Homilies on First Corinthians

“But this I say to move you to shame.” These are the words of one exposing their objection as being an idle pretext: and therefore he adds, “Is it so that there is not a wise man among you, no not even one?” Is the scarcity, says he, so great? So great the want of sensible persons among you? And what he subjoins strikes even still harder. For having said, “Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you, not even one?” he adds, “who shall be able to judge in the case of his brother.” For when brother goes to law with brother, there is never any need of understanding and talent in the person who is mediating in the cause, the feeling and relationship contributing greatly to the settlement of such a quarrel.

“But brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers.” Do you observe with what effect he disparaged the judges at first by calling them unrighteous; whereas here, to move shame, he calls them Unbelievers? For surely it is extremely disgraceful if the priest could not be the author of reconciliation even among brethren, but recourse must be had to those without. So that when he said, “those who are of no account,” his chief meaning was not (οὐ τοῦτο εἰπε προηγουμένως) that the Church's outcasts should be appointed as judges, but to find fault with them. For that it was proper to make reference to those who were able to decide, he has shown by saying, “Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you, not even one?” And with great impressiveness he stops their mouths, and says, “Even though there were not a single wise man, the hearing ought to have been left to you who are unwise rather than that those without should judge.” For what else can it be than absurd, that whereas on a quarrel arising in a house we call in no one from without and feel ashamed if news get abroad among strangers of what is going on within doors; where the Church is, the treasure of the unutterable Mysteries, there all things should be published without?