Abstinentia Pauli ab licitis
Paul’s abstinence from licit things
9:1 Non sum liber? non sum apostolus? nonne Christum Jesum Dominum nostrum vidi? nonne opus meum vos estis in Domino? [n. 455]
9:1 Am I not I free? Am not I an apostle? Have not I seen Christ Jesus our Lord? Are not you my work in the Lord? [n. 455]
9:2 Et si aliis non sum apostolus, sed tamen vobis sum: nam signaculum apostolatus mei vos estis in Domino. [n. 457]
9:2 And if unto others I am not an apostle, but yet to you I am. For you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord. [n. 457]
9:3 Mea defensio apud eos qui me interrogant, haec est:
9:3 My defense with them that examine me is this.
9:4 Numquid non habemus potestatem manducandi et bibendi? [n. 458]
9:4 Have not we power to eat and to drink? [n. 458]
9:5 numquid non habemus potestatem mulierem sororem circumducendi sicut et ceteri apostoli, et fratres Domini, et Cephas? [n. 460]
9:5 Have we not power to carry about a woman, a sister, as well as the rest of the apostles and the brethren of the Lord and Cephas? [n. 460]
9:6 aut ego solus, et Barnabas, non habemus potestatem hoc operandi? [n. 461]
9:6 Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to do this? [n. 461]
9:7 Quis militat suis stipendiis umquam? quis plantat vineam, et de fructu ejus non edit? quis pascit gregem, et de lacte gregis non manducat? [n. 462]
9:7 Who serves as a soldier, at any time, at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and eats not of the fruit thereof? Who feeds the flock and eats not of the milk of the flock? [n. 462]
9:8 Numquid secundum hominem haec dico? an et lex haec non dicit? [n. 464]
9:8 Do I speak these things according to man? Or does not the law also say these things? [n. 464]
9:9 Scriptum est enim in lege Moysi: non alligabis os bovi trituranti. Numquid de bobus cura est Deo? [n. 466]
9:9 For it is written in the law of Moses: you shall not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treads out the corn. Does God take care for oxen? [n. 466]
9:10 an propter nos utique hoc dicit? Nam propter nos scripta sunt: quoniam debet in spe qui arat, arare: et qui triturat, in spe fructus percipiendi.
9:10 Or does he say this indeed for our sakes? For these things are written for our sakes: so that he who ploughs, should plough in hope and he who threshes, in hope to receive fruit.
455. Superius monuit cavere ab edendo idolothita coram infirmis, propter scandalum fratrum infirmorum, hic proponit se in exemplum, quia propter alios abstinet se a sibi licitis, scilicet ab acceptione sumptuum, ubi
455. Above he advised avoiding eating food offered to idols in the presence of the weak, on account of the scandal caused to weak brethren; here he gives himself as an example, because for the sake of other persons he abstains from things licit in themselves, namely from accepting means of living.
primo proponit multipliciter, quia licitum est sumptus accipere;
He first shows in many ways that it is licit to accept means of living;
secundo quod nihilominus non vult accipere, ibi ego autem nullo horum usus sum, et cetera.
second, that he nonetheless does not wish to accept them, at but I have used none of these things (1 Cor 9:15).
In prima parte, quod licitum sit sumptus accipere, probat tripliciter.
In the first part, he proves in three ways that it is licit to accept means of living:
Primo per auctoritatem;
first, by authority;
secundo per rationem, ibi si nos vobis spiritualia seminavimus, etc.;
second, by reason, at if we have sown unto you spiritual things (1 Cor 9:11);
tertio per exemplorum similitudinem, ibi nescitis quod hi qui, et cetera.
third, by the example of a like case, at know you not that they who work (1 Cor 9:13).
In prima, primo probat per auctoritatem apostolicae dignitatis;
In the first part, he first proves it by the authority of the apostolic dignity;
secundo per auctoritatem humanae consuetudinis, ibi quis militat suis stipendiis, etc.;
second by the authority of human custom, at who serves as a solder at his own expense;
tertio per auctoritatem divinae legis, ibi numquid secundum hominem, et cetera.
third by the authority of the divine law, at do I speak these things.
In prima primo probat quod sit apostolus generaliter;
In the first part, he first proves that he is an apostle in general;
secundo quod sit apostolus eorum specialiter, ibi et si aliis non sum apostolus;
second that he is specially their apostle, at if unto others I am not an apostle;
tertio quod potest accipere sumptus licite, ibi numquid non habemus, et cetera.
third that he can licitly accept means of living, at have we not.
456. In prima, primo quaerit an habeat libertatem accipiendi sumptus; secundo an sit apostolus, ibi non sum apostolus, etc.; tertio probat duplici ratione quod sit liber, et apostolus, ibi nonne Dominum Iesum Christum, et cetera.
456. In the first part, he first asks whether he has freedom of accepting means of living; second whether he is an apostle, at am I not an apostle; third he proves with two reasons that he is free and an apostle, at have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord.
Dicit ergo non sum liber? etc., quasi dicat: abstinete ab hoc licito, scilicet ab esu idolothitorum, quia ego etiam abstineo a stipendiis, cum tamen habeam libertatem accipiendi. Numquid enim non sum apostolus? Immo vere sum apostolus. Gal. II, 8: qui operatus est Petro in apostolatum circumcisionis, operatus est et mihi inter gentes.
He says, therefore, am I not free? As though to say: abstain from this licit thing, namely from eating foods offering to idols, because I too abstain from wages, although I have the freedom to accept them. For am I not an apostle? Indeed I am truly an apostle: he who worked in Peter for the apostleship of the circumcision, worked in me also among the gentiles (Gal 2:8).
Est ergo ratio sua talis: omnis apostolus ratione sui apostolatus habet libertatem accipiendi sumptus; sed ego sum apostolus: utrumque probat postea; ergo, et cetera.
His reasoning is therefore as follows: every apostle by reason of his apostolate has freedom of accepting means of living; but I am an apostle – each of these he proves afterwards – therefore, etc.
Deinde cum dicit nonne Dominum Iesum Christum, etc., hic probat duplici ratione quod sit apostolus, primo per causam, secundo per effectum, ibi nonne opus meum, et cetera. Prima ratio sumitur ex parte Christi mittentis; secunda ex parte Corinthiorum quibus mittitur.
Then, when he says have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord, he proves with two reasons that he is an apostle. First through the cause, second through the effect, at are not you my work. The first reason is taken on the part of Christ who sent him, the second on the part of the Corinthians to whom he was sent.
Prima ratio talis est: ego vidi Dominum qui me misit ad praedicandum, ergo sum apostolus. Et hoc est quod dicit nonne, etc.; quasi dicat: vere sum apostolus, nonne Dominum Iesum Christum vidi? Hoc dicit propter pseudoapostolos, qui dicebant ipsum non esse apostolum, quia non fuerat in societate Domini sicut caeteri apostoli. Ipse autem vidit eum iam immortalem, secundum Glossam, vel in via, Act. III, 9, vel in templo, Act. XXII, 19. Unde, Act. IX, 27, Barnabas apprehensum illum duxit ad apostolos, et narravit quomodo in via vidisset Dominum. Infra, XV, 8: novissime omnium tamquam abortivo visus est et mihi.
The first reason is this: I have seen the Lord who sent me to preach, therefore I am an apostle. And this is what he means in saying have I not, as though to say: truly I am an apostle; have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? He says this on account of the pseudoapostles, who say that he is not an apostle, because he was not in the Lord’s company as the rest of the apostles were. But he saw him as an immortal, according to the Gloss, either on the way (Acts 3:9), or in the temple (Acts 22:19). Hence: Barnabas took him and brought him to the apostles, and told them how he had seen the Lord on the way (Acts 9:27) And last of all, he was seen also by me, as by one born out of due time (1 Cor 15:8).
Nonne opus meum, et cetera. Ecce secunda ratio talis: vos estis conversi ad fidem per me missum ad hoc; ergo sum apostolus; nonne opus meum vos estis, o Corinthii? Sicut templum architecti, supra III, 10: ut sapiens architectus fundamentum posui. Item ut filius opus genitoris, supra IV, 15: in Christo Iesu per Evangelium vos genui. Opus, inquam, meum, et hoc in Domino, id est, Domino cooperante. Vel in Domino, id est ad gloriam Domini, quasi dicat: sic estis.
Are not you my work in the Lord? See the second reason, which is this: you were converted to the faith by me, who were sent to you; therefore I am an apostle; are not you my work, O Corinthians? As a temple is the work of an architect: as a wise architect, I have laid the foundation (1 Cor 3:10). Again, as a son is the work of him who begets him: for in Christ Jesus, by the Gospel, I have begotten you (1 Cor 4:15). Again, my work, and this in the Lord, i.e., as fellow worker with the Lord. Or in the Lord, i.e., for the glory of the Lord, as though to say: thus you are.
457. Deinde cum dicit et si aliis apostolus, etc., hic probat quod est apostolus eorum specialiter. Ubi primo proponit quod est apostolus eorum specialiter; secundo probat hoc per effectum, ibi nam sigillum apostolatus, etc.; tertio ostendit quod per effectum illum defendit se esse apostolum, ibi mea defensio ad eos, et cetera.
457. Then, when he says and if unto others I am not an apostle, he proves that he is especially an apostle to them. Here he first states that he is especially an apostle to them; second he proves this by the effect, at for you are the seal of my apostleship; third he shows that he makes a defense of himself as an apostle by that effect, at my defense with them.
Dicit ergo et si, etc., quasi dicat: vere opus meum estis, quia et si aliis, scilicet Iudaeis quorum legem evacuo, non sum, id est non videor esse, apostolus, sed tamen vobis sum, qui per me conversi estis specialiter. Rom. XI, 13: quamdiu gentium sum apostolus, ministerium meum honorificabo. Et vere vobis sum apostolus, nam vos estis sigillum apostolatus mei, id est forma et sigillum, quia apostolatus meus impressus est in vobis, sicut forma sigilli in cera. Glossa: in vobis apparet quod sum apostolus dum habetis per me quod etiam per alios apostolos. I Cor. IX, 2: signa apostolatus mei facta sunt super vos. Vos estis, inquam, in Domino, id est Domino principali auctore.
He says, therefore, and if, as though to say: truly you are my work, because even if unto others, namely to the Jews whose law I empty out, I am not, i.e., do not seem to be, an apostle, but yet to you I am; to you, that is, who were especially converted by me: as long as I am the apostle of the gentiles, I will honor my ministry (Rom 11:13). And truly I am to you an apostle, for you are the seal of my apostleship, i.e., the form and the seal, since my apostleship is impressed in you, as the form of a seal in wax. A Gloss says: in you is seen that I am an apostle, when you have from me what you also have from the other apostles. And the signs of my apostleship have been wrought on you (2 Cor 12:12). You are, indeed, in the Lord, i.e., with the Lord as principal author.
Et vere ita est, quia mea defensio ad eos qui me interrogant, utrum scilicet sim apostolus, scilicet hoc estis vos; per vos enim ostendo me esse apostolum.
And truly it is so, that my defense with them that examine me, namely about whether I am an apostle, is you yourselves, for by you I show that I am an apostle.
458. Deinde cum dicit numquid non habemus, etc., hic ostendit quod potest accipere sumptus licenter. Ubi
458. Then, when he says have we not power, he shows that he can licitly accept means of living.
primo quaerit an habeat hanc potestatem generaliter;
He first asks whether he has this power in general;