Commentary on 1 Corinthians
Lecture 2. Warning against contentions
1:10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing and that there be no schisms among you: but that you be perfect in the same mind and in the same judgment. [n. 19]
1:11 For it has been signified unto me, my brethren, of you, by them that are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. [n. 24]
1:12 Now this I say, that every one of you says: I indeed am of Paul; and I am of Apollo; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.
1:13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul then crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? [n. 26]
1:14 I give God thanks, that I baptized none of you but Crispus and Caius: [n. 35]
1:15 Lest any should say that you were baptized in my name.
1:16 And I baptized also the household of Stephanus. Beyond that, I know not whether I baptized any other. [n. 37]
1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel: [n. 38] not in wisdom of speech, lest the cross of Christ should be made void. [n. 40]
19. After the greeting, the Apostle begins to instruct them.
First, he instructs them about things pertaining to all generally, namely, about the sacraments.
Second, he instructs them about things pertaining to some of them, at now concerning the collections that are made for the saints (1 Cor 16:1).
In the sacraments, three things should be considered: first, the sacrament itself, as baptism; second, the reality signified and contained, namely, grace: third, the reality signified but not contained, namely, the glory of the resurrection.
First, therefore, he discusses the sacraments themselves;
second, the graces, at now concerning spiritual things (1 Cor 12:1);
third, the glory of the resurrection, at now I make known unto you (1 Cor 15:1).
In regard to the first he does three things.
First he determines what pertains to baptism;
second, what pertains to the sacrament of matrimony, at it is absolutely heard (1 Cor 5:1);
third, what pertains to the sacrament of the Eucharist, at now concerning those things that are sacrificed (1 Cor 8:1).
20. In the first part the Apostle deals with doctrine along with baptism; thus he follows the example of the Lord, who gave the disciples the injunction to teach and to baptize in one command: go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them (Matt 28:19).
Now it should be noted that there was dissension among the Corinthian believers, because those who had been instructed assumed that they had received the better teaching and a better baptism and began to look down on the others.
21. Hence the Apostle does two things.
First, he ends the strife;
second, he attacks the cause of the strife, namely, that they glory in some of Christ’s ministers and look down on the other ones, at and I, brethren, could not speak to you (1 Cor 3:1). As to the first he does three things. First, he gives a friendly warning; second, he shows the need for the warning, at for it has been signified unto me; third, the reason for the warning, at is Christ divided.
22. In regard to the first, two things should be considered.
First, he uses humble language as one way of inducing them to heed his warning; hence he says, now I beseech you: the poor will speak with supplications (Prov 18:23); the second way is by brotherly love when he says, brethren, because this warning came from the warmth of his fraternal charity: a brother helped by a brother is like a strong city (Prov 18:19). The third way is by appealing to their reverence for Christ when he says: by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, who should be honored by all and to whom all should be subject: in the name of Jesus every knee should bend (Phil 2:10).
23. The second thing to be considered is that he urges them to three things.
First, to concord when he says, that you all speak the same thing, i.e., that all confess the same faith and hold the same opinion in matters that must be done in common: that together you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ (Rom 15:6).
Second, he forbids a vice contrary to virtue when he says: and that there be no schisms among you, because ecclesial unity must not be fragmented. As a sign of this unity the soldiers said of the coat without a seam: let us not cut it, but let us cast lots for it, whose it shall be (John 19:24). Properly speaking, there are schisms when the members of one group separate into various factions according to their various beliefs or according to their various opinions about conduct: you shall see the breaches of the city of David (Isa 22:9).
Third, he urges them to seek perfection, which is the good of the whole. For the cause of division is, while each one seeks a partial good, the perfect good is overlooked, which is the good of the whole. Therefore, he says, but that you be perfect in the same mind, which judges about conduct, and in the same judgment, which judges about belief. As if to say: these things will enable you to be perfect, if you continue in unity: over all these things have charity, which is the bond of perfection (Col 3:14); be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect (Matt 5:48).
24. Then when he says, it has been signified unto me, he shows why it was necessary to warn them, namely, because they were burdened with the vice of contention. As if to say: it is necessary to induce you to this, for it has been signified unto me, my brethren, of you, by them who are of the house of Chloe, i.e., from a certain villa subject to the jurisdiction of the Corinthians. Or Chloe might be the name of a matron in whose home many believers assembled: that there are contentions among you, contrary to what is said in Proverbs: it is an honor for a man to separate himself from quarrels (Prov 20:3).
Then he specifies the nature of the contention when he says, now this I say, i.e., the contention consists in this, that every one of you gives himself a name derived from the person by whom he was baptized and instructed, and says: I indeed am of Paul, because he had been baptized and instructed by Paul; another says: I am of Apollo, who had preached to the Corinthians (Acts 19); still another says: and I of Cephas, i.e., Peter, to whom it had been said: you shall be called Cephas, which is interpreted Peter (John 1:42). Now they made these statements because they thought that they received a better baptism from a better baptizer, as though the virtue of the minister had an influence on the one baptized. Finally, others say: and I of Christ, who alone gives grace, because the grace of Christ alone works in Christ’s baptism: he upon whom you shall see the Spirit descending and remaining upon him, he it is who baptizes with the Holy Spirit (John 1:33). Accordingly, the baptized are called Christians from Christ alone and not Paulians from Paul: only let us be called by your name (Isa 4:1).
25. In order to avoid this error the Greeks are said to have used the following formula in baptism: let Christ’s servant, Nicholas, be baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, to show that a man is not baptized interiorly, unless he is baptized by Christ. But because a man also baptizes, as a minister and member of Christ, the Church uses this formula in baptizing: I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, which is more in keeping with the formula given by Christ, who said to the disciples: teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (Matt 28:19), where he also calls the apostles baptizers. It is according to this command that the minister says: I baptize you.
26. Then when he says, is Christ divided, he gives the reason for this warning that there should be no schisms and contentions among them: first, on the part of baptism: second, on the part of doctrine, at not in wisdom of speech (1 Cor 1:17). As to the first he does three things. First, he mentions the mistake which follows from their contention; second, why that mistake follows, at was Paul then crucified; third, he dismisses a false surmise, at I give God thanks.
27. He says, therefore: I have said that everyone of you says, I indeed am of Paul; and I am of Apollo; from which it follows that Christ is divided. Nor does it matter whether this is read interrogatively or remissively.
28. This can be understood in one way as though he were saying: inasmuch as there is contention among you, Christ is divided from you, because he dwells only in peace: his place is in peace (Ps 76:3); your iniquities have made a separation between you and your God (Isa 59:2).
But it is better understood of him as saying: inasmuch as you believe that a baptism performed by a better minister is better, it follows that Christ, who principally and interiorly baptizes, is divided, i.e., differs in his power and effect, depending on the differing ministers. But this is false, because it is said: one Lord, one faith, one baptism (Eph 4:5).
An even better interpretation is to understand the Apostles as saying that inasmuch as you attribute to others the things that are exclusively Christ’s, you divide Christ by forming many christs, which is contrary to what is stated in Matthew: one is your master, Christ (Matt 23:10); turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God and there is no other (Isa 45:22).
29. For it should be noted that there are two powers proper to Christ in the sacrament of baptism: one is the divine power, by which he and the Father and the Holy Spirit cleanse from sin interiorly. This cannot be communicated to any creature.
The other is the power proper to his human nature, which is the power of excellence in the sacraments and consists of four things: one is that he instituted the sacraments; the second is that he can produce the effect of the sacraments without the sacraments; the third is that the merit of his passion works in baptism and the other sacraments; the fourth is that the sacraments are conferred by calling on his name. Now he could have shared this power of excellence with his ministers and particularly the fourth, namely, that baptism be consecrated in their names, but he reserved it for himself; otherwise schism would arise in the Church, for people would suppose that there are as many baptisms as baptizers.
According to Augustine this is why John the Baptist confessed that he did not know whether Christ would keep this power for himself.
30. Then when he says, was Paul then crucified, he shows that their mistake follows from their error of supposing that there are diverse baptisms, depending on the different baptizers; for this would be so, if baptism derived its power from the baptizers and not from Christ alone.
31. He shows this in two ways.
First, on the part of Christ’s passion, in virtue of which baptism works, as it says in Romans: know you not that all who are baptized in Christ Jesus are baptized in his death? (Rom 6:3). Accordingly, he says, was Paul then crucified for you? As if to say: were Paul’s sufferings the cause of our salvation, so that baptism depends on him for its saving power? As if to say: certainly not. For Christ alone is the one by whose sufferings and death our salvation is wrought: it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation not perish (John 11:50); one has died for all (2 Cor 5:14).
32. On the other hand, the Apostle seems to say the opposite in Colossians: I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, the Church (Col 1:24).
I answer that Christ’s sufferings benefited us not only by their example: Christ also suffered for us, leaving you an example that you should follow in his steps (1 Pet 2:21), but also by their merit and efficacy, inasmuch as we have been redeemed and sanctified by his blood: so Jesus also suffered outside the gate in order to sanctify the people through his own blood (Heb 13:12). But the sufferings of others benefit us only as an example: if we are afflicted, it is for your comfort and salvation (2 Cor 1:6).
33. Second, he shows the same thing from the power of Christ’s name invoked in baptism; hence he adds, or were you baptized in the name of Paul? As if to say: no. For as it is said: there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved (Acts 4:12). Hence, too, Isaiah says: your name and your remembrance are the desire of the soul (Isa 26:8).
34. But it seems that men are not baptized in Christ’s name, for it is commanded in Matthew: teach all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (Matt 28:19).
The answer is that in the early Church, because Christ’s name was much hated, the apostles were inspired by the Holy Spirit to baptize in the name of Christ. Whence it is said: in the name of Christ they were baptized, both men and women (Acts 8:12). Yet, as Ambrose says, the whole Trinity is understood in the name of Christ. For ‘Christ’ means anointed, which implies not only the Son who is anointed, but the anointing itself, which is the Holy Spirit, and the one who anoints, namely, the Father as a psalm says: God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows (Ps 45:8).
But now that Christ’s name is great among the gentiles from the rising of the sun to its setting (Mal 1:11), the Church uses the formula first instituted by Christ, baptizing in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Nevertheless, everyone baptized in this form is baptized in the name of him who is truly Son of God: that we may be in his true Son, Jesus Christ (1 John 5:20). Furthermore, all faithful are baptized in the name of Christ, that is, in faith and by confession of the name of Christ: everyone who shall call upon the name of the Lord, shall be saved (Joel 2:32); hence they are called Christians, for as many of you as have been baptized in Christ alone, have put on Christ (Gal 3:27).
Therefore, if the sufferings of Christ alone, if the name of Christ alone, confers the power to be saved on the baptized, then it is from Christ alone that baptism has the power to sanctify. Consequently, anyone who attributes this to others divides Christ into many parts.
35. Then when he says, I give God thanks, he dismisses a false surmise.
For since he had said, was Paul then crucified for you, someone might suppose that though he had not baptized in his own name, he did baptize many people as a minister.
In regard to this he does three things.
First, he gives thanks for having baptized only a few;
second, after naming the few, he adds certain others, at and I baptized also; third, he gives the reason why he did not baptize many, at for Christ sent me not to baptize (1 Cor 1:17).
36. He says, therefore: I give God thanks, that I baptized none of you but Crispus, of whom it is said: Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue believed in the Lord with all his house (Acts 18:8), and Caius, to whom John’s third epistle is written.
But because thanksgiving has no place except for blessings received, the Apostle shows why he gives thanks in this case when he continues: lest any should say that you were baptized in my name. For holy men desire that their good deeds not be taken as an occasion of error or sin by others.
And because the Corinthians had fallen into the error of naming themselves from the baptizer and saying, I indeed am of Paul and Apollo, he thanked God that such an error had not been occasioned by his ministry. That is why he was careful to say that he had baptized those who were immune from this error.
37. Then when he says, and I baptized also, he mentions the others he had baptized, lest anything less than the truth appear in his words; hence he adds, I baptized also the household, i.e., family estate, of Stephanus, namely, of his wife.
Then because man’s memory is unreliable in regard to particular facts, he adds: beyond that, I know not, i.e., do not recall, whether I baptized any other, in person.
38. Then when he says, for Christ sent me not, he gives the reason why he baptized so few, saying, for Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel.
39. But this seems to be in opposition to the Lord’s command: teach all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit (Matt 28:19).
The answer is that Christ sent the apostles to do both, but in such a way that they preached in person, as they said in Acts: it is not right that we should give up preaching the word of God to serve tables (Acts 6:2).
But they baptized through their ministers, and they did this because the diligence or virtue of the baptizer contributes nothing in baptism, for it is indifferent whether baptism be given by a greater or lesser personage. But in the preaching of the Gospel the wisdom and virtue of the preacher contributes a great deal; consequently, the apostles, being better qualified, exercised the office of preaching in person. In the same way it is said of Christ that he himself did not baptize but his disciples did (John 4:2); of him it is said: I must preach the good news of the kingdom of God to the other cities also, for I was sent for that purpose (Luke 4:43); the Lord has anointed me to bring good tidings to the afflicted (Isa 61:1).