Letters 4.10–4.29

To Isidore the bishop. [On what the Apostle said: "We pray to God that you do no wrong."] You have written asking what Paul meant when he said, "We pray to God that you do no wrong, not that we may appear approved, but that you may do what is right, though we may be as if unapproved." Listen, then, briefly. Punishment brought on sinners by a word, such as that on Ananias and Sapphira and that on the magician who was blinded, humbled the sinners but made those who punished them illustrious, conspicuous, and feared. That is why he says: we do not wish to appear illustrious through your wickedness, but we would gladly be obscure on that account, so that you may be well approved. Those who want the distinction of their own virtue to be born from the misfortune of those who are punished seem to me to be not fathers or teachers, but destroyers, enemies, and tyrants. [Letter 4.8] [On Cain and Lamech.] Why, you asked, were Cain and Lamech not punished alike, though both committed murder? For the one paid the penalty, while the other was pardoned. Because the one denied it even when he was convicted, while the other confessed without being convicted. Even if the sins were equal, what came after the sin was not equal. For there is a divine oracle that commands, "Tell your sins first, that you may be justified." So let us strive above all not to offend; but if we do offend, let us not make the penalty harsher for ourselves by denial. [Letter 4.9] To Eudaemon the deacon. [Why the young men in the furnace urged all in common to bless God, but Daniel separately.] Why, you asked, did the three young men, after urging all men in common to bless God, urge Daniel separately? I say, then, that it is because the ones enjoyed a common providence, while the other enjoyed also a particular and special protection; and the ones had the natural law, while the other received also the written law. [Letter 4.10] To Isidore the bishop. [On the saying in the letter of James: "The tongue is a fire."] The saying you asked about, "The tongue is a fire, the world of unrighteousness," seems to me to have a double interpretation, one more plausible, the other more bitter. Chiefly, because the tongue is nimble and very easily speaks many evils: it accuses, slanders, perjures, lies, and bears false witness, and it casts many unjustly into fire and thrusts them to the sword and into the sea. And Scripture is accustomed to call the multitude "world": "For the world," it says, "did not know him," that is, the multitude. The tongue, then, he says, is either a fire that unjustly burns up a multitude, or a vessel of a multitude of unjust fire. But since many who cooperate with vice and dignify injustice, being very clever at speaking for wicked and lawless deeds and never short of handsome words, unwittingly cast their vote against themselves and display through these words a sample of their own will leaning toward what is base, he perhaps said this to pillory them: "The tongue is a fire, the adornment of unrighteousness"; as if he were saying that the torch of eloquence, when it adorns those who commit great faults, seems to be an embellishment of the truth. One must therefore use cleverness not to adorn vice, but to dignify virtue, which is resplendent even without words. [Letter 4.11] [On "If your enemy is hungry, feed him."] You do not know, it seems, that the new philosophy is loftier than the old exhortation, which was addressed as to infants. For what you admired, "If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him drink," is not very great or bold, but is the matter of a prayer. For that the other should fall into such need as to want the necessities of life and to be pitied by his enemy, I for my part define as heavier than any misfortune and harder than any punishment. That is why most people regard this as the greatest oath, saying, "May I never take a contribution from my enemies." If, then, it happens to those who do it as the answer to a prayer, and to those who suffer it as a punishment, why do you admire it? Especially when the benefit is not simple, but produces a greater punishment: "For by doing this," he says, "you will heap coals of fire on his head." If, then, the deed in itself counts as a punishment, the reason for which it is done is also for the sake of a further chastisement. For those who say, "You will warm his ruling faculty and bring him to his senses," should not be heeded much; otherwise he would not have added the constraint of hunger, but would have commanded us to do good at every time. I do not admire those who do this, but those who see their enemies prospering and not only do not resent it, but praise them and pray for them, as the new philosophy commands: "Love your enemies; do good to those who hate you; pray for those who abuse you and persecute you." There, necessity is apt to bend a man; here the testing of the mind is naked. And if the Apostle too used the old exhortation, it is clear to all that his word was addressed to the less perfect.

To Theodore the deacon. [Why Paul, having said, "Would you have no fear of the authority?", says shortly after, "Pay fear to whom fear is due."] I ought not to have written back to you, since you asked for the apostolic passage to be paraphrased without preparation or proof, when even with preparation and a long circuit it is barely made clear. But since I was compelled, under the tyranny of love, I say (it would be for you to judge whether I can briefly catch the Apostle's elusive meaning) that what he says is this. If you were called to the faith while a slave, do not be distressed or resentful, as if harmed by it. To show that this is nothing terrible, I advise you that even if you can become free, you should rather make use of your slavery. For you will be asked for a smaller account at the audit, since you serve not only the Lord himself but also your bodily master. For one who has been called to the faith and freed from sin, if he is a slave, is the Lord's freedman, in that he has been freed by him from slavery to sin; but since he is also bound to owe service to his bodily master, a strict reckoning will not be demanded of him. But the free man, subject to no one, being Christ's slave, will be subject to him in everything; therefore a stricter account will be demanded of him. Let this be said by way of paraphrasing the saying. If you wish to learn about it more broadly and with proof, read the letter I wrote earlier to the bishop on this, and you will know exactly. [Letter 4.13] To Syron. [On "to those who are called according to his purpose."] All people want to fight alongside and attend to those whom they see not sleeping or idle, but prepared and drawn up for battle, and willing to do what they must. How then do you, sleeping and snoring and not caring for your own salvation, ask the invincible alliance to fly to you, and resent it when you fail? Let your part lead, then, and its part will follow. For when it is summoned not only by words but also by deeds, it will come as if of its own accord. For the help that rouses the sleeping and urges on the unwilling would not abandon those who choose virtue of themselves, but will work with them and bring their achievement to a happy end.

To Hierax the presbyter. [On "Let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall."] The nature that reigns over all threatens punishments to those who stumble, so that they may keep the beauty of the soul unharmed; but to those who have fallen it stretches out a saving right hand and grants pardon to those who repent. To the one group it cries, "Let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall"; to others, "Does not he who falls rise again?"; and to others, "See, you have been made well; sin no more."

To Epimachus the reader. The common enemy of all, sick with lust for tyranny, stripped the human race of the natural advantages that belonged to it and clothed it in the way of life opposed to virtue, once he had received the strength of men as his subject. For he would not have had such purpose of his own, had he not been greatly strengthened by the negligence of those he deceived. But since, by the Creator's love for humankind, it was necessary to put on the armour of virtue again, God the Word came here, and, having woven love for us like an angelic robe, fashioned everything in it. For the achievements of the virtues, counted one by one by their kinds, are embraced by one generic virtue, whose name is love. [Letter 4.16] [On "Pay honour to whom honour is due."] One must pay, most eloquent friend, honour to the one worthy of honour, not displaying flattery or hunting his favour (for by that there is a danger of falling into cheapness and disgracing oneself by practising a buffoonish flattery), but rendering what is fitting with proper decorum. For it is possible for the debt to be paid fittingly. [Letter 4.17] Although I could show from all the holy Scriptures that the Jewish order is entirely gone and will have no rebirth, I shall try to show its complete disappearance from the very saying on the strength of which the Jew who disputed with you thought it would be restored. What then is this saying in which he takes such pride? "And the glory of the house," it says, "the latter, shall be greater than the former." But before I proceed to the interpretation, I do not know what to do: whether to condemn his lack of learning or to hate his villainy. For the ignorant must be taught, and the villain refuted. Rather, since the interpretation will be instruction for those who do not know and refutation for those who act villainously, come, let us bring the saying itself into the open. I say, then, that when Solomon had raised the temple, the Babylonian laid it low and led the Jews away captive. Since, then, after the return they were going to raise it, but no supply of money appeared, God, leading them to good hopes so that they would set their hands to the work, said: "Mine is the silver, and mine the gold. And the latter glory of this house shall be greater than the former." Pay attention to me here. Zerubbabel set his hand to the second building, and an oracle was spoken about him: "The hands of Zerubbabel laid the foundation of this house, and his hands will complete it." The "laid the foundation" shows both the complete desolation after Babylon and the second building. When, then, the temple rose and was brought to a splendour brighter than the former, the Jews stumbled again, in what concerned Christ, and it was handed over to the hand of the Romans, which brought it to the ground. If, then, it was going to be raised again, he would have said, "The second glory of this house shall be greater than the first." But "than the former" declared the second to be the last. Just as there is nothing earlier than the earliest, so there is nothing later than the last. If he had said, "The second shall be greater than the one before," it would be reasonable to expect a third as well. But since he called the second the last, every road of shamelessness has been closed to them.

To Leontius the bishop. [On "The scribes have sat on the seat of Moses."] Every word bereft of deeds is dead and useless, especially one put forward by those who are dignified with the most holy priesthood. For the more readily they seem to use it, the more those who look at their life disbelieve it. They must therefore show a great conversion and a great change, practising discipline, living quietly, and not making money, if they want anyone to pay attention to them. If they do this, not only will the affairs of those under them be in good order, but they themselves will be proclaimed. Let them not bring forward for their own defence, or to muzzle others, the saying that was spoken so that no pretext might be left to those under them: "The scribes and the Pharisees have sat on the seat of Moses; so do whatever they tell you to do." For this apparent defence increases the accusation, not only bringing forth a punishment that cannot be averted but also attaching the reproach of folly. Even if it profits disciples to hear this, it does not befit teachers to put it forward, since it parades their own negligence. For it was said, "But do not do according to their works; for they say and do not do." Christ, wishing to banish every pretext, commanded them to attend neither to the life of their teachers, when it gives a handle to those who see it, nor to what they do in private unless it agrees with the heavenly oracles, but only to the teaching given in the churches. That is why he mentioned the seat of Moses the lawgiver: for then they speak not their own things but the Scriptures'. But the teachers themselves would have no right to put forward these words, which show all their wickedness; rather they should strive, as far as possible, to cut away every pretext. If, living splendidly, they do not benefit some people, that is nothing to them. For just as those who live badly do not share in the crowns stored up for the approved, so those who live splendidly will not share the punishments of those who stumble. "You," he says, "set in order what concerns yourself, your life, I mean, and your word; these I demand of you; and if you benefit others, I will rejoice with you, but if you do not, I will not dishonour you but will even crown you." For each will receive his own reward according to his own labour, not according to the outcome of the toil. Considering this, then, let teachers and disciples alike drive themselves to virtue, banishing every pretext.

To Dorotheus. You left here as if to come back very soon; but you have stayed there, I do not know how, beyond your promises; perhaps to benefit the people there, to hunt them and bring them to Christ. If, then, our guess is true, let us know, so that we may drive away the pain of your absence with the expectation of your success. For having readily yielded its bounds to the Master's glory, it will readily make way for those abroad. [Letter 4.20] Those who stumble conspicuously over what is agreed would not be credible when pronouncing on what seems disputed. For if those who embrace vice are not even permitted to raise a word about the divine ordinances ("For to the sinner God said: Why do you recount my ordinances?"), how is it permitted to those who outrage the very ordinances by what they do to discourse about doctrines? If, then, virtue guarantees piety, one must strive to possess it, since through it piety will be shown to be credible. For no one will be persuaded by one who does not live well, since vice outrages even right doctrines and does not let them be accepted. Hold fast, then, to virtue and piety; for the one is the foundation, the other the crown and ornament.

To Theon. [On the same.] Either you have failed to notice that your judgment of things is not right, or I have failed to notice that you have it sound. If you have failed to notice it, use a vigorous teacher; for if you seek, you will find; and you will seek if you think you know nothing. For thinking one knows is the cause of not even finding. But if it is I who have failed to notice it, show your judgment through your deeds; and you will show it if your life runs together with your word.

To Zeno. [To the Philippians. On "counting one another better than yourselves," and what "Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus" means.] The Apostle's meaning is distinguished and very clear; but if it seems deep and hard to reach to you, I shall try to make it clear briefly. The Apostle, urging humility, after saying, "counting one another better than yourselves," said: "Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not count being equal with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant." If, then, he was not equal, the example is superfluous: he obeyed the greater one who commanded him and did what he did. But if he is equal, as indeed he is equal, what was said is apt and looks to humility. Had he considered being equal a windfall, he would not have humbled himself, lest the excess of humility should prejudice his dignity. But since he was equal by nature, and had his nobility by essence and not as a gift of grace, he did not decline to humble himself. A slave who has been freed and honoured with adoption, regarding his dignity as a prize or a lucky find, would not submit to performing a servant's work; but the genuine son, whose nobility and dignity are inborn, would not decline to perform such a thing, since every suspicion is out of the way. In the one, his former slavery breeds a suspicion of meanness; in the other, inborn nobility does not admit even the birth of such a suspicion. For the one can fall from his adoption; the other will never fall from his inborn nobility and dignity.

To Theon the scholasticus. [How Ahab, though he had learned of his death in advance, could not guard against it.] You said you greatly wondered how Ahab, though he learned of his own death in advance, could not escape it. I do not wonder; for it is not possible to escape justice. It steals away the wits of those who try to steal away from it, and makes those who want to evade it fall into their own nets, through the very things they contrive.

To Eutonius the deacon. [On "Our Father."] You seem to wonder at the brevity of the prayer; but I have always admired, and still admire, the extraordinary philosophy in its brief words. For even if reciting the words is easy, the prayer is not a matter of sounds; it asks not only for a hearer of words, but for a doer of works. I consider it beyond all daring that one who does not do what befits an approved son should dare to call the Master Father; that one who does things for which the divine name will be blasphemed should undertake to say, "Hallowed be your name"; that one who is the tyrant's most distinguished bodyguard should say, "Your kingdom come" (that is, appear as a victorious king to those under tyranny, granting the invincible alliance against sin); that one who does none of the things God wills should feign virtue and say, "Your will be done, as in heaven, so also on earth"; and that one who has given himself up to luxury and profligacy, and has stored up many provisions not only for food but for gluttony, should pray, "Give us today our daily bread" (that is, either the bread fit for the soul or the bread sufficient for the flesh). For "today" indicates provision day by day: having led the mind of the soul to the highest philosophy, he also limits the time of the request. Then, that one who is implacable and cruel should say, "Forgive us our debts"; that one who bears grudges and retaliates beyond measure should say, "as we also forgive our debtors"; and that one who throws himself into temptations and cuts every road that leads to dangers should say, "Lead us not into temptation": this seems laughable, or rather it deserves all indignation. And that one who gladly follows the enemy (for he prevails not by force or tyranny but by deceit) should say, "But deliver us from the evil one" surpasses all irony. And to say, "For yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory," while despising the one who is the fountain of all power and glory, is too great for pardon. So only those, after the wondrous birth-pangs of divine baptism and the strange and paradoxical law of that birth, have the right to say "Our Father," showing that they are genuine sons; and "Hallowed be your name," those who do nothing accursed; and "Your kingdom come," those who flee what gives the tyrant pleasure; and "Your will be done," those who show it by their actions; and "Give us today our daily bread," those who renounce luxury and profligacy; and "Forgive us our debts," those who pardon those who have sinned against them; and "Lead us not into temptation," those who throw neither themselves nor others into it; and "Deliver us from the evil one," those who wage a truceless war against Satan; and "For yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory," those who tremble at his words and display them in their works. For knowledge of the prayer does not achieve as much as the character and life of the one who prays.

To Athanasius the presbyter. [On "Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?"] It seems to be a common affliction not only to be blind about one's own faults while seeing the faults of one's neighbours sharply, but also to supply oneself with defences that do not even exist, while sitting as bitter and inexorable judges of others. But those who are truly free of self-love, and think that justice must prevail, cast against themselves, when they sin, the same vote they would cast against their neighbours; and they rather punish themselves through repentance, knowing the destruction that awaits the uncorrected. For it was to put us to this exact test that Christ said, "Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?" For it is not fitting for one who overlooks his own faults to be a bitter judge of others.

To Isidore the presbyter. [On what was said about Esau: "He found no place for repentance, though he sought it with tears."] You said you wondered how Paul could declare that repentance, which he himself preached and which God crowned, had availed nothing in Esau's case, when he said, "For he found no place for repentance, though he sought it with tears." I for my part wonder how this escaped you. He did not say this as if the Judge had dishonoured repentance, but because he had not given the reward, that is, the blessing, which was owed to virtue rather than to seniority of birth, to the one who had sold it. For it was not just (even if we grant that the privilege was owed to seniority of birth) that he should recover the possession he had sold. If it had been snatched from him, it ought to have been restored; but if it had been sold and was in the purchaser's possession, it was not just for it to be snatched away. So although not only he but also his father wept bitterly, justice prevailed. That this is so, hear what is said about him: "Let no one be sexually immoral or profane like Esau, who sold his birthright for a single meal. For you know that afterwards, when he wished to inherit the blessing, he was rejected." You see (to pass over for now the sale of the birthright) that he had not practised virtue either, but, relying on the birthright he had sold, he wished to inherit the blessing which, as I said, was owed to virtue; and that was impossible. For if, with his father's goodwill, he had also had the honour of the birthright, he would not have missed the divine blessings. For it is virtue that is crowned by God. But since he had lawfully sold the birthright, Jacob's victory is beyond dispute. Suppose someone sold a field, received the price, and put the buyer in possession of the property, and later, without returning the price, I say (indeed, even if he does return it, the laws do not allow the property to be taken from the buyer against his will; but let it be said anyway), without returning the price, disputed the ownership: what law, what judge would answer him, even if he wept endlessly and uttered pitiful words? None, surely. Fittingly, then, he did not receive it: first, because he had not practised virtue but wished to inherit a blessing of which he had shown himself unworthy; second, because he had sold the privilege; third, because he was fittingly shut out by the time. For if he had truly repented and fought back against all his defeats, he would not have been overlooked by God. For God is rich, and rich in other crowns, and could have adorned him. Even if he could not recover the blessings he had sold, he would at any rate have been adorned with other crowns, and first of all with having God gracious to him. But since he cared nothing for virtue, while laying claim to the blessings owed to virtue, he fittingly failed.

To Olympiodorus. [That the Greeks overturn their own position by the very means by which they think they belittle that of the Christians.] I wonder how not only the uneducated among the Greeks, but also those who profess wisdom, who pride themselves on eloquence, boast of dialectic, and rely on syllogisms, who see the contradictions of arguments but do not perceive those of facts, fail to realize that by the very things with which they shoot at the divine preaching they rather disgrace themselves. For the superiority of the victors brings some honour to the vanquished. They say that Jesus is a dead man, so that the crowd of their gods may be shown to be weaker than a dead man. They mock the cross, so that they may be mocked the more, having been shamefully sacked and conquered by a cross. They jeer at the apostles' lack of learning, so that their celebrated wise men may be pilloried more conspicuously, defeated by the teaching of unlettered men. They scoff at the venerated tomb of Christ, so that their famous temples may incur the greater laughter, having yielded to a tomb that is scoffed at. They seize on everything in the preaching as cheap, so that their own famous things may appear the more ridiculous, having bowed to the nature of cheap things.

To Asclepius the sophist. [On the same.] The children of the Greeks fail to notice that by what they say they overturn themselves. For they disparage the divine Scripture as barbarous in speech, composed with foreign coinages, lacking necessary conjunctions, and confusing the sense of what is said by the addition of superfluous ones. But from these very things let them learn the strength of the truth. How did the rustic one persuade eloquence? Let the wise say how she who speaks with utter barbarism and solecism has defeated Attic-speaking error; how Plato, the chief of the outside philosophers, prevailed over no tyrant, while she brought land and sea under her.

To Herminus the count. [On the same.] The cross, my good friend, mocked by idolaters, crucified the error of many gods; the passion pilloried the accursed demons; death killed death; the putting to death of the flesh put to death the hopes of those who crucified him; and the tomb buried the devil, but poured forth a spring of life for all. That is why the divine herald cries, "For I am not ashamed of the gospel." For it brings us good news better than our prayers.