1 Corinthians 1

Paul begins this epistle differently, because his subject matter is different. He writes that he is an apostle by the will of God, alluding to those false apostles who had not been sent by Christ and whose teaching was not true. There were many sects which had emerged and which preached Christ according to their own whims. They broke up churches, and some of their dried-up branches are still with us today. For this reason, Paul sets out everything which is opposed to the heresies and asserts that he is a true preacher because he has been sent by Christ, according to God’s will.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

See how immediately, from the very beginning, he casts down their pride, and dashes to the ground all their fond imagination, in that he speaks of himself as "called." For what I have learnt, saith he, I discovered not myself, nor acquired by my own wisdom, but while I was persecuting and laying waste the Church I was called. Now here of Him that calleth is everything: of him that is called, nothing, (so to speak,) but only to obey.

"Of Jesus Christ." Your teacher is Christ; and do you register the names of men, as patrons of your doctrine?

"Through the will of God." For it was God who willed that you should be saved in this way. We ourselves have wrought no good thing, but by the will of God we have attained to this salvation; and because it seemed good to him, we were called, not because we were worthy.

"And Sosthenes our brother." Another instance of his modesty; he puts in the same rank with himself one inferior to Apollos; for great was the interval between Paul and Sosthenes. Now if where the interval was so wide he stations with himself one far beneath him, what can they have to say who despise their equals?

Homily on 1 Corinthians 1

By calling Sosthenes his brother, Paul is both demonstrating his own humility and pointing out that Sosthenes is a fellow worker in the gospel.

Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians 1

Paul is saying in effect: “You Corinthians have been called by men, but I have been called by God.” I think that Sosthenes was a Corinthian. He is mentioned in Acts [18:17], where Luke says that in the time of Gallio the Greeks arrested him and beat him.

Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians 165

Here is the beginning, directly exposing the false teachers. I, he says, was called, and did not invent it myself, did not attain it by my own wisdom, and was sent by Christ, and did not ordain myself, as your teachers did. "Jesus Christ." The Teacher is Christ: how then do you appoint men as teachers for yourselves? "By the will" (δια θελήματος) "of God." He saved and called us not because we were worthy of it, but because it was pleasing to Him. Therefore now He Himself also wills that I be your apostle. How then do you desire other teachers for yourselves? Are you not opponents of God? Note the preposition δια (through), which here refers to the Father.

"And Sosthenes the brother." Out of humility he places alongside himself a man who was far lesser than he; and he does this in order to shame the high-minded Corinthians, who despised everyone.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

This epistle is divided into two parts: in the first he sends his greeting and in the other his message (v. 4). As to the first he does three things: first, he mentions the persons who send the greeting; secondly, the persons greeted (v. 2); thirdly, he wishes them well (v. 3).

As to the first he mentions the principal person first and describes him from his name, Paul. Enough had been said about this name in the epistle to the Romans. Suffice it to say here that this name is mentioned as a token of humility, for Paul means a small amount, which pertains to humility: "Though you are little in your own eyes, are you not the head of the tribes of Israel?" (1 Sam 15:17); "You have hidden these things from the wise and understanding are revealed them to babes" (Matt 11:25).

Then he describes himself from his dignity. First, he mentions how a dignity should be obtained when he says, called, since it is stated in Heb (5:4): "One does not take the honor upon himself, but is called by God, as Aaron was."

Secondly, he mentions his dignity, saying: an apostle of Jesus Christ. This, of course, is the highest dignity in the Church and means "sent," because they were sent by God to act in His name on earth; hence it says in Lk (6:13): "He chose from them twelve, whom he named apostles," and below (12:28): "God has appointed in the church, first, apostles."

Thirdly, he indicates the source and cause of this dignity when he says: by the will of God. This refers to the will of His good pleasure, which chooses those who rule the Church in one way or another: "The government of the earth is in the hands of the Lord, and over it he will raise up the right man for the time." (Sir 10:4).

But when God sets someone in authority on account of the sins of the subjects: "He makes a man that is a hypocrite to reign for the sins of the people" (Jb 34:30), such a ruler is not according to God's will but according to His indignation: "I have given you kings in my anger, and I have taken them away in my wrath" (Hos 13:10).

Secondly, he mentions the other person who sends the greeting when he says, and Sosthenes, our brother, whom he mentions along with himself, because he was the one who had reported to the Apostle the quarrels and other failings current among the Corinthians. He calls him brother, to show that he had done this not out of hatred but out of the zeal of charity: "Reprove a wise man and he will love you" (Pr 9:8).

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Why did Paul write “to those called to be saints” as well as to those who are already “sanctified” and in the church? Surely this means that the letter is addressed not only to those who are already cleansed from their sins but also to those who still await cleansing, though they are among those whom God has called.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians 1.1.7

Paul writes to the church as a whole, because at that time leaders had not yet been appointed for individual churches. He censures them for many things, but in spite of that he still says that they have been sanctified. However, they later began to behave badly, so that although the whole church was sanctified in Christ, some members of it had been deflected from the truth by the wicked teaching of the false apostles.The Corinthians were called to be saints, which means that they could not deviate from the narrow path of sanctification. Paul linked them, as Gentiles, with the true Jews, because salvation is of the Jews, so that wherever there are Gentiles who call on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and wherever there are true Jews, both are united in him. But the false apostles, who preached the name of Christ in accordance with the wisdom of this world, criticized the law and the prophets. Like Marcion and Mani, they maintained that Christ was not really crucified but that it merely appeared that he had been. Neither did they believe in the resurrection of the body.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

"Unto the Church of God." Not "of this or of that man," but of God.

"Which is at Corinth." Seest thou how at each word he puts down their swelling pride; training their thoughts in every way for heaven? He calls it, too, the Church "of God;" shewing that it ought to be united. For if it be "of God," it is united, and it is one, not in Corinth only, but also in all the world: for the Church's name (exxlhsia: properly an assembly) is not a name of separation, but of unity and concord.

"To the sanctified in Christ Jesus." Again the name of Jesus; the names of men he findeth no place for. But what is Sanctification? The Laver, the Purification. For he reminds them of their own uncleanness, from which he had freed them; and so persuades them to lowliness of mind; for not by their own good deeds, but by the loving-kindness of God, had they been sanctified.

"Called to be Saints." For even this, to be saved by faith, is not saith he, of yourselves; for ye did not first draw near, but were called; so that not even this small matter is yours altogether. However, though you had drawn near, accountable as you are for innumerable wickednesses, not even so would the grace be yours, but God's. Hence also, writing to the Ephesians, he said, (Ephesians 2:8) "By grace have ye been saved through faith, and this not of yourselves;" not even the faith is yours altogether; for ye were not first with your belief, but obeyed a call.

"With all who call upon the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ." Not "of this or that man," but "the Name of the Lord."

"In every place, both theirs and ours." For although the letter be written to the Corinthians only, yet he makes mention of all the faithful that are in all the earth; showing that the Church throughout the world must be one, however separate in divers places; and much more, that in Corinth. And though the place separate, the Lord binds them together, being common to all. Wherefore also uniting them he adds, "both theirs and ours." And this is far more powerful [to unite], than the other [to separate]. For as men in one place, having many and contrary masters, become distracted, and their one place helps them not to be of one mind, their masters giving orders at variance with each other, and drawing each their own way, according to what Christ says, (Matthew 6:24) "Ye cannot serve God and Mammon;" so those in different places, if they have not different lords but one only, are not by the places injured in respect of unanimity, the One Lord binding them together. "I say not then, (so he speaks,) that with Corinthians only, you being Corinthians ought to be of one mind, but with all that are in the whole world, inasmuch as you have a common Master." This is also why he hath a second time added "our;" for since he had said, "the Name of Jesus Christ our Lord," lest he should appear to the inconsiderate to be making a distinction, he subjoins again, "both our Lord and theirs."

That my meaning may be clearer, I will read it according to its sense thus: "Paul and Sosthenes to the Church of God which is in Corinth and to all who call upon the Name of Him who is both our Lord and theirs in every place, whether in Rome or wheresoever else they may be: grace unto you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ."

Or again thus; which I also believe to be rather more correct: "Paul and Sosthenes to those that are at Corinth, who have been sancified, called to be Saints, together with all who call upon the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ in place, both theirs and ours; "that is to say, "grace unto you, and peace unto you, who are at Corinth, who have been sanctified and called;" not to you alone, but "with all who in every place call upon the Name of Jesus Christ, our Lord and theirs."

Homily on 1 Corinthians 1

Paul is writing to those who have preserved their sanctity, not to those who have lost it. The former he honors with his letter; the latter he admonishes with his authority.

Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians 1

Everything Paul mentions here is meant to be a remedy for the disease of schism. They are meant to heal division and display the church’s unity.

Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians 165

"To the church of God which is at Corinth." The Church is not of this or that person, but of God. How then do you have men as your leaders? If, again, you are the Church, then you must be in perfect unity.

"To those sanctified in Christ Jesus." You were sanctified not in some human being, but in Christ, that is, through baptism, and not through wisdom or wealth, of which you boast.

"Called to be saints." And that very thing, he says, that you believed, is not from you, but you obeyed and believed because you were called by God. Therefore faith too has its beginning from God; for if He had not called, you would not have believed.

"With all who call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ." Grace, he says, and peace be not only with you, Corinthians, but also with all who call upon the name of Christ, and not of this one or that one.

"In every place, both theirs and ours." He mentions the believers in every place in order to show that all believers constitute one Church, wherever they may be. How then have you, living in one city, become divided? On the other hand, he added "our." For having said "of our Lord Jesus Christ" and placed in the middle "in every place," he repeated and said the Lord "both theirs and ours," in order to show that the Master is one for all. Some, however, understand these words as they stand: in every place, both theirs and ours, that is, in which both we live and they.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Then he mentions the persons he is greeting, saying: to the church of God that is at Corinth.

First, he mentions the chief persons, whom he describes in three ways: first, from their region when he says, to the church of God that is at Corinth, i.e., Christ's faithful assembled at Corinth: "I will thank thee in the great congregation" (Ps 35:18).

Secondly, from their gift of grace when he says: to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, i.e., in the faith, passion and sacraments of Christ Jesus: "You were washed, you have been sanctified" (1 Cor 6:11); "Jesus also suffered outside the gate in order to sanctify the people" (Heb 13:12).

Thirdly, he mentions the source of grace when he says: called to be saints, because they arrived at sanctity through the grace of being called: "Those whom he predestined he also called" (Rom 8:30); "He called you out of darkness into his marvelous light (1 Pt 2:9).

Then he mentions the other persons, namely the faithful who were not in that city but lived in the diocese of the city or in the environs; hence he says: together with those who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ by confessing the true faith: "All who call upon the name of the Lord shall be delivered" (Jl 2:32). And this in every place subject to their jurisdiction; both their Lord and ours, because their subjection to the bishop of the city did not exempt them from the Apostle's power; rather they were more subject to the Apostle than to those whom he had subjected them: "In all places of his dominion, bless the Lord, O my soul!" (Ps 103:22).

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

My preliminary remarks on the preceding epistle called me away from treating of its superscription, for I was sure that another opportunity would occur for considering the matter, it being of constant recurrence, and in the same form too, in every epistle. The point, then, is, that it is not (the usual) health which the apostle prescribes for those to whom he writes, but "grace and peace." I do not ask, indeed, what a destroyer of Judaism has to do with a formula which the Jews still use. For to this day they salute each other with the greeting of "peace," and formerly in their Scriptures they did the same. But I understand him by his practice plainly enough to have corroborated the declaration of the Creator: "How beautiful are the feet of them that bring glad tidings of good, who preach the gospel of peace!" For the herald of good, that is, of God's "grace" was well aware that along with it "peace" also was to be proclaimed. Now, when he announces these blessings as "from God the Father and the Lord Jesus," he uses titles that are common to both, and which are also adapted to the mystery of our faith; and I suppose it to be impossible accurately to determine what God is declared to be the Father and the Lord Jesus, unless (we consider) which of their accruing attributes are more suited to them severally. First, then, I assert that none other than the Creator and Sustainer of both man and the universe can be acknowledged as Father and Lord; next, that to the Father also the title of Lord accrues by reason of His power, and that the Son too receives the same through the Father; then that "grace and peace" are not only His who had them published, but His likewise to whom offence had been given. For neither does grace exist, except after offence; nor peace, except after war. Now, both the people (of Israel) by their transgression of His laws, and the whole race of mankind by their neglect of natural duty, had both sinned and rebelled against the Creator.

Against Marcion Book 5

Paul teaches that Christ should be invoked in prayer but all grace comes from the Father. The two are one in their divinity, but primacy belongs to the authority of the Father.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

Now if our peace be of grace, why hast thou high thoughts? Why art Thou so puffed up, being saved by grace? And if thou hast peace with God, why wish to assign thyself to others? since this is what separation comes to. For what if you be at "peace" with this man, and with the other even find "grace?" My prayer is that both these may be yours from God; both from Him I say, and towards Him. For neither do they abide secure except they enjoy the influence from above; nor unless God be their object will they aught avail you: for it profiteth us nothing, though we be peaceful towards all men, if we be at war with God; even as it is no harm to us, although by all men we are held as enemies, if with God we are at peace. And again it is no gain to us, if all men approve, and the Lord be offended; neither is there any danger, though all shun and hate us, if with God we have acceptance and love. For that which is verily grace, and verily peace, cometh of God, since he who finds grace in God's sight, though he suffer ten thousand horrors, feareth no one; I say not only, no man, but not even the devil himself; but he that hath offended God suspects all men, though he seem to be in security. For human nature is unstable, and not friends only and brethren, but fathers also, before now, have been altogether changed and often for a little thing he whom they begat, the branch of their planting, hath been to them, more than all foes, an object of persecution. Children, too, have cast off their fathers. Thus, if ye will mark it, David was in favor with God, Absalom was in favor with men. What was the end of each, and which of them gained most honor, ye know. Abraham was in favor with God, Pharaoh with men; for to gratify him they gave up the just man's wife. Which then of the two was the more illustrious, and the happy man? every one knows. And why speak I of righteous men; The Israelites were in favor with God, but they were hated by men, the Egyptians; but nevertheless they prevailed against their haters and vanquished them, with how great triumph, is well known to you all.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 1

Paul says that Christ is their benefactor as well as the Father, demonstrating that the two are one.

Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians 166

Grace and peace from God. Even before, when we were at enmity against Him, we received peace by His grace, and I pray that from God both may always be yours, that is, that you be deprived of neither His grace nor peace; because you live in discord among yourselves. How then do you turn to men and seek from them, as from teachers, grace and favor?

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Finally, he mentions in this greeting the salutary gifts he wishes them. The first of these is grace to you, by which we are set free of sin: "They are justified by his grace as a gift" (Rom 3:24) and the last is peace, which is brought to perfection in eternal happiness: "He makes peace in your borders" (Ps 147:14); "My people will abide in a peaceful habitation" (Is 32:18). But these two include all other gifts; hence he says: grace and peace. The one who causes them is mentioned when he says: from God our Father: "Every good endowment and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights" (Jas 1:17). He adds: and from the Lord Jesus Christ, by Whom he has granted to us his precious and very great promises" (2 Pt 1:4); "Grace and truth came through Jesus Christ" (Jn. 1:17).

The phrase, from God our Father, can be understood of the whole Trinity, by Whom we have been created and adopted as sons; but the Lord Jesus Christ is added, not as though He were a person over and above the three persons, but on account of His other nature.

Or God our Father is taken for the person of the Father, as in Jn (20:17): "I ascend to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God," whereas the Lord Jesus Christ is added to indicate the person of the Son. The Holy Spirit is not mentioned, because He is nexus of the Father and Son, and is understood when the other two persons are mentioned, or because He is the gift of both, He is understood in the gifts, grace and peace, which are granted by the Holy Spirit: "All these are inspired by one and the same Spirit" (1 Cor 12:11).

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Paul does not just give thanks for the Corinthians some of the time, nor only when they do good. He puts himself in the position of a father, who is thankful for his children all the time, whatever they may have done.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians 1.2.1-15

God has decreed that a person who believes in Christ can be saved without works. By faith alone he receives the forgiveness of his sins.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

That which he exhorts others to do, saying, "Let your requests with thanksgiving be made known unto God," the same also he used to do himself: teaching us to begin always from these words, and before all things to give thanks unto God. For nothing is so acceptable to God as that men should be thankful, both for themselves and for others wherefore also he prefaces almost every Epistle with this. But the occasion for his doing so is even more urgent here than in the other Epistles. For he that gives thanks, does so, both as being well off, and as in acknowledgment of a favor: now a favor is not a debt nor a requital nor a payment: which indeed every where is important to be said, but much more in the case of the Corinthians who were gaping after the dividers of the Church.

"Unto my God." Out of great affection he seizes on that which is common, and makes it his own; as the prophets also from time to time use to say, "O God, my God;" and by way of encouragement he incites them to use the same language also themselves. For such expressions belong to one who is retiring from all secular things, and moving towards Him whom he calls on with so much earnestness: since he alone can truly say this, who from things of this life is ever mounting upwards unto God, and always preferring Him to all, and giving thanks continually, not only for the grace already given, but whatever blessing hath been since at any time bestowed, for this also he offereth unto Him the same praise. Wherefore he saith not merely, "I give thanks," but "at all times, concerning you;" instructing them to be thankful both always, and to no one else save God only.

"For the grace of God." Seest thou how from every quarter he draws topics for correcting them? For where "grace" is, "works" are not; where "works," it is no more "grace." If therefore it be "grace," why are ye high-minded? Whence is it that ye are puffed up?

"Which is given you." And by whom was it given? By me, or by another Apostle? Not at all, but "by Jesus Christ." For the expression, "In Jesus Christ," signifies this. Observe how in divers places he uses the word en, "in," instead of di ou, "through means of whom;" therefore its sense is no less.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 2

Paul takes care to sweeten their ears before starting to admonish them. What he says is true, however: He gives thanks to God because of the gifts which have been given to them.

Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians 166

"I give thanks unceasingly." He teaches us to be thankful. He does this in almost every epistle; but now he speaks of thankfulness especially fittingly. For thankfulness is for a benefaction, and a benefaction is neither a debt nor a recompense. Consequently, by this too he brings down the pride of the Corinthians.

"My God." He appropriates to himself, out of great love, the God who is common to all.

"For you, on account of the grace of God." This teaches the Corinthians as well to always nurture grateful feelings toward God and not toward their own works, for he says: I give thanks "for the grace of God," and not for your works.

"Given to you in Christ Jesus." That is, through Christ Jesus, and not through such-and-such a person. Why then do you give heed to men?

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Then when he says, I give thanks to God, he begins his message: first, he gives thanks for their blessings, so that they will more easily bear the correction of their faults; secondly, he begins to instruct them (v. 10).

As to the first he does two things. First, he gives thanks for the blessings they have already received; secondly, for those they expected in the future (v. 7b). He mentions his thanks when he says: I give thanks to God, Who in addition to being the God of all things by creation and governance, is his and every just man's God through faith and devotion: "Thou are my God, and I will give thanks to you" (Ps 118:28). He also mentions this when he gives thanks; hence he says: always, because this thanks came from the ardor of charity, which was continually alive in his heart: "A friend loves at all times" (Pr 17:17). But although he loved them at all times and continually gave thanks for their blessings, he gave thanks for them especially at all the hours he set aside for prayer. He also mentions those for whom he gives thanks when he says: for you, in whose blessings he rejoiced as in his own because of the union of charity: "No greater joy can I have than this, to hear that my children follow the truth" (3 Jn. v. 4).

Then he indicates the blessings for which he gives thanks. First, in general, when he says: because of the grace of God, i.e., by the grace of God, which was given you in Christ Jesus, i.e., by Christ Jesus: "Of his fullness we have all received and grace for grace" (Jn. 1:16).

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Knowledge shows what there is to know. Speech goes further and explains it.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians 1.2.29-30

This means that the Corinthians have remained steadfast in the grace which they have received and in the preaching of the doctrine of truth, because they have acquired spiritual knowledge. Paul therefore gives thanks to God for these things.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

"That in every thing ye were enriched." Again, by whom? By Him, is the reply. And not merely "ye were enriched, but "in every thing." Since then it is first of all, "riches" then, "riches of God," next, "in every thing," and lastly, "through the Only-Begotten," reflect on the ineffable treasure!

"In all utterance, and all knowledge." "Word" or "utterance," not such as the heathen, but that of God. For there is knowledge without "word," and there is knowledge with "word." For so there are many who possess knowledge, but have not the power of speech; as those who are uneducated and unable to exhibit clearly what they have in their mind. Ye, saith he, are not such as these, but competent both to understand and to speak.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 2

When the Corinthians came to faith in Christ they were blessed with all grace. But now that they were no longer living according to their faith, they had made void the grace which they had received.

Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians 1

"Because in Him (ἐν αὐτῷ) you were enriched in everything." "In Him" is again used in place of "through Him (δι' αυτού)." So when you have richness, and the richness of God, and in all things, and through the Only-Begotten Himself, how is it that you, ungrateful ones, appoint men as your teachers?

"In all utterance and in all knowledge." There is also speech without reason, when, for example, someone speaks empty words, without any thought. There is also reason without speech, when someone thinks about lofty subjects but cannot find words to express them. But you have both speech and divine reason, so that you are able both to think and to speak.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Secondly, in detail: first, when he mentions the abundance of their grace, saying: because in every way, namely, which pertains to salvation, you were enriched, i.e., made to overflow in him, i.e., through Christ: "For your sake he became poor, so that by his poverty you become rich" (2 Cor 8:9).

He explains in what matters they became rich when he says: with all speech, either because they spoke in all manner of tongues or because they abounded in the utterance of doctrine. But because the word was not uttered properly, unless it proceeded from knowledge, he adds: and all knowledge, i.e., the understanding of all Scriptures and, in general, of all things pertaining to salvation: "He gave them a knowledge of holy things" (Wis 10:10).

What the Apostle says here refers to those in the Church who were more perfect and includes even lesser personages who possessed these riches, as Augustine says: "If you love the unity of which you are a member, you have whatever the others have in it. Remove envy and the possessions of others are yours, for love unites those whom greed and envy would separate."

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

The testimony of Christ is confirmed in us if we can say, like the apostle Paul, “I am persuaded that neither life nor death etc. can separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord” [Rom 8:38-39]. But if we are upset by every little thing that happens, then Christ’s testimony has not been confirmed in us at all.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians 1.2.35-40

The testimony of Christ has been confirmed in them because they have been strengthened by their faith. They had come to put no trust in human things. Rather, all their hope was in Christ, for they were ensnared neither by pleasure nor by the enticements of pleasure.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

"Even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you." Under the color of praises and thanksgiving he touches them sharply. "For not by heathen philosophy," saith he, "neither by heathen discipline, but the grace of God, and by the riches, by and the knowledge, and the word given by Him, were you enabled to learn the doctrines of the truth, and to be confirmed unto the testimony of the Lord; that is, unto the Gospel. For ye had the benefit of many signs, many wonders unspeakable grace, to make you receive the Gospel. If therefore ye were established by signs and grace, why do ye waver?" Now these are the words of one both reproving, and at the same time prepossessing them in his favor.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 2

For the word stands in place of: "through which" (δι᾿ ων). Through the word, he says, and knowledge, by which you were enriched, the "testimony," that is, the preaching about Christ, was confirmed in you; for you received this preaching not through outward wisdom, but through signs and gifts, of which you were deemed worthy.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Secondly, he shows their correctness when he says: even as the testimony to Christ was confirmed among you. For the utterance of doctrine would not be correct or knowledge correct, if it disagreed with the testimony of Christ or if Christ's testimony did not have a firm hold on their hearts by faith, because, as it says in Jas (1:6): "He who wavers is like a wave of the sea that is driven and tossed by the wind."

He says: in testimony to Christ, either because the prophets have spoken of Him; "To him all the prophets give testimony" (Ac 10:43) or because Christ Himself gave testimony: "Although I give testimony of myself, my testimony is true" (Jn. 8:14) or even because the Apostle in his own preaching gave testimony about Christ: "You shall give testimony of me" (Ac 22:18).

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

It is surely noteworthy that nobody doubted that it was kept by a Christian and Apostolic ordinance. So St. Paul argues from its Christian observance, in his rebuke of the Corinthians.

Ephesus

In this life the righteous person does not yet enjoy what he hopes for but rather endures suffering and danger. He is waiting for the revelation of Christ to come.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians 1.2.48-51

It is clear that Paul was a circumspect man who was full of concern as he awaited the day of judgment. On that day the Lord Jesus Christ will be revealed both to believers and to unbelievers. Then unbelievers will realize that what they did not want to believe is in fact true. Believers will rejoice, finding that what they believed in is more wonderful than they had imagined.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

"So that ye come behind in no gift." A great question here arises. They who had been "enriched in all utterance," so as in no respect to "come behind in any gift," are they carnal? For if they were such at the beginning, much more now. How then does he call them "carnal?" For, saith he, "I was not able to speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal." What must we say then? That having in the beginning believed, and obtained all gifts, (for indeed they sought them earnestly,) they became remiss afterwards. Or, if not so, that not unto all are either these things said or those; but the one to such as were amenable to his censures, the other to such as were adorned with his praises. For as to the fact that they still had gifts; "Each one," saith he, "hath a psalm, hath a revelation, hath a tongue, hath an interpretation; let all things be done unto edifying." And, "Let the prophets speak two or three." Or we may state it somewhat differently; that as it is usual with us to call the greater part the whole, so also he hath spoken in this place. Withal, I think he hints at his own proceedings; for he too had shewn forth signs; even as also he saith in the second Epistle to them, "Truly the signs of an Apostle were wrought among you in all patience:" and again, "For what is there wherein you were inferior to other churches?"

Or, as I was saying, he both reminds them of his own miracles and speaks thus with an eye to those who were still approved. For many holy men were there who had "set themselves to minister unto the saints," and had become "the first fruits of Achaia;" as he declareth towards the end.

In any case, although the praises be not very close to the truth, still however they are inserted by way of precaution, preparing the way beforehand for his discourse. For whoever at the very outset speaks things unpleasant, excludes his words from a hearing among the weaker: since if the hearers be his equals in degree they feel angry; if vastly inferior they will be vexed. To avoid this, he begins with what seem to be praises. I say, seem; for not even did this praise belong to them, but to the grace of God. For that they had remission of sins, and were justified, this was of the Gift from above. Wherefore also he dwells upon these points, which shew the loving-kindness of God, in order that he may the more fully purge out their malady.

"Waiting for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ." "Why make ye much ado," saith he, "why are ye troubled that Christ is not come? Nay, he is come; and the Day is henceforth at the doors." And consider his wisdom; how withdrawing them from human considerations he terrifies them by mention of the fearful judgment-seat, and thus implying that not only the beginnings must be good, but the end also. For with all these gifts, and with all else that is good, we must be mindful of that Day: and there is need of many labors to be able to come unto the end. "Revelation" is his word; implying that although He be not seen, yet He is, and is present even now, and then shall appear. Therefore there is need of patience: for to this end did ye receive the wonders, that ye may remain firm.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 2

Christ’s second coming is described as a revelation, because now it is hidden from us.

Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians 1

Although we lack no gift, nevertheless we await the appearance of our Lord Jesus Christ. He will then keep us secure in all things and present us unimpeachable when the day of our Lord Jesus Christ comes. The end of the world shall arrive, when no flesh may glory in his sight.

Against the Pelagians 2.8

"So that you come behind in no gift." If they had no lack in gifts, then how does he later call them (1 Cor. 3:1) carnal? To this we shall say: not all were spiritual, and not all were carnal; therefore everything he speaks of now, he speaks to the spiritual, and what follows he speaks to the carnal. Or: perhaps in the beginning they received all manner of gifts, but afterwards became negligent and began to live according to the flesh.

"Awaiting the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ." Here he frightens them by reminding them of the second coming of Christ. For if Christ shall appear, then how is it that you have alien leaders? He also shows that along with gifts, virtues are also necessary. For on that day, gifts will in no way help the one who has not lived virtuously (Matt. 7:21–23). Finally, by the word "appearing" he expresses the thought that Christ is present even now, but in a hidden way, and then He shall be manifest.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Thirdly, he touches on the perfection of grace when he says: you are not wanting in any spiritual gift, namely, because various persons among them enjoyed all the Charismatic graces. For it befits divine providence to bestow the necessities of life without stint: "Those who fear him have no want" (Ps 34:9) and again "Those who seek the Lord lack no good thing" (Ps 34:10).

Then he mentions the blessings to be expected in the future. In regard to this he does three things. First, he mentions their expectation of a future blessing when he says: to you, who not only have grace at present but are waiting for the future revealing of our Lord Jesus Christ, namely because He will be manifested to His saints not only in the glory of His humanity: "Your eyes will see the king in his beauty" (Is 33:17) but also in the glory of His divinity: "The glory of the Lord shall be revealed" (Is 40:5). This is the revelation that makes men happy: "When he appears we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is" (1 Jn. 3:2), and in which eternal life consists: "This eternal life, that they know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent" (Jn. 17:3). Now just as those to whom Christ is revealed are happy in reality, so those who await this are happy in hope: "Blessed are all they that wait for him" (Is 30:18). This is why he gives thanks for their expectations.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Who sustains us? Christ Jesus, the Word and Wisdom of God. Moreover, he sustains us not merely for a day or two, but forever.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians 1.2.52-54

Paul is confident that the Corinthians will persevere in righteousness until the day of judgment. People who could not be shaken in spite of so many turmoils and disagreements proved that they would remain faithful to the end. In praising them, Paul is also challenging those who had been corrupted by the errors of the false apostles, for in proclaiming the faith of the former, he is calling the latter to repentance.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

"Who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye may be unreprovable." Here he seems to court them, but the saying is free from all flattery; for he knows also how to press them home; as when he saith, "Now some are puffed up as though I would not come to you:" and again, "What will ye? shall I come unto you with a rod, or in love, and in the spirit of meekness?" And, "Since ye seek a proof of Christ speaking in me." But he is also covertly accusing them: for, to say, "He shall confirm," and the word "unreprovable" marks them out as still wavering, and liable to reproof.

But do thou consider how he always fasteneth them as with nails to the Name of Christ. And not any man nor teacher, but continually the Desired One Himself is remembered by him: setting himself, as it were to arouse those who were heavy-headed after some debauch. For no where in any other Epistle doth the Name of Christ occur so continually. But here it is, many times in a few verses; and by means of it he weaves together, one may say, the whole of the proem. Look at it from the beginning. "Paul called to be an Apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have been sanctified in Jesus Christ, who call upon the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, grace be unto you and peace from God the Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ. I thank my God for the grace which hath been given you by Jesus Christ, even as the testimony of Christ hath been confirmed in you, waiting for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ, who shall confirm you unreprovable in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. God is faithful, by whom ye have been called into the fellowship of His Son Jesus Christ our Lord. And I beseech you by the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ." Seest thou the constant repetition of the Name of Christ? From whence it is plain even to the most unobservant, that not by chance nor unwittingly he doeth this, but in order that by incessant application of that glorious Name he may foment their inflammation, and purge out the corruption of the disease.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 2

By saying that he hopes that they will be guiltless in the day of Christ Jesus, Paul is indicating that right now they are guilty.

Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians 167

By the word "will confirm" he shows that they are wavering, and by the word "blameless" he expresses that now they are subject to accusation. In this epistle more frequently than in others he mentions the Lord Jesus Christ, in order to remind the Corinthians by Whom they were saved and Whose name they bear. For Christians are called so from Christ, and not from the name of any man.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Secondly, he shows that this expectation is not vain because of the help of God's grace: hence he adds: Who, i.e., Christ, Who gave them the hope of such a manifestation, will sustain you in the grace received: "After you have suffered a little while, He will restore, establish and strengthen you" (1 Pt 5:10) to the end of your life: "He who endures to the end will be saved" (Matt 10:22). Not that you will be without sin, because "If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us" (1 Jn. 1:8), but that you may be guiltless, i.e., without mortal sin: "If they prove themselves blameless let them minister" (1 Tim 3:10). This, I say, will be in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ, because a person found without crime on the day of death will arrive at the day of judgment without crime: "If a tree falls to the south or to the north, in the place where the tree falls, there it will lie" (Ec 11:3). For unless he is found without crime now, he awaits that revelation in vain.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

And when it is said, "God is faithful," it is intimated that He is worthy to be believed when declaring aught. Now His Word declares; and "God" Himself is "faithful." How, then, if to believe is to suppose, do the philosophers think that what proceeds from themselves is sure? For the voluntary assent to a preceding demonstration is not supposition, but it is assent to something sure. Who is more powerful than God? Now unbelief is the feeble negative supposition of one opposed to Him: as incredulity is a condition which admits faith with difficulty.

The Stromata Book 2

That God is faithful means that we can trust his self-revelation. His Word reveals him. He is the God who is faithful.

The Stromata Book 2

Believe in Christ always, because you were called for no other purpose than to be one with us in him.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians 1.3

Fellowship is brotherhood. Just as Paul declares God’s unfailing faithfulness toward us in this regard, so we ourselves must not be found to be faithless or dishonorable with respect to our adoption. Rather we must remain faithful in it.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

"God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of His Son." Wonderful! How great a thing saith he here! How vast in the magnitude of the gift which he declares! Into the fellowship of the Only-Begotten have ye been called, and do ye addict yourselves unto men? What can be worse than this wretchedness? And how have ye been called? By the Father. For since "through Him," and "in Him," were phrases which he was constantly employing in regard of the Son, lest men might suppose that he so mentioneth Him as being less, he ascribeth the same to the Father. For not by this one and that one, saith he, but "by the Father" have ye been called; by Him also have ye been "enriched." Again, "ye have been called;" ye did not yourselves approach. But what means, "into the fellowship of His Son?" Hear him declaring this very thing more clearly elsewhere. "If we suffer, we shall also reign with Him; if we die with Him, we shall also live with Him." Then, because it was a great thing which He had said, he adds an argument fraught with unanswerable conviction; for, saith he, "God is faithful," i.e. "true." Now if "true," what things He hath promised He will also perform. And He hath promised that He will make us partakers of His only-begotten Son; for to this end also did He call us. For "His gifts, and the calling of God," are without repentance.

These things, by a kind of divine art he inserts thus early, lest after the vehemence of the reproofs they might fall into despair. For assuredly God's part will ensue, if we be not quite impatient of His rein. As the Jews, being called, would not receive the blessings; but this was no longer of Him that called, but of their lack of sense. For He indeed was willing to give, but they, by refusing to receive, cast themselves away. For, had He called to a painful and toilsome undertaking, not even in that case were they pardonable in making excuse; however, they would have been able to say that so it was: but if the call be unto cleansing, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption, and grace, and a free gift, and the good things in store, which eye hath not seen, nor ear heard; and it be God that calls, and calls by Himself; what pardon can they deserve, who come not running to Him? Let no one therefore accuse God; for unbelief cometh not of Him that calleth, but of those who start away from Him.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 2

That is, God is true. If He is true, and has called us into the fellowship of His Son, that is, to be glorified together with the Son in His Kingdom, then it is evident that He will fulfill what He promised. "You were called," he says, and did not come of your own accord. How then do you boast, as though by your own works? Note here that the word "by Whom" refers directly to the Father.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Thirdly, he assigns the reason for his promise, saying that God will strengthen you, because God is faithful: "God is faithful and without iniquity" (Dt 32:4). By whom you were called into the fellowship of his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, i.e., to have fellowship with Christ, both in the present life through the likeness of grace: "If we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another" (1 Jn. 1:7) and in the future by sharing in His glory: "Provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him" (Rom 8:17). But God would not seem to be faithful, if He called us to the fellowship of His Son and then denied us on His part the things by which we could attain to Him. Hence Joshua (1:5) says: "I will not fail you or forsake you."

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

It is therefore befitting that you should in every way glorify Jesus Christ, who hath glorified you, that by a unanimous obedience "ye may be perfectly joined together in the same mind, and in the same judgment, and may all speak the same thing concerning the same thing," and that, being subject to the bishop and the presbytery, ye may in all respects be sanctified.

Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians

I therefore, yet not I, out the love of Jesus Christ, "entreat you that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind, and in the same judgment." For there are some vain talkers and deceivers, not Christians, but Christ-betrayers, bearing about the name of Christ in deceit, and "corrupting the word" of the Gospel; while they intermix the poison of their deceit with their persuasive talk, as if they mingled aconite with sweet wine, that so he who drinks, being deceived in his taste by the very great sweetness of the draught, may incautiously meet with his death. One of the ancients gives us this advice, "Let no man be called good who mixes good with evil." For they speak of Christ, not that they may preach Christ, but that they may reject Christ; and they speak of the law, not that they may establish the law, but that they may proclaim things contrary to it. For they alienate Christ from the Father, and the law from Christ. They also calumniate His being born of the Virgin; they are ashamed of His cross; they deny His passion; and they do not believe His resurrection. They introduce God as a Being unknown; they suppose Christ to be unbegotten; and as to the Spirit, they do not admit that He exists. Some of them say that the Son is a mere man, and that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are but the same person, and that the creation is the work of God, not by Christ, but by some other strange power.

Epistle of Ignatius to the Trallians

Moreover, when he blames dissensions and schisms, which undoubtedly are evils, he immediately adds heresies likewise. Now, that which he subjoins to evil things, he of course confesses to be itself an evil; and all the greater, indeed, because he tells us that his belief of their schisms and dissensions was grounded on his knowledge that "there must be heresies also." For he shows us that it was owing to the prospect of the greater evil that he readily believed the existence of the lighter ones; and so far indeed was he from believing, in respect of evils (of such a kind), that heresies were good, that his object was to forewarn us that we ought not to be surprised at temptations of even a worse stamp, since (he said) they tended "to make manifest all such as were approved; " in other words, those whom they were unable to pervert. In short, since the whole passage points to the maintenance of unity and the checking of divisions, inasmuch as heresies sever men from unity no less than schisms and dissensions, no doubt he classes heresies under the same head of censure as he does schisms also and dissensions. And by so doing, he makes those to be "not approved," who have fallen into heresies; more especially when with reproofs he exhorts men to turn away from such, teaching them that they should "all speak and think the selfsame thing," the very object which heresies do not permit.

The Prescription Against Heretics

Besides which, it must have followed, that, for the man to whom he committed the ministration of the gospel, he would add the injunction that it be not ministered in all places, and without respect to persons, in accordance with the Lord's saying, "Not to cast one's pearls before swine, nor that which is holy unto dogs." Openly did the Lord speak, without any intimation of a hidden mystery. He had Himself commanded that, "whatsoever they had heard in darkness" and in secret, they should "declare in the light and on the house-tops." He had Himself fore-shown, by means of a parable, that they should not keep back in secret, fruitless of interest, a single pound, that is, one word of His. He used Himself to tell them that a candle was not usually "pushed away under a bushel, but placed on a candlestick," in order to "give light to all who are in the house." These things the apostles either neglected, or failed to understand, if they fulfilled them not, by concealing any portion of the light, that is, of the word of God and the mystery of Christ. Of no man, I am quite sure, were they afraid,-neither of Jews nor of Gentiles in their violence; with all the greater freedom, then, would they certainly preach in the church, who held not their tongue in synagogues and public places. Indeed they would have found it impossible either to convert Jews or to bring in Gentiles, unless they "set forth in order" that which they would have them believe. Much less, when churches were advanced in the faith, would they have withdrawn from them anything for the purpose of committing it separately to some few others. Although, even supposing that among intimate friends, so to speak, they did hold certain discussions, yet it is incredible that these could have been such as to bring in some other rule of faith, differing from and contrary to that which they were proclaiming through the Catholic churches, -as if they spoke of one God in the Church, (and) another at home, and described one substance of Christ, publicly, (and) another secretly, and announced one hope of the resurrection before all men, (and) another before the few; although they themselves, in their epistles, besought men that they would all speak one and the same thing, and that there should be no divisions and dissensions in the church, seeing that they, whether Paul or others, preached the same things. Moreover, they remembered the words): "Let your communication be yea, yea; nay, nay; for whatsoever is more than this cometh of evil; " so that they were not to handle the gospel in a diversity of treatment.

The Prescription Against Heretics

The visible church is a mixed body, consisting of both righteous and unrighteous people. This is why Paul praises some of its members and criticizes others. The person who agrees with the right doctrine and the church’s teaching concerning the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, as well as with the dispensation concerning us, with resurrection and judgment, and who follows the rules of the church is not in schism.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians 1.4

Who, then, is so wicked and faithless, who is so insane with the madness of discord, that either he should believe that the unity of God can be divided, or should dare to rend it-the garment of the Lord-the Church of Christ? He Himself in His Gospel warns us, and teaches, saying, "And there shall be one flock and one shepherd." And does any one believe that in one place there can be either many shepherds or many flocks? The Apostle Paul, moreover, urging upon us this same unity, beseeches and exhorts, saving, "I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no schisms among you; but that ye be joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment."

Treatise I On the Unity of the Church

That a schism must not be made, even although he who withdraws should remain in one faith, and in the same tradition. In Ecclesiasticus, in Solomon: "He that cleaveth firewood shall be endangered by it if the iron shall fall off." Also in Exodus: "In one house shall it be eaten: ye shall not cast forth the flesh abroad out of the house." Also in the cxxxiid Psalm: "Behold how good and how pleasant a thing it is that brethren should dwell in unity!" Also in the Gospel according to Matthew: "He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth." Also in the first Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: "But I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all say the same thing, and that there be no schisms among you; but that ye be all joined together in the same mind and in the same opinion." Also in the sixty-seventh Psalm: "God, who maketh men to dwell with one mind in a house."

Treatise XII. Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews.

Be of one mind, O you bishops, one with another, and be at peace with one another; sympathize with one another, love the brethren, and feed the people with care; with one consent teach those that are under you to be of the same sentiments and to be of the same opinions about the same matters, "that there may be no schisms among you; that you may be one body and one spirit, perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment," [1 Corinthians 1:10; Ephesians 4:4] according to the appointment of the Lord. And let the deacon refer all things to the bishop, as Christ does to His Father. But let him order such things as he is able by himself, receiving power from the bishop, as the Lord did from His Father the power of creation and of providence. But the weighty matters let the bishop judge; but let the deacon be the bishop's ear, and eye, and mouth, and heart, and soul, that the bishop may not be distracted with many cares, but with such only as are more considerable, as Jethro did appoint for Moses, and his counsel was received.

(Book 2), Section 6, XLIV

Paul prays that the Corinthians will all think one thing, namely, that those who have been born again are children of God. He wants them to be perfectly united in the teaching which he had given to them. He challenges them to think this way and to defend his teaching.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

What I have continually been saying, that we must frame our rebukes gently and gradually, this Paul doth here also; in that, being about to enter upon a subject full of many dangers and enough to tear up the Church from her foundations he uses very mild language. His word is that he "beseeches" them, and beseeches them "through Christ;" as though not even he were sufficient alone to make this supplication, and to prevail.

The emphatic force of the word "schism," I mean the name itself, was a sufficient accusation. For it was not that they had become many parts, each entire within itself, but rather the One Body which originally existed had perished. For had they been entire Churches, there might be many of them; but if they were divisions, in the next place, because he had sharply dealt with them by using the word "schism," he again softens and soothes them, saying, "That ye may be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment." That is; since he had said, "That ye may all speak the same thing;" "do not suppose," he adds, "that I said concord should be only in words; I seek for that harmony which is of the mind." But since there is such a thing as agreement in words, and that hearty, not consenting, is no longer "perfected," nor fitted in to complete accordance. There is also such a thing as harmony of opinions, where there is not yet harmony of sentiment; for instance, when having the same faith we are not joined together in love: for thus, in opinions we are one, (for we think the same things,) but in sentiment not so. And such was the case at that time; this person choosing one leader, and that, another. For this reason he saith it is necessary to agree both in "mind" and in "judgment." For it was not from any difference in faith that the schisms arose, but from the division of their judgment through human contentiousness.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 3

Paul was right to add the name of Christ here, because that is what the Corinthians were really rejecting.

Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians 167

"I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ." Intending to speak to them more sternly, he first declares that he beseeches them by Christ. I, he says, cannot ask you alone, but I take to my aid the name of the Lord, from whose name you are called Christians and which you have insulted by wishing to be called by the names of men. Let this bring you to shame!

"That you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you." What do I beseech you about? That you all be in agreement and not be divided. For that which is divided, although it may seem to become many instead of one, in reality does not become many (for what use is a body cut into many parts?): in it unity has perished. Thus, he very expressively called what was happening among them "divisions"; by this word he clearly shows how calamitous their condition was.

"But that you be joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment." Above he said: "that you all speak the same thing." Therefore, lest they think that agreement consists only in words, he adds: "in one spirit," that is, I beseech you to be in agreement also in your thoughts. But many think alike about one subject, yet differently about another; therefore he added: "joined together in one spirit." Furthermore, many are in agreement in their way of thinking, but diverge in the disposition of their will (for when we have one and the same faith, but are not united with one another by love, then although we think alike, we diverge in the disposition of our will). Therefore, having said: "in one spirit," he added: "and in one mind," that is, so that they would disagree neither regarding faith nor regarding the disposition of their will.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

After the greeting the Apostle begins to instruct them. First, he instructs them about things pertaining to all generally, namely, about the sacraments. Secondly, about things pertaining to some of them (c. 16). In the sacraments three things should be considered: first, the sacrament itself, as baptism; secondly, the reality signified and contained, namely, grace: thirdly, the reality signified but not contained, namely, the glory of the resurrection. First, therefore, he discusses the sacraments themselves; secondly, the graces (c. 12); thirdly, the glory of the resurrection (c. 15). In regard to the first he does three things: first he determines what pertains to baptism; secondly, what pertains to the sacrament of matrimony (c. 5); thirdly, what pertains to the sacrament of the Eucharist (c. 8).

In the first part the Apostle deals with doctrine along with baptism; thus he follows the example of the Lord, Who gave the disciples the injunction to teach and to baptize in one command: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matt 28:19). Now it should be noted that there was dissension among the Corinthian believers, because those who had been instructed assumed that they had received the better teaching and a better baptism and began to look down on the others.

Hence the Apostle does two things: first, he ends the strife; secondly he attacks the cause of the strife, namely, that they glory in some of Christ's ministers and look down on the other ones (c. 3). As to the first he does three things: first, he gives a friendly warning; secondly, he shows the need for the warning (v. 11); thirdly, the reason for it (v. 13).

In regard to the first, two things should be considered. First, he uses humble language as one way of inducing them to heed his warning; hence he says: I appeal to you; the second way is by brotherly love when he says: brethren, because this warning came from the warmth of his fraternal charity: "A brother helped by a brother is like a strong city" (Pr 18:19). The third way is by appealing to their reverence for Christ when he says: by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, Who should be honored by all and to Whom all should be subject: "In the name of Jesus every knee should bend" (Phil 2:10).

The second thing to be considered is that he urges them to three things. First, to concord when he says: that you all agree, i.e., that all confess the same faith and hold the same opinion in matters that must be done in common: "That together you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" (Rom 15:6). Secondly, he forbids a vice contrary to virtue when he says: that there be no dissensions (schisms) among you, because ecclesial unity must not be fragmented. As a sign of this unity the soldiers said of the coat without seam: "Let us not cut it, but let us cast lots for it, whose it shall be" (Jn. 19:24). Properly speaking, there are schisms, when the members of one group separate into various factions according to their various beliefs or according to their various opinions about conduct: "You shall see the breaches of the city of David" (Is 22:9). Thirdly, he urges them to seek perfection, which is the good of the whole. Therefore, he says: but that you be united in the same mind, which judges about conduct, and in the same judgment, which judges about belief. As if to say: These things will enable you to be perfect, if you continue in unity: "Over all these things have charity, which is the bond of perfection" (Col 3:14); "Be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect" (Matt 5:48).

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

But they roll back an objection from that apostle himself, in that he said, "For Christ sent me not to baptize; " , as if by this argument baptism were done away! For if so, why did he baptize Gaius, and Crispus, and the house of Stephanas? However, even if Christ had not sent him to baptize, yet He had given other apostles the precept to baptize. But these words were written to the Corinthians in regard of the circumstances of that particular time; seeing that schisms and dissensions were agitated among them, while one attributes everything to Paul, another to Apollos. For which reason the "peace-making" apostle, for fear he should seem to claim all gifts for himself, says that he had been sent "not to baptize, but to preach." For preaching is the prior thing, baptizing the posterior. Therefore the preaching came first: but I think baptizing withal was lawful to him to whom preaching was.

On Baptism

Some people think that “Chloe’s people” are those who remain faithful and bear fruit in the faith of Christ. Others think that Chloe is a place, as if one were to say “Antioch’s people,” for example. But others think that she was a woman devoted to God, in whose company there were many faithful worshipers.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

But seeing that whoso is blamed is unabashed so long as he hath no witnesses, observe how, not permitting them to deny the fact, he adduces some to bear witness.

"For it hath been signified unto me concerning you, my brethren, by them which are of the household of Chloe." Neither did he say this at the very beginning, but first he brought forward his charge; as one who put confidence in his informants. Because, had it not been so, he would not have found fault: for Paul was not a person to believe lightly. Neither then did he immediately say, "it hath been signified." Consider also his prudence in not speaking of any distinct person, but of the entire family; so as not to make them hostile towards the informer: for in this way he both protects him, and fearlessly opens the accusation. For he had an eye to the benefit not of the one side only, but of the other also. Wherefore he saith not, "It hath been declared to me by certain," but he indicates also the household, lest they might suppose that he was inventing.

What was "declared?" "That there are contentions among you." Thus, when he speaks, he relies upon the informants.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 3

Perhaps there was a family at Corinth called Chloe, but Paul does not give any details so as not to reveal their identity and start more quarreling.

Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians 168

"For it has been made known to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of the household of Chloe." Lest they begin to deny it, he brings forward witnesses, and lest it seem as though he is inventing them, he names them, saying: "from the household of Chloe" (there was a house in Corinth called Chloe's). He also calls them "brethren": for although their sin was evident, nothing prevented him from calling them brethren. However, he did not say who exactly informed him, but pointed to the whole household in general, so as not to arm them against those who had informed.

"That there are contentions among you." Revealing what he has heard from others, he uses a softer expression — "contentions," but when he speaks in his own person, he calls the same thing "divisions" (1 Cor. 1:10), which is much worse than "contentions."

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Then when he says, It has been reported, he shows why it was necessary to warn them, namely, because they were burdened with the vice of contention. As if to say: It is necessary to induce you to this, because it has been reported to me, my brethren, by Chloe's people, i.e., from a certain villa subject to the jurisdiction of the Corinthians. Or Chloe might be the name of a matron in whose home many believers assembled: that there is quarreling among you contrary to what is said in Pr (20:24): "It is an honor for a man to separate himself from quarrels."

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Inspired by God, Paul wrote to you concerning himself and Cephas and Apollos, because even then you were given to faction. But that factiousness involved you in less guilt, because then you were partisans of highly reputed apostles and of those commended by them.

Epistle to the Corinthians 47.3-4

Of this work the Creator also by the same prophet says, "Behold, I lay in Sion for a foundation a precious stone and honourable; and he that resteth thereon shall not be confounded." Unless it be, that God professed Himself to be the builder up of an earthly work, that so He might not give any sign of His Christ, as destined to be the foundation of such as believe in Him, upon which every man should build at will the superstructure of either sound or worthless doctrine; forasmuch as it is the Creator's function, when a man's work shall be tried by fire, (or) when a reward shall be recompensed to him by fire; because it is by fire that the test is applied to the building which you erect upon the foundation which is laid by Him, that is, the foundation of His Christ. "Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? "

Against Marcion Book 5

Paul exposes their error without mentioning the names of the people responsible. The men whom he names here were all good teachers, but by alluding to them in this way he is really getting at the false apostles. For if the Corinthians were not to boast of their devotion to any of these men, how much more would this be true in the case of false teachers, whose corrupt doctrine he refers to next?

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

Next he declares also the kind of contention. "That each one of you saith, I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas." "I say, contentions," saith he, "I mean, not about private matters, but of the more grievous sort, of the Church. And yet they were not speaking about himself, nor about Peter, nor about Apollos; but he signifies that if these were not to be leaned on, much less others. For that they had not spoken about them, he saith further on: "And these things I have transferred in a figure unto myself and Apollos, that ye may learn in us not to go beyond the things which are written." For if it were not right for them to call themselves by the name of Paul, and of Apollos, and of Cephas, much less of any others. If under the Teacher and the first of the Apostles, and one that had instructed so much people, it were not right to enroll themselves, much less under those who were nothing. By way of hyperbole then, seeking to withdraw them from their disease, he sets down these names. Besides, he makes his argument less severe, not mentioning by name the rude dividers of the Church, but concealing them, as behind a sort of masks, with the names of the Apostles.

"I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas." Not esteeming himself before Peter hath he set his name last, but preferring Peter to himself, and that greatly. He arranged his statement in the way of climax, that he might not be supposed to do this for attack, and then mentions Apollos, and then Cephas. Not therefore to magnify himself did he do this, but in speaking of wrong things he administers the requisite correction in his own person first.

But that those who addicted themselves to this or that man were in error, is evident. And rightly he rebukes them, saying, "Ye do not well in that ye say, 'I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas.'" But why did he add, "And I of Christ?" For although those who addicted themselves to men were in error, not surely those who dedicated themselves unto Christ. But this was not his charge, that they called themselves by the Name of Christ, but that they did not all call themselves by that Name alone. And I think that he added this of himself, wishing to make the accusation more grievous, and to point out that by this rule Christ must be considered as belonging to one party only: although they were not so using the Name themselves. For that this was what he hinted at he declared in the sequel.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 3

In reality the Corinthians called themselves after other teachers, but Paul uses his own name and that of Apollos and Peter in order to make his point. By adding the name of Christ to the rest, he showed them how ridiculous the whole conflict was.

Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians 168

Not some say this, but "among you." The Corinthians, however, did not actually say this, but the apostle gives such a turn of phrase, wishing to show that if it is unforgivable to call oneself followers of Paul and of Cephas, then all the more so of the names of others. "I am of Cephas." He mentioned Peter after himself not in order to exalt himself, but showing him greater preference, just as he mentioned Christ after. In general, in matters that ought not to be, he mentions his own person first. "And I am of Christ." He does not reproach them for saying "I am of Christ," but for the fact that not all say this; or rather, he added this on his own, wishing to make the rebuke stronger and to show that in such a case even Christ is appropriated by one party, although the Corinthians did not actually do this.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Then he specifies the nature of the contention when he says: What I mean is, i.e., the contention consists in this, that every one of you gives himself a name derived from the person by whom he was baptized and instructed, and says: I belong to Paul, because he had been baptized and instructed by Paul; another says: I belong to Apollos, who had preached to the Corinthians (Ac 19); still another says: and I belong to Cephas, i.e., Peter, to whom it had been said: "You shall be called Cephas, which is interpreted Peter" (Jn. 1:42). Now they made these statements, because they thought that they received a better baptism from a better baptizer, as though the virtue of the minister had an influence on the one baptized. Finally, others say: I belong to Christ, Who alone gives grace, because the grace of Christ alone works in Christ's baptism: "He upon whom you shall see the Spirit descending and remaining upon him, he it is that baptizes with the Holy Spirit" (Jn. 1:33). Accordingly, the baptized are called Christians from Christ alone and not Paulians from Paul: "Only let us be called by your name" (Is 4:1).

In order to avoid this error the Greeks are said to have used the following formula in baptism: "Let Christ's servant, Nicholas, be baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," to show that a man is not baptized interiorly, unless he is baptized by Christ. But because a man also baptizes, as a minister and member of Christ, the Church uses this formula in baptizing: "I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit," which is more in keeping with the formula given by Christ, Who said to the disciples: "Teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matt 28:19), where He also calls the apostles baptizers. It is according to this command that the minister says: "I baptize you."

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

By believing different things about Christ, the people have divided him. One person thought that Christ was a mere man, another that he was only God. One says that he was foretold by the prophets, while another denies it.Paul starts with himself, so that nobody will think that he is disparaging the status of others. If Christ died for us, how can we attribute his grace and blessing to men, thereby doing him a grave injustice?

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

"Is Christ divided?" What he saith comes to this: "Ye have cut in pieces Christ, and distributed His body." Here is anger! here is chiding! here are words full of indignation! For whenever instead of arguing he interrogates only, his doing so implies a confessed absurdity.

But some say that he glanced at something else, in saying, "Christ is divided:" as if he had said, "He hath distributed to men and parted the Church, and taken one share Himself, giving them the other." Then in what follows, he labors to overthrow this absurdity, saying, "Was Paul crucified for you, or were ye baptized into the name of Paul?" Observe his Christ-loving mind; how thenceforth he brings the whole matter to a point in his own name, shewing, and more than shewing, that this honor belongs to no one. And that no one might think it was envy which moved him to say these things, therefore he is constantly putting himself forward. Observe, too, his considerate way, in that he saith not, "Did Paul make the world? did Paul from nothing produce you into being?" But only those things which belonged as choice treasures to the faithful, and were regarded with great solicitude - those he specifies, the Cross, and Baptism, and the blessings following on these. For the loving-kindness of God towards men is shewn by the creation of the world also: in nothing, however, so much as by the condescension through the Cross. And he said not, "did Paul die for you?" but, "was Paul crucified?" setting down also the kind of death.

"Or were ye baptized into the name of Paul?" Again, he saith not, "did Paul baptize you?" For he did baptize many: but this was not the question, by whom they had been baptized, but, into whose name they had been baptized! For since this also was a cause of schisms, their being called after the name of those who baptized them, he corrects this error likewise saying, "Were ye baptized into the name of Paul?" "Tell me not," saith he, "who baptized, but into whose name. For not he that baptizeth, but he who is invoked in the Baptism, is the subject of enquiry. For this is He who forgives our sins."

And at this point he stays the discourse, and does not pursue the subject any further. For he saith not, "Did Paul declare to you the good things to come? Did Paul promise you the kingdom of heaven?" Why, then, I ask, doth he not add these questions also? Because it is not all as one, to promise a kingdom and to be crucified. For the former neither had danger nor brought shame; but the latter, all these. Moreover, he proves the former from the latter: for having said, (Romans 8:32) "He that spared not His own Son," he adds, "How shall He not with Him also freely give us all things?" And again, (Romans 5:10) "For if when we were enemies we were reconciled unto God by the death of His Son, much more being reconciled, we shall be saved." This was one reason for his not adding what I mentioned. The one were in promise; the other had already come to pass.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 3

"Is Christ divided?" Why have you divided Christ? Why have you torn apart His body? A speech filled with anger. Some, however, understood the words "is Christ divided?" in this way: has Christ divided the Church from the people and taken one part for Himself, while giving the other part to them?

"Was Paul crucified for you?" By this he refutes their unreasonable behavior, and mentions his own name, so that they would not think he mentioned the names of others out of envy. He did not say: did Paul create or bring you from non-being into being? But, what is much more, showing the ineffable love of Christ for mankind, he speaks of the cross. He also did not say: "did Paul die," but: "was crucified," pointing thereby to the supposed dishonor of the death.

"Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?" And I, he says, baptized many, but in the name of Christ. He speaks of baptism because the cause of the division was also that they called themselves by the names of those who baptized them. But the point is not who baptized, but in whose name one baptizes; for it is Christ who forgives sins, not the one who baptizes.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Then when he says, Is Christ divided, he gives the reason for this warning that there should be no schisms and contentions among them: first, on the part of baptism; secondly, on the part of doctrine (v. 17b). As to the first he does three things: first, he mentions the mistake which follows from their contention; secondly, why that mistake follows (v. 13b); thirdly, he dismisses a false surmise (v. 14).

He says, therefore: I have said that everyone of you says, I belong to Paul; from which it follows that Christ is divided.

This can be understood in one way as though he were saying: Inasmuch as there is contention among you, Christ is divided from you, because He dwells only in peace: "His place is in peace" (Ps 76:3); "Your iniquities have made a separation between you and your God" (Is 59:2). But it is better understood of him as saying: Inasmuch as you believe that a baptism performed by a better minister is better, it follows that Christ, Who principally and interiorly baptizes, is divided, i.e., differs in His power and effect, depending on the differing ministers. But this is false, because it says in Eph (4:5): "One Lord, one faith, one baptism." An even better interpretation is to understand the Apostle as saying that inasmuch as you attribute to others the things that are exclusively Christ's, you divide Christ by forming many Christs, which is contrary to what is stated in Matt (23:10): "One is your master, Christ"; "Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God and there is no other" (Is 45:22).

For it should be noted that there are two powers proper to Christ in the sacrament of baptism: One is the divine power, by which He and the Father and the Holy Spirit cleanse from sin interiorly. This cannot be communicated to any creature. The other is the power proper to His human nature, which is the power of excellence in the sacraments and consists of four things: one is that He instituted the sacraments; the second is that He can produce the effect of the sacraments without the sacraments; the third is that the merit of His passion works in baptism and the other sacraments; the fourth is that the sacraments are conferred by calling on His name. Now he could have shared this power of excellence with His ministers and particularly the fourth, namely, that baptism be consecrated in their names, but He reserved it for Himself; otherwise schism would arise in the Church, for people would suppose that there are as many baptisms as baptizers. According to Augustine this is why John the Baptist confessed that he did not know whether Christ would keep this power for Himself.

Then when he says, Was Paul crucified, he shows that their mistake follows from their error of supposing that there are diverse baptisms, depending on the different baptizers; for this would be so, if baptism derived its power from the baptizers and not from Christ alone.

He shows this in two ways. First, on the part of Christ's passion, in virtue of which baptism works, as it says in Rom (6:3): "Know you not that all who are baptized in Christ Jesus are baptized in his death?" Accordingly, he says: Was Paul crucified for you? As if to say: Were Paul's sufferings the cause of our salvation, so that baptism depends on him for its saving power? As if to say: Certainly not. For Christ alone is the one by Whose sufferings and death our salvation is wrought: "It is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation not perish" (Jn. 11:50); "One has died for all" (2 Cor 5:14).

On the other hand, the Apostle seems to say the opposite in Col (1:24): "I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, the church." I answer that Christ's sufferings benefited us not only by their example: "Christ also suffered for us, leaving you an example that you should follow in his steps" (1 Pt 2:21), but also by their merit and efficacy, inasmuch as we have been redeemed and sanctified by his blood: "So Jesus also suffered outside the gate in order to sanctify the people through his own blood" (Heb 13:12). But the sufferings of others benefit us only as an example: "If we are afflicted, it is for your comfort and salvation" (2 Cor 1:6).

Secondly, he shows the same thing from the power of Christ's name invoked in baptism; hence he adds: or were you baptized in the name of Paul? As if to say: No. For as it is stated in Ac (4:12): "There is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved." Hence, too, Is (26:8) says: "Your name and your remembrance are the desire of the soul."

But it seems that men are not baptized in Christ's name, for it is commanded in Matt (28:19): "Teach all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." The answer is that in the early Church, because Christ's name was much hated, the apostles were inspired by the Holy Spirit to baptize in the name of Christ. Yet, as Ambrose says, the whole Trinity is understood in the name of Christ. For "Christ" means anointed, which implies not only the Son Who is anointed, but the anointing itself, which is the Holy Spirit, and the one who anoints, namely, the Father as Ps 45 (v.8) says: "God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows." But now that Christ's name is great among the Gentiles from the rising of the sun to its setting (Mal 1:11), the Church uses the formula first instituted by Christ, baptizing in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Nevertheless, everyone baptized in this form is baptized in the name of Him Who is truly Son of God: "That we may be in his true Son, Jesus Christ" (1 Jn. 5:30). Furthermore, all faithful are baptized in the name of Christ; hence they are called Christians, for "as many of you as have been baptized in Christ alone, have put on Christ" (Gal 3:27). Therefore, if the sufferings of Christ alone [si solius Christi passio], if the name of Christ alone [si solius Christi nomen], confers the power to be saved on the baptized, then it is from Christ alone [verum esse proprium esse Christo] that baptism has the power to sanctify. Consequently, anyone who attributes this to others divides Christ into many parts.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

But they roll back an objection from that apostle himself, in that he said, "For Christ sent me not to baptize; " , as if by this argument baptism were done away! For if so, why did he baptize Gaius, and Crispus, and the house of Stephanas? However, even if Christ had not sent him to baptize, yet He had given other apostles the precept to baptize. But these words were written to the Corinthians in regard of the circumstances of that particular time; seeing that schisms and dissensions were agitated among them, while one attributes everything to Paul, another to Apollos. For which reason the "peace-making" apostle, for fear he should seem to claim all gifts for himself, says that he had been sent "not to baptize, but to preach." For preaching is the prior thing, baptizing the posterior. Therefore the preaching came first: but I think baptizing withal was lawful to him to whom preaching was.

On Baptism

For I offer you withal, for your investigation, this very question: Whether there were in the first Epistle others, too, who "wholly saddened" the apostle by "acting disorderly," and "were wholly saddened" by him, through incurring (his) "rebuke," according to the sense of the second Epistle; of whom some particular one may in that (second Epistle) have received pardon. Direct we, moreover, our attention to the entire first Epistle, written (that I may so say) as a whole, not with ink, but with gall; swelling, indignant, disdainful, comminatory, invidious, and shaped through (a series of) individual charges, with an eye to certain individuals who were, as it were, the proprietors of those charges? For so had schisms, and emulations, and discussions, and presumptions, and elations, and contentions required, that they should be laden with invidiousness, and rebuffed with curt reproof, and filed down by haughtiness, and deterred by austerity. And what kind of invidiousness is the pungency of humility? "To God I give thanks that I have baptized none of you, except Crispus and Gaius, lest any say that I have baptized in mine own name."

On Modesty

These Corinthians were like the Novatianists and the Donatists of today, who claim baptism for themselves and do not recognize anybody else’s. Those who are so baptized glory in the names of Novatian and Donatus, having been deprived of the name of Christ. Crispus and Gaius are called as witnesses, because although they were baptized by Paul, they never suggested that he should be given any glory because of it.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

14–15

"I thank God that I baptized none of you but Crispus and Gaius." "Why are you elate at having baptized, when I for my part even give thanks that I have not done so!" Thus saying, by a kind of divine art he does away with their swelling pride upon this point; not with the efficacy of the baptism, (God forbid,) but with the folly of those who were puffed up at having been baptizers: first, by showing that the Gift is not theirs; and, secondly, by thanking God therefore. For Baptism truly is a great thing: but its greatness is not the work of the person baptizing, but of Him who is invoked in the Baptism: since to baptize is nothing as regards man's labor, but is much less than preaching the Gospel. Yea, again I say, great indeed is Baptism, and without baptism it is impossible to obtain the kingdom. Still a man of no singular excellence is able to baptize, but to preach the Gospel there is need of great labor.

He states also the reason, why he giveth thanks that he had baptized no one. What then is this reason? "Lest anyone should say that ye were baptized into my own name." Why, did he mean that they said this in those other cases? Not at all; but, "I fear," saith he, "lest the disease should proceed even to that. For if, when insignificant persons and of little worth baptize, a heresy ariseth, had I, the first announcer of Baptism, baptized many, it was likely that they forming a party, would not only call themselves by my name, but also ascribe the Baptism to me." For if from the inferiors so great an evil arose, from those of higher order it would perhaps have gone on to something far more grievous.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 3

Why, he says, do you boast that you baptize, when I thank God that I did not baptize? He says this not in order to diminish the importance of baptism, but in order to restrain the Corinthians, who boasted of baptism. For baptism is an important matter, but to baptize is not an important one.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Then when he says, I am thankful, he dismisses a false surmise. For since he had said, Was Paul then crucified for you, someone might suppose that though he had not baptized in his own name, he did baptize many people as a minister. In regard to this he does three things: first, he gives thanks for having baptized only a few; secondly, after naming the few, he adds certain others (v. 16); thirdly, he gives the reason why he did not baptize many (v. 17).

He says, therefore: I give God thanks that I baptized none of you but Crispus. "Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue believed in the Lord with all his house" (Ac 18:8) and Gaius, to whom John's third epistle is written.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

I say this not because it was actually so, but out of fear that the disease might reach such a degree. For if division arose when baptism was performed by insignificant people, then if I, who preached baptism, had baptized, some would certainly have agreed to attribute the baptism to me.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

But because thanksgiving has no place except for blessings received, the Apostle shows why he gives thanks in this case when he continues: lest anyone should say that you were baptized in my name. For holy men desire that their good deeds not be taken as an occasion of error or sin by others. And because the Corinthians had fallen into the error of naming themselves from the baptizer and saying, I belong to Paul and to Apollos, he thanked God that such an error had not been occasioned by his ministry. That is why he was careful to say that he had baptized those who were immune from this error.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Then, having abashed those who were unsound in this respect and subjoining, "I baptized also the house of Stephanas," he again drags down their pride, saying besides, "I know not whether I baptized any other." For by this he signifies that neither did he seek much to enjoy the honor accruing hereby from the multitude, nor did he set about this work for glory's sake.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 3

"I also baptized the household of Stephanas." That is, all who were in the house of Stephanas. He was a great and most illustrious man in Corinth.

"And whether I baptized anyone else, I do not know." For me, he says, it is so unflattering to baptize that I do not even remember whether I baptized anyone else. So how can you take pride in baptism?

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Then when he says, I baptized also, he mentions the others he had baptized, lest anything less than the truth appear in his words; hence he adds: I baptized also the household of Stephanas. Then because man's memory is unreliable in regard to particular facts, he adds: Beyond that, I do not know, i.e., do not recall, whether I baptized anyone else.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

But they roll back an objection from that apostle himself, in that he said, "For Christ sent me not to baptize; " , as if by this argument baptism were done away! For if so, why did he baptize Gaius, and Crispus, and the house of Stephanas? However, even if Christ had not sent him to baptize, yet He had given other apostles the precept to baptize. But these words were written to the Corinthians in regard of the circumstances of that particular time; seeing that schisms and dissensions were agitated among them, while one attributes everything to Paul, another to Apollos. For which reason the "peace-making" apostle, for fear he should seem to claim all gifts for himself, says that he had been sent "not to baptize, but to preach." For preaching is the prior thing, baptizing the posterior. Therefore the preaching came first: but I think baptizing withal was lawful to him to whom preaching was.

On Baptism

That the kingdom of God is not in the wisdom of the world, nor in eloquence, but in the faith of the cross, and in virtue of conversation. In the first Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: "Christ sent me to preach, not in wisdom of discourse, lest the cross of Christ should become of no effect. For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who perish; but to those who are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and I will reprove the prudence of the prudent. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? Since indeed, in the wisdom of God, the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. Because the Jews desire signs, and the Greeks seek for wisdom: but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews indeed a stumbling-block, and to the Gentiles foolishness; but to them that are called, Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God." And again "Let no man deceive himself. If any man think that he is wise among you, let him become a fool to this world, that he may be wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, Thou shall rebuke the wise in their own craftiness." And again: "The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are foolish."

Treatise XII. Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews.

Because it is a greater thing to preach the gospel than to baptize, Paul says that he was sent to do the former, not the latter. Not everyone who baptizes is competent to preach the gospel, for the words used at baptism are an established formula. When Cornelius became a believer, the apostle Peter gave orders that he should be baptized along with his household, but he did not bother to do it himself when he had his assistants standing by. It was because Christian preaching does not need elaborate refinement of verbal expression that fishers, who were uneducated, were chosen to preach the gospel. In that way the truth of the message would be its own recommendation, and it would not depend on the cleverness or ingenuity of human wisdom. The false apostles were doing just that, and moreover they were omitting the things which the world does not believe, like the virgin birth of Christ and his resurrection from the dead.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

And not by these only, but also by the next words, he greatly represses their pride. And therefore it was that Paul had it put into his hand.

And why, not being sent to baptize, did he baptize? Not in contention with Him that sent him, but in this instance laboring beyond his task. For he saith not, "I was forbidden" but, "I was not sent for this, but for that which was of the greatest necessity." For preaching the Gospel is a work perhaps for one or two; but baptizing, for everyone endowed with the priesthood. For a man being instructed and convinced, to take and baptize him is what any one whatever might do: for the rest, it is all effected by the will of the person drawing near, and the grace of God. But when unbelievers are to be instructed, there must be great labor, great wisdom. And at that time there was danger also annexed. In the former case the whole thing is done, and he is convinced, who is on the point of initiation: and it is no great thing when a man is convinced, to baptize him. But in the latter case the labor is great, to change the deliberate will, to alter the turn of mind, and to tear up error by the roots, and to plant the truth in its place.

Not that he speaks out all this, neither doth he argue in so many words that Baptism has no labor, but that preaching has. For he knows how always to subdue his tone, whereas in the comparison with heathen wisdom he is very earnest, the subject enabling him to use more vehemency of language.

Not therefore in opposition to Him that sent him did he baptize; but, as in the case of the widows, though the apostles had said, (Acts 6:2) "it is not fit that we should leave the Word of God and serve tables," he discharged the office of a deacon, "Let the Elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially they who labor in the word and in teaching." For as to teach the wrestlers in the games is the part of a spirited and skilful trainer, but to place the crown on the conquerors head may be that of one who cannot even wrestle, (although it be the crown which adds splendor to the conqueror,) so also in Baptism. It is impossible to be saved without it, yet it is no great thing which the baptizer doth, finding the will ready prepared.

"Not in wisdom of words, lest the Cross of Christ should be made of none effect."

Having brought down the swelling pride of those who were arrogant because of their baptizing, he changes his ground afterwards to meet those who boasted about heathen wisdom, and against them he puts on his armor with more vehemency. For to those who were puffed up with baptizing he said, "I give thanks that I baptized no one;" and, "for Christ sent me not to baptize." He speaks neither vehemently nor argumentatively, but, having just hinted his meaning in a few words, passeth on quickly. But here at the very outset he gives a severe blow, saying, "Lest the Cross of Christ be made void." Why then pride thyself on a thing which ought to make thee hide thy face? Since, if this wisdom is at war with the Cross and fights with the Gospel, it is not meet to boast about it, but to retire with shame. For this was the cause why the Apostles were not wise; not through any weakness of the Gift, but lest the Gospel preached suffer harm. The sort of people therefore above mentioned were not those employed in advocating the Word: rather they were among its defamers. The unlearned men were the establishers of it. This was able to check vain glory, this to repress arrogance, this to enforce moderation.

"But if it was 'not by wisdom of speech,' why did they send Apollos who was eloquent?" It was not, he replies, through confidence in his power of speech, but because he was (Acts 18:24, 29) "mighty in the Scriptures," and "confuted the Jews." And besides the point in question was that the leaders and first disseminators of the word were not eloquent; since these were the very persons to require some great power, for the expulsion of error in the first instance; and then, namely at the very outset, was the abundant strength needed. Now He who could do without educated persons at first, if afterwards some being eloquent were admitted by Him, He did so not because He wanted them, but because He would make no distinctions. For as he needed not wise men to effect whatever He would, so neither, if any were afterwards found such, did He reject them on that account.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 3

Paul did not usurp the functions of the lower offices when he was able to exercise the higher ones. It would be as if nowadays a bishop or even a priest were to do the work of a deacon.

Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians 1

Anyone can baptize if he is a priest, but preaching is a gift given to few, and it must not be confused with mere eloquence, which is purely superficial.

Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians 169

"For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel." Preaching the Gospel is far more difficult and required an especially steadfast soul; for to persuade a person and turn him away from ancestral traditions, and moreover amid dangers, is the work of a great and courageous soul. But to receive one prepared for baptism and baptize him, anyone who held the priesthood could do. But if he was not sent to baptize, then how did he baptize? He was not sent for this as his primary purpose; but neither was he forbidden to baptize. He was sent for a more important work; yet he was not forbidden to perform the less important one as well.

"Not in the wisdom of word, lest the cross of Christ be made void." Having overthrown the arrogance of those who boasted in baptism, he now turns to those who were puffed up with worldly wisdom, and says: (Christ) sent me to preach the gospel "not in wisdom of speech," that is, not with eloquence and refined words, lest the cross or the preaching of the cross should suffer harm and degradation; for what does "lest it be made void" mean? That is, lest it prove useless and vain. Indeed, if the apostles had preached with wisdom of speech, some might have said that they persuaded by the power of words, and not by the power of what was preached; and this would have been a degradation and harm to the Crucified One. But now, preaching with simplicity, they show that the power of the Crucified One accomplishes everything. The cross is also made void in another way. For example, a Greek asks me about something divine that surpasses our understanding. If I try to prove it to him by means of syllogisms and worldly wisdom, I will prove weak; for no intellect can adequately represent divine things. Thus my weakness will appear to be the weakness of the preaching, and by this the cross itself will be made void, because it will appear futile and vain.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Then when he says, For Christ did not, he gives the reason why he baptized so few, saying: For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel.

But this seems to be in opposition to the Lord's command: "Teach all nations; baptizing them" (Matt 28:19). The answer is that Christ sent the apostles to do both, but in such a way that they preached in person, as they said in Ac (6:2): "It is not right that we should give up preaching the word of God to serve tables." But they baptized through their ministers, and they did this because the diligence or virtue of the baptizer contributes nothing in baptism, for it is indifferent whether baptism be given by a greater or lesser personage. But in the preaching of the gospel the wisdom and virtue of the preacher contributes a great deal; consequently, the apostles, being better qualified, exercised the office of preaching in person. In the same way it is said of Christ (Jn. 4:2) that He Himself did not baptize but His disciples did; of Him it says in Lk (4:43): "I must preach the good news of the kingdom of God to the other cities also, for I was sent for the purpose," and in Is (61:1): "The Lord has anointed me to bring good tidings to the afflicted."

After condemning their strife with a reason based on baptism, the Apostle disapproves of it again with a reason based on doctrine. For some of the Corinthians gloried in the doctrine of false apostles, who corrupt the truth of the faith with elegant words and reasons born of human wisdom. First, therefore, the Apostle says that this method is not suited for teaching the faith; secondly, he shows that he did not employ this method of teaching, when he was among them (c. 2). As to the first he does two things: first, he states his proposition; secondly, he explains it (v. 17b).

He says, therefore: I have stated that Christ sent me to preach the Gospel, but not to preach it with eloquent wisdom, i.e., the worldly wisdom which makes men verbose, inasmuch as it inclines them to employ many vain reasons: "The more words, the more vanity" (Ec 6:11); "Mere talk tends only to want" (Pr 14:23). Or by eloquent wisdom he means rhetoric, which teaches elegant speech by which men are sometimes drawn to assent to error and falsity: "By fair and flattering words they deceive the hearts of the simple-minded" (Rom 16:18); and under the figure of a harlot, which stands for heretical doctrine, it is said: "You will be saved from the adventuress with her smooth words" (Pr 2:16).

But on the other hand it says in Is (33:19): "You will see no more the insolent people," namely, in the Catholic Church, "the people of an obscure speech which you cannot comprehend." But because the Greek version has logos, which signifies reason and speech, it might be more fitting to interpret eloquent wisdom of human reason, because the things of faith transcend human reason: "Matters too great for human understanding have been shown you" (Sir 3:25).

But the fact that many teachers in the Church have used human reason and human wisdom as well as elegant words would seem to be contrary to this. For Jerome says in a letter to Magnus, a Roman orator, that all the teachers of the faith have crammed their books with an elegant portion of philosophical doctrines and sciences, so that one is at a loss whether to admire their worldly learning more or their knowledge of the Scriptures. And Augustine in the book On Christian Doctrine says: "There are churchmen who have treated of divine matters not only with wisdom but with elegance." The answer is that it is one thing to teach in eloquent wisdom, however you take it, and another to use it to teach eloquent wisdom in teaching. A person teaches in eloquent wisdom, when he takes the eloquent wisdom as the main source of his doctrine, so that he admits only those things which contain eloquent wisdom and rejects the others which do not have eloquent wisdom: and this is destructive of the faith. But one uses eloquent wisdom, when he builds on the foundations of the true faith, so that if he finds any truths in the teachings of the philosophers, he employs them in the service of the faith. Hence Augustine says in the book On Christian Doctrine that if philosophers have uttered things suited to our faith, they should not be feared but taken from them as from an unjust possessor for our use. Again, in the same book he says: "Since the faculty of eloquent speech which has great power to win a person over to what is base or to what is right, why not use it to fight for the truth, if evil men misuse it for sin and error?"

Then when he says, lest the cross of Christ, he proves his statement. First, on the part of the matter; secondly, of those who teach (v. 26). In regard to the first he does three things: first, he shows that the method of teaching by eloquent wisdom is not suited to the Christian faith; secondly, he proves something he had presupposed (v. 18); thirdly, he clarifies the proof (v. 22).

As to the first point it should be noted that even in philosophical doctrines the same method does not suit every doctrine; hence the forms of speech must fit the material, as it says in Ethics I. Now a particular method of teaching is unsuited to the subject matter, when that method destroys the chief element in the subject matter; for example, in purely intelligible matters to employ metaphorical proofs, which do not go beyond the imagination and leave the hearer stranded in images, as Boethius says in the book On the Trinity. But the chief element in the doctrines of the Catholic faith is salvation effected by the cross of Christ; hence in (2:2) he says: "For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified." On the other hand, a person who depends chiefly on eloquent wisdom when he teaches, to that extent makes the cross of Christ void. Therefore, to teach in eloquent wisdom is not suited to the Christian faith. Consequently, he says: lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power, i.e., lest in trying to preach in eloquent wisdom, faith in the power of Christ's cross be made void: "Then is the stumbling block of the cross made void" (Gal 5:11); "Remember how they said, 'Rase it, rase it!' Down to its foundation" (Ps 137:7).

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

My spirit bows in adoration to the cross, which is a stumbling-block to those who do not believe, but is to you for salvation and eternal life.

Second Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians (Syriac)

For that fan they explain to be the cross (Stauros), which consumes, no doubt, all material objects, as fire does chaff, but it purifies all them that are saved, as a fan does wheat. Moreover, they affirm that the Apostle Paul himself made mention of this cross in the following words: "The doctrine of the cross is to them that perish foolishness, but to us who are saved it is the power of God." And again: "God forbid that I should glory in anything save in the cross of Christ, by whom the world is crucified to me, and I unto the world."

Against Heresies (Book 1, Chapter 3)

Now, both the people (of Israel) by their transgression of His laws, and the whole race of mankind by their neglect of natural duty, had both sinned and rebelled against the Creator. Marcion's god, however, could not have been offended, both because he was unknown to everybody, and because he is incapable of being irritated. What grace, therefore, can be had of a god who has not been offended? What peace from one who has never experienced rebellion? "The cross of Christ," he says, "is to them that perish foolishness; but unto such as shall obtain salvation, it is the power of God and the wisdom of God."

Against Marcion Book 5

Who was capable of destroying the plague of ignorance, darkness and destruction? Not a prophet, nor an apostle, nor any other righteous man. Rather there had to be a divine power coming down from heaven, capable of dying on behalf of us all, so that by his death there might be a defense against the devil.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians 1.6.8-12

To the sick and gasping even wholesome meats are unpleasant, friends and relations burdensome; who are often times not even recognized, but are rather accounted intruders. Much like this often is the case of those who are perishing in their souls. For the things which tend to salvation they know not; and those who are careful about them they consider to be troublesome. Now this ensues not from the nature of the thing, but from their disease. And just what the insane do, hating those who take care of them, and besides reviling them, the same is the case with unbelievers also. But as in the case of the former, they who are insulted then more than ever compassionate them, and weep, taking this as the worst symptom of the disease in its intense form, when they know not their best friends; so also in the case of the Gentiles let us act; yea more than for our wives let us wail over them, because they know not the common salvation. For not so dearly ought a man to love his wife as we should love all men, and draw them over unto salvation; be a man a Gentile, or be he what he may. For these then let us weep; for "the word of the Cross is to them foolishness," being itself Wisdom and Power. For, saith he, "the word of the Cross to them that perish is foolishness."

For since it was likely that they, the Cross being derided by the Greeks, would resist and contend by aid of that wisdom, which came (forsooth) of themselves, as being disturbed by the expression of the Greeks; Paul comforting them saith, think it not strange and unaccountable, which is taking place. This is the nature of the thing, that its power is not recognized by them that perish. For they are beside themselves, and behave as madmen; and so they rail and are disgusted at the medicines which bring health.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 4

But what sayest thou, O man? Christ became a slave for thee. "having taken the form of a slave," and was crucified, and rose again. And when thou oughtest for this reason to adore Him risen and admire His loving kindness; because what neither father, nor friend, nor son, did for thee, all this the Lord wrought for thee, the enemy and offender-when, I say, thou oughtest to admire Him for these things, callest thou that foolishness, which is full of so great wisdom? Well, it is nothing wonderful; for it is a mark of them that perish not to recognize the things which lead to salvation. Be not troubled, therefore, for it is no strange nor unaccountable event, that things truly great are mocked at by those who are beside themselves. Now such as are in this mind you cannot convince by human wisdom. Nay, if you want so to convince them, you do but the contrary. For the things which transcend reasoning require faith alone. Thus, should we set about convincing men by reasonings, how God became man, and entered into the Virgin's womb, and not commit the matter unto faith, they will but deride the more. Therefore they who inquire by reasonings, it is they who perish.

And why speak I of God? for in regard of created things, should we do this, great derision will ensue. For suppose a man, wishing to make out all things by reasoning; and let him try by thy discourse to convince himself how we see the light; and do thou try to convince him by reasoning, Nay, thou canst not: for if thou sayest that it suffices to see by opening the eyes, thou hast not expressed the manner, but the fact. For "why see we not," one will say, "with our hearing, and with our eyes hear? And why hear we not with the nostril, and with the hearing smell?" If then, he being in doubt about these things, and we unable to give the explanation of them, he is to begin laughing, shall not we rather laugh him to scorn? Wherefore, leaving this unto God's power and boundless wisdom, let us be silent.

Just so with regard to the things of God; should we desire to explain them by the wisdom which is from without, great derision will ensue, not from their infirmity, but from the folly of men. For the great things of all no language can explain.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 4

Now observe: when I say, "He was crucified;" the Greek saith, "And how can this be reasonable? Himself He helped not when undergoing crucifixion and sore trial at the moment of the Cross: how then after these things did He rise again and help others? For if He had been able, before death was the proper time to display His power: and actually in the midst of horrors He should have shewn Himself above all horrors; and being in the enemy's hold should have overcome; this cometh of Infinite Power. For as in the case of the fish, to suffer no harm from the monster, than if he had not been swallowed at all;-so also in regard of Christ; His not dying would not have been so inconceivable, as that having died He should loose the bands of death. Say not then, "why did He not help Himself on the Cross?" for he was hastening on to close conflict with death himself. He descended not from the Cross, not because He could not, but because He would not. For Him Whom the tyranny of death restrained not, how could the nails of the Cross restrain?

But these things, though known to us, are not so as yet to the unbelievers. Wherefore he said that "the word of the Cross is to them that perish foolishness; but to us who are saved it is the power of God."

Homily on 1 Corinthians 4

"For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing." There were in Corinth unbelievers who subjected the cross to mockery and said: truly, it is foolish to preach a crucified God, for if He were God, He would not have allowed Himself to be crucified; and since He could not escape death, how could He have risen from the dead? The faithful, it seems, opposed them with their own wisdom, indignant that those people were blaspheming the cross. Therefore he also says: do not consider this strange; for that which is given by God for salvation seems foolishness to those who are perishing. By "the word of the cross" he means the preaching of the cross, or of Christ crucified.

"For us who are being saved, it is the power of God." For us, he says, who are not perishing but being saved, it is the power of God. But the cross also shows wisdom. It shows power in that by death He destroyed death, for if the one who has fallen conquers, this is a sign of the greatest power; and wisdom — in that He saved the perishing in precisely this manner.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Then when he says, for the word of the cross, he proves that the cross of Christ is made void by the method of teaching which consists in eloquent wisdom. First he gives the proof; secondly, he gives the reason for his statements (v. 19).

He says, therefore: The reason I have said that the cross of Christ is made void, if the teachings of the faith are presented in eloquent wisdom is that the word of the Cross, i.e., the announcing of Christ's cross is folly, i.e., it appears foolish, to them that are perishing, i.e., to unbelievers, who consider themselves wise according to the world, for the preaching of the cross of Christ contains something which to worldly wisdom seems impossible; for example, that God should die or that Omnipotence should suffer at the hands of violent men. Furthermore, that a person not avoid shame when he can, and other things of this sort, are matters which seem contrary to the prudence of this world. Consequently, when Paul was preaching such things, Festus said: "Paul, you are beside yourself: much learning makes you mad" (Ac 26:24). And Paul himself says below that the word of the Cross actually does contain foolishness; he adds: but to us that are being saved, namely, Christ's faithful who are saved by Him: "He will save his people from their sins" (Matt 1:21), it is the power of God, because they recognize in the cross of Christ God's power, by which He overcame the devil and the world: "The Lion of the tribe of Judah, has conquered" (Rev. 5:5), as well as the power they experience in themselves, when together with Christ they die to their vices and concupiscences, as it says in Gal (5:24): "Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires." Hence it says in Ps (110:10): "The Lord sends forth from Zion your mighty scepter"; "Virtue went out of him and healed all" (Lk 6:19).

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

The Cross is more poetical than the Union Jack, because it is simpler. The more simple an idea is, the more it is fertile in variations. Francis Thompson could have written any number of good poems on the Cross, because it is a primary symbol. The number of poems which Mr. Rudyard Kipling could write on the Union Jack is, fortunately, limited, because the Union Jack is too complex to produce luxuriance.

All Things Considered, A Dead Poet (1908)

And of such it is said, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise: I will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent." The apostle accordingly adds, "Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this world?" setting in contradistinction to the scribes, the disputers of this world, the philosophers of the Gentiles. "Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?" which is equivalent to, showed it to be foolish, and not true, as they thought.

The Stromata Book 1

Now, both the people (of Israel) by their transgression of His laws, and the whole race of mankind by their neglect of natural duty, had both sinned and rebelled against the Creator. Marcion's god, however, could not have been offended, both because he was unknown to everybody, and because he is incapable of being irritated. What grace, therefore, can be had of a god who has not been offended? What peace from one who has never experienced rebellion? "The cross of Christ," he says, "is to them that perish foolishness; but unto such as shall obtain salvation, it is the power of God and the wisdom of God." And then, that we may known from whence this comes, he adds: "For it is written, `I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.' "

Against Marcion Book 5

But how remote is our (Catholic) verity from the artifices of this heretic, when it dreads to arouse the anger of God, and firmly believes that He produced all things out of nothing, and promises to us a restoration from the grave of the same flesh (that died) and holds without a blush that Christ was born of the virgin's womb! At this, philosophers, and heretics, and the very heathen, laugh and jeer. For "God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise" -that God, no doubt, who in reference to this very dispensation of His threatened long before that He would "destroy the wisdom of the wise."

Against Marcion Book 5

By doing this, God shows that actions speak louder than words. Commentary on Paul’s Epistles.

"For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the prudence of the prudent will I reject." Nothing from himself which might give offence, does he advance up to this point; but first he comes to the testimony of the Scripture, and then furnished with boldness from thence, adopts more vehement words.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 4

Paul speaks about the wisdom of this world and not merely the eloquence, for God has given it also. It was God who divided the languages and gave each one its own character. It was he who gave the Greek language its splendor. But those who abuse these gifts have prepared food for deception and have preached false tales. What Paul objects to is not their eloquence as such but the false teaching which lies behind it.

Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians 170-71

Having said that the unbelieving wise men perish, he confirms this with Scripture: for it says, "the wisdom of his wise men shall perish" (Isa. 29:14), namely, of the external ones, that is, in the wisdom of this world there is no understanding (this is no longer wisdom), and the understanding of those who consider themselves intelligent and knowledgeable has been rejected.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Then when he says, For it is written, he states the reason for the above: first, he tells why the word of the cross is folly to men; secondly, why this folly is the power of God to them that are saved (v. 21). As to the first he does two things: first, he adduces a text which foretells what is asked; secondly, he shows that it has been fulfilled (v. 20).

It should be noted in regard to the first point that anything good in itself cannot appear foolish to anyone, unless there is a lack of wisdom. This, therefore is the reason why the word of the cross, which is salutary for believers, seems foolish to others, namely, because they are devoid of wisdom; and this is what he says: For it is written: I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the cleverness (prudence) of the clever (prudent) I will thwart. This can be taken from two places: for it is written in Ob (v.8): "Will I not destroy the wise men out of Edom, and understanding out of Mount Esau?"; but it is more explicit in Is (29:14): "The wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the discernment of their discerning men shall be hid." Now wisdom and prudence are different: for wisdom is knowledge of divine things; hence it pertains to contemplation; "The fear of the Lord is wisdom" (Jb 28:28). Prudence, however, is, properly speaking, knowledge of human things; hence it says in Pr (10:23): "Wisdom is prudence to a man," namely, because knowledge of human affairs is called wisdom. Hence, the Philosopher also says in Ethics VI that prudence is the right understanding of things to be done; and so prudence pertains to reason.

Yet it should be noted that men, however evil, are not altogether deprived of God's gifts; neither are God's gifts in them destroyed. Consequently, he does not say absolutely, "I will destroy the wisdom," because "all wisdom is from the Lord God" (Sir 1:1), but I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, i.e., which the wise of this world have invented for themselves against the true wisdom of God, because as it says in Jas (3:15): "This is not wisdom, descending from above; but earthly, sensual, devilish." Similarly, he does not say, "I will reject prudence," for God's wisdom teaches true prudence, but the prudence of the prudent, i.e., which is regarded as prudent by those who esteem themselves prudent in worldly affairs, so that they cling to the goods of this world, or because "the prudence of the flesh is death" (Rom 8:6). Consequently, because of their lack of wisdom they suppose that it is impossible for God to become man and suffer death in His human nature; but due to a lack of prudence they consider it unbecoming for a man to endure the cross, "despising the shame" (Heb 12:2).

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

To those that do not believe, but to us salvation and life eternal. "Where is the wise man? where the disputer? ". The cross of Christ is indeed a stumbling-block to those that do not believe, but to the believing it is salvation and life eternal. "Where is the wise man? where the disputer? "

Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians

My spirit has become an offscouring of the cross, which is a stumbling block to those who are unbelievers, but to us it is salvation and life eternal. Where is the wise man? Where is the debater? Where is the boasting of those who are called prudent?

Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians

For since the soul became too enfeebled for the apprehension of realities, we needed a divine teacher. The Saviour is sent down—a teacher and leader in the acquisition of the good—the secret and sacred token of the great Providence. "Where, then, is the scribe? where is the searcher of this world? Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?" And again, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent," plainly of those wise in their own eyes, and disputatious.

The Stromata Book 5

For thenceforward Simon Magus, just turned believer, (since he was still thinking somewhat of his juggling sect; to wit, that among the miracles of his profession he might buy even the gift of the Holy Spirit through imposition of hands) was cursed by the apostles, and ejected from the faith. Both he and that other magician, who was with Sergius Paulus, (since he began opposing himself to the same apostles) was mulcted with loss of eyes. The same fate, I believe, would astrologers, too, have met, if any had fallen in the way of the apostles. But yet, when magic is punished, of which astrology is a species, of course the species is condemned in the genus. After the Gospel, you will nowhere find either sophists, Chaldeans, enchanters, diviners, or magicians, except as clearly punished. "Where is the wise, where the grammarian, where the disputer of this age? Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this age? " You know nothing, astrologer, if you know not that you should be a Christian. If you did know it, you ought to have known this also, that you should have nothing more to do with that profession of yours which, of itself, fore-chants the climacterics of others, and might instruct you of its own danger. There is no part nor lot for you in that system of yours. He cannot hope for the kingdom of the heavens, whose finger or wand abuses the heaven.

On Idolatry

But, again, how happens it, that in the system of a Lord who is so very good, and so profuse in mercy, some carry off salvation, when they believe the cross to be the wisdom and power of God, whilst others incur perdition, to whom the cross of Christ is accounted folly;-(how happens it, I repeat, ) unless it is in the Creator's dispensation to have punished both the people of Israel and the human race, for some great offence committed against Him, with the loss of wisdom and prudence? What follows will confirm this suggestion, when he asks, "Hath not God infatuated the wisdom of this world? " and when he adds the reason why: "For after that, in the wisdom of God, the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe." But first a word about the expression "the world; " because in this passage particularly, the heretics expend a great deal of their subtlety in showing that by world is meant the lord of the world. We, however, understand the term to apply to any person that is in the world, by a simple idiom of human language, which often substitutes that which contains for that which is contained. "The circus shouted," "The forum spoke," and "The basilica murmured," are well-known expressions, meaning that the people in these places did so. Since then the man, not the god, of the world in his wisdom knew not God, whom indeed he ought to have known (both the Jew by his knowledge of the Scriptures, and all the human race by their knowledge of God's works), therefore that God, who was not acknowledged in His wisdom, resolved to smite men's knowledge with His foolishness, by saving all those who believe in the folly of the preached cross.

Against Marcion Book 5

One may no doubt be wise in the things of God, even from one's natural powers, but only in witness to the truth, not in maintenance of error; (only) when one acts in accordance with, not in opposition to, the divine dispensation. For some things are known even by nature: the immortality of the soul, for instance, is held by many; the knowledge of our God is possessed by all. I may use, therefore, the opinion of a Plato, when he declares, "Every soul is immortal." I may use also the conscience of a nation, when it attests the God of gods. I may, in like manner, use all the other intelligences of our common nature, when they pronounce God to be a judge. "God sees," (say they); and, "I commend you to God." But when they say, "What has undergone death is dead," and, "Enjoy life whilst you live," and, "After death all things come to an end, even death itself; "then I must remember both that "the heart of man is ashes," according to the estimate of God, and that the very "Wisdom of the world is foolishness," (as the inspired word) pronounces it to be. Then, if even the heretic seek refuge in the depraved thoughts of the vulgar, or the imaginations of the world, I must say to him: Part company with the heathen, O heretic! for although you are all agreed in imagining a God, yet while you do so in the name of Christ, so long as you deem yourself a Christian, you are a different man from a heathen: give him back his own views of things, since he does not himself learn from yours. Why lean upon a blind guide, if you have eyes of your own? Why be clothed by one who is naked, if you have put on Christ? Why use the shield of another, when the apostle gives you armour of your own? It would be better for him to learn from you to acknowledge the resurrection of the flesh, than for you from him to deny it; because if Christians must needs deny it, it would be sufficient if they did so from their own knowledge, without any instruction from the ignorant multitude. He, therefore, will not be a Christian who shall deny this doctrine which is confessed by Christians; denying it, moreover, on grounds which are adopted by a man who is not a Christian. Take away, indeed, from the heretics the wisdom which they share with the heathen, and let them support their inquiries from the Scriptures alone: they will then be unable to keep their ground. For that which commends men's common sense is its very simplicity, and its participation in the same feelings, and its community of opinions; and it is deemed to be all the more trustworthy, inasmuch as its definitive statements are naked and open, and known to all. Divine reason, on the contrary, lies in the very pith and marrow of things, not on the surface, and very often is at variance with appearances.

On the Resurrection of the Flesh

The wisdom of this world and the wisdom of God are not the same thing. God’s wisdom is the true one, without any additives to corrupt it. The world’s wisdom is foolish, even though the simplicity of God’s wisdom makes those who have it appear foolish in the eyes of the world. Believers have received this divine wisdom and thus in this world appear to be fools.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians 1.7.1-7

Wherefore, if they were not wise who were so called, nor those of later times, who did not hesitate to confess their want of wisdom, what remains but that wisdom is to be sought elsewhere, since it has not been found where it was sought. But what can we suppose to have been the reason why it was not found, though sought with the greatest earnestness and labour by so many intellects, and during so many ages, unless it be that philosophers sought for it out of their own limits? And since they traversed and explored all parts, but nowhere found any wisdom, and it must of necessity be somewhere, it is evident that it ought especially to be sought there where the title of folly appears; under the covering of which God hides the treasury of wisdom and truth, lest the secret of His divine work should be exposed to view.

The Divine Institutes Book 4

In this matter the wise and the prudent are silent, for they have rejected the wisdom of God.

In this matter the wise and the prudent are silent, for they have rejected the wisdom of God.

On the Trinity 2.12

Here Paul attacks the Jews as much as the Gentiles, because their scribes and doctors of the law think that it is foolish to believe that God has a Son. Gentiles also laugh at this, but the Jews’ unbelief is based on the fact that the matter is not openly stated in the law, whereas the Gentiles think it is silly because the reasoning of the world does not accept it, claiming that nothing can be made without sexual union. The debater of this age is a man who thinks that the world is governed by the conjunction of the stars and that births and deaths are brought about by the twelve signs of the zodiac. Is there anything more foolish than the belief that the Creator does not care about the world he has made? What would be the point of making it in that case? It is because they see some people enjoying life and others not, because they see the righteous suffering while the wicked boast, that they have come to believe that God does not care. But to say this is to say that God is malevolent and unjust.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

"Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? Where is the wise? Where the Scribe? Where the disputer of this world? Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?" Having said, "It is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise," He subjoins demonstration from facts, saying, "Where is the wise? where the Scribe?" at the same time glancing at both Gentiles and Jews. For what sort of philosopher, which among those who have studied logic, which of those knowing in Jewish matters, hath saved us and made known the truth? Not one. It was the fisherman's work, the whole of it.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 4

The wise man is the Greek, the scribe is the Jew.

Pauline Commentary from the Greek Church

Having brought forward testimony from Scripture, he then proves his thought from deeds, and exposes both the Greeks with the words "where is the wise man," that is, the philosopher, and the Jews with the words "where is the scribe?" And he called "disputers" those who base everything on syllogisms and investigations. None of them saved us; but the fishermen led us out of error. The expression "has not God turned the wisdom of this world into foolishness?" stands in place of: He showed that it was foolish, because it could not find the truth.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Then when he says, Where is the wise man? He shows that the prophecy about the destruction of human wisdom and prudence has been fulfilled. First, he presents the proving reason in the form of a question; secondly, he draws the conclusion (v. 20b).

He says, therefore: Where is the wise? As if to say: He is not found among the faithful who are saved. By the wise he understands one who searches for the secret causes of nature: "How will you say to Pharaoh: 'I am the son of the wise?'" (Is 19:11). This refers to the Gentiles, who pursue the wisdom of this world. Where is the scribe? i.e., skilled in the Law: and this is referred to the Jews. As if to say: Not among the believers. Where is the debater of this age? Who through prudence examines what is suitable to human life in the affairs of this world. As if to say: He is not found among the believers. This refers to both Jews and Gentiles: "The sons of Hagar, who seek for understanding on the earth" (Bar 3:23). The Apostle seems to have based this question on Is (33:18): "Where is the learned?" for which he substitutes "the wise"; "where is the one that ponders the words of the law?" for which he substitutes the debater of this age, because it is mainly little ones who are customarily instructed in matters pertaining to the moral life.

Then when he says, Has not God, he draws the conclusion contained in the question. As if to say: since those who are considered the wise of this world have failed in the way of salvation, has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world, i.e., proved it foolish, inasmuch as those versed in this wisdom have been so found so foolish that they have not discovered the road to salvation: "Every man is stupid and without knowledge" (Jer 51:17); "Your wisdom and your knowledge have led you astray" (Is 47:10).

Another way to interpret this is as if he were saying: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise and the prudence of the prudent I will reject," i.e., I will strike it first from my preachers, as it says in Pr (30:1): "Surely I am too stupid to be a man. I have not the understanding of a man." Where is the wise? As if to say: He is not found among the preachers: "You have hid these things from the wise and prudent, and revealed them to little ones" (Matt 11:25). Has not God made, i.e., proved, foolish the wisdom of this world by achieving what it considered impossible, namely, that a dead man rise, and other things of this sort.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

And if you ask the cause of their seeming wisdom, he will say, "because of the blindness of their heart;" since "in the wisdom of God," that is, as proclaimed by the prophets, "the world knew not," in the wisdom "which spake by the prophets," "Him," that is, God—"it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching"—what seemed to the Greeks foolishness—"to save them that believe. For the Jews require signs," in order to faith; "and the Greeks seek after wisdom," plainly those reasonings styled "irresistible," and those others, namely, syllogisms.

The Stromata Book 1

Paul says that the wisdom of God is teaching in conformity with the Lord, which will show that true philosophy is conveyed through the Son.

The Stromata Book 1

What follows will confirm this suggestion, when he asks, "Hath not God infatuated the wisdom of this world? " and when he adds the reason why: "For after that, in the wisdom of God, the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe."

Against Marcion Book 5

The Lord had come, of course, to save that which "had perished; " "a Physician." necessary to "the sick" "more than to the whole." This fact He was in the habit both of typifying in parables and preaching in direct statements. Who among men "perishes," who falls from health, but he who knows not the Lord? Who is "safe and sound," but he who knows the Lord? These two classes-"brothers" by birth-this parable also will signify. See whether the heathen have in God the Father the "substance" of origin, and wisdom, and natural power of Godward recognition; by means of which power the apostle withal notes that "in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom knew not God," -(wisdom) which, of course, it had received originally from God.

On Modesty

Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord: the King against the tyrant; not with omnipotent power and wisdom, but with that which is accounted the foolishness

Oration on the Psalms

Since, therefore, human wisdom has no existence (Socrates says in the writings of Plato), let us follow that which is divine, and let us give thanks to God, who has revealed and delivered it to us; and let us congratulate ourselves, that through the divine bounty we possess the truth and wisdom, which, though sought by so many intellects through so many ages, philosophy

Given that men had rejected the contemplation of God and were looking for him in nature and in the material world, making gods for themselves out of mortal men and demons, the loving and general Savior of all, the Word of God, took to himself a body and walked about like a man, in order to meet the senses halfway, so that those who think that God is corporeal might perceive the truth by observing what the Lord accomplishes in his body, and through him recognize the Father.

On the Incarnation of the Word 15

The world has not recognized God but has attributed divine majesty to his creatures and to the elemental powers of the universe, thinking that visible things ought to be worshiped. God has therefore chosen a form of preaching which will seem foolish to such people. Those who reject what the apostles preach will be condemned, while believers are being saved.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

"For seeing that in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom knew not God, it was God's good pleasure through the foolishness of the preaching to save them that believe." The wisdom apparent in those works whereby it was His will to make Himself known. For to this end did he frame them, and frame them such as they are, that by a sort of proportion, from the things which are seen heaven great as it is, not only was made by Him, but made with ease; and that boundless earth, too, was brought into being even as if it had been nothing. Wherefore of the former He saith, "The works of Thy fingers are the heavens," and concerning the earth, "Who hath made the earth as it were nothing." Since then by this wisdom the world was unwilling to discover God, He employed what seemed to be foolishness, i.e. the Gospel, to persuade men; not by reasoning, but by faith. It remains that where God's wisdom is, there is no longer need of man's. For before, to infer that He who made the world such and so great, must in all reason be a God possessed of a certain uncontrollable, unspeakable power; and by these means to apprehend Him;-this was the part of human wisdom. But now we need no more reasonings, but faith alone. For to believe on Him that was crucified and buried, and to be fully persuaded that this Person Himself both rose again and sat down on high; this needeth not wisdom, nor reasonings, but faith. For the Apostles themselves came in not by wisdom, but by faith, and surpassed the heathen wise men in wisdom and loftiness, and that so much the more, as to raise disputings is less than to receive by faith the things of God. For this transcends all human understanding.

But how did He "destroy wisdom?" Being made known to us by Paul and others like him, He shewed it to be unprofitable. For towards receiving the evangelical proclamation, neither is the wise profited at all by wisdom, nor the unlearned injured at all by ignorance. But the shepherd and the rustic will more quickly receive this, once for all both repressing all doubting thoughts and delivering himself unto faith. For the matter is not of that kind; this way of knowing God being far greater than the other. You see then, faith and simplicity are needed, and this we should seek every where, and prefer it before the wisdom which is from without. For "God," saith he, "hath made wisdom foolish."

But what is, "He hath made foolish?" He hath shewn it foolish in regard of receiving the faith. For since they prided themselves on it, He lost no time in exposing it. For what sort of wisdom is it, when it cannot discover the chief of things that are good? He caused her therefore to appear foolish, after she had first convicted herself. For if when discoveries might have been made by reasoning, she proved nothing, now when things proceed on a larger scale, how will she be able to accomplish aught? now when there is need of faith alone, and not of acuteness? You see then, God hath shewn her to be foolish.

It was His good pleasure, too, by the foolishness of the Gospel to save; foolishness, I say, not real, but appearing to be such. For that which is more wonderful yet is His having prevailed by bringing in, not another such wisdom more excellent than the first, but what seemed to be foolishness. He cast out Plato for example, not by means of another philosopher of more skill, but by an unlearned fisherman. For thus the defeat became greater, and the victory more splendid.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 4

Paul enumerates two or even three different kinds of wisdom here. First there is what the world calls folly, wisdom greater than the others. Then there is the wisdom given to human beings by which we reason and act, by which we develop and invent things and by which we can know God. Finally, there is a third kind of wisdom, which is found in the contemplation of the creation. The wisdom which is folly to the world is given to us by the Savior, so that people who know God by natural wisdom and who are led to him by contemplating the created order may attain the salvation which neither of these kinds of wisdom can provide and be delivered from error.

Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians 171

He gives the reason why worldly wisdom turned into foolishness. Since in the wisdom manifest in creatures (for heaven and earth and all creation proclaims the Creator: see Ps. 19:2; Rom. 1:20), "the world," that is, those who think in worldly terms, did not know God (evidently because wisdom of the kind seen in eloquence hindered it from doing so), it pleased God to save believers through the simplicity of preaching (which only seemed like foolishness but was not truly so). Thus the Greeks had as their teacher the wisdom of God, that is, the wisdom discerned in creatures, yet they did not know God, because they were guided by the wisdom that consists in eloquence, which is not true wisdom.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Then when he says, For since, he states the reason why the faithful are saved by the foolishness of preaching. He had already stated that the word of the cross is foolishness to them that perish, but the power of God to them that are saved; for it pleased God by the folly of what we preach, i.e., by the preaching which human wisdom considers foolish, to save them that believe; and this because the world, i.e., worldly men, knew not God by wisdom taken from things of the world; and this in the wisdom of God. For divine wisdom, when making the world, left indications of itself in the things of the world, as it says in Sirach (1:10): "He poured wisdom out upon all his works," so that the creatures made by God's wisdom are related to God's wisdom, whose signposts they are, as a man's words are related to his wisdom, which they signify. And just as a disciple reaches an understanding of the teacher's wisdom by the words he hears from him, so man can reach an understanding of God's wisdom by examining the creatures He made, as it says in Romans (1:20): "His invisible nature has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made." But on account of the vanity of his heart man wandered from the right path of divine knowledge; hence it says in Jn (1:10): "He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world knew him not." Consequently, God brought believers to a saving knowledge of Himself by other things, which are not found in the natures of creatures; on which account worldly men, who derive their notions solely from human things, considered them foolish: things such as the articles of faith. It is like a teacher who recognizes that his meaning was not understood from the words he employed, and then tried to use other words to indicate what he meant.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

And that is the reason why the myths and the philosophers were at war until Christ came. That is why the Athenian democracy killed Socrates out of respect for the gods; and why every strolling sophist gave himself the airs of a Socrates whenever he could talk in a superior fashion of the gods; and why the heretic Pharaoh wrecked his huge idols and temples for an abstraction and why the priests could return in triumph and trample his dynasty under foot; and why Buddhism had to divide itself from Brahminism, and why in every age and country outside Christendom there has been a feud for ever between the philosopher and the priest. It is easy enough to say that the philosopher is generally the more rational; it is easier still to forget that the priest is always the more popular. For the priest told the people stories; and the philosopher did not understand the philosophy of stories. It came into the world with the story of Christ.

The Everlasting Man, The Escape from Paganism (1925)

As, then, he who is fond of hunting captures the game after seeking, tracking, scenting, hunting it down with dogs; so truth, when sought and got with toil, appears a delicious thing. Why, then, you will ask, did you think it fit that such an arrangement should be adopted in your memoranda? Because there is great danger in divulging the secret of the true philosophy to those, whose delight it is unsparingly to speak against everything, not justly; and who shout forth all kinds of names and words indecorously, deceiving themselves and beguiling those who adhere to them. "For the Hebrews seek signs," as the apostle says, "and the Greeks seek after wisdom."

The Stromata Book 1

Since then the man, not the god, of the world in his wisdom knew not God, whom indeed he ought to have known (both the Jew by his knowledge of the Scriptures, and all the human race by their knowledge of God's works), therefore that God, who was not acknowledged in His wisdom, resolved to smite men's knowledge with His foolishness, by saving all those who believe in the folly of the preached cross. "Because the Jews require signs," who ought to have already made up their minds about God, "and the Greeks seek after wisdom," who rely upon their own wisdom, and not upon God's. If, however, it was a new god that was being preached, what sin had the Jews committed, in seeking after signs to believe; or the Greeks, when they hunted after a wisdom which they would prefer to accept? Thus the very retribution which overtook both Jews and Greeks proves that God is both a jealous God and a Judge, inasmuch as He infatuated the world's wisdom by an angry and a judicial retribution.

Against Marcion Book 5

That He also is both the wisdom and the power of God, Paul proves in his first Epistle to the Corinthians. "Because the Jews require a sign, and the Creeks seek after wisdom: but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews indeed a stumbling-block, and to the Gentiles foolishness; but to them that are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God."

Treatise XII. Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews.

The Jews seek signs because they do not reject the possibility that things like this can happen. What they want to know is whether it has actually occurred, like Aaron’s rod, which sprouted and bore fruit, and Jonah who spent three days and nights in the belly of the whale before being spewed out alive. But the Greeks seek wisdom, refusing to believe anything which does not accord with human reason.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

22–24

Next, to shew the power of the Cross, he saith, "For Jews ask for signs and Greeks seek after wisdom: but we preach Christ crucified, unto Jews a stumbling-block, and unto Greeks foolishness; but unto them that are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the Power of God, and the Wisdom of God."

Vast is the import of the things here spoken! For he means to say how by contraries God hath overcome, and how the Gospel is not of man. What he saith is something of this sort. When, saith he, we say unto the Jews, Believe; they answer, Raise the dead, Heal the demoniacs, Shew unto us signs. But instead thereof what say we? That He was crucified, and died, who is preached. And this is enough, not only to fail in drawing over the unwilling, but even to drive away those even who are willing. Nevertheless, it drives not away, but attracts and holds fast and overcomes. Again; the Greeks demand of us a rhetorical style, and the acuteness of sophistry. But preach we to these also the Cross, and that which in the case of the Jews seems weakness, this in the case of the Greeks is foolishness. Wherefore, when we not only fail in producing what they demand, but also produce the very opposites of their demand; (for the Cross has not merely no appearance of being a sign sought out by reasoning, but even the very annihilation of a sign;-is not merely deemed no proof of power, but a conviction of weakness;-not merely no display of wisdom, but a suggestion of foolishness;)-when therefore they who seek for signs and wisdom not only receive not the things which they ask, but even hear the contrary to what they desire, and then by means of contraries are persuaded;-how is not the power of Him that is preached unspeakable? As if to some one tempest-tost and longing for a haven, you were to shew not a haven but another wilder portion of the sea, and so could make him follow with thankfulness? Or as if a physician could attract to himself the man that was wounded and in need of remedies, by promising to cure him not with drugs, but with burning of him again! For this is a result of great power indeed. So also the Apostles prevailed, not simply without a sign, but even by a thing which seemed contrary to all the known signs. Which thing also Christ did in the case of the blind man. For when He would heal him, He took away the blindness by a thing that increased it: i.e. He put on clay. As then by means of clay He healed the blind man, so also by means of the Cross He brought the world to Himself. That certainly was adding an offence, not taking an offence away. So did He also in creation, working out things by their contraries. With sand, for instance, He walled in the sea, having made the weak a bridle to the strong. He placed the earth upon water, having taken order that the heavy and the dense should be borne on the soft and fluid. By means of the prophets again with a small piece of wood He raised up iron from the bottom. In like manner also with the Cross He hath drawn the world to Himself. For as the water beareth up the earth, so also the Cross beareth up the world. You see now, it is proof of great power and wisdom, to convince by means of the things which tell directly against us. Thus the Cross seems to be matter of offence; and yet far from offending, it even attracts.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 4

The Jews want signs, because that is what the prophets gave them, but even then they do not believe. The Greeks, on the other hand, want clever academic arguments.

Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians 1

22–23

Paul wants to show how God produced opposite effects by opposite means, and says: when I tell a Jew "believe," he immediately demands signs to confirm the preaching, but we preach Christ crucified; and this not only does not show signs, but on the contrary appears to be weakness, and yet this very thing, which seems feeble and opposite to what the Jew demands, brings him to faith, which demonstrates the great power of God. Again: the Greeks seek wisdom from us; but we preach the cross to them, which is to preach a crucified God; this would seem to be foolishness, yet they too are persuaded by it. Therefore, is this not proof of the greatest power, when they are persuaded by the very opposite of what they themselves demand?

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Then when he says, For the Jews, he explains his proof: first in regard to the statement that the word of the cross is foolishness to them that perish; secondly, in regard to the statement that to them that are saved it is the power of God (v. 24). As to the first he does two things: first, he mentions the differing interests of those that perish; secondly, from this he assigns the reason for what he had said (v. 23).

Among those that perish, i.e., unbelievers, some were Jews and some Gentiles. He says, therefore: I have said that the word of the cross is foolish to them that perish, and this because the Jews demand signs, for the Jews were used to being instructed in a divine manner: "He led him about and taught him" (Dt 32:10), in the sense that God's teachings were accompanied by many marvels: "In the sight of their fathers he wrought marvels in the land of Egypt" (Ps 78:12). Consequently, they require signs from everyone asserting a doctrine: "Master, we would see a sign from you" (Matt 12:38); "We have not seen our signs" (Ps 74:9). But the Greeks seek wisdom, being interested in the pursuit of wisdom: the wisdom, I say, which is founded on the reasons of worldly things and of which it is said: "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom" (Jer 9:23). By the Greeks are understood all the Gentiles who received worldly wisdom from the Greeks. When they sought wisdom, therefore, they wished to judge every doctrine proposed to them according to the rule of human wisdom.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

For as it was not possible that the man who had once for all been conquered, and who had been destroyed through disobedience, could reform himself, and obtain the prize of victory; and as it was also impossible that he could attain to salvation who had fallen under the power of sin,-the Son effected both these things, being the Word of God, descending from the Father, becoming incarnate, stooping low, even to death, and consummating the arranged plan of our salvation, upon whom [Paul], exhorting us unhesitatingly to believe, again says, "Who shall ascend into heaven? that is, to bring down Christ; or who shall descend into the deep? that is, to liberate Christ again from the dead." Then he continues, "If thou shall confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised Him from the dead, thou shall be saved." And he renders the reason why the Son of God did these things, saying, "For to this end Christ both lived, and died, and revived, that He might rule over the living and the dead." And again, writing to the Corinthians, he declares, "But we preach Christ Jesus crucified;" and adds, "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ?"

Against Heresies (Book 3, Chapter 18)

And, of course, it had been meet that the mystery of the passion itself should be figuratively set forth in predictions; and the more incredible (that mystery), the more likely to be "a stumbling-stone," if it had been nakedly predicted; and the more magnificent, the more to be adumbrated, that the difficulty of its intelligence might seek (help from) the grace of God.

An Answer to the Jews

Thus the very retribution which overtook both Jews and Greeks proves that God is both a jealous God and a Judge, inasmuch as He infatuated the world's wisdom by an angry and a judicial retribution. Since, then, the causes are in the hands of Him who gave us the Scriptures which we use, it follows that the apostle, when treating of the Creator, (as Him whom both Jew and Gentile as yet have) not known, means undoubtedly to teach us, that the God who is to become known (in Christ) is the Creator.

Against Marcion Book 5

What has empowered us is belief in Christ crucified. To the extent that we are lacking something in our faith, then we are missing out on what the power of God has to offer us.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians 1.8.1-4

It is a stumbling block to the Jews when they hear Christ calling himself the Son of God yet not observing the sabbath. It is foolishness to the Gentiles because they hear things like the virgin birth and the resurrection being preached but regard them as irrational.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

For the Jews, he says, the Crucified One is a stumbling block; for they stumble over Him, saying: how can He be God who ate and drank both with tax collectors and with sinners and was crucified with robbers? And the Greeks mock this mystery as foolishness, when they hear that only by faith alone, and not by the rational arguments to which they are so attached, can one understand that God was crucified and that the preaching of the cross is not adorned with eloquence.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Then he concludes why the word of the cross is foolishness to them, saying: But we preach Christ crucified, as below (11:26): "You proclaim the Lord's death until he comes," to Jews a stumbling block, because they desired strength working miracles and saw weakness suffering; and to the Gentiles foolishness, because it seemed against the nature of human reason that God should die and that a just and wise man should voluntarily expose himself to a very shameful death.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

For this is the last proof of the miracle; that something so supernatural should have become so natural. I mean that anything so unique when seen from the outside should only seem universal when seen from the inside. I have not minimised the scale of the miracle, as some of our milder theologians think it wise to do. Rather have I deliberately dwelt on that incredible interruption, as a blow that broke the very backbone of history. I have great sympathy with the monotheists, the Moslems, or the Jews, to whom it seems a blasphemy; a blasphemy that might shake the world. But it did not shake the world; it steadied the world. That fact, the more we consider it, will seem more solid and more strange. I think it a piece of plain justice to all the unbelievers to insist upon the audacity of the act of faith that is demanded of them. I willingly and warmly agree that it is, in itself, a suggestion at which we might expect even the brain of the believer to reel, when he realised his own belief. But the brain of the believer does not reel; it is the brains of the unbelievers that reel. We can see their brains reeling on every side and into every extravagance of ethics and psychology; into pessimism and the denial of life; into pragmatism and the denial of logic; seeking their omens in nightmares and their canons in contradictions; shrieking for fear at the far-off sight of things beyond good and evil, or whispering of strange stars where two and two make five. Meanwhile this solitary thing that seems at first so outrageous in outline remains solid and sane in substance. It remains the moderator of all these manias; rescuing reason from the Pragmatists exactly as it rescued laughter from the Puritans. I repeat that I have deliberately emphasised its intrinsically defiant and dogmatic character. The mystery is how anything so startling should have remained defiant and dogmatic and yet become perfectly normal and natural. I have admitted freely that, considering the incident in itself, a man who says he is God may be classed with a man who says he is glass. But the man who says he is glass is not a glazier making windows for all the world. He does not remain for after ages as a shining and crystalline figure, in whose light everything is as clear as crystal.

The Everlasting Man, Conclusion: The Summary of This Book (1925)

Perspicuity accordingly aids in the communication of truth, and logic in preventing us from falling under the heresies by which we are assailed. But the teaching, which is according to the Saviour, is complete in itself and without defect, being "the power and wisdom of God;" and the Hellenic philosophy does not, by its approach, make the truth more powerful; but rendering powerless the assault of sophistry against it, and frustrating the treacherous plots laid against the truth, is said to be the proper "fence and wall of the vineyard." And the truth which is according to faith is as necessary for life as bread; while the preparatory discipline is like sauce and sweetmeats.

The Stromata Book 1

And he is truly a legislator, who not only announces what is good and noble, but understands it. The law of this man who possesses knowledge is the saving precept; or rather, the law is the precept of knowledge. For the Word is "the power and the wisdom of God." Again, the expounder of the laws is the same one by whom the law was given; the first expounder of the divine commands, who unveiled the bosom of the Father, the only-begotten Son.

The Stromata Book 1

One righteous man, then, differs not, as righteous, from another righteous man, whether he be of the Law or a Greek. For God is not only Lord of the Jews, but of all men, and more nearly the Father of those who know Him. For if to live well and according to the law is to live, also to live rationally according to the law is to live; and those who lived rightly before the Law were classed under faith, and judged to be righteous,-it is evident that those, too, who were outside of the Law, having lived rightly, in consequence of the peculiar nature of the voice, though they are in Hades and in ward, on hearing the voice of the Lord, whether that of His own person or that acting through His apostles, with all speed turned and believed. For we remember that the Lord is "the power of God," and power can never be weak.

The Stromata Book 6

In Him, at any rate, and with Him, did (Wisdom) construct the universe, He not being ignorant of what she was making. "Except Wisdom," however, is a phrase of the same sense exactly as "except the Son," who is Christ, "the Wisdom and Power of God," according to the apostle, who only knows the mind of the Father. "For who knoweth the things that be in God, except the Spirit which is in Him? " Not, observe, without Him. There was therefore One who caused God to be not alone, except "alone" from all other gods.

Against Praxeas

When Jews believe in Christ, they understand that he is the power of God. When Greeks believe in him, they understand that he is the wisdom of God. He is God’s power because the Father does everything through him. He is God’s wisdom because God is known through him. It would not be possible for God to be known through anyone who was not from him in the first place. No one has seen the Father except the Son and whomever the Son has chosen to reveal him to.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

Through this description of Christ we derive notions of the divine which make the name an object of reverence for us. Since all creation, both perceptible and imperceptible, came into being through him and is united with him, wisdom is necessarily interwoven with power in connection with the very definition of Christ, the maker of all things.

On Perfection

Note that Paul does not say that the divinity of Christ is God’s power and wisdom, but rather the pattern of the cross.

Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians 1

The power and wisdom of God is not the divinity of Christ as such but the preaching of the cross.

Pauline Commentary from the Greek Church

But perhaps someone is troubled by the silent question of how the Son can be equal to the Father. In this matter, what human nature cannot grasp by wondering, it remains that it should know this to be credible from another wonder. For it has something by which it may briefly answer itself on these matters. For it is established that he himself created the mother in whose virgin womb he was to be created from humanity. What wonder then if he is equal to the Father, who is prior to his mother?

With Paul also attesting, we have learned that Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God. Therefore whoever thinks the Son is lesser detracts particularly from the Father, whose wisdom he confesses to be unequal to him. For what powerful man would calmly bear it if someone said to him: "You are indeed great, but nevertheless your wisdom is less than you"?

Forty Gospel Homilies, Homily 25

For the unbelieving Jews, he says, Christ serves as a stumbling block, and for the unbelieving Greeks He seems foolishness, because both groups do not find in Him the signs and wisdom they seek. But to the "called" among both Jews and Greeks — that is, those called by God as worthy — Christ manifests in Himself both of these things they seek. Why, indeed, do you, O Jew, seek signs? Behold, Christ is the power of God, who works signs. And you, O Greek, what do you say? You seek wisdom? Behold, you have Christ, who is the wisdom of the Father.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Then when he says, But to those who are called, he explains what he meant when he said, to them that are saved it is the power of God.

He says, therefore: It has been stated that we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Gentiles foolishness; but we preach Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God to them that are called, whether Jews or Gentiles, i.e., to those Jews and Gentiles who were called to faith in Christ. They recognize the power of God in Christ's cross, by which devils are overcome, sins forgiven and men saved: "Be exalted, O Lord, in thy strength!" (Ps 21:13). He says this against the Jews, who made a stumbling block of Christ's weakness. They also recognize in it the wisdom of God, inasmuch as He delivered the human race in a most becoming manner by the cross: "Men were taught what pleases thee, and were saved by wisdom" (Wis 9:13).

He is called the power of God and all the wisdom of God by appropriation: the power, because the Father does all things through Him: "All things were made through him" (Jn. 1:3); the wisdom, because the Word, which is the Son, is nothing less than begotten or conceived wisdom: "I came forth from the mouth of the Most High" (Sir 24:5). But it is not to be understood as though God the Father is powerful and wise by begotten power or wisdom, for, as Augustine proves in The Trinity, it would follow that the Father would have being from the Son, because for God to be wise and to be powerful are His very essence.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Moreover, having the spirit of the world, and "in the wisdom of God by wisdom knowing not God," they seem to themselves to be wiser than God; because, as the wisdom of the world is foolishness with God, so also the wisdom of God is folly in the world's esteem. We, however, know that "the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men." Accordingly, God is then especially great, when He is small to man; then especially good, when not good in man's judgment; then especially unique, when He seems to man to be two or more.

Against Marcion Book 2

The very "stumbling-block" which he declares Christ to be "to the Jews," points unmistakeably to the Creator's prophecy respecting Him, when by Isaiah He says: "Behold I lay in Sion a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence." This rock or stone is Christ. This stumbling-stone Marcion retains still. Now, what is that "foolishness of God which is wiser than men," but the cross and death of Christ? What is that "weakness of God which is stronger than men," but the nativity and incarnation of God? If, however, Christ was not born of the Virgin, was not constituted of human flesh, and thereby really suffered neither death nor the cross there was nothing in Him either of foolishness or weakness; nor is it any longer true, that "God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; "nor, again, hath "God chosen the weak things of the world to confound the mighty; "nor "the base things" and the least things "in the world, and things which are despised, which are even as nothing" (that is, things which really are not), "to bring to nothing things which are" (that is, which really are).

Against Marcion Book 5

When Paul speaks of the “foolishness of God,” he is not implying that God is foolish. Rather he is saying that since God’s way of reasoning is in accord with things of the spirit, it confounds the reasoning of this world. It is wiser than human reasoning, because spiritual things are wiser than carnal ones. Spiritual things do not exist through carnal ones, but the other way around. Therefore carnal things are understandable in relation to spiritual ones. Similarly, what belongs to heaven is stronger than what belongs to earth. So what seems like the weakness of God is not really weak at all. Christ appeared to be defeated when he was killed, but he emerged as the victor and turned the reproof back on his persecutors.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

All these things, therefore, Paul bearing in mind, and being struck with astonishment, said that "the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men;" in relation to the Cross, speaking of a folly and weakness, not real but apparent. For he is answering with respect unto the other party's opinion. For that which philosophers were not able by means of reasoning to accomplish, this, what seemed to be foolishness did excellently well. Which then is the wiser, he that persuadeth the many, or he that persuadeth few, or rather no one? He who persuadeth concerning the greatest points, or about matters which are nothing? What great labors did Plato endure, and his followers, discoursing to us about a line, and an angle, and a point, and about numbers even and odd, and equal unto one another and unequal, and such-like spiderwebs; (for indeed those webs are not more useless to man's life than were these subjects;) and without doing good to any one great or small by their means, so he made an end of his life. How greatly did he labor, endeavoring to show that the soul was immortal! and even as he came he went away, having spoken nothing with certainty, nor persuaded any hearer. But the Cross wrought persuasion by means of unlearned men; yea it persuaded even the whole world: and not about common things, but in discourse of God, and the godliness which is according to truth, and the evangelical way of life, and the judgment of the things to come. And of all men it made philosophers: the very rustics, the utterly unlearned. Behold how "the foolishness of God is wiser than men," and "the weakness stronger?" How "stronger?" Because it overran the whole world, and took all by main force, and while men were endeavoring by ten thousands to extinguish the name of the Crucified, the contrary came to pass: that flourished and increased more and more, but they perished and wasted away; and the living at war with the dead, had no power. So that when the Greek calls me foolish, he shows himself above measure foolish: since I who am esteemed by him a fool, evidently appear wiser than the wise. When he calls me weak, then he shows himself to be weaker. For the noble things which publicans and fishermen were able to effect by the grace of God, these, philosophers, and rhetoricians, and tyrants, and in short the whole world, running ten thousand ways here and there, could not even form a notion of. For what did not the Cross introduce? The doctrine concerning the Immortality of the Soul; that concerning the Resurrection of the Body; that concerning the contempt of things present; that concerning the desire of things future. Yea, angels it hath made of men, and all, every where, practice self-denial, and show forth all kinds of fortitude.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 4

But among them also, it will be said, many have been found contemners of death. Tell me who? was it he who drank the hemlock? But if thou wilt, I can bring forward ten thousand such from within the Church. For had it been lawful when persecution befell them to drink hemlock and depart, all had become more famous than he. And besides, he drank when he was not at liberty to drink or not to drink; but willing or against his will he must have done it. What great thing was it then, to do that from necessity, which robbers and man-slayers, having fallen under the condemnation of their judges, have suffered? But with us it is all quite the contrary. For not against their will did the martyrs endure, but of their will, and being at liberty not to suffer; shewing forth fortitude harder than all adamant. This then you see is no great wonder, that he whom I was mentioning drank hemlock; it being no longer in his power not to drink, and also when he had arrived at a very great age. For when he despised life he stated himself to be seventy years old; if this can be called despising. For I for my part could not affirm it: nor, what is more, can anyone else. But show me some one enduring firm in torments for godliness' sake, as I shew thee ten thousand every where in the world. Who, while his nails were tearing out, nobly endured? Who, while his body joints were wrenching asunder? Who, while his body was cut in pieces, member by member? Who, while his bones were forced out by levers? Who, while placed without intermission upon frying-pans? Who, when thrown into a caldron? Show me these instances. For to die by hemlock is all as one with a man's continuing in a state of sleep. Nay even sweeter than sleep is this sort of death, if report say true. Wherefore of the deeds of those nothing is said; but these flourish and daily increase. Which Paul having in mind said, "The weakness of God is stronger than all men."

Homily on 1 Corinthians 4

For that the Gospel is divine, even from hence is evident; namely, whence could it have occurred to twelve ignorant men to attempt such great things? who sojourned in marshes, in rivers, in deserts; who never at any time perhaps had entered into a city nor into a forum;-whence did it occur, to set themselves in array against the whole world? For that they were timid and unmanly, he shews who wrote of them, not apologizing, nor enduring to throw their failings into the shade: which indeed of itself is a very great token of the truth. What then doth he say about them? That when Christ was apprehended, after ten thousand wonders, they fled; and he who remained, being the leader of the rest, denied. Whence was it then that they who when Christ was alive endured not the attack of the Jews; now that He was dead and buried, and as ye say, had not risen again, nor had any talk with them, nor infused courage into them-whence did they set themselves in array against so great a world? Would they not have said among themselves, "what meaneth this? Himself He was not able to save, and will He protect us? Himself He defended not when alive, and will He stretch out the hand unto us now that he is dead? Himself, when alive, subdued not even one nation; and are we to convince the whole world by uttering His Name?" How, I ask, could all this be reasonable, I will not say, as something to be done, but even as something to be imagined? From whence it is plain that had they not seen Him after He was risen, and received most ample proof of his power, they would not have ventured so great a cast.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 4

There is no way that this gospel truth could have been made acceptable to some philosophers and debaters. They follow a way of life that does not stand in the truth but is only an imitation of it. They deceived themselves and others.

Letter 120, to Consentius

He calls the cross foolishness because that is what people thought of it; yet it is wiser than men. For the philosophers occupied themselves with empty and useless subjects, while the cross saved the world. Furthermore, it appears weak, as though the crucified Christ were weak, but in reality He is stronger than men, not only because He flourishes more and more despite the efforts of countless people to extinguish this Name, but also because by this seemingly weak instrument the strong devil was bound. You may, however, understand this also in another way: what is most wise in God is called unwise, that is, foolish, and everything most powerful is called weak, just as His most exalted light is called gloom and darkness.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Then when he says, for the foolishness of God, he assigns the reason for what he had said and tells how something weak and foolish could be the power and wisdom of God, because the foolishness of God is wiser than men. As if to say: Something divine seems to be foolish, not because it lacks wisdom but because it transcends human wisdom. For men are wont to regard as foolish anything beyond their understanding: "Matters too great for human understanding have been shown you" (Sir 3:23). And the weakness of God is stronger than men, because something in God is not called weak on account of a lack of strength but because it exceeds human power, just as He is called invisible, inasmuch as He transcends human sight: "Thou dost show thy strength when men doubt the completeness of thy power" (Wis 12:17). However, this could refer to the mystery of the incarnation, because that which is regarded as foolish and weak in God on the part of the nature He assumed transcends all wisdom and power: "Who is like to you among the strong, O Lord?" (Ex 15:11).

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

But since neither he, nor the chief priests, nor the rulers, nor the eminent of the people, turned to Him [in faith], but, on the contrary, those who sat begging by the highway, the deaf, and the blind, while He was rejected and despised by others, according to what Paul declares, "For you see your calling, brethren, that there are not many wise men among you, not many noble, not many mighty; but those things of the world which were despised has God chosen." Such souls, therefore, were not superior to others on account of the seed deposited in them, nor on this account were they honoured by the Demiurge.

Against Heresies (Book 2, Chapter 19)

What am I to fasten on as the cause of this madness, except the weakness of faith, ever prone, to the concupiscences of worldly joys?-which, indeed, is chiefly found among the wealthier; for the more any is rich, and inflated with the name of "matron," the more capacious house does she require for her burdens, as it were a field wherein ambition may run its course. To such the churches look paltry. A rich man is a difficult thing (to find) in the house of God; and if such an one is (found there), difficult (is it to find such) unmarried.

To His Wife Book 2

26–27

Again; he proved at the same time that the thing is not new, but ancient, as it was presignified and foretold from the beginning. For, "It is written," saith he, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise." Withal he shews that it was neither inexpedient nor unaccountable for things to take this course: (for, "seeing that in the wisdom of God the world," saith he, "knew not God, God was well pleased through the foolishness of preaching to save them which believe:") and that the Cross is a demonstration of ineffable power and wisdom, and that the foolishness of God is far mightier than the wisdom of man. And this again he proves not by means of the teachers, but by means of the disciples themselves. For, "Behold your calling," saith he: that not only teachers of an untrained sort, but disciples also of the like class, were objects of His choice; that He chose "not many wise men" (that is his word) "according to the flesh." And so that of which he is speaking is proved to surpass both in strength and wisdom, in that it convinces both the many and the unwise: it being extremely hard to convince an ignorant person, especially when the discourse is concerning great and necessary things. However, they did work conviction. And of this he calls the Corinthians themselves as witnesses. For, "behold your calling, brethren," saith he: consider; examine: for that doctrines so wise, yea, wiser than all, should be received by ordinary men, testifies the greatest wisdom in the teacher.

But what means, "according to the flesh?" According to what is in sight; according to the life that now is; according to the discipline of the Gentiles. Then, lest he should seem to be at variance with himself, (for he had convinced both the Proconsul, and other wise men, too, we have seen coming over to the Gospel;) he said not, No wise man, but, "Not many wise men." For he did not designedly call the ignorant and pass by the wise, but these also he received, yet the others in much larger number. And why? Because the wise man according to the flesh will not cast away his corrupt doctrine. And as in the case of a physician who might wish to teach certain persons the secrets of his art, those who know a few things, having a bad and perverse mode of practicing the art which they make a point of retaining, would not endure to learn quietly, but they who knew nothing would most readily embrace what was said: even so it was here. The unlearned were more open to conviction, for they were free from the extreme madness of accounting themselves wise. For indeed the excess of folly is in these more than any, these, I say, who commit unto reasoning things which cannot be ascertained except by faith. Thus, suppose the smith by means of the tongs drawing out the red-hot iron; if any one should insist on doing it with his hand, we should vote him guilty of extreme folly: so in like manner the philosophers who insisted on finding out these things for themselves disparaged the faith. And it was owing to this that they found none of the things they sought for.

"Not many mighty, not many noble;" for these also are filled with pride. And nothing is so useless towards an accurate knowledge of God as arrogance, and being nailed down to wealth: for these dispose a man to admire things present, and make no account of the future; and they stop up the ears through the multitude of cares: but "the foolish things of the world God chose:" which thing is the person one meets in the market more of a philosopher than themselves. Wherefore also he said himself, "That He might put to shame the wise." And not in this instance alone hath he done this, also in the case of the other advantages of life. For, to proceed, "the weak things" He chose; not foolish sons only, but needy also, and contemptible and obscure He called, that He might humble those who were in high places.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 5

Paul did not say that there was nobody like this in the church, only that there were not many.

Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians 173

Consider, he says, and examine those called to the faith, and you will find that "not many of you are wise according to the flesh," that is, in outward appearance, in a manner suited to the present life. He did not say: there is not a single wise person, but: "not many," because there were believers even among the wise, for example, the Areopagite, the proconsul, and others whose names are now unknown; some from among the powerful and noble also believed. Therefore he said of all: "not many." So then, behold the power of the preaching, how it taught such wise doctrines to uneducated people, and how worldly wisdom proved to be useless.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

After showing that the method of teaching according to eloquent wisdom does not suit Christian doctrine by reason of its subject matter, the cross of Christ, the Apostle now shows that the same method is not suitable for Christian teaching by reason of the teachers according to Pr (26:7): "A parable is unseemly in the mouth of fools" and Sirach (20:22): "A parable out of a fool's mouth shall be rejected." Therefore, because the first teachers of the faith were not wise in carnal wisdom, it was not suitable for them to teach according to eloquent wisdom. In regard to this he does two things: first, he shows how the first teachers of the faith were not versed in carnal wisdom and suffered from a defect in human affairs; secondly, how this defect was made up for them by Christ (v. 27); thirdly, he assigns the reason (v. 29).

He says, therefore: It has been stated that "the foolishness of God is wiser than men" and you can consider this in your own life; for consider carefully your call, brethren, i.e., how you were called: for you did not approach him by yourselves but you were called by him: "Whom he predestined he also called" (Rom 8:30); "He called you out of the darkness into his marvelous light" (1 Pt 2:9). But he urges them to ponder the manner of their calling by considering the ones by whom they were called, as Is (51:2) says: "Look unto Abraham your father, and to Sarah that bore you." From these ministers of our calling he first of all excludes wisdom when he says: Not many of those by whom you were called were wise according to worldly standards, i.e., in carnal and earthly wisdom: "For this is not wisdom descending from above: but earthly, sensual, devilish" (Jas 3:15); "The children of Hagar also, that search after the wisdom that is of the earth" (Bar 3:23). He says, not many, because some few had been instructed even in worldly wisdom, as he himself and Barnabas, or in the Old Testament Moses, of whom Ac (7:22) says that he had been instructed in all the wisdom of the Egyptians. Secondly, he excludes worldly power when he says: not many powerful, namely, according to the world; hence it says in Jn (7:48): "Have any of the authorities or of the Pharisees believed in him?" Thirdly, he excludes lofty birth when he says: not many were of noble birth. Yet some of them were noble, as Paul himself, who said that he had been born in a Roman city (Ac 22:25), and others referred to in Rom (16:7): "They are men of note among the apostles."

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

If, however, Christ was not born of the Virgin, was not constituted of human flesh, and thereby really suffered neither death nor the cross there was nothing in Him either of foolishness or weakness; nor is it any longer true, that "God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; "nor, again, hath "God chosen the weak things of the world to confound the mighty; "nor "the base things" and the least things "in the world, and things which are despised, which are even as nothing" (that is, things which really are not), "to bring to nothing things which are" (that is, which really are). For nothing in the dispensation of God is found to be mean, and ignoble, and contemptible. Such only occurs in man's arrangement.

Against Marcion Book 5

But (once for all) let Marcion know that the principle term of his creed comes from the school of Epicurus, implying that the Lord is stupid and indifferent; wherefore he refuses to say that He is an object to be feared. Moreover, from the porch of the Stoics he brings out matter, and places it on a par with the Divine Creator. He also denies the resurrection of the flesh,-a truth which none of the schools of philosophy agreed together to hold. But how remote is our (Catholic) verity from the artifices of this heretic, when it dreads to arouse the anger of God, and firmly believes that He produced all things out of nothing, and promises to us a restoration from the grave of the same flesh (that died) and holds without a blush that Christ was born of the virgin's womb! At this, philosophers, and heretics, and the very heathen, laugh and jeer. For "God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise" -that God, no doubt, who in reference to this very dispensation of His threatened long before that He would "destroy the wisdom of the wise."

Against Marcion Book 5

But, Marcion, consider well this Scripture, if indeed you have not erased it: "God hath chosen the foolish things of the world, to confound the wise." Now what are those foolish things? Are they the conversion of men to the worship of the true God, the rejection of error, the whole training in righteousness, chastity, mercy, patience, and innocence? These things certainly are not "foolish." Inquire again, then, of what things he spoke, and when you imagine that you have discovered what they are will you find anything to be so "foolish" as believing in a God that has been born, and that of a virgin, and of a fleshly nature too, who wallowed in all the before-mentioned humiliations of nature? But some one may say, "These are not the foolish things; they must be other things which God has chosen to confound the wisdom of the world." And yet, according to the world's wisdom, it is more easy to believe that Jupiter became a bull or a swan, if we listen to Marcion, than that Christ really became a man.

On the Flesh of Christ

Now, when you contend that the flesh will still have to undergo the same sufferings, if the same flesh be said to have to rise again, you rashly set up nature against her Lord, and impiously contrast her law against His grace; as if it were not permitted the Lord God both to change nature, and to preserve her, without subjection to a law. How is it, then, that we read, "With men these things are impossible, but with God all things are possible; " and again, "God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise? "

On the Resurrection of the Flesh

Who also can be unaware that "the things which are impossible with men are possible with God? " The foolish things also of the world hath God chosen to confound the things which are wise." We have read it all. Therefore, they argue, it was not difficult for God to make Himself both a Father and a Son, contrary to the condition of things among men. For a barren woman to have a child against nature was no difficulty with God; nor was it for a virgin to conceive. Of course nothing is "too hard for the Lord." But if we choose to apply this principle so extravagantly and harshly in our capricious imaginations, we may then make out God to have done anything we please, on the ground that it was not impossible for Him to do it. We must not, however, because He is able to do all things suppose that He has actually done what He has not done. But we must inquire whether He has really done it. God could, if He had liked, have furnished man with wings to fly with, just as He gave wings to kites. We must not, however, run to the conclusion that He did this because He was able to do it. He might also have extinguished Praxeas and all other heretics at once; it does not follow, however, that He did, simply because He was able. For it was necessary that there should be both kites and heretics; it was necessary also that the Father should be crucified.

Against Praxeas

Incredulity, on the other hand, wonders, but does not believe: for the simple acts it wonders at, as if they were vain; the grand results, as if they were impossible. And grant that it be just as you think sufficient to meet each point is the divine declaration which has fore-run: "The foolish things of the world hath God elected to confound its wisdom; " and, "The things very difficult with men are easy with God." For if God is wise and powerful (which even they who pass Him by do not deny), it is with good reason that He lays the material causes of His own operation in the contraries of wisdom and of power, that is, in foolishness and impossibility; since every virtue receives its cause from those things by which it is called forth.

On Baptism

For in other respects, too, injustice in proportion to the enmity it displays against righteousness affords occasion for attestations of that to which it is opposed as an enemy, that so righteousness may be perfected in injustice, as strength is perfected in weakness. For the weak things of the world have been chosen by God to confound the strong, and the foolish things of the world to confound its wisdom. Thus even injustice is employed, that righteousness may be approved in putting unrighteousness to shame.

On Flight in Persecution

The two most “foolish things of the world” are in particular the virgin birth of Christ and his resurrection from the dead. The wise are confounded because they see that what a few of them deny, the many profess to be true. There is no doubt that the opinions of the many faithful take precedence over those of a small number. Likewise, those who are mighty in this world can easily see the so-called weak things of Christ overturning demons and performing miracles. To the world the injuries and sufferings of the Savior are weak things, because the world does not understand that they have become the source of power through Christ who submitted to suffering in order to overcome death.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

Behold, he who clings to earthly substance more than is right refuses to come to the Lord's supper; he who sweats at the labor of curiosity disdains the prepared nourishments of life; he who serves carnal desires rejects the feasts of the spiritual banquet. Therefore, because the proud refuse to come, the poor are chosen. Why is this? Because, according to Paul's words, God chooses the weak things of the world to confound the strong. But it must be noted how those who are called to the supper and come are described: the poor and the feeble. They are called poor and feeble who in their own judgment are weak in their own eyes. For there are poor who are as if strong, who even when placed in poverty are proud. The blind, indeed, are those who have no light of understanding. The lame also are those who do not have right steps in their conduct. But since vices of character are signified in the weakness of the limbs, it is certainly clear that just as those were sinners who when called refused to come, so also these are sinners who are invited and come. But proud sinners are rejected, so that humble sinners may be chosen.

Forty Gospel Homilies, Homily 36

Indeed, for the Greeks it is the greatest shame to see that a common craftsman surpasses them in philosophy, and that the weak and despised humbles the strong and wealthy.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Then when he says, But God chose, he shows that they were lowly according to worldly standards. First, he shows that they lacked wisdom when he says: what is foolish in the world, i.e., those whom the world would consider foolish, God chose for the offices of preaching, namely, ignorant fishermen: "Understanding that they were illiterate and ignorant men, they wondered" (Ac 4:13); "Where is the learned? Where is he that ponders the words of the law?" (Is 33:18). And this to shame the wise, i.e., those who trusted in the wisdom of the world, whereas they themselves did not know the truths revealed to the simple: "Thou hast hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to babes" (Matt 11:25); "Where then are your wise men? Let them tell you what the Lord of hosts has purposed" (Is 19:12).

Secondly, he shows that they lacked power, saying: what is weak in the world, i.e., men with no power in the world, such as peasants, plebeians, God chose for the office of preaching: "I will deliver them into your hand by the servants of the governors of the districts" (1 Kgs 20:13); and in Pr (9:3) it says that "wisdom has sent out her maids to call from the highest places in the town." Weakness is designated by both of these shortcomings in the first preachers; and this to shame the strong, i.e., the powerful of this world: "The haughtiness of man shall be humbled, and the pride of men shall be brought low" (Is 2:17).

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

27–28

The modern world, when it praises its little Caesars, talks of being strong and brave: but it does not seem to see the eternal paradox involved in the conjunction of these ideas. The strong cannot be brave. Only the weak can be brave; and yet again, in practice, only those who can be brave can be trusted, in time of doubt, to be strong. The only way in which a giant could really keep himself in training against the inevitable Jack would be by continually fighting other giants ten times as big as himself. That is by ceasing to be a giant and becoming a Jack. Thus that sympathy with the small or the defeated as such, with which we Liberals and Nationalists have been often reproached, is not a useless sentimentalism at all, as Mr. Wells and his friends fancy. It is the first law of practical courage. To be in the weakest camp is to be in the strongest school.

Heretics, Ch. 5: Mr. H. G. Wells and the Giants (1905)

27–28

The truth is that the tradition of Christianity (which is still the only coherent ethic of Europe) rests on two or three paradoxes or mysteries which can easily be impugned in argument and as easily justified in life. One of them, for instance, is the paradox of hope or faith—that the more hopeless is the situation the more hopeful must be the man. Stevenson understood this, and consequently Mr. Moore cannot understand Stevenson. Another is the paradox of charity or chivalry that the weaker a thing is the more it should be respected, that the more indefensible a thing is the more it should appeal to us for a certain kind of defence. Thackeray understood this, and therefore Mr. Moore does not understand Thackeray.

Heretics, Ch. 9: The Moods of Mr. George Moore (1905)

27–28

We are always ready to make a saint or prophet of the educated man who goes into cottages to give a little kindly advice to the uneducated. But the medieval idea of a saint or prophet was something quite different. The mediaeval saint or prophet was an uneducated man who walked into grand houses to give a little kindly advice to the educated. The old tyrants had enough insolence to despoil the poor, but they had not enough insolence to preach to them. It was the gentleman who oppressed the slums; but it was the slums that admonished the gentleman.

Heretics, Ch. 19: Slum Novelists and the Slums (1905)

27–28

If you wish to find the past preserved, follow the million feet of the crowd. At the worst the uneducated only wear down old things by sheer walking. But the educated kick them down out of sheer culture.

Tremendous Trifles, XXXIII. The Prehistoric Railway Station (1909)

27–28

And then the higher culture. I know that culture. I would not set any man free for it if I could help it. The effect of it on the rich men who are free for it is so horrible that it is worse than any of the other amusements of the millionaire—worse than gambling, worse even than philanthropy. It means thinking the smallest poet in Belgium greater than the greatest poet of England. It means losing every democratic sympathy. It means being unable to talk to a navvy about sport, or about beer, or about the Bible, or about the Derby, or about patriotism, or about anything whatever that he, the navvy, wants to talk about. It means taking literature seriously, a very amateurish thing to do. It means pardoning indecency only when it is gloomy indecency. Its disciples will call a spade a spade; but only when it is a grave-digger's spade. The higher culture is sad, cheap, impudent, unkind, without honesty and without ease. In short, it is "high." That abominable word (also applied to game) admirably describes it.

What's Wrong with the World, Woman (1910)

27–28

But the real historic strength of England, physical and moral, has never had anything to do with this athletic specialism; it has been rather hindered by it. Somebody said that the Battle of Waterloo was won on Eton playing-fields. It was a particularly unfortunate remark, for the English contribution to the victory of Waterloo depended very much more than is common in victories upon the steadiness of the rank and file in an almost desperate situation. The Battle of Waterloo was won by the stubbornness of the common soldier—that is to say, it was won by the man who had never been to Eton. It was absurd to say that Waterloo was won on Eton cricket-fields. But it might have been fairly said that Waterloo was won on the village green, where clumsy boys played a very clumsy cricket. In a word, it was the average of the nation that was strong, and athletic glories do not indicate much about the average of a nation. Waterloo was not won by good cricket-players. But Waterloo was won by bad cricket-players, by a mass of men who had some minimum of athletic instincts and habits.

All Things Considered, Patriotism and Sport (1908)

27–28

If there is one class of men whom history has proved especially and supremely capable of going quite wrong in all directions, it is the class of highly intellectual men. I would always prefer to go by the bulk of humanity; that is why I am a democrat.

All Things Considered, The Error of Impartiality (1908)

27–28

All Joan's wisdom and energy, it seems, came from a certain priest, of whom there is not the tiniest trace in all the multitudinous records of her life. The only foundation I can find for this fancy is the highly undemocratic idea that a peasant girl could not possibly have any ideas of her own. It is very hard for a freethinker to remain democratic. The writer seems altogether to forget what is meant by the moral atmosphere of a community. To say that Joan must have learnt her vision of a virgin overthrowing evil from _a_ priest, is like saying that some modern girl in London, pitying the poor, must have learnt it from _a_ Labour Member. She would learn it where the Labour Member learnt it—in the whole state of our society.

All Things Considered, The Maid of Orleans (1908)

27–28

It is only we who play badly who love the Game itself. You love glory; you love applause; you love the earthquake voice of victory; you do not love croquet. ... It is we the bunglers who adore the occupation in the abstract. ... Our play is called amateurish; and we wear proudly the name of amateur, for amateurs is but the French for Lovers. ... The good painter has skill. It is the bad painter who loves his art. The good musician loves being a musician, the bad musician loves music. With such a pure and hopeless passion do I worship croquet.

Tremendous Trifles, The Perfect Game (1909)

27–28

Our civilisation has decided, and very justly decided, that determining the guilt or innocence of men is a thing too important to be trusted to trained men. It wishes for light upon that awful matter, it asks men who know no more law than I know, but who can feel the things that I felt in the jury box. When it wants a library catalogued, or the solar system discovered, or any trifle of that kind, it uses up specialists. But when it wishes anything done which is really serious, it collects twelve of the ordinary men standing round. The same thing was done, if I remember right, by the Founder of Christianity.

Tremendous Trifles, The Twelve Men (1909)

27–28

This especially is true of the toy theatre; that, by reducing the scale of events it can introduce much larger events. Because it is small it could easily represent the earthquake in Jamaica. Because it is small it could easily represent the Day of Judgment. Exactly in so far as it is limited, so far it could play easily with falling cities or with falling stars. Meanwhile the big theatres are obliged to be economical because they are big. When we have understood this fact we shall have understood something of the reason why the world has always been first inspired by small nationalities. The vast Greek philosophy could fit easier into the small city of Athens than into the immense Empire of Persia. In the narrow streets of Florence Dante felt that there was room for Purgatory and Heaven and Hell. He would have been stifled by the British Empire. Great empires are necessarily prosaic; for it is beyond human power to act a great poem upon so great a scale. You can only represent very big ideas in very small spaces.

Tremendous Trifles, The Toy Theatre (1909)

27–28

It is remarkable that in so many great wars it has been the defeated who have won. The people who were left worst at the end of the war were generally the people who were left best at the end of the whole business. For instance, the Crusades ended in the defeat of the Christians. But they did not end in the decline of the Christians; they ended in the decline of the Saracens. That huge prophetic wave of Moslem power which had hung in the very heavens above the towns of Christendom, that wave was broken, and never came on again. The Crusaders had saved Paris in the act of losing Jerusalem. The same applies to that epic of Republican war in the eighteenth century to which we Liberals owe our political creed. The French Revolution ended in defeat: the kings came back across a carpet of dead at Waterloo. The Revolution had lost its last battle; but it had gained its first object. It had cut a chasm. The world has never been the same since. No one after that has ever been able to treat the poor merely as a pavement.

Tremendous Trifles, XX. The Giant (1909)

27–28

Democracy means getting those people to vote who would never have the cheek to govern: and (according to Christian ethics) the precise people who ought to govern are the people who have not the cheek to do it.

Tremendous Trifles, The Travellers in State (1909)

[Describing Wallie, a simple Roman Catholic farmer in his World War I battalion who was the butt of every joke for his gullibility]

Perhaps the best of us all was our butt, Wallie. Wallie was a farmer, a Roman Catholic, a passionate soldier (the only man I met who really longed for fighting) and gullible to any degree by the rawest subaltern. ... Mortals must not judge; but I doubt whether any man fought in France who was more likely to go straight to Heaven if he were killed. I would have been better employed cleaning his boots than laughing at him.

Surprised by Joy, Chapter 12: Guns and Good Company

God chose ignoble and contemptible things to exalt. It is not that they are really ignoble and contemptible; this is how the world sees them. By believing in Christ they have overturned worldly reasoning. God did this in order to destroy things which are really ignoble and contemptible, because those who judged were more deserving of judgment and condemnation. Their teaching was asserted in words but not demonstrated in power, and so it was destroyed. Our teaching is proved true not only by words but by power as well.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

"And the base things of the world, and the things that are despised, and the things that are not?" Those persons who are considered to be nothing because of their great insignificance. Thus hath He shown forth His great power, casting down the great by those who seem to be nothing. The same elsewhere he thus expresses, "My strength is made perfect in weakness:" such as never applied themselves to any branch of learning, how all at once to discourse wisely on the things which are above the heavens. For suppose a physician, an orator, or any one else: we then most admire him, when he convinces and instructs those completely uneducated. Now, if to instil into an uneducated man the rules of art be a very wonderful thing, much more things which pertain to so high philosophy.

But not for the wonder's sake only, neither to shew His own power, hath He done this, but to check also the arrogant. And therefore he both said before, "That he might confound the wise and the strong, that He might bring to nought the things which are," and here again,

Homily on 1 Corinthians 5

Paul uses the expression “things that are not” differently here from the way he uses it in his epistle to the Romans. Here it means simply that which is vile and contemptible, as opposed to “things that are,” which are beautiful, powerful and respected.

Pauline Commentary from the Greek Church

He calls "things that are not" those who were regarded as nothing, and "things that are" those who seemed to be something. So then, in order to show these latter to be vain and useless people, God chose those who were regarded as nothing. And when you hear "chose," do not think that He necessarily wanted to choose the despised and reject the distinguished; no, but since the distinguished were puffed up by their own wisdom and therefore did not accept the preaching, God found more capable of receiving it those who had nothing to boast of.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Thirdly, he mentions a defect of splendor of rank, which is implied in the word "nobility." Opposed to these he says: and despised in the world, i.e., men looked down upon by the world: "We have become a taunt to our neighbors, mocked and derided by those round about us" (Ps 79:4), God has chosen for the office of preaching. Thirdly, the grand opinion men have of the nobility. Opposed to this he says: and things that are not, i.e., men who seem to be nothing in the world: "The strength of whose hands was to me as nothing, and they were thought unworthy of life itself" (Jb 30:2), has God chosen for the office of preaching. This He did to bring to naught things that are, i.e., those who seem to be something in this world: "The Lord of hosts had purposed it, to defile the pride of all glory, to dishonor all the honored of the earth" (Is 23:9).

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

[This was done] that man, receiving an unhoped-for salvation from God, might rise from the dead, and glorify God, and repeat that word which was uttered in prophecy by Jonah: "I cried by reason of my affliction to the Lord my God, and He heard me out of the belly of hell;" [Jonah 2:2] and that he might always continue glorifying God, and giving thanks without ceasing, for that salvation which he has derived from Him, "that no flesh should glory in the Lord's presence;" [1 Corinthians 1:29] and that man should never adopt an opposite opinion with regard to God, supposing that the incorruptibility which belongs to him is his own naturally, and by thus not holding the truth, should boast with empty superciliousness, as if he were naturally like to God. For he (Satan) thus rendered him (man) more ungrateful towards his Creator, obscured the love which God had towards man, and blinded his mind not to perceive what is worthy of God, comparing himself with, and judging himself equal to, God.

Against Heresies (Book 3, Chapter 20)

The very Old Testament of the Creator itself, it is possible, no doubt, to charge with foolishness, and weakness, and dishonour and meanness, and contempt. What is more foolish and more weak than God's requirement of bloody sacrifices and of savoury holocausts? What is weaker than the cleansing of vessels and of beds? What more dishonourable than the discoloration of the reddening skin? What so mean as the statute of retaliation? What so contemptible as the exception in meats and drinks? The whole of the Old Testament, the heretic, to the best of my belief, holds in derision. For God has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound its wisdom. Marcion's god has no such discipline, because he does not take after (the Creator) in the process of confusing opposites by their opposites, so that "no flesh shall glory; but, as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord." In what Lord? Surely in Him who gave this precept.

Against Marcion Book 5

Under the judgment of God the wisdom of the flesh can only blush at its miscalculations.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

"That no flesh should glory in the presence of God." For God doeth all things to this end, to repress vainglory and pride, to pull down boasting. "Do you, too," saith he, "employ yourselves in that work." He doth all, that we may put nothing to our own account; that we may ascribe all unto God. And have ye given yourselves over unto this person or to that? And what pardon will ye obtain?

For God Himself hath shown that it is not possible we should be saved only by ourselves: and this He did from the beginning. For neither then could men be saved by themselves; but it required their compassing the beauty of the heaven, and the extent of the earth, and the mass of creation besides; if so they might be led by the hand to the great artificer of all the works. And He did this, repressing beforehand the self-conceit which was after to arise. Just as if a master who had given his scholar charge to follow wheresoever he might lead, when he sees him forestalling, and desiring to learn all things of himself, should permit him to go quite astray; and when he hath proved him incompetent to acquire the knowledge, should thereupon at length introduce to him what himself has to teach: so God also commanded in the beginning to trace Him by the idea which the creation gives; but since they would not, He, after showing by the experiment that they are not sufficient for themselves, conducts them again unto Him by another way. He gave for a tablet, the world; but the philosophers studied not in those things, neither were willing to obey Him, nor to approach unto Him by that way which Himself commanded. He introduces another way more evident than the former; one that might bring conviction that man is not of himself alone sufficient unto himself. For then scruples of reasoning might be started, and the Gentile wisdom employed, on their part whom He through the creation was leading by the hand; but now, unless a man become a fool, that is, unless he dismiss all reasoning and all wisdom, and deliver up himself unto the faith, it is impossible to be saved. You see that besides making the way easy, he hath rooted up hereby no trifling disease, namely, in forbidding to boast, and have high thoughts: "that no flesh should glory:" for hence came the sin, that men insisted on being wiser than the laws of God; not willing so to obtain knowledge as He had enacted: and therefore they did not obtain it at all. So also was it from the beginning. He said unto Adam, "Do such a thing, and such another thou must not do." He, as thinking to find out something more, disobeyed; and even what he had, he lost. He spake unto those that came after, "Rest not in the creature; but by means of it contemplate the Creator." They, forsooth, as if making out something wiser than what had been commanded, set in motion windings innumerable. Hence they kept dashing against themselves and one another, and neither found God, nor concerning the creature had any distinct knowledge; nor had any meet and true opinion about it. Wherefore again, with a very high hand, lowering their conceit, He admitted the uneducated first, showing thereby that all men need the wisdom from above. And not only in the matter of knowledge, but also in all other things, both men and all other creatures He hath constituted so as to be in great need of Him; that they might have this also as a most forcible motive of submission and attachment, lest turning away they should perish. For this cause He did not suffer them to be sufficient unto themselves. For if even now many, for all their indigency, despise Him, were the case not so, whither would they not have wandered in haughtiness? So that He stayed them from boasting as they did, not from any grudge to them, but to draw them away from the destruction thence ensuing.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 5

Boasting, even if it is of good works, harms the soul of the boaster. Anyone who boasts of worldly achievements is highly worldly himself.

Pauline Commentary from the Greek Church

Paul’s intention is perfectly clear—to accost the pride of man, that no one should take glory in human works and that no one should glory in himself.

Predestination of the Saints 5.9

If Paul had chosen only the most eloquent and gifted people as preachers they would have gloried in their own abilities and been damned for it, whether they preached the truth or not.

Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians 173

So that no flesh should boast before Him. For this reason, he says, God acted in this way, to bring down the pride and boasting of those who were thinking about worldly things, and to convince them that they should ascribe everything received from Him to Him and not boast before Him. How then do you, Corinthians, take pride in this? Note in passing, we did not say without reason that those who were rejected were not deemed worthy of the preaching because of their pride.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Then he reveals the cause of all this, saying: He has not chosen the great but the lowly, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God, i.e., that no one may glory in his own worldly greatness as compared with the Lord: "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, let not the mighty man glory in his might, and let not the rich man glory in his riches" (Jer 9:23). For inasmuch as God did not subject the world to His faith by employing the great ones of the world but the lowly ones, man cannot boast that the world was saved by employing worldly greatness. However, since it might appear that worldly greatness did not originate from God, if He never employed it for His purposes, God employed a few and later a great number of the worldly great for the office of preaching. Hence a Gloss says that if the faithful fisherman had not come first, the humble orator could not have come later. Furthermore, it pertains to God's glory to draw the great of the world by means of the lowly.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Christ did what he did in order to strengthen believers, for no one can redeem something which did not originally belong to him. Therefore, whether it is because we have been redeemed, or because we have been sanctified (i.e., purged from the works of the flesh and the filthiness of idols), or because we have been justified (for it is just to worship only the Creator and spurn everything else) or because we are wise, having learned that worldly people are unwise—all this is a gift of God through Christ. But this is our redemption—when the devil desires it, Christ offers himself to the devil so that he may cancel sin and rescue the devil’s captives.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

We are taught by the knowledge that Christ is redemption, because he gave himself as an atonement on our behalf, that when he bestowed immortality on us as our own possession, he ransomed us from death with his own life.

On Perfection

Christ was made our sanctification, not so that he might change what he was but that he might sanctify us in the flesh.

On the Holy Spirit 3.4.26

"But of Him are ye in Christ Jesus, who was made unto us wisdom from God, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption."

The expression "of Him," I suppose he uses here, not of our introduction into being, but with reference to the faith: that is, to our having become children of God, "not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh." "Think not then, that having taken away our glorying, He left us so: for there is another, a greater glorying, His gift. For ye are the children of Him in whose presence it is not meet to glory, having become so through Christ." And since he has said, "The foolish things of the world He chose, and the base," he signifies that they are nobler than all, having God for their Father. And of this nobility of ours, not this person or that, but Christ is the cause, having made us wise, and righteous, and holy. For so mean the words, "He was made unto us wisdom."

Who then is wiser than we are who have not the wisdom of Plato, but Christ Himself God having so willed.

But what means, "of God?" Whenever he speaks great things concerning the Only-Begotten, he adds mention of the Father, lest any one should think that the Son is unbegotten. Since therefore he had affirmed His power to be so great, and had referred the whole unto the Son, saying that He had "become wisdom unto us, and righteousness, and sanctification and redemption;" through the Son again referring the whole to the Father, he saith, "of God."

But why said he not, He hath made us wise, but "was made unto us wisdom?" To show the copiousness of the gift. As if he had said, He gave unto us Himself. And observe how he goes on in order. For first He made us wise by delivering from error, and then righteous and holy, by giving us the Spirit; and He hath so delivered us from all our evils as to be "of Him." and this is not meant to express communication of being, but is spoken concerning the faith. Elsewhere we find him saying, "We were made righteousness in Him;" in these words, "Him who knew no sin He made to be sin for us that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him;" but now he saith, "He hath been made righteousness unto us; so that whosoever will may partake plentifully." For it is not this man or that who hath made us wise, but Christ. "He that glorieth," therefore, "let him glory in Him," not in such or such an one. From Christ have proceeded all things. Wherefore, having said, "Who was made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption," he added, "that, according as it is written, he that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord."

Homily on 1 Corinthians 5

"But of Him you are in Christ Jesus." The words "of Him" understand not as referring to being brought into existence in general, but into a better existence. The meaning of the words is this: you have become children of God, and "of Him," having become His sons "in Christ," that is, through Christ. And by the words "the base things He chose," he shows that they are nobler than all, because they have God as their Father.

"Who became for us wisdom from God, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption." That is, He made us wise, and righteous, and holy, and free; for this is what "redemption" means, that is, liberation from captivity. Furthermore, just as, having chosen the ignoble, He made them noble, because He adopted them as children of God, so also He made the uneducated wise, having Himself become wisdom for us. Why then did he not say: He made us wise, but: "became wisdom for us"? In order to express the abundance of the gift. He as it were said: He gave us His very Self. Having used lofty expressions about the Son, he adds: "from God," so that you would not consider Him (the Son) unbegotten, but would turn to His cause, the Father. And note the order: first, He made them wise, delivering them from error and teaching them the knowledge of God; then righteous, granting them the remission of sins; then He sanctified them with the Holy Spirit, and thus granted us perfect freedom and "redemption" from all evils, so that we belong to Him alone and are under His authority.

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Then when he says, He is the source, he prevents the preachers of the faith, since they were not the worldly great but the lowly, from being regarded as contemptible, by showing how God supplied for their defects. In regard to this he does three things.

First, he indicates who deserves the honor for the world's salvation, which was procured by the ministry of preaching. He says: You have been called not by the great of this world but by the lowly; consequently, your conversion should not be attributed to men but to God. In other words, He is the source of your life, i.e., by God's power are you called in Christ Jesus, i.e., joined to Him by grace: "We are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works" (Eph 2:10).

Then he shows how God supplies for the deficiencies of his preachers by means of Christ: first, as to their lack of wisdom when he says: whom, namely, Christ, God made for us, who preach the faith, and by us unto all the faithful, our wisdom, because by adhering to Him Who is the wisdom of God and by partaking of Him through grace, we have been made wise; and this is our God, Who gave Christ to us and drew us to Him, as it says in Jn (6:44): "No man can come to me, except the Father who has sent me draw him"; "This is your wisdom and understanding in the sight of nations" (Dt 4:6). Secondly, as to their lack of power he says: our righteousness, which is called a breastplate because of its strength: "He will put on righteousness as a breastplate" (Wis 5:19). Now Christ is said to have been made righteousness for us, inasmuch as we are made righteous by faith, as it says in Rom (3:22): "The righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe." Thirdly, as to their lack of nobility he says: and sanctification and redemption, for we are sanctified by Christ, inasmuch as it is through Him that we are joined to God, in Whom true nobility is found, as it says in 1 Sam (2:30): "Those who honor me I will honor, and those who despise me shall be lightly esteemed." Hence it says in Heb (13:12): "Jesus suffered outside the gate in order to sanctify the people through his own blood." But He has been made our redemption, inasmuch as we have been redeemed by Him from the slavery of sin, in which true baseness consists; hence it says in Ps 31 (v.6): "Thou hast redeemed me O Lord, faithful God."

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Let us therefore, brethren, be of humble mind, laying aside all haughtiness, and pride, and foolishness, and angry feelings; and let us act according to that which is written (for the Holy Spirit says, "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, neither let the rich man glory in his riches; but let him that glories glory in the Lord, in diligently seeking Him, and doing judgment and righteousness" ), being especially mindful of the words of the Lord Jesus which He spoke teaching us meekness and long-suffering.

Letter to the Corinthians (Clement)

But I measure myself, that I may not perish through boasting: but it is good to glory in the Lord. And even though I were established in things pertaining to God, yet then would it befit me to be the more fearful, and not give heed to those that vainly puff me up. For those that commend me scourge me. [I do indeed desire to suffer], but I know not if I be worthy to do so. For the envy of the wicked one is not visible to many, but it wars against me. I therefore have need of meekness, by which the devil, the prince of this world, is brought to nought.

Epistle of Ignatius to the Trallians

But if human wisdom, as it remains to understand, is the glorying in knowledge, hear the law of Scripture: "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, and let not the mighty man glory in his might; but let him that glorieth glory in the Lord." But we are God-taught, and glory in the name of Christ.

The Instructor Book 1

What Jeremiah [as quoted here] says is commendable, because the person who glories in the Lord will not be confounded.

Commentary on Paul’s Epistles

Keep thyself pure as the habitation of God. Thou art the temple of Christ. Thou art the instrument of the Spirit. Thou knowest in what way I have brought thee up. Though I am the least of men, do thou seek to follow me, be thou an imitator of my conduct. I do not glory in the world, but in the Lord. I exhort Hero, my son; "but let him that glorieth, glory in the Lord." May I have joy of thee, my dear son, whose guardian may He be who is the only unbegotten God, and the Lord Jesus Christ! Do not believe all persons, do not place confidence in all; nor let any man get the better of thee by flattery. For many are the ministers of Satan; and "he that is hasty to believe is light of heart."

Epistle of Pseudo-Ignatius to Hero

For this cause also he had vehemently inveighed against the wisdom of the Greeks, to teach men this lesson, and no other: that (as indeed is no more than just) they should boast themselves in the Lord. For when of ourselves we seek the things which are above us, nothing is more foolish, nothing weaker than we are. In such case, a tongue well whetted we may have; but stability of doctrine we cannot have. Rather, reasonings, being alone, are like the webs of spider. For unto such a point of madness have some advanced as to say that there is nothing real in the whole of being: yea, they maintain positively that all things are contrary to what appears.

Say not therefore that anything is from thyself, but in all things glory in God. Impute unto no man anything at any time. For if unto Paul nothing ought to be imputed much less unto any others. For, saith he, "I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase." He that hath learnt to make his boast in the Lord, will never be elated, but will be moderate at all times, and thankful under all circumstances. But not such is the mind of the Greeks; they refer all to themselves; wherefore even of men they make gods. In so great shame hath desperate arrogance plunged them.

Homily on 1 Corinthians 5

All this, he says, was done so that no one would consider himself to be something and would boast neither in himself nor in any other person, but only in God, Who has granted us such great blessings. How then do you take pride both in yourselves and in your teachers — mere men?

Commentary on 1 Corinthians

Thirdly, he assigns the cause of the above when he says: Therefore, as it is written, Let him that boasts, boast of the Lord (Jer 9:24), where our version has: "Let him that glories, glory in this that he understands and knows me." For he is saying: If man's salvation does not spring from any human greatness but solely from God's power, the glory belongs not to man but to God, as it says in Ps 115 (v. 1): "Not to us, O Lord, not to us; but to thy name give glory"; "To him that gives me wisdom will I give glory" (Sir 51:23).

Commentary on 1 Corinthians