Already indeed there is plainly a fault among you, that you have lawsuits one with another. Why do you not rather take wrong? Why do you not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?

“And how shall one "judge" the apostate "angels," who has become himself an apostate from that forgetfulness of injuries, which is according to the Gospel? "Why do ye not rather suffer wrong?" he says; "why are ye not rather defrauded? Yea, ye do wrong and defraud," manifestly by praying against those who transgress in ignorance, and deprive of the philanthropy and goodness of God, as far as in you lies, those against whom you pray, "and these your brethren,"—not meaning those in the faith only, but also the proselytes.”

“That believers who differ among themselves ought not to refer to a Gentile judge. In the first Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: "Dares any of you, having a matter against other, to discuss it among the unrighteous, and not among the saints? Know ye not that the saints shall judge this world? " And again: "Now indeed there is altogether a fault among you, because ye have judgments one against another. Wherefore do ye not rather suffer injury? or wherefore are ye not rather defrauded? But ye do wrong, and defraud, and this your brethren. Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not obtain the kingdom of God? "”

“After the Apostle rebuked the Corinthians for going to law before unbelieving judges, he here rebukes them concerning the judgments themselves. And about this he does two things. First he sets down in what they were sinning concerning judgments; second he makes plain what he had said, at the words *or do you not know*, etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he rebukes in them, concerning judgments, that which is lawful but not expedient; second, that which is altogether unlawful, at the words *but you*, etc. Concerning the first he does two things: first he sets down the rebuke; second he removes the excuse, at the words *why do you not rather*, etc. He says therefore first: it was said, that brother goes to law with brother, that it is not only evil that you contend before unbelievers, but *now indeed*, after your conversion, it is altogether *a fault among you*, that is, it is reckoned to you as a fault, *that you have lawsuits with one another*, among whom, that is, there ought to be peace: because, as it is said in 2 Tim. 2:24, *the servant of the Lord must not quarrel, but be gentle toward all*. It appears, however, from this, as the Gloss of Augustine says here, that it is a sin to have a lawsuit against anyone; but this seems to be false: because if it is a sin to have a lawsuit, it seems to follow that it is likewise a sin to appoint judges, since this would be to give occasion to those who have lawsuits, whereas it is said in Deut. 1:16: *hear them, and judge what is just*, and afterward it is added, *because it is the judgment of God*. This is resolved in the Gloss: that it is permitted to the weak to seek back their own goods in a lawsuit, but not to the perfect: to whom it is permitted to seek their own goods, but not in a lawsuit. Now here it must be known that a certain thing is unlawful to the perfect, and a certain thing to all. The perfect indeed have no property of their own, according to Matt. 19:21: *if you wish to be perfect, go and sell all that you have, and give to the poor, and come, follow me*; and therefore it is not lawful for them to seek things back in a lawsuit as their own, since it is not lawful for them to have anything as their own, though it is lawful for them to seek back in a lawsuit those things which are common. For in doing this they do not sin, but rather merit. For it is a work of charity to defend or recover the goods of the poor, according to Ps. 81:4: *rescue the poor, and deliver the needy out of the hand of the sinner*. But a lawsuit against someone is unlawful to all as regards three things. First indeed as regards the cause from which someone has a lawsuit, namely from cupidity and avarice. Whence, in Luke 12:13, when a certain man from the crowd had said to the Lord: *tell my brother to divide the inheritance with me*, the Lord said: *who has appointed me a judge to divide between you?* Afterward he adds: *see and beware of all covetousness*. Second, as regards the manner of the lawsuit, namely because they pursue the lawsuit with contention and to the detriment of peace; for as it is said in James 3:16, *where there is envy and contention, there is instability and every evil work*. And this the Apostle appears to rebuke in them, as is clear from what he said above: *brother goes to law with brother*. Third, from the perversity of the judgment, as when someone proceeds unjustly and fraudulently in a lawsuit, according to Is. 10:2: *that they might oppress the poor, and do violence to the cause of the humble of my people*. And this too the Apostle rebukes in them, as is clear from what he adds: *but you do injury*. Fourth, on account of the scandal that follows. Whence the Lord also commands, in Matt. 5:40: *he who wishes to contend with you at law, and take away your tunic, let go to him your cloak also*. From charity, however, it is lawful to seek back one's own goods in a lawsuit. Whence Gregory says in the Morals: *when necessity imposes on us care of goods, some, while they seek them back, are only to be tolerated: some, however, while charity is preserved, are to be prevented*, namely lest, seizing what is not their own, they destroy themselves. Then when he says *why do you not rather*, etc., he removes the excuse. For they could say: necessity leads us to have lawsuits, namely so that we may resist the injuries and frauds of others; but he excludes this, adding, as regards the first, *why do you not rather accept injury*, namely manifest injury, that is, by patiently enduring it, according to what the Lord says, Matt. 5:39: *if anyone strikes you on the cheek, offer him the other also*. But as regards the second he adds *why do you not rather suffer fraud*, that is, deceitful seduction, according to Matt. 5:41: *if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two more*. But, as Augustine says in the book On the Sermon of the Lord on the Mount, these precepts of the Lord are not always to be observed in the execution of the deed, but are always to be held in the preparation of the mind, namely that we be ready rather to do or endure this, than to do anything against fraternal charity. Then when he says *but you*, etc., he rebukes in them that which is altogether unlawful. And first he charges them with manifest injustice, when he says *but you do injury*, namely by speaking manifestly against the justice of others, either in a lawsuit or outside a lawsuit. Ecclus. 9:17: *let not the injury of the unjust be pleasing to you*. Second, deceitful deception, when he adds *and you defraud*, Prov. 12:5: *the counsels of the wicked are deceitful*. Third, he aggravates both, when he adds *and this to brothers*, that is, to the faithful, to whom we ought most of all to do good, according to Gal. ult.: *while we have time, let us work good to all; but especially to those of the household of the faith*. And therefore against certain ones it is said in Jer. 9:4: *every brother will utterly supplant, and every friend will walk deceitfully*. Then, when he says *or do you not know*, etc., he makes plain what he had said. And first, as regards that which is altogether unlawful; second, as regards that which is lawful but not expedient, at the words *all things are lawful for me*. Concerning the first he does two things. First he raises the question; second he settles it, at the words *do not err*, etc. He says therefore first: I said that you do injury, and defraud, which is to commit iniquity, but *do you not know that the unjust will not possess the kingdom of God*? As if to say: you seem not to know this, since you do not depart from iniquity, whereas nevertheless it is said in Ps. 6:9 and Matt. 7:23: *depart from me, all you who work iniquity*. Then, when he says *do not err*, etc., he settles the truth. And first he shows the danger that threatens the unjust; second he shows how they themselves escaped this danger, so that they might fear to fall into it again, at the words *and this indeed you were once*, etc. He says therefore first: *do not err*, which he says pointedly, because concerning the impunity of sins some erred in many ways, according to Wis. 2:21: *and they thought, and they erred*. For some philosophers erred, believing that God has no care of human affairs, according to Zeph. 1:12: *the Lord will not do good, and he will not do evil*. Some, however, believing that faith alone is sufficient for salvation, according to John 11:26: *he who believes in me shall not die forever*. Some, however, believing that they are saved through the sacraments of Christ alone, on account of what is said in Mark ult.: *he who believes and is baptized shall be saved*, and John 6:55: *he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life*. Some, however, on account of works of mercy alone, think that they sin with impunity, on account of what is said in Luke 11:41: *give alms, and behold all things are clean for you*. Nor do they understand that all these things without charity do not profit, according to what is said below in 13:2 ff.: *if I have all faith, and distribute all my goods to feed the poor, but have not charity, it profits me nothing*. And therefore he adds that sins contrary to charity exclude from the kingdom of God, into which charity alone introduces, saying *neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers* (of whom it is said in Heb. ult.: *fornicators and adulterers God will judge*), *nor the effeminate*, that is, men suffering womanish things, *nor those who lie with males*, as regards those acting in that vice, of whom it is said in Gen. 13:13: *the men of Sodom were most wicked and sinners before the Lord exceedingly*, *nor the covetous, nor thieves* (of whom it is said in Zech. 5:3: *every thief, as it is written, shall be judged*), *nor the drunken, nor the reviling, nor the rapacious shall possess the kingdom of God*. For it is said in Is. 35:8: *it shall be called the holy way, the unclean shall not pass through it*. And Apoc. 21:27: *nothing defiled, or that works abomination, shall enter into it*. And it is to be noted that here he enumerates the same vices which he had set down in the preceding chapter. He adds, however, certain ones under the genus of lust, namely adultery and the vice against nature, and under the genus of injustice, theft. Then, when he says *and these indeed*, etc., he shows how they escaped the aforesaid danger. And first he recalls their past state, saying *and indeed you were once*, namely fornicators and serving idols, etc., and therefore he specially recalls these vices, because they had abounded in them, according to Eph. 5:8: *for you were once darkness, but now light in the Lord*. Second he shows how they were inwardly freed from these, saying *but you are washed*, namely by the power of the blood of Christ in Baptism, according to Apoc. 1:5: *he washed us from our sins in his own blood*. But *you are sanctified*, consecrated by grace through the power of the blood of Christ, according to Heb. ult.: *Jesus, that he might sanctify the people through his own blood, suffered outside the gate*. But *you are justified*, unto the state of justice and virtue, according to Rom. 8:30: *whom he called, these he also justified*. The cause of these benefits, however, is added. And first on the part of the humanity of Christ, when he says *in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ*, that is, in faith and invocation of the name of Christ, according to Acts 4:12: *there is no other name given under heaven to men, in which we must be saved*. Second on the part of the divinity, when he adds *and in the Spirit of our God*, according to Ezek. 37:5: *behold I will send into you the spirit, and you shall live*. Because therefore you have been freed by so powerful a power, you ought not to return to the same things. Then, when he says *all things are lawful for me*, etc., he makes plain what he had said about the prohibition of judgment, showing in what sense he rebuked it, namely that he did not rebuke it as altogether unlawful, but as inexpedient and harmful. And about this he does two things. First he proposes what he intends; second he assigns the reason, at the words *food for the belly*, etc. Concerning the first he does two things. First he proposes what he had rebuked as being lawful, but not expedient, saying *all things are lawful for me*. Now those things are called lawful which a man is not prohibited from doing; but prohibition is twofold, one of coercion, the other of precept, and according to this some have understood that those things are lawful which are not forbidden by any compelling necessity; and therefore, since the free choice of man is by nature free from coercion, they understood the Apostle to say in this sense: *all things are lawful for me*, namely because they are subject to the free choice of man, whether they be good or whether they be evil, according to Ecclus. 15:18: *before man is good and evil, life and death, whatever he shall choose shall be given to him*. But this manner of speaking is foreign to sacred Scripture, in which it is said that those things are not lawful which are forbidden by divine law, according to Matt. 14:4: *it is not lawful for you to have your brother's wife*. And therefore what the Apostle here says, *all things are lawful for me*, cannot be understood absolutely, but is to be taken as a fitting distribution under this sense: all things are lawful for me, namely those which are not forbidden by divine law. And this can be referred to three things: first indeed to what he had said about lawsuits, namely that it is lawful for each one to seek back all his own goods in a lawsuit, since this is not forbidden by divine law. In another way it can be referred to what he is about to say below in 8:8 about the indifferent use of foods, so that the sense is: it is lawful for me to eat all foods, according to Titus 1:15: *all things are clean to the clean*. Third it can be referred to what he is about to say below in 9:4 ff., about receiving expenses, so that the sense is: *all things are lawful for me*, namely to receive for the necessity of life, just as to my fellow apostles. He adds, however, *but not all things are expedient*. Now that is said to be expedient which is without impediment to the attaining of the end. But it happens that something does not totally exclude the end, yet brings some impediment, just as marriage does not exclude a man from the kingdom of God, yet it brings an impediment, because, namely, as he says below in 7:34, *the woman who is under a husband thinks how she may please her husband*. Whence, in Matt. 19:10, the disciples say: *if the case of a man with his wife is so, it is not expedient to marry*. Thus therefore to fornicate is neither lawful nor expedient, because it totally excludes the end, which is eternal life; but marriage is lawful, but not expedient. According, therefore, to this manner, to seek back one's own goods in a lawsuit, to use all foods indifferently, to receive expenses from those to whom one preaches, is indeed lawful, because it is not against justice, nor is it forbidden by any law; yet it is not expedient, either because peace toward one's neighbor is impeded, or some scandal is generated for the weak, or some occasion of reviling is afforded; whence Ecclus. 37:31: *not all things are expedient for all*. In another way it can be understood not absolutely, but under a condition, so that the sense is: I said that neither fornicators, etc., will possess the kingdom of God, and therefore they are not lawful, because they exclude the end; but if all things were lawful for me, not all things are expedient, because through them an impediment is afforded to human life. Whence in the person of the wicked it is said in Wis. 5:7: *we were wearied in the way of iniquity and perdition, and we walked difficult ways*. Second he shows that what he rebuked above is harmful, saying *all things are lawful for me*, as was explained above, *but I will not be brought under the power of any*, namely of man. For he who uses that which is not expedient, whether lawful or unlawful, is in a certain way brought under the power of some thing, or of some man. Of a thing indeed, because he who loves some thing too much becomes in a certain way the slave of that thing, according to Rom. ult.: *such as these do not serve Christ the Lord, but their own belly*. But of a man, because while someone does what is not expedient, he is in a certain way subjected to the judgment of others, and especially he who seeks back his own goods in a lawsuit is subjected to the power of a judge. Below in 10:29: *for why is my liberty judged by another's conscience?* Then, when he says *food for the belly*, etc., he assigns the reason for what he had said. And first why all things are lawful, saying *food for the belly*, namely is owed, so that, namely, being digested in the belly, it may pass into nourishment for the whole body. *And the belly for foods*, namely it serves for receiving and digesting them. Since, therefore, by God's ordination the belly is intent on receiving foods, and foods are appointed for this, that they be placed in the belly, according to Gen. 1:29 f.: *behold I have given you every food, and to all living things, that they may have it to eat*, it is not unlawful that a man seek back his own goods, or that a preacher receive wages on account of the necessity of food, or even that a man use all foods. Second, at the words *but God*, etc., he assigns the reason why not all things are expedient. For it is not expedient that a man suffer any detriment in that which is never corrupted, namely in the heavenly kingdom, on account of that which is corrupted; and this happens with food and the belly. For after this life the use of foods and of the belly will cease, because the bodies of those rising again will be preserved without food, God bringing this about. And this is what he means: *but God will destroy*, that is, will cause to cease, *this*, namely the belly, not indeed as regards its essence, but as regards the effect which it now has; *and these*, namely foods, as far as they pertain to man's use, because in the resurrection men will be like the Angels in heaven, as it is said in Matt. 22:30.”

“Now, therefore, there is utterly a fault among you. Fault Theophylact renders condemnation and shame. It is simpler to take it as a defect or shortcoming, as when a man is overcome by another his strength and courage are thereby diminished. Imperfection, meanness, and feebleness of mind are among you, because you are overcome by anger, avarice, and strife, and can bear nothing. It is the mark of a great mind to be raised high above all these things, to look down upon them as beneath its notice, and to care nothing for injuries. It is littleness of mind and love of gain which make you go to law before heathen tribunals, to the scandal of believers and unbelievers, who are thus led to blaspheme the faith of Christ Why do ye not rather take wrong t Or suffer loss, as beseems those that are but newly Christians, who are few in number, and in the first fervour of their profession of peace and perfection. This passage, however, does not favour the Anabaptists, who hold that it means that all judicial power should be taken from the magistrates. For (1.) as Chrysostom says, the Apostle is not condemning the existence of law-courts, but the impatience of the litigants. (2.) He censures them for inflicting injury on their fellowChristians (ver. 8); (3.) for going for judgment on these matters before the unbelievers and the unjust; (4.) for oppressing the poor among them wrongfully; (5.) for so scandalously disturbing brotherly peace, which is the bond of charity, and thus injuring the faith itself. Cajetan adds that one or other of the parties must Digitized by v^,ooQle LITIGIOUSNESS 109 always be in the wrong, because one or other favours an unjust cause, unless he can be excused through ignorance. Wherefore S. Augustine {Enchirid. c. 78) says that even lawsuits that are just can hardly be entered into without sin, at all events venial sin, because they generally proceed from a too great love of worldly things, and can scarcely be free from the danger of hatred, ill-will, and injurious dealing. There is added to this loss of time, of peace, and internal tranquillity, which cannot be compensated for except by a still greater good, and therefore even suits that have justice on their side are not undertaken without sin. Hence Christ, in S. Matt v. 40, enjoins : “ If any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.” A greater good is the necessity of one's sel£ of the public, of one's family, godliness, or the obligations of justice, as when you determine to protect or recover the goods of a monastery, or of the poor, by the public lawcourts. So Paul appealed to Caesar's judgment-seat (Acts xxv. 11). In fine, the Apostle is not here blaming judging on the part of the judge, but only on the part of the suitors. And so, even if it were sin to go to law, it would not be sin to pass judgment ; for judgments put an end to suits, which is altogether a good thing. S. Clement of Rome supports in this S. Paul, his master and contemporary {Comfit. A post. lib. ii. c. 45), in the words: It is the beautiful boast of a Christian that he goes to law with no one But if by the doing of others, or by any temptation, it come to pass that he is entangled in a lawsuit, he does all he can to put an end to it, although he have thereby to suffer loss, and to prevent himself from having to appear before the heathen's judgment- seat. Nay, do not suffer secular magistrates to decide in your causes, for by them the devil endeavours to bring the servants of God into reproach, by making it appear that you have no wise man to do justice between you , or to put an end to controversy .” Vers. 9, 10. — Neither fornicators nor adulterers, &c. . . . shall inherit the kingdom of God. Hence it appears that not only adultery but also fornication, by which an unmarried man sins with an unmarried woman, is against the law of Christ and of nature. Rabbi Digitized by v^,ooQle no FIRST EPISTLE TO THE MQses ^gypt. erred shamefully in this respect ( More , lib. iii. c. 50) when he excused the intercourse of Judah with Tamar, related in Gen. xxxviiL, on the ground that before the law of Moses whoredom was allowable. Our politicians err still more shamefully who, while allowing that fornication is forbidden by the law of Christ, yet deny that it was forbidden by the law of Moses. For Moses includes it, as do the Rabbins always, in Exod. xx., under the sixth commandment, “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” under which not only adultery, but also incest, sodomy, fornication, and all kinds of sexual intercourse and lust outside the limits of matrimony are forbidden. So Tobias (iv. 13) says: “Keep thyself, my son, from all fornication.” So the Apostle here reckons fornication with adultery, idolatry, and other sins which are against the law of nature and of the Decalogue, and naturally shut out men from the kingdom of heaven. For fornication is at variance with the first creation of man, and with the institution of matrimony, by which the God of nature and the Lord of all things has tied the use of those members which serve for generation to matrimony ; and outside that He has taken away all permisson to use them. It is opposed also to conjugal fidelity, and to the good of the offspring, who cannot be properly brought up in fornication, but only in matrimony. Hence Deut. xxii. 21 orders a maiden to be stoned who before marriage has committed fornication in her father’s house. And the Wise Man says (Ecclus. xix. 3): “ He who joins himself to fornication shall be vile.” Lastly, to pass over other instances, 24,000 of the Israelites were killed for committing fornication with the daughters of Moab. Effeminate, Those guilty of self-pollution. Covetous, Those who by fraud, unfair contracts, and legal quibbles get possession of the goods of others. They are distinct from thieves and robbers. Cf. note to ver. 10. Drunkards, The Greek word here stands both for one that is drunk and one that is given to drink. Here it denotes rather the act than the habit, as the other words, thieves, revilers, adulterers, do; for one of such acts excludes from the kingdom of heaven. Digitized by v^,ooQle THINGS LAWFUL AND EXPEDIENT III Cf. Gal. v. 21. A single act of drunkenness, if it is perfected, is deadly sin, because it deprives a man of the use of his reason, and makes him like a beast, and exposes him to danger of broils, lust, and many other sins. S. Thomas says, however : “ Drunkenness is not a mortal sin if a man is ignorant of the strength of the wine or the weakness of his head.” This excuse, however, is rendered invalid by frequent experience; therefore the Apostle says significantly, “habitual drunkard,” not merely “drunkard.” But the former explanation is the sounder. Ver. ii. — But ye are washed . . . by the Spirit of our God, Ye were justified in baptism by the Holy Spirit. So Chrysostom, Theophylact, CEcumenius. S. Cyprian gives a beautiful example of this washing and change of character, produced in his own case by being baptized into Christianity, in Ep. 2, to Donatus, in which he candidly confesses what sort of man he was before his baptism, what a sudden change passed over him through the grace of baptism, and what benefits Christianity conferred upon him, which, as he says, “ is the death of vices, the life of virtues.” Nazianzen ( Orat . Funebr . in Laudem S. Cypr .) says the same, and relates his wonderful conversion, and the change of heart and life which baptism wrought in him”

“Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you,.... Or a "defect": a want of brotherly love, or there would be no occasion to go to law at all; a want of wisdom and conduct, or proper persons would be pitched upon, and chosen out from among themselves to be arbitrators and judge between them; and a want of care among their leaders, who else would have pointed out to them such a method of accommodation, and not have suffered them to go the lengths they did: because ye go to law one with another; which would never be, was there not a declension among you, a decay of your first love, and of the power of religion and true godliness: why do ye not rather take wrong why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded? than to go to law, especially before unjust persons and unbelievers, taking the advice of Christ, Mat 5:40 It is more advisable to a believer to suffer wrong than to go to law with any man, and especially with a brother. It is a petition in the Jewish liturgy (g), "let it please thee, O Lord God, and the God of my fathers, to deliver me this day, and every day---from hard judgment, and a severe adversary, , "whether he be a Son of the covenant, or whether he be not a son of the covenant".'' (g) Seder Tephillot, fol. 3. 2. Ed. Basil. fol. 5. 2. Ed. Amst.”

“There is utterly a fault among you - There is a most manifest defect among you, 1. Of peaceableness; 2. Of brotherly love; 3. Of mutual confidence; and 4. Of reverence for God, and concern for the honor of his cause. Why do ye not rather take wrong? - Better suffer an injury than take a method of redressing yourselves which must injure your own peace, and greatly dishonor the cause of God.”