• Accueil
  • Œuvres
  • Introduction Instructions Collaboration Sponsors / Collaborateurs Copyrights Contact Mentions légales
Bibliothek der Kirchenväter
Recherche
DE EN FR
Œuvres Jean Chrysostome (344-407) In epistulam i ad Corinthios argumentum et homiliae 1-44 (CCEL) Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the First Epistle of St. Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians
Homily II.

10.

"And why," say you, "did He not make knowledge and virtue natural to us?" Who speaketh thus? The Greek or the Christian? Both of them, indeed, but not about the same things: for the one raises his objection with a view to knowledge, the other with a view to conduct. First, then, we will reply to him who is on our side; for I do not so much regard those without, as our own members.

What then saith the Christian? "It were meet to have implanted in us the knowledge itself of virtue." He hath implanted it; for if he had not done so, whence should we have known what things are to be done, what left undone? Whence are the laws and the tribunals? But "God should have imparted not [merely] knowledge, but also the very doing of it [virtue]." For what then wouldest thou have to be rewarded, if the whole were of God? For tell me, doth God punish in the same manner thee and the Greek upon committing sin 1 ? Surely not. For up to a certain point thou hast confidence, viz. that which ariseth from the true knowledge. What then, if any one should now say that on the score of knowledge thou and the Greek will be accounted of like desert? Would it not disgust thee? I think so, indeed. For thou wouldest say that the Greek, having of his own wherewith to attain knowledge, was not willing. If then the latter also should say that God ought to have implanted knowledge in us naturally, wilt thou not laugh him to scorn, and say to him, "But why didst thou not seek for it? why wast thou not in earnest even as I?" And thou wilt stand firm with much confidence, and say that it was extreme folly to blame God for not implanting knowledge by nature. And this thou wilt say, because thou hast obtained what appertains to knowledge. So also hadst thou performed what appertains to practice, thou wouldest not have raised these questions: but thou art tired of virtuous practice, therefore thou shelterest thyself with these inconsiderate words. But how could it be at all right to cause that by necessity one should become good? Then shall we next have the brute beasts contending with us about virtue, seeing that some of them are more temperate than ourselves.

But thou sayest, "I had rather have been good by necessity, and so forfeited all rewards, than evil by deliberate choice, to be punished and suffer vengeance." But it is impossible that one should ever be good by necessity. If therefore thou knowest not what ought to be done, shew it, and then we will tell you what is right to say. But if thou knowest that uncleanness is wicked, wherefore dost thou not fly from the evil thing?

"I cannot," thou sayest. But others who have done greater things than this will plead against thee, and will more than prevail to stop thy mouth. For thou, perhaps, though living with a wife, art not chaste; but another even without a wife keeps his chastity inviolate. Now what excuse hast thou for not keeping the rule, while another even leaps beyond the lines 2 that have been drawn to mark it?

But thou sayest "I am not of this sort in my bodily frame, or my turn of mind." That is for want, not of power, but of will. For thus I prove that all have a certain aptness towards virtue: That which a man cannot do, neither will he be able to do though necessity be laid upon him; but, if, necessity being laid upon him, he is able, he that leaveth it undone, leaveth it undone out of choice. The kind of thing I mean is this: to fly up and be borne towards heaven, having a heavy body, is even simply impossible. What then, if a king should command one to do this, and threaten death, saying, "Those men who do not fly, I decree that they lose their heads, or be burnt, or some other such punishment:" would any one obey him? Surely not. For nature is not capable of it. But if in the case of chastity this same thing were done, and he were to lay down laws that the unclean should be punished, be burnt, be scourged, should suffer the extremity of torture, would not many obey the law? "No" thou wilt say: "for there is appointed, even now, a law forbidding to commit adultery 3 and all do not obey it." Not because the fear looses its power, but because the greater part expect to be unobserved. So that if when they were on the point of committing an unclean action the legislator and the judge came before them, the fear would be strong enough to cast out the lust. Nay, were I to apply another kind of force inferior to this; were I to take the man and remove him from the beloved person, and shut him up close in chains, he will be able to bear it, without suffering any great harm. Let us not say then that such an one is by nature evil: for if a man were by nature good, he could never at any time become evil; and if he were by nature evil, he could never be good. But now we see that changes take place rapidly, and that men quickly shift from this side to the other, and from that fall back again into this. And these things we may see not in the Scriptures only, for instance, that publicans have become apostles; and disciples, traitors; and harlots, chaste; and robbers, men of good repute; and magicians have worshipped; and ungodly men passed over unto godliness, both in the New Testament and in the Old; but even every day a man may see many such things occurring. Now if things were natural, they could not change. For so we, being by nature susceptible, could never by any exertions become void of feeling. For that which is whatever it is by nature, can never fall away from such its natural condition. No one, for example, ever changed from sleeping to not sleeping: no one from a state of corruption unto incorruption: no one from hunger to the perpetual absence of that sensation. Wherefore neither are these things matters of accusation, nor do we reproach ourselves for them; nor ever did any one, meaning to blame another, say to him, "O thou, corruptible and subject to passion:" but either adultery or fornication, or something of that kind, we always lay to the charge of those who are responsible; and we bring them before judges, who blame and punish, and in the contrary cases award honors.


  1. The meaning seems to be, "Whatever other sins you commit, you have not the sin of unbelief to answer for; and would, I suppose, think it hard, if caeteris paribus you were counted as guilty as an unbeliever. Now this your instinctive judgment confutes any hope you may have that nature and circumstances may excuse you in any other sin." ↩

  2. Ta skammata. The image is borrowed from the gymnastic exercise of leaping. ↩

  3. From the time of Constantine to that of Justinian it was a capital offence. Gibbon, e. 44. note 197. ↩

pattern
  Imprimer   Rapporter une erreur
  • Afficher le texte
  • Référence bibliographique
  • Scans de cette version
Traductions de cette œuvre
Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the First Epistle of St. Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians

Table des matières

Faculté de théologie, Patristique et histoire de l'Église ancienne
Miséricorde, Av. Europe 20, CH 1700 Fribourg

© 2025 Gregor Emmenegger
Mentions légales
Politique de confidentialité