifices, and not to know that he who strives against the appointment of God, is punished on account of the daring of his temerity by divine visitation.

That we are to live with the good, but to avoid the evil. In Solomon, in the Proverbs: "Bring not the impious man into the habitation of the righteous." Also in the same, in Ecclesiasticus: "Let righteous men be thy guests." And again: "The faithful friend is a medicine of life and of immortality." Also in the same place: "Be thou far from the man who has the power to slay, and thou shalt not suspect fear." Also in the same place, : "Blessed is he who findeth a true friend, and who speaketh righteousness to the listening ear." Also in the same place: "Hedge thine ears with thorns, and hear not a wicked tongue." Also in the seventeenth Psalm: "With the righteous Thou shalt be justified; and with the innocent man Thou shalt be innocent; and with the froward man Thou shalt be froward." Also in the first Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: "Evil communications corrupt good dispositions."

A brother questioned Poemen and said, 'How should a monk live in his cell?' He said, 'To stay in the cell is this: externally, to work with the hands, eat once a day, keep silence and meditate and, internally, to make progress by remembering your sins wherever you may be, and keeping the hours of prayer, and keeping a watch on the secret thoughts of the heart. If it is time to stop working with the hands, begin to pray and finish your work later in tranquillity. The aim of all this is to be with those who are good and to avoid the company of the wicked.'

And the apostle says, "Evil communications corrupt good manners."

You despise gold; someone else loves it. You spurn wealth; he eagerly pursues it. You love silence, weakness and privacy. He takes delight in talking and effrontery in the public square, and streets, and apothecary shops.… Do not remain under the same roof with him. Do not rely on your past continence. You cannot be holier than David or wiser than Solomon.… If in the course of your clerical duty you have to visit a widow or a virgin, never enter the house alone. Let your companions be persons who will not disgrace you.… You must not sit alone with a woman secretly and without witnesses. If she has anything confidential to disclose, she is sure to have some nurse or housekeeper, some virgin, some widow, some married woman. She cannot be so friendless as to have none except you to whom she can venture to confide her secrets.

"Be not deceived: evil company doth corrupt good manners."

Then that he might not make his discourse too rough, he dwells not long upon his "reductio ad absurdum," but again turns his discourse to exhortation, saying, "Be not deceived: evil company doth corrupt good manners."

And this he said, both to rebuke them as without understanding, (for here he by a charitable expression, calls "good" that which is easily deceived,) and also, as far as he could, to make some allowance to them for the past with a view to their return, and to remove from them and transfer to others the greater part of his charges, and so by this way also to allure them to repentance. Which he doth likewise in the Epistle to the Galatians, saying, "But he that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be."

We see quiet and respectable men who, when they have become associated with turbulent and shameless people, have their good manners corrupted by evil conversations. They are turned into men of the same sort as those who are steeped in every kind of witness. This sometimes happens to men of mature age, who prove that they have lived more chastely in youth than when advanced years had granted them the opportunity of a freer life.

Follow companies and conversations worthy of God, mindful of that short verse, sanctified by the apostle's quotation of it, "Ill interviews good morals do corrupt." Talkative, idle, winebibbing, curious tent-fellows, do the very greatest hurt to the purpose of widow-hood.

He turns his speech to exhortation. Meanwhile he covertly accuses them of foolishness and frivolity; for this is what he expresses by the word: "be not deceived." By "good manners" he means manners that easily yield to deception; he shows at the same time that others are drawing them into such reasoning.

961. – Then when he says: Do not be deceived, he concludes to a warning from the preceding: first, as to the sick; secondly, as to the perfect and just (v. 34).

962. – In regard to the first he does two things: first, he makes them attentive, saying: Do not be deceived. As if to say: It has been stated that if there is no resurrection of the dead, it would be foolish not to use lascivious and voluptuous things. Therefore, lest you be tempted to lascivious things, do not be deceived by those who deny the resurrection. "Let no one disqualify you" (Col 2:18). Secondly, he assigns the reason for their attention, saying: Bad company ruins good morals. As if to say: Do not be deceived, because the bad speech of those who deny the resurrection ruins good morals: "Their talk will eat its way like gangrene" (2 Tim 2:17). Jerome says that was taken form the statements of the Gentiles and is a verse of a certain Menandrus. And from this he says we have an argument that it is lawful sometimes in Sacred Scripture to use the authorities of Gentiles.

"Be sober as is right, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God," that is, those who sin. "For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against spiritual powers." But the rulers of darkness have power to tempt us. That is why concessions are made. Therefore also Paul says: "I buffet my body and bring it into subjection. For everyone who wishes to take part in a contest is continent in all things" (the words "he is continent in all things" really mean that, though he does not abstain from everything, yet he is self-controlled on such things as he thinks fit). "They do it to obtain a corruptible crown, but we an incorruptible," as if we conquer in the struggle, though there is no crown for us if we do not put up any fight at all.

The wise are on the lookout for wrongdoing and have awakened from the sleep of ignorance.

"Awake up righteously and sin not."

As if he were speaking to drunkards and madmen. For suddenly to cast every thing out of their hands, was the part of drunkards and madmen, in not seeing any longer what they saw nor believing what they had before confessed. But what is, "righteously?" with a view to what is profitable and useful. For it is possible to awake up unrighteously, when a man is thoroughly roused up to the injury of his own soul. And well did he add, "sin not," implying that hence were the sins of their unbelief. And in many places he covertly signifies this, that a corrupt life is the parent of evil doctrines; as when he saith, "The love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, which some reaching after, have been led astray from the faith." Yea, and many of those who are conscious of wickedness and would fain not pay its penalty are by this fear damaged also in their faith concerning the resurrection: even as they who do very virtuously desire even daily to behold it.

"For some have no knowledge of God; I speak this to move you to shame."

See how again he transfers his accusations to others. For he said not, "Ye have no knowledge," but, "some have no knowledge." Because disbelieving the resurrection is the temper of one not fully aware that the power of God is irresistable and sufficient for all things. For if out of the things which are not He made the things that are, much more will He be able to raise again those which have been dissolved.

And because he had touched them to the quick and exceedingly mocked them, accusing them of gluttony, of folly, of madness; mitigating those expressions, he saith, "I speak to move you to shame," that is, to set upright, to bring back, to make you better, by this shame of yours. For he feared lest if he cut too deep, he should cause them to start away.

As he speaks to drunkards: "become sober; as you ought," that is, for benefit; for one can be sober unrighteously as well, for example, for the commission of evil. "And do not sin," he says. It is from this that you do not believe in the resurrection. For those who are conscious of evil in themselves do not agree to acknowledge the resurrection out of fear of punishment. Those who do not believe in the resurrection "do not know God." For they do not know the omnipotence of God. He did not say: you do not know, but: "they do not know," in order to soften the accusation. "I speak this to your shame." Since he had reproved them for quite a long time, he now consoles them: I said this, he says, not out of enmity and not as a reproach, but for shaming, so that when you are ashamed and reason as you ought, to bring you to correction.

963. – Then when he says: Come to your right mind and sin no more, he presents an admonition as to the perfect. For someone could say that from their conversations the weak should take care, because they are easily deceived; but the perfect cannot be so deceived. But the Apostle wishes that even the perfect be cautious. Hence he does two things in this regard. First, he makes them attentive, saying: O just ones, watch, i.e., you who are regarded as just, watch, i.e., be careful: "Watch, therefore, for you do not know on what day your Lord will come." (Matt 24:42); "Blessed is he who is awake keeping his garments" (Rev 16:15). Secondly, he assigns the reason, saying: Sin no more, and this twofold, one of which is on account of themselves. For no one is so perfect that he does not need to be wary of sin. But inertia and inactivity frequently lead to sin; hence, lest they sin, he induces them to be vigilant. Therefore, he says: sin no more: "Remember the Lord our God all your days, and refuse to sin" (Tob 4:5). He presents another reason for the benefit of others, because they are not solicitous only for themselves but also for others, lest they be deceived. And this is what he says: For some have no knowledge of God, i.e., do no have a correct faith: "Being ignorant of the righteousness of God, they did not submit to God's righteousness" (Rom 10:3). And this I say to your shame, that you should be careful. Or to your shame, because it is shameful to you who are regarded wise and instructed in the faith, that some among you are ignorant of God, i.e., do not have the correct faith.

Some may wonder how decayed bodies can become sound again, scattered members brought together, and destroyed parts restored. Yet no one seems to wonder how seeds softened and broken by the dampness and weight of the earth grow and become green again. Such seeds, of course, are rotted and dissolved by contact with the earth. But when the generative moisture of the soil imparts life to the buried and hidden seeds by a kind of life-giving heat, they receive the animating force of the growing plant. Then gradually, nature raises from stalk the tender life called the growing ear, and, like a careful mother, wraps it in a sheath as a protection against its being nipped at this immature stage by the frost or scorched by the sun when the kernels are emerging, as it were, from early infancy.

The second class of miracles, on this view, foretell what God has not yet done, but will do, universally. He raised one man (the man who was Himself) from the dead because He will one day raise all men from the dead. Perhaps not only men, for there are hints in the New Testament that all creation will eventually be rescued from decay, restored to shape and subserve the splendour of re-made humanity. The Transfiguration and the walking on the water are glimpses of the beauty and the effortless power over all matter which will belong to men when they are really waked by God. Now resurrection certainly involves "reversal" of natural process in the sense that it involves a series of changes moving in the opposite direction to those we see. At death, matter which has been organic, falls back gradually into the inorganic, to be finally scattered and used perhaps in other organisms. Resurrection would be the reverse process. It would not of course mean the restoration to each personality of those very atoms, numerically the same, which had made its first or "natural" body. There would not be enough to go round, for one thing; and for another, the unity of the body even in this life was consistent with a slow but perplexed change of its actual ingredients. But it certainly does mean matter of some kind rushing towards organism as now we see it rushing away. It means, in fact, playing backwards a film we have already seen played forwards. In that sense it is a reversal of Nature. But, of course, it is a further question whether reversal in this sense is necessarily contradiction. Do we know that the film cannot be played backwards?

Well, in one sense, it is precisely the teaching of modern physics that the film never works backwards. For modern physics, as you have heard before, the universe is "running down." Disorganization and chance is continually increasing. There will come a time, not infinitely remote, when it will be wholly run down or wholly disorganized, and science knows of no possible return from that state. There must have been a time, not infinitely remote, in the past when it was wound up, though science knows of no winding-up process. The point is that for our ancestors the universe was a picture: for modern physics it is a story. If the universe is a picture these things either appear in that picture or not; and if they don't, since it is an infinite picture, one may suspect that they are contrary to the nature of things. But a story is a different matter; specially if it is an incomplete story. And the story told by modern physics might be told briefly in the words "Humpty Dumpty was falling." That is, it proclaims itself an incomplete story. There must have been a time before he fell, when he was sitting on the wall; there must be a time after he had reached the ground. It is quite true that science knows of no horses and men who can put him together again once he has reached the ground and broken. But then she also knows of no means by which he could originally have been put on the wall. You wouldn't expect her to. All science rests on observation: all our observations are taken during Humpty Dumpty's fall, because we were born after he lost his seat on the wall and shall be extinct long before he reaches the ground. But to assume from observations taken while the clock is running down that the unimaginable winding-up which must have preceded this process cannot occur when the process is over is the merest dogmatism. From the very nature of the case the laws of degradation and disorganization which we find in matter at present, cannot be the ultimate and eternal nature of things. If they were, there would have been nothing to degrade and disorganize. Humpty Dumpty can't fall off a wall that never existed.

But some one will say, How are the dead raised? and with what body do they come? To that he has, be sure, an answer: Thou fool! he says, that which thou sowest is not quickened, unless it die, and that which thou sowest, thou sowest not the body that shall be, but a bare grain, it may chance of wheat or of some other kind; but God giveth it a body even as it hath pleased him, and to each seed a body of its own. What he says is this: Consider, O men, that the bare grain when sown in the earth, in the first place undergoes dissolution, for if this, he says, first dies, it then grows up by the power and providence of God, and reappears richly endowed, artfully contrived and exceeding beautiful; instead of one grain, a great number, instead of being bare, enfolded in a sheath, instead of being easily plucked up and trodden underfoot, firmly rooted and aided by having ears to keep it safe from all that could do it harm. This very body then which has been corrupted and changed into earth, and again sprouts up from the earth multiplied and of an admirable beauty, is a work full of wisdom and art, and most fair to see—a product of the providence of God by whom all things were made.

Consider then that God gives it a body as it pleases Him, and gives to each of the seeds its own body, suitable for it; as if he said: When multiplying seeds God gives to each neither an alien nor a strange body, but a body similar and suitable to it.

But further, when they hear the resurrection preached to them, they pronounce this to be impossible, for how, say they, can one who has been used up to form countless bodies in succession, rise up? And, to be brief, they attack with sophistries the Giver of their speech in their endeavour to overthrow the doctrines of His Church.

Gentle and lowly as the apostle is to a great degree every where, he here adopts a style rather pungent, because of the impiety of the gainsayers. He is not however content with this, but he also employs reasons and examples, subduing thereby even the very contentious. And above he saith, "Since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead;" but here he solves an objection brought in by the Gentiles. And see how again he abates the vehemence of his censure; in that he said not, "but perhaps ye will say," but he set down the objector indefinitely, in order that, although employing his impetuous style with all freedom, he might not too severely wound his hearers. And he states two difficulties, one touching the manner of the resurrection, the other, the kind of bodies. For of both they on their part made a question, saying, "How is that which hath been dissolved raised up?" and, "with what manner of body do they come?" But what means, "with what manner of body?" It is as if they had said, "with this which hath been wasted, which hath perished, or with some other?"

Then, to point out that the objects of their enquiry are not questionable but admitted points, he at once meets them more sharply, saying, "Thou foolish one, that which thou thyself sowest is not quickened, except it die." Which we also are wont to do in the case of those who gainsay things acknowledged.

And wherefore did he not at once appeal to the power of God? Because he is discoursing with unbelievers. For when his discourse is addressed to believers, he hath not much need of reasons. Wherefore having said elsewhere, "He shall change the body of your humiliation, that it may be fashioned like to the body of his glory," and having indicated somewhat more than the resurrection, he stated no analogies, but instead of any demonstration, brought forward the power of God, going on to say, "according to the working whereby He is able to subject all things to Himself." But here he also urges reasons. That is, having established it from the Scriptures, he adds also in what comes after, these things over and above, with an eye to them who do not obey the Scriptures; and he saith, "O foolish one, that which Thou sowest:" i.e., "from thyself thou hast the proof of these things, by what thou doest every day, and doubtest thou yet? Therefore do I call thee foolish because of the things daily done by thine own self thou art ignorant, and being thyself an artificer of a resurrection, thou doubtest concerning God." Wherefore very emphatically he said, "what Thou sowest," thou who art mortal and perishing.

And see how he uses expressions appropriate to the purpose he had in view: thus, "it is not quickened," saith he, "except it die." Leaving, you see, the terms appropriate to seed, as that "it buds," and "grows," and "is dissolved," he adopts those which correspond to our flesh, viz. "it is quickened," and, "except it die;" which do not properly belong to seeds, but to bodies.

And he said not, "after it is dead it lives," but, which is a greater thing, "therefore it lives, because it dies." Seest thou, what I am always observing, that he continually gives their argument the contrary turn? Thus what they made a sure sign of our not rising again, the same he makes a demonstration of our rising. For they said, "the body rises not again, because it is dead." What then doth he, retorting their argument, say? "Nay, but unless it died, it could not rise again: and therefore it rises again, because it died." For as Christ more clearly signifies this very thing, in the words, "Except a grain of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth by itself alone: but if it die, it beareth much fruit:" thence also Paul, drawing this example, said not, "it doth not live," but, "is not quickened;" again assuming the power of God and showing that not the nature of the ground, but God Himself, brings it all to pass.

And what can be the reason that he did not bring that forward, which was more akin to the subject: I mean, the seed of mankind? (For our generation too begins from a sort of decay, even as that of the corn.) Because it was not of equal force, but the latter was a more complete instance: for he wants a case of something that perished entirely, whereas this was but a part; wherefore he rather alleges the other. Besides, that proceeds from a living body and falls into a living womb; but here it is no flesh, but the earth into which the seed is cast, and into the same it is dissolved, like the body which is dead. Wherefore on this account too the example was more appropriate.

Everything wrong with our bodies in this life will be healed in the resurrection.

What, then, shall they do who are baptized for the body, if the body rises not again? We stand, then, on firm ground (when we say) that the next question which the apostle has discussed equally relates to the body. But "some man will say, `How are the dead raised up? With what body do they come? '" Having established the doctrine of the resurrection which was denied, it was natural to discuss what would be the sort of body (in the resurrection), of which no one had an idea.

For useless must that conflict be deemed (which is sustained in a body) for which no resurrection is in prospect. "But some man will say, How are the dead to be raised? And with what body will they come? " Now here he discusses the qualities of bodies, whether it be the very same, or different ones, which men are to resume.

He did not say: you say, in order that the speech might be more acceptable, when he would be examining the words as if of other unbelievers. Two subjects were called into doubt: one — the manner of the resurrection, how a body that has once decayed will rise; the other — in what body they will rise, in the present one or some other. By the example of the seed he resolves both perplexities.

964. – Having proved the resurrection of the dead, the Apostle now shows the quality and mode of those rising. In regard to this he does two things: first, he raises a question about the quality of those rising; secondly, he answers it (v. 36).

965. – In regard to the resurrection there have been two errors. For some absolutely denied the future resurrection of the dead. For since they considered only the principles and capabilities of nature and saw that according to natural principles and capabilities no one could return to life or a blind person recover sight, they absolutely denied the resurrection. From their mouth it says in Wis (2:5): "Our allotted time is the passing of a shadow"; "We are born of nothing" (Wis. 2:2); "Do you think a dead man will live again?" (Jb 14:14). Others, on the other hand, have said there will be a resurrection, but they will rise to the same manner of living and to the same acts. Even philosophers have posited this when they said: After many years Plato will rise again and will have the same scholars in Athens, whom he had at some time. The Sadducees also assert this Matt (22:29) about the woman with seven husbands. Hence they asked: "In the resurrection to which of the seven will she be wife?" The Saracens, too, pretend that after the resurrection they will have wives and voluptuous and bodily pleasures: "He will not move upon the rivers, the streams flow with honey and curds" (Jb 20:17). Against these Matt (22:30) says that "they will be as the angels in heaven." Therefore the Apostle raises two questions here. The first is when he says, How will the dead rise? How is it possible that the dead who are dust can rise? The second when he says, With what kind of body will they come? As if to say: will they rise with the same kind of body as we have now?

We must not doubt what is more in accord with nature than against it. For it is as natural that all things living should rise again as it is unnatural that they should perish.

That no one should be made sad by death; since in living is labour and peril, in dying peace and the certainty of resurrection. In Genesis: "Then said the Lord to Adam, Because thou hast hearkened to the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of that tree of which alone I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat, cursed shall be the ground in all thy works; in sadness and groaning shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life: thorns and thistles shall it cast forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field in the sweat of thy brow. Thou shall eat thy bread until thou return unto the earth from which also thou wast taken; because earth thou art, and to earth thou shall go." Also in the same place: "And Enoch pleased God, and was not found afterwards: because God translated him." And in Isaiah: "All flesh is grass, and all the glory of it as the flower of grass. The grass withered, and the flower hath fallen away; but the word of the Lord abideth for ever." In Ezekiel: "They say, Our bones are become dry, our hope hath perished: we have expired. Therefore prophesy, and say, Thus saith the Lord, Behold, I open your monuments, and I will bring you forth from your monuments, and I will bring you into the land of Israel; and I will put my Spirit upon you, and ye shall live; and I will place you into your land: and ye shall know that I the Lord have spoken, and will do it, saith the Lord." Also in the Wisdom of Solomon: "He was taken away, lest wickedness should change his understanding; for his soul was pleasing to God." Also in the eighty-third Psalm: "How beloved are thy dwellings, Thou Lord of hosts? My soul desires and hastes to the courts of God." And in the Epistle of Paul to the Thessalonians: "But we would not that you should be ignorant, brethren, concerning those who sleep, that ye sorrow not as others which have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, so also them which have fallen asleep in Jesus will God bring with Him." Also in the first Epistle to the Corinthians: "Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened except it have first died." And again: "Star differeth from star in glory: so also the resurrection. The body is sown in corruption, it rises without corruption; it is sown in ignominy, it rises again in glory; it is sown in weakness, it rises again in power; it is sown an animal body, it rises again a spiritual body." And again: "For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal put on immortality. But when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall come to pass the word that is written, Death is absorbed Into striving. Where, O death, is thy sting? Where, O death, is thy striving? " Also in the Gospel according to John: "Father, I will that those whom Thou hast given me be with me where I shall be, and may see my glory which Thou hast given me before the foundation of the world." Also according to Luke: "Now lettest Thou Thy servant depart in peace, O Lord, according to the word; for mine eyes have seen Thy salvation." Also according to John: "If ye loved me, ye would rejoice because I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I."

We must therefore conclude that it is in reference to the flesh that death is mentioned; which [flesh], after the soul's departure, becomes breathless and inanimate, and is decomposed gradually into the earth from which it was taken. This, then, is what is mortal. And it is this of which he also says, "He shall also quicken your mortal bodies." And therefore in reference to it he says, in the first [Epistle] to the Corinthians: "So also is the resurrection of the dead: it is sown in corruption, it rises in incorruption." For he declares, "That which thou sowest cannot be quickened, unless first it die."

But what is that which, like a grain of wheat, is sown in the earth and decays, unless it be the bodies which are laid in the earth, into which seeds are also cast?

The sun sinks down and arises, the stars pass away and return, the flowers die and revive again, after their win-try decay the shrubs resume their leaves, seeds do not flourish again. unless they are rotted:

And with a felicitous sally he proceeds at once to illustrate the point, as if an objector had plied him with some such question. "Thou fool," says he, "that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die." From this example of the seed it is then evident that no other flesh is quickened than that which shall have undergone death, and therefore all the rest of the question will become clear enough.

The solution is borrowed from what is obvious and happens among them every day. Therefore he also calls them foolish, because they do not know such a clear matter. What, he says, "you sow," you — a corruptible being: how then do you doubt about God? "It is not made alive (ου ζωοποιεΐται)," he says, "unless it dies"; he used words applying not to seeds, but to bodies. For he did not say: otherwise it will not grow, if it is not destroyed, but: "it is not made alive," if it does not die. See how he gave the speech a reverse form. It seemed incomprehensible to them how we shall rise after death; but he, on the contrary, says that we shall rise precisely because we die. For it would have been impossible to be made alive otherwise, if there were no death.

966. – He answers these two questions when he says, you foolish man! First, he solves the second; secondly, he solves the first (v. 44b). To understand what the Apostle presents in the first part, it is necessary to investigate what the Apostle intends. But in this part the Apostle intends to show that the dead will rise and that their substance will be the same. Here he first presents likenesses; secondly, he adapts (v. 42); thirdly, he proves (v. 44b). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he proposes likenesses in one species; secondly, in diverse species (v. 39).

967. – In regard to the first it should be noted that we see in one and the same species that one thing on the way to generation has diverse qualities and forms: as grain has one form and quality, when it is planted, and another, when it shoots up, and another, when it is in herb. From this likeness the Apostle intends to show the quality of the rising. Hence, in regard to this he does three things: first, he compares the order of sowing to growing; secondly, the difference in quality in sowing and growing (v. 37); thirdly, the cause of the quality in growing (v. 38).

968. – He says, therefore, O foolish man! But on the other hand it says in Matthew (5:22): "Whoever says to his brother, 'You fool', shall be liable to hell." The answer is that God forbids saying, "you fool" or "stupid" to your brother in anger and not correction. Now the reason he say foolish is that this objection against the resurrection proceeds from the principles of human wisdom, which is wisdom as long as it is subjected to divine wisdom. But when one departs from God, he falls back on unwisdom; hence, when he contradicts divine wisdom, he calls him foolish. As if to say: You foolish man! Do you not experience every day that what you sow in the earth does not come to life unless it dies, i.e., decays: "Unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone" (Jn. 12:24). And the Apostle seems to make this comparison, that when a man's body is put in a tomb, it is a form of sowing; but when it rises, it is coming to life.

969. – Hence, from this some suppose that the resurrection of the dead is natural, inasmuch as the Apostle here compares the resurrection of the dead to the sprouting of a seed, which is natural. For they believed that in the dust, into which human bodies are resolved, there were certain active seminal powers for the resurrection of bodies. But this does not seem to be true. For the resolution of human bodies into elements happens in the same way as other mixed bodies; hence, the dust into which human bodies are resolved has no other active power than other dust, in which there is no evidence of any active power to constitute a human body, but only in man's seed. However, the dusts into which human bodies are reduced differ from other dust only according to God's plan, inasmuch as these dusts are ordained by divine wisdom that human bodies be formed from them again. Hence the active cause of the resurrection is God alone, even though for this he uses the service of angels to collect the dust. Hence, the Apostle explaining the manner of the resurrection below attributes it to Christ's raising, but not to any active power in the dusts. Therefore, the Apostle does not intend to prove here that the resurrection is natural, but to manifest by certain examples that the quality of rising bodies and that of dying bodies is not the same; and, first of all, by the fact that the quality of the seed and of the sprouting bud are not the same, as will be clearly shown from the following.

If a seed dies and comes back again with so much additional benefit to the human race, why is it incredible that a human body should rise again, by the power of God, with an equally improved substance?

"And he who soweth, soweth not that body that shall be."

For the things before spoken meet the question, "how they are raised;" but this, the doubt, "with what manner of body they come." But what is, "thou sowest not that body which shall be?" Not an entire ear of corn, nor new grain. For here his discourse no longer regards the resurrection, but the manner of the resurrection, what is the kind of body which shall rise again; as whether it be of the same kind, or better and more glorious. And he takes both from the same analogy, intimating that it will be much better.

But the heretics, considering none of these things, dart in upon us and say, "one body falls and another body rises again. How then is there a resurrection? For the resurrection is of that which was fallen. But where is that wonderful and surprising trophy over death, if one body fall and another rise again? For he will no longer appear to have given back that which he took captive. And how can the alleged analogy suit the things before mentioned?" Why, it is not one substance that is sown, and another that is raised, but the same substance improved. Else neither will Christ have resumed the same body when He became the first-fruits of them that rise again: but according to you He threw aside the former body, although it had not sinned, and took another. Whence then is that other? For this body was from the Virgin, but that, whence was it? Seest thou to what absurdity the argument hath come round? For wherefore shows He the very prints of the nails? Was it not to prove that it is that same body which was crucified, and the same again that rose from the dead? And what means also His type of Jonah? For surely it was not one Jonah that was swallowed up and another that was cast out upon dry land. And why did He also say, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up?" For that which was destroyed, the same clearly He raised again. Wherefore also the Evangelist added, that "He spake of the temple of His body."

What is that then which he saith, "Thou sowest not the body that shall be?" i.e. not the ear of corn: for it is the same, and not the same; the same, because the substance is the same; but not the same, because this is more excellent, the substance remaining the same but its beauty becoming greater, and the same body rising up new. Since if this were not so, there were no need of a resurrection, I mean if it were not to rise again improved. For why did He at all pull down His house, except He were about to build it more glorious?

This now, you see, he said to them who think that it is utter corruption. Next, that none again might suspect from this place that another body is spoken of, he qualifies the dark saying, and himself interprets what he had spoken, not allowing the hearer to turn his thoughts from hence in any other direction. What need is there then of our reasonings? Hear himself speaking, and explaining the phrase, "Thou sowest not the body that shall be." For he straightway adds, "but a bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other kind;" i.e., it is not the body that shall be; not so clothed, for instance; not having a stalk and beard, but "a bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other kind."

The power which exists in a grain of wheat refashions and restores the grain, after its corruption and death, into a body with stalk and ear.

Indeed, since he proposes as his examples "wheat grain, or some other grain, to which God giveth a body, such as it hath pleased Him; " since also he says, that "to every seed is its own body; " that, consequently, "there is one kind of flesh of men, whilst there is another of beasts, and (another) of birds; that there are also celestial bodies and bodies terrestrial; and that there is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars" -does he not therefore intimate that there is to be a resurrection of the flesh or body, which he illustrates by fleshly and corporeal samples? Does he not also guarantee that the resurrection shall be accomplished by that God from whom proceed all the (creatures which have served him for) examples? "So also," says he, "is the resurrection of the dead.

Two, it is said, were the perplexities: one — how they will rise, the other — in what body. The first, how they will rise, he resolved; namely: through death, as also a seed. Now, having explained in what body they will rise, he resolves the other perplexity as well. He says that the very same body will rise, that is, a body of the very same essence, but in a brighter and more glorious form. The heretics say that the same body will not rise, for this, they say, is what the apostle expresses when he says: "not the body that shall be." But the apostle does not say this, but what? That what you sow as a seed is not such as it will be, not bright and glorious, but bare, yet the stalk grows up in beauty; and it is not entirely the same, because what was sown was not a stalk, that is, not with a stem, but a "bare grain"; but neither is it entirely different, because this stalk is not from another grain, but from this bare one.

970. – For when he says, and what you sow, he shows that the quality of seed is different from the quality of the sprout. Hence he says, what you sow is not the body which is to be, i.e., you do not plant it as it will be. Explaining this he says, but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain, namely, a seed, because a bare kernel is sowed, but what sprouts is fashioned as a herb, or an ear of corn and so on. Similarly, the human body will have another quality in the resurrection than it has now, as will be explained below. Yet there is a difference between the resurrection of the human body and the sprouting of a seed, for the same numerical body will rise, but it will have another quality, as the Apostle says below (v. 53): "For this perishable nature must put on the imperishable"; and Job (19:27): "And my eyes shall behold and not another." But in sprouting there is neither the same quality nor the same numerical body, but only the same in species. And therefore, the Apostle speaking about sprouting said, what you sow is not the body which is to be, giving us to understand that it is not the same numerically. And in this the work of nature falls short of God's work. For the power of nature restores what is the same in species, but not the same numerically; but God's power can restore even the same numerically.

971. – And so, even from what is stated here can be taken a proof that the future is not something impossible as the foolish man objected. For if nature, from what is dead, can restore the same thing specifically, much more can God restore the same numerical thing, because whatever nature can do is a work of God. For nature has from God that it can do this.

He did not say God "gave" or "ordered" but God "gives," that you may know how the Creator applies the effective power of his wisdom to the creation of things which come into existence daily at their appointed times.

But if there is a rudimentary Leonine self, to that also God can give a "body" as it pleases Him--a body no longer living by the destruction of the lamb, yet richly Leonine in the sense that it also expresses whatever energy and splendour and exulting power dwelled within the visible lion on this earth.

It seems to me that here Paul is refuting those who ignore the particular standards of nature and assess the divine power in the light of their own strength. They think that God can do only as much as man can comprehend. They think that what is beyond us also exceeds the power of God.

"But God giveth it a body even as it pleased Him."

"Yes," saith one, "but in that case it is the work of nature." Of what nature, tell me? For in that case likewise God surely doeth the whole; not nature, nor the earth, nor the rain. Wherefore also he making these things manifest, leaves out both earth and rain, atmosphere, sun, and hands of husbandmen, and subjoins, "God giveth it a body as it pleased Him." Do not thou therefore curiously inquire, nor busy thyself with the how and in what manner, when thou hearest of the power and will of God.

"And to each seed a body of its own." Where then is the alien matter which they speak of? For He giveth to each "his own." So that when he saith, "Thou sowest not that which shall be," he saith not this, that one substance is raised up instead of another, but that it is improved, that it is more glorious. For "to each of the seeds," saith he, "a body of its own."

From hence in what follows, he introducing also the difference of the resurrection which shall then be. For do not suppose, because grain is sown and all come up ears of corn, that therefore there is also in the resurrection an equality of honor. For in the first place, neither in seeds is there only one rank, but some are more valuable, and some inferior. Wherefore also he added, "to each seed a body of its own."

However, he is not content with this, but seeks another difference greater and more manifest. For that thou mayest not, when hearing, as I said, that all rise again, suppose that all enjoy the same reward; he laid before even in the preceding verses the seeds of this thought, saying, "But each in his own order." But he brings it out here also more clearly.

Indeed, since he proposes as his examples "wheat grain, or some other grain, to which God giveth a body, such as it hath pleased Him; " since also he says, that "to every seed is its own body; " that, consequently, "there is one kind of flesh of men, whilst there is another of beasts, and (another) of birds; that there are also celestial bodies and bodies terrestrial; and that there is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars" -does he not therefore intimate that there is to be a resurrection of the flesh or body, which he illustrates by fleshly and corporeal samples? Does he not also guarantee that the resurrection shall be accomplished by that God from whom proceed all the (creatures which have served him for) examples? "So also," says he, "is the resurrection of the dead.

And to every seed God has assigned its own body -not, indeed, its own in the sense of its primitive body-in order that what it acquires from God extrinsically may also at last be accounted its own.

If God gives the body, then why do you still inquire in what body we shall be raised, and not believe in the resurrection, hearing of the power and will of God? For God will raise the destroyed body, only He will raise it more glorious and more spiritual. This can be observed also in seeds, because a germinated seed comes up better than the one that was cast into the earth.

These words irrefutably shut the mouths of heretics who say that in the resurrection the body that comes to life will not be the same, but a different one. For behold, you hear that each one is given his own body.

972. – Then, describing the quality of sprouting, he attributes it first to God; secondly, to the proportion of nature.

973. – First he says, God gives it a body as he has chosen, because it proceeds from an ordination of the divine will that from such a seed such a plant is produced, which plant is as the body of a seed. For the ultimate fruit of a plant is the seed. And therefore, he attributes this to the activity of God, as it says above (12:6): "It is the same God who inspires them all in every one." And this can be considered in this way. For it is manifest that natural things act without knowledge for a fixed end; otherwise, they would not always or for the most part attain the same end. But it is manifest that nothing lacking knowledge tends to a fixed end unless directed by a knower, as an arrow tends to a fixed target by the direction of the bowman. Therefore, just as if someone saw an arrow directly moving toward a definite target would immediately know that it was directed by a bowman, so when we see natural things without knowledge tend to definite ends, we can know for certain that they are acting under the will of some director, which we call God. And the Apostle says, God gives to the seed a body, i.e., he produces from the seed a plant, as he has chosen.

974. – But again, lest anyone believe that such natural effects arise solely from God's will without the activity and proportion of nature, he adds, and to each kind of seed its own body; for example, from the olive seed an olive is produced, and wheat from the seed of wheat. Hence, it says in Genesis (1:11): "Let the earth put forth vegetation, plants yielding seed, each according to its kind." Thus therefore in the resurrection too, there will be another quality of the rising body, which will be proportionate to the merits of the dying person.