Homilies on First Corinthians

“That there should be no schism in the body.”

Now if He tempered it together, He did not suffer that which is more uncomely to appear. For that which is mingled becomes one thing, and it does not appear what it was before: since otherwise we could not say that it was tempered. And see how he continually hastens by the defects, saying, “that which lacked.” He said not, “to that which is dishonorable,” “to that which is unseemly,” but, to that which lacked, (“that which lacked;” how? By nature,) giving more abundant honor. And wherefore? “That there should be no schism in the body.” Thus because, though they enjoyed an endless store of consolation, they nevertheless indulged grief as if they had received less than others, he signifies that they were rather honored. For his phrase is, “Giving more abundant honor to that which lacked.”

Next he also adds the reason, showing that with a view to their profit he both caused it to lack and more abundantly honored it. And what is the reason? “That there should be no schism,” says he, “in the body.” (And he said not, “in the members,” but, “in the body.”) For there would indeed be a great and unfair advantage, if some members were cared for both by nature and by our forethought, others not even by either one of these. Then would they be cut off from one another, from inability to endure the connection. And when these were cut off, there would be harm done also to the rest. Do you see how he points out, that of necessity “greater honor” is given to “that which lacks?” “For had not this been so, the injury would have become common to all,” says he. And the reason is, that unless these received great consideration on our part, they would have been rudely treated, as not having the help of nature: and this rude treatment would have been their ruin: their ruin would have divided the body; and the body having been divided, the other members also would have perished, which are far greater than these.

Do you see that the care of these latter is connected with making provision for those? For they have not their being so much in their own nature, as in their being one, by virtue of the body. Wherefore if the body perish, they profit nothing by such health as they have severally. But if the eye remain or the nose, preserving its proper function, yet when the bond of union is broken there will be no use for them ever after; whereas, suppose this remaining, and those injured, they both support themselves through it and speedily return to health.

But perhaps some one may say, “this indeed in the body has reason, that 'that which lacks has received more abundant honor,' but among men how may this be made out?” Why, among men most especially you may see this taking place. For so they who came at the eleventh hour first received their hire; and the sheep that had wandered induced the shepherd to leave behind the ninety and nine and run after it, and when it was found, he bore and did not drive it; and the prodigal son obtained more honor than he who was approved; and the thief was crowned and proclaimed before the Apostles. And in the case of the talents also you may see this happen: in that to him that received the five talents, and to him that received two, were vouchsafed the same rewards; yea, by the very circumstance that he received the two, he was the more favored with great providential care. Since had he been entrusted with the five, with his want of ability he would have fallen from the whole: but having received the two and fulfilled his own duty, he was thought worthy of the same with him that had gained the five, having so far the advantage, as with less labor to obtain the same crown. And yet he too was a man as well as the one that traded with the five. Nevertheless, his Master does not in any wise call him to a strict account, nor compel him to do the same with his fellow-servant, nor does he say, “Why can you not gain the five?” (though he might justly have said so,) but assigned him likewise his crown.

4. Knowing these things therefore, you that are greater, trample not on the less, lest, instead of them, you injure yourselves. For when they are cut off, the whole body is destroyed. Since, what else is a body than the existence of many members? As also Paul himself says, that “the body is not one member, but many.” If therefore this be the essence of a body, let us take care that the many continue many. Since, unless this be entirely preserved, the stroke is in the vital parts; which is the reason also why the Apostle does not require this only, their not being separated, but also their being closely united. For instance, having said, “that there be no schism in the body,” he was not content with this, but added, “that the members should have the same care one for another.” Adding this other cause also of the less enjoying more honor. For not only lest they should be separated one from another has God so contrived it, but also that there may be abundant love and concord. For if each man's being depends on his neighbor's safety, tell me not of the less and the more: in this case there is no more and less. While the body continues you may see the difference too, but when it perishes, no longer. And perish it will, unless the lesser parts also continue.

If now even the greater members will perish when the less are broken off, these ought to care in like manner for the less, and so as for themselves, inasmuch as in the safety of these the greater likewise remain. So then, should you say ten thousand times, “such member is dishonored and inferior,” still if you provide not for it in like manner as for yourself, if you neglect it as inferior, the injury will pass on to yourself. Wherefore he said not only, that “the members should care one for another,” but he added, “that they should have the same care one for another,” i.e., in like manner the small should enjoy the same providential care with great.

Say not then, that such is an ordinary person, but consider he is a member of that body which holds together the whole: and as the eye, so also does he cause the body to be a body. For where the body is built up, there none has anything more than his neighbor: since neither does this make a body, there being one part greater and another less, but their being many and diverse. For even as thou, because you are greater, helped to make up the body, so also he, because he is less. So that his comparative deficiency, when the body is to be built up, turns out of equal value with you unto this noble contribution: yea, he avails as much as yourself. And it is evident from hence. Let there be no member greater or less, nor more and less honorable: but let all be eye or all head: will not the body perish? Every one sees it. Again, if all be inferior, the same thing will happen. So that in this respect also the less are proved equal. Yea, and if one must say something more, the purpose of the less being less is that the body may remain. So that for your sake he is less, in order that you may continue to be great. And here is the cause of his demanding the same care from all. And having said, “that the members may have the same care one for another,” he explains “the same thing” again, by saying,