The Pulpit Commentary — 1 Corinthians — Section 286

the b1Lr of their criticism. Is this. 'rhat I Mary. This is the view of St. Clement of was the cause of your conversion. ID 2 Cor. Alexandria in ancient times, an<! writers xii. 12 ho refers to other proofs of his 1Lpos- so ditferent from each other as De Wette. tolic power. Ncander, Osiander, Meyer, Ewald, and Ver. 4.-To eat and to drink. To be sup- Alford, in modern. The theory of Jerome, ported by those to whom we pre1Lch (Luke that they were cousins of Jesu_s, being sons x. 7). of Alphreus and Mary, a sister of the Ver. 5.-To lead about a sister, a wife. Virgin, is on every ground absolutely UI!- There cuu be no doubt that this represents tenuble, and it was half clropped even by the true l'eading, and that the meaning is, St. Jerome himself, when it had served his- "We have power to lead 1Lbout, thut is, to controversial purpose. The theory of Epi- travel in company with, some Christian ph1Lnius, that they were sons of Joseph by a sister to :whom we are m1Lrried, nnd who is previous marriage, is possible, but incapable· supported at the expense of the Church." of proof. It comes from a tainted source- This plain meaning, however, involving the the apocryphal Gospels (see my ' Early Days assertion that the apostles and desposyni of Christianity,' ii.). Cephas. St. Paul (" the Lord's brethren") were murried men, also uses the Aramaic name in Gal. ii. D. was so distasteful to the morbid asceticism Peter's wife is mentioned in Matt. viii. H which hehl celibacy in o. sort of Manich:ean and in the tradition of her martyrdom (Clem. reverence, that the scribes of the fomth, fifth, Alex., 'Strom.,' vii. § 63). and later centuries freely tampered with the Ver. 6.-And Bame.bas. Like St. Paul, text, in the h1Lppily fruitless 1Lttempt to Barnablls was in every respect a genuine get rid of this meaning. They endeavoured, apostle, by the Divine call (Acts xiii. 2; by putting the word in the plurnl or by Gal. ii. 9), though not one of the twelve. He omitting " wife," to suggest that the women seems to have continued in his separate whom the apostles travelled with were mission work the practice of independence " deaconesses." Augustine, Tertullian, which he hnd learnt from St. Paul. This Ambro8e, and others explain the verse of allusion is interesting, becnuse it is the lust "ministering women" (Luke viii. 2, 3). time that the name of Burnnbns occurs. Tbe false interpretation avenged itself on ILnd it shows thnt, even after the quarrel und the bias which led to it. Valli\ 1Ldopts the separation, Paul rego.rded him with love and wilful invention that the apostles, though esteem. To forbear working. To give up JUlltTied, trnvelled with their wives only ns the manual labour by which we mo.intuin sisters. Such subterfuges have euten away ourselves without any expense to tho the heart of honest exegesis from many Churches (Acts xviii. 3 ; 2 TI.Jess. iii. 8, 9). p1Lssnges of Scripture, ILDd originuted tho If, then, St. Paul toiled at the dull, taunt that it is a "nose of WILX," which mechanical, despised, and ill-paid work of readers c1Ln twist ILS they like. It was the tent-making, he did so, not because it was, cnuse of such sh1Lmeful 1Lbuses 1Lnd misre- in the abstract, his duty to earn his own presentations th1Lt at last the pmctice of living, but beoo.use he chose to be nobly tmvelling nbout ,vith unmarried women, who independent, that the llbsolute disinterested- went under the name of "sisters,"" beloved," ness of his motives might be m1Lnifost to nil "eomp1Lnions," wns distinctly forbidden by the world. For this reason even when he the third canon of the first Council of Nice. WILS most in need he would never receive Simon llfogus might unblushingly Cllrry assistunce from any Church oxcept that of about with him 1L 'fyrinn womnn named Philippi, where he had at least one wonlthy Hclcnu; but apostles nnd true Christians convert, and where ho wus beloved with ,. would novcr h1Lve been guilty of any conduct peculiar warmth of affectioa. which oould give IL handle to base suspicions. Ver. 7.-Who goeth a war!e.re, eto.? In 'fhoy travelled only with their wives. A this nnrl tho following verses ho nrlduces si~ •ister. A Christian wom1Ln (eh. vii. 15; successive arguments to pro\·e tho right of Rom. xvi. 1; Jas. ii. 15, etc.). A wife; i.e. a minister to bo supported by his congrega- ns a wife. Other apostles. This is a tion. l. From the or,linnry lo.we of huuurn positive mistranslation for "the rest of the justice (ver. 7). 2. By analogy, from tho 1Lpostles." It might be too much to infer Law of Moses (vers. 8-10). 3. A fortiori, positively from this that evenJ one of the from the obli~lltions of common gratitndu apostles nnd desposyni were married; but (vcr. 11). 4. From their concossion of tho there is independent evidence and tradition right to others who ha.,l inferior claims (vcr. to show that at any rate most of them were. 12). 5. Frnm the Jewish provision for the The brethren of the Lord. They are clearly maintenanco of priests (vcr. 13). 6. Dy and undeniably distingui,hed from the the rule lo.id down by Christ himself (vcr. 1! •. apostles. According to the Helvidio.n theory Goelh a warfare. Analogy frJm tho pay- (to which the plain language of the Gospels ment of soldiers (2 Cor. x. 4). At his own seems to point), they were sons of Joseph and charges. 'file word used for "co,t" mcnns 288 THE FIRST EPISTLE 'l'O THE CORINTHIANS. [cH. IX. 1-27.