1 Corinthians 9

1 Corinthians 9:1

John Chrysostom: “Am I not an Apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord?”

Inasmuch as he had said, “If meat make my brother to stumble I will eat no flesh forever;” a thing which he had not yet done, but professed he would do if need require: lest any man should say, “Thou vauntest thyself at random, and art severe in discourse, and utterest words of promise, a thing easy to me or to any body; but if these sayings come from thy heart, shew by deeds something which thou hast slighted in order to avoid making thy brother stumble:” for this cause, I say, in what follows he is compelled to enter on the proof of this also, and to point out how he was used to forego even things permitted that he might not give offence, although without any law to enforce his doing so.

And we are not yet come to the admirable part of the matter: though it be admirable that he abstain even from things lawful to avoid offence: but it is his habit of doing so at the cost of so much trouble and danger “For why,” saith he, “speak of the idol sacrifices? Since although Christ had enjoined that those who preach the Gospel should live at the charge of their disciples, I did not so, but chose, if need were, to end my life with famine and die the most grievous of deaths, so I might avoid receiving of those whom I instruct.”

Not because they would otherwise be made to stumble, but because his not receiving would edify them: a much greater thing for him to do. And to witness this he summons themselves, among whom he was used to live in toil and in hunger, nourished by others, and put to straits, in order not to offend them. And yet there was no ground for their taking offence, for it would but have been a law which he was fulfilling. But for all this, by a sort of supererogation he used to spare them.

“Am I not an Apostle?” For besides all that hath been said, this also makes no small difference that Paul himself is the person thus conducting himself. As thus: To prevent their alleging, “You may taste of the sacrifices, sealing at the same time:” for a while he withstands not that statement, but argues, “Though it were lawful, your brethren’s harm should keep you from doing so;” and afterwards he proves that it is not even lawful. In this particular place, however, he establishes the former point from circumstances relating to himself. And intending presently to say that he had received nothing from them, he sets it not down at once, but his own dignity is what he first affirms: “Am I not an Apostle? am I not free?”

Thus, to hinder their saying, “True; thou didst not receive, but the reason thou didst not was its not being lawful;” he sets down therefore first the causes why he might reasonably have received, had he been willing to do so.

Further: that there might not seem to be any thing invidious in regard of Peter and such as Peter, in his saying these things, (for they did not use to decline receiving;) he first shows that they had authority to receive, and then that no one might say, “Peter had authority to receive but thou hadst not,” he possesses the hearer beforehand with these encomiums of himself. And perceiving that he must praise himself, (for that was the way to correct the Corinthians,) yet disliking to say any great thing of himself, see how he hath tempered both feelings as the occasion required: limiting his own panegyric, not by what he knew of himself, but by what the subject of necessity required. For he might have said, “I most of all had a right to receive, even more than they, because ‘I labored more abundantly than they.’” But this he omits, being a point wherein he surpassed them; and those points wherein they were great and which were just grounds for their receiving, those only he sets down.

“Am I not an Apostle? am I not free?” i.e. “have I not authority over myself? am I under any, to overrule me and forbid my receiving?”

“But they have an advantage over you, in having been with Christ.”

“Nay, neither is this denied me.” With a view to which he saith, “Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord?” For “last of all,” saith he, “as unto one born out of due time, He appeared unto me also.” Now this likewise was no small dignity: since “many Prophets,” saith He, “and righteous men have desired to see the things which ye see, and have not seen them:” and, “Days will come when ye shall desire to see one of these days.”

“What then, though thou be ‘an Apostle,’ and ‘free,’ and hast ‘seen Christ,’ if thou hast not exhibited any work of an Apostle; how then can it be right for thee to receive?” Wherefore after this he adds, “Are not ye my work in the Lord?” For this is the great thing; and those others avail nothing, apart from this. Even Judas himself was “an Apostle,” and “free,” and “saw Christ;” but because he had not “the work of an Apostle,” all those things profited him not. You see then why he adds this also, and calls themselves to be witnesses of it.

Moreover, because it was a great thing which he had uttered, see how he chastens it, adding, “In the Lord:” i.e., “the work is God’s, not mine.” — Homily on 1 Corinthians 21

Tertullian: “No man hath seen God at any time.” What God does he mean? The Word? But he has already said: “Him we have seen and heard, and our hands have handled the Word of life.” Well, (I must again ask, ) what God does he mean? It is of course the Father, with whom was the Word, the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, and has Himself declared Him. He was both heard and seen and, that He might not be supposed to be a phantom, was actually handled. Him, too, did Paul behold; but yet he saw not the Father. “Have I not,” he says, “seen Jesus Christ our Lord? " Moreover, he expressly called Christ God, saying: “Of whom are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever.” — Against Praxeas

Tertullian: Nor indeed, if, among the Greeks, in accordance with the carelessness of custom, women and wives are classed under a common name-however, there is a name proper to wives-shall we therefore so interpret Paul as if he demonstrates the apostles to have had wives? For if he were disputing about marriages, as he does in the sequel, where the apostle could better have named some particular example, it would appear right for him to say, “For have we not the power of leading about wives, like the other apostles and Cephas? “But when he subjoins those (expressions)which show his abstinence from (insisting on) the supply of maintenance, saying, “For have we not the power of eating and drinking? “he does not demonstrate that “wives” were led about by the apostles, whom even such as have not still have the power of eating and drinking; but simply “women,” who used to minister to them in the stone way (as they did) when accompanying the Lord. — On Monogamy

Tertullian: And, “(I think) God hath selected us the apostles (as) hindmost, like men appointed to fight with wild beasts; since we have been made a spectacle to this world, both to angels and to men: “And, “We have been made the offscourings of this world, the refuse of all: “And, “Am I not free? am I not an apostle? have I not seen Christ Jesus our Lord? " With what kind of superciliousness, on the contrary, was he compelled to declare, “But to me it is of small moment that I be interrogated by you, or by a human court-day; for neither am I conscious to myself (of any guilt); “and, “My glory none shall make empty. — On Modesty

1 Corinthians 9:2

Ambrosiaster: Those Jewish believers who nevertheless continued to observe the law of Moses denied that Paul was an apostle because he taught that it was no longer necessary to be circumcised or to observe the sabbath. Even the other apostles thought that he was teaching something different because of this, and they denied that he was an apostle. But to the Corinthians Paul was an apostle, because they had seen the signs of God’s power in him. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

John Chrysostom: “If to others I am not an Apostle, yet at least I am to you.”

Do you see how far he is from enlarging here without necessity? And yet he had the whole world to speak of, and barbarous nations, and sea and land. However, he mentions none of these things, but carries his point by concession, and even granting more than he need. As if he had said, “Why need I dwell on things over and above, since these even alone are enough for my present purpose? I speak not, you will observe, of my achievements in other quarters, but of those which have you for witnesses. Upon which it follows that if from no other quarter, yet from you I have a right to receive. Nevertheless, from whom I had most right to receive, even you whose teacher I was, from those I received not.”

“If to others I am not an Apostle, yet at least I am to you.” Again, he states his point by concession. For the whole world had him for its Apostle. “However,” saith he, “I say not that, I am not contending nor disputing, but what concerns you I lay down. ‘For the seal of mine Apostleship are ye:’” i.e., its proof. “Should any one, moreover, desire to learn whence I am an Apostle, you are the persons whom I bring forward: for all the signs of an Apostle have I exhibited among you, and not one have I failed in.” As also he speaks in the Second Epistle, saying, “Though I am nothing, truly the signs of an Apostle were wrought among you in all patience, by signs and wonders and mighty works. For what is there wherein ye were made inferior to the rest of the Churches?” Wherefore he saith, “The seal of mine Apostleship are ye.” “For I both exhibited miracles, and taught by word, and underwent dangers, and shewed forth a blameless life.” And these topics you may see fully set forth by these two Epistles, how he lays before them the demonstration of each with all exactness. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 21

1 Corinthians 9:3

Ambrosiaster: Here Paul begins to develop the argument which he set out above, namely: “All things are lawful for me, but I will not be enslaved by anything” (6:12). — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

John Chrysostom: “My defence to them that examine me is this.”

What is, “My defence to them that examine me is this?” “To those who seek to know whereby I am proved to be an Apostle, or who accuse me as receiving money, or inquire the cause of my not receiving, or would fain shew that I am not an Apostle: to all such, my instruction given to you and these things which I am about to say, may stand for a full explanation and defence.” — Homily on 1 Corinthians 21

Theodoret of Cyrus: Paul says that if anyone wants to examine his works, let him look at the Corinthians, for they are a sufficient witness to his labors. — COMMENTARY ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 219

1 Corinthians 9:4

Ambrosiaster: This is what Paul meant when he said that all things were lawful to him. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Clement of Alexandria: “For if any of such meats make a brother to stumble, I shall not eat it as long as the world lasts,” says he, “that I may not make my brother stumble.” I gain the man by a little self-restraint. “Have we not power to eat and to drink?” — The Instructor Book 2

John Chrysostom: “Have we no right to eat and to drink? Have we no right to lead about a wife that is a believer?”

Why, how are these sayings a defence? “Because, when it appears that I abstain even from things which are allowed, it cannot be just to look suspiciously on me as a deceiver or one acting for gain.”

Wherefore, from what was before alleged and from my having instructed you and from this which I have now said, I have matter sufficient to make my defence to you: and all who examine me I meet upon this ground, alleging both what has gone before and this which follows: “Have we no right to eat and to drink? have we no right to lead about a wife that is a believer?” Yet for all this, having it I abstain?

What then? did he not use to eat or to drink? It were most true to say that in many places he really did not eat nor drink: for “in hunger,” saith he, “and in thirst, and in nakedness” we were abiding. Here, however, this is not his meaning; but what? “We eat not nor drink, receiving of those whom we instruct, though we have a right so to receive.”

“Have we no right to lead about a wife that is a believer, even as the rest of the Apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?” Observe his skilfulness. The leader of the choir stands last in his arrangement: since that is the time for laying down the strongest of all one’s topics. Nor was it so wonderful for one to be able to point out examples of this conduct in the rest, as in the foremost champion and in him who was entrusted with the keys of heaven. But neither does he mention Peter alone, but all of them: as if he had said, Whether you seek the inferior sort or the more eminent, in all you find patterns of this sort.

For the brethren too of the Lord, being freed from their first unbelief, had come to be among those who were approved, although they attained not to the Apostles. And accordingly the middle place is that which he hath assigned to them, setting down those who were in the extremes before and after. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 21

1 Corinthians 9:5

Augustine of Hippo: To what right does he refer unless it be to the one which the Lord gave to those whom he sent to preach the kingdom of heaven when he said: “Eat what they have; for the laborer deserves his wages”? He offered himself as an exponent of this privilege. Very faithful women attended to the necessities of his life at their own expense.

Augustine of Hippo: When his identity has been established, he shows that the privileges granted to the other apostles are his also, namely, exemption from manual labor and livelihood in recompense for his preaching as the Lord appointed. This is stated most clearly according to the verses where St. Paul argues explicitly that faithful women, possessing the goods of this world, went along with the apostles and ministered to them from their own supplies that the servants of God might lack none of those commodities which constitute the necessities of life… Certain persons, not understanding this passage, have interpreted it as “wife.” The obscurity of the Greek word deceived them, since, in Greek, the same word is used for wife and woman. Yet the apostle has placed the words in such a way that people should not be deceived, since he says not merely “a woman” but “a sister woman,” and not “to take in marriage” but “to take about.”

Clement of Alexandria: The apostles concentrated on undistracted preaching and took their wives around as Christian sisters rather than as spouses, to be their fellow ministers to the women of the household, so that the gospel would reach them without causing scandal. — The Stromata Book 3

Tertullian: Thus it comes to pass that “all things are lawful, but not all are expedient,” so long as (it remains true that) whoever has a “permission” granted is (thereby) tried, and is (consequently) judged during the process of trial in (the case of the particular) “permission.” Apostles, withal, had a “licence” to marry, and lead wives about (with them ). — On Exhortation to Chastity

1 Corinthians 9:6

Ambrosiaster: Paul means by this that he and Barnabas do have this right, but they do not want to exercise it. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: The Lord directed those who preach the gospel to live by the gospel, that is, to maintain at the expense of the faithful that life for which food and clothing are essential.

John Chrysostom: “Or I only and Barnabas, have we not a right to forbear working?”

See his humility of mind and his soul pure from envy, how he takes care not to conceal him whom he knew to be a partaker with himself in this perfection. For if the other things be common, how is not this common? Both they and we are apostles and are free, and have seen Christ, and have exhibited the works of Apostles. Therefore we likewise have a right both to live without working and to be supported by our disciples. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 21

Tertullian: For there is extant withal an Epistle to the Hebrews under the name of Barnabas-a man sufficiently accredited by God, as being one whom Paul has stationed next to himself in the uninterrupted observance of abstinence: “Or else, I alone and Barnabas, have not we the power of working? " And, of course, the Epistle of Barnabas is more generally received among the Churches than that apocryphal “Shepherd” of adulterers. — On Modesty

1 Corinthians 9:7

Augustine of Hippo: The church has its own soldiers and its own provincial officers … its vineyard and its planters, its flock and its shepherds.… Thus some are rightly fed and clothed at the expense of the charitable rich. They accept nothing for their own necessities except from those who sell their goods. They are not to be judged and condemned by the more perfect members of Christ who furnish their own needs with their own hands—a higher virtue which the apostle strongly commends. They in turn ought not to condemn as Christians of lower grade those from whose resources they are supplied.… The servants of God who live by selling the honest works of their own hands could, with much less impropriety, condemn those from whom they receive nothing than could those others who are unable to work with their hands because of some bodily weakness yet who condemn the very ones at whose expense they live. — LETTER 157, TO HILARIUS

John Chrysostom: “What soldier ever serveth at his own charges?”

For since, which was the strongest point, he had proved from the Apostles that it is lawful to do so, he next comes to examples and to the common practice; as he uses to do: “What soldier serveth at his own charges?” saith he. But do thou consider, I pray, how very suitable are the examples to his proposed subject, and how he mentions first that which is accompanied with danger; viz. soldiership and arms and wars. For such a kind of thing was the Apostolate, nay rather much more hazardous than these. For not with men alone was their warfare, but with demons also, and against the prince of those beings was their battle array. What he saith therefore is this: “Not even do heathen governors, cruel and unjust as they are, require their soldiers to endure service and peril and live on their own means. How then could Christ ever have required this?”

Nor is he satisfied with one example. For to him who is rather simple and dull, this also is wont to come as a great refreshment, viz. their seeing the common custom also going along with the laws of God. Wherefore he proceeds to another topic also and says, “Who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof?” For as by the former he indicated his dangers, so by this his labor and abundant travail and care.

He adds likewise a third example, saying, “Who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk thereof?” He is exhibiting the great concern which it becomes a teacher to show for those who are under his rule. For, in fact, the Apostles were both soldiers and husbandmen and shepherds, not of the earth nor of irrational animals, nor in such wars as are perceptible by sense; but of reasonable souls and in battle array with the demons.

It also must be remarked how every where he preserves moderation, seeking the useful only, not the extraordinary. For he said not, “What soldier serveth and is not enriched?” but, “What soldier ever serveth at his own charges?” Neither did he say, “Who planteth a vineyard, and gathereth not gold, or spareth to collect the whole fruit?” but, “Who eateth not of the fruit thereof?” Neither did he say, “Who feedeth a flock, and maketh not merchandize of the lambs?” But what? “And eateth not of the milk thereof?” Not of the lambs, but of the milk; signifying, that a little relief should be enough for the teacher, even his necessary food alone. (This refers to those who would devour all and gather the whole of the fruit.) “So likewise the Lord ordained,” saying, “The laborer is worthy of his food.”

And not this only doth he establish by his illustrations, but he shows also what kind of man a priest ought to be. For he ought to possess both the courage of a soldier and the diligence of a husbandman and the carefulness of a shepherd, and after all these, to seek nothing more than necessaries. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 21

Tertullian: When he teaches that every man ought to live of his own industry, he begins with a copious induction of examples-of soldiers, and shepherds, and husbandmen. But he wanted divine authority. — Against Marcion Book V

1 Corinthians 9:8

Ambrosiaster: Paul indicates here that his position corresponds to the teaching of Scripture and that his refusal to accept any payment from the Corinthians was with good reason. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

John Chrysostom: “Do I speak these things after the manner of men? or saith not the law also the same?”

For since he had hitherto alleged nothing out of the Scriptures, but put forward the common custom; “think not,” saith he, “that I am confident in these alone, nor that I go to the opinions of men for the ground of these enactments. For I can shew that these things are also well-pleasing to God, and I read an ancient law enjoining them.” Wherefore also he carries on his discourse in the form of a question, which is apt to be done in things fully acknowledged; thus saying, “Say I these things after the manner of men?” i.e. “do I strengthen myself only by human examples?” “or saith not the law also the same?” — Homily on 1 Corinthians 21

1 Corinthians 9:9

Apostolic Constitutions: Let him use those tenths and first-fruits, which are given according to the command of God, as a man of God; as also let him dispense in a right manner the free-will offerings which are brought in on account of the poor, to the orphans, the widows, the afflicted, and strangers in distress, as having that God for the examiner of his accounts who has committed the disposition to him. Distribute to all those in want with righteousness, and yourselves use the things which belong to the Lord, but do not abuse them; eating of them, but not eating them all up by yourselves: communicate with those that are in want, and thereby show yourselves unblameable before God. For if you shall consume them by yourselves, you will be reproached by God, who says to such unsatiable people, who alone devour all, “You eat up the milk, and clothe yourselves with the wool;” [Ezekiel 34:3] and in another passage, “Must you alone live upon the earth”? [Isaiah 5:8] Upon which account you are commanded in the law, “You shall love your neighbour as yourself.” [Leviticus 19:18] Now we say these things, not as if you might not partake of the fruits of your labours; for it is written, “You shall not muzzle the mouth of the ox which treads out the grain;” [Deuteronomy 25:4; 1 Corinthians 9:9] but that you should do it with moderation and righteousness. As, therefore, the ox that labours in the threshing-floor without a muzzle eats indeed, but does not eat all up; so do you who labour in the threshing-floor, that is, in the Church of God, eat of the Church: which was also the case of the Levites, who served in the tabernacle of the testimony, which was in all things a type of the Church. — Apostolic Constitutions (Book II), Section 4, XXV

Fulgentius of Ruspe: These animals accomplish their life and purpose in this world according to the incomprehensible will of the Creator. They render no account of their deeds because they are not rational. “Is God concerned about oxen?” Human beings, however, because they have been made rational, will render an account to God for themselves and for all the things which they have received for use in this present life. — TO PETER ON THE FAITH 42

John Chrysostom: “For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn.”

And on what account hath he mentioned this, having the example of the priests? Wishing to establish it far beyond what the case required. Further, lest any should say, “And what have we to do with the saying about the oxen?” he works it out more exactly, saying, “Is it for the oxen that God careth;” Doth God then, tell me, take no care for oxen? Well, He doth take care of them, but not so as to make a law concerning such a thing as this. So that had he not been hinting at something important, training the Jews to mercy in the case of the brutes, and through these, discoursing with them of the teachers also; he would not have taken so much interest as even to make a law to forbid the muzzling of oxen.

Wherein he points out another thing likewise, that the labor of teachers both is and ought to be great.

And again another thing. What then is this? That whatever is said by the Old Testament respecting care for brutes, in its principal meaning bears on the instruction of human beings: as in fact do all the rest: the precepts, for example, concerning various garments; and those concerning vineyards and seeds and not making the ground bear divers crops, and those concerning leprosy; and, in a word, all the rest: for they being of a duller sort He was discoursing with them from these topics, advancing them by little and little.

And see how in what follows he doth not even confirm it, as being clear and self-evident. For having said, “Is it for the oxen that God careth?” he added, “or saith he it altogether for our sake?” Not adding even the “altogether” at random, but that he might not leave the hearer any thing whatever to reply.

And he dwells upon the metaphor, saying and declaring, “Yea for our sakes it was written, because he who ploweth ought to plow in hope;” i.e., the teacher ought to enjoy the returns of his labors; “and he that thresheth ought to thresh in hope of partaking.” And observe his wisdom in that from the seed he transferred the matter to the threshing floor; herein also again manifesting the many toils of the teachers, that they in their own persons both plough and tread the floor. And of the ploughing, because there was nothing to reap, but labor only, he used the word, “hope;” but of treading the floor he presently allows the fruit, saying, “He that thresheth is a partaker of his hope.”

Further, lest any should say, “Is this then the return for so many toils,” he adds, “in hope,” i.e., “which is to come.” No other thing therefore doth the mouth of this animal being unmuzzled declare than this; that the teachers who labor ought also to enjoy some return. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 21

Origen of Alexandria: God’s care was not only for the oxen but moreso for the apostles, for whose sake he uttered these words. — ON FIRST PRINCIPLES 2.4.2

1 Corinthians 9:10

Ambrosiaster: The whole of Scripture applies to us by way of analogy. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Tertullian: To these prime counsels of innocence, chastity, and justice, and piety, are also added prescriptions of humanity, as when every seventh year slaves are released for liberty; when at the same period the land is spared from tillage; a place is also granted to the needy; and from the treading ox’s mouth the muzzle is removed, for the enjoyment of the fruit of his labour before him, in order that kindness first shown in the case of animals might be raised from such rudiments to the refreshment of men. — Against Marcion Book II

1 Corinthians 9:11

Augustine of Hippo: Paul emphasizes the fact that his fellow apostles were not transgressing in any way when they did not engage in manual labor to provide the necessities of life, but, as the Lord directed, living on the gospel, they accepted, without offering payment, bodily nourishment from those to whom they in turn furnished spiritual nourishment without demanding payment.

Gregory the Dialogist: If our peace is received, it is fitting that we remain in the same house eating and drinking such things as are with them, so that we may obtain earthly provisions from those to whom we offer the rewards of the heavenly homeland. Hence Paul also, receiving these very things as of little account, says: “If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?” — Forty Gospel Homilies, Homily 17

John Chrysostom: “If we sowed unto you spiritual things, is it a great matter if we shall reap your carnal things?”

Lo, he adds also a fourth argument for the duty of yielding support. For since he had said, “What soldier ever serveth at his own charges?” and, “who planteth a vineyard?” and, “who feedeth a flock?” and introduced the ox that treadeth the corn; he points out likewise another most reasonable cause on account of which they might justly receive; viz. having bestowed much greater gifts, no more as having labored only. What is it then? “if we sowed unto you spiritual things, is it a great matter if we shall reap your carnal things?” Seest thou a most just allegation and fuller of reason than all the former? for “in those instances,” says he, “carnal is the seed, carnal also is the fruit; but here not so, but the seed is spiritual, the return carnal.” Thus, to prevent high thoughts in those who contribute to their teachers, he signified that they receive more than they give. As if he had said, “Husbandmen, whatsoever they sow, this also do they receive; but we, sowing in your souls spiritual things, do reap carnal.” For such is the kind of support given by them. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 21

1 Corinthians 9:12

Ambrosiaster: Paul does not exercise his rights because they might be an obstacle to the gospel. That left him free to argue that he was not one of the false apostles. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

John Chrysostom: “If others partake of this right over you, do not we yet more?”

See also again another argument, and this too from examples though not of the same kind. For it is not Peter whom he mentions here nor the Apostles, but certain other spurious ones, with whom he afterwards enters into combat, and concerning whom he says, “If a man devour you, if he take you captive, if he exalt himself, if he smite you on the face,” and already he is sounding the prelude to the fight with them. Wherefore neither did he say, “If others take of you,” but pointing out their insolence and tyranny and trafficking, he says, “if others partake of this right over you,” i.e., “rule you, exercise authority, use you as servants, not taking you captive only, but with much authority.” Wherefore he added “do not we yet more?” which he would not have said if the discourse were concerning the Apostles. But it is evident that he hints at certain pestilent men, and deceivers of them. “So that besides the law of Moses even ye yourselves have made a law in behalf of the duty of contribution.”

And having said, “do not we yet more?” he does not prove why yet more, but leaves it to their consciences to convince them of that, wishing at the same time both to alarm and to abash them more thoroughly.

“Nevertheless, we did not use this right;” i.e., “did not receive.” Do you see, when he had by so many reasons before proved that receiving is not unlawful, how he next says, “we receive not,” that he might not seem to abstain as from a thing forbidden? “For not because it is unlawful,” saith he, “do I not receive; for it is lawful and this we have many ways shown: from the Apostles; from the affairs of life, the soldier, the husbandman, and the shepherd; from the law of Moses; from the very nature of the case, in that we have sowed unto you spiritual things; from what yourselves have done to others.” But as he had laid down these things, lest he should seem to put to shame the Apostles who were in the habit of receiving; abashing them and signifying that not as from a forbidden thing doth he abstain from it: so again, lest by his large store of proof and the examples and reasonings by which he had pointed out the propriety of receiving, he should seem to be anxious to receive himself and therefore to say these things; he now corrects it. And afterwards he laid it down more clearly where he says, “And I wrote not these things, that it may be so done in my case;” but here his words are, “we did not use this right.”

And what is a still greater thing, neither could any have this to say, that being in abundance we declined using it; rather, when necessity pressed upon us we would not yield to the necessity. Which also in the second Epistle he says; “I robbed other Churches, taking wages of them that I might minister unto you; and when I was present with you, and was in want, I was not a burden on any man.” And in this Epistle again, “We both hunger, and thirst, and are naked, and are buffeted.” And here again he hints the same thing, saying, “But we bear all things.” For by saying, “we bear all things,” he intimates both hunger and great straits and all the other things. “But not even thus have we been compelled,” saith he, “to break the law which we laid down for ourselves. Wherefore? “that we may cause no hinderance to the Gospel of Christ.” For since the Corinthians were rather weak-minded, “lest we should wound you,” saith he “by receiving, we chose to do even more than was commanded rather than hinder the Gospel,” i.e., your instruction. Now if we in a matter left free to us, and when we were both enduring much hardship and having Apostles for our pattern, used abstinence lest we should give hindrance, (and he did not say, “subversion,” but “hindrance;” nor simply “hindrance,” but “any” hindrance,) that we might not, so to speak, cause so much as the slightest suspense and delay to the course of the Word: “If now,” saith he, “we used so great care, how much more ought you to abstain, who both come far short of the Apostles and have no law to mention, giving you permission: but contrariwise are both putting your hand to things forbidden and things which tend to the great injury of the Gospel, not to its hindrance only and not even having any pressing necessity in view.” For all this discussion he had moved on account of these Corinthians, who were making their weaker brethren to stumble by eating of things sacrificed to idols. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 21

1 Corinthians 9:13

John Chrysostom: He takes great care to show that the receiving was not forbidden. Whereupon having said so much before, he was not content but proceeds also to the Law, furnishing an example closer to the point than the former. For it was not the same thing to bring forward the oxen and to adduce the law expressly given concerning priests.

But consider, I pray, in this also the wisdom of Paul, how he mentions the matter in a way to give it dignity. For he did not say, “They which minister about sacred things receive of those who offer them.” But what? “They eat of the temple:” so that neither they who receive may be blamed nor they who give may be lifted up. Wherefore also what follows he hath set down in the same way.

For neither did he say, “They which wait upon the altar receive of them which sacrifice,” but, “have their portion with the altar.” For the things offered now no longer belonged to those who offered them, but to the temple and the altar. And he said not, “They receive the holy things,” but, they “eat of the temple,” indicating again their moderation, and that it behoves them not to make money nor to be rich. And though he say that they have their portion “with the altar,” he doth not speak of equal distribution but of relief given them as their due. And yet the case of the Apostles was much stronger. For in the former instance the priesthood was an honor, but in the latter it was dangers and slaughters and violent deaths. Wherefore all the other examples together did not come up to the saying, “If we sowed unto you spiritual things:” since in saying, “we sowed,” he points out the storms, the danger, the snares, the unspeakable evils, which they endured in preaching. Nevertheless, though the superiority was so great, he was unwilling either to abase the things of the old law or to exalt the things which belong to himself: nay he even contracts his own, reckoning the superiority not from the dangers, but from the greatness of the gift. For he said not, “if we have jeoparded ourselves” or “exposed ourselves to snares” but “if we sowed unto you spiritual things.”

And the part of the priests, as far as possible, he exalts, saying, “They which minister about sacred things,” and “they that wait upon the altar,” thereby intending to point out their continual servitude and patience. Again, as he had spoken of the priests among the Jews, viz. both the Levites and the Chief Priests, so he hath expressed each of the orders, both the inferior and the superior; the one by saying, “they which minister about sacred things,” and the other by saying, “they which wait upon the altar.” For not to all was one work commanded; but some were entrusted with the coarser, others with the more exalted offices. Comprehending therefore all these, lest any should say, “why talk to us of the old law? knowest thou not that ours is the time of more perfect commandments?” after all those topics he placed that which is strongest of all, saying, “Even so did the Lord ordain that they who proclaim the Gospel should live of the Gospel.” — Homily on 1 Corinthians 22

Tertullian: When he teaches that every man ought to live of his own industry, he begins with a copious induction of examples-of soldiers, and shepherds, and husbandmen. — Against Marcion Book V

1 Corinthians 9:14

Ambrosiaster: It was not by the law of Moses that God followed the practice of the Gentiles, but natural reason itself decrees that a person should live from his labor. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: The apostle says this [here and in Timothy :-] so that Timothy might understand that what he took from those for whom he was, as it were, fighting, and whom he was cultivating as a vine, or feeding as a flock, was not a sign of begging but an acknowledgment of a right.

John Chrysostom: “Even so did the Lord ordain that they who proclaim the Gospel should live of the Gospel.”

Nor doth he even here say that they are supported by men, but as in the case of the priests, of “the temple” and “of the altar,” so likewise here, “of the Gospel;” and as there he saith, “eat,” so here, “live,” not make merchandize nor lay up treasures. “For the laborer,” saith He, “is worthy of his hire.” — Homily on 1 Corinthians 22

1 Corinthians 9:15

Ambrosiaster: Paul says he would rather die because he knew it would be better from the standpoint of his future salvation. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: “For the laborer deserves his hire.” He showed that this practice was permitted, though not commanded, lest perhaps a disciple who took some compensation for his personal needs from those to whom he was preaching might think he was doing wrong. That it was more commendable to omit this practice is shown clearly in the life of the apostle … [who] declared: “Nevertheless I have not used this right.” … He possessed the right, but he did not bind his followers by a command. Since we are, then, unable to comprehend many passages, we gather from the deeds of the saints how to understand those passages which may easily be misinterpreted if reference is not made to the example set by the saints.

Augustine of Hippo: “The Lord directed that those who preach the gospel should have their living from the gospel. But I for my part have appealed to none of these rights.” … What is clearer than this? What is more definite? My only fear is that, when I discuss the passage in an attempt to explain it, I may obscure that which is of itself patent and forceful. For, they who do not understand these words, or pretend that they do not understand them, understand mine much less.

John Chrysostom: “But I have used none of these things:”

What then if thou hast not used them now, saith one, but intendest to use them at a future time, and on this account sayest these things. Far from it; for he speedily corrected the notion, thus saying; “And I write not these things that it may be so done in my case.”

And see with what vehemence he disavows and repels the thing: “For it were good for me rather to die, than that any man should make my glorying void.”

And not once nor twice, but many times he uses this expression. For above he said, “We did not use this right:” and after this again, “that I abuse not my right:” and here, “but I have used none of these things.” “These things;” what things? The many examples. That is to say, many things giving me license; the soldier, the husbandman, the shepherd, the Apostles, the law, the things done by us unto you, the things done by you unto the others, the priests, the ordinance of Christ; by none of these have I been induced to abolish my own law, and to receive. And speak not to me of the past: (although I could say, that I have endured much even in past times on this account,) nevertheless I do not rest on it alone, but likewise concerning the future I pledge myself, that I would choose rather to die of hunger than be deprived of these crowns.

“For it were good for me rather to die,” saith he, “than that any man should make my glorying void.”

He said not, “that any man should abolish my law,” but, “my glorying.” For lest any should say, “he doth it indeed but not cheerfully, but with lamentation and grief,” willing to show the excess of his joy and the abundance of his zeal, he even calls the matter “glorying.” So far was he from vexing himself that he even glories, and chooses rather to die than to fall from this “glorying.” So much dearer to him even than life itself was that proceeding of his. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 22

Origen of Alexandria: “It is better that I die” than that they ravish and plunder some of my brothers and by sly verbal deception lead captive the “little children” and sucklings in Christ. — HOMILIES ON Genesis 4.6

Tertullian: Of this he boasted, and suffered no man to rob him of such glory -certainly with no view of destroying the law, which he proved that another man might use. — Against Marcion Book V

Tertullian: And, “(I think) God hath selected us the apostles (as) hindmost, like men appointed to fight with wild beasts; since we have been made a spectacle to this world, both to angels and to men: “And, “We have been made the offscourings of this world, the refuse of all: “And, “Am I not free? am I not an apostle? have I not seen Christ Jesus our Lord? " With what kind of superciliousness, on the contrary, was he compelled to declare, “But to me it is of small moment that I be interrogated by you, or by a human court-day; for neither am I conscious to myself (of any guilt); “and, “My glory none shall make empty.” “Know ye not that we are to judge angels? " Again, of how open censure (does) the free expression (find utterance), how manifest the edge of the spiritual sword, (in words like these): “Ye are already enriched! ye are already satiated! ye are already reigning!” and, “If any thinks himself to know, he knoweth not yet how it behaves him to know I” Is he not even then “smiting some one’s face,” in saying, “For who maketh thee to differ? What, moreover, hast thou which thou hast not received? Why gloriest thou as if thou have not received? " Is he not withal “smiting them upon the mouth,” (in saying): “But some, in (their) conscience, even until now eat (it) as if (it were) an idol-sacrifice. — On Modesty

1 Corinthians 9:16

Ambrosiaster: The servant sent by the Lord does what he has to do even if he is not willing, because if he does not do it he will suffer for it. Moses preached to Pharaoh even though he did not want to, and Jonah was forced to preach to the Ninevites.8. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

John Chrysostom: “For if I preach the Gospel, I have nothing to glory of; for necessity is laid upon me; for woe is unto me, if I preach not the Gospel! For if I do this of mine own will, I have a reward: but if not of mine own will, I have a stewardship entrusted to me. What then is my reward? That when I preach the Gospel, I may make the Gospel of Christ without charge, so as not to use to the full my right in the Gospel.”

What sayest thou? tell me. “If thou preach the Gospel, it is nothing for thee to glory of, but it is, if thou make the Gospel of Christ without charge?” Is this therefore greater than that? By no means; but in another point of view it hath some advantage, inasmuch as the one is a command, but the other is a good deed of my own free-will: for what things are done beyond the commandment, have a great reward in this respect: but such as are in pursuance of a commandment, not so great: and so in this respect he says, the one is more than the other; not in the very nature of the thing. For what is equal to preaching; since it maketh men vie even with the angels themselves. Nevertheless since the one is a commandment and a debt, the other a forwardness of free-will, in this respect this is more than that. Wherefore he saith, explaining the same, what I just now mentioned:

“For if I do this of mine own will, I have a reward, but if not of mine own will, a stewardship is entrusted to me;” taking the words of mine own “will” and “not of mine own will,” of its being committed or not committed to him. And thus we must understand the expression, “for necessity is laid upon me;” not as though he did aught of these things against his will, God forbid, but as though he were bound by the things commanded, and for contradistinction to the liberty in receiving before mentioned. Wherefore also Christ said to the disciples, “When ye have done all, say, We are unprofitable servants; for we have done that which was our duty to do.”

“What then is my reward? That when I preach the Gospel, I may make the Gospel without charge.” What then, tell me, hath Peter no reward? Nay, who can ever have so great an one as he? And what shall we say of the other Apostles? How then said he, “If I do this of mine own will I have a reward, but if not of mine own will, a stewardship is entrusted to me?” Seest thou here also his wisdom? For he said not, “But if not of mine own will,” I have no reward, but, “a stewardship is committed unto me:” implying that even thus he hath a reward, but such as he obtains who hath performed what was commanded, not such as belongs to him who hath of his own resources been generous and exceeded the commandment.

“What then is the reward? That, when I preach the Gospel,” saith he, “I may make the Gospel without charge, so as not to use to the full my right in the Gospel.” See how throughout he uses the term “right,” intimating this, as I have often observed; that neither are they who receive worthy of blame. But he added, “in the Gospel,” partly to show the reasonableness of it, partly also to forbid our carrying the matter out into every case. For the teacher ought to receive, but not the mere drone also. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 22

Tertullian: And so there is incumbent on us a necessity binding us, since we have premised that a new law was predicted by the prophets, and that not such as had been already given to their fathers at the time when He led them forth from the land of Egypt, to show and prove, on the one hand, that that old Law has ceased, and on the other, that the promised new law is now in operation. — An Answer to the Jews

1 Corinthians 9:17

Ambrose of Milan: Surely it is better to merit a reward than to serve as a steward. Let us not be bound by the yoke of slavery, but let us serve in charity of spirit. — LETTER 47

Augustine of Hippo: Up to now I am so far restored in that glory that I confess I am ignorant not only how near I come to it but even whether I shall come to it at all. It is true I am a dispenser of eternal salvation along with my other innumerable fellow servants. “For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward.” To be a dispenser of that salvation by word and sacrament is not at all the same as to be a partaker of it. Letter , To Audax.

Origen of Alexandria: What then shall I do, to whom the dispensation of the Word is committed? Although I am an “unprofitable servant,” I have, nevertheless, received from the Lord the commission “to distribute the measure of wheat to the master’s servants.”. — HOMILIES ON Genesis 10

1 Corinthians 9:19

Ambrosiaster: Paul is free from all human claims because he preached the gospel without getting any praise for it and never wanted anything from anyone, except their salvation. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Clement of Alexandria: “For though I be free from all men, I have made myself servant to all “it is said, “that I might gain all. And every one that striveth for mastery is temperate in all things.”. For instance, Paul circumcised Timothy because of the Jews who believed, in order that those who had received their training from the law might not revolt from the faith through his breaking such points of the law as were understood more cam ally, knowing right well that circumcision does not justify; for he professed that “all things were for all “by conformity, preserving those of the dogmas that were essential, “that he might gain all.”. And Daniel, under the king of the Persians, wore “the chain”. But that he might not, by dragging all at once away from the law to the circumcision of the heart through faith those of the Hebrews who were reluctant listeners, compel them to break away from the synagogue, he, “accommodating himself to the Jews, became a Jew that he might gain all.” — The Stromata Book 4

Cyril of Alexandria: So also the blessed Paul “became all things to all men,” not in order that he might gain some sort of advantage but that, with the loss of a part, he might gain all. — LETTER 76

John Chrysostom: “For though I was free from all men, I brought myself under bondage to all, that I might gain the more.”

Here again he introduces another high step in advance. For a great thing it is even not to receive, but this which he is about to mention is much more than that. What then is it that he says? “Not only have I not received,” saith he, “not only have I not used this right, but I have even made myself a slave, and in a slavery manifold and universal. For not in money alone, but, which was much more than money, in employments many and various have I made good this same rule: and I have made myself a slave when I was subject to none, having no necessity in any respect, (for this is the meaning of, “though I was free from all men;”) and not to any single person have I been a slave, but to the whole world.” Wherefore also he subjoined, “I brought myself under bondage to all.” That is, “To preach the Gospel I was commanded, and to proclaim the things committed to my trust; but the contriving and devising numberless things beside, all that was of my own zeal. For I was only under obligation to invest the money, whereas I did every thing in order to get a return for it, attempting more than was commanded.” Thus doing as he did all things of free choice and zeal and love to Christ, he had an insatiable desire for the salvation of mankind. Wherefore also he used to overpass by a very great deal the lines marked out, in every way springing higher than the very heaven. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 22

Origen of Alexandria: The fact that he is completely free makes Paul the exemplary apostle. For it is possible to be free of immorality but a slave to anger, to be free of greed but a slave to boasting, to be free of one sin but a slave to another. — COMMENTARY ON 1 CORINTHIANS 3.43.1-5

Tertullian: Now by this time, you who argue about “Joseph” and “Daniel,” know that things old and new, rude and polished, begun and developed, slavish and free, are not always comparable. For they, even by their circumstances, were slaves; but you, the slave of none, in so far as you are the slave of Christ alone, who has freed you likewise from the captivity of the world, will incur the duty of acting after your Lord’s pattern. — On Idolatry

Tertullian: Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. — On Fasting

1 Corinthians 9:20

Ambrosiaster: Did Paul merely pretend to be all things to all men, in the way that flatterers do? No. He was a man of God and a doctor of the spirit who could diagnose every pain, and with great diligence he tended them and sympathized with them all. We all have something or other in common with everyone. This empathy is what Paul embodied in dealing with each particular person. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: A person who nurses a sick man becomes, in a sense, sick himself, not by pretending to have a fever but by thinking sympathetically how he would like to be treated if he were sick himself. Letter , To Jerome.

Augustine of Hippo: Paul was not pretending to be what he is not but showing compassion. Letter , To Jerome.

Clement of Alexandria: “For not only for the Hebrews and those that are under the law “according to the apostle, “is it right to become a Jew, but also a Greek for the sake of the Greeks, that we may gain all.”. Also in the Epistle to the Colossians he writes, “Admonishing every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom, that we may present every man perfect in Christ.”. Let a man milk the sheep’s milk if he need sustenance: let him shear the wool if he need clothing. And in this way let me produce the fruit of the Greek erudition. , that evil has an evil nature, and can never turn out the producer of aught that is good; indicating that philosophy is in a sense a work of Divine Providence. — The Stromata Book 1

John Chrysostom: “And I became,” says he, “to the Jews as a Jew, that I might gain Jews.” And how did this take place? When he circumcised that he might abolish circumcision. Wherefore he said not, “a Jew,” but, “as a Jew,” which was a wise arrangement. What sayest thou? The herald of the world and he who touched the very heavens and shone so bright in grace, doth he all at once descend so low? Yea. For this is to ascend. For you are not to look to the fact only of his descending, but also to his raising up him that was bowed down and bringing him up to himself.

“To them that are under the law, as under the law, not being myself under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law.” Either it is the explanation of what went before, or he hints at some other thing besides the former: calling those Jews, who were such originally and from the first: but “under the law,” the proselytes, or those who became believers and yet adhered to the law. For they were no longer as Jews, yet “under the law.” And when was he under the law? When he shaved his head; when he offered sacrifice. Now these things were done, not because his mind changed, (since such conduct would have been wickedness,) but because his love condescended. For that he might bring over to this faith those who were really Jews, he became such himself not really, showing himself such only, but not such in fact nor doing these things from a mind so disposed. Indeed, how could he, zealous as he was to convert others also, and doing these things only in order that he might free others who did them from that degradation? — Homily on 1 Corinthians 22

Tertullian: But, inasmuch as our very perverse cavillers obtrude the rebuke in question for the set purpose of bringing the earlier doctrine into suspicion, I will put in a defence, as it were, for Peter, to the effect that even Paul said that he was “made all things to all men-to the Jews a Jew,” to those who were not Jews as one who was not a Jew-“that he might gain all.” Therefore it was according to times and persons and causes that they used to censure certain practices, which they would not hesitate themselves to pursue, in like conformity to times and persons and causes. — The Prescription Against Heretics

Tertullian: Their truth may be inferred from their agreement with the apostle’s own profession, how “to the Jews he became as a Jew, that he might gain the Jews, and to them that were under the law, as under the law,"-and so here with respect to those who come in secretly,-“and lastly, how he became all things to all men, that he might gain all.” Now, inasmuch as the circumstances require such an interpretation as this, no one will refuse to admit that Paul preached that God and that Christ whose law he was excluding all the while, however much he allowed it, owing to the times, but which he would have had summarily to abolish if he had published a new god. — Against Marcion Book V

1 Corinthians 9:21

Ambrosiaster: To be under the law of Christ is to be under the law of God, because everything which is of Christ is of God. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: He did this by compassion, not by lying. For each one becomes like him whom he wants to help when such great mercy prevails as that each one would wish for himself if he were in the same misery. And so he becomes like the other—not by deceiving him but by putting himself in the other’s place. — Against Lying 12

John Chrysostom: “To them that are without law, as without law.” These were neither Jews, nor Christians, nor Greeks; but “outside of the Law,” as was Cornelius, and if there were any others like him. For among these also making his appearance, he used to assume many of their ways. But some say that he hints at his discourse with the Athenians from the inscription on the altar, and that so he saith, “to them that are without law, as without law.”

Then, lest any should think that the matter was a change of mind, he added, “not being without law to God, but under law to Christ;” i.e., “so far from being without law, I am not simply under the Law, but I have that law which is much more exalted than the older one, viz. that of the Spirit and of grace.” Wherefore also he adds, “to Christ.” Then again, having made them confident of his judgment, he states also the gain of such condescension, saying, “that I might gain them that are without law.” And every where he brings forward the cause of his condescension, and stops not even here, but says, — Homily on 1 Corinthians 22

Theodore of Mopsuestia: Paul states, somewhat surprisingly, that he is under the law of Christ, lest anyone think that he is under the law of Moses. — Pauline Commentary from the Greek Church

1 Corinthians 9:22

Ambrose of Milan: He who did not think it robbery to be equal with God took the nature of a slave. He became all things to all men to bring salvation to all. Paul, an imitator of him, lived as if outside the law while remaining accountable to the law. He spent his life for the advantage of those he wished to win. He willingly became weak for the weak in order to strengthen them. He ran the race to overtake them. — Letter 37 (To Simplician)

Ambrosiaster: Paul became weak by abstaining from things which would scandalize the weak. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: This is correctly interpreted to mean that he, not by lying but by sympathy, brought it about that he enabled their con-version by his own great love which made it seem as though he himself were afflicted with that evil of which he wished to heal them. — On Lying 21

Clement of Alexandria: Wherefore also, to those that ask the wisdom that is with us, we are to hold out things suitable, that with the greatest possible ease they may, through their own ideas, be likely to arrive at faith in the truth. For “I became all things to all men, that I might gain all men.” — The Stromata Book 5

Cyprian: If we reject the repentance of those who have some confidence in a conscience that may be tolerated; at once with their wife, with their children, whom they had kept safe, they are hurried by the devil’s invitation into heresy or schism; and it will be attributed to us in the day of judgment, that we have not cared for the wounded sheep, and that on account of a single wounded one we have lost many sound ones. And whereas the Lord left the ninety and nine that were whole, and sought after the one wandering and weary, and Himself carried it, when found, upon His shoulders, we not only do not seek the lapsed, but even drive them away when they come to us; and while false prophets are not ceasing to lay waste and tear Christ’s flock, we give an opportunity to dogs and wolves, so that those whom a hateful persecution has not destroyed, we ruin by our hardness and inhumanity. And what will become, dearest brother, of what the apostle says: “I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved. Be ye followers of me, as I also am of Christ.” And again: “To the weak I became as weak, that I might gain the weak.” And again: “Whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member rejoice, all the members rejoice with it.” — Epistle LI

Cyril of Jerusalem: Everywhere the Savior becomes “all things to all men.” To the hungry, bread; to the thirsty, water; to the dead, resurrection; to the sick, a physician; to sinners, redemption. — SERMON ON THE PARALYTIC 10

John Chrysostom: “To the weak became I weak, that I might gain the weak:” in this part coming to their case, with a view to which also all these things have been spoken. However, those were much greater things, but this more to the purpose; whence also he hath placed it after them. Indeed he did the same thing likewise in his Epistle to the Romans, when he was finding fault about meats; and so in many other places.

Next, not to waste time by naming all severally, he saith, “I am become all things to all men, that I may by all means save some.”

Seest thou how far it is carried? “I am become all things to all men,” not expecting, however, to save all, but that I may save though it be but a few. And so great care and service have I undergone, as one naturally would who was about saving all, far however from hoping to gain all: which was truly magnanimous and a proof of burning zeal. Since likewise the sower sowed every where, and saved not all the seed, notwithstanding he did his part. And having mentioned the fewness of those who are saved, again, adding, “by all means,” he consoled those to whom this was a grief. For though it be not possible that all the seed should be saved, nevertheless it cannot be that all should perish. Wherefore he said, “by all means,” because one so ardently zealous must certainly have some success. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 22

Tertullian: " No doubt he used to please them by celebrating the Saturnalia and New-year’s day! [Was it so] or was it by moderation and patience? by gravity, by kindness, by integrity? In like manner, when he is saying, “I have become all things to all, that I may gain all,” does he mean “to idolaters an idolater? ““to heathens a heathen? ““to the worldly worldly? “But albeit he does not prohibit us from having our conversation with idolaters and adulterers, and the other criminals, saying, “Otherwise ye would go out from the world,” of course he does not so slacken those reins of conversation that, since it is necessary for us both to live and to mingle with sinners, we may be able to sin with them too. — On Idolatry

Tertullian: They seemed to be changing their company from respect of persons. And yet as Paul himself “became all things to all men,” that he might gain all, it was possible that Peter also might have betaken himself to the same plan of practising somewhat different from what he taught. — Against Marcion Book IV

Tertullian: But so did circumstances require him to “become all things to all, in order to gain all; " “travailing in birth with them until Christ should be formed in them; " and “cherishing, as it were a nurse,” the little ones of faith, by teaching them some things “by way of indulgence, not by way of command”-for it is one thing to indulge, another to bid-permitting a temporary licence of re-marriage on account of the “weakness of the flesh,” just as Moses of divorcing on account of “the hardness of the heart. — On Monogamy

1 Corinthians 9:23

John Chrysostom: “And I do all things for the Gospel’s sake, that I may be a joint partaker thereof.”

“That is, that I may seem also myself to have added some contribution of mine own, and may partake of the crowns laid up for the faithful. For as he spake of “living of the Gospel,” i.e, of the believers; so also here, “that I may be a joint partaker in the Gospel, that I may be able to partake with them that have believed in the Gospel.” Do you perceive his humility, how in the recompense of rewards he places himself as one of the many, though he had exceeded all in his labors? whence it is evident that he would in his reward also. Nevertheless, he claims not to enjoy the first prize, but is content if so be he may partake with the others in the crowns laid up for them. But these things he said, not because he did this for any reward, but that hereby at least he might draw them on, and by these hopes might induce them to do all things for their brethren’s sake. Seest thou his wisdom! Seest thou the excellency of his perfection? how he wrought beyond the things commanded, not receiving when it was lawful to receive. Seest thou the exceeding greatness of his condescension? how he that was “under law to Christ,” and kept that highest law, “to them that were without law,” was “as one without law,” to the Jews, as a Jew, in either kind showing himself preeminent, and surpassing all. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 22

Origen of Alexandria: Only someone as mature in faith as the apostle Paul could say this. A sinner could never talk in this way. — COMMENTARY ON 1 CORINTHIANS 3.43.49-50

1 Corinthians 9:24

Augustine of Hippo: It is not from the one who wills nor from the one that runs but from God who has mercy that we obtain what we hope for and reach what we desire. Esau was unwilling and did not run. Had he been willing and had he run, he would have obtained the help of God who by calling him would have given him the power both to will and to run. — TO SIMPLICIAN 10

Gregory of Nyssa: As far as you extend your efforts in behalf of piety, so far will the greatness of your soul extend through efforts and toils toward what the Lord urges us. — ON THE CHRISTIAN MODE OF LIFE

Irenaeus: But I so run, not as uncertainty; I fight, not as One beating the air; but I make my body livid, and bring it into subjection, lest by any means, when preaching to others, I may myself be rendered a castaway.” — Against Heresies Book IV

John Chrysostom: Having pointed out the manifold usefulness of condescension and that this is the highest perfectness, and that he himself having risen higher than all towards perfection, or rather having gone beyond it by declining to receive, descended lower than all again; and having made known to us the times for each of these, both for the perfectness and for the condescension; he touches them more sharply in what follows, covertly intimating that this which was done by them and which was counted a mark of perfectness, is a kind of superfluous and useless labor. And he saith it not thus out clearly, lest they should become insolent; but the methods of proof employed by him makes this evident.

And having said that they sin against Christ and destroy the brethren, and are nothing profited by this perfect knowledge, except charity be added; he again proceeds to a common example, and saith, “Know ye not that they which run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize?” Now this he saith, not as though here also one only out of many would be saved; far from it; but to set forth the exceeding diligence which it is our duty to use. For as there, though many descend into the course not many are crowned, but this befalls one only; and it is not enough to descend into the contest, nor to anoint one’s self and wrestle: so likewise here it is not sufficient to believe, and to contend in any way; but unless we have so run as unto the end to show ourselves unblameable, and to come near the prize, it will profit us nothing. For even though thou consider thyself to be perfect according to knowledge, thou hast not yet attained the whole; which hinting at, he said, “so run, that ye may obtain.” They had not then yet, as it seems, attained. And having said thus, he teaches them also the manner. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 23

Pseudo-Clement: So then, my brothers, let us strive, knowing that the contest is close at hand and that many make voyages for corruptible contests, but not all are crowned—only those who have labored much and striven well. — 2 Clement 7

Tertullian: Your master, Jesus Christ, has anointed you with his Spirit and has brought you to this training ground. He determined long before the day of the contest to take you from a softer way of life to a harsher regimen, that your strength may increase. Athletes are set apart for more rigid training to apply themselves to the building up of their physical strength. They are kept from lavish living, from more tempting dishes, from more pleasurable drinks. They are urged on, they are subjected to tortuous toils, they are worn out. The more strenuously they have exerted themselves, the greater is their hope of victory. — TO THE MARTYRS 3.3

1 Corinthians 9:25

Ambrose of Milan: You are an athlete. Come to grips with your opponent, not with your head but with your arms. — The Six Days of Creation, Book 6, Chapter 1

Augustine of Hippo: When we enter upon the way of the Lord, let us fast from the vanity of this present life and refresh ourselves with the hope of the future life, not focusing our heart on things here but feasting it on things above. — SERMON 263

Basil of Caesarea: No one is crowned except he strive lawfully. — GIVE HEED TO THYSELF

Clement of Alexandria: No effort, no crown! Today there are people who place the widow above the virgin in terms of self-control, because the widow has rejected a pleasure which she once enjoyed. — The Stromata Book 3

Cyprian: This fight, therefore, predicted of old by the prophets, begun by the Lord, waged by the apostles… — Epistle VIII

Desert Fathers: They said that Dioscorus of Namisias made his bread out of barley, and his soup out of lentils. Every year he made one particular resolution: either not to meet anyone for a year, or not to speak, or not to taste cooked food, or not to eat any fruit, or not to eat vegetables. This was his system in everything. He made himself master of one thing, and then started on another, and so on each year…

They said of Helladius that he lived twenty years in his cell, and did not once raise his eyes to look at the roof. — The Desert Fathers, Sayings of the Early Christian Monks

Desert Fathers: John the Short said, ‘If a king wants to take a city filled with his enemies, he first captures their food and water, and when they are starving he subdues them. So it is with gluttony. If a man is sincere about fasting and is hungry, the enemies that trouble his soul will grow weak.’ — The Desert Fathers, Sayings of the Early Christian Monks

Desert Fathers: Joseph asked Poemen, ‘How should we fast?’ Poemen said, ‘I suggest that everyone should eat a little less than he wants, every day.’ Joseph said to him, ‘When you were a young man, didn’t you fast for two days on end?’ He said to him, ‘That’s right, I used to fast three days on end, even for a week. But the great hermits have tested all these things, and they found that it is good to eat something every day, but on some days a little less. They have shown us that this is the king’s highway, for it is easy and light.’ — The Desert Fathers, Sayings of the Early Christian Monks

Desert Fathers: She also said, ‘The devil sometimes sends a severe fast which is too prolonged; the devil’s disciples do this as well as holy men. How do we distinguish the fasting of our God and King from the fasting of that tyrant the devil? Clearly by its moderation. Throughout your life, then, you ought to keep an unvarying rule of fasting. Do you fast four or five days on end and then lose your spiritual strength by eating a feast? That really pleases the devil! Everything which is extreme is destructive. So do not suddenly throw away your armour, or you may be found unarmed in the battle and easily captured. Our body is the armour, our soul is the warrior. Take care of both, and you will be ready for whatever comes.’ — The Desert Fathers, Sayings of the Early Christian Monks

John Chrysostom: “And every man that striveth in the games is temperate in all things.”

What is, “all things?” He doth not abstain from one and err in another, but he masters entirely gluttony and lasciviousness and drunkenness and all his passions. “For this,” saith he, “takes place even in the heathen games. For neither is excess of wine permitted to those who contend at the time of the contest, nor wantonness, lest they should weaken their vigor, nor yet so much as to be busied about any thing else, but separating themselves altogether from all things they apply themselves to their exercise only.” Now if there these things be so where the crown fails to one, much more here, where the incitement in emulation is more abundant. For here neither is one to be crowned alone, and the rewards also far surpass the labors. Wherefore also he puts it so as to shame them, saying, “Now they do it receive to a corruptible crown, but we an incorruptible.” — Homily on 1 Corinthians 23

Tertullian: They are kept from luxury, from daintier meats, from more pleasant drinks; they are pressed, racked, worn out; the harder their labours in the preparatory training, the stronger is the hope of victory. “And they,” says the apostle, “that they may obtain a corruptible crown.” We, with the crown eternal in our eye, look upon the prison as our training-ground, that at the goal of final judgment we may be brought forth well disciplined by many a trial; since virtue is built up by hardships, as by voluptuous indulgence it is overthrown. — Ad Martyras

Theonas of Alexandria: Be clothed with patience and courtesy; be replenished with the virtues and the hope of Christ. Bear all things for the sake of your Creator Himself; endure all things; overcome and get above all things, that ye may win Christ the Lord. Great are these duties, and full of painstaking. But he that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things; and they do it to obtain a corruptible crown, but we an incorruptible. — The Epistle of Theonas, Bishop of Alexandria, to Lucianus, the Chief Chamberlain

1 Corinthians 9:26

Ambrose of Milan: As a wrestler therefore he enters the lists last of all; he raises his eyes to heaven, he sees that even the heavenly creation was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope. He sees that the whole creation groaneth in pain together, waiting for redemption. He sees that labour awaits us all. He raises his eyes, he sees the circlets of lights, he surveys the orbs of the moon and stars: For the just, who overcome, shall be as the stars in heaven. And he chastises his body, that it may not be his enemy in the combat, he anoints it with the oil of mercy, he exercises it with daily trials of virtue, he smears himself with dust, he runs to the goal of the course but not as uncertainly, he aims his blows, he darts forth his arms, but not into empty space. Thus the earth is man’s trial-ground, heaven is his crown. — Letter 49, 5-6

Ambrose of Milan: And so Paul, like a good athlete, not only knew how to avoid the blows of opposing powers, but also how to strike back. Therefore he says: I beat my body and make it my slave, so that after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified for the prize. And so, like a good athlete, he deserved to reach the crown. — On Paradise, Chapter 12, 56

Ambrosiaster: Paul means that he fights not merely with his words but with his deeds. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Jerome: So run in this world as to obtain in the next. — Against the Pelagians 1

John Chrysostom: “I therefore so run, as not uncertainly.”

Thus having shamed them from those that are without, he next brings forward himself also, which kind of thing is a most excellent method of teaching: and accordingly we find him every where doing so.

But what is, “not uncertainly?” “Looking to some mark,” saith he, “not at random and in vain, as ye do. For what profit have ye of entering into idol-temples, and exhibiting for-sooth that perfectness? None. But not such am I, but all things whatsoever I do, I do for the salvation of my neighbor. Whether I show forth perfectness, it is for their sake; or condescension, for their sake again: whether I surpass Peter in declining to receive [compensation], it is that they may not be offended; or descend lower than all, being circumcised and shaving my head, it is that they may not be subverted. This is, “not uncertainly.” But thou, why dost thou eat in idol-temples, tell me? Nay, thou canst not assign any reasonable cause. For “meat commendeth thee not to God; neither if thou eat art thou the better, nor if thou eat not art thou the worse.” Plainly then thou runnest at random: for this is, “uncertainly.”

“So fight I, as not beating the air.” This he saith, again intimating that he acted not at random nor in vain. “For I have one at whom I may strike, i.e., the devil. But thou dost not strike him, but simply throwest away thy strength.”

Now so far then, altogether bearing with them, he thus speaks. For since he had dealt somewhat vehemently with them in the preceding part, he now on the contrary keeps back his rebuke, reserving for the end of the discourse the deep wound of all. Since here he says that they act at random and in vain; but afterwards signifies that it is at the risk of no less than utter ruin to their own soul, and that even apart from all injury to their brethren, neither are they themselves guiltless in daring so to act. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 23

Theodore of Mopsuestia: The “air” here refers to the powers of evil. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

1 Corinthians 9:27

Ambrosiaster: To pommel the body is to fast and to avoid any kind of luxury. Paul shows that he disciplines his own body so that he will not miss out on the reward about which he preaches to others. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: Paul chastises what is of him and not what is himself. For what is of him is one thing, what is himself is another. He chastises what is of him so that he, being just, may bring about the death of bodily wantonness. — AGAINST JULIAN 24

Cassiodorus: Free us, Lover of men, from the danger which Paul mentions, that while preaching to others I may myself be found false. You truly know how weak we are. You recognize the nature of the foe who oppresses us. In our uneven contest and our mortal weakness we seek you, for the glory redounds to your majesty if the roaring lion is overcome by the feeble sheep. — EXPLANATION OF THE PSALMS, PRAYER

Clement of Alexandria: “I buffet my body and bring it into subjection.” “For everyone who wishes to take part in a contest is continent in all things” (the words “he is continent in all things” really mean that, though he does not abstain from everything, yet he is self-controlled on such things as he thinks fit). “They do it to obtain a corruptible crown, but we an incorruptible,” as if we conquer in the struggle, though there is no crown for us if we do not put up any fight at all. — The Stromata Book 3

Desert Fathers: Pambo said to Antony, ‘What shall I do?’ Antony said, ‘Do not trust in your own righteousness. Do not go on sorrowing over a deed that is past. Keep your tongue and your belly under control.’ — The Desert Fathers, Sayings of the Early Christian Monks

Desert Fathers: He also said, ‘Fasting is the monk’s control over sin. The man who stops fasting is like a stallion who lusts the moment he sees a mare.’ — The Desert Fathers, Sayings of the Early Christian Monks

Desert Fathers: A brother felt hungry at dawn, and struggled not to eat till nine o’clock. When nine o’clock came, he made himself wait till noon. At noon he dipped his bread and sat down to eat, but then got up again, saying, ‘I will wait till three.’ At three o’clock he prayed, and saw the devil’s work going out of him like smoke; and his hunger ceased. — The Desert Fathers, Sayings of the Early Christian Monks

Gregory the Dialogist: For the cross is taken up in two ways: either when the body is afflicted through abstinence, or when the mind is troubled through compassion for one’s neighbor. Let us consider how Paul had borne his cross in both ways, who said: “I chastise my body and bring it into subjection, lest perhaps while preaching to others I myself should become a castaway.” Behold, in the affliction of the body we have heard of the cross of the flesh. — Forty Gospel Homilies, Homily 32

Jerome: Let our soul be in command and our body in subjection. Then Christ will come immediately and make his dwelling with us. — HOMILY 9

John Chrysostom: If Paul—a man of such caliber and stature, who traversed the whole world like a winged creation, who proved superior to bodily necessities and was privileged to hear those secret words that no one else to this day has heard—if he wrote these words, “I punish my body and bring it into subjection lest while preaching to others I myself become disqualified,” if then that man, the object of so great favor, despite such conspicuous prowess felt the need to pommel his body, bring it into subjection, submit it to the authority of the soul and place its impulses under the virtue of the soul … what then would we say, deprived as we are of these virtues and with nothing to show in addition to this beyond deep indifference? After all, this war admits of no truce, does it? It has no set time for the assault, does it? — HOMILIES ON GENESIS; 22.22

John Chrysostom: “But I buffet my body, and bring it into bondage lest by any means, after that I have preached to others, I myself should be rejected.”

Here he implies that they are subject to the lust of the belly and give up the reins to it, and under a pretence of perfection fulfil their own greediness; a thought which before also he was travailing to express, when he said, “meats for the belly, and the belly for meats.” For since both fornication is caused by luxury, and it also brought forth idolatry, he naturally oftentimes inveighs against this disease; and pointing out how great things he suffered for the Gospel, he sets this also down among them. “As I went,” saith he, “beyond the commands, and this when it was no light matter for me:” (“for we endure all things,” it is said,) “so also here I submit to much labor in order to live soberly. Stubborn as appetite is and the tyranny of the belly, nevertheless I bridle it and give not myself up to the passion, but endure all labor not to be drawn aside by it.”

“For do not, I pray you, suppose that by taking things easily I arrive at this desirable result. For it is a race and a manifold struggle, and a tyrannical nature continually rising up against me and seeking to free itself. But I bear not with it but keep it down, and bring it into subjection with many struggles.” Now this he saith that none may despairingly withdraw from the conflicts in behalf of virtue because the undertaking is laborious. Wherefore he saith, “I buffet and bring into bondage.” He said not, “I kill:” nor, “I punish” for the flesh is not to be hated, but, “I buffet and bring into bondage;” which is the part of a master not of an enemy, of a teacher not of a foe, of a gymnastic master not of an adversary.

“Lest by any means, having preached to others, I myself should be a rejected.”

Now if Paul feared this who had taught so many, and feared it after his preaching and becoming an angel and undertaking the leadership of the whole world; what can we say?

For, “think not,” saith he, “because ye have believed, that this is sufficient for your salvation: since if to me neither preaching nor teaching nor bringing over innumerable persons, is enough for salvation unless I exhibit my own conduct also unblameable, much less to you.” — Homily on 1 Corinthians 23

Pseudo-Clement: He in whomsoever the Spirit of God is, is in accord with the will of the Spirit of God; and, because he is in accord with the Spirit of God, therefore does he mortify the deeds of the body and live unto God, “treading down and subjugating the body and keeping it under; so that, while preaching to others,” he may be a beautiful example and pattern to believers, and may spend his life in works which are worthy of the Holy Spirit, so that he may “not be cast away,” [1 Corinthians 9:27] but may be approved before God and before men. — Two Epistles on Virginity

Tertullian: Nay, rather, by the virtue of contemning food He was initiating “the new man” into “a severe handling” of “the old,” that He might show that (new man) to the devil, again seeking to tempt him by means of food, (to be) too strong for the whole power of hunger. — On Fasting