210 Discipline, towards Heathens, superfluous. XVI. HOMIL. Because in the other case he wished to soothe them, but in this, not so. For the fault in this case and in that was not the same, but in the Thessalonians it was less. For there, he is reproving indolence; but here, fornication and other most grievous sins. And if any one wished to go over to the Greeks, he hinders not him from eating with such persons; this too, for the same reason. So also do we act; for our children and our brethren we leave nothing undone, but of strangers we do not make much account. How then. Did not Paul care for them that were without as well? Yes, he cared for them; but it was not till after they had received the Gospel, and he had made them subject to the doctrine of Christ, that he laid down laws for them. But so long as they despised, it was superfluous to speak the precepts of Christ to those who knew not Christ Himself. Do not ye judge them that are within? But them that are without, God judgeth. For since he had said, What have I to do with judging those without; lest any one should think that these were left unpunished, there is another tribunal which he sets over them, and that a fearful one. And this he said, both to terrify those, and to console these; intimating also that this punishment which is for a season snatches them away from that which is undying and perpetual: which also he has plainly declared elsewhere, saying, 11 Cor. 1 But now being judged, we are chastened, that we should not be condemned with the world. 11.32. (2.) 17, 7. [3.] Wherefore take away from among yourselves that wicked person. He hath mentioned an expression found in the Old * Deut. Testament, partly hinting that they too will be very great gainers, in being freed as it were from some grievous plague; and partly to shew that this kind of thing is no innovation, but even from the beginning thus it seemed good to the legislator, that such as these should be cut off. But in that instance it was done with more severity, in this with more gentleness. On which account one might reasonably question, why in that case he conceded that the sinner should be severely punished and stoned, but in the present instance not so; rather he leads him to repentance. Why then were the lines drawn in the former instance one way and in the latter another way? For these two causes: one, because these Analogy of Church Discipline with the Old Test. Punishments. 211 12. were being led into a greater trial, and needed greater long-ICOR.5. suffering; the other, and that the truer one, because these by their impunity were more easily to be corrected, coming as they might to repentance: but the others were likely to go on to greater wickedness. For if when they saw the first undergoing punishment they persisted in the same things, had none at all been punished, much more would this have been their feeling. For which reason in that dispensation death is immediately inflicted upon the adulterer and the manslayer; but in this, if through repentance they are absolved, they have escaped the punishment. However, both here one may see some instances of heavier punishment, and in the Old Testament some less severe, in order that it may be signified in every way, that the covenants are akin to each other, and of one and the same lawgiver: and you may see the punishment following immediately both in that covenant and in this, and in both often after a long interval. Nay, and oftentimes not even after a long interval, repentance alone being taken as satisfaction by the Almighty. Thus, on the one hand, in the Old Testament, David, who had committed adultery and murder, was saved by means of repentance; and in the New, Ananias, who withdrew but a small portion of the price of the land, perished together with his wife. Now if these instances are more frequent in the Old Testament, and those of the contrary kind in the New, the difference of the persons produces the difference in the economy adopted in such matters. ἀδελφὸν, rec.text, ୧୦. [4.] C. 6. V. 1. Dare any one of you, having a matter against his brother', go to law before the unjust, and not before the rov saints? Here also he again makes his complaint upon acknowledged grounds for in that other place he says, It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you. And in this place, Dare any one of you? From the very first outset giving signs of his anger, and implying that the thing spoken of comes of a daring and lawless spirit. Now wherefore did he bring in by the way that discourse about covetousness and about the duty of not going to law without the Church? In fulfilment of his own rule. For it is a custom with him to set to right things as they fall in his way; just as when speaking about the tables 212 Absurdity of Christians seeking heathen Tribunals. HOMIL. Which they used in common, he launched out into the discourse XVI. about the mysteries. So here, you see, since he had made 1 mention of covetous brethren, burning with anxiety to correct those in sin, he brooks not exactly to observe order: but he again corrects the sin which had been introduced out of the regular course, and so returns to the former subject. Let us hear then what he also says about this. Dare any of you, having a matter with his brother, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? For a while, he employs those personal terms to expose, discredit, and blame their proceedings: nor does he quite from the beginning subvert the custom of seeking judgment before the believers: but when he had stricken them down by many words, then he even takes away entirely all going to law. "For in the first place," says he," if one must go to law, it were wrong to do so before the unjust. But you ought not to go to law at all." This however he adds afterwards. For the present he thoroughly sifts the former subject, namely, that they should not submit matters to external arbitration. "For," says he," how can it be otherμικρο wise than absurd, that one who is at variance1 with his friend ψυχοῦν should take his enemy to be a reconciler between them? And how can you avoid feeling shame and blushing, when a Greek sits to judge a Christian? And if about private matters it is not right to go to law before Greeks, how shall we submit to their decisions about other things of greater importance ?" τα Observe, moreover, how he speaks. He says not, "Before the unbelievers," but, Before the unjust; using the expression of which he had most particular need for the matter before him, in order to deter and keep them away. For seeing that his discourse was about going to law, and those who are engaged in suits seek for nothing so much as that the judges should feel great interest about what is just; he takes this as a ground of dissuasion, all but saying, "Where are you going? What are you doing, O man, bringing on yourself the contrary to what you wish, and in order to obtain justice committing yourself to unjust men?" And because it would have been intolerable to be told at once not to go to law, he did not immediately add this, but only changed the judges, bringing the party engaged in the trial from without into the Church. How the Saints are to judge the World. 213 1, 3. [5.] Then, since it seemed easily open to contempt, I mean 1Cor.6. our being judged by those who were within, and especially at that time, (for they were not perhaps competent to comprehend a point, nor were they such as the heathen judges, well skilled in laws and rhetoric, inasmuch as the greater part of them were uneducated men,) mark how he makes them worthy of credit, first calling them Saints. But seeing that this bore witness to purity of life, and not to accuracy in receiving instruction, observe how he orderly handles this part also, saying thus, Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? How then canst thou, (3.)) who art in that day to judge them, endure to be judged by them now? They will not indeed judge, taking their seat in person and demanding account, yet they shall condemn. This at least he plainly said; And if the world is judged in you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? He says not "by you," but in you: just as 1 S. Mat. when He said, 'The queen of the south shall rise up and 12.42. condemn this generation: and, the men of Nineveh shall arise and shall condemn this generation. For when, beholding the same sun and sharing all the same things, we shall be found believers but they unbelievers, they will not be able to take refuge in ignorance. For we shall accuse them, simply by the things which we have done. And many such ways of judgment one will find there. Then, that no one should think he speaks about other persons, mark how he generalizes his speech. And if the world is judged in you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? The thing is a disgrace to you, he says, and an unspeakable reproach. For since it was likely that they would be out of countenance at being judged by those that were within; "nay," saith he, " on the contrary, the disgrace is when you are judged by those without: for those are the very small controversies, not these." Ver, 3. Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more then the things which pertain to this life? Some say that here the priests are darkly spoken of: but away with this. His speech is about demons. For, had he been speaking about corrupt priests, he would have meant them above, when he said, the world is judged in you; XVI. 214 Ordinary Christians fitter Judges than wise Heathens. HOMIL. (for the Scripture is wont to call evil men also The world:) and he would not have said the same thing twice, nor would he, as if he was saying something of greater consequence, have put it down afterwards. But he speaks concerning those angels, about whom Christ saith, Go ye into the fire which 1 S.Mat. is prepared for the devil and his angels1. And Paul, his 25. 41. angels are transformed as ministers of righteousness2. For 11. 15. when the very incorporeal powers shall be found inferior to us who are clothed with flesh, they shall suffer heavier punishment. 22 Cor. But if some should still contend that he speaks of priests, "What sort of priests?" let us ask. Those whose walk in life has been worldly, of course. In what sense then does he say, We shall judge angels, much more things that relate to this life? He mentions the angels in contradistinction to things relating to this life: likely enough; for they are removed from the need of these things, because of the superior excellence of their nature. [6.] Ver. 4. If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the Church. For Wishing to instruct us as forcibly as possible, that they ought not to commit themselves to those without, whatsoever the matter might chance to be; having raised what seemed to be an objection, he answers it in the first instance. what he says is something like this: Perhaps some one will say, "No one among you is wise, nor competent to pass sentence; all are contemptible." Now what follows? "Even though none be wise," says he, "I bid you entrust things to those who are of least weight." Ver. 5. But this I speak to your shame. These are the words of one exposing their objection as being an idle pretext: and therefore he adds, Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you, no not even one? Is the scarcity, says he, so great? so great the want of sensible persons among you? And what he subjoins strikes even still harder. For having said, Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you, not even one? he adds, Who shall be able to judge in the case of his brother. For when brother goes to law with brother, there is never any need of understanding and talent in the |