I Corinthians 9 · The Lantern

Am I not free? Am I not an Apostle? Have I not seen Christ Jesus our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord?

"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.

"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 w…

Having said: if food causes my brother to stumble, I will never eat meat, lest anyone consider him boastful and self-praising, he is compelled at last to declare that he abstained even from what was permitted, so as not to cause anyone to stumble.

And if I am not an Apostle to others, yet still I am to you. For you are the seal of my Apostleship in the Lord.

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.

"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.

I do not say that I am a teacher of the whole universe; but am I not a teacher to you at least? Why then did I take nothing from you, from whom I had a special right to take? Through such a concession he further strengthens his argument. That is, the proof. If anyone wishes to be convinced whether I am truly an apostle, I will point to you.

My defense with those who question me is this:

Do we not have the authority to eat and to drink?

Do we not have the authority to travel around with a woman who is a sister, just as do the other Apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?

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.

But let us return to the order of our discourse, and the whole of the passage itself of the Epistle let us diligently consider. "Have we not," saith he, "leave to eat and to drink?

The apostles were followed by wealthy women who provided them with necessities and took upon themselves all the care for this, so that they might occupy themselves solely with preaching. Note that he placed the chief apostle last, as the most important, expressing this thought: why speak of the others? Peter himself does this.

Or is it only myself and Barnabas who do not have the authority to act in this way?

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?

"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?

That is, do we really not have the authority to live without working and to be supported at the expense of our disciples, without laboring? He did not fail to mention Barnabas either, who, as he knew, was also scrupulous in this regard; for he lived by his own labor.

Who has ever served as a soldier and paid his own stipend? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat from its produce? Who pastures a flock and does not drink from the milk of the flock?

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.

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.

On that passage in 1 Corinthians 9: Who serves as a soldier, etc.; the Gloss says: "As the Lord ordained, those living from the Gospel ate bread freely given, received from those to whom they preached grace freely given"; but it is called bread freely given because it was not acquired through bodily labor: therefore those exercising the work of preaching are not bound to bodily…

Am I saying these things according to man? Or does the law not also say these things?

For it is written in the law of Moses: “You shall not bind the mouth of an ox, while it is treading out the grain.” Is God here concerned with the oxen?

What was the use, however, of adducing the Creator's, which he was destroying? It was vain to do so; for his god had no such authority! (The apostle) says: "Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn," and adds: "Doth God take care of oxen? "Yes, of oxen, for the sake of men! For, says he, "it is written for our sakes.

"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.

He confirms the desired point abundantly, which is why he brings up the example of oxen as well. What then? Does He truly not care? He does care, but not so as to give laws about them. Therefore, by His concern for dumb animals He was suggesting something else, namely He was training the Jews in caring for their teachers.

Or is he saying this, indeed, for our sake? These things were written specifically for us, because he who plows, ought to plow in hope, and he who threshes, too, in hope of receiving the produce.

If we have sown spiritual things in you, is it important if we harvest from your worldly things?

If others are sharers in this authority over you, why are we not more entitled? And yet we have not used this authority. Instead, we bear all things, lest we give any hindrance to the Gospel of Christ.

Do you not know that those who work in the holy place eat the things that are for the holy place, and that those who serve at the altar also share with the altar?

So, too, has the Lord ordained that those who announce the Gospel should live by the Gospel.

Yet I have used none of these things. And I have not written so that these things may be done for me. For it is better for me to die, rather than to let anyone empty out my glory.

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?

"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.

That is, I did not make use of any of the above-mentioned Old Testament examples, nor of the commandment of Christ, in order to eat and drink at your expense. So that no one would say to him: "What then?

For if I preach the Gospel, it is not glory for me. For an obligation has been laid upon me. And woe to me, if I do not preach the Gospel.

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.

"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?

What are you saying? Your praise is not in preaching the Gospel, but in preaching without charge? Is the latter better than the former?

For if I do this willingly, I have a reward. But if I do this reluctantly, a dispensation is granted to me.

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.".

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.

To that which is objected, that such men are imitators of Gehazi, who minister spiritual things for temporal ones: to this the Gloss responds sufficiently enough on that passage of 1 Corinthians 9: A dispensation is entrusted to me: "We ought not to preach the Gospel in order that we may eat, but rather to eat in order that we may preach the Gospel, so that food is not a good w…

And what, then, would be my reward? So, when preaching the Gospel, I should give the Gospel without taking, so that I may not misuse my authority in the Gospel.

For when I was a free man to all, I made myself the servant of all, so that I might gain all the more.

And especially is it incumbent on those entrusted with such a dispensation to exhibit to disciples a pure example. "For though I be free from all men, I have made myself servant to all," it is said, "that I might gain all.

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.

He says something even greater. Not only did I not take, though I had the authority, but also, being free, not being subject to anyone, without external compulsion, I enslaved myself to all, not to one or two, but to the whole world, not in order to please everyone through flattery, but to gain "more" believers; for it is impossible to gain all.

And so, to the Jews, I became like a Jew, so that I might gain the Jews.

"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.".

"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?

For example, when he circumcised Timothy (Acts 16:3). He did not say: a Jew, but: "as" a Jew, to show that this was done with a special purpose. We understand proselytes, or those of the Jews who believed but still held to the law. This was when he shaved his head (Acts 18:18), when he offered a sacrifice according to the rite of purification (Acts 21:26).

To those who are under the law, I became as if I were under the law, (though I was not under the law) so that I might gain those who were under the law. To those who were without the law, I became as if I were without the law, (though I was not without the law of God, being in the law of Christ) so that I might gain those who were without the law.

To the weak, I became weak, so that I might gain the weak. To all, I became all, so that I might save all.

For we are taught what is like by what is like. For says Solomon, "Answer a fool according to his folly." 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.

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.

So now too, for your sake, because of your unsteadiness in convictions and inclination toward temptation, I did not wish to be fed at your expense.

And I do everything for the sake of the Gospel, so that I may become its partner.

Do you not know that, of those who run in a race, all of them, certainly, are runners, but only one achieves the prize. Similarly, you must run, so that you may achieve.

On this account also Paul the Apostle says to the Corinthians, "Know ye not, that they who run in a racecourse, do all indeed run, but one receiveth the prize? So run, that ye may obtain. Every one also who engages in the contest is temperate in all things: now these men do it that they may obtain a corruptible crown, but we an incorruptible.

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.

Having proved that one must be condescending toward the brethren, he now addresses them with a more stern discourse. His words have the following meaning. Do not think that for your salvation it is already enough that you believed and entered upon the arena of the Church.

And one who competes in a contest abstains from all things. And they do this, of course, so that they may achieve a corruptible crown. But we do this, so that we may achieve what is incorruptible.

And so I run, but not with uncertainty. And so I fight, but not by flailing in the air.

Instead, I chastise my body, so as to redirect it into servitude. Otherwise, I might preach to others, but become myself an outcast.

"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).

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.

Here he points out that they are given over to gluttony and excuse it under the pretext of perfection. But I, he says, endure every labor in order to live chastely. For "I discipline" (ὑποπιέζω — I strike under the eyes) means: I fight with the body. The word ὑπώποι refers to the bruises under the eyes that come from beatings.

I Corinthians9