1 Corinthians 1:12Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

Then he says wherein the discord consisted: "that each of you says, 'I am of Paul,' 'I am of Apollos,' 'I am of Cephas,' and 'I am of Christ'" (1 Cor 1:12).

I mean, he says, not disagreements in private affairs, but much weightier ones.

"That each of you says." The evil touched not a part, but the whole Church.

Yet the Corinthians did not say this either of him, or of Peter, or of Apollos. But he shows that if even such persons should not be placed in such a relation to oneself, then all the more should others not be so placed.

That they did not say this, he himself explains below: "These things I have applied to myself and Apollos... that you may learn from us not to think beyond what is written" (1 Cor 4:6).

This is what I mean: some of you say, "We are Paul’s," and some, "We are Apollos’s." Here the Apostle again humbles himself more than Apollos, in order to shame those who arrogantly exalted themselves over one another. For they were called by the names of Paul and Apollos, and not by the names of Peter and Christ, but by the names of their teachers. Therefore, not wishing to trouble them or announce their names to the whole world, he passed over their names. He wrote his own name, those of his companions, and that of the Lord of all Himself, so that after such rebuke and censure they might turn to humility and meekness.

"Now I say this, that each of you says." The divisions among you, which compelled me to write this apostolic exhortation, consist in this: each of you claims a particular teacher for himself and, following one, despises the others.

One wished to call himself a disciple of Paul, another of Apollos, another of Peter. All these most worthy men were servants of Jesus Christ and most excellent preachers of the gospel faith.

Paul was counted worthy to be a chosen vessel (Acts 9:15). Peter, or Cephas, was called the stone of faith in Jesus Christ, because he confessed without doubt that He is the Son of God (Mt 16:16-18). Apollos was an eloquent man, mighty in scriptural wisdom, as Saint Luke testifies of him in Acts 18:24.

Considering these merits, the newly converted Jews who were in Corinth gave Peter precedence over the other apostles, chiefly because he held the ceremonial law of Moses in honor. Those who were converted to the Christian faith from the Gentiles honored Paul more, because, as teacher of the Gentiles (1 Tim 2:7), he preached Christian freedom.

He taught that Christians were made free from professing the Jewish ceremonial law. Others, especially from among the simple people, attached themselves more to Apollos, who possessed outstanding skill in eloquence.

Although such divisions did not touch the doctrine of faith at all, they nevertheless disturbed the Church of Christ in some measure.

The Apostle Paul forbids the Corinthians to claim other names for themselves: "I am of Paul," "I am of Apollos," "I am of Cephas," and "I am of Christ." This apostolic prohibition seems not to accord with Paul's own conduct, for he called himself a Pharisee in the Jewish assembly: "I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees" (Acts 23:6).

The explanation is this. By those words, the Apostle Paul does not forbid separation by names that comes from disagreement in faith. He only cuts off occasions for every useless quarrel arising among those who stand on the same dogmas of faith.

The Corinthians, whom the Apostle draws to himself in brotherly love, were all in agreement in the chief dogmas of the holy faith. Therefore he calls them his brethren: "I beseech you, my brethren" (1 Cor 1:10).

They had disputes about matters of little importance and not belonging to man's salvation, especially about the primacy and precedence of persons. Some thought they distinguished themselves above others by the importance, primacy, and dignity of the teachers from whom they had learned and come to the knowledge of the faith.

Because of this inequality of persons and of the gifts of outward perfections, many divided into different parties and opinions. They claimed the names of the apostles for themselves in such a way that the name of Jesus Christ Himself, the Author of faith, began in some measure to be neglected.

Some of them claimed Paul for themselves: "I am of Paul." Others thought it better to be called disciples of Apollos: "I am of Apollos." Others distinguished themselves by Peter's name: "I am of Cephas." The last agreed to take on themselves the name of Christ: "I am of Christ."

It was as though they divided Christ Himself and counted the names of the apostles equal to His most holy name. In this sense the Apostle Paul forbids his brethren of the same faith to have divisions, quarrels beginning from the names of respected persons, and manifold Christian appellations.

But this apostolic reasoning does not in the least apply to those who, by their perversities, have divided the Church of Jesus Christ into various factions. They have made themselves leaders and heads of destructive heresies and divisions, and have left their own names to their followers.

They do not agree with the Orthodoxy of the holy Eastern Apostolic Church in the chief articles of the Orthodox confession of faith. Therefore they are not our brethren in Christ. Consequently no division is produced if one merely designates them by the name of the originator of their corruptions.

The Corinthians boasted in the dignity of their instructors and teachers: "I am of Paul," "I am of Apollos," "I am of Cephas," "I am of Christ." Why, then, although they stirred up such divisions and disputes among themselves, are they called by the Apostle brethren, beloved of Christ, and sanctified to God?

Christ's disciples must remain constantly in the word of Jesus Christ and in His teaching. "If you continue in My word, you are truly My disciples, and you will know the truth" (Jn 8:31).

The example of the Corinthians, enlightened by the grace of Jesus Christ and His Gospel, teaches us the following immutable truths.

First, when the Corinthians no longer followed the humble life of Christ and His footsteps, but began to exalt themselves by their advantages and to rise above one another, then disputes appeared among them. They were then no longer spiritual, but carnal.

Through this high-mindedness they would soon have lost Christ. One was called Paul's, another Apollos's, and a third Cephas's. Such arrogance in the Corinthians came from nowhere else but the dignity and perfections they found in their instructors and teachers.

They saw particular advantages in each. Paul was lofty in knowledge. Apollos was powerful in tongues. Cephas, or Peter, acted through miracles, by which he became so renowned that his shadow healed the sick and drove out unclean spirits (Acts 5:15).

The Corinthians wished to make their outward gifts equal to the dignity of their teachers. Always exalting themselves over one another by their advantages, they began, through pride, to despise others and to multiply divisions through their arrogance.

Those who possessed lofty knowledge were Paul's. Those endowed with various tongues were Apollos's. Those who had gifts to work miracles were Cephas's. But where, then, was Christ?

Those who shine with learning act in the same way even now. They think only about how to surpass one another by their outward show and the ardor of their intellect. They ought to act as Saint Paul acted with the Corinthians.

He brought them down to the humble life of Christ and said, "I show you a more excellent way. If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and if I have prophecy and know all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, but have not love, I am nothing and it profits me nothing" (1 Cor 12:31; 13:1-3).

Therefore the one who wishes to be lofty in learning will soon stir up divisions and heresies. The one who is lofty in love stirs up no heresies. This is what it means: "Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up" (1 Cor 8:1).

Second, to humble such arrogance, one may present the example of Cornelius in Acts 10. When he desired to obtain the pure and soul-saving teaching of Jesus Christ, he had to ask God for the fulfillment of his desire in true repentance, fasting, and tears.

Only then was the Apostle Peter sent to him, and he preached Christ to him. Other nations that desired to turn to the true God also showed the example of such humility, as Saint Luke testifies.

We see the same in Paul, the chosen vessel. Since he had to be enlightened by the eternal light and to be united in faith with the other apostles, whom he knew, he had to cast down high-mindedness and enter into the humble life of Christ.

In brief, all the prophets and all the apostles had to walk this path of humility. The apostles had to receive the divine Spirit from above. For this reason they had to take upon themselves the form of Christ's life, leave everything, renounce all that they had, and deny themselves.

In this evangelical humility, following their Teacher and Lord, they were counted worthy to receive the light in which they saw all the incomprehensible mysteries of faith.

Third, the Lord does not speak in vain in Jn 8:31: "If you continue in My word, you are truly My disciples, and you will know the truth." This abiding in Christ's word must be understood not only of teaching, but especially of Christ's life.

Those do not abide in Christ's word who, by their life, turn away from His teaching. From this it is clear that those who do not follow Jesus Christ in life cannot know the truth.

The all-evil devil draws man away from the grace of Jesus Christ and from His teaching. Deceiving the whole world by his snares, he blinds the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the clear light of the Gospel (Rev 12:9; 2 Cor 4:4).

On the contrary, he cannot deceive anyone who walks in the life and ways of Christ. If even the devil himself, the chief of the human race, had remained in this true and humble life of Christ, no deception would ever have come into the world.

Some flatter themselves with the height of doctrine, but do not conform themselves to the life of Christ. They are not ashamed to assert that one must look more at doctrine than at life.

Our Savior, drawing His disciples away from this most destructive fantasy, requires from each the fruits of His teaching. He said, "By their fruits you shall know them" (Mt 7:16).

If teachers of the holy faith do not follow the image of their supreme Teacher, and if they lead a life that does not accord with the teaching of piety, they show themselves to be complete hypocrites. All their teaching is a sign of false Christianity.

If there is to be a righteous and not false being, the life must be the same as the teaching, and the teaching must be the same as the life, as far as this is possible for man by grace.

Teaching that does not accord with life will be nothing other than hypocrisy itself, a false Pharisaic being, darkness and not light. The Lord confirms this: "If you continue in My word, you are truly My disciples."

For this reason He says, "The scribes and Pharisees sit on Moses' seat. Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, observe and do" (Mt 23:2-3). Here the Lord shows that the Pharisees taught one way and lived another. Therefore they could not know Christ, the true Light, and were cursed eight times by the Lord.

Fourth, bring into this reasoning all heretics and false prophets. Did they walk in the ways and life of Christ? Truly, they did not, but in the ways of the crafty Satan. Why else would the Lord point us to their life, saying that we must know them by their fruits?

It is altogether impossible for the one who does not follow the Lord Jesus Christ to have the light of life. The rivers of grace flow downward, not upward. How, then, will the grace of righteous knowledge of our God and of pure, soul-saving teaching abide in men who do not conform themselves to the humble life of Christ?

Instead, they walk the corrupt paths of the proud Belial.

Fifth, the tower of Babylon serves as a strong prefiguration of destructive heresies, corruptions, and all divisions that have arisen in the Church of Christ. In Genesis 11:4 we read that, from pride and high-mindedness, the glory-loving descendants of Noah wished to build a tower whose height would reach to heaven.

They intended to leave a loud glory after themselves. But the undertaking of those lovers of glory was founded [...] on false human wisdom. Through the confusion of tongues [...] they lost their own language, so that no one could understand another's thoughts or speech.

We see this likeness in impious corrupters. They did not wish to subject themselves to the teaching of the holy faith and the traditions of the Apostolic Church. From pride and contempt they scattered into many factions worthy of mockery and produced so many divisions.

Having entirely lost the purest teaching itself, they began to introduce useless disputes into the Church. They occupied themselves with subtleties alone, which do not belong at all to the knowledge of faith. Thus, having lost the holy truth itself, they follow only the opinions of their founders.

This is what I mean: some of you say, "We are Paul’s," and some, "We are Apollos’s." Here the Apostle again humbles himself more than Apollos, in order to shame those who arrogantly exalted themselves over one another. For they were called by the names of Paul and Apollos, and not by the names of Peter and Christ, but by the names of their teachers. Therefore, not wishing to trouble them or announce their names to the whole world, he passed over their names. He wrote his own name, those of his companions, and that of the Lord of all Himself, so that after such rebuke and censure they might turn to humility and meekness.

Paul reveals the error, but does not disclose the names of those who spoke in this way. Yet all those whom he names were undoubtedly truly good teachers. Still, through the example of good teachers, he strikes at the false apostles. For if he does not permit the Corinthians to boast even in the names of the worthy, how much stronger is the prohibition concerning evil teachers, whose perverse teaching he will touch on later. Among the groups named are also those whom the Apostle already praises above, namely those who called themselves Christ’s and did not attach themselves to any man.

The Corinthians named themselves after other teachers, but Paul put forward his own name and that of Apollos. He also added the name of the chief Apostle, thereby teaching that it is unjust to make such use even of these names. We shall learn this more clearly from what follows. Yet he acted very wisely by numbering the name of Christ together with the others. He thereby showed the absurdity of the matter: the Corinthians were placing both the Master and the servants in one rank.

Take up the epistle of the blessed Apostle Paul. What did he write to you first, at the beginning of the Gospel? In truth and in the Spirit, he wrote to you concerning himself, Cephas, and Apollos, because even then divisions had arisen among you. But that division involved you in a lesser sin, for you were taking sides with renowned apostles and with a man approved by them. Clement of Rome wrote to the Church of Corinth in the 90s after Christ, reminding them of their inclination to divisions even then, that is, in the time of Paul.

"Those of Chloe." These words have this meaning: those of the household, or those under Chloe, who may perhaps have been a Corinthian woman.

For example, "those of Aristobulus" and "those of Narcissus" mean those who belong to the households of Aristobulus and Narcissus (Rom 16:10-11). "Now I say this" means namely, or for example.

"Each of you" means one of you and another of you. By Cephas he calls here not Peter, but certain disciples of his, because nowhere is it mentioned that Peter preached the word of the Gospel in Corinth.

Notice with what prudence Paul rebukes the Corinthians. First he mixes the bitterness of rebukes with the sweetness of the brotherly name. "My brethren," he says.

"Of Apollos." According to the testimony of the book of Acts (Acts 18:24-25), he was an Alexandrian Jew, an eloquent man and knowledgeable in the Scriptures. At first he was a disciple of John the Forerunner, but afterward he was converted to Christianity by Aquila and Priscilla.

Some consider Apollos himself the cause of the Corinthian quarrels. Yet it should rather be supposed that his name, like Paul’s, was used by rivals in order to exalt themselves in the eyes of their opponents.

"Of Cephas." Cephas is Peter. Peter’s Hebrew name is probably given here because the party of Corinthian Jews converted to Christ covered itself with his name.

What did these disputes over names mean?

One should not connect with these names any false teachings, or separate sects and religious schools in Corinth. The Apostle himself makes no hint of sectarian errors.

The whole quarrel among the Corinthians arose, according to the Greek habit, over the comparative dignity of teachers and preachers of Christian doctrine.

It did not arise from sectarian difference in the faith, which the Apostle would have reproved if it had truly existed.

To some, one teacher seemed better by force of speech. To others, another seemed superior by depth of thought, and so on.

Grace and peace in Corinth were disturbed by disputes over the dignity of the teachers of the faith of Christ.

One should not think that the Corinthians were divided into parties under the names of the persons mentioned here. Yet there is no doubt that they had long been accustomed to divide themselves under the names of various philosophers and rhetoricians.

They were therefore inclined to come to a similar division even now. In this, some could place Christ and His Apostles on the same level.

Concerning the Apostle's words, "I am of Paul," "I am of Apollos," and the rest, Saint John Chrysostom observes: "The Corinthians did not say this either of him, Saint Paul, or of Peter, or of Apollos.

"Now I say this" means, I speak by way of example.

Your situation resembles this: one of you might say, "I am of Paul. I love Paul, follow him, prefer him to all, take his side, stand firmly for him, and am perhaps ready to die for him."

Another would have Apollos in the same way, a third Peter, and a fourth Christ Himself.

"Each one" does not mean each member of the Church, but each of those carried away into this movement. The greater part remained calm, and the body of the Church was not shaken.

There is no evidence that any false opinions were joined to this, nor should conjecture introduce such a notion.

If some error had been hidden under each title, Saint Paul would have set out and reproved each one. Instead, he afterwards reproves only human wisdom in general.