Homily XXX.
1 Cor. xii. 12
For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of the body, being many, are one body; so also is Christ.
After soothing them from the considerations that the thing given was of free favor; that they received all from "one and the self-same Spirit;" that it was given "to profit withal," that even by the lesser gifts a manifestation was made; and withal having also stopped their mouth from the duty of yielding to the authority of the Spirit: ("for all these," saith he, "worketh the one and the same Spirit, dividing to each one severally even as he will;" wherefore it is not right to be over-curious:) he proceeds now to soothe them in like manner from another common example, and betakes himself to nature itself, as was his use to do.
For when he was discoursing about the hair of men and women, after all the rest he drew matter thence also to correct them, saying, "Doth not even nature itself teach you that if a man have long hair, it is a dishonor to him? but if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her?" (1 Cor. xi. 14, 15.) And when he spake concerning the idol-sacrifices, forbidding to touch them, he drew an argument from the examples also of them that are without, both making mention of the Olympic games, where he saith, "they which run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize:" (1 Cor. ix. 24.) and confirming these views from shepherds and soldiers and husbandmen. Wherefore he brings forward here also a common example by which he presses on and fights hard to prove that no one was really put in a worse condition: a thing which was marvellous and surprising to be able to show, and calculated to refresh the weaker sort, I mean, the example of the body. For nothing so consoles the person of small spirit and inferior gifts, or so persuades him not to grieve, as the being convinced that he is not left with less than his share. Wherefore also Paul making out this point, thus expresses himself: "for as the body is one and hath many members."
Seest thou his exact consideration? He is pointing out the same thing to be both one and many. Wherefore also he adds, pressing the point more vigorously, "and all the members of the one body, being many, are one body." He said not, "being many, are of one body," but "the one body itself is many:" and those many members are this one thing. If therefore the one is many, and the many are one, where is the difference? where the superiority? where the disadvantage? For all, saith he, are one: and not simply one, but being strictly considered in respect of that even which is principal, i.e., their being a body, they are found all to be one: but when considered as to their particular natures, then the difference comes out, and the difference is in all alike. For none of them by itself can make a body, but each is alike deficient in the making a body, and there is need of a coming together since when the many become one, then and not till then is there one body. Wherefore also covertly intimating this very thing, he said, "And all the members of the one body, being many, are one body." And he said not, "the superior and the inferior," but "being many," which is common to all.
And how is it possible that they should be one? When throwing out the difference of the members, thou considerest the body. For the same thing which the eye is, this also is the foot in regard of its being a member and constituting a body. For there is no difference in this respect. Nor canst thou say that one of the members makes a body of itself, but another does not. For they are all equal in this, for the very reason that they are all one body.
But having said this and having shown it clearly from the common judgment of all, he added, "so also is Christ." And when he should have said, "so also is the Church," for this was the natural consequent he doth not say it but instead of it places the name of Christ, carrying the discourse up on high and appealing more and more to the hearer's reverence. But his meaning is this: "So also is the body of Christ, which is the Church." For as the body and the head [178] are one man, so he said that the Church and Christ are one. Wherefore also he placed Christ instead of the Church, giving that name to His body. "As then," saith he, "our body is one thing though it be composed of many: so also in the Church we all are one thing. For though the Church be composed of many members, yet these many form one body."
[2.] Thus having, you see, recovered and raised up by this common example him who thought himself depreciated, again he leaves the topic of common experience, and comes to another, a spiritual one, bringing greater consolation and indicative of great equality of honor. What then is this?
Ver. 13. "For in one Spirit, saith he, were we all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether bond or free."
Now his meaning is this: that which established us to become one body and regenerated us, is one Spirit: for not in one Spirit was one baptized, and another another. And not only is that which hath baptized us one, but also that unto which [179] He baptized us, i.e., for which [180] He baptized us, is one. For we were baptized not that so many several bodies might be formed, but that we might all preserve one with another the perfect nature of one body: i.e., that we might all be one body, into the same were we baptized.
So that both He who formed it is one, and that into which He formed it is one. And he said not, "that we might all come to be of the same body;" but, "that we might all be one body." For he ever strives to use the more expressive phrases. And well said he, "we all," adding also himself. "For not even I, the Apostle, have any more than thou in this respect," saith he. "For thou art the body even as I, and I even as thou, and we have all the same Head and have passed through [181] the same birth-pains. Wherefore we are also the same body." "And why speak I," saith he, "of the Jews? since even the Gentiles who were so far off from us, He hath brought into the entireness of one body." Wherefore having said, "we all," he stopped not here, but added, "whether Jews or Greeks, whether bond or free." Now if, having before been so far off, we were united and have become one, much more after that we have become one, we can have no right to grieve and be dejected. Yea, the difference, in fact, hath no place. For if to Greeks and Jews, to bond and free, He hath vouchsafed the same blessings, how can it be that after so vouchsafing He divides them, now that He hath bestowed a greater perfection of unity by the supply of His gifts?
"And were all made to drink of one Spirit."
Ver. 14. "For the body is not one member, but many."
i.e., We are come to the same initiation, we enjoy the same Table. And why said he not, "we are nourished by the same body and drink the same blood?" Because by saying "Spirit," he declared them both, as well the flesh as the blood. For through both are we "made to drink of the Spirit."
But to me he appears now to speak of that visitation of the Spirit which takes place in us after Baptism and before the Mysteries. And he said, "We were made to drink," because this metaphorical speech suited him extremely well for his proposed subject: as if he had said respecting plants and a garden, that by the same fountain all the trees are watered, or by the same water; so also here, "we all drank the same Spirit, we enjoyed the same grace," saith he.
If now one Spirit both formed us and gathered us all together into one body; for this is the meaning of, "we were baptized into one body:" and vouchsafed us one table, and gave us all the same watering, (for this is the meaning of, "we were made to drink into one Spirit [182] ,") and united persons so widely separated; and if many things then become a body when they are made one: why, I pray, art thou continually tossing to and from their difference? But if thou sayest, "Because there are many members and diverse," know that this very thing is the wonder and the peculiar excellency of the body, when the things which are many and diverse make one. But if they were not many, it were not so wonderful and incredible that they should be one body; nay, rather they would not be a body at all.
[3.] This however he states last; but for the present he goes to the members themselves, saying thus:
Ver. 15. "If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?"
Ver. 16. "And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?"
For if the one being made inferior and the other superior, doth not allow their being of the body, the whole is done away. Do not say therefore, "I am not the body, because I am inferior." For the foot also hath the inferior post, yet is it of the body: for the being or not being part of the body, is not from the one lying in this place and the other in that; (which is what constitutes difference of place;) but from the being conjoined or separated. For the being or not being a body, arises from the having been made one or not. But do thou, I pray, mark his considerate way, how he applies their words to our members. For as he said above, "These things have I in a figure transferred to myself and Apollos," (1 Cor. iv. 6.) just so likewise here, to make his argument free from invidiousness and acceptable, he introduces the members speaking: that when they shall hear nature answering them, being thus convicted by experience herself and by the general voice, they may have nothing further to oppose. "For say, if you will," saith he, "this very thing, murmur as you please, you cannot be out of the body. For as the law of nature, so much more doth the power of grace guard all things and preserve them entire." And see how he kept to the rule of having nothing superfluous; not working out his argument on all the members, but on two only and these the extremes; having specified both the most honorable of all, the eye, and the meanest of all, the feet. And he doth not make the foot to discourse with the eye, but with the hand which is mounted a little above it; and the ear with the eyes. For because we are wont to envy not those who are very far above us, but those who are a little higher, therefore he also conducts his comparison thus.
Ver. 17. "If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling?"
Thus, because, having fallen upon the difference of the members, and having mentioned feet, and hands, and eyes, and ears, he led them to the consideration of their own inferiority and superiority: see how again he consoles them, intimating that so it was expedient: and that their being many and diverse, this especially causeth them to be a body. But if they all were some one, they would not be a body. Wherefore, he saith, "If they were all one member, where were the body?" This however, he mentions not till afterwards; but here he points out also something more; that besides the impossibility of any one being a body, it even takes away the being of the rest.
"For if the whole were hearing, where were the smelling," saith he.
[4.] Then because after all they were yet disturbed: that which he had done above, the same he doth also now. For as there he first alleged the expediency to comfort them and afterwards stopped their mouths, vehemently saying, "But all these worketh the one and the same Spirit, dividing to each one man severally even as He will:" so also here having stated reasons for which he showed that it was profitable that all should so be, he refers the whole again to the counsel of God, saying,