12.For we dare not. He says this by way of irony, for afterwards he does not merely compare himself boldly with them, but, deriding their vanity, he leaves them far behind him. Now by this irony he gives a stroke, not merely to those foolish boasters, (772) but also to the Corinthians, who encouraged them in their folly by their misdirected approbation. “I am satisfied,” says he, “with my moderate way; for I would not dare to put myself on a footing with your Apostles, who are the heralds of their own excellence.” In the mean time, when he intimates that their glory consists of mere speaking and boasting, he shows, how silly and worthless they are, while he claims for himself deeds instead of words, that is, true and solid ground of glorying. He may seem, however, to err in the very thing for which he reproves others, for he immediately afterwards commends himself. I answer, that his design must be taken into view, for those do not aim at their own commendation, who, entirely free from ambition, have no desire but to serve the Lord usefully. (773) As to this passage, however, there is no need of any other explanation than what may be gathered from the words themselves, for those are said to commend themselves, who, while in poverty and starvation as to true praise, exalt themselves in vain-glorious boasting, and falsely give out, that they are what they are not. This, also, appears from what follows.

But they measure themselves by themselves Here he points out, as with his finger their folly. The man that has but one eye sees well enough among the blind: the man that is dull of hearing hears distinctly enough among the totally deaf. Such were those that were satisfied with themselves, and showed themselves off among others, simply because they did not look to any that were superior to themselves, for if they had compared themselves with Paul, or any one like him, they would have felt constrained to lay aside immediately that foolish impression which they entertained, and would have exchanged boasting for shame.

For an explanation of this passage we need look no farther than to the monks; for as they are almost all of them the most ignorant asses, and at the same time are looked upon as learned persons, on account of their long robe and hood, if any one has merely a slight smattering of elegant literature, he proudly spreads out his feathers like a peacock — a marvelous fame goes abroad respecting him — among his companions he is adored (774) Were, however, the mask of the hood laid aside, (775) and a thorough examination entered upon, their vanity would at once be discovered. Why so? The old proverb holds good: “Ignorance is pert.” (776) But the excessively insolent arrogance of the monks (777) proceeds chiefly from this — that they measure themselves by themselves; for, as in their cloisters there is nothing but barbarism, (778) it is not to be wondered, if the man that has but one eye is a king among the blind. Such were Paul’s rivals, for inwardly they flattered themselves, not considering what virtues entitled a person to true praise, and how far short they came of the excellence of Paul, and those like him. And, certainly, this single consideration might justly have covered them with shame, but it is the just punishment of the ambitious, that by their silliness they expose themselves to ridicule, (than which there is nothing that they are more desirous to avoid,) and in place of glory, which they are immoderately desirous of, (779) they incur disgrace.

Continues after advertising
Continues after advertising