1 Timothy 5:1–10

The preacher of Almighty God, Paul the apostle, says, "Rebuke not an elder" (1 Tim. v. 1). But this rule of his is to be observed in cases where the fault of an elder does not draw through his example the hearts of the younger into ruin. But, when an elder sets an example to the young for their ruin, he is to be smitten with severe rebuke. For it is written, "Ye are all a snare to the young" (Isai. xlii. 22). And again the prophet says, "The sinner being an hundred years old is accursed" (Isai. lxv. 20).

"Rebuke not an elder." Is he now speaking of the order? I think not, but of any elderly man. What then if he should need correction? Do not rebuke him, but address him as you would a father offending.

Among our negligent and sluggish brothers there is generally something requiring correction by a sterner show of authority. But the correction should be applied so as not to destroy charity. Hence, also, the blessed apostle Paul, instructing Timothy in the government of the church, says, "Do not rebuke an elderly man, but exhort him as you would a father, and young men as brothers, elderly women as mothers, younger women as sisters in all chastity." If, by the apostle's direction, this moderation is to be shown to any members of lesser rank, how much more should it be displayed without offense toward our brothers and fellow bishops?

Do not rebuke an elder man, but encourage him as a father, younger men as brothers, older women as mothers, younger women as sisters, in all purity.

Paul does not teach any new doctrine, but all things are old. What then does he say? If correction is needed, admonish as a father, teaching with gentleness. For harsh rebuke is severe, especially from a young man toward an elder; through modesty what is severe is softened.

younger men as brothers. With common sense understood, to exhort. But therefore as brothers, so that you may recall their rashness to modesty.

older women as mothers.  Because of the said reason concerning the elders.

in all purity. Since even conversations with younger people hardly escape suspicion, you should do this with all purity, that is, not even to the slightest degree of favor.

— Otherwise. And not only to Timothy, but also to every overseer he gives advice.

On the age, manner, and management of widows.

The apostle is not speaking about one who holds the rank of presbyter in the Church, but about every aged person. But what if he needs correction? In that case, he says, treat him as a father.

Then when he says, do not rebuke an ancient man, he shows how his teaching must be adapted to various hearers; and he mentions two varieties: first, according to age; second, according to sex. In regard to the second, they are divided:

first, into men;

second, into women, at old women.

He says, therefore: do not rebuke an ancient man, but entreat him as a father: honor the person of an aged man (Lev 19:32). Therefore, they are not to be sarcastically rebuked, but entreated: the ancients, therefore, that are among you, I beseech, who am myself an ancient (1 Pet 5:1). And if Peter did this as an old man, how much more should a young man do so?

But this seems to be contrary to Isaiah: the child shall die a hundred years old, and the sinner being a hundred years old shall be accursed (Isa 16:20).

I answer that an old man of unusual wickedness is a disgrace to old age and deserves to be accursed. Young men, as brethren: all you are brethren (Matt 23:8); you ruled over them with rigor (Ezek 34:4).

"The elder women as mothers, the younger men as brethren; the younger women as sisters, with all purity." Rebuke is in its own nature offensive, particularly when it is addressed to an old man, and when it proceeds from a young man too, there is a threefold show of forwardness. By the manner and the mildness of it, therefore, he would soften it. For it is possible to reprove without offense, if one will only make a point of this: it requires great discretion, but it may be done. "The younger men as brethren." Why does he recommend this too here? With a view to the high spirit natural to young men, whence it is proper to soften reproof to them also with moderation. "The younger women as sisters"; he adds, "with all purity." Tell me not, he means, of merely avoiding sinful intercourse with them. There should not be even a suspicion. For since intimacy with young women is always suspicious, and yet a Bishop cannot always avoid it, he shows by adding these words, that "all purity" is required in such intimacy. But does Paul give this advice to Timothy? Yes, he says, for I am speaking to the world through him. But if Timothy was thus advised, let others consider what sort of conduct is required of them, that they should give no ground for suspicion, no shadow of pretext, to those who wish to calumniate.

If the emperor visits her imperial majesty, or she him, then should ye also be most circumspect in eye and demeanour, and in all your words. Let her mark your mastery of yourselves and your modesty; and let her followers and attendants mark your demeanour; let them mark it and admire it, and by reason thereof praise Jesus Christ our Lord in you.

Since reproof is hard to bear, especially when a young man reproves an old one—then it becomes triply reckless—therefore, he says, you should soften it with gentleness.

Since this age is characterized by great boldness and does not tolerate reproofs, therefore, he says, one must soften them with condescension.

Since conversations with young women give rise to suspicions, and yet a bishop must converse with them too, you, he says, must not only guard against sinful union, but must not give any occasion for suspicion either. The Apostle commands this to Timothy not for his sake, but for ours, the subsequent bishops, so that we might guard against suspicions.

On the part of women, there is a difference of ages, because old women, as mothers, especially those who are not young: honor widows (1 Tim 5:3); young women, as sisters, with the love of charity. And this in all chastity; because spiritual love toward women soon degenerates into carnal. Therefore, in matters pertaining to young women, chastity must be applied; that is why the Apostle adds, in all chastity. Wherefore Pope Leo writing to them, says: beloved in Christ; but to men he simply says: beloved sons.

So, then, a widow is not only marked off by bodily abstinence but is distinguished by virtue. It is not I who give this command but the apostle. I am not the only person to do them honor, but the teacher of the Gentiles did so first, when he said, "Honor widows that are widows indeed. But if any widow has children or nephews, let her first learn to govern her own house and to take care of her parents." Thus we encourage every inclination of affection in a widow to love her children and to do her duty to her parents. So when discharging her duty to her parents she is teaching her children and is rewarded herself by her own compliance with duty, in that what she performs for others benefits herself.

That all widows that are approved are to be held in honour. In the first Epistle of Paul to Timothy: "Honour widows which are truly widows. But the widow that is wanton, is dead while she liveth." And again: "But the younger widows pass by: for when they shall be wanton in Christ, they wish to marry; having judgment, because they have cast off their first faith."

"Honour widows that are widows indeed." Be the friend of orphans; for God is "the Father of the fatherless, and the Judge of the widows." Do nothing without the bishops; for they are priests, and thou a servant of the priests. They baptize, offer sacrifice, ordain, and lay on hands; but thou ministerest to them, as the holy Stephen did at Jerusalem to James and the presbyters. Do not neglect the sacred meetings [of the saints]; inquire after every one by name. "Let no man despise thy youth, but be thou an example to the believers, both in word and conduct."

[Paul] is training a church still untaught in Christ and making provision for people of all stations but especially for the poor, the charge of whom has been committed to himself and Barnabas. Thus he wishes only those to be supported by the exertions of the church who cannot labor with their own hands and who are widows indeed, approved by their years and by their lives.

"Honor widows, that are widows indeed." Why does he say nothing of virginity, nor command us to honor virgins? Perhaps there were not yet any professing that state, or they might have fallen from it. "For some," he says, "are already turned aside after Satan." For a woman may have lost her husband, and yet not be truly a widow. As in order to be a virgin, it is not enough to be a stranger to marriage, but many other things are necessary, as blamelessness and perseverance; so the loss of a husband does not constitute a widow, but patience, with chastity and separation from all men. Such widows he justly bids us honor, or rather support. For they need support, being left desolate, and having no husband to stand up for them. Their state appears to the multitude despicable and inauspicious. Therefore he wishes them to receive the greater honor from the Priest, and the more so, because they are worthy of it.

Honor widows who are truly widows. But if any widow has children or grandchildren, let them first learn to manage their own household properly and to repay their elders. For this is acceptable in the sight of God.

Why does Paul say nothing about virgins? Perhaps they were not in their prime. And who is the truly widowed woman, he goes on to say. He ordered that she herself be honored, because they have no husbands nor children, and the matter seems to be a curse for many. Therefore, he says, she should enjoy much honor from the priest, as if restoring the reproaches from others. Or Paul calls the honor the condition of necessities.

if any widow has children. These are not truly widows. For truly they are those who are isolated on all sides.

— [OECUMENIUS] to manage their own household properly. That is, to arrange well. [end of the excerpt by Oecumenius] —

and to repay their elders. See the wisdom of the blessed Paul. Often he also urges from human reasoning. For he says, since those before you were not able to give back the recompenses (for they died), through the descendants of those, your children, you should repay them the favors which you owed to those.

— And furthermore. That children and grandchildren should first learn to revere their own household; that is, that children and grandchildren should learn to honor their own mother and to nourish and treat her well. For this is what it means to revere. And also the ancestors, that is, the grandmother. Add also to the account that this is acceptable to God.

Further, if we set down in order the higher and happier grades of bodily patience, (we find that)it is she who is entrusted by holiness with the care of continence of the flesh: she keeps the widow, and sets on the virgin the seal and raises the self-made eunuch to the realms of heaven.

Paul's intention is precisely not to give honor to women who have given only a promise of widowhood but rather to give honor to those who have clearly fulfilled the promise by their action.

Those faithful widows who have no other support must have churchly assistance.

Why does he say nothing about virgins? Perhaps because there were none of them there yet. He commands to honor widows because they do not have husbands who would advocate for them, and their very condition seemed shameful and worthy of reproach. Therefore they should enjoy great respect from the priest, and most of all because they are worthy of it, as "true widows." And what kind of widows are these? – you will see further on. Consequently, one can be without a husband and still not be a widow. The expression "honor" stands in place of: be merciful to them and provide them with what they need.

Above, he instructed Timothy on the use and abstinence from foods; here he instructs him on the distribution of foods to spiritual persons, namely, the foods dispensed to widows and teachers:

first, therefore, he instructs him concerning widows;

second, concerning teachers, at let the priests who rule well.

In regard to the first he does two things: first, he states when food is to be distributed by the Church to widows and teachers;

second, what sort of widow is to be selected, at let a widow be chosen.

In regard to the first he does three things: first, he shows what sort of widow should be helped;

second, he amplifies what he has said, at but if any widow;

third, he gives the reason for his statement, at but if any man.

He says, therefore, honor widows, not only by showing reverence, but also by supplying necessities. For these two elements are part and parcel of honor. Hence in the command to honor our parents, we understand a command to help them. As if to say: provide for them in necessity; and this was a custom from the very beginning of the Church: there arose a murmuring of the Greeks against the Hebrews for that their widows were neglected in the daily ministration (Acts 6:1); in the temple there were sums deposited for the subsistence of the widows and fatherless (2 Macc 3:10).

But which widows? Those who are widows indeed. For a widow is, as it were, one who has lost her husband. For a true widow is one who does not have other persons by whom she is sustained; and her needs were provided from the alms of the faithful.

"But if any widow have children or grandchildren, let them learn first to show piety at home, and to requite their parents." Observe the discretion of Paul; how often he urges men from human considerations. For he does not here lay down any great and lofty motive, but one that is easy to be understood: "to requite their parents." How? For bringing them up and educating them. As if he should say, Thou hast received from them great care. They are departed. Thou canst not requite them. For thou didst not bring them forth, nor nourish them. Requite them in their descendants, repay the debt through the children. "Let them learn first to show piety at home." Here he more simply exhorts them to acts of kindness; then to excite them the more, he adds, "For that is good and acceptable before God." And as he had spoken of those "who are widows indeed," he declares who is indeed a widow.

It is the children and grandchildren who should learn their religious duties, namely, to care for widowed forebears, and not the widows who are to learn, for it is precisely they who are worthy of assistance, partly because they have no children.

That is, let children and grandchildren learn to honor their mother, providing her with rest and sustenance. For εὐσεβεῖν – "to act piously" here means – to give rest to one's mother or grandmother in old age. The dignity of parents is a divine dignity, so that to give them rest means to be pious, and conversely, not to give them rest in old age is impiety.

Render to parents, that is, to mother or grandmother. Notice the prudence of Paul, how he touches upon a noble feeling, namely the feeling of rendering to parents for their upbringing and nurturing. To this he also adds the reason: "for this is pleasing to God."

Then when he says, but if any widow, he explains who truly are widows:

first, he shows who truly are;

second, who are not, at for she who is a widow.

In regard to the first he does two things: first, he deals with the institution of those who are really widows;

second, he assigns the reason, at for this is acceptable.

Therefore, he instructs such to learn first to govern her own house: they taught their daughter to take care of the family (Tob 10:13). And he says, first, because a widow who is accepted to have her needs filled by the Church ought to be watchful and honorable. And this is what he says, let her learn; she should also serve her parents; hence he says, and to make a return of duty to her parents. As if to say: just as her parents nourished her, so she them, if she has parents.

He assigns the reason for this when he says, for this is acceptable before God; because this is done not only to men, but to God. And this is clear from the fact that the Lord gave a special commandment on this point, and Jesus in the Gospel refused to ignore it. Furthermore, nature teaches this, namely, that a man make a return to those who conferred benefits on him. But no one has conferred as much as parents have.

And you, O widow, find those who will pray for you. If as a true widow and desolate you hope in God, continue constant in supplications. Persist in prayers. Treat your body as dying daily, that by dying you may live again. Avoid pleasures, that you, too, being sick, may be healed.

When the Lord exhorted us to pray always and not to faint, he told of the widow whose continuous appeal brought a wicked and impious judge, who scorned both God and man, to hear her cause. From this it can be easily understood how widows, beyond all others, have the duty of applying themselves to prayer, since an example was taken from widows to encourage us all to develop a love of prayer. But, in a practice of such importance, what characteristic of widows is singled out but their poverty and desolation? Therefore, insofar as every soul understands that it is poor and desolate in this world, as long as it is absent from the Lord, it surely commends its widowhood, so to speak, to God its defender, with continual and most earnest prayer.

The church is called Christ's widow, because she is stripped of all worldly help and places her hope solely in the Lord. Like a widow, she suffers the shameful actions of evil men, the most cruel plunderings of the wicked. Like a woman deprived of a husband's aid, she always grieves and is always worn out, yet she enjoys the unchanging steadfastness of a most chaste mind.… She is called a widow because she is bereft of worldly protection and has placed her hope in her heavenly Bridegroom, who has transformed her swarthiness into beauty, her error into uprightness, her cruelty into devotion and her frailty into total constancy.

A widow who has ceased to have a husband to please, and who in the apostle's language is a widow indeed, needs nothing more earnestly than perseverance. Remembering past enjoyments, she knows what gave her pleasure and what she has now lost. By rigid fasting and vigils she must quench the fiery darts of the devil.

To whom is this said? To those who have no children, because they are more highly approved and have a greater opportunity of pleasing God, because all their chains are loosened to them. There is no one to hold them fast, no one to compel them to drag their chains after them. You are separated from your husband but are united to God. You have not a fellow servant for your associate, but you have your Lord.

"Now she that is a widow indeed, and desolate, trusteth in God, and continueth in supplications and prayers night and day. But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth." She who being a widow has not made choice of a worldly life, is a widow indeed; she who trusts in God as she ought, and continues instant in prayer night and day, is a widow indeed. Not that she, who has children, is not a widow indeed. For he commends her who brings up children as she ought. But if any one has not children, he means, she is desolate, and her he consoles, saying, that she is most truly a widow, who has lost not only the consolation of a husband, but that arising from children, yet she has God in the place of all. She is not the worse for not having children, but He fills up her need with consolation, in that she is without children. What he says amounts to this. Grieve not, when it is said that a widow ought to bring up children, as if, because thou hast no children thy worth were on that account inferior. Thou art a widow indeed, whereas she who liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth.

But the widow who is truly alone has hoped in God and continues in supplications and prayers night and day. But the one who lives in luxury has died while still living.

But the widow who is truly alone. Since Paul ordered that those who are truly widows to be honored, he now says what kind of women are truly widows, characterizing them in an explanation. He says she is isolated, both from children and from descendants.

has hoped in God and continues in supplications and prayers. Therefore, this is the true widow, who hopes in God and waits with prayers. For since she is abandoned of human help, it is reasonable that she turns to God.

But the one who lives in luxury has died while still living. For many choose widowhood in order to act with greater authority in things that are not proper, Paul says: "But the one who lives in luxury," that is, the one living in indulgence, "though living, has died." How? For life seems to be the life now. The eternal life has been lost. Therefore, she has died through sin, as far as eternal life is concerned.

Having said above: honor those widows who are true widows, and not those who are not true, that is, those who have someone to care for them, he now says who is a true widow: she, he says, who has no one to look after her, has neither son nor grandson, and has placed all her hope in God. This is the kind of woman one should care for, this is the kind one should show mercy to, providing her with everything she needs.

And rightly so. For, having no one else, she turns to God. Since they were probably grieving because they had absolutely no protectors, the apostle comforts them with the fact that in place of everything they have God. If she who raises her own children receives a reward, then your dignity is not diminished by the fact that you have no children.

Then when he says, but she who is a widow indeed, he treats of true widows:

first, he shows who are true widows;

second, how they are to be instructed, at let her trust in God.

He says, therefore: she who is a widow indeed, and desolate, i.e., has no human consolation, namely, children and grandchildren, and no other refuge, let her trust in God, even in regard to temporal subsidies provided by the Church.

First, she should be instructed to pursue the good;

second, to avoid evil, at and command this.

In regard to the first he does two things:

first, he shows how a widow should occupy her time;

second, he gives the reason, at for she who lives.

He says, therefore: let her trust in God and make acts worthy of hope, which is done by prayer and entreaty through which one obtains what is hoped. For prayer is the lifting up of the mind to God; and supplication is an entreaty through sacred things. Therefore, he continues: and continue in supplications and prayers night and day.

He says, night and day, because it is impossible for a person to be entirely without anxiety. Therefore, since a widow has nothing to occupy her, she ought to devote all her time to God: Anna did not depart from the temple, by fastings and prayers serving night and day (Luke 2:37); she made herself a private chamber in the upper part of her house (Jdt 8:5).

But there is a kind of death that the apostle detests when he says of the widow, "But she that lives in pleasures is dead while she is living." Hence, the soul which was impious but has now become pious is said to have come back to life from the dead and to live on account of justification by faith. The body, on the contrary, is not only said to be about to die on account of the departure of the soul, which will come to pass, but, in a certain number of passages, it is even spoken of as already dead on account of the great weakness of flesh and blood, as where the apostle says, "The body, it is true, is dead on account of sin, the spirit is life on account of justice."

May God avert from us the sentence which will be in hard pursuit of those who indulge in any kind of wickedness, who are adorned with the most precious ornaments for the sake of vanity and worldly pomp. Such persons seize the property of another, are filled even to the point of vomiting with many delicacies, bury themselves in excessive drinking and store up by almsgiving little or nothing for heaven. It is of these persons that the apostle says, "The soul which gives herself up to pleasures is dead while she is still alive."

Let no one addicted to idleness eat, lest he become a wanderer about, and a whoremonger. Let drunkenness, anger, envy, reviling, clamour, and blasphemy "be not so much as named among you." Let not the widows live a life of pleasure, lest they wax wanton against the word. Be subject to Caesar in everything in which subjection implies no [spiritual] danger. Provoke not those that rule over you to wrath, that you may give no occasion against yourselves to those that seek for it. But as to the practice of magic, or the impure love of boys, or murder, it is superfluous to write to you, since such vices are forbidden to be committed even by the Gentiles. I do not issue commands on these points as if I were an apostle; but, as your fellow-servant, I put you in mind of them.

It is difficult, or rather impossible, when we are swimming in luxury or pleasure, not to think of what we are doing. And it is an idle pretense which some put forward that they can take their fill of pleasure with their faith and purity and mental uprightness unimpaired. It is a violation of nature to revel in pleasure, and the apostle gives a caution against this very thing when he says, "She that gives herself to pleasure is dead while she lives." The bodily senses are like horses madly racing, but the soul like a charioteer holds the reins. And as the horses without a driver go at breakneck speed, so the body, if it be not governed by the reasonable soul, rushes to its own destruction.

No one—not even though he call himself a Christian or a monk a thousand times over—confesses God while he is sinning. No one remembers God while he allows what the Lord hates. It is like pretending he is a faithful servant while he takes no notice of his master's commands. St. Paul says of a widow, "She that gives herself to pleasure is dead while she lives." This is the kind of death he means. Many whose bodies are alive are dead and in hell and cannot praise God. And many whose bodies are dead bless and praise God together in the spirit.… In the Apocalypse the souls of the martyrs are described as praying to God as well as praising him.

Again, to live in luxury does not seem to be a manifest and admitted crime; but then it brings forth in us great evils,—drunkenness, violence, extortion, and rapine. For the prodigal and sumptuous liver, bestowing extravagant service upon the belly, is often compelled to steal, and to seize the property of others, and to use extortion and violence. If, then, thou avoidest luxurious living, thou removest the foundation of extortion, and rapine, and drunkenness, and a thousand other evils; cutting away the root of iniquity from its extremity. Hence Paul saith, that "she who liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth."

What then? Is it not possible, they say, to enjoy ease both here and hereafter? This, O man, is unattainable; it is one of the things impossible. It cannot, it cannot be, that he who here enjoys ease and plenty, and continually indulges in every luxury—who lives a vain and aimless life—can also enjoy honour hereafter. At the same time, if he be not troubled by poverty, he still is troubled by desire, and from this cause suffers restraint—a cause which gives rise to no small amount of trouble, Again, if disease do not afflict him, yet evil passion burns within, and it is no slight pain that springs from wrath; also, if trials be not laid upon him, yet wicked thoughts constantly arise to vex him. It is by no means a trivial matter to restrain lawless desire, to put a stop to vainglorious thoughts, to check insensate pride, to refrain from excess, to live in self-denial. And he who does not accomplish these things, and such as these, can never attain salvation. For that they who live luxuriously are not saved, hear what St Paul says concerning widows, "She that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth." And if this is said concerning a widow, much more is it true concerning a man.

But since many who have children choose the state of widowhood, not to cut off the occasions of a worldly life, but rather to enhance them, that they may do what they will with the greater license, and indulge the more freely in worldly lusts: therefore he says, "She that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth." Ought not a widow then to live in pleasure? Surely not. If then when nature and age is weak, a life of pleasure is not allowable, but leads to death, eternal death; what have men to say, who live a life of pleasure? But he says with reason, "She that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth."

Behold, to what does the wisdom of this world urge a man? To live in pleasures. Whence it is said: A widow that liveth in pleasure, is dead while she liveth.

These, then, have repentance within their reach, if they repent quickly, and do not remain in their pleasures; but if they abide in their deeds, these, too, work to themselves death.

Since many women choose widowhood in order to indulge themselves with greater independence, he says: the pleasure-loving (σπαταλῶσα) woman, though she appears to live this sensual life, has died in spirit. But if it is impermissible for a woman to give herself over to pleasures, where in any case both nature and age often prove weak, what shall pleasure-loving men say?

Then when he says, for she who lives in pleasures is dead while she is living, he gives the reason why she should devote all her time to prayer, namely, because it is impossible for the soul never to be occupied with some pleasure. And since the soul of an idle person is not occupied with useful things, then it must be occupied with carnal things. Consequently, he says that a widow so desolate should devote herself to prayer: you have the name of being alive, but you are dead (Rev 3:1); the living, the living, he shall give praise to you (Isa 38:19).

And although pleasures are an occasion for death for all men, they are so in a particular way for women, because by nature their soul is soft. Therefore, since pleasures soften the soul, it follows that women are much more softened by them: as much as she has glorified herself and lived in delicacies, so much torment and sorrow give to her (Rev 18:7).

"These things give in charge, that they may be blameless." He does not leave it to their choice. Command them, he says, not to be luxurious, assuming it to be confessedly an evil, as not holding it lawful or admissible for the luxurious to partake of the Holy Mysteries. "These things command," he says, "that they may be blameless." Thus you see it is reckoned among sins. For if it were a matter of choice, though it were left undone, we might still be blameless. Therefore in obedience to Paul, let us command the luxurious widow not to have place in the list of widows. For if a soldier, who frequents the bath, the theater, the busy scenes of life, is judged to desert his duty, much more the widows. Let us then not seek our rest here, that we may find it hereafter. Let us not live in pleasure here, that we may hereafter enjoy true pleasure, true delight, which brings no evil with it, but infinite good.

And these things command, so that they may be blameless. But if anyone does not provide for his own, especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.

And these things command. Do you see that Paul wants the matter to be as a law? For it does not permit abstaining from luxury as an achievement, but forbids it as a sin.

But if anyone does not provide for his own. For personal virtue alone would not be sufficient for salvation, unless one also cares for others. Concerning the widow, Paul says these things. He calls those related by family "own." For some are personal, like friends, but not necessarily family. Therefore, one must care for their own, especially for family members. Which the extravagant does not do, attending only to luxury.

especially for those of his household. He takes care of both his own and those close to him, not only attending to what is appropriate but also to himself, by cutting off passions. Thus Clement says in the seventh Hypotyposes: "He speaks of providence both concerning the soul and concerning the body."

he has denied the faith. And how does the one who wastes, and does not provide for both his own and his household, deny the faith? Because, it is said: "And from your own seed you shall not be despised." (Isa. 58:7) But if you see God and do not deny Him, yet transgress His laws, you have denied God Himself. For it is said that they acknowledge God in words, but deny Him by their deeds. (Titus 1:16) How then is he worse than an unbeliever? Because although the unbelievers do not provide for everybody, at least they do so for their relatives, being led by the law of nature.

You see that he desires this to be a law. He does not leave it to one's discretion whether to indulge in pleasures or not, but forbids it as a sin. For such is the meaning of the word "command" (παράγγελλε); it stands in place of: with all strictness forbid anyone to dare to do this.

Then when he says, and command this, he shows that they should be trained to abstain from evils. Therefore, he says that he even forbids this, commanding that women who are sustained by the Church should be blameless: holiness becomes your house, O Lord (Ps 92:5).

Now God, our master, teaches two chief precepts: love of God and love of neighbor. In them one finds three objects for his love: God, himself and his neighbor. One who loves God is not wrong in loving himself. It follows, therefore, that he will be concerned also that his neighbor should love God, since he is told to love his neighbor as himself. And the same is true of his concern for his wife, his children, for the members of his household, and for all others, so far as is possible. And, for the same end, he will wish his neighbor to be concerned for him, if he happens to need that concern. For this reason he will be at peace, as far as in him lies, with all. In that peace he will live in ordered harmony. The basis of this order is the observance of two rules: first, to do no harm to anyone, and, second, to help everyone whenever possible. To begin with, therefore, one has a responsibility for his own household—obviously, both in the order of nature and in the framework of human society. He has easier and more immediate contact with them.

By the conversion or sanctification of family life we must be careful to mean something more than the preservation of "love" in the sense of natural affection. Love (in that sense) is not enough. Affection, as distinct from charity, is not a cause of lasting happiness. Left to its natural bent affection becomes in the end greedy, naggingly solicitous, jealous, exacting, timorous. It suffers agony when its object is absent—but is not repaid by any long enjoyment when the object is present. Even at the vicar's lunch table affection was partly the cause of the quarrel. That son would have borne patiently and humorously from any other old man the silliness which enraged him in his father. It is because he still (in some fashion) "cares" that he is impatient. The vicar's wife would not be quite that endless whimper of self-pity which she now is if she did not (in a sense) "love" the family: the continued disappointment of her continued and ruthless demand for sympathy, for affection, for appreciation has helped to make her what she is. I do not think this aspect of affection is nearly enough noticed by most popular moralists. The greed to be loved is a fearful thing. Some of those who say (and almost with pride) that they live only for love come, at last, to live in incessant resentment.

Perhaps we grow kinder to children; but then we grow less kind to the old. Any G.P. will tell you that even prosperous people refuse to look after their parents. 'Can't they be got into some sort of Home?' says Goneril.

The apostle in his first Epistle to Timothy: "But if any take not care of his own, and especially of those of his own household, he denies the faith, and is worse than an infidel."

Many consider that their own virtue is sufficient for their salvation, and if they duly regulate their own life, that nothing further is wanting to save them. But in this they greatly err, which is proved by the example of him who buried his one talent, for he brought it back not diminished but entire, and just as it had been delivered to him. It is shown also by the blessed Paul, who says here, "If any one provide not for his own." The provision of which he speaks is universal, and relates to the soul as well as the body, since both are to be provided for.

"If any provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house," that is, those who are nearly related to him, "he is worse than an infidel." And so says Isaiah, the chief of the Prophets, "Thou shalt not overlook thy kinsmen of thy own seed." For if a man deserts those who are united by ties of kindred and affinity, how shall he be affectionate towards others? Will it not have the appearance of vainglory, when benefiting others he slights his own relations, and does not provide for them? And what will be said, if instructing others, he neglects his own, though he has greater facilities; and a higher obligation to benefit them? Will it not be said, These Christians are affectionate indeed, who neglect their own relatives? "He is worse than an infidel." Wherefore? Because the latter, if he benefits not aliens, does not neglect his near kindred.

What is meant is this: The law of God and of nature is violated by him who provides not for his own family. But if he who provides not for them has denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel, where shall he be ranked who has injured his relatives? With whom shall he be placed? But how has he denied the faith? Even as it is said, "They profess that they know God, but in works they deny Him." What has God, in whom they believe, commanded? "Hide not thyself from thine own flesh." How does he then believe who thus denies God? Let those consider this, who to spare their wealth neglect their kindred. It was the design of God, in uniting us by the ties of kindred, to afford us many opportunities of doing good to one another. When therefore thou neglectest a duty which infidels perform, hast thou not denied the faith? For it is not faith merely to profess belief, but to do works worthy of faith. And it is possible in each particular to believe and not to believe.

A pleasure-loving woman, he says, has already died and perished because she devotes all her care to herself. Meanwhile, one must care "for one's own," that is, the faithful, "and especially for those of the household," that is, those belonging to one's family — he means every kind of care, both for the soul and for the body.

Why? Because his deeds are not the deeds of a believer. If he believed in God, he would heed His words: "hide not thyself from thine own flesh" (Isa. 58:7). They say that "they profess that they know God, but in works they deny Him" (Tit. 1:16).

Because the last one, even if he despises strangers, at least does not despise those close to him, being moved, of course, by nature; but this one violates both the law of God and the law of nature, and acts unjustly. Who then would believe that such a person can be merciful to strangers? And if he is indeed merciful to strangers, is this not vainglory? Consider: if the one who does not care for his own household is worse than an unbeliever, then where shall we rank the one who wrongs his own? For it is not enough for anyone's salvation to possess virtue alone, if he, being virtuous himself, does not also teach and persuade his relatives to be the same.

Then when he says, but if any man, he assigns the reason for his statement that she learn first to govern her own house and to make a return of duty to her parents, saying that she needs to be instructed on this point, because it is a matter of necessity. Therefore, he says, of her own, whose care has been entrusted to her, and especially those of her own house: he set in order charity in me (Song 2:4).

And, as Augustine says, we can wish well to everyone, but those who are closer to us are regarded as our principles and, consequently, more worthy of love. Ambrose says that the reason for this is that perhaps those who are not ashamed to receive from their own would be ashamed to receive from others. He has denied the faith by his works, because if he does not observe the faith in regard to those to whom nature has joined him, the result is that he will not observe it in regard to others: they profess that they know God, but in their works they deny him (Titus 1:16).

But is it true that he is worse than an infidel? For Augustine seems to think the contrary: if I had not come and spoken to them they would not have sinned (John 15:22), for he comments on this and says that he is speaking of the sin of infidelity which is graver than all other sins, because sins against God are graver than those against our neighbor.

I answer that believer and unbeliever can be taken in two senses: first, in regard to the state of sin, and then the latter are in a worse state, because nothing they do is pleasing to God. Second, in regard to one sin, and then it is the opposite: for a believer and an unbeliever, if they commit adultery, the believer sins more, because he sins against the faith. And so he says that if a believer scorns to provide for his parents, he sins more than an unbeliever who does the same: it had been better for them not to have known the path of justice, then after they have known it, to turn back from that holy commandment which was delivered to them (2 Pet 2:21).

It is not that old age alone makes the widow. Rather the virtues of the widow may become the duties of old age. For she certainly is the more prone to virtue who represses the heat of youth and the impetuous ardor of youthful age, coveting neither the tenderness of a husband nor the abundant delights of children. She rises above one who, now worn out in body, cold in age, of ripe years, can neither grow warm with pleasures nor hope for offspring.

Choose your "widows not under sixty years of age". Let the deaconess be a pure virgin; or, at the least, a widow who has been but once married, faithful, and well esteemed.

Against the vowing of widowed continence it is objected: 1 Timothy 5: Let a widow be chosen not less than sixty years of age; and in the same place: Avoid the younger widows: therefore it does not seem that widowed chastity should be undertaken except in elderly women, nor this for any other reason than on account of the danger: therefore it does not seem safe to make a vow of continence.

To that which is objected: Let a widow be chosen not less than sixty years old: it must be said that this is not understood with respect to the vow of continence, but with respect to the ministry that was to be rendered to the Saints, who also were to be sustained from ecclesiastical goods. Hence in the Gloss: "Let a widow be chosen not less than sixty years old, who is to be nourished by the sustenance of the Church." Hence what he adds: Avoid younger widows: is understood in the same sense. Hence the Gloss there: "Avoid younger widows, that is, do not so greatly concern yourself with their vows of chastity as to undertake to sustain them with the sustenance of the Church." But that he does not intend to prohibit continence or the vow of continence for them is apparent from what Ambrose says in the book On Virginity: "We ought not to regard the virtue of age, but the age of virtue; nor should you marvel at profession in young girls, when you read of passion in little children." Hence also blessed Agnes in her legend, which Ambrose composed: "Do not, she said to the prefect, so despise bodily youth in me as to think that I wish to have you favorable: for faith is found not in years but in understanding, and almighty God approves minds more than ages."

It is possible to be a widow and not be enrolled in the rank of widows, as when a woman has not as yet accepted this way of life.… Paul allows the uncommitted woman to remarry if she so desires. But he strongly admonishes the one who has professed perpetual widowhood to God but then has later gotten married, because she has treated superficially her commitment to God.

He had said, "Let them learn first to show piety at home, and to requite their parents." He had also said, "She that liveth in pleasure is dead whilst she liveth." He had said, "If she provides not for her own she is worse than an infidel." Having mentioned the qualities which not to have would render a woman unworthy to be reckoned among the widows, he now mentions what she ought to have besides. What then? are we to receive her for her years? What merit is there in that? It is not her own doing that she is threescore years old. Therefore he does not speak of her age merely, as, if she has even reached those years, she may not yet, he says, without good works, be reckoned among the number. But why then is he particular about the age? He afterwards assigns a cause not originating with himself, but with the widows themselves.

Let a widow be counted as not less than sixty years old, the wife of one man, well attested for good works, if she has brought up children, if she has hosted strangers, if she has washed the feet of the saints, if she has comforted the afflicted, if she has devoted herself to every good work.

Here, Paul also considers age along with other factors, and previously he states the reason, saying that even if the age were sixty years old, without the other conditions being met, it should not be counted.

— [OECUMENIUS] They also say that Paul is referring to those designated for widowhood. [end of the excerpt by Oecumenius A f. 172v, B f. 207v; G J. 295v] —

— [OECUMENIUS] well attested for good works. Having said generally, "well attested for good works," Paul then proceeds to each particular thing. And he said that the care of children is above. What then, if he has no children? Let him do the rest. [end of the excerpt by Oecumenius] —

— [OECUMENIUS] He does not say "if she had children," but "if she has brought them up according to the will of God, if she has led them properly," for this is exceptional. One must understand that this is said concerning widows. [end of the excerpt by Oecumenius G f. 295v] —

if she has hosted strangers. Do you see that even here Paul places the benefits to one's own people before those to foreigners? For having said this first.

if she has brought up children. Thus it suggests, "She has hosted strangers."

if she has washed the feet of the saints. But he will say: I am very poor, and I do not have the means to be host or to assist the afflicted. Does he not say, "Can you not wash the feet of the saints?" Is the ability lacking to pursue good works? For Paul spoke of each of these according to what was available.

if she washed the feet of the saints; that is, if she performed the lowest services to the saints without shame. Thus, Clement in the seventh book of Hypotyposes.

if she has devoted herself to every good work, that is, she has shared, supplied. For although the ability to act may be lacking, the ability to provide is nevertheless present.

Not only fornication but also a second marriage excludes someone from office in the church. Anyone twice married may be neither a bishop nor a presbyter nor a deacon nor a widow.

What is being said here applies in particular to the women who are being considered for ordination as deaconesses.

So far as we can, let us love the opportunity of continence. As soon as it offers itself, let us resolve to accept it, so that what one may not have had the strength to follow in matrimony one may now follow in widowhood. Continence in widowhood transcends the command that has previously been necessary for marriage. How detrimental to faith, how obstructive to holiness, second marriages are. The discipline of the church and the prescription of the apostle also declare this, when he does not permit men twice married to preside over a church. The same is true when he would not grant a widow admittance into an order unless she had been "the wife of one man."

But the authority which licenses her sitting in that seat uncovered is the same which allows her to sit there as a virgin: a seat to which (besides the "sixty years" not merely "single-husbanded "(women)-that is, married women-are at length elected, but "mothers" to boot, yes, and "educators of children; "in order, forsooth, that their experimental training in all the affections may, on the one hand, have rendered them capable of readily aiding all others with counsel and comfort, and that, on the other, they may none the less have travelled down the whole course of probation whereby a female can he tested.

How detrimental to faith, how obstructive to holiness, second marriages are, the discipline of the Church and the prescription of the apostle declare, when he suffers not men twice married to preside (over a Church ), when he would not grant a widow admittance into the order unless she had been "the wife of one man; " for it behoves God's altar to be set forth pure.

What is said here applies only to the order of widows and not to deaconesses, as some believe.

The teaching that a widow should be the wife of only one man is an encouragement to chastity within marriage, not a forbidding of second marriages.

Since above the apostle said that a pleasure-loving woman who does not care for her own household is unworthy to be numbered among the widows, he now teaches us what she must have. In the first place the apostle sets a definite age for her, and indicates the reason for this afterward. However, he does not approve a sixty-year-old woman simply on the basis of age alone, for even such a woman may prove to be unworthy. Then the apostle requires of her a single marriage, as a sign of her dignified honesty and love of chastity.

Above, he taught that widows in the Church must be provided for; here he shows which ones are to be provided for:

first, he shows which ones are to be chosen;

second, which ones are to be avoided, at but the younger widows.

In regard to the first he does three things:

first, he shows that they must be chosen according to age;

second, by reason of their chastity;

third, from having performed good works, at having testimony for her good works.

According to age, they must be no less than sixty years of age.

But of what choice is he speaking? This can be answered in two ways:

in one way, as referring to the election by which she is chosen to preside over the governance of other widows, who are sustained by the Church; some of these are so old that there is no suspicion about their continence: from thirty years old and upward, unto fifty years old (Num 4:25).

But the opposite seems to be true, because the Church does the contrary by appointing young women abbesses.

The answer is that it is unfortunate that ones so young are appointed abbesses; but yet there is not as much interest shown by the Church to those that are enclosed as to those that are free.

Another answer is that he is speaking of the election whereby she is chosen to be sustained by the subsidies granted by the Church; then one who is less than sixty years old should not be chosen, because young women can labor with their hands, just as the Apostle did, who even though he could have lived off the Gospel, chose to labor. But old women are at rest.

Furthermore, the widow must be chaste; hence he says, who has been the wife of one husband. For just as it is required that a bishop be the husband of one wife, so an old woman must be the wife of one husband.

A Gloss says: this is said because of the sacrament. But this gloss is magisterial and of little value. For the reason does not seem to be drawn from any sacrament, because women do not receive certain sacraments. But he says this on account of firmness, namely, that they have a continual intention to persevere in widowhood.

But Jerome in a letter to Ageruntia gives another reason, namely, that with the gentiles it was the custom that in sacrifices to the gods, no woman should preside, if she had two husbands. And therefore, the Apostle declares that those who are nourished by the Church's food should not be less chaste: because you have loved chastity, and after your husband have not known any other (Jdt 15:11); she had lived with her husband seven years from her virginity (Luke 2:56). Consequently, it is a praiseworthy sign of her chastity that she was the wife of one husband.

...this name of widow is not a title of calamity but of honour, aye the greatest honour. For do not quote the erroneous opinion of the world as a testimony, but the admonition of the blessed Paul, or rather of Christ. For in his utterances Christ was speaking through him as he himself said "If ye seek a proof of Christ who is speaking in me?" What then does he say? "Let not a widow be enrolled under threescore years of age" and again "but the younger widows refuse" intending by both these sayings to indicate to us the importance of the matter. And when he is making regulations about bishops he nowhere prescribes a standard of age, but in this case he is very particular on the point, and, pray, why so? not because widowhood is greater than priesthood, but because widows have greater labour to undergo than priests, being encompassed on many sides by a variety of business public and private. For as an unfortified city lies exposed to all who wish to plunder it, so a young woman living in widowhood has many who form designs upon her on every side not only those who aim at getting her money but also those who are bent upon corrupting her modesty. ... For once when I was still a young man I know that the sophist who taught me (and he exceeded all men in his reverence for the gods) expressed admiration for my mother before a large company. For enquiring, as was his wont, of those who sat beside him who I was, and some one having said that I was the son of a woman who was a widow, he asked of me the age of my mother and the duration of her widowhood, and when I told him that she was forty years of age of which twenty had elapsed since she lost my father he was astonished and uttered a loud exclamation, and turning to those present "Heavens!" cried he "what women there are amongst the Christians." So great is the admiration and praise enjoyed by widowhood not only amongst ourselves, but also amongst those who are outside the Church. And being aware of all this the blessed Paul said "Let not a widow be enrolled under threescore years of age." And even after this great qualification of age he does not permit her to be ranked in this sacred society but mentions some additional requisites "well reported of for good works, if she have brought up children if she have lodged strangers if she have washed the saints feet if she have relieved the afflicted, if she have diligently followed every good work." Heavens! what testing and scrutiny! how much virtue does he demand from the widow, and how precisely does he define it! which he would not have done, had he not intended to entrust to her a position of honour and dignity.

"Well reported of for good works, if she have brought up children." Truly, it is no unimportant work to bring up children; but bringing them up is not merely taking care of them; they must be brought up well; as he said before, "If they continue in faith, and charity, and holiness." (1 Tim. ii. 15) Observe how constantly he sets kindnesses to our own relatives before those to strangers. First he says, "If she have brought up children," then, "If she have lodged strangers, if she have washed the Saints' feet, if she have relieved the afflicted, if she have diligently followed every good work." But what if she be poor? Not even in that case is she debarred from bringing up children, lodging strangers, relieving the afflicted. She is not more destitute than the widow who gave the two mites. Poor though she be, she has an house, she does not lodge in the open air. "If," he says, "she have washed the Saints' feet." This is not a costly work. "If she have diligently followed every good work." What precept does he give here? He exhorts them to contribute bodily service, for women are peculiarly fitted for such attendance, for making the bed of the sick, and composing them to rest.

Strange! what strictness does he require of widows; almost as much as of the Bishop himself. For he says, "If she have diligently followed every good work." This is as though he meant that, if she could not of herself perform it, she shared and cooperated in it. When he cuts off luxury, he would have her provident, a good economist, and at the same time continually persevering in prayer. Such was Anna. Such strictness does he require of widows. Greater even than of virgins, from whom he yet requires much strictness, and eminent virtue. For when he speaks of "that which is comely," and "that she may attend upon the Lord without distraction" (1 Cor. vii. 35), he gives, in a manner, a summary of all virtue.

Observe, the hospitality here spoken of is not merely a friendly reception, but one given with zeal and alacrity, with readiness, and going about it as if one were receiving Christ Himself. The widows should perform these services themselves, not commit them to their handmaids. For Christ said, "If I your Master and Lord have washed your feet, ye ought also to wash one another's feet." (John xiii. 14) And though a woman may be very rich, and of the highest rank, vain of her birth and noble family, there is not the same distance between her and others, as between God and the disciples. If thou receivest the stranger as Christ, be not ashamed, but rather glory: but if you receive him not as Christ, receive him not at all. "He that receiveth you," He said, "receiveth Me." (Matt. x. 40) If you do not so receive him, you have no reward.

Abraham was receiving men that passed as travelers, as he thought, and he did not leave to his servants to make the preparations for their entertainment, but took the greater part of the service upon himself, and commanded his wife to mix the flour, though he had three hundred and eighteen servants born in his house, of whom there must have been many maidservants; but he wished that himself and his wife should have the reward, not of the cost only, but of the service. Thus ought we ever to exercise hospitality by our own personal exertions, that we may be sanctified, and our hands be blessed. And if thou givest to the poor, disdain not thyself to give it, for it is not to the poor that it is given, but to Christ; and who is so wretched, as to disdain to stretch out his own hand to Christ?

This is hospitality, this is truly to do it for God's sake. But if you give orders with pride, though you bid him take the first place, it is not hospitality, it is not done for God's sake. The stranger requires much attendance, much encouragement, and with all this it is difficult for him not to feel abashed; for so delicate is his position, that whilst he receives the favor, he is ashamed. That shame we ought to remove by the most attentive service, and to show by words and actions, that we do not think we are conferring a favor, but receiving one, that we are obliging less than we are obliged. So much does good will multiply the kindness. For as he who considers himself a loser, and thinks that he is doing a favor, destroys all the merit of it; so he who looks upon himself as receiving a kindness, increases the reward. "For God loveth a cheerful giver." (2 Cor. ix. 7) So that you are rather indebted to the poor man for receiving your kindness. For if there were no poor, the greater part of your sins would not be removed. They are the healers of your wounds, their hands are medicinal to you. The physician, extending his hand to apply a remedy, does not exercise the healing art more than the poor man, who stretches out his hand to receive your alms, and thus becomes a cure for your ills. You give your money, and with it your sins pass away. Such were the Priests of old, of whom it was said, "They eat up the sin of My people." (Hosea iv. 8) Thus thou receivest more than thou givest, thou art benefited more than thou benefitest. Thou lendest to God, not to men. Thou increasest thy wealth, rather than diminishest it. But if thou dost not lessen it by giving, then it is indeed diminished!

"If she have received strangers, if she have washed the Saints' feet." But who are these? The distressed saints, not any saints whatever. For there may be saints, who are much waited on by every one. Do not visit these, who are in the enjoyment of plenty, but those who are in tribulation, who are unknown, or known to few. He who hath "done it unto the least of these," He saith, "hath done it unto Me." (Matt.xxv. 40)

It is possible, however, that even one who is a saint needs the washing of feet, since even the widow who is enrolled into ecclesiastical honor is examined, along with her other good works, also about this, "If she has washed the feet of saints."... Consequently, the faithful are obliged to do this in whatever station of life they happen to be, whether bishops and presbyters, who seem to be in ecclesiastical prominence, or even those in other positions of honor in the world. This means that the master comes to wash the feet of the believing servant, and parents the feet of their son.

For who would suffer his wife, for the sake of visiting the brethren, to go round from street to street to other men's, and indeed to all the poorer, cottages? Who will willingly bear her being taken from his side by nocturnal convocations, if need so be? Who, finally, will without anxiety endure her absence all the night long at the paschal solemnities? Who will, without some suspicion of his own, dismiss her to attend that Lord's Supper which they defame? Who will suffer her to creep into prison to kiss a martyr's bonds? nay, truly, to meet any one of the brethren to exchange the kiss? to offer water for the saints' feet? to snatch (somewhat for them) from her food, from her cup? to yearn (after them)? to have (them) in her mind? If a pilgrim brother arrive, what hospitality for him in an alien home? If bounty is to be distributed to any, the granaries, the storehouses, are foreclosed.

In emphasizing hospitality and the care of the saints as important qualifications for the widow, Paul's goal is not to focus on a certain quantity of virtuous activity but rather on a quality of mind.

This is precisely what makes her worthy to be numbered among the widows. Then the apostle enumerates, in particular, her deeds.

Raising children does not consist in simply feeding them, but in bringing them up as one ought, just as he also said above: "if she continues in faith and love and holiness" (1 Tim. 2:15).

Do you see that he places good deeds toward one's own above good deeds toward strangers? Having first said: "if she brought up children," only then does he add: "if she lodged strangers." Even if some widow were lacking in something, she still has a house and does not live out in the open air.

He said this because many widows, although they receive strangers, do not serve them themselves, but their maidservants serve them. Therefore, wishing that the widow be active and not idle, he commands her to serve herself: laziness is characteristic of a more pampered woman. Furthermore, lest some widow, out of unwillingness to receive strangers, justify herself by claiming complete poverty, as though she had no means for this, the apostle says: to wash feet, there is no need for great expenditure and wealth. And "saints" are all those who hold the right faith and live piously, even if they do not perform signs.

Money, intercession, and mediation.

For example, if she herself could not do it, she at least took part in the affairs of another, serving. The Apostle urges the widow to carry out bodily service — to make a bed, for instance, to give comfort, things which women are most capable of doing.

Then when he says, having testimony for her good works, he shows that a widow must be chosen, because she has performed good works:

first, in general;

second, in detail, at if she has brought up children;

third, he gives to understand the same for all good works, at if she has diligently.

As to the first he says: having testimony for her good works: let her works praise her in the gates (Prov 31:31). And he says, having testimony: the works themselves which I do, give testimony of me that the Father has sent me (John 5:36); for externals disclose the faith within: I will show you by works my faith (Jas 2:18).

But which works? Toward her own and toward others. Toward her own he says, if she has brought up children, namely, in the fear of God and in chastity: have you children? Instruct them and bow down their neck from their childhood (Sir 7:25).

Toward others he mentions three works of godliness: first, mercy, because women, being soft-hearted, are naturally merciful. First, therefore, he teaches hospitality, if she has shown hospitality: pursuing hospitality (Rom 12:13);

second, along with this he mentions humility, if she has washed the saints' feet: for saints are to be received in that way and treated honorably: but Martha was busy about much serving (Luke 10:40). So too Christ: if I have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet (John 13:14). Augustine's gloss on this says: brethren, do this to one another; and what they cannot do with their hands, they do in their heart. But it is much better to do this with their hands; lest a Christian come to scorn the very thing which Christ did. For when one is bowed down before his brother's feet, his heart is ready for humility; or if humility is already present, it is strengthened.

Third, courage and constancy to help those in trouble; hence he says, if she has ministered to those who suffer tribulation: you had compassion on those who were in bands (Heb 10:34).

Then when he says, if she has diligently, he concludes to the works she ought to have practiced well, saying, if she has diligently followed every good work: while we have time, let us work good to all men (Gal 6:10).