1 Corinthians 1:15Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

Then Paul gives the reason why he thanks God that he baptized no one. What is it?

"Lest anyone should say that I baptized in my own name" (1 Cor 1:15).

What is this? Is he speaking here about the Corinthians? No. But I fear, he says, lest the sickness reach such a degree.

If division arose when men of little importance and little account performed Baptism, then if I, who preached Baptism, had baptized many, those who received it would probably not only have been called by my name.

They would also have attributed Baptism itself to me.

If such evil occurred in connection with those who were lesser, then certainly a greater evil would have occurred in connection with those who were greater.

Not for glory. The Apostle shows here that he did not strive to gain honor from the people by such a deed, and that he did not approach it for the sake of glory.

I say this not because it was actually so, but from fear that the disease might reach such a degree. For if division arose when insignificant men performed baptism, then if I, who preached baptism, had baptized, some would surely have agreed to ascribe baptism to me.

He rejoices that he baptized few, lest anyone should say to my reproach that you had become my disciples, and not Christ’s.

"Lest anyone should say that I baptized in my own name." In former times people liked to call themselves by the names of those who baptized them or stood as sponsors for them. Even now among us there is a custom, confirmed by law, that some godchildren retain at least the surname of their sponsor or of the person who adopted the child.

The Apostle strengthens the accusation with each added word, yet he does not strike the accused severely. He puts his own person in place of the Corinthian teachers. He also gives them to understand that they named themselves not only after teachers, but also after those who baptized them. He then presents the reason why he did not baptize many.

Crispus was the ruler of the synagogue in Corinth, where Paul baptized him with his whole household.

Three men named Gaius are found in Holy Scripture. The first was a Macedonian, Paul's companion in Ephesus (Acts 19:29).

The second was a Thessalonian, who followed him even as far as Asia (Acts 20:4).

The third was his host and the host of the whole Church (Rom 16:23).

Since he says, "none of you," that is, I baptized none of you Corinthians except Crispus and Gaius, it follows that Gaius also was a Corinthian, like Crispus.

From this one may conclude that he is not speaking here of the Macedonian or the Thessalonian, but of the Gaius whom he called his host.

He received both Paul himself when he was in Corinth and all the faithful who came there.

Then the Apostle sets forth how groundless the Corinthian disagreements are (1 Cor 1:13-16).

"Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?" (1 Cor 1:13).

By the first question the Apostle wanted to show the Corinthians their groundlessness.

If their various teachers do not preach different Christs, but on the contrary one and the same Christ is the subject of their common preaching, then it is extremely unreasonable to place oneself under the headship of one teacher in preference to another.

By the remaining questions the Apostle directly sets forth the obvious absurdity contained in their thought. Yet this thought could be attributed to the Corinthians because of their divisions, as though their teachers were also their redeemers.

Turning to himself and to similar persons, the Apostle proclaims that the circumstance of who performed the Baptism of this or that person gives no occasion for division.

In entering Christianity, from the human point of view, the more difficult work is not Baptism, but preaching the Gospel and preparing for it.

Thus, when the Apostle Paul sends up thanksgiving to God that he baptized few, he does not diminish Baptism or those who perform it.

On the contrary, he even exalts it, and at the same time removes every possibility of finding in himself an occasion for divisions.

For division according to those who baptize may seem in Christianity to have greater significance than division according to the dignity of teachers.

He supposes an even greater misfortune.

If, he says, when I baptized almost no one, you formed a party under my name, then if I had baptized everyone, someone might have proclaimed that I baptized in my own name.

Then from you, who gathered yourselves under my name, a new faction would have been formed, counting themselves baptized in my name.

I consider even this possible, he says, and "I fear lest the sickness reach such a degree" (Saint Chrysostom).

After the empty opinions that divided you, anything can be expected from you.

To baptize in one's own name means to set oneself up as a saving god for someone.

This could very well be expected from Greeks. In one place Saint Paul had already been considered a god in human form.