2 Corinthians 11:1–6

Paul says that he is being foolish when he starts to talk about himself but that he is forced to do so because these people were harboring unworthy thoughts, when they of all people ought to be thinking well of him.

Being about to enter upon his own praises he uses much previous correction. And he does this not once or twice, although the necessity of the subject, and what he had often said, were sufficient excuse for him. For he that remembereth sins which God remembered not, and who therefore saith that he was unworthy of the very name of the Apostles, even by the most insensate is seen clearly not to be saying what he is now going to say, for the sake of glory. For if one must say something startling, even this would be especially injurious to his glory, his speaking something about himself; and to the more part it is offensive. But nevertheless he regarded not timidly any of these things, but he looked to one thing, the salvation of his hearers. But still in order that he might not cause harm to the unthinking by this, by saying, I mean, great things of himself, he employs out of abundant caution these many preparatory correctives, and says, "Would that ye could bear with me," whilst I play the fool in some little things, yea, rather, "ye do indeed bear with me." Beholdest thou wisdom? For when he says, "would that," it is as putting it at their disposal: but when he even asserts [that they do], it is as confiding greatly in their affection, and as declaring that he both loves and is loved. Yea, rather, not from bare love merely, but from a sort of warm and insane passion he says that they ought to bear with him even when he plays the fool.

Paul calls himself foolish in order to demonstrate that it is those who boast about themselves who really are the foolish ones.

Paul realizes that wise people do not boast of themselves, but he has been forced to do so.

Intending to begin a discourse about his own praises, he made many qualifications, avoiding what is offensive to others in self-praise. Necessity compelled him to this, and the fear that it would harm his disciples if they began to despise him while regarding the false apostles as persons of importance. For even to the most slow-witted it is clear that he came to this out of pressing need and for the benefit of his disciples. For how would one who remembered his former errors, from which he was delivered through baptism, and who acknowledged himself unworthy of the apostolic calling, boast of himself without necessity? So he says: Oh, that you would bear with me a little in my foolishness! But you are very forbearing. For I am convinced that you love me and bear with me in all things.

After defending himself against the false charges placed against him by the false apostles, the Apostle, in order to refute them, that is, the false apostles, and render his own testimony more honorable, now commends himself to the Corinthians. In regard to this he does two things. First, he assigns the reason for his commendation; secondly, he makes the commendation (v. 21b). In regard to the first he does three things. First, he asks that they bear with his foolishness; secondly, he states why he must commend himself in order not to seem foolish (v. 2); thirdly, he suggests that, granted he is foolish, they should bear with it (v. 16). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he mentions his desire so that his request may be easier to grant; secondly, he makes the request (v. 1b).

The Apostle's desire is that the Corinthians bear with him as he commends himself; therefore he begins with an optative expression: I wish you would bear with me in a little foolishness. In regard to this it should be noted that the moral precepts deal with actions which, since they are particular and variable, cannot be confined within the limits of one general reason and rule with no exceptions. But sometimes it is necessary to do something beside the common rule in some case that crops up. But when something is done beside the common rule in this way, wise men, who consider the cause of it, are not troubled and do not think it was done foolishly. For example, the moral precept forbids killing, but sometimes it is necessary to kill evil men. When this is done, wise men commend it or do not think it was wicked to have done so, but the undiscerning and less wise, not considering the cause why one acted in this manner, are disturbed and think it was foolish to do. So when the wicked are killed, fools and heretics condemn it, saying it was a wicked thing to do. Therefore, because the common law is that a man should not commend himself, as it says in Prov. (27:2): "Let another praise you, and not your own mouth; a stranger, and not your own lips", it could happen in some case beside this common rule, that a man commends himself and is acting praiseworthily; nevertheless, the undiscerning regard it as folly. Therefore, since the Apostle was confronted with a case in which he should commend himself, he urges them not to lay it to his folly, saying, I wish you would bear with me in a little foolishness. He says, little, because were he to commend himself without cause, it would be the utmost folly. Again, if he commended himself for a reason entirely urgent, then there would be no folly involved. But because he is commending himself for a reason not altogether urgent, since he could refute the false apostles in some other way, and because he is commending himself very much, there seems to be some folly there; and that is what he says, in a little foolishness: "I have been a fool! You forced me to it" (2 Cor. 12:11).

But although I am foolish, do bear with me. And they should do this because subjects should uphold their prelates and vice versa: "Bear one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ" (Gal. 6:2); "Forbearing one another in love" (Eph. 4:2).

Paul is making it clear that what he is about to say he will say out of love for them, so that it may be conducive to their progress as much as to his praise and that they may learn from it how to do a favor to their father in the gospel. For to speak ill of a father harms the sons, and the praise of sons is a father's glory.

Why does Paul address all these different people as a "chaste virgin," unless he is referring to their faith, hope and love?

To the same church the apostle says: "For I have promised you to one spouse, that I might present you as a chaste virgin to Christ." … The church, then, like Mary, has inviolate integrity and incorrupt fecundity. What Mary merited physically, the church has guarded spiritually, with the exception that Mary brought forth one Child, while the church has many children destined to be gathered into one body by One.

Do you wish to know how the church is a virgin? Hear the apostle Paul; hear the friend of the Bridegroom who is zealous not for himself but for the Bridegroom: "I betrothed you to one spouse." He spoke to the church. To which church? To all that his letter could reach. "I betrothed you to one spouse, that I might present you a chaste virgin to Christ. But I fear lest," he said, "as the serpent seduced Eve by his guile …" That serpent never physically defiled Eve, did he? Yet he did destroy her virginity of heart. On that account Paul said: "I fear lest … your minds may be corrupted from that chastity which is in Christ." Therefore, the church is a virgin; she is a virgin, may she be a virgin. Let her beware of the deceiver, lest he turn out to be a corrupter. The church is a virgin. Are you, perhaps, going to say to me: "If the church is a virgin, how does she bring forth children? Or, if she does not bring forth children, how did we give our names so that we might be born of her?" I answer: "She is a virgin and she also brings forth children." She imitates Mary, who gave birth to the Lord. Did not the holy Mary bring forth her Child and remain a virgin? So, too, the church both brings forth children and is a virgin. And if you would give some consideration to the matter, she brings forth Christ, because they who are baptized are his members.

The souls of all men and women know that they are spouses of Christ if they are willing to preserve both bodily chastity and virginity of heart. For Christ is to be understood as the spouse of their souls, not of their bodies.

Directly in point is the instance of the apostle, who says, writing the Corinthians: "For I have espoused you to one man, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ," whether as children or saints, but to the Lord alone. And writing to the Ephesians, he has unfolded in the clearest manner the point in question, speaking to the following effect: "Till we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: that we be no longer children, tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine, by the craft of men, by their cunning in stratagems of deceit; but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up to Him in all things," -saying these things in order to the edification of the body of Christ, who is the head and man, the only one perfect in righteousness; and we who are children guarding against the blasts of heresies, which blow to our inflation; and not putting our trust in fathers who teach us otherwise, are then made perfect when we are the church, having received Christ the head.

For there are not many spouses of Christ, since the apostle says, "I have espoused you, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ; "

Yet there is a difference, and it is just what I suggested. The Eastern mysticism is an ecstasy of unity; the Christian mysticism is an ecstasy of creation, that is of separation and mutual surprise. The latter says, like St. Francis, "My brother fire and my sister water"; the former says, "Myself fire and myself water." Whether you call the Eastern attitude an extension of oneself into everything or a contraction of oneself into nothing is a matter of metaphysical definition. The effect is the same, an effect which lives and throbs throughout all the exquisite arts of the East. This effect is the thing called rhythm, a pulsation of pattern, or of ritual, or of colours, or of cosmic theory, but always suggesting the unification of the individual with the world. But there is quite another kind of sympathy--the sympathy with a thing because it is different. No one will say that Rembrandt did not sympathise with an old woman; but no one will say that Rembrandt painted like an old woman. No one will say that Reynolds did not appreciate children; but no one will say he did it childishly. The supreme instance of this divine division is sex, and that explains (what I could never understand in my youth) why Christendom called the soul the bride of God. For real love is an intense realisation of the "separateness" of all our souls. The most heroic and human love-poetry of the world is never mere passion; precisely because mere passion really is a melting back into Nature, a meeting of the waters. And water is plunging and powerful; but it is only powerful downhill. The high and human love-poetry is all about division rather than identity; and in the great love-poems even the man as he embraces the woman sees her, in the same instant, afar off; a virgin and a stranger.

And therefore he added, "For I am jealous over you with a godly jealousy." He did not say, "for I love you," but uses a term far more vehement than this. For those souls are jealous which burn ardently for those they love, and jealousy can in no other way be begotten than out of a vehement affection. Then that they may not think, that it is for the sake of power, or honor, or wealth, or any other such like thing, that he desires their affection, he added, "with a jealousy of God." For God also is said to be jealous, not that any should suppose passion, (for the Godhead is impassible,) but that all may know that He doeth all things from no other regard than their sakes over whom He is jealous; not that Himself may gain aught, but that He may save them. Among men indeed jealousy ariseth not from this cause, but for the sake of their own repose; not because the beloved ones sustain outrage, but lest these who love them should be wounded, and be outshone in the good graces, and stand lower in the affections, of the beloved. But here it is not so. "For I care not," he says, "for this, lest I should stand lower in your esteem; but lest I should see you corrupted. For such is God's jealousy; and such is mine also, intense at once and pure." Then there is also this necessary reason; "For I espoused you to one husband, as a pure virgin." "Therefore I am jealous, not for myself, but for him to whom I have espoused you." For the present time is the time of espousal, but the time of the nuptials is another; when they sing, "the Bridegroom hath risen up." Oh what things unheard of! In the world they are virgins before the marriage, but after the marriage no longer. But here it is not so: but even though they be not virgins before this marriage, after the marriage they become virgins. So the whole Church is a virgin. For addressing himself even to all, both husbands and wives, he speaks thus. But let us see what he brought and espoused us with, what kind of nuptial gifts. Not gold, not silver, but the kingdom of heaven. Wherefore also he said, "We are ambassadors on behalf of Christ," and beseeches them, when he was about to receive the Bride.

Who sees her daughters after a long separation, she embraced and kissed each one of us with great joy, saying, 'O, my daughters you have come with toil and pain to me who am earnestly longing to conduct you to the pasture of immortality; toilsomely have you come by a way abounding with many frightful reptiles; for, as I looked, I saw you often stepping aside, and I was fearing lest you should turn back and slip over the precipices. But thanks to the Bridegroom to whom I have espoused. If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth; if I prefer not Jerusalem above my chief joy; "meaning by Jerusalem, as I said, these very undefiled and incorrupt souls, which, having with self-denial drawn in the pure draught of virginity with unpolluted lips, are "espoused to one husband "to be presented "as a chaste virgin to Christ"

May purity, then—that purity which goes above and beyond the will and which we should will always to possess—be also given to us for the sake of redemption, so that what has been consecrated by Christ cannot be corrupted. If the apostle states that the church is the bride of Christ, I ask you now to reflect just what purity is required of you, when the church herself is given in marriage as a virgin bride.

The apostle Paul says, "But I want you all to present yourselves as a pure virgin to one man, Christ. For I fear lest, as the serpent seduced Eve by his cunning, your minds may be corrupted from the simplicity which is in Christ." Therefore, Paul wants "all the Corinthians" to present themselves as a pure "virgin to Christ"; certainly he would never want that unless it would seem possible. Whence also it would appear wonderful how these, who although corrupted by diverse sins, came to the faith of Christ, all at once are called "a pure virgin"; a virgin which is so holy and so pure that she is worthy also to be joined in marriage to Christ. However, since we cannot refer these things to the chastity of the flesh, it is sure that they refer to the chastity of the soul, whose "simplicity of the faith which is in Christ," according to the understanding of Paul himself, was called his virginity.

When also he (in a later passage) enjoins us "to cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of flesh and blood" (since this substance enters not the kingdom of Gods ); when, again, he "espouses the church as a chaste virgin to Christ," a spouse to a spouse in very deed, an image cannot be combined and compared with what is opposed to the real nature the thing (with which it is compared).

For flesh not yet manumitted to Christ, for whom it was being kept, used to be contaminated with impunity: so now, after manumission, it no more receives pardon.

He did not say "I love," but, to express it much more strongly: "I am jealous." For jealousy arises in those who love ardently. Then, lest they think he is jealous over them for some human motives, for the sake of money or glory, he adds: "with godly jealousy"; for it is said that God also is jealous, having exceedingly loved us, not in order to gain some advantage, but to save us, bringing us into communion and union with Himself. Such, he says, is my jealousy for you as well: it proceeds not from desire for my own profit, but so that you may not perish.

I betrothed you, he says, to Christ. So I am jealous for Him, and not for myself. For I am not the husband, but the friend of the bridegroom. Notice that he did not say: I am your teacher, and therefore you ought to hold fast to me; but he placed them in the position of the bride and himself in the position of the friend of the bridegroom, ascribing greater significance to them. He attributed something wondrous to the Church; for in the world, after marriage, women do not remain virgins, but here even those who were not previously virgins become virgins after this marriage. Thus, the entire Church is a virgin. For Paul says this to all, both husbands and wives. And what did he promise as a dowry? The Kingdom of Heaven. Something similar occurred with Abraham, when he sent his servant to betroth a bride of the same tribe for his son (Gen. 24:4). For here too God sent His servants, the prophets, to betroth the Church to His Son Christ—such as David, who says: "Hearken, O daughter, and consider, and incline your ear" (Ps. 44:11)—and the apostles, for example Paul, who says: we are sent in the name of Christ. Thus, the present time is the time of betrothal, but the future is the time of the wedding, when the voice shall be heard: "Behold, the bridegroom comes" (Matt. 25:6).

Then, saying I feel a divine jealousy, he shows the need for this commendation. In regard to this he does three things. First, he shows that a commendation of this sort springs from zeal, to exclude folly; secondly, he says that this zeal is not irregular, to avoid indiscretion (v. 3); thirdly, he rejects their excuse (v. 4). In regard to the first he does two things. First, he mentions the holy zeal he has for them; secondly, the cause of this zeal, because his office obliged him (v. 2b).

His zeal, therefore, is holy, because I feel a divine jealousy for you, i.e., I love you fervently with the jealousy of God, i.e., to God's honor, not mine. In regard to this it should be noted that jealousy taken as being the same as zeal is nothing more than a good or evil movement of the spirit concerning itself with the state of one's neighbor, and implies a fervor of love. Consequently, zeal is an intense love that does not permit any sharing of the beloved. If it does not permit any sharing of an evil, say of a vice or some imperfection, but it alone wishes to have the beloved exclusively, then the zeal is good and the jealousy good. Thus it says in 1 Cor. (12:31): "But earnestly desire the higher gifts"; "For a good purpose it is always good to be made much of" (Gal. 4:18); "I have been very jealous for the Lord, the God of hosts" (1 Kg. 19:10); "For zeal for your house has consumed me" (Ps. 69:10). But if it does not allow a sharing in something excellent or in some worldly prosperity, because someone wants it all for himself, then the zeal is evil and the jealousy evil. Now a person is sometimes jealous for his wife, to keep her for himself. This is the way the Apostle was jealous on behalf of his people, whom he saw prepared for a fall and, although espoused to Christ, wished to be prostituted to the devil. Consequently, he would not permit Christ, the true spouse, to suffer their being shared with the devil; hence he says, a divine jealousy. As if to say: Not for me but for Christ, who is the spouse: "He who has the bride is the bridegroom" (Jn. 3:29); "I have been very jealous for the Lord, the God of hosts" (1 Kg. 19:10).

Then he shows from what source the responsibility to be zealous arose, when he says: for I betrothed you to Christ to present you as a pure bride to her one husband. As if to say: it is proper for me to be zealous for you with the jealousy of God, because I am the groomsman of this wedding between you and Christ, i.e., I effected the espousals made by faith and charity: "I will betroth you to me in faithfulness" (Hos. 2:20). Therefore, it is my duty to protect you. So whoever converts the people by faith and charity, espouses them to Christ. I have betrothed you, I say, not to many, because she that adheres to many is defiled: "You have played the harlot with many lovers" (Jer. 3:1), but to one husband, Christ, that is, to a perfect man filled with the virtues: "The Orient is his name" (Zech. 6:12, Vulgate). Christ is called one husband because he is unique both as to the manner of conception (as to the manner of being born), and as to the fullness of grace: "One man among a thousand I found" (Ecc. 7:28). To that husband, I say, I have espoused you to present you a virgin.

Note that he passes from the plural, I have betrothed you, to the singular, to present you as a pure bride, thus showing that from all the faithful is formed one body and one Church, which ought to be a virgin in all its members. For in all, virginity is taken for bodily integrity and chastity for mental integrity; for sometimes a person is a virgin in body, but not chaste in mind. Thus the Church shows herself a virgin when she perseveres in the faith and the sacraments without being corrupted by idolatry and unbelief: "At the head of every street you built your lofty place and prostituted your beauty" (Ez. 16:25). She shows herself chaste when, persevering in the sacraments and in the faith of Christ, she presents herself pure in body and in work: "That he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish" (Eph. 5:27).

Paul is saying that glory has been given to him not so that he might praise himself but so that he might cast blame on those who, in the name of Christ, were preaching against Christ and by whom the Corinthians were being seduced.

Hence Paul speaks against people who are like those I have mentioned, saying: "You have then these promises, beloved; let us cleanse ourselves from all defilement of flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God." "For I am jealous for you with a divine jealousy, for I betrothed you to one husband to present a pure virgin to Christ." The Church cannot marry another, having obtained a bridegroom; but each of us individually has the right to marry the woman he wishes according to the law; I mean here first marriage. "I am afraid lest, as the serpent in his craftiness deceived Eve, so also your thoughts may be corrupted from the simplicity which is toward Christ," said the apostle as a very careful and conscientious teacher.

"But I fear lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is toward Christ." "For although the destruction be yours [alone], yet is the sorrow mine as well." And consider his wisdom. For he does not assert, although they were corrupted; and so he showed when he said, "When your obedience is fulfilled," and "I shall bewail many which have sinned already;" but still he does not leave them to get shameless. And therefore he says, "lest at any time." For this neither condemns nor is silent; for neither course were safe, whether to speak out plainly or to conceal perpetually. Therefore he employs this middle form, saying, "lest at any time." For this is the language neither of one that entirely distrusts, nor entirely relies on them, but of one who stands between these two. In this way then he palliated, but by his mention of that history threw them into an indescribable terror, and cuts them off from all forgiveness. For even although the serpent was malignant, and she senseless, yet did none of these things snatch the woman from punishment. "Beware then," he says, "lest such be your fate, and there be naught to screen you. For he too promising greater things, so deceived." Whence it is plain that these too, by boasting and puffing themselves up, deceived.

And he does not say, "Lest by any means as Adam was deceived:" but shows that those men are but women who are thus abused, for it is the part of woman to be deceived. And he did not say, "so ye also should be deceived:" but keeping up the metaphor, he says, "so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is toward Christ." "From the simplicity, I say, not from wickedness; neither out of wickedness [is it], nor out of your not believing, but out of simplicity." But, nevertheless, not even under such circumstances are the deceived entitled to forgiveness, as Eve showed. But if this does not entitle to forgiveness, much more will it not do so, when through vain-glory any is so.

The serpent deceived Eve by lying to her about God, saying that God merely threatened men with death, but would never actually kill anyone. Likewise, the false apostles in Paul's day were saying that the gospel was merely added to the Old Testament and that it was therefore necessary to go on keeping the law of Moses as before. In our own time, there are those who claim that hell is merely a threat, either because it does not exist at all or because it is not an eternal punishment—notions which are contrary to the teaching of Scripture.

And again Paul saith, "I fear lest, as the serpent led Eve astray in its guile, your mind should be corrupted from the simplicity that is towards Christ;" and here again he teacheth us that whosoever believeth in Christ, it is meet for him to abide in His doctrine. And he sheweth us also by his words that until Eve had forsaken simplicity towards the commandment of God she did not receive the guile of the cunning of the Tempter.

But, to come now to Moses, why, I wonder, did he merely at the time when Joshua was battling against Amalek, pray sitting with hands expanded, when, in circumstances so critical, he ought rather, surely, to have commended his prayer by knees bended, and hands beating his breast, and a face prostrate on the ground; except it was that there, where the name of the Lord Jesus was the theme of speech-destined as He was to enter the lists one day singly against the devil-the figure of the cross was also necessary, (that figure) through which Jesus was to win the victory? Why, again, did the same Moses, after the prohibition of any "likeness of anything," set forth a brazen serpent, placed on a "tree," in a hanging posture, for a spectacle of healing to Israel, at the time when, after their idolatry, they were suffering extermination by serpents, except that in this case he was exhibiting the Lord's cross on which the "serpent" the devil was "made a show of," and, for every one hurt by such snakes-that is, his angels -on turning intently from the peccancy of sins to the sacraments of Christ's cross, salvation was outwrought? For he who then gazed upon that (cross) was freed from the bite of the serpents.

For though it is you who are perishing, it is I who fear. He does not say openly: you will be corrupted, although they were already corrupted, but expressed it indefinitely: "I fear lest your minds should be corrupted." For that one also deceived by promising something better; and the false apostles, praising themselves and telling you something great, beguile with their craftiness. But just as neither the craftiness of the serpent nor the simplicity of Eve were sufficient for her forgiveness, so neither will it be granted to you on that basis. And he did not say that Adam was beguiled, in order to show that being beguiled is characteristic of women. And he did not say: lest you be beguiled, but: "lest your minds be corrupted" (in Slavonic: be defiled), using the image of defilement; for the word "defilement" is used in reference to virgins. "Lest they be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ." That is, lest you be beguiled on account of your simplicity. Some interpret it thus: lest you turn aside from simple faith to the cruelty of outsiders (unbelievers), for this constitutes the greatest corruption.

But because the Corinthians could say: it is not necessary for you to protect us, and your zeal is not reasonable, because we can take care of ourselves very well, he discloses the cause of his zeal saying, but I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve by his cunning, your thoughts will be led astray. Here it should be noted that in paradise Adam and Eve were married, but Eve was corrupted by the serpent, not with violence, but with craftiness, inasmuch as he promised something false and urged something wicked: false, when he said, "You will be as gods" (Gen. 3:5), and "No, you will not die" (Gen. 3:4), even though they did incur guilt as a result; wicked, when he persuaded her to transgress and ignore God's command. The Apostle, speaking according to this likeness, says that the Church is like Eve, whom the devil has sometimes persecuted openly by tyrants and potentates, and then "like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour," as it says in 1 Pet. (5:8); and sometimes he molests the Church in secret by heretics who promise the truth and pretend to be good, and then as the serpent deceived Eve with his subtility by promising false things.

Therefore he says, I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve, casting her out of paradise, by his cunning with false promises: "Adam was not deceived, but the woman" (1 Tim. 2:14), so, i.e., by like deceptions of heretics, your thoughts will be led astray. He says, your senses, because just as in a natural marriage a spouse takes precautions against his bride's being corrupted carnally, so in this spiritual marriage the Apostle fears that the senses of the heart will be spiritually corrupted: "Bad company ruins good morals" (1 Cor. 15:33). Or the spiritual senses referred to in Wis. (1:1): "Think of the Lord with uprightness"; "Do not be children in your thinking" (1 Cor. 14:20). And from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ. That is simple which lacks composition. Therefore, the false apostles formed one sect with Judaism and the Gospel, commanding that the ceremonies of the Law be observed along with the Gospel. Therefore, they fall from the simplicity of Christ, who, being seduced by the false apostles, observe those ceremonies along with the Gospel; and this the Apostle feared about the Corinthians: "The integrity of the upright guides them" (Prov. 11:3).

"For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus whom we did not preach:" showing hereby that their deceivers were not Corinthians, but persons from some other quarter previously corrupted: wherefore he saith, "he that cometh." "If ye receive a different Spirit, if a different Gospel which ye did not accept, ye do well to bear" with him. What sayest thou? Thou that saidst to the Galatians, "If any preach another Gospel to you than that ye have received, let him be anathema;" dost thou now say, "ye do well to bear" with him? And yet on this account it were meet not to bear with, but to recoil, from them; but if they say the same things, it is meet to bear with them. How then dost thou say, "because they say the same things, it is not meet to bear with them?" for he says, "if they said other things, it were meet to bear with them." Let us then give good heed, for the danger is great, and the precipice deep, if men run past this carelessly; and what is here said giveth an entrance to all the heresies. What then is the sense of these words? Those persons so boasted as if the Apostles taught incompletely, and they were introducing somewhat more than they. For it is probable that with much idle talk, they were bringing in senseless rubbish so as to overlay these doctrines. And therefore he made mention of the serpent and of Eve who was thus deceived by the expectation of acquiring more. And alluding to this in the former Epistle also, he said, "Now ye are become rich, ye have reigned as kings without us;" and again, "we are fools for Christ's sake, but ye are wise in Christ."

Since then it was probable that using the wisdom which is without, they talked much idly, what he says is this: that "if these persons said any thing more, and preached a different Christ who ought to have been preached, but we omitted it, ye do well to bear with them." For on this account he added, "whom we did not preach." "But if the chief points of the faith are the same, what have ye the more of them? for whatsoever things they may say, they will say nothing more than what we have said." And observe with what precision he states the case. For he did not say, "if he that cometh saith any thing more;" for they did say something more, haranguing with more authority and with much beauty of language; wherefore he did not say this, but what? [If] "he that cometh preacheth another Jesus," a thing which had no need of that array of words: "or ye receive a different Spirit," (for neither was there need of words in this case;) that is to say, "makes you richer in grace;" or "a different Gospel which ye did not accept," (nor did this again stand in need of words,) "ye do well to bear" with him.

What are you saying, Paul? In the Epistle to the Galatians you wrote: if anyone preaches to you a gospel other than what you have received, let him be anathema (Gal. 1:8); so how can you now say that if they preached another Jesus, your forbearance would be justified? Listen, then: the false apostles boasted that they brought more than the true apostles. So since they spoke much foolishness, using worldly wisdom, the apostle says: if they preached another Christ, who ought to have been preached but whom we overlooked, then your forbearance would be justified. For this reason he added: "whom we have not preached." But if the articles of faith are the same, then what is new about them? Note further that he did not say: if anyone coming should preach something more (for they did speak somewhat more, with greater arrogance and greater beauty of speech), but: "preach another Jesus, whom we have not preached," and for this there is no need for embellishments of speech. "Or if you received another Spirit," that is, if he enriched you with more spiritual gifts, which have no need of verbal subtleties. "Or another gospel," which must consist not merely in words. Everywhere he shows that one should be forbearing not in this case, if they merely speak somewhat better, but if they say what ought to have been said, but about which we were silent. Notice: another Jesus, "whom we have not preached, or if you received another Spirit, which you have not received, or another gospel, which you have not accepted." So if they say the same thing, then why do you listen to them with such eagerness? And since they say the same, then why do you, Paul, hinder them? Because, using hypocrisy, they introduce new dogmas.

Having described the zeal he had for the Corinthians and proved it reasonable, the Apostle now rejects their excuse. In regard to this he does two things. First, he proposes their excuse; secondly, he removes it (v. 5).

In regard to the first it should be noted that the Corinthians might suppose that he has zeal for them, because he feared that they might set aside his teaching on account of the false apostles' teaching; hence they could say: it is obvious that lesser goods should be discarded in favor of greater goods. Therefore, if the false apostles teach better doctrines, you should not be disturbed if we acquiesce in them. Hence, he proposes this excuse by showing that no one is better than the Apostle in teaching and preaching.

For the Apostle preached and taught three things. First, that they were Christ's: "For what we preach is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord" (2 Cor. 4:5); secondly, that they have the Spirit of Christ: "Any one who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him" (Rom. 8:9); thirdly, that they received the Gospel of Christ: "For I am not ashamed of the gospel: it is the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith, to the Jew first and also to the Greek" (Rom. 1:16). If, therefore, the false apostles preach and teach something better to you, you would do right and would be excusable; but they do not do this. And this is what he says: For if some one comes and preaches another Jesus than the one we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you submit to it readily enough. As if to say: I fear that a false apostle might come to you unsent, but of himself, as a thief and a robber: "All who came before me are thieves and robbers" (Jn. 10:8); "I did not send the prophets, yet they ran" (Jer. 25:21); "And how can men preach unless they are sent?" (Rom. 10:15). If, I say, such a preacher preaches to you another Christ, namely, more excellent than the one we have preached, which cannot be, because as it says in 1 Cor. (8:6): "And one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist"; and this as to the first. Or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, namely, better than the one you have received from us, i.e., by our ministry, which cannot be, because as it says in 1 Cor. (12:11): "All these are inspired by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills"; and this as to the second. Or if you accept a different gospel, i.e., another preaching or doctrine, from the one you accepted from us: "I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and turning to a different gospel" (Gal. 1:6). If, I say, they did other and better things for you, you submit to it readily enough, i.e., you would be right in excusing yourselves. But because another, i.e., better Gospel cannot be delivered to them, the Apostle excommunicates the Galatians, if they receive another Gospel: "If any one is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed" (Gal. 1:9).

Paul does not think that he is inferior to the other apostles because he has taught the same things and done the same miracles.

"For I reckon that I am not a whit behind the very chiefest Apostles," no longer making comparison of himself with them, but with Peter and the rest. "So that if they know more than I do, [they know more] than they also." And observe how here also he shows modesty. For he did not say, "the Apostles said nothing more than I," but what? "I reckon," so I deem, "that I am not a whit behind the very chiefest Apostles." For since this also appeared to bespeak an inferiority in him, that those having preceded him were of greater name; and more respect was entertained for them, and these persons were intending to foist themselves in; therefore he makes this comparison of himself with them with the dignity that becomes him. Therefore he also mentions them with encomiums, not speaking simply of "the Apostles," but "the very chiefest," meaning Peter and James and John.

At last he compares himself with the followers of Peter, wishing to show by this that if they know more than he, then they also know more than the chiefest apostles, reducing the matter to absurd conclusions. See what self-abasement: "I suppose," he says, but affirms nothing. Not simply apostles, he says, but "the very chiefest," alluding to Peter, John, and James. He says this because now it was necessary, whereas in another place he said: "I am not worthy to be called an apostle" (1 Cor. 15:9).

Then when he says, I think that I am not in the least inferior, he removes this excuse. In regard to this he does two things. First, he shows that he did not do less for them than the others; secondly, that he did more (v. 7). In regard to the first he does three things. First, he shows that he did nothing less in deed than the other apostles; secondly, he suggests that he was not lacking the means to do this (v. 6); thirdly, he presents the evidence for both (v. 6b).

He says therefore: you would be right in allowing yourselves to be seduced by them, if they preached something better to you; but this is not true. For, i.e., because I think that I am not in the least inferior to these superlative apostles, i.e., than Peter and John, whom they considered great. He compares himself to the great apostles, both because Paul seemed to them and was regarded by them as less than they, on the ground that they had been with Christ, and Paul not; and because the false apostles claimed to have been sent by them. Therefore, by showing himself equal to the great apostles, he removes their error and refutes the false apostles: "I worked harder than any of them" (1 Cor. 15:10).

This does not refer to the apostles, who were unlettered men of no eloquence, but to the false teachers whose rhetorical skill the Corinthians preferred. Paul did not mean by this that he did not know how to speak but that commendation did not depend on mere eloquence. A person of little eloquence is not guilty before God, but someone who does not know God is liable to be charged with ignorance, because it was a sin to be ignorant of what is conducive to salvation. It was not eloquence which would commend Paul's message but the power to save which accompanied it.

The primacy of knowledge the apostle shows to those capable of reflection, in writing to those Greeks of Corinth, in the following terms: "But having hope, when your faith is increased, that we shall he magnified in you according to our rule abundantly, to preach the Gospel beyond you." He does not mean the extension of his preaching locally: for he says also that in Achaia faith abounded; and it is related also in the Acts of the Apostles that he preached the word in Athens. But he teaches that knowledge, which is the perfection of faith, goes beyond catechetical instruction, in accordance with the magnitude of the Lord's teaching and the rule of the Church. Wherefore also he proceeds to add, "And if I am rude in speech, yet I am not in knowledge."

Paul was learned in Hebrew letters and sat at the feet of Gamaliel, whom he was not ashamed to acknowledge, but he showed a contempt for Greek eloquence, or at least he kept quiet about it because of his humility, so that his preaching lay not in the persuasiveness of his words but in the power of his signs.

"But though I be rude in speech, yet am I not in knowledge." For since those that corrupted the Corinthians had the advantage in this, that they were not rude; he mentions this also, showing that he was not ashamed of, but even prided himself upon it. And he said not, "But though I be rude in speech," yet so also are they, for this would have seemed to be accusing them as well as himself, and exalting these: but he overthrows the thing itself, the wisdom from without. And indeed in his former Epistle he contends even vehemently about this thing, saying that it not only contributes nothing to the Preaching, but it even throws a shadow on the glory of the Cross; for he says, "I came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom unto you, lest the cross of Christ should be made void;" and many other things of the same kind; because "in knowledge" they were "rude," which is also the extremest form of rudeness. When therefore it was necessary to institute a comparison in those things which were great, he compares himself with the Apostles: but when to show that which appeared to be a deficiency, he no longer does this, but grapples with the thing itself and shows that it was a superiority. And when indeed no necessity urged him, he says that he is "the least of the Apostles," and not worthy even of the title; but here again when occasion called, he says that he is "not a whit behind the very chiefest Apostles." For he knew that this would most advantage the disciples. Wherefore also he adds, "Nay, in every thing we have made it manifest among all men to you ward." For here again he accuses the false Apostles as "walking in craftiness." And he said this of himself before also, that he did not live after the outward appearance, nor preach "handling the word deceitfully and corrupting it. But those men were one thing and appeared another. But not so he. Wherefore also he every where assumes a high tone, as doing nothing with a view to men's opinion nor concealing aught about himself. As he also said before, "by the manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience," so now again he saith "in every thing we have made it manifest to you." But what does this mean? "We are rude," he said, "and do not conceal it: we receive from some persons and we do not keep it secret. We receive then from you, and we pretend not that we do not receive, as they do when they receive, but we make every thing that we do manifest unto you;" which was the conduct of one that both had exceeding confidence in them, and told them every thing truly.

For the wisdom of God flourisheth not by these things, that is the study and care of earthly thoughts, but all its meditation is upon spiritual things, and its motions and thoughts are above the world, even as the Apostle himself testified concerning himself, "I am a fool to the wisdom of the world, but by my knowledge I possess the wisdom which is above the world."

Since the false apostles prided themselves on not being unskilled, he shows that he does not shun such lack of skill, but even considers it an honor. And he does not say: if I am unskilled, then the other apostles are the same—so as not to appear to condemn them; instead he demeans the very matter of worldly wisdom, as he also showed in the first epistle that it is not only useless but even harmful to the glory of the Cross. So, I am rude in speech, but not in knowledge. By this he hints to them that the more they boast of eloquence, the more they are deprived of the knowledge of God and remain unskilled in this matter.

Not like the false apostles, who are one thing in reality but appear to be another; rather in all that we do and say, we are known to you. There is in us no duplicity or hypocrisy, as in those who only cover themselves with a mask of piety but in everything act incomparably worse.

But lest perhaps they should say to him: whence did you obtain the faculty to do this, since you are unskilled in our speech? He shows that the faculty is due to the vastness of his knowledge, saying, even if I am unskilled in speaking, I am not in knowledge: "So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him" (2 Pet. 3:15). But this should be noted, namely, that the false apostles, seeking their own glory and pursuing gain, tried to attract people by ornate and subtle and exquisite words, trying only to stroke their ears gently. But the Apostle, because he was not seeking his own advantage but only the spread and growth of the faith, proposed the word of faith in such a way that all could understand, adjusting himself to the condition and capacity of his hearers. Hence, because they were not capable of lofty doctrine in the beginning, he proposed the faith to them not in subtle terms but in a way they could understand, namely, plainly and clearly. That is why they said he was rude in speech: "Not with eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power" (1 Cor. 1:17). On this account the Apostle says: although I be rude in speech, as it seems to you, this was not due to a lack of knowledge but for your sake by way of dispensing it, because I "could not address you as spiritual men, but as men of the flesh, as babes in Christ" (1 Cor. 3:1). Or according to the letter, it must be said that the Apostle stuttered, and on this account the false apostles ridiculed him. Therefore he says: for even if I am unskilled in speaking, i.e., have a speech impediment, I am not in knowledge: "I am slow of speech and of tongue" (Ex. 4:10).

But the fact that I did no less than the great apostles is evident from the things I have done for you; hence, he says: in every way we have made this plain to you in all things, who have experienced what I have done: "You are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord" (1 Cor. 9:2); "The signs of a true apostle were performed among you in all patience, with signs and wonders and mighty works" (2 Cor. 12:12).