2 Thessalonians 3:14Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

"Note that person and do not associate with him." But how, you will say, does Paul say, "If anyone does not obey our word in this epistle, note that person and do not associate with him, that he may be ashamed"? True, this is said about brethren, but not simply so. It too is said with meekness. Do not overlook what follows; add also what is said next. Namely, after saying, "Do not count him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother." Do you see how he commands us to hate the evil deed, not the man? It is the devil's work to tear us from one another. He strives mightily to destroy love, so as to cut off the path to correction. Thus he keeps the neighbor in error and you in enmity, thereby blocking the way to salvation. If a physician hates and flees the sick man, and the sick man turns away from the physician, can the sick man be healed when he does not summon the physician and the physician does not come to him?

But however these words are understood, either that the corrupt are punished by the Church with all strictness through excommunication, or that each person, instructing and correcting himself, casts the corrupt man out of himself, the words cited above contain no ambiguity. They prescribe not associating with brethren noted for any of the vices listed above, that is, with those of bad reputation. With what intention and with what love this merciful severity must be applied, he shows clearly not only where he says, "that the spirit may be saved in the day of our Lord Jesus" (1 Cor 5:5). But also elsewhere: "If anyone does not obey our word in this epistle, keep him in view, note him, and do not associate with him, that he may be ashamed; but do not count him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother."

Chrysostom concerning the apostolic exhortation to the Thessalonians: "The Apostle does not allow the punishment to extend beyond the proper measure. For above, after saying, 'If anyone will not work, neither let him eat,' he feared that they might perish from hunger and added, 'But you, do not grow weary in doing good.' So now also, after saying, 'Withdraw yourselves and do not associate with him,' he feared that this very thing might separate him from the community. Therefore the Apostle added, 'Do not count him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother.'"

Against this, the Apostle says, I have shown you an easy remedy: withdraw from such a person. That is, do not give him boldness. Show the appearance of being angry with him. This is not insignificant. This is how we ought to punish a brother if we truly desire that he be corrected. For tell me, if you had a brother according to the flesh, would you leave him without help when he was dying of hunger? I do not think so. Rather, you would probably take care for his correction. Thus the Apostle does not allow the punishment to extend beyond the proper measure. After saying, 'Withdraw yourselves and do not associate with him,' he feared that this very thing might tear him away from the society of the brethren. Then, despairing of himself, he might soon perish if encouragement were denied him. Therefore the Apostle added, 'Do not count him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother.' Admonish as a brother, said the Apostle, and do not insult as an enemy. The one who admonishes his brother does not do this publicly, nor does he solemnly expose him to shame. Rather, he does it in secret and with great caution, grieving and contrite, with tears and weeping."

The Thessalonian Christian community, or its leaders, having announced to the unreformed the Apostle's command to them and about them, were to see whether they corrected themselves. If they did not, they were to inform St. Paul about them by a special letter, naming them in that letter, for his further orders. These would be like the orders he later gave in Corinth concerning the incestuous man. Naturalness, correspondence to the flow of the discourse, and the Greek text compel us to side with this translation and understanding. For if the Apostle had been informed about the unreformed, and if afterward it was necessary to announce to them what the Apostle wrote about them, then they must have been evident to all. There was no need to designate them for the Thessalonians. From the moment the apostolic will was announced to them, the refusal to mix with them began without special orders. It also ceased in relation to some as soon as they appeared corrected. Keeping them under observation would have led nowhere. What was expected was not this, but something stricter. The unreformed appeared; word about them was given, or the Apostle learned of it and wrote a strict rebuke and exhortation. All this was announced to the unreformed. If they corrected themselves, well and good. But if they did not correct themselves, what further was expected? It was expected that the Apostle would be informed about them for further orders. Such is the simplest and most natural course of the matter. There is no doubt that this was the Apostle's thought: let me know about him by letter, while you yourselves do not mix with him. Do this not with hostile feelings, but to shame and admonish him as a brother, in love. Others understand the marking as being for the Thessalonians: mark him for yourselves, or keep him under observation. In this case they connect the word "by letter," δια της επιστολης, not with "mark," but with "our word," thus: whoever does not obey our word, spoken or communicated to you through this letter, keep him under observation, or mark him for yourselves. But such a connection of the words need not be accepted. In that case one would expect λογω... τω δια... Since this is absent, the translation becomes strained and arbitrary. With it, one must supply "spoken" or "communicated" to obtain the sense. But with "mark" it connects naturally and requires no supplements: mark him by letter. The interpretation of our ancient commentators would give special weight to this understanding. But Chrysostom's words on this expression are: "mark this man; consequently, he commands this to be done, so that such deeds, or such persons, may not be hidden." These words cannot decisively be turned in favor of that understanding. This is especially so if one considers that he read "your word" rather than "our word." With such a reading, δια της επιστολης would naturally have to go with "mark." Blessed Theodoret, St. John of Damascus, and Theophylact make no remark about this. Only Oecumenius wrote: "Mark this man, so that he may not be hidden from you, or unknown to you." Clearly, given this relation of our ancient interpreters to the passage, understanding it in the latter sense cannot be obligatory. At the very least, it may be left free. For us, however, the Slavonic translation and the thought connected with it must take precedence. We incline to it. "And do not mix with him." Write to me about him, but do not associate with him. In Greek, "do not mix" uses a word by which one describes someone entering a crowd and blending into the common mass, as wine with water. The Apostle wants not only that no one should see Christians in the circle of these disorderly persons. He wants strict Christians to make it known to them that they shun them because they consider their conduct incompatible with the calling of Christians. By this estrangement they are to awaken their conscience and bring them to shame: "that he may be ashamed." This is a silent reproof and instruction without words. "But according to the Apostle's thought, such a relation to the unreformed is prescribed as punishment for them. And it is indeed no small punishment" (Chrysostom). "This punishment for the disobedient seems moderate, but in fact it is among the heaviest. What is heavier than being as if in a desert, though one is in a city?" (St. John of Damascus). "It is very great shame when everyone turns away from someone" (Oecumenius).