Homily 16 — First Corinthians 5, verse 9, to 6, verse 11

“I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with the sexually immoral; yet not altogether with the sexually immoral of this world, or with the greedy and robbers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world. But now I write to you not to associate with anyone who is called a brother if he is sexually immoral, or greedy, or an idolater, or a drunkard, or a slanderer, or a robber — with such a one not even to eat.” [a]

He had said, “And you have not rather mourned, that such a one should be taken away,” and, “Clean out the old yeast.” So it was likely that they would suppose it was their duty to avoid all the sexually immoral. For if the man who has sinned passes some of his own infection on to those who have not sinned, it is all the more right to keep oneself away from those outside. (If one must not spare even a friend because of the harm that comes from him, much less anyone else.) Under this impression they would probably have separated themselves from the sexually immoral among the Greeks as well; and when the thing turned out to be impossible, they would have taken it very hard. So he used this way of correcting them, saying, “I wrote to you not to associate with the sexually immoral; yet not altogether with the sexually immoral of this world.” He uses the word “altogether” as though this were something already agreed.

He did not want them to think that he had spared them this command because they were too imperfect for it, and then set out to do it under the mistaken idea that they were perfect. So he shows that it would be impossible to do, however much they wanted to. It would mean looking for another world. That is why he added, “For then you would have to go out of the world.” Do you see that he is no harsh master, and that when he makes laws he always looks not only to what can be done, but also to what can be done easily? For, he says: “How is it possible for a man who has a house and children to care for and is busy with the affairs of the city, or who is a craftsman or a soldier, to avoid the unclean, who are to be found everywhere, since the greater part of humankind are Greeks?” By “the sexually immoral of this world” he means those among the Greeks.

“But now I write to you: if any brother” is of this kind, “with such a one not even to eat.” Here too he glances at others who were living in wickedness. But how can one who is “a brother” be an idolater? As was once the case with the Samaritans, who chose godliness only by halves. And besides, he is laying his ground in advance for the discussion of food offered to idols, which he means to take up after this.

“Or greedy.” With these too he does battle. That is why he also said, “Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded? No, you yourselves do wrong and defraud.” “Or a drunkard.” This too he lays to their charge further on, as when he says, “One is hungry and another is drunk,” and, “Food for the belly and the belly for food.” “Or a slanderer, or a robber.” These too he had rebuked before.

Next he also adds the reason why he does not forbid them to mix with pagans of that kind, showing that it is not only impossible but also pointless. Verse 12: “For what have I to do with judging those outside?” He calls the Christians and the Greeks “those inside” and “those outside,” as he also says elsewhere (First Timothy 3, verse 7): “He must also have a good report from those outside.” And in the letter to the Thessalonians he speaks the same language, saying (Second Thessalonians 3, verse 14), “Do not associate with him, so that he may be put to shame,” and, “Do not count him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother.” [f]

Here, however, he does not add the reason. Why? Because there he wanted to soothe them, and here he did not. For the fault in this case and in that one was not the same; in the case of the Thessalonians it was lighter. There he is rebuking idleness; here, sexual immorality and other most grievous sins. And if anyone wished to go among the Greeks, he does not stop him from eating with such people; and this too for the same reason. We act the same way ourselves. For our children and our brothers we leave nothing undone, but we do not take much account of strangers. What then? Did Paul not care for those outside as well? Yes, he cared for them. But it was not until they had received the good news, and he had brought them under the teaching of Christ, that he laid down laws for them. As long as they despised it, it was pointless to speak the commands of Christ to people who did not know Christ himself.

“Do you not judge those inside, while God judges those outside?” He had said, “What have I to do with judging those outside?” So, in case anyone should think these were left unpunished, he sets another court over them, and a fearful one. He said this both to frighten those outside and to comfort those inside, hinting also that this punishment, which lasts for a time, snatches those who receive it away from the one that is undying and everlasting. He has said so plainly elsewhere too (First Corinthians 11, verse 32): “But when we are judged now, we are disciplined, so that we may not be condemned along with the world.”

“Remove the wicked person from among yourselves.” He used an expression found in the Old Testament (Deuteronomy 17, verse 7). Partly he is hinting that they too will gain a great deal by it, as though they were being set free from some grievous plague; and partly he is showing that this kind of thing is nothing new, but that from the beginning it seemed good to the Lawgiver that such people should be cut off. But in that case it was done with more severity, in this one with more gentleness. So one might reasonably ask why in that case he allowed the sinner to be severely punished and stoned, but not in this one; here, rather, he leads him to repentance. Why, then, were the lines drawn one way before and another way now? For two reasons. One is that these were being led into a greater trial and needed greater patience. The other, and truer one, is that these were more easily corrected by being spared, since they might come to repentance, while the others were likely to go on into greater wickedness. For if they persisted in the same things when they saw the first offenders being punished, how much more would they have done so if no one at all had been punished! That is why, under that covenant, death is inflicted at once on the adulterer and the murderer; but under this one, if they are released through repentance, they have escaped the punishment. [i]

Still, you can see some instances of heavier punishment here too, and some milder ones in the Old Testament, so that it may be shown in every way that the two covenants are akin to each other and come from one and the same Lawgiver. And you can see the punishment following at once both under that covenant and under this one, and in both often only after a long interval. Indeed, often it does not follow at all, even after a long interval, because the Almighty accepts repentance alone as satisfaction. So in the Old Testament David, who had committed adultery and murder, was saved through repentance; while in the New, Ananias, who kept back only a small part of the price of his land, perished together with his wife. And if cases like the first are more frequent in the Old Testament, and cases of the opposite kind in the New, it is the difference in the persons that makes the difference in the way such matters are handled.

Chapter 6, verse 1: “Does any one of you, having a matter against his brother, dare to go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints?” [k]

Here too he makes his complaint on grounds already admitted. In that other place he says, “It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you,” and in this one, “Does any one of you dare?” From the very outset he shows signs of his anger, and implies that the thing he speaks of comes from a daring and lawless spirit. Now why did he bring in, in passing, this discussion about greed, and about the duty of not going to law outside the church? In keeping with his own practice. It is his habit to set right things as they come in his way; just as, when he was speaking about the tables they shared in common, he launched into the discussion of the mysteries. So here too: since he had mentioned greedy brothers, burning as he was with eagerness to correct those in sin, he cannot bear to keep strictly to order. He corrects the sin that has come up out of the regular course, and then returns to his former subject.

Let us hear, then, what he says about this too. “Does any of you, having a matter, dare to go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints?” For a while he uses these words about the persons involved to expose what they were doing, to discredit it and to blame it. Nor does he, right from the beginning, overturn the custom of seeking judgment before believers. Only when he has struck them down with many words does he take away going to law altogether. He says: “In the first place, if one must go to law, it would be wrong to do it before the unrighteous. But you ought not to go to law at all.” This last, however, he adds later. For the present he thoroughly sifts the first subject, namely, that they should not submit their affairs to outside judges. He says: “How can it be anything but absurd that a man at odds with his friend should take his enemy to reconcile the two of them? And how can you help feeling ashamed and blushing when a Greek sits in judgment on a Christian? And if it is not right to go to law before Greeks about private matters, how will we submit to their decisions about other things of greater importance?”

Notice, too, how he puts it. He does not say, “Before the unbelievers,” but, “Before the unrighteous,” using the very word he most needed for the matter in hand, in order to frighten them off and keep them away. For his discussion was about going to law, and people engaged in lawsuits want nothing so much as judges who care deeply about what is just. So he takes this as his ground for turning them back, all but saying: “Where are you going? What are you doing, my friend? You are bringing on yourself the opposite of what you want. To get justice, you are putting yourself in the hands of unjust men!” And because it would have been unbearable to be told at once not to go to law, he did not add this immediately. He only changed the judges, bringing the parties to the case in from outside into the church.

Then there was the fact that being judged by those inside seemed easy to look down on, especially at that time. They were perhaps not able to grasp a point of law, nor were they like the pagan judges, well trained in law and in rhetoric, since most of them were uneducated men. So notice how he makes them worthy of trust: first, by calling them “saints.” But this bore witness to purity of life, not to skill in hearing a case. So notice how carefully he deals with this part as well, saying, “Do you not know that the saints will judge the world?” How, then, can you, who are one day to judge them, put up with being judged by them now? They will not, indeed, judge by taking their seat in person and demanding an account; yet they will condemn. This, at least, he said plainly: “And if the world is judged in you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters?” [m]

He does not say “by you,” but “in you,” just as when Christ said (Matthew 12, verse 42), “The queen of the south will rise up and condemn this generation,” and, “The men of Nineveh will rise up and condemn this generation.” For when we have looked on the same sun and shared all the same things, and we are found to be believers and they unbelievers, they will not be able to take refuge in ignorance. We will accuse them simply by the things we have done. And one will find many such ways of judging there. Then, so that no one would think he is speaking about other people, notice how he makes his words apply to all: “And if the world is judged in you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters?” The thing is a disgrace to you, he says, and a reproach beyond words. For since they were likely to feel put out at being judged by those inside, he says: “No, on the contrary: the disgrace is when you are judged by those outside. For it is those that are the very small disputes, not these.”

Verse 3: “Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more, then, the things of this life?” Some say that the priests are hinted at here. Far from it! His words are about demons. For if he had been speaking about corrupt priests, he would have meant them above, when he said, “the world is judged in you” (since Scripture is used to calling evil people “the world” too). He would not have said the same thing twice, nor would he have put it afterward as though he were saying something weightier. No, he is speaking of those angels about whom Christ says, “Depart into the fire prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matthew 25, verse 41). And Paul says, “His angels disguise themselves as servants of righteousness” (Second Corinthians 11, verse 15). For when the bodiless powers themselves are found to be inferior to us who are clothed in flesh, they will suffer a heavier punishment. But if some still insist that he is speaking of priests, let us ask, “What sort of priests?” Those, of course, whose way of life has been worldly. In what sense, then, does he say, “We will judge angels, how much more the things of this life”? He mentions the angels in contrast with “the things of this life,” and with good reason; for they are far removed from any need of these things, because of the higher excellence of their nature.

Verse 4: “If, then, you have to judge the things of this life, set those to judge who are of no account in the church.” He wants to teach us as forcefully as possible that they ought not to put themselves in the hands of those outside, whatever the matter may be. So he raises what seemed to be an objection and answers it first. What he says is something like this. Perhaps someone will say: “No one among you is wise, or able to pass sentence. They are all contemptible.” What follows? “Even if no one is wise, I tell you to entrust your affairs to those who carry the least weight.”

Verse 5: “I say this to your shame.” These are the words of someone exposing their objection as an idle excuse. And so he adds, “Is it so that there is not a wise man among you, not even one?” Is the shortage so great, he says? Such a lack of sensible people among you? And what he adds next strikes even harder. Having said, “Is it so that there is not a wise man among you, not even one?” he adds, “who will be able to decide the case of his brother.” For when brother goes to law with brother, there is never any need of understanding and talent in the one who acts as go-between, since the feeling between them and the tie of kinship go a long way toward settling such a quarrel.

“But brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers.” Do you notice to what effect he belittled the judges at first by calling them unrighteous, while here, to shame them, he calls them unbelievers? For surely it is extremely disgraceful if the priest cannot bring about a reconciliation even between brothers, and they must turn to those outside. So when he said, “those who are of no account,” his chief meaning was not that the church’s outcasts should be appointed judges; he was finding fault with the Corinthians. That the matter ought to be referred to those who were able to decide it, he has shown by saying, “Is it so that there is not a wise man among you, not even one?” And with great force he stops their mouths and says: “Even if there were not a single wise man, the hearing should have been left to you, unwise as you are, rather than letting those outside judge.” For what else can this be but absurd? When a quarrel breaks out in a house, we call in no one from outside, and we are ashamed if word of what goes on indoors gets out among strangers. Yet where the church is, the treasure house of the mysteries beyond words, there everything is to be published outside!

Verse 6: “But brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers.” The charge is twofold: both that he “goes to law,” and that he does it “before unbelievers.” For if the thing by itself, going to law with a brother, is a fault, what pardon can there be for doing it before outsiders as well?

Verse 7: “Now it is already a complete failure on your part that you have lawsuits with one another.” Do you see where he kept this point in reserve, and how he has cleared the way to discuss it at the right moment? He says: “I am not yet speaking of which one does the wrong, and which one suffers it.” So far, the act of going to law itself brings each party under his censure, and in that respect neither is any better than the other. Whether one goes to law justly or unjustly is quite another subject. “So do not say, ‘Which one did the wrong?’ On this ground I condemn you at once, for the very act of going to law.” [o]

Now if not being able to put up with someone who does wrong is a fault, what accusation can match actually doing the wrong? “Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be defrauded?” Verse 8: “No, you yourselves do wrong and defraud, and that your own brothers and sisters.” Again the crime is twofold, perhaps even threefold or fourfold. The first is not knowing how to bear being wronged. The second is actually doing wrong. The third is handing the settlement of these matters over even to the unjust. And the fourth is that it is done to a brother. For people’s offenses are not judged by the same rule when they are committed against some chance person and when they are committed against one’s own member. It takes a greater degree of recklessness to venture on that. In the one case, only the nature of the act is trampled on; in the other, the person’s standing as well.

So, you see, having shamed them with arguments from general principles, and before that with the rewards set before them, he closes the exhortation with a threat, making his words more severe. He says (verse 9), “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate men, nor men who lie with men, (verse 10) nor the greedy, nor thieves, nor drunkards, nor slanderers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.” What are you saying? You were speaking about the greedy; have you now brought in on us so vast a crowd of lawless men? “Yes, but in doing this I am not confusing my argument; I am going on in regular order.” [p]

For just as, when he was speaking about the unclean, he mentioned them all together, so again, on mentioning the greedy, he brings them all forward, and in this way makes his rebukes easier to take for those who have such things on their conscience. The constant mention of the punishment stored up for others makes the reproof easy to receive when it comes up against our own sins. And so in this case he utters his threat not at all as though he knew they were doing such things, nor as calling them to account. This has a special power to hold the hearer and keep him from bolting: the words have no bearing on him in particular, but are spoken in general, and so they wound his conscience in secret.

“Do not be deceived.” Here he glances at certain people who maintain — as most people indeed say now — that God, being good and kind to humankind, does not take vengeance for our misdeeds. They say: “So let us not be afraid. He will never exact justice from anyone for anything.” It is because of these people that he says, “Do not be deceived.” For it is the height of error and delusion to count on good and then meet with the opposite, and to suspect such things of God as no one would think even of a man. That is why the prophet says in God’s own person (Psalm 50, verse 21), “You conceived wickedness, thinking that I would be like you. I will rebuke you and set your wrongdoings before your face.” And Paul says here, “Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral” (he puts first the one already condemned) “nor adulterers, nor effeminate men, nor drunkards, nor slanderers will inherit the kingdom of God.”

Many have attacked this passage as extremely severe, since he places the drunkard and the slanderer alongside the adulterer and the abominable man and the man who lies with men. The offenses, they say, are not equal; how, then, is the sentence of punishment the same? What shall we say, then? First, that drunkenness is no small thing, and neither is slander, since Christ himself handed over to hell the man who called his brother a fool. And that sin has often given birth to death. Again, the Jewish people also committed the greatest of their sins through drunkenness. Next, it is not about punishment that he is speaking so far, but about exclusion from the kingdom. From the kingdom the one and the other are equally thrust out. But whether they will find any difference in hell is not for this occasion to inquire, for that subject is not before us just now.

Verse 11: “And such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were made holy.” [r]

He adds this to put them thoroughly to shame. It is as if he said: “Consider what evils God has set us free from, and what a proof and display of his love for humankind he has given us! He did not limit his redemption to mere release; he made the benefit far greater, for he also made you clean. Was that all? No, he also ‘made you holy.’ And not even that is all: he also ‘counted you righteous.’ Even bare release from our sins would have been a great gift, but as it is, he has also filled you with countless blessings. And he has done this ‘in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,’ not in this name or that, and also ‘in the Spirit of our God.’”

Knowing these things, then, beloved, and keeping in mind how great the blessing is that has been worked for us, let us go on living with self-control, keeping pure from all the things that have been listed. Let us avoid the courts that sit in the public squares of the pagans, and let us keep to the end the noble birth that God has freely given us. Think how shameful it is for a Greek to take his seat and hand out justice to you.

But you will say: “What if the judge inside the church gives judgment against the law?” Why should he? Tell me. I would like to know by what kind of laws the Greek gives judgment, and by what kind the Christian. Is it not perfectly plain that human laws are the Greek’s rule, and God’s laws the Christian’s? Surely, then, there is a better chance of justice with the Christian, since his laws are sent down from heaven. And with those outside, besides what has already been said, there are many other things to be wary of: the cleverness of the speakers, the bribery of the magistrates, and many other things that are the ruin of justice. With us there is nothing of the kind.

You will say: “What then, if my opponent is a man of high position?” Well, for this reason above all you ought to go to law in the Christian courts, since in the courts outside he will get the better of you in any case. “But what if he will not agree to that, but despises the courts inside and drags the case outside by force?” It would be better to submit willingly to what you are likely to suffer by force anyway, and not go to law, so that you may have a reward as well. For “if anyone will go to law with you and take away your coat, let him have your cloak as well” (Matthew 5, verse 40); and, “Agree with your opponent quickly, while you are with him on the way” (Matthew 5, verse 25). And why should I speak of our own rules? Even the advocates in the pagan courts very often tell us the same thing: “It would be better to settle matters out of court.”

But O wealth! Or rather, O this senseless love of wealth! It overturns everything and throws it down, and because of money everything is idle talk and fables to most people. That people who live in the world should trouble the law courts is no wonder. But that many of those who have said farewell to the world should do the very same thing, this is past all excuse.

If you want to see, by the rule of Scripture, how far you ought to keep from this kind of need, I mean the need of the courts, and to learn for whom laws are laid down, listen to what Paul says: “The law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and unruly” (First Timothy 1, verse 9). And if he says this about the law of Moses, how much more about the laws of the pagans!

Now if you do wrong, it is plain that you cannot be righteous. But if you are wronged and bear it, and this is the special mark of a righteous man, you have no need of the laws outside. You say: “How will I be able to bear it when I am wronged?” And yet Christ has commanded something even greater than this. He has not only commanded you to bear it when you are wronged, but even to give the wrongdoer a great deal more besides, and in your eagerness to suffer harm to outdo his eagerness to do it. He did not say, “To the one who will sue you at law and take away your coat, give your coat,” but, “give him your cloak as well.” “I bid you overcome him by suffering evil, not by doing it; for this is the sure and splendid victory.” [u]

That is also why Paul goes on to say, “Now it is altogether a defeat for you that you have lawsuits with one another,” and, “Why do you not rather suffer wrong?”

I will make it plain to you that the one who is wronged is the winner, rather than the one who cannot bear being wronged. The man who cannot bear being wronged, even if he drags the other into court and wins the verdict, is at that very moment defeated most of all. For he has suffered what he did not want: his opponent has forced him both to feel pain and to go to law. What does it matter that you have won? What does it matter that you have recovered all the money? Meanwhile you have borne what you did not wish, since you were forced to settle the matter at law. But if you bear the injustice, you win. You lose the money, yes, but not in the least the victory that goes with such mastery of yourself. For the other man had no power to make you do what you did not want.

To show that this is true, tell me: on the dung heap, who won? Who was defeated? Job, who was stripped of everything, or the devil, who stripped him of everything? The devil, obviously, who stripped him of everything. Whom do we admire for the victory, the devil who struck or Job who was struck? Job, clearly. And yet he could not keep his perishing wealth or save his children. Why do I speak of riches and children? He could not even keep his own body in health. Nevertheless, the winner is this man, the one who lost everything he had. His riches he could not keep, but his devotion to God he kept with all exactness. “But he could not help his children when they were dying.” And what of it? What happened made them more glorious, and besides, in this way he guarded himself against the outrage done to him. If he had not suffered harm and been wronged by the devil, he would not have won that brilliant victory.

If suffering wrong were an evil thing, God would not have commanded it of us, for God does not command evil things. What, do you not know that he is the God of glory? That it could not be his will to surround us with shame and ridicule and loss, but to bring us into the very opposite of these? That is why he commands us to suffer wrong, and does everything to draw us away from the things of this world and to teach us what glory is and what shame is, what loss is and what gain.

“But it is hard to suffer wrong and be treated with contempt.” No, my friend, it is not; it is not hard. How long will your heart go fluttering about the things of this present life? God, you may be sure, would not have commanded this if it were hard. Just think. The wrongdoer goes off with the money, but with an evil conscience as well. The one who was wronged has lost some money, yes, but he has been made rich in confidence toward God, a possession worth more than countless treasures.

Knowing these things, then, let us of our own free choice act on strict principles, and not be like the foolish, who think they have not been wronged when they suffer wrong as the result of a trial. It is quite the opposite: that is the greatest harm. And the same is true whenever we show restraint in such matters, not willingly, but only after being beaten in that other place. For it does a man no good to bear it after he has lost a trial, since from then on it is a matter of necessity. What, then, is the splendid victory? When you look down on the whole thing; when you refuse to go to law. [x]

Someone says: “What are you saying? I have been stripped of everything, and you tell me to keep quiet? I have been shamefully treated, and you urge me to bear it gently? How will I be able to?” Why, it is very easy, if you will look up to heaven; if you will look at the beauty that is there to be seen, and at the place where God has promised to receive you if you bear wrong nobly. Do this, then. Look up to heaven, and think that you are being made like the one who sits there above the cherubim. For he too was wronged, and he bore it; he was insulted, and he did not avenge himself; he was beaten, and he did not stand up for his rights. No, he repaid those who did such things with the opposite, with benefits beyond number, and he commanded us to imitate him.

Think how you came out of your mother’s womb naked, and how naked you will depart, both you and the man who wronged you. Or rather, he for his part will depart with countless wounds, breeding worms. Think how the things of this life last only for a season. Count over the tombs of your ancestors; learn exactly what happened in times past; and you will see that the wrongdoer has made you stronger. His own passion, I mean his greed, he has made worse; but yours he has eased, by taking away the wild beast’s food. And besides all this, he has set you free from cares, anguish, envy, informers, trouble, worry and constant fear, and has heaped that foul mass of evils on his own head.

Someone says: “What then, if I have to struggle with hunger?” You bear this with Paul, who says, “Up to this very hour we both hunger and thirst, and are naked” (First Corinthians 4, verse 11). “But he did it for God’s sake.” Then you too do it for God’s sake. For when you refrain from taking revenge, you do it for God’s sake. “But the man who wronged me is enjoying himself with the rich.” No, rather with the devil. But you, be crowned with Paul.

So do not be afraid of hunger, for “the Lord will not kill the souls of the righteous with hunger” (Proverbs 10, verse 3). And again another says, “Cast your care upon the Lord, and he will nourish you” (Psalm 55, verse 23). If the sparrows of the field are fed by him, how will he not feed you? Let us not be of little faith or small of soul, my beloved! He who has promised the kingdom of heaven and such great blessings, how will he not give the things of this life? Let us not long for more than we need, but be content with enough, and we will always be rich. Let shelter and food be what we seek, and we will obtain everything, both these and things far greater.

But if you are still grieving and bowed down, I would like to show you the soul of the wrongdoer after his victory, how it has turned to ashes. For sin is truly like that. While a man is committing it, it gives a certain pleasure; but when it is done, the trifling pleasure is gone, no one knows how, and dejection comes in its place. This is what we feel when we harm anyone: afterward, at any rate, we condemn ourselves. So too when we take more than our share, we feel pleasure, but afterward our conscience stings us.

Do you see some poor man’s house in someone else’s hands? Do not weep for the one who was robbed, but for the robber, for he has not done harm but suffered it. He robbed the other man of the things of this life, but he threw himself out of blessings beyond words. For if the man who does not give to the poor will go away into hell, what will the man suffer who takes the goods of the poor?

Someone says: “Yet where is the gain, if I suffer harm?” The gain is great indeed. God does not make up your compensation out of the punishment of the man who harmed you; that would be nothing great. What great good is it if I suffer harm and he suffers harm too? And yet I know many who count this the greatest comfort, and think they have got everything back when they see those who insulted them being punished. But God does not limit his recompense to this.

Would you really like to know how great the blessings are that wait for you? He opens the whole of heaven to you; he makes you a fellow citizen with the saints; he fits you to take your part in their choir; he frees you from your sins; he crowns you with righteousness. For if those who forgive wrongdoers will receive forgiveness, then those who not only forgive but give generously besides, what blessing will they not inherit? So do not bear it in a small-spirited way; no, even pray for the man who wronged you. It is for your own sake that you do this.

Has he taken your money? Well, he has taken your sins too, as happened with Naaman and Gehazi. How much wealth would you not give to have your wrongdoings forgiven? Believe me, that is what is happening now. For if you bear it nobly and do not curse, you have put on a glorious crown. These are not my words; you have heard Christ saying, “Pray for those who mistreat you.” And think how great the reward is: “that you may be like your Father who is in the heavens.” So you have been deprived of nothing; no, you have gained. You have suffered no wrong; rather, you have been crowned. For you have become better trained in soul, you are made like God, you are set free from worry over money, and you are made the owner of the kingdom of heaven.

Taking all these things into account, then, beloved, let us restrain ourselves when we are wronged, so that we may be set free from the turmoil of this present life, cast out all useless dejection of spirit, and obtain the joy to come, through the grace and love for humankind of our Lord Jesus Christ, with whom be glory, power and honor to the Father and the Holy Spirit, now and always, and forever and ever. Amen.