:
1 Paul, a servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God's elect, and the acknowledging of the truth which is after godliness; 2 In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began; 3 But hath in due times manifested his word through preaching, which is committed unto me according to the commandment of God our Saviour; 4 To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour. 5 For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee: 6 If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly. 7 For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre; 8 But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, just, holy, temperate; 9 Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers. 10 For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision: 11 Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake. 12 One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. 13 This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith; 14 Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth. 15 Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled. 16 They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.
Previous Chapter
Next Chapter
[AD 220] Tertullian on Titus 1:1
By means of these organs, indeed, we are to enjoy flowers; but if he declares that those who make idols will be like them, they already are so who use anything after the style of idol adornings. "To the pure all things are pure: so, likewise, all things to the impure are impure; " but nothing is more impure than idols.

Source: De Corona
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:1
Ver. 1. "Paul, a servant of God, and an Apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God's elect."

You observe how he uses these expressions indifferently, sometimes calling himself the "servant of God," and sometimes the "servant of Christ," thus making no difference between the Father and the Son.

"According to the faith of God's elect, and the acknowledging of the truth which is after godliness. In hope of eternal life."

"According to the faith of God's elect." It is because you have believed, or rather because you were entrusted? I think he meant, that he was entrusted with God's elect, that is, not for any achievements of mine, nor from my toils and labors, did I receive this dignity. It was wholly the effect of His goodness who entrusted me. Yet that the grace may not seem without reason, (for still the whole was not of Him, for why did He not entrust it to others?) he therefore adds, "And the acknowledging of the truth that is after godliness." For it was for this acknowledgment that I was entrusted, or rather it was of His grace that this too was entrusted to me, for He was the author of this also. Whence Christ Himself said, "You have not chosen Me, but I have chosen you." [John 15:16] And elsewhere this same blessed one writes, "I shall know, even as also I am known." [1 Corinthians 13:12] And again, "If I may apprehend that, for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus." [Philippians 3:12] First we are apprehended, and afterwards we know: first we are known, and then we apprehend: first we were called, and then we obeyed. But in saying, "according to the faith of the elect," all is reckoned to them, because on their account I am an Apostle, not for my worthiness, but "for the elect's sake." As he elsewhere says, "All things are yours, whether Paul, or Apollos." [1 Corinthians 3:21]

"And the acknowledging the truth that is after godliness." For there is a truth in other things, that is not according to godliness; for knowledge in matters of agriculture, knowledge of the arts, is true knowledge; but this truth is after godliness. Or this, "according to faith," means that they believed, as the other elect believed, and acknowledged the truth. This acknowledging then is from faith, and not from reasonings.

"In hope of eternal life." He spoke of the present life, which is in the grace of God, and he also speaks of the future, and sets before us the rewards that follow the mercies which God has bestowed upon us. For He is willing to crown us because we have believed, and have been delivered from error. Observe how the introduction is full of the mercies of God, and this whole Epistle is especially of the same character, thus exciting the holy man himself, and his disciples also, to greater exertions. For nothing profits us so much as constantly to remember the mercies of God, whether public or private. And if our hearts are warmed when we receive the favors of our friends, or hear some kind word or deed of theirs, much more shall we be zealous in His service when we see into what dangers we had fallen, and that God has delivered us from them all.

"And the acknowledging of the truth." This he says with reference to the type. For that was an "acknowledging" and a "godliness," yet not of the Truth, yet neither was it falsehood, it was godliness, but it was in type and figure. And he has well said, "In hope of eternal life." For the former was in hope of the present life. For it is said, "he that does these things shall live in them." [Romans 10:5] You see how at the beginning he sets forth the difference of grace. They are not the elect, but we. For if they were once called the elect, yet are they no longer called so.

Source: Homily 81 on Titus
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:1
I think Paul’s meaning is this: I was entrusted with God’s elect, not for any achievements of mine. It was not from my toils and labors that I received this dignity. It was wholly the effect of the goodness of the One who entrusted it to me. Yet that this grace may not seem without reason, … he adds: “and the acknowledging of the truth that is after godliness.” For it was for this acknowledgment that I was entrusted. It was of his grace that all this was entrusted to me. God was the author of all this.

Source: HOMILIES ON TITUS 1
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:1-4
Titus was an approved one of the companions of Paul; otherwise, he would not have committed to him the charge of that whole island, nor would he have commanded him to supply what was deficient, as he says, "That you should set in order the things that are wanting." [Titus 1:5] He would not have given him jurisdiction over so many Bishops, if he had not placed great confidence in him. They say that he also was a young man, because he calls him his son, though this does not prove it. I think that there is mention made of him in the Acts. Perhaps he was a Corinthian, unless there was some other of the same name. And he summons Zenas, and orders Apollos to be sent to him, never Titus. [Titus 3:13] For he also attests their superior virtue and courage in the presence of the Emperor.

Some time seems to have since elapsed, and Paul, when he wrote this Epistle, appears to have been at liberty. For he says nothing about his trials, but dwells continually upon the grace of God, as being a sufficient encouragement to believers to persevere in virtue. For to learn what they had deserved, and to what state they had been transferred, and that by grace, and what had been vouchsafed them, was no little encouragement. He takes aim also against the Jews, and if he censures the whole nation, we need not wonder, for he does the same in the case of the Galatians, saying, "O foolish Galatians." [Galatians 3:1] And this does not proceed from a censorious temper, but from affection. For if it were done for his own sake, one might fairly blame him; but if from the fervor of his zeal for the Gospel, it was not done reproachfully. Christ too, on many occasions, reproached the Scribes and Pharisees, not on his own account, but because they were the ruin of all the rest.

And he writes a short Epistle, with good reason, and this is a proof of the virtue of Titus, that he did not require many words, but a short remembrance. But this Epistle seems to have been written before that to Timothy, for that he wrote as near his end and in prison, but here, as free and at liberty. For his saying, "I have determined to winter at Nicopolis" [Titus 3:12], is a proof that he was not yet in bonds, as when he wrote to Timothy.

Source: Homily 81 on Titus
[AD 420] Jerome on Titus 1:1
"Paul the servant of God: an apostle however of Jesus Christ." In the Epistle to the Romans he begins thus: “Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle,” but in this one he calls himself “a servant of God,” while he is “an apostle of Jesus Christ.” For if the Father and the Son are one, and he who believes in the Son, believes also in the Father, that servitude of the Apostle Paul is to be referred, indiscriminately, either to the Father or to the Son. But, however, this servitude is not that of which the Apostle says himself: “For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear, but ye have received the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry Abba, Father” (Romans 8:15), but it is a noble servitude, of which David speaks to God: “Behold, oh Lord, I am thy servant; I am thy servant, and the son of thy handmaid” (Psalms 116:16), and of which the blessed Mary speaks to the angel: “Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word" (Luke 1:38). Moses had this bondage, of whom the Lord said to Joshua the son of Nun, 'Moses, my servant, is dead' (Joshua 1:2). And in another place, 'Moses, the servant of the Lord, died on the land of Moab according to the word of the Lord' (Deuteronomy 34:5). It is to be far from thinking that Moses and Mary had the spirit of servitude in fear and not in love for God. It is not surprising that although called holy men, they were nobly called servants of God, as the Father speaks to the Son through the prophet Isaiah: 'It is great for you to be called my servant, my child' (Isaiah 49:6), which is said in Greek: μέγα σοὶ ἐστι τοῦ κληθῆναί σε παῖδά μου. But we sought after 'my child' in Hebrew and found it not written, but 'my servant,' that is, Abdi. Hence, Obadiah the prophet, whose name means 'the servant of the Lord,' received his name from serving God. If anyone is moved when he hears that the Lord and Savior, who created the universe, is called a servant of God, he will not be moved if he listens to the apostles speaking to themselves, 'Whoever wills among you shall be the greatest, let him be the servant of all,' and 'The Son of Man came not that he should be served, but that he should serve' (Matthew 20:27-28). He did not only seem to teach this with words, but also demonstrated it through example. For once, he took a towel, girded himself, and filled a basin with water and washed the disciples' feet (John 13). It is not therefore impious to believe that he who assumed the form of a servant did those things which were the duty of a servant, so that he should be said to have served his Father's will by serving his own servants. But this servitude is of charity, by which we are commanded to serve one another. And the Apostle himself, though free from all, made himself the servant of all (1 Cor. 9). And in another place: "Your servant for Christ's sake." He is the servant of God who is not the servant of sin. For everyone who commits sin is the servant of sin (John 8:34). Therefore, the Apostle, who was not the servant of sin, is rightly called the servant of God the Father and of Christ. Furthermore, when he says, "The Apostle of Jesus Christ," it seems to me to mean the same as if he had said, "The appointed prefect of the emperor Augustus, the commander-in-chief of the army of Tiberius Caesar." For just as judges of this world, in order to appear more noble, take their titles from the kings they serve and from the dignity with which they are inflated, so the Apostle, claiming for himself a great dignity among Christians, designated himself by the title of Apostle of Christ, so that he might inspire terror in those who read his name itself, indicating that all who believed in Christ should be subject to him. Moreover, what we have just written in Romans: "The servant of Jesus Christ" does not differ from his saying, "The servant of wisdom, the servant of righteousness, the servant of sanctification, the servant of redemption, for Christ became for us from God the Father, wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption (1 Cor. 1:30).

Source: Commentary on Titus
[AD 458] Theodoret of Cyrus on Titus 1:1
The opening of every one of his letters is distinguished by the divine apostle with this address. At one time it is “Paul a servant of Jesus Christ called to be an apostle.” At another “Paul called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ.” At another “Paul a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ.” And suiting his benediction to his salutation he deduces it from the same source and links the title of the Son with God the Father, saying “grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.”

Source: LETTERS 146
[AD 1274] Thomas Aquinas on Titus 1:1
Therefore he says Paul, — a name to be revered by all the faithful who have been taught by him — a prisoner. 2 Timothy 2:9: ‘in which I suffer even to bonds, as a criminal’. For now he is a prisoner in Rome, but of Christ Jesus, to give the reason for his chains. For it is highly praiseworthy to be imprisoned for the sake of Christ; for in this he is blessed. Matthew 5:10: ‘Blessed are they who suffer persecution for justice’ sake...’ 2 Peter 4:15: ‘Let none of you suffer as a murderer, or a thief, or a slanderer, or as one coveting what belongs to others. But if he suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God under this name.’ Acts 5.41: ‘So they departed from the Sanhedrin, rejoicing that they had been counted worthy to suffer disgrace for the name of Jesus.’
And our brother Timothy... They are brothers with regard to perfect faith. Philippians 2:20: ‘For I have no one so like-minded who is so genuinely solicitous for you.’ He joins Timothy to himself, that he might more easily succeed, because it is impossible that the prayers of many will not be heard.
Then he mentions the persons greeted. And first the principal person greeted, then others, particularly the husband and wife whose house it is, to whom the servant is obliged. To Philemon, our beloved and fellow worker, and to Appia, beloved sister... Beloved, he says on account of her good works. John 13:34: ‘This is my command, that you love one another.’ Fellow worker, because he ministers to the saints. Proverbs 18.19: ‘A brother that is helped by his brother is like a strong city.’ Then he mentions Archippus our fellow soldier, who was so powerful at Colossae that all Christians were under his protection.
[AD 1274] Thomas Aquinas on Titus 1:1
‘If you have a faithful servant, let him be to you as your own soul’ (Sirach 33:31). The wise man shows three things concerning master and slave, namely, what is required on the side of the servant; what ought to be the feeling of the master towards the servant; and what is the use of the servant. From the servant fidelity is asked, for in this he is a good servant, because what he is and all that he has he ought to give to the master. Matthew 24-45: ‘Who, do you think, is the faithful and prudent servant...’ And he says, ‘if he is faithful’, because fidelity is found in few. Proverbs 20:6: ‘But who shall find a faithful man?’ The master ought to feel towards his servant as a friend, hence it is said, ‘as his own soul’. For this is proper to friends, that they are of one mind in what they will and what they do not will. Acts 4.32: ‘Now the multitude of the believers were of one heart and one soul.’ By which we are given to understand that there is a consensus of master and servant, when the faithful servant becomes a friend. As for his use, he should be treated like a brother, for he is a brother, both with respect to generation of nature, because they have the same author —Job 31.13: ‘If I have despised to abide judgement with my man-servant’; Malachi 2:10: ‘Have we not all one father? Did not one God created us?’ —and with respect to the generation of grace, which is the same for both. Galatians 3:27: ‘For all you who have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek; there is neither slave nor freeman; there is neither male nor female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus.’ Matthew 23:8: ‘And all you are brothers.’ These words are relevant to the matter of this epistle. For as it was shown above how spiritual prelates should relate to their subjects, so here he shows how temporal masters should relate to their temporal servants, and how the faithful servant to his master.
The occasion of the epistle is this. At Colossae an important Christian had a servant who secretly fled to Rome where he was baptized by the Apostle who now writes on his behalf. First he gives a greeting, followed by the narrative of the epistle. In the greeting he mentions persons who send their greeting and then the recipients and finally the good hoped for.
[AD 99] Clement of Rome on Titus 1:2
Having then this hope [in the resurrection], let our souls be bound to him who is faithful in his promises and just in his judgments. He who has commanded us not to lie shall much more himself not lie; for nothing is impossible with God, except to lie.

Source: FIRST LETTER OF CLEMENT 27
[AD 367] Hilary of Poitiers on Titus 1:2
Since the periods of time, therefore, come within the scope of our knowledge or speculations, we pass judgment upon them according to the understanding of human reasoning. In this way we believe ourselves justified in saying about anything: “It has not been before it is born.” The times that have already past always come before the origin of everything. Since in the things of God, that is, in the birth of God, everything is before the eternal time, then we cannot say of him: “Before he was born.” Nor can we say that he to whom the eternal promise was made before the eternal time has the “hope of life everlasting,” according to the statement of the apostle, which the God who does not lie has promised to him before the eternal time, nor can we say that at one time he had not been. We cannot assume that he whom we must confess as being before the eternal time has had his beginning after something.

Source: ON THE TRINITY 12.27
[AD 397] Ambrose of Milan on Titus 1:2
But God can neither be in doubt, nor can he be deceived. For he only is in doubt who is ignorant of the future. One who has predicted one thing while something else has happened is deceived about the future. Not so with God. What is plainer than the fact that Scripture states the Father to have said one thing of the Son and that the same Scripture proves another thing to have taken place? The Son was beaten, he was mocked, was crucified and died. He suffered much worse things in the flesh than those servants who had been appointed before. Was the Father deceived? Was he ignorant of it? Was he unable to give help? The One who is the truth cannot make a mistake. It is written that “the ever-truthful God cannot lie.” How could he who knows all be ignorant? What could he not do, who could do all?

Source: Exposition of the Christian Faith 5.17.215-16
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:2
Ver. 2. "Which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began."

That is, not now upon a change of mind, but from the beginning it was so foreordained. This he often asserts, as when he says, "Separated unto the Gospel of God." [Romans 1:1] And again, "Whom He did foreknow, He also did predestinate." [Romans 8:29] Thus showing our high origin, in that He did not love us now first, but from the beginning: and it is no little matter to be loved of old, and from the beginning.

"Which God, that cannot lie, promised." If He "cannot lie," what He has promised will assuredly be fulfilled. If He "cannot lie," we ought not to doubt it, though it be after death. "Which God, that cannot lie," he says, "promised before the world began"; by this also, "before the world began," he shows that it is worthy of our belief. It is not because the Jews have not come in, that these things are promised. It had been so planned from the first. Hear therefore what he says,

"But has in His own times manifested."

Wherefore then was the delay? From His concern for men, and that it might be done at a seasonable time. "It is time for You, Lord, to work" [Psalm 119:125], says the Prophet. For by "His own times" is meant the suitable times, the due, the fitting.

Source: Homily 81 on Titus
[AD 420] Jerome on Titus 1:2-4
"According to the faith of the elect of God and the knowledge of the truth, which is in accordance with piety towards eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before eternal times and has manifested in due time His word in preaching, believed in accordance with the command of our Savior God by me, Titus, his dear son according to the common faith: Grace and peace from God the Father, and Jesus Christ our Savior." If anyone knows the art of grammar, or dialectic, in order to have the correct reasoning of speech, and to judge between false and true. Also, geometry and arithmetic and music have truth in their science; but that is not the science of piety. The science of piety is to know the Law, understand the prophets, believe in the Gospel, and not ignore the apostles. Conversely, there are many who have a true knowledge of piety: but not immediately the truth of the other arts of which we have just mentioned above. Therefore, this truth, whose knowledge is in line with piety, is placed in the hope of eternal life: because he who knows himself immediately bestows on him the reward of immortality. Without piety, knowledge of the truth is pleasing at present: but it does not have the eternity of rewards, which the truthful God promised before eternal times: and he manifested it in his time in Christ Jesus. To whom did he promise it before and afterwards made it clear except to His wisdom, which was always with the Father, when He rejoiced over the perfect world and rejoiced over the sons of men, and promised them who would believe in Him, that they would have eternal life? Before the foundation of the world was laid, before the seas were spread, the mountains established, the sky hung, and the earth with a solid mass lowered, God promised this, in whom there is no falsehood. Not because He can lie, and does not want to break out into words of falsehood: but because He is the father of truth and has no lie in Him, according to the saying: But let God be true: and every man a liar (Rom. 3:4). Therefore, God is called not a liar: indeed, when He promises certain things to the prophets with an oath, in order that we may be more secure, we hope that what is foretold will come to pass, and believing with our whole heart, we may be prepared to attain what is to come.

It seems not irrelevant briefly to discuss why God alone is true, and every man a liar, as it is said by the voice of the Apostles. And if I am not mistaken, how is he alone said to have immortality, when he has made angels and many rational creatures to whom he has given immortality: so too he is said to be true alone, not because the others, who are not immortal, are not lovers of truth, but because he alone is naturally, and immortal, and true. The others, indeed, attain immortality and truth by his gift, and it is one thing to be true, but another to have something in and of oneself: it is another thing to have what the giver has in his power to give. But I also think that this should not be passed over in silence, that God is not a liar, having promised eternal life before the eternal ages: from which, according to the history of Genesis, the world was made, and through the succession of nights and days, months and years, times were established. In this cycle and wheel of the world, times slip away and come, and either the future or the past is. Hence some philosophers do not believe that there is a present time: but either the past or the future; because everything that we speak, do, or think, either passes if it has happened, or if it has not yet happened, we expect it to come. Therefore, before the times of this world, it must be believed that there was a certain eternity of centuries, in which the Father always was with the Son and the Holy Spirit: and, so to speak, the time of God is one, that is, all eternity: in fact, there are innumerable times, since he who exceeds all times was there before all time. But not even a thousand years of our world are yet completed: and how many previous eternities, how many times, how many origins of ages must be considered, in which the angels, thrones, dominations, and other powers served God: and without the vicissitudes and measures of times, they stood by God's command! Before all these times, therefore, which neither speech can utter nor mind can grasp, nor silent thought dare touch, God the Father promised his Word and Wisdom, and his very Wisdom and the life of those who were to believe, should come into the world. Pay close attention to the text and order of the reading: for eternal life, which the not false God promised before eternal ages, is none other than the Word of God. For he has manifested his word in due time, saying: Therefore the word itself, which was in the beginning with the Father, must be that life eternal which he had promised; and the Word was God, and the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us. (John 1) But that the Word of God, which is Christ himself, is life, he testifies in another place, saying: I am the life (John 14:6). Now life is not short, not bounded by certain periods; but eternal, which was manifested in the last ages, in the preaching which was believed in by the teacher of the gentiles, Paul, and revealed to the world, and made known to men, according to the command of the Savior God, who wished us to be saved, and fulfilled what he had promised. And the Apostle writes to his beloved son Titus, which is called in Greek, γνησίῳ τέκνῳ: and cannot be explained in Latin: for γνήσιος means this rather, when someone is called faithful and proper, and (so to speak) legitimate or genuine without comparison to another. From which we understand that there was much difference even among the sons of Paul, that he had some γνησίους, that is, most genuine, closely connected to himself, and born of true marriage and free procreation; but others almost from a handmaid and from Hagar, who cannot receive inheritance with the free son, Isaac. For the speech and wisdom and doctrine by which Titus instructed the Churches of Christ, made him a true son of the Apostle, and separate from all the companionship of others. Let us see after this what follows: According to the common faith, whether he said that it was common to all who believed in Christ, or common to him and Titus alone. Indeed, to me it seems that the common faith of the Apostle Paul and Titus was better than that of all believers; among whom, due to the variety of opinions, faith could not be common but diverse. Finally, the preface of the Epistle and the greeting of the Apostle's preface to Titus are completed with such an ending: Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior. Whether both grace and peace are given to both the Father and Christ Jesus, and both can be understood from each other, or whether grace refers to the Father and peace to the Son, must not be passed over without doubt. The Apostle had cursed some, that grace and peace would multiply to them: now, to Titus, peace and grace are placed without multiplication. Noah the righteous man, and the only one saved in a storm-tossed world, is said to have found not many graces, but one grace before God. And Moses said to the Lord, "If I have found grace with you" (Exodus 33:13). And wherever grace is placed in the person of the saints, seek and you shall find it, not that they have found graces but grace. That merchant of the Gospel who had many pearls, at last found one precious one, which he bought alone from many pearls (Matthew 13). For the perfect, indeed, it is to buy one pearl and one treasure for all pearls and all their substance by their business: but for those who are just beginning and are still on the way, not only one and alone but many pearls must be had.

Source: Commentary on Titus
[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Titus 1:2
I confess that I do not know what ages passed before the human race was created, yet I am perfectly sure that no one creature is coeternal with the Creator. Curiously enough, the apostle uses the expression tempora aeterna in reference not to the future but to the past. Thus he says: “in the hope of eternal life which God, who does not lie, promised before the eternal times, he has in due times manifested, his word.” He seems to be saying that time stretches backward eternally; yet time is not coeternal with God, since not only did God exist “before eternal times” but he promised eternal life which he manifested in his own time, that is, in due time. Now, what he promised was his Word. For the Word is eternal life. But how did he make this promise, since it was made to those who certainly did not exist before the “eternal times”? The meaning, then, must be that what was to take place in its own time was already predestined and determined in his eternity and in his coeternal Word.

Source: City of God 12.16
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:3
Ver. 3. "But has in due times manifested His word through preaching, which is committed unto me."

That is, the preaching is committed unto me. For this included everything, the Gospel, and things present, and things future, life, and godliness, and faith, and all things at once. "Through preaching," that is, openly and with all boldness, for this is the meaning of "preaching." For as a herald proclaims in the theater in the presence of all, so also we preach, adding nothing, but declaring the things which we have heard. For the excellence of a herald consists in proclaiming to all what has really happened, not in adding or taking away anything. If therefore it is necessary to preach, it is necessary to do it with boldness of speech. Otherwise, it is not preaching. On this account Christ did not say, Tell it "upon the housetops," but "preach upon the housetops" [Matthew 10:27]; showing both by the place and by the manner what was to be done.

"Which is committed unto me according to the commandment of God our Saviour."

The expressions, "committed unto me," and "according to the commandment," show the matter to be worthy of credit, so that no one should think it discreditable, nor be hesitating about it, or discontented. If then it is a commandment, it is not at my disposal. I fulfill what is commanded. For of things to be done, some are in our power, others are not. For what He commands, that is not in our power, what He permits, is left to our choice. For instance, "Whosoever shall say to his brother, You fool, shall be in danger of hell fire." [Matthew 5:22] This is a commandment. And again, "If you bring your gift to the altar, and there rememberest that your brother has anything against you, leave there your gift before the altar, and go your way; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift." [Matthew 5:23-24] This also is a command. But when He says, "If you will be perfect, go and sell all that you have" [Matthew 19:21]: and, "He that is able to receive it, let him receive it" [Matthew 19:12]: this is not a command, for He makes His hearer the disposer of the matter, and leaves him the choice, whether he will do it or not. For these things we may either do or not do. But commandments are not left to our choice, we must either perform them, or be punished for not doing so. This is implied when he says, "Necessity is laid upon me; yea woe is unto me, if I preach not the Gospel." [1 Corinthians 9:16] This I will state more plainly, that it may be manifest to all. For instance, He that is entrusted with the government of the Church, and honored with the office of a Bishop, if he does not declare to the people what they ought to do, will have to answer for it. But the layman is under no such obligation. On this account Paul also says, "According to the commandment of God our Saviour," I do this. And see how the epithets fit in to what I have said. For having said above, "God who cannot lie," here he says, "According to the commandment of God our Saviour." If then He is our Saviour, and He commanded these things with a view that we should be saved, it is not from a love of command. It is a matter of faith, and the commandment of God our Saviour.

"To Titus my own son," that is, my true son. For it is possible for men not to be true sons, as he of whom he says, "If any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, with such an one no not to eat." [1 Corinthians 5:11] Here is a son, but not a true son. A son indeed he is, because he has once received the grace, and has been regenerated: but he is not a true son, because he is unworthy of his Father, and a deserter to the usurped sovereignty of another. For in children by nature, the true and the spurious are determined by the father that begot, and the mother who bore them. But it is not so in this case, but it depends on the disposition. For one who was a true son may become spurious, and a spurious son may become a true one. For it is not the force of nature, but the power of choice, on which it depends, whence it is subject to frequent changes. Onesimus was a true son, but he was again not true, for he became "unprofitable"; then he again became a true son, so as to be called by the Apostle his "own bowels." [Philemon 12]

Source: Homily 81 on Titus
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:3
“Through the preaching,” that is, openly and with all boldness, for this is the meaning of “preaching.” For as a herald proclaims in the theater in the presence of all, so also we preach, adding nothing but declaring the things which we have heard. For the excellence of a herald consists in proclaiming to all what has really happened, not in adding or taking away anything.

Source: HOMILIES ON TITUS 1
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:3
If then it is a commandment, it is not at my disposal. I fulfill what is commanded. For of things to be done, some are in our power; others are not. For what he commands, that is not in our power; what he permits is left to our choice.… But commandments are not left to our choice, we must either perform them or be punished for not doing so.

Source: HOMILIES ON TITUS 1
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:4
Ver. 4. "Grace and peace from God the Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour."

Because he had called him his son, he adds, "from God the Father," to elevate his mind by showing whose son he was, and by not only naming the common faith, but by adding "our Father," he implies that he has this honor equally with himself. Moral . Observe also how he offers the same prayers for the Teacher, as for the disciples and the multitude. For indeed he needs such prayers as much, or rather more than they, by how much he has greater enmities to encounter, and is more exposed to the necessity of offending God. For the higher is the dignity, the greater are the dangers of the priestly office. For one good act in his episcopal office is sufficient to raise him to heaven and one error to sink him to hell itself. For, to pass over all other cases of daily occurrence, if he happens, either from friendship or any other cause, to have advanced an unworthy person to a Bishopric, and have committed to him the rule of a great city, see to how great a flame he renders himself obnoxious. For not only will he have to account for the souls that are lost, for they are lost through the man's irreligion, but for all that is done amiss by the other. For he that is irreligious in a private station will be much more so when he is raised to power. It is much indeed, if a pious man continue such after his elevation to rule. For he is then more strongly assailed by vainglory, and the love of wealth, and self-will, when office gives him the power; and by offenses, insults, and reproaches, and numberless other evils. If therefore any one be irreligious, he will become more so when raised to office; and he who appoints such a ruler will be answerable for all the offenses committed by him, and for the whole people. But if it is said of him who gives offense to one soul, "It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea" [Matthew 18:6]; what will he have to suffer who offends so many souls, whole cities and populations, and multitudes of families, men, women, children, citizens, and husbandmen, the inhabitants of the city itself, and of all places subject to it? To say thrice as much more is to say nothing, so severe is the vengeance and the punishment to which he will be obnoxious. So that a Bishop especially needs the grace and peace of God. For if without these he governs the people, all is ruined and lost, for want of those helms. And though he be skilled in the art of steering, he will sink the vessel and those that sail in it, if he has not these helms, "the grace and peace of God."

Hence I am struck with astonishment at those who desire so great a burden. Wretched and unhappy man, do you see what it is you desire? If you are by yourself, unknown and undistinguished, though you commit ten thousand faults, you have only one soul for which to give an account, and for it alone will you be answerable. But when you are raised to this office, consider for how many persons you are obnoxious to punishment. Hear what Paul says, "Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls as they that must give account." [Hebrews 13:17] But do you desire honor and power? But what pleasure is there in this honor? I confess, I see not. For to be a ruler indeed is not possible, since it depends upon those under your rule to obey or not. And to any one who considers the matter closely; it will appear that a Bishop does not so much come to rule, as to serve a multitude of masters, who are of opposite desires and sentiments. For what one commends, another blames; what this man censures, that admires. To whom therefore shall he listen, with whom shall he comply? It is impossible! And the slave that is bought with money complains if his master's commands are contrary to each other. But should you grieve, when so many masters give the contrary orders, you are condemned even for this, and all mouths are opened against you. Tell me then, is this honor, is this rule, is this power?

One who holds the Episcopal office has required a contribution of money. He who is unwilling to contribute not only withholds it, but that he may not seem to withhold it from indifference, he accuses his Bishop. He is a thief, he says, a robber, he engulfs the goods of the poor, he devours the rights of the needy. Cease your calumnies! How long will you say these things? Will you not contribute? No one compels you, there is no constraint. Why do you revile him who counsels and advises you? Is any one reduced to need, and he from inability, or some other hindrance, has not lent a hand? No allowance is made for him, the reproaches in this case are worse than in the other. This then is government! And he cannot avenge himself. For they are his own bowels, and as though the bowels be swollen, and though they give pain to the head and the rest of the body, we venture not on revenge, we cannot take a sword and pierce them; so if one of those under our rule be of such sort, and create trouble and disorder by these accusations, we dare not avenge ourselves, for this would be far from the disposition of a father, but we must endure the grief till he becomes sound and well.

The slave bought with money has an appointed work, which when he has performed, he is afterwards his own master. But the Bishop is distracted on every side and is expected to do many things that are beyond his power. If he knows not how to speak, there is great murmuring; and if he can speak, then he is accused of bring vainglorious. If he cannot raise the dead, he is of no worth, they say: such an one is pious, but this man is not. If he eats a moderate meal, for this he is accused, he ought to be strangled, they say. If he is seen at the bath, he is much censured. In short, he ought not to look upon the sun! If he does the same things that I do, if he bathes, eats and drinks, and wears the same clothing, and has the care of a house and servants, on what account is he set over me? But he has domestics to minister to him, and an ass to ride upon, why then is he set over me? But say, ought he then to have no one to wait upon him? Ought he himself to light his own fire, to draw water, to cleave wood, to go to market? How great a degradation would this be! Even the holy Apostles would not that any ministers of the word should attend upon the tables of the widows, but they considered it a business unworthy of them: and would you degrade them to the offices of your own domestics? Why dost not thou, who commandest these things, come and perform these services? Tell me, does not he minister to you a better service than yours, which is bodily? Why do you not send your domestic to wait upon him? Christ washed the feet of His disciples; is it a great thing for you to give this service to your Teacher? But you are not willing to render it yourself, and you grudge it to him. Ought he then to draw his livelihood from heaven? But God wills not so.

But you say, "Had the Apostles free men to serve them?" Would you then hear how the Apostles lived? They made long journeys, and free men and honorable women laid down their lives and souls for their relief. But hear this blessed Apostle thus exhorting; "Hold such in reputation" [Philippians 2:29-30]: and again, "Because for the work of Christ he was near unto death, not regarding his life, to supply your lack of service toward me." See what he says! But you have not a word to throw away upon your spiritual father, much less will you submit to any danger in his behalf. But you say, "He ought not to frequent the bath." And where is this forbidden? There is nothing honorable in being unclean.

These are not the things we find blamed or applauded at all. For the qualities which a Bishop is required to possess are different, as to be blameless, sober, orderly, hospitable, apt to teach. These the Apostle requires, and these we ought to look for in a ruler of the Church, but nothing further. You are not more strict than Paul, or rather more strict than the Spirit. If he be a striker, or violent, or cruel, and unmerciful, accuse him. These things are unworthy of a Bishop. If he be luxurious, this also is censurable. But if he takes care of his body that he may minister to you, if he attends to his health that he may be useful, ought he for this to be accused? Do you not know that bodily infirmity no less than infirmity of soul injures both us and the Church? Why, otherwise, does Paul attend to this matter, in writing to Timothy, "Use a little wine for your stomach's sake, and your often infirmities"? [1 Timothy 5:23] For if we could practice virtue with the soul alone, we need not take care of the body. And why then were we born at all? But if this has contributed a great share, is it not the extreme of folly to neglect it?

For suppose a man honored with the Bishopric, and entrusted with a public charge of the Church, and let him in other respects be virtuous, and have every quality, which a priest ought to possess, yet let him be always confined to his bed by reason of great infirmity, what service will he be able to render? Upon what mission can he go? What visitation can he undertake? Whom can he rebuke or admonish? These things I say, that you may learn not causelessly to accuse him, but rather may receive him favorably; as also that if any one desire rule in the Church, seeing the shower of abuse that attends it, he may quench that desire. Great indeed is the danger of such a station, and it requires "the grace and peace of God." Which that we may have abundantly, do you pray for us, and we for you, that practicing virtue aright we may so obtain the blessings promised, through Jesus Christ, with whom, etc.

Source: Homily 81 on Titus
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:4
To Titus, my own son after the common faith.
What is after the common faith? After he had called him his own son, and assumed the dignity of a father, hear how it is that he lessens and lowers that honor. He adds, After the common faith; that is, with respect to the faith I have no advantage over you; for it is common, and both thou and I were born by it. Whence then does he call him his son? Either only wishing to express his affection for him, or his priority in the Gospel, or to show that Titus had been enlightened by him. On this account he calls the faithful both children and brethren; brethren, because they were born by the same faith; children, because it was by his hands. By mentioning the common faith, therefore, he intimates their brotherhood.

Grace and peace from God the Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.
Because he had called him his son, he adds, from God the Father, to elevate his mind by showing whose son he was, and by not only naming the common faith, but by adding our Father, he implies that he has this honor equally with himself. Moral . Observe also how he offers the same prayers for the Teacher, as for the disciples and the multitude. For indeed he needs such prayers as much, or rather more than they, by how much he has greater enmities to encounter, and is more exposed to the necessity of offending God. For the higher is the dignity, the greater are the dangers of the priestly office. For one good act in his episcopal office is sufficient to raise him to heaven and one error to sink him to hell itself. For, to pass over all other cases of daily occurrence, if he happens, either from friendship or any other cause, to have advanced an unworthy person to a Bishopric, and have committed to him the rule of a great city, see to how great a flame he renders himself obnoxious. For not only will he have to account for the souls that are lost, for they are lost through the man's irreligion, but for all that is done amiss by the other. For he that is irreligious in a private station will be much more so when he is raised to power. It is much indeed, if a pious man continue such after his elevation to rule. For he is then more strongly assailed by vainglory, and the love of wealth, and self-will, when office gives him the power; and by offenses, insults, and reproaches, and numberless other evils. If therefore any one be irreligious, he will become more so when raised to office; and he who appoints such a ruler will be answerable for all the offenses committed by him, and for the whole people. But if it is said of him who gives offense to one soul, It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea Matthew 18:6; what will he have to suffer who offends so many souls, whole cities and populations, and multitudes of families, men, women, children, citizens, and husbandmen, the inhabitants of the city itself, and of all places subject to it? To say thrice as much more is to say nothing, so severe is the vengeance and the punishment to which he will be obnoxious. So that a Bishop especially needs the grace and peace of God. For if without these he governs the people, all is ruined and lost, for want of those helms. And though he be skilled in the art of steering, he will sink the vessel and those that sail in it, if he has not these helms, the grace and peace of God.

Hence I am struck with astonishment at those who desire so great a burden. Wretched and unhappy man, do you see what it is you desire? If you are by yourself, unknown and undistinguished, though you commit ten thousand faults, you have only one soul for which to give an account, and for it alone will you be answerable. But when you are raised to this office, consider for how many persons you are obnoxious to punishment. Hear what Paul says, Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls as they that must give account. Hebrews 13:17 But do you desire honor and power? But what pleasure is there in this honor? I confess, I see not. For to be a ruler indeed is not possible, since it depends upon those under your rule to obey or not. And to any one who considers the matter closely; it will appear that a Bishop does not so much come to rule, as to serve a multitude of masters, who are of opposite desires and sentiments. For what one commends, another blames; what this man censures, that admires. To whom therefore shall he listen, with whom shall he comply? It is impossible! And the slave that is bought with money complains if his master's commands are contrary to each other. But should you grieve, when so many masters give the contrary orders, you are condemned even for this, and all mouths are opened against you. Tell me then, is this honor, is this rule, is this power?

One who holds the Episcopal office has required a contribution of money. He who is unwilling to contribute not only withholds it, but that he may not seem to withhold it from indifference, he accuses his Bishop. He is a thief, he says, a robber, he engulfs the goods of the poor, he devours the rights of the needy. Cease your calumnies! How long will you say these things? Will you not contribute? No one compels you, there is no constraint. Why do you revile him who counsels and advises you? Is any one reduced to need, and he from inability, or some other hindrance, has not lent a hand? No allowance is made for him, the reproaches in this case are worse than in the other. This then is government! And he cannot avenge himself. For they are his own bowels, and as though the bowels be swollen, and though they give pain to the head and the rest of the body, we venture not on revenge, we cannot take a sword and pierce them; so if one of those under our rule be of such sort, and create trouble and disorder by these accusations, we dare not avenge ourselves, for this would be far from the disposition of a father, but we must endure the grief till he becomes sound and well.

The slave bought with money has an appointed work, which when he has performed, he is afterwards his own master. But the Bishop is distracted on every side and is expected to do many things that are beyond his power. If he knows not how to speak, there is great murmuring; and if he can speak, then he is accused of bring vainglorious. If he cannot raise the dead, he is of no worth, they say: such an one is pious, but this man is not. If he eats a moderate meal, for this he is accused, he ought to be strangled, they say. If he is seen at the bath, he is much censured. In short, he ought not to look upon the sun! If he does the same things that I do, if he bathes, eats and drinks, and wears the same clothing, and has the care of a house and servants, on what account is he set over me? But he has domestics to minister to him, and an ass to ride upon, why then is he set over me? But say, ought he then to have no one to wait upon him? Ought he himself to light his own fire, to draw water, to cleave wood, to go to market? How great a degradation would this be! Even the holy Apostles would not that any ministers of the word should attend upon the tables of the widows, but they considered it a business unworthy of them: and would you degrade them to the offices of your own domestics? Why dost not thou, who commandest these things, come and perform these services? Tell me, does not he minister to you a better service than yours, which is bodily? Why do you not send your domestic to wait upon him? Christ washed the feet of His disciples; is it a great thing for you to give this service to your Teacher? But you are not willing to render it yourself, and you grudge it to him. Ought he then to draw his livelihood from heaven? But God wills not so.

But you say, Had the Apostles free men to serve them? Would you then hear how the Apostles lived? They made long journeys, and free men and honorable women laid down their lives and souls for their relief. But hear this blessed Apostle thus exhorting; Hold such in reputation Philippians 2:29-30: and again, Because for the work of Christ he was near unto death, not regarding his life, to supply your lack of service toward me. See what he says! But you have not a word to throw away upon your spiritual father, much less will you submit to any danger in his behalf. But you say, He ought not to frequent the bath. And where is this forbidden? There is nothing honorable in being unclean.

These are not the things we find blamed or applauded at all. For the qualities which a Bishop is required to possess are different, as to be blameless, sober, orderly, hospitable, apt to teach. These the Apostle requires, and these we ought to look for in a ruler of the Church, but nothing further. You are not more strict than Paul, or rather more strict than the Spirit. If he be a striker, or violent, or cruel, and unmerciful, accuse him. These things are unworthy of a Bishop. If he be luxurious, this also is censurable. But if he takes care of his body that he may minister to you, if he attends to his health that he may be useful, ought he for this to be accused? Do you not know that bodily infirmity no less than infirmity of soul injures both us and the Church? Why, otherwise, does Paul attend to this matter, in writing to Timothy, Use a little wine for your stomach's sake, and your often infirmities? 1 Timothy 5:23 For if we could practice virtue with the soul alone, we need not take care of the body. And why then were we born at all? But if this has contributed a great share, is it not the extreme of folly to neglect it?

For suppose a man honored with the Bishopric, and entrusted with a public charge of the Church, and let him in other respects be virtuous, and have every quality, which a priest ought to possess, yet let him be always confined to his bed by reason of great infirmity, what service will he be able to render? Upon what mission can he go? What visitation can he undertake? Whom can he rebuke or admonish? These things I say, that you may learn not causelessly to accuse him, but rather may receive him favorably; as also that if any one desire rule in the Church, seeing the shower of abuse that attends it, he may quench that desire. Great indeed is the danger of such a station, and it requires the grace and peace of God. Which that we may have abundantly, do you pray for us, and we for you, that practicing virtue aright we may so obtain the blessings promised, through Jesus Christ, with whom, etc.
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:4
After Paul had called Titus his own son and assumed the dignity of a father, hear how it is that he lessens and lowers that honor. He adds, “After the common faith”—that means: with respect to the faith I have no advantage over you. It is common to us both. You and I were together born by it. Why then does he call him son? Either wishing to express his affection for him, or his priority in the gospel, or to show that Titus had been enlightened by him. In a similar way he calls the faithful both children and brothers. They are brothers because they were born by the same faith. They are children, because it was by his hands.

Source: HOMILIES ON TITUS 1
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:4
For in children by nature, the true and the spurious are determined by the father who begot and the mother who bore them. But it is not so in this case, but it depends on the disposition. For one who was a true son may become spurious, and a spurious son may become a true one. For it is not the force of nature but the power of choice on which it depends, whence it is subject to changes in time.

Source: HOMILIES ON TITUS 1
[AD 458] Theodoret of Cyrus on Titus 1:4
Natural generation does not operate by the assent of the one who is born, whereas the birth that comes from faith requires such assent. Although the one who preaches may sincerely believe, he who hears, unless he takes to himself what he learns with faith, cannot be called the son of the preacher.

Source: INTERPRETATION OF THE LETTER TO TITUS
[AD 100] Didache on Titus 1:5-9
Therefore, appoint for yourselves bishops and deacons worthy of the Lord, men meek, and not lovers of money, [1 Timothy 3:4] and truthful and proven; for they also render to you the service of prophets and teachers. Despise them not therefore, for they are your honoured ones, together with the prophets and teachers.

Source: The Didache, Chapter 15
[AD 220] Tertullian on Titus 1:5
Thence, therefore, among us the prescript is more fully and more carefully laid down, that they who are chosen into the sacerdotal order must be men of one marriage; which rule is so rigidly observed, that I remember some removed from their office for digamy.

Source: On Exhortation to Chastity
[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Titus 1:5
Whoever loves Christ must demonstrate this in the way he treats his slaves, knowing that the Lord will require of him whatever he expects from them.
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:5
Here he is speaking of episkopoi [bishops].… He did not wish the whole island to be entrusted to one elder, but that each one should have his own charge and care, for thus he would have less labor himself, and those under his rule would receive greater attention. The teacher would not then be required to hold the presidency of many churches but was left to be occupied with one only, and to bring that into order.

Source: HOMILIES ON TITUS 2
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:5-6
The whole life of men in ancient times was one of action and contention; ours on the contrary is a life of indolence. They knew that they were brought into the world for this purpose, that they might labor according to the will of Him who brought them into it; but we, as if we had been placed here but to eat and drink, and lead a life of pleasure, we pay no regard to spiritual things. I speak not only of the Apostles, but of those that followed them. You see them accordingly traversing all places, and pursuing this as their only business, living altogether as in a foreign land, as those who had no city upon earth. Hear therefore what the blessed Apostle says,

"For this cause left I you in Crete."

As if the whole world had been one house, they divided it among themselves, administering its affairs everywhere, each taking care of his several portion of it.

"For this cause left I you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are [R.V. were] wanting."

He does not command this in an imperious manner; "that you should set in order," he says. Here we see a soul free from all envy, seeking everywhere the advantage of his disciples, not curiously solicitous, whether the good was done by himself or by another. For where there was a case of danger and great difficulty, he in his own person set it in order. But those things which were rather attended with honor and praise he committed to his disciple, as the ordination of Bishops, and such other things as required some farther arrangement, or, so to speak, to be brought to greater perfection. What do you say? Does he farther set in order your work? And do you not think it a disgrace bringing shame upon you? By no means; for I look only to the common good, and whether it be done by me, or by another, it makes no difference to me. Thus it becomes him to be affected who presides in the Church, not to seek his own honor, but the common good.

"And ordain elders in every city," here he is speaking of Bishops, as we have before said, "as I had appointed you. If any is blameless." "In every city," he says, for he did not wish the whole island to be entrusted to one, but that each should have his own charge and care, for thus he would have less labor himself, and those under his rule would receive greater attention, if the Teacher had not to go about to the presidency of many Churches, but was left to be occupied with one only, and to bring that into order.

Source: Homily 82 on Titus
[AD 420] Jerome on Titus 1:5
"For this reason, I left you in Crete, so that you would correct what was lacking." It is the dignity of the apostolic Church to lay the foundation, which no one can lay except the architect. And the foundation is none other than Jesus Christ (1 Cor. 3:11). Those who are lesser artisans can build houses upon the foundation. Therefore, as a wise architect, Paul exerted himself in every labor, not to glory in what had already been prepared, but after he had softened the hard hearts of the Cretans to faith in Christ, and had subdued them by both word and signs, and had taught them to believe in God the Father and in Christ, not in their native Jupiter, he left Titus as his disciple in Crete, to confirm the rudiments of the nascent Church and to correct anything that might appear lacking, while he himself went to other nations, in order to lay again the foundation of Christ in them. But when he says, "so that you would correct what was lacking," it shows that they had not yet attained to the full knowledge of the truth, and even though they had been corrected by the Apostle, they still needed further correction. However, everything that is corrected is imperfect. Moreover, in Greek, the addition of the preposition in the word ἐπιδιορθώσῃ, which means "correct," does not mean exactly the same thing as διορθώσῃ, that is, "to correct," but rather, to over-correct, so that the things that I have corrected, and which have not yet been brought to the full line of truth, may be corrected by you, and receive the rule of equality.

And (as) you should appoint presbyters through cities, just as I arranged for you. Bishops who have the power to appoint presbyters in individual cities should listen, under which law the order of Ecclesiastical constitution is maintained: nor should they think that the words of the apostles are their own, but Christ's, who said to the disciples: He who despises you, despises me; but he who despises me, despises him who sent me (Luke 10:16). So whoever hears you, hears me; and whoever rejects me, rejects him who sent me. From this it is clear that those who wish to confer the Ecclesiastical grade on anyone without merit, but through grace, contrary to the law of the apostles, do so against Christ himself, who through his apostle carried out the appointment of presbyter in the Church. Moses, the friend of God, to whom God spoke face to face (Deut. 5 and 31), could certainly have made his sons his successors in the principality and bequeathed his dignity to his descendants; but Jesus, a stranger from another tribe, was elected so that we would know that the principality must not be conferred on bloodline, but on life. But now we see many doing this as a favor, so that they do not seek to elevate pillars in the Church who can benefit the Church more, but those whom they themselves love, or with whose services they are entangled: or for whom someone of their ancestors begged, and, to not speak of worse things, who obtained the office by gifts. Let us carefully attend to the words of the apostles, saying: That you appoint presbyters in cities, just as I arranged for you. The person speaking about who ought to be ordained as a presbyter says this: "If anyone is without blame, a one-woman man, etc., for it is necessary for the bishop to be blameless, as a dispenser of God." Therefore, the presbyter is the same as the bishop, and before, by the instigation of the devil, competitions arose in religion and it was said among the people, "I am of Paul," "I am of Apollo," "I am of Cephas" (1 Cor. 1:12), the governance of the church was conducted by the joint counsel of the presbyterate. But when each person began to consider those whom he had baptised as his own rather than Christ's, it was decided throughout the world that one chosen from among the presbyters should be placed in charge of the others and have care of the general well-being of the church, so that the seeds of schism might be rooted out. Someone may think that this is not the teaching of the scriptures but our own opinion, that a bishop and a presbyter are the same, that the difference lies only in the age of the office. That person should pay attention to the words of the Apostle to the Philippians, where he addresses his epistle to "Paul and Timothy, servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons; grace to you and peace" (Phil. 1:1–2), and so on. Now, although the city of Philippi is one in Macedonia, it is impossible for there to be several bishops in one city. But because they used to call the same persons bishops then, whom they did "presbyters" also, for this reason he spoke without distinction of bishops and presbyters. Finally, lest this statement by confirmed only by one witness, let it be confirmed by another. In the Acts of the Apostles it is written, that when the Apostle came to Miletus, he sent to Ephesus and called the presbyters of the same Church, to whom afterwards among other things he spoke: 'Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the Church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood' (Acts 20:28). And here observe carefully how, calling the Ephesian presbyters to him, he afterwards called the same men bishops. If anyone desires to receive the Epistle which is written to the Hebrews under the name of Paul, and in which the care of the Churches is equally divided, it is read among many. For he writes to the people: 'Obey your prelates, and be subject to them. For they watch as being to render an account of your souls; that they may do this with joy, and not with grief. For this is not expedient for you' (Hebrews 13:17). And Peter, who for the strengthening of the faith received the name of Firm, speaks in his epistle to the elders, saying: 'The ancients therefore that are among you, I beseech, who am myself also an ancient and a witness of the sufferings of Christ: as also a partaker of that glory which is to be revealed in time to come: feed the flock of God which is among you, taking care of it not by constraint, but willingly according to God: not for filthy lucre's sake, but voluntarily' (1 Peter 5:1-2). This we have shown in order to demonstrate that in former times those same people were presbyters whom later on were called bishops; and gradually it was so arranged that the various obligations were entrusted to one person. Therefore just as the presbyters know that by the custom of the Church they are subject to him who has been placed over them as their head, so also let the bishops know that according to the custom of the Church they are greater than the presbyters and ought to regulate the whole church by common council, imitating Moses, who, when he alone had power over the people of Israel, chose seventy others with whom he might judge the people (Numbers 11). Let us see therefore what sort of man ought to be ordained presbyter or bishop.

Source: Commentary on Titus
[AD 420] Jerome on Titus 1:5
And lest any should in a spirit of contention argue that there must then have been more bishops than one in a single church, there is the following passage which clearly proves a bishop and a presbyter to be the same. Writing to Titus the apostle says: “For this cause I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are wanting, and appoint presbyters in every city, as I had instructed you: if any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having believing children not accused of wantonness or unruly. For a bishop must be blameless as the steward of God.” … When subsequently one was chosen to preside over the rest, this was done to remedy schism and to prevent each individual from rending the church of Christ by drawing it to himself.

Source: LETTERS 146.1
[AD 428] Theodore of Mopsuestia on Titus 1:5
Paul emphasizes that correct teaching must accompany these ordinations. He mentions only presbyters, since theirs is the most general office.

Source: COMMENTARY ON TITUS
[AD 220] Tertullian on Titus 1:6
Should we not rather recognize, from among the store of primitive scriptural precedents, those that correspond with the gospel order of things respecting discipline? By this means we convey to the new community the typical requirements of antiquity. In the old law I find the pruning knife applied to the license of repeated marriage.… Among us the prescript is more fully and more carefully laid down, that they who are chosen into the sacerdotal order must be men of one marriage. This rule is so rigidly observed that I remember some removed from their office for bigamy.

Source: ON EXHORTATION TO CHASTITY 7
[AD 220] Tertullian on Titus 1:6
How detrimental to faith, how obstructive to holiness, second marriages are, the discipline of the Church and the prescription of the apostle declare, when he suffers not men twice married to preside (over a Church ), when he would not grant a widow admittance into the order unless she had been "the wife of one man; " for it behoves God's altar to be set forth pure.

Source: To His Wife Book I
[AD 220] Tertullian on Titus 1:6
Come, now, you who think that an exceptional law of monogamy is made with reference to bishops, abandon withal your remaining disciplinary titles, which, together with monogamy, are ascribed to bishops. Refuse to be "irreprehensible, sober, of good morals, orderly, hospitable, easy to be taught; "nay, indeed, (be) "given to wine, prompt with the hand to strike, combative, money-loving, not ruling your house, nor caring for your children's discipline,"-no, nor "courting good renown even from strangers.

Source: On Monogamy
[AD 380] Apostolic Constitutions on Titus 1:6
We have already said that a bishop, a presbyter and a deacon, when they are constituted, must be married but once, whether their wives are alive or whether they are dead. It is not lawful for them, if they are unmarried when they are ordained, to be married afterwards; or if they are married at that time, to marry a second time, but to be content with that wife which they had when they came to ordination.

Source: CONSTITUTIONS OF THE HOLY APOSTLES
[AD 380] Apostolic Constitutions on Titus 1:6
We have already said, that a bishop, a presbyter, and a deacon, when they are constituted, must be but once married, whether their wives be alive or whether they be dead; and that it is not lawful for them, if they are unmarried when they are ordained, to be married afterwards; or if they be then married, to marry a second time, but to be content with that wife. which they had when they came to ordination.

Source: CONSTITUTIONS OF THE HOLY APOSTLES
[AD 397] Ambrose of Milan on Titus 1:6
I have put down the faults which I have been taught to avoid. But it is the apostle who is the teacher of virtues. He teaches a bishop … to be “the husband of one wife.” The bishop is thereby not excluded from marriage altogether … but rather encouraged by chastity in marriage to preserve the grace of his baptism.… There are many who argue that “husband of one wife” is said of marriage after baptism, on the ground that the fault which would constitute an impediment has been washed away in baptism.… But where there has been a second marriage, it is not dissolved. Sin is washed away in baptism, law is not.

Source: LETTERS 63.62-63
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:6
Ver. 6. "If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children, not accused of riot, or unruly."

Why does he bring forward such an one? To stop the mouths of those heretics, who condemned marriage, showing that it is not an unholy thing in itself, but so far honorable, that a married man might ascend the holy throne; and at the same reproving the wanton, and not permitting their admission into this high office who contracted a second marriage. For he who retains no kind regard for her who is departed, how shall he be a good president? And what accusation would he not incur? For you all know, that though it is not forbidden by the laws to enter into a second marriage, yet it is a thing liable to many ill constructions. Wishing therefore a ruler to give no handle for reproach to those under his rule, he on this account says, "If any be blameless," that is, if his life be free from reproach, if he has given occasion to no one to assail his character. Hear what Christ says, "If the light that is in you be darkness, how great is that darkness!" [Matthew 6:23]

"Having faithful children, not accused of riot, or unruly."

We should observe what care he bestows upon children. For he who cannot be the instructor of his own children, how should he be the Teacher of others? If he cannot keep in order those whom he has had with him from the beginning, whom he has brought up, and over whom he had power both by the laws, and by nature, how will he be able to benefit those without? For if the incompetency of the father had not been great, he would not have allowed those to become bad whom from the first he had under his power. For it is not possible, indeed it is not, that one should turn out ill who is brought up with much care, and has received great attention. Sins are not so prevalent by nature, as to overcome so much previous care. But if, occupied in the pursuit of wealth, he has made his children a secondary concern, and not bestowed much care upon them, even so he is unworthy. For if when nature prompted, he was so void of affection or so senseless, that he thought more of his wealth than of his children, how should he be raised to the Episcopal throne, and so great rule? For if he was unable to restrain them it is a great proof of his weakness; and if he was unconcerned, his want of affection is much to be blamed. He then that neglects his own children, how shall he take care of other men's? And he has not only said, "not riotous," but not even "accused of riot." There must not be an ill report, or such an opinion of them.

Source: Homily 82 on Titus
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:6
Paul says this to stop the mouths of those heretics who condemned marriage. He shows that it is not an unholy thing in itself, but so far honorable that a married man might ascend the holy throne. And at the same time he wishes to reprove the wanton, not permitting their admission into this high office those who contracted a second marriage.

Source: HOMILIES ON TITUS 2
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:6
We should observe what care he bestows upon children. For he who cannot be the instructor of his own children, how could he be the teacher of others?… For if he was unable to restrain them, it is a great proof of his weakness. And if he was unconcerned, his want of affection is much to be blamed. He then who neglects his own children, how shall he take care of others’?

Source: HOMILIES ON TITUS 2
[AD 420] Jerome on Titus 1:6
“A bishop then must be blameless.” The same thing that he says to Titus, “if any be blameless.” All the virtues are comprehended in this one word; thus he seems to require an impossible perfection. For if every sin, every idle word, is deserving of blame, who is there in this world that is sinless and blameless? Still he who is chosen to be shepherd of the church must be one compared with whom other men are rightly regarded as but a flock of sheep.

Source: LETTERS 69.8
[AD 420] Jerome on Titus 1:6
“One that rules well his own house.” That is, not by increasing riches, not by providing regal banquets, not by having a pile of finely wrought plates, not by slowly steaming pheasants so that the heat may reach the bones without melting the flesh upon them. No, he does this rather by first requiring of his own household the conduct which he has to inculcate in others.

Source: LETTERS 69.9
[AD 420] Jerome on Titus 1:6
"If anyone is blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children, not accused of reckless living, or disobedient." Therefore he must be blameless, which I believe is also referred to in Timothy as irreprehensible (1 Tim. III): not that during the time he is ordained he has no crime, and has washed away past stains with a new life, but from the time he is reborn in Christ, he is not tormented by any consciousness of sin. For how can the leader of the Church remove evil from those who are in similar transgression? Or with what freedom can he rebuke the sinner, when the sinner answers silently that he himself has committed the same thing he is rebuking? Therefore, whoever desires a bishopric, desires good work. He says work, not privilege, not glory. But he must also have a good testimony from those outside, so that he does not fall into shame, and into the trap of the devil. And what he says, the husband of one wife, must be understood thus: so that we do not think that every monogamist is better than a widower; but so that he can exhort to monogamy and continence, who offers his example in teaching. For suppose a young man lost his wife and was overcome by the necessity of the flesh, and took a second wife, whom he also immediately lost and then lived continently; another, however, married until old age, and, as most believe, never gave up the work of the flesh: which of the two do you think is better, more chaste, more continent? Certainly he who was unfortunate even in a second marriage and afterwards conducted himself modestly and piously, is preferable to him who has been separated neither by the embrace of his wife nor by advanced age. Therefore, whoever is chosen as a quasi-monogamist should not applaud himself because he is better than every man who is twice married, since the greater happiness rather than his will has been chosen. Some people think this about this place: it was the custom of the Jews either to have two or more wives: which we read in the Old Law of Abraham and Jacob: and now they want it to be a precept, that he who is to be elected bishop should not have two wives at the same time. Even those who have been with the Gentiles, and after losing one wife, have taken another after the baptism of Christ, think more superstitiously than truly, that they should not be read in the priesthood: for certainly, if this is to be observed. those who, before taking one regenerated wife, indulged in wandering through prostitutes, should be more strongly barred from the episcopate: and it is much more detestable to fornicate with several than to find one who is twice married; because in the former, there is a kind of unhappiness in marriage, while in the latter there is a tendency to voluptuousness towards sin. Montanus and those who follow the Novatian schism, took the name of cleanliness to themselves: and they think that second marriages should be prohibited from the communion of the Church: whereas the Apostle, imposing this on bishops and presbyters, relaxed it in other respects. Not that he encourages second marriages; but that he indulges the necessity of the flesh. And Tertullian wrote a heretical book about Monogamy, which no one who has read the Apostle will be ignorant of opposing. And indeed, it is in our power to have a bishop or a presbyter without blame, and to have one wife. But that which follows, to have faithful children, not accused of lewdness, and not subject, is beyond our power. For to be sure, if parents have well instructed their children and always taught them the precepts of the Lord from a young age, if later they give themselves to lewdness, and putting aside the reins of vice, will the fault then rebound to the parents, and the sins of the father will stain the holiness of the son? If anyone has well instructed his children, I believe that includes Isaac, who is to be held as having well instructed his son Esau. But Esau, a fornicator and profane, sold his firstborn for one meal (Gen. 25:29-34). Samuel too, who was such that he called upon the Lord, and the Lord answered him, and in the time of harvest obtained the rain of the winter season, had sons who turned aside after bribes, and became such wicked judges that the people, not bearing it, demanded a king for themselves like the other nations (1 Samuel 8:4-5). Therefore, if the election of the priests were to take place, and Isaac on account of Esau and Samuel on account of his sons were deemed unworthy of the priesthood. And since the sins of parents are not attributed to their children, will the faults of the children prejudge the parents? (Ezekiel 18:2) First of all, it must be said that the name of the priesthood is so sacred that even external things are considered for us, not because we are not bishops because of our faults: but because we are barred from this position because of the incontinence of our sons. For with what freedom can we correct other people's children and teach what is right: when immediately he who has been corrected can say to us: First teach your sons? Or with what confidence do 1 Cor.ect a stranger who commits fornication when my own conscience responds to me: Therefore disinherit the fornicating son: reject your sons serving vices? But when a wicked son comes together with you under the same roof, do you dare to remove the speck from someone else's eye, not seeing the beam in your own eye (Matthew VII and Luke VI)? Therefore, the righteous is not polluted by the vices of his children: but freedom is reserved by the Apostle for the prince of the Church: so that he may become such that he may not be afraid to rebuke outsiders because of the vices of his children. Then also it must be inferred against those who are swollen with pride about the episcopate and think that they have achieved not the dispensation of Christ, but authority: because they are not immediately better than all those who have not been ordained bishops: and from the fact that they have been elected they themselves think that they are more confirmed: but understand that some are removed from the priesthood because their children's vices have hindered them. But if the sins of the children prohibit the righteous from the episcopate: how much more should each one consider himself and know that the powerful suffer torment powerfully (Wisdom VI), so he will withdraw from this not as much honor as burden: and he will not seek to take the place of others who are more worthy! Finally, it must be said that in the Scriptures by sons are meant reasonings, that is, thoughts; but by daughters, deeds, that is, works, and now he who will become a bishop must be commanded to have both thoughts and works in his power, and he truly believes in Christ, and is not stained by any creeping vice.

Source: Commentary on Titus
[AD 428] Theodore of Mopsuestia on Titus 1:6
Paul does not measure the virtue of fathers by the depravity of their children, nor did the misbehavior of his sons make Samuel unworthy of the priesthood; Paul wishes only to show the likely intentions of the father from what has been created in the sons.

Source: COMMENTARY ON TITUS
[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Titus 1:6
The first freedom, then, is to be without crimes. And so when the apostle Paul chose either priests or deacons to be ordained, and when anyone is to be ordained to take charge of a church, he does not say, If anyone is without sin. For if he were to say this, every person would be rejected, no one would be ordained. But he says, “if anyone is without crime,” such as homicide, adultery and uncleanness of fornication, theft, fraud, sacrilege, and other things of this sort.

Source: TRACTATES ON JOHN 41.10.1
[AD 258] Cyprian on Titus 1:7
For which reason you must diligently observe and keep the practice delivered from divine tradition and apostolic observance, which is also maintained among us, and almost throughout all the provinces; that for the proper celebration of ordinations all the neighbouring bishops of the same province should assemble with that people for which a prelate is ordained. And the bishop should be chosen in the presence of the people, who have most fully known the life of each one, and have looked into the doings of each one as respects his habitual conduct. And this also, we see, was done by you in the ordination of our colleague Sabinus; so that, by the suffrage of the whole brotherhood, and by the sentence of the bishops who had assembled in their presence, and who had written letters to you concerning him, the episcopate was conferred upon him, and hands were imposed on him in the place of Basilides. Neither can it rescind an ordination rightly perfected, that Basilides, after the detection of his crimes, and the baring of his conscience even by his own confession, went to Rome and deceived Stephen our colleague, placed at a distance, and ignorant of what had been done, and of the truth, to canvass that he might be replaced unjustly in the episcopate from which he had been righteously deposed. The result of this is, that the sins of Basilides are not so much abolished as enhanced, inasmuch as to his former sins he has also added the crime of deceit and circumvention. For he is not so much to be blamed who has been through heedlessness surprised by fraud, as he is to be execrated who has fraudulently taken him by surprise. But if Basilides could deceive men, he cannot deceive God, since it is written, "God is not mocked." But neither can deceit advantage Martialis, in such a way as that he who also is involved in great crimes should hold his bishopric, since the apostle also warns, and says, "A bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God."

Source: Epistle LXVII
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:7
Ver. 7. "For a Bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not self-willed, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker."

For a ruler without, as he rules by law and compulsion, perhaps does not consult the wishes of those under his rule. But he who ought to rule men with their own consent, and who will be thankful for his rule, if he so conduct himself as to do everything of his own will, and share counsels with no one, makes his presidency tyrannical rather than popular. For he must be "blameless, as the steward of God, not self-willed, not soon angry." For how shall he instruct others to rule that passion, who has not taught himself? For power leads on to many temptations, it makes a man more harsh and difficult to please, even him that was very mild, surrounding him with so many occasions of anger. If he have not previously practiced himself in this virtue, he will grow harsh, and will injure and destroy much that is under his rule.

"Not given to wine, no striker." Here he is speaking of the insolent man. For he should do all things by admonition or rebuke, and not by insolence. What necessity, tell me, for insult? He ought to terrify, to alarm, to penetrate the soul with the threat of hell. But he that is insulted becomes more impudent, and rather despises him that insults him. Nothing produces contempt more than insult; it disgraces the insolent person, and prevents his being respected, as he ought to be. Their discourse ought to be delivered with much caution. In reproving sins they should bear in mind the future judgment, but keep clear of all insolence. Yet if any prevent them from doing their duty, they must prosecute the matter with all authority. "Not a striker," he says. The teacher is the physician of souls. But the physician does not strike, but heals and restores him that has stricken him. "Not given to filthy lucre."

Source: Homily 82 on Titus
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:7
The teacher is the physician of souls. But the physician does not strike. Rather he heals and restores any who might strike him.

Source: HOMILIES ON TITUS 2
[AD 420] Jerome on Titus 1:7
"For it is necessary that a bishop be without blame, as the steward of God: not arrogant, not prone to anger, not given to wine, not a striker, not greedy for filthy lucre." Therefore, it is required among stewards that a faithful person be found: and not eating and drinking with drunkards, striking slaves and maidservants; but uncertain of the return of God, and giving food to his servants in due season. But between the stewards and the servile, this is the only difference: that a servant is appointed over his servants. Therefore, a bishop and a priest must know that the people are their servants, not slaves. The rest that follows is up to us: Not arrogant, that is not swelling and pleasing himself because he is a bishop, but like a good steward, seeking what will benefit many. Not prone to anger. He is angry who is always angry and is moved like a leaf by a light breeze of provocation and sin. And indeed, there is nothing more shameful than an angry teacher, who ought to be gentle (and according to what is written: But the servant of the Lord must not quarrel, but be gentle to all, masterful, patient, instructing in meekness those who oppose him), he, on the other hand, with an angry face, trembling lips, wrinkled front, unrestrained invective, a face varying between paleness and redness, shouting uproariously, does not lead astray so much towards good, as hurries towards evil by his cruelty; hence Solomon says: Anger destroys even the wise (Prov. 21); And: The anger of a just man does not work the justice of God (James I, 20). Nor is he who is sometimes angry, actually irascible: but he is called irascible, who is frequently overcome by this passion. The bishop is also prohibited from being given to wine, about which it is written to Timothy: Not given to much wine. (1 Tim. 3:8). But what kind of bishop is it to see intoxicated, with his mind occupied, or to raise laughter against the gravity of his position, and to cackle with loose lips: or if, when he has remembered some little thing sad, he bursts into sobs and tears among his cups. It is a long journey to go through all the follies that drunkenness suggests. You may see some hurling drinking cups across the room, or throwing them in the countenance of their fellow guests; some tearing their clothing and wounding themselves on the bodies of others; some shouting; some nodding off; while he who drinks most is regarded as the strongest: it is even an accusation against him, that he has not drunk frequently enough when the king has called upon him to testify. They vomit in order to drink, and drink to be able to vomit. The stomach and the throat are engaged in but one business. Let it suffice to have said thus much, that according to St. Paul, intemperance lies in wine. And wherever there is gluttony or drunkenness, there debauchery reigns. Look at the belly and the genitals, and according to the character of the vices so is the order of the members. I will never consider a drunkard to be chaste, for even if he has fallen asleep in his cups, he could still have sinned through the wine. But we are filled with wonder that the Apostle should condemn intoxication in bishops or priests, when in the old law it was commanded that the priests, when they entered into the temple, should not drink wine at all; and when a lawful Nazarite is bidden to nourish his holy locks, to avoid all defilement, to abstain from wine, or anything that is made of grapes, from the husks that remain after wine has been pressed, and from every sort of strong drink which perverts a sound mind. Let every one say what he likes: I speak my own thoughts: I know what abstinence has done for me, and what harm has come of its intermission or its excess. After drunkenness, however, he warns that a person should not be a striker; as in simplicity of understanding it builds up the listener so they do not easily reach out to strike, so that the insane person does not burst out to strike another in the face. However, it is better not to say that one is a striker who is gentle and patient, who knows in time what should be spoken and what should be kept silent, and who does not hit the conscience of the weak with useless talk. For when the Apostle was forming the leader of the church, he did not forbid him from being a boxer and pancratiast (that is, an athlete) (which is also reprehensible in any plebeian or pagan), but as I said: so that the abusive and garrulous one does not lose him, who could be corrected by modesty and gentleness. The desire for shameful gain from someone who is to become a bishop should also be alien. For there are many who teach things that are not proper, for the sake of shameful gain: who destroy entire households, and think that piety is a business. But it is better, according to Solomon, to have a little with righteousness, than to have much gain with iniquity (Prov. 16:8): and a good name is to be preferred in poverty than in wealth. A bishop who desires to be an imitator of the Apostle should be content with food and clothing alone (1 Tim. 6). Those who serve at the altar should live by it (1 Cor. 9). They live, he says, but do not become rich. Hence also, money is shaken off our belt; and we have only one tunic (Matt. 10 and Mark 6): nor do we think about tomorrow. The desire for shameful gain is to think more about the future than the present. What a bishop or presbyter should not have has been taught by the Apostle's word; but now, on the contrary, what he should have is explained.

Source: Commentary on Titus
[AD 420] Jerome on Titus 1:7
That a priest must avoid covetousness even Samuel teaches when he proves before all the people that he has taken nothing from anyone. And the same lesson is taught by the poverty of the apostles who used to receive sustenance and refreshment from their brothers and to boast that they neither had nor wished to have anything besides food and clothing. What the epistle to Timothy calls covetousness Titus openly censures as the desire for filthy lucre.

Source: LETTERS 69.9
[AD 428] Theodore of Mopsuestia on Titus 1:7
Paul here shows that at this time “elders” and “bishops” were interchangeable and that some were put in charge of towns, some of whole regions. These latter became the bishops of later times.

Source: COMMENTARY ON TITUS
[AD 428] Theodore of Mopsuestia on Titus 1:7
He is not given to useless discord.

Source: COMMENTARY ON TITUS
[AD 458] Theodoret of Cyrus on Titus 1:7
Here it is clear that he calls presbyters bishops. In the same community it was the custom that there would be more presbyters than bishops.

Source: INTERPRETATION OF THE LETTER TO TITUS
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:8-9
You see what intensity of virtue he required. "Not given to filthy lucre," that is, showing great contempt for money. "A lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, just, holy"; he means, giving away all his substance to them that need. "Temperate"; he speaks not here of one who fasts, but of one who commands his passions, his tongue, his hands, his eyes. For this is temperance, to be drawn aside by no passion.

"Holding fast the faithful word as he has been taught." By "faithful" is here meant "true," or that which was delivered through faith, not requiring reasonings, or questionings.

"Holding fast," that is, having care of it, making it his business. What then, if he be ignorant of the learning that is without? For this cause, he says, "the faithful word, according to teaching."

"That he may be able both to exhort, and to convince the gainsayers."

So that there is need not of pomp of words, but of strong minds, of skill in the Scriptures and of powerful thoughts. Do you not see that Paul put to flight the whole world, that he was more powerful than Plato and all the rest? But it was by miracles, you say. Not by miracles only, for if you peruse the Acts of the Apostles, you will find him often prevailing by his teaching previously to his miracles.

"That he may be able by sound doctrine to exhort," that is, to retain his own people, and to overthrow the adversaries. "And to convince the gainsayers." For if this is not done, all is lost. He who knows not how to combat the adversaries, and to "bring every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ," and to beat down reasonings, he who knows not what he ought to teach with regard to right doctrine, far from him be the Teacher's throne. For the other qualities may be found in those under his rule, such as to be "blameless, to have his children in subjection, to be hospitable, just, holy." But that which characterizes the Teacher is this, to be able to instruct in the word, to which no regard is now paid.

Source: Homily 82 on Titus
[AD 420] Jerome on Titus 1:8-9
"But [he should be] hospitable, a lover of good, chaste, just, holy, continent or abstinent, one who holds to the correct doctrine, faithful in speech, so that [he] is able to comfort [others] in sound doctrine and refute those who contradict it." Above all, hospitality is required of a future bishop. For if everyone wishes to hear it from the Gospel: "I was a stranger and you took me in" (Matt. 25:35): how much more should a bishop, whose house should be a common inn for everyone! For a layman receiving one or two, or a few, fulfills the duty of hospitality. If a bishop does not receive all, he is inhuman. But I fear that just as the Queen of the South came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon (Matt. 12), judging the men of her own time, and the men of Nineveh, who repented at the preaching of Jonah will condemn those who disdained to hear a greater Savior than Jonah: so most people judge bishops, withdrawing themselves from the ecclesiastical rank and exercising things that do not befit a bishop; of whom I think John writes to Gaius: "Dear friend, you are faithful in whatever you do for the brothers and sisters, even though they are strangers to you. They have told the church about your love. Please send them on their way in a manner that honors God. It was for the sake of the Name that they went out receiving no help from the pagans" (3 John 5ff.). And truly, with the Holy Spirit speaking through him, [John] foretells what will happen in the churches, even then condemning those who desire to have the first place, Diotrephes, who does not receive us. Therefore, when I come, I will call attention to the works he is doing, spreading malicious nonsense about us. Not satisfied with that, he even refuses to welcome other believers. He also stops those who want to do so and puts them out of the church. Truly, it is now evident that what was predicted [has come true]: in many cities, bishops or priests, if they see laypeople being hospitable, lovers of good, [they] envy, become angry, excommunicate, and expel them from the Church, as if it were not lawful to do what the bishop does not do: and that such laypeople should be damned by the priests. Therefore, [the priests] hold them [i.e. the laypeople] in heavy burdens, and, as if imposed on their own necks, they turn them away from good work and disturb them with various persecutions. But let the bishop be chaste, whom the Greeks call σώφρονα; and the Latin interpreter, being deceived by the ambiguity of the word, translated it as "prudent" instead of "chaste". But if it is ordered for lay people to abstain from sexual intercourse during prayer, what should be thought of a bishop who will offer God the unstained victims daily for his own and the people's sins? Let us turn to the books of the Kings and find priest Abimelech who did not want to give bread to David and his men until he questioned whether they were pure from women. And unless he had heard that they had been pure from work with their wives yesterday and the day before, he would not have allowed the loaves that he had previously denied. There is as much difference between the loaves of the offering and the body of Christ as there is between shadow and body, image and truth, exemplars of the future and the very things that were foreshadowed by the exemplars. Therefore, just as meekness, patience, sobriety, moderation, renunciation of gain, hospitality, and kindness must be especially present in the bishop and outstanding among all laymen, so must personal chastity and (if I may say so) priestly modesty be present, so that the mind, which will make Christ's body, is free not only from unclean works but also from the error of the eye and thought. And the bishop also should be just and holy so that he may exercise justice among the peoples whom he presides over and give to each what he deserves, not showing partiality in judgment. The difference between laypersons and bishops in justice consists in this: a layperson can appear just in a few things, while a bishop can exercise justice in as many people as he has subjects. But sanctus, which in Greek is called ὅσιος, signifies this more: when sanctity itself is mixed with piety and refers to God. For whom we call sanctum, the Greeks call ἅγιον; but whom they call ὅσιον, we can call pious towards God. Let the bishop also be abstinent: not only (as some think) from lust and embracing his wife, but from all disturbances of the soul, so that he not be roused to anger, not be cast down by sadness, not be agitated by fear nor lifted up by excessive joy. Abstinence, moreover, has been counted among the fruits of the spirit by the Apostle. And if it is required of all, how much more from a bishop, who must bear the sins of sinners with patience and gentleness: console the fearful: sustain the weak: render no evil for evil, but overcome evil with good. Finally, let him hold fast to the faithful word which is according to doctrine, so that just as the word of God is faithful and worthy of every acceptance, so he may present himself in such a way that everything he says is considered worthy of faith, and his words are a rule of truth. Let him also be able to console those who are agitated by the turmoil of this age and to destroy weak precepts through sound doctrine. Sound doctrine is said, in distinction to weak and frail doctrine. Let him also be such that he can refute contradicting heretics or Jews and the wise of this age. And indeed, the virtues that he has placed in the bishop pertain to life. But what he says here, that he may be able to console in sound doctrine and to refute the contradicting, refers to knowledge. For if a bishop's only holy life, it can benefit him to live so. Moreover, if he is learned in doctrine and speech, he can instruct himself and others, and not only instruct and teach his own but also strike back at adversaries, who unless they are refuted and convicted, can easily pervert the hearts of the simple. This passage is against those who think it is a sin to read scriptures and who despise those who meditate day and night on the Law of the Lord, as though they were useless talkers, not realizing that the Apostle, after the catalogue of the bishop's conversation, likewise commanded doctrine.

Source: Commentary on Titus
[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Titus 1:9
When Paul describes the character of those who are called bishops and portrays what sort of a man a bishop ought to be, he instructs that he should be a teacher. He must be “able also to refute the adversaries,” that by his wisdom he may restrain those who speak vainly and deceive souls. He prefers for the episcopate a man once married rather than one twice married, and a man unblamable rather than blameable, and a sober man rather than one not of this character, and a prudent man rather than one imprudent, and an orderly man rather than one even slightly disorderly. In the same way he most wishes that the one who is to be selected as bishop should be a teacher and capable of “refuting adversaries.”

Source: AGAINST CELSUS 3.48
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:9
“For the bishop,” he says, “must hold to the faithful word which is according to the teaching, that he may be able to convict even the gainsayers.” How, then, if he is inexperienced at speaking, as they say, will he be able to convict the objectors and to stop their mouths? If it is permissible to welcome such inexperience in the episcopacy, then why should any church leader bother to read books and study the Scriptures? This is all just a pretense and excuse and a pretext for carelessness and indolence.

Source: ON THE PRIESTHOOD 4.8
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:9
There is need not of pomp of words but of strong minds, of skill in the Scriptures and of powerful thoughts. Do you not see that Paul put to flight the whole world, that he was more powerful than Plato and all the rest?

Source: HOMILIES ON TITUS 2
[AD 420] Jerome on Titus 1:9
To Titus he gives commandment that among a bishop’s other virtues [which he briefly describes] he should be careful to seek a knowledge of the Scriptures. A bishop, he says, must hold fast “the faithful word as he has been taught that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.” In fact, want of education in a clergyman prevents him from doing good to any one but himself. Even if the virtue of his life may build up Christ’s church, he does it an injury as great by failing to resist those who are trying to pull it down.

Source: LETTERS 53.3
[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Titus 1:9
If anyone says, however, that if teachers are made learned by the Holy Spirit then they do not need to be taught by educators what they should say or how they should say it, he should also say that we should not pray because the Lord says, “for your Father knows what is needful for you, before you ask him.” With such a false premise one might argue that the apostle Paul should not have taught Timothy and Titus what or how they should teach others. One upon whom is imposed the personage of a teacher in the church should have these three apostolic epistles before his eyes. Do we not read in the first epistle to Timothy … and in the second epistle is it not said … again, does he not say to Titus that a bishop should persevere in “that faithful word which is according to doctrine, that he may be able to exhort in sound doctrine and to convince the gainsayers”?

Source: ON CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE 4.16.33
[AD 108] Ignatius of Antioch on Titus 1:10
I therefore, yet not I, out the love of Jesus Christ, "entreat you that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind, and in the same judgment." For there are some vain talkers and deceivers, not Christians, but Christ-betrayers, bearing about the name of Christ in deceit, and "corrupting the word" of the Gospel; while they intermix the poison of their deceit with their persuasive talk, as if they mingled aconite with sweet wine, that so he who drinks, being deceived in his taste by the very great sweetness of the draught, may incautiously meet with his death. One of the ancients gives us this advice, "Let no man be called good who mixes good with evil." For they speak of Christ, not that they may preach Christ, but that they may reject Christ; and they speak of the law, not that they may establish the law, but that they may proclaim things contrary to it. For they alienate Christ from the Father, and the law from Christ. They also calumniate His being born of the Virgin; they are ashamed of His cross; they deny His passion; and they do not believe His resurrection. They introduce God as a Being unknown; they suppose Christ to be unbegotten; and as to the Spirit, they do not admit that He exists. Some of them say that the Son is a mere man, and that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are but the same person, and that the creation is the work of God, not by Christ, but by some other strange power.

Source: Epistle of Ignatius to the Trallians
[AD 215] Clement of Alexandria on Titus 1:10
"For there are "he says, "many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers: "
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:10-11
Do you see how he shows that they are such? From their not wishing to be ruled, but to rule. For he has glanced at this. When therefore you can not persuade them, do not give them charges, but stop their mouths, for the benefit of others. But of what advantage will this be, if they will not obey, or are unruly? Why then should he stop their mouths? In order that others may be benefited by it.

"Who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not for filthy lucre's sake."

For if he has undertaken the office of a Teacher, and is not able to combat these enemies, and to stop their mouths who are so shameless, he will become in each case the cause of their destination who perish. And if some one has thus advised, "Seek not to be a judge, unless you can take away iniquity" [Sirach 7:6]; much more may we say here, "Seek not to be a Teacher, if you are unequal to the dignity of the office; but though dragged to it, decline it." Do you see that the love of power, the love of filthy lucre, is the cause of these evils? "Teaching things which they ought not," he says, "for filthy lucre's sake."

Moral . For there is nothing which is not spoiled by these passions. But as when violent winds, falling on a calm sea, turn it up from its foundation, and mingle the sand with the waves, so these passions assailing the soul turn all upside down, and dim the clearness of the mental sight, but especially does the mad desire of glory. For a contempt for money any one may easily attain, but to despise the honor that proceeds from the multitude, requires a great effort, a philosophic temper, a certain angelic soul that reaches to the very summit of heaven. For there is no passion so tyrannical, so universally prevalent, in a greater or less degree indeed, but still everywhere. How then shall we subdue it, if not wholly, yet in some little part? By looking up to heaven, by setting God before our eyes, by entertaining thoughts superior to earthly things. Imagine, when you desire glory, that you have already attained it, and mark the end, and you will find it to be nothing. Consider with what loss it is attended, of how many and how great blessings it will deprive you. For you will undergo the toils and danger, yet be deprived of the fruits and rewards of them. Consider that the majority are bad, and despise their opinion. In the case of each individual, consider what the man is, and you will see how ridiculous a thing is glory, that it is rather to be called shame.

And after this, lift up your thoughts to the theater above. When in doing any good you consider that it ought to be displayed to men, and you seek for some spectators of the action, and art in travail to be seen, reflect that God beholds you, and all that desire will be extinguished. Retire from the earth, and look to that theater that is in Heaven. If men should praise you, yet hereafter they will blame you, will envy you, will assail your character; or if they do not, yet their praise will not benefit you. It is not so with God. He delights in praising our virtuous deeds. Have you spoken well, and obtained applause? What have you gained? For if those who applauded you were benefited, changed in their minds, become better men, and had desisted from their evil deeds, then might thou indeed rejoice, not at the praises bestowed, but at the wonderful change for the better. But if they continue their praises, and loud plaudits, but gain no good by what they applaud, you ought rather to grieve: for these things turn to their judgment and condemnation. But you obtain glory for your piety. If you are truly pious, and conscious of no guilt, you should rejoice, not because thou are reputed pious, but because you are so. But if, without being so, you desire the good opinion of the multitude, consider that they will not be your judges at the last day, but He who knows perfectly the things that are hid. And if while conscious of guilt, you are supposed by all to be pure, instead of rejoicing, you should grieve and mourn bitterly, keeping constantly in view that Day, in which all things will be revealed, in which the hidden things of darkness will be brought to light.

Do you enjoy honor? Reject it, knowing that it renders you a debtor. Does no one honor you? You ought to rejoice at it. For God will not lay to your charge this, among other things, that you have enjoyed honor. Do you see not that God upbraids Israel with this among other things, by his prophet, "I took of your sons for Prophets, and of your young men for sanctification"? [Amos 2:11, Septuagint] You will therefore gain this advantage at least, that you will not aggravate your punishment. For he who is not honored in the present life, who is despised, and held in no consideration, but is insulted and scorned, gains this at least, if nothing else, that he has not to answer for being honored by his fellow-servants. And on many other accounts he gains by it. He is brought down and humbled, nor if he would, can he be high-minded, if he takes the more heed to himself. But he, who enjoys more honor, besides being responsible for great debts, is lifted up into arrogance and vainglory, and becomes the slave of men; and as this tyranny increases, he is compelled to do many things which he would not.

Knowing therefore that it is better to want glory, than to possess it, let us not seek for honors, but evade them when they are offered, let us cast them from us, let us extinguish that desire. This we have said at once to the rulers of the church, and to those under their rule. For a soul desirous of honor, and of being glorified, shall not see the kingdom of heaven. This is not my own saying. I speak not my own words, but those of the Spirit of God. He shall not see it, though he practice virtue. For he says, "They have their reward." [Matthew 6:5] He then, who has no reward to receive, how shall he see the kingdom of heaven? I forbid you not to desire glory, but I would wish it to be the true glory, that which proceeds from God. "Whose praise," it is said, "is not of men, but of God." [Romans 2:29] Let us be pious in secret, not cumbered with parade, and show, and hypocrisy. Let us cast away the sheep's clothing, and rather let us become sheep. Nothing is more worthless than the glory of men. Should thou see a company of little children, mere sucklings, would you desire glory from them? sayest.}--> Be thus affected towards all men with respect to glory.

It is for this reason called vainglory. Do you see the masks worn by stage-players? How beautiful and splendid they are, fashioned to the extreme height of elegance. Can you show me any such real countenance? By no means. What then? Did you ever fall in love with them? No. Wherefore? Because they are empty, imitating beauty, but not being really beautiful. Thus human glory is empty, and an imitation of glory: it is not true glory. That beauty only which is natural, which is within, is lasting: that which is put on externally often conceals deformity, conceals it from men until the evening. But when the theater breaks up, and the masks are taken off, each appears what he really is.

Let us therefore pursue truth, and not be as if we were on the stage and acting a part. For of what advantage is it, tell me, to be gazed at by a multitude? It is vainglory, and nothing else. For return to your house, and solitude, and immediately all is gone. You have gone to the market-place, you have turned upon you the eyes of all present. What have you gained? Nothing. It vanished, and passed away like dissolving smoke. Do we then love things thus unsubstantial? How unreasonable is this! What madness! To one thing only let us look, to the never seek the praise of men; but if it falls to us, we shall despise, deride, and reject it. We shall be affected as those who desire gold, but receive clay. Let not any one praise you, for it profits nothing; and if he blame you, it harms you not. But with God praise and blame are attended with real gain and loss, while all is vain that proceeds from men. And herein we are made like God, that He needs not glory from men. "I receive not," said Christ, "honor from men." [John 5:41] Is this then a light thing, tell me? When you are unwilling to despise glory, say, "By despising it, I shall resemble God," and immediately you will despise it. But it is impossible that the slave of glory should not be a slave to all, more servile than slaves in reality. For we do not impose upon our slaves such tasks, as glory exacts from her captives. Base and shameful are the things she makes them say, and do, and suffer, and when she sees them obedient, she is the more urgent in her commands.

Let us fly then, I entreat you, let us fly from this slavery. But how shall we be able? If we think seriously of what is in this world, if we observe that things present are a dream, a shadow, and nothing better; we shall easily overcome this desire, and neither in little nor in great things shall be led captive by it. But if in little things we do not despise it, we shall easily be overcome by it in the most important. Let us therefore remove far from us the sources of it, and these are, folly, and meanness of mind, so that, if we assume a lofty spirit, we shall be able to look beyond honor from the multitude, and to extend our views to heaven, and obtain the good things there. Of which God grant that we may all be partakers, by the grace and lovingkindness of our Lord Jesus Christ, with whom, etc.

Source: Homily 82 on Titus
[AD 420] Jerome on Titus 1:10-11
For there are many who are not subject, vain talkers, and deceivers of minds: especially those who are of the circumcision, who must be indicated as silent: who overturn whole houses, teaching what they ought not, for the sake of base gain. Let him who is to be a prince of the Church have eloquence associated with integrity of life, lest his works be taciturn without speech, and let his words blush when his deeds fail: especially when they are not a few, but many: neither subject, but insolent, who do not care to say what the Psalmist says: Is not my soul subject to God (Ps. 61:1)? But let them overthrow the good seed of minds, which naturally have knowledge of God, with empty persuasion. For this, it seems to me that Paul meant when he said "deceivers", not as the Latin interpreter simply translated "deceivers", but "deceivers of the mind". And indeed, without the authority of the Scriptures, their talk would not have faith, unless their perverse doctrine appeared to be confirmed by divine testimonies. These are of the circumcision of the Jews, who at that time were striving to subvert the nascent Church of Christ and to introduce legal precepts, on which Paul explains more fully both to the Romans and to the Galatians. And just a few months ago, we presented three volumes on the explanation of the Letter to the Galatians. Men of such a kind, as the Doctor of the Church, to whom the souls of the people are entrusted, ought to surpass with reason the Scriptures, and to impose silence upon them in evidence: they overthrow not merely one or few houses, but all homes with owners and families, teaching [them] about differences of foods, about the long-ago abolition of the Sabbath, about the harm of circumcision: and if they did this very thing by zeal for the faith, it might be pardoned to some extent, with the Apostle saying: I bear witness that they have zeal for God, but not according to knowledge (Romans 10:2). But because God is their belly, they willingly seek to make their own disciples for shameful gain, so that they may be fed by their followers as masters. But we can interpret this, which has been said for the sake of shameful gain, in another way: that we may think the Apostle used a common word, by which all heretics with their perverse teachings usually assert that they are gainers of men. When in fact it is not gain, but destruction, deceiving the souls of the deluded. On the contrary, he who has corrected his erring brother according to the Gospel, if he was converted, has gained him. For what greater gain can there be or what is more precious than if one gains a human soul? Therefore, every teacher of the Church who persuades rightly by the reason of faith in Christ is an honest gainer. And every heretic who deceives and is deceived by certain tricks of men, speaks what ought not to be spoken, for the sake of shameful gain.

Source: Commentary on Titus
[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Titus 1:11
Reborn in Christ, they are still not pure Christians; they wish for the law to be partly venerated, for Christ to be partly venerated, all of this as if to profit from the Jews.

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE LETTER TO TITUS
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:11
Whose mouths must be stopped.
Do you see how he shows that they are such? From their not wishing to be ruled, but to rule. For he has glanced at this. When therefore you can not persuade them, do not give them charges, but stop their mouths, for the benefit of others. But of what advantage will this be, if they will not obey, or are unruly? Why then should he stop their mouths? In order that others may be benefited by it.

Who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not for filthy lucre's sake.
For if he has undertaken the office of a Teacher, and is not able to combat these enemies, and to stop their mouths who are so shameless, he will become in each case the cause of their destination who perish. And if some one has thus advised, Seek not to be a judge, unless you can take away iniquity Sirach 7:6; much more may we say here, Seek not to be a Teacher, if you are unequal to the dignity of the office; but though dragged to it, decline it. Do you see that the love of power, the love of filthy lucre, is the cause of these evils? Teaching things which they ought not, he says, for filthy lucre's sake.

Moral . For there is nothing which is not spoiled by these passions. But as when violent winds, falling on a calm sea, turn it up from its foundation, and mingle the sand with the waves, so these passions assailing the soul turn all upside down, and dim the clearness of the mental sight, but especially does the mad desire of glory. For a contempt for money any one may easily attain, but to despise the honor that proceeds from the multitude, requires a great effort, a philosophic temper, a certain angelic soul that reaches to the very summit of heaven. For there is no passion so tyrannical, so universally prevalent, in a greater or less degree indeed, but still everywhere. How then shall we subdue it, if not wholly, yet in some little part? By looking up to heaven, by setting God before our eyes, by entertaining thoughts superior to earthly things. Imagine, when you desire glory, that you have already attained it, and mark the end, and you will find it to be nothing. Consider with what loss it is attended, of how many and how great blessings it will deprive you. For you will undergo the toils and danger, yet be deprived of the fruits and rewards of them. Consider that the majority are bad, and despise their opinion. In the case of each individual, consider what the man is, and you will see how ridiculous a thing is glory, that it is rather to be called shame.

And after this, lift up your thoughts to the theater above. When in doing any good you consider that it ought to be displayed to men, and you seek for some spectators of the action, and art in travail to be seen, reflect that God beholds you, and all that desire will be extinguished. Retire from the earth, and look to that theater that is in Heaven. If men should praise you, yet hereafter they will blame you, will envy you, will assail your character; or if they do not, yet their praise will not benefit you. It is not so with God. He delights in praising our virtuous deeds. Have you spoken well, and obtained applause? What have you gained? For if those who applauded you were benefited, changed in their minds, become better men, and had desisted from their evil deeds, then might thou indeed rejoice, not at the praises bestowed, but at the wonderful change for the better. But if they continue their praises, and loud plaudits, but gain no good by what they applaud, you ought rather to grieve: for these things turn to their judgment and condemnation. But you obtain glory for your piety. If you are truly pious, and conscious of no guilt, you should rejoice, not because thou are reputed pious, but because you are so. But if, without being so, you desire the good opinion of the multitude, consider that they will not be your judges at the last day, but He who knows perfectly the things that are hid. And if while conscious of guilt, you are supposed by all to be pure, instead of rejoicing, you should grieve and mourn bitterly, keeping constantly in view that Day, in which all things will be revealed, in which the hidden things of darkness will be brought to light.

Do you enjoy honor? Reject it, knowing that it renders you a debtor. Does no one honor you? You ought to rejoice at it. For God will not lay to your charge this, among other things, that you have enjoyed honor. Do you see not that God upbraids Israel with this among other things, by his prophet, I took of your sons for Prophets, and of your young men for sanctification? Amos 2:11, Septuagint You will therefore gain this advantage at least, that you will not aggravate your punishment. For he who is not honored in the present life, who is despised, and held in no consideration, but is insulted and scorned, gains this at least, if nothing else, that he has not to answer for being honored by his fellow-servants. And on many other accounts he gains by it. He is brought down and humbled, nor if he would, can he be high-minded, if he takes the more heed to himself. But he, who enjoys more honor, besides being responsible for great debts, is lifted up into arrogance and vainglory, and becomes the slave of men; and as this tyranny increases, he is compelled to do many things which he would not.

Knowing therefore that it is better to want glory, than to possess it, let us not seek for honors, but evade them when they are offered, let us cast them from us, let us extinguish that desire. This we have said at once to the rulers of the church, and to those under their rule. For a soul desirous of honor, and of being glorified, shall not see the kingdom of heaven. This is not my own saying. I speak not my own words, but those of the Spirit of God. He shall not see it, though he practice virtue. For he says, They have their reward. Matthew 6:5 He then, who has no reward to receive, how shall he see the kingdom of heaven? I forbid you not to desire glory, but I would wish it to be the true glory, that which proceeds from God. Whose praise, it is said, is not of men, but of God. Romans 2:29 Let us be pious in secret, not cumbered with parade, and show, and hypocrisy. Let us cast away the sheep's clothing, and rather let us become sheep. Nothing is more worthless than the glory of men. Should thou see a company of little children, mere sucklings, would you desire glory from them? Be thus affected towards all men with respect to glory.

It is for this reason called vainglory. Do you see the masks worn by stage-players? How beautiful and splendid they are, fashioned to the extreme height of elegance. Can you show me any such real countenance? By no means. What then? Did you ever fall in love with them? No. Wherefore? Because they are empty, imitating beauty, but not being really beautiful. Thus human glory is empty, and an imitation of glory: it is not true glory. That beauty only which is natural, which is within, is lasting: that which is put on externally often conceals deformity, conceals it from men until the evening. But when the theater breaks up, and the masks are taken off, each appears what he really is.

Let us therefore pursue truth, and not be as if we were on the stage and acting a part. For of what advantage is it, tell me, to be gazed at by a multitude? It is vainglory, and nothing else. For return to your house, and solitude, and immediately all is gone. You have gone to the market-place, you have turned upon you the eyes of all present. What have you gained? Nothing. It vanished, and passed away like dissolving smoke. Do we then love things thus unsubstantial? How unreasonable is this! What madness! To one thing only let us look, to the never seek the praise of men; but if it falls to us, we shall despise, deride, and reject it. We shall be affected as those who desire gold, but receive clay. Let not any one praise you, for it profits nothing; and if he blame you, it harms you not. But with God praise and blame are attended with real gain and loss, while all is vain that proceeds from men. And herein we are made like God, that He needs not glory from men. I receive not, said Christ, honor from men. John 5:41 Is this then a light thing, tell me? When you are unwilling to despise glory, say, By despising it, I shall resemble God, and immediately you will despise it. But it is impossible that the slave of glory should not be a slave to all, more servile than slaves in reality. For we do not impose upon our slaves such tasks, as glory exacts from her captives. Base and shameful are the things she makes them say, and do, and suffer, and when she sees them obedient, she is the more urgent in her commands.

Let us fly then, I entreat you, let us fly from this slavery. But how shall we be able? If we think seriously of what is in this world, if we observe that things present are a dream, a shadow, and nothing better; we shall easily overcome this desire, and neither in little nor in great things shall be led captive by it. But if in little things we do not despise it, we shall easily be overcome by it in the most important. Let us therefore remove far from us the sources of it, and these are, folly, and meanness of mind, so that, if we assume a lofty spirit, we shall be able to look beyond honor from the multitude, and to extend our views to heaven, and obtain the good things there. Of which God grant that we may all be partakers, by the grace and lovingkindness of our Lord Jesus Christ, with whom, etc.
[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Titus 1:11
But I, pierced with such grief as I am, what can I do except speak? Or do they do such things and then say to me: “Be silent”? May the Lord preserve me from such cowardice that I should hold my peace through fear of their wrath, when he commands me through his apostle, saying that “they ought to be reproved” by the bishop for “teaching the things which they ought not.” … For when God commands that we speak and preach the word and that we refute and condemn “in season and out of season” those who “teach the things which they ought not”—as I can prove by the words of the Lord and the apostles—let no man think that I can be enjoined to silence in these matters.

Source: LETTERS 34.4, 35.3
[AD 180] Tatian the Assyrian on Titus 1:12
Though some one says that the Cretans are liars.
[AD 190] Athenagoras of Athens on Titus 1:12
What wonder, too, that others, such as Heracles and Perseus, should be called gods on the ground of their strength? And yet others, as Asclepius, on the ground of their skill? Either their subjects accorded them this honor or else the rulers themselves seized it. Some got the title from fear, others from reverence.… And those who lived later accepted these deifications uncritically.The Cretans always lie; for they, O King,
Have built your tomb, and you are not yet dead.
While you, Callimachus, believe in the birth of Zeus, you disbelieve in his tomb. While you imagine you are hiding the truth, you actually proclaim, even to those who do not realize it, that Zeus is dead.

Source: A PLEA REGARDING CHRISTIANS 30
[AD 220] Tertullian on Titus 1:12
Your Jupiter too, stolen in his infancy, was unworthy of both the home and the nutriment accorded to human beings; and, as he deserved for so bad a child, he had to live in Crete. Afterwards, when full-grown, he dethrones his own father, who, whatever his parental character may have been, was most prosperous in his reign, king as he was of the golden age.

Source: Ad Nationes Book II
[AD 220] Tertullian on Titus 1:12
Comic poets deride the Phrygians for their cowardice; Sallust reproaches the Moors for their levity, and the Dalmatians for their cruelty; even the apostle brands the Cretans as "liars." Very likely, too, something must be set down to the score of bodily condition and the state of the health.

Source: A Treatise on the Soul
[AD 373] Athanasius of Alexandria on Titus 1:12
But the heretic, though he use scriptural terms, yet, as being equally dangerous and depraved, shall be asked in the words of the Spirit, “Why do you preach my laws and take my covenant in your mouth?” Thus, the devil, though speaking from the Scriptures, is silenced by the Savior. The blessed Paul, though he speaks from profane writers, “The Cretans are always liars,” and ‘We are his offspring,” and “Evil communications corrupt good manners,” yet has a religious meaning, as being holy—is “doctor of the nations, in faith and verity,” as having “the mind of Christ.”

Source: COUNCILS OF ARIMINUM AND SELEUCIA 3.39
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:12
It was Epimenides who said this, himself a Cretan, and the reason he was moved to say it is necessary to mention. It is this. The Cretans have a tomb of Jupiter, with this inscription. “Here lieth Zan, whom they call Jove.” On account of this inscription, then, the poet ridiculing the Cretans as liars, as he proceeds, introduces, to increase the ridicule, this passage.For even a tomb, O King, of thee
They made, who never diedst, but aye shalt be.
If then this testimony is true, observe what a difficulty! For if the poet is true who said that they spoke falsely, in asserting that Jupiter could die, as the apostle says, it is a fearful thing! Attend, beloved, with much exactness. The poet said that the Cretans were liars for saying that Jupiter was dead. The apostle confirmed his testimony: so, according to the apostle, Jupiter is immortal: For he says, “this witness is true”! What shall we say then? Or rather how shall we solve this? The apostle has not said this but simply and plainly applied this testimony to their habit of falsehood.… And as to the question, why does he cite the testimonies of the Greeks? It is because we put them most to confusion when we bring our testimonies and accusations from their own writers, when we make those their accusers, who are admired among themselves.… And from what writers should he address them? From the Prophets? They would not have believed them. Since with the Jews too he does not argue from the Gospels, but from the Prophets.

Source: HOMILIES ON TITUS 3
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:12-14
There are several questions here. First, who it was that said this? Secondly, why Paul quoted it? Thirdly, why he brings forward a testimony that is not correct? Let us then offer a seasonable solution of these, having premised some other things. For when Paul was discoursing to the Athenians, in the course of his harangue he quoted these words, "To the Unknown God": and again, "For we also are His offspring, as certain also of your own poets have said." [Acts 17:23-28] It was Epimenides who said this, himself a Cretan, and whence he was move moved to say it is necessary to mention. It is this. The Cretans have a tomb of Jupiter, with this inscription. "Here lies Zan, whom they call Jove." On account of this inscription, then, the poet ridiculing the Cretans as liars, as he proceeds, introduces, to increase the ridicule, this passage.

For even a tomb, O King, of you

They made, who never died, but aye shall be.

If then this testimony is true, observe what a difficulty! For if the poet is true who said that they spoke falsely, in asserting that Jupiter could die, as the Apostle says, it is a fearful thing! Attend, beloved, with much exactness. The poet said that the Cretans were liars for saying that Jupiter was dead. The Apostle confirmed his testimony: so, according to the Apostle, Jupiter is immortal: for he says, "this witness is true"! What shall we say then? Or rather how shall we solve this? The Apostle has not said this, but simply and plainly applied this testimony to their habit of falsehood. Else why has he not added, "For even a tomb, O king, of you, they made"? So that the Apostle has not said this, but only that one had well said, "The Cretians are always liars." But it is not only from hence that we are confident that Jupiter is not a God. From many other arguments we are able to prove this, and not from the testimony of the Cretans. Besides, he has not said, that in this they were liars. Nay and it is more probable that they were deceived as to this point too. For they believed in other gods, on which account the Apostle calls them liars.

And as to the question, why does he cite the testimonies of the Greeks? It is because we put them most to confusion when we bring our testimonies and accusations from their own writers, when we make those their accusers, who are admired among themselves. For this reason he elsewhere quotes those words, "To the Unknown God." For the Athenians, as they did not receive all their gods from the beginning, but from time to time admitted some other, as those from the Hyperboreans, the worship of Pan, and the greater and the lesser mysteries, so these same, conjecturing that besides these there might be some other God, of whom they were ignorant, that they might be duly devout to him also, erected to him an altar, with this inscription, "To the Unknown God," thereby almost implying, "if there might be some God unknown to them." He therefore said to them, Him whom you have by anticipation acknowledged, I declare to you. But those words, "We also are His offspring," are quoted from Aratus, who having previously said, "Earth's paths are full of Jove, the sea is full" — adds, "For we too are His offspring," in which I conceive he shows that we are sprung from God. How then does Paul wrest what is said of Jupiter to the God of the universe? He has not transferred to God what belongs to Jupiter. But what is applicable to God, and was neither justly nor properly applied to Jupiter, this he restores to God, since the name of God belongs to Him alone, and is not lawfully bestowed upon idols.

And from what writers should he address them? From the Prophets? They would not have believed them. Since with the Jews too he does not argue from the Gospels, but from the Prophets. For this reason he says, "Unto the Jews I became as a Jew, to them that are without law, as without law, to those that are under the Law, as under the Law." [1 Corinthians 9:20-21] Thus does God too, as in the case of the wise men, He does not conduct them by an Angel, nor a Prophet, nor an Apostle, nor an Evangelist, but how? By a star. For as their art made them conversant with these, He made use of such means to guide them. So in the case of the oxen, that drew the ark. "If it goes up by the way of his own coast, then He has done us this great evil" [1 Samuel 6:9], as their prophets suggested. Do these prophets then speak the truth? No; but he refutes and confounds them out of their own mouths. Again, in the case of the witch, because Saul believed in her, he caused him to hear through her what was about to befall him. Why then did Paul stop the mouth of the spirit, that said, "These men are the servants of the most high God, which show unto us the way of salvation"? [Acts 16:17] And why did Christ hinder the devils from speaking of Him? In this case there was reason, since the miracles were going on. For here it was not a star that proclaimed Him, but He Himself; and the demons again were not worshipped ; for it was not an image that spoke, that it should be forbidden. He also suffered Balaam to bless, and did not restrain him. Thus He everywhere condescends.

And what wonder? For He permitted opinions erroneous, and unworthy of Himself, to prevail, as that He was a body formerly, and that He was visible. In opposition to which He says, "God is a Spirit." [John 4:24] Again, that He delighted in sacrifices, which is far from His nature. And He utters words at variance with His declarations of Himself, and many such things. For He nowhere considers His own dignity, but always what will be profitable to us. And if a father considers not his own dignity, but talks lispingly with his children, and calls their meat and drink not by their Greek names, but by some childish and barbarous words, much more does God. Even in reproving He condescends, as when He speaks by the prophet, "Hath a nation changed their gods?" [Jeremiah 2:11], and in every part of Scripture there are instances of His condescension both in words and actions.

Source: Homily 83 on Titus
[AD 420] Jerome on Titus 1:12
You ask me at the close of your letter why it is that sometimes in my writings I quote examples from secular literature and thus defile the purity of the church with the foulness of heathenism.… For who is there who does not know that both in Moses and the prophets there are passages cited from Gentile books and that Solomon proposed questions to the philosophers of Tyre and answered others put to him by them.… The apostle Paul also, in writing to Titus, has used a line of the poet Epimenides: “The Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, slow bellies.” Half of this line was afterward adopted by Callimachus.

Source: LETTERS 70.2
[AD 420] Jerome on Titus 1:12-14
"A certain one of them, their own prophet, said: 'Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.' This testimony is true. For this cause, reprove them sharply, so that they may be sound in the faith, not paying attention to Jewish myths and commandments of people who turn away from the truth." As for the text of the discourse and the context of the passage, what he says: "A certain one of them, their own prophet," seems to be referring to those he spoke of earlier, especially those who are of the circumcision, who must be silenced because they are upsetting entire households by teaching things they should not for the sake of shameful gain. And he continues, "A certain one of them, their own prophet." However, since this hexameter verse is not found in any of the prophets who prophesied in Judah, it seems to me that it should be read in two ways: either that what he says, "A certain one of them, their own prophet," is connected with what came before, in order to correct the things that were lacking in Crete, or that it refers specifically to the Cretans. But because there are many things in between, and this seems absurd and perhaps no one will accept it, therefore, with regard to the things that are closer, it must be read differently from what came before, as follows: "For there are many rebellious people, full of meaningless talk and deception, especially those of the circumcision group; they must be silenced, because they are disrupting whole households by teaching things they ought not to teach, and that for the sake of dishonest gain." A certain one of them, their own prophet, said: so that what is said, "their own prophet," does not refer specifically to the Jews, and especially to those of the circumcision, but rather to many who are rebellious, full of meaningless talk and deception, who must be silenced along with those of the circumcision group, who are disrupting whole households by teaching things they should not, and who, since they were in Crete, should be believed to be Cretans. However, this couplet is said to be found in the oracles of the Cretan poet Epimenides; he called him a prophet, jokingly or allusively, meaning that Christians of such kind deserve to have prophets, just as prophets belonged to Baal and to the confusion of the Jews and to other offenses, and the scriptures mention any wicked prophets, genuinely because he wrote about oracles and responses that also foretold the future and predicted things that were to come long before. Finally, the book itself is titled Oracles, and because it seemed to promise something divine, I think the Apostle looked into it to see what the pagan divination promised, and in due time he used the couplet when he wrote to Titus, who was on Crete, in order to convict the false teachers of Crete with their own teacher. However, Paul is found to have done this not only in this place, but also in others. In the Acts of the Apostles, when he preached to the people, and in the Areopagus, which is the court of the Athenians, he argued, he says among other things: For we are his offspring, as some of your own poets have said (Acts 17), which hemistich is read in the Phaenomena Arati; which Cicero translated into Latin; and Germanicus Caesar, and recently Avienus, and many others, whom to enumerate is too long. To the Corinthians also (1 Cor. 15:33), who were themselves polished by Attic eloquence; and because of the proximity of the places, they were seasoned with the taste of Athenians, he took an iambic verse from Menander's comedy: Evil company corrupts good habits. Nor is it surprising if, for the opportunity of the time, he abuses the verses of pagan poets: for even altering some inscription of an altar, he spoke to the Athenians: "For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you. But the inscription on the altar was not as Paul asserted, to an unknown God, but as follows: To the Gods of Asia, Europe, and Africa; to unknown and foreign gods. But because Paul did not need many unknown gods, but only one unknown God, he used a unique expression; so that he would teach that he was their God whom the Athenians had marked with the title of the altar; and, knowing it correctly, they ought to worship him whom they were ignorant of and could not ignore. But Paul did this seldom, and as the circumstances of the place more than suitability demanded it, in the manner of bees, which are accustomed to compose honey from various flowers and to adapt the cells of their favors. Some consider this verse taken from Callimachus the Cyrenian poet, and are not entirely wrong. In his praise of Jupiter against the Cretans, who boasted about showing his tomb, he says, "The Cretans are always liars, who also built his tomb with a sacrilegious mind." But, as we said above, the whole verse was taken by the Apostle from Epimenides the poet, and Callimachus used his exordium in his poem. Or perhaps he turned the common proverb by which the Cretans were called deceitful into a meter without stealing the labor of others. Some believe that the Apostle should be blamed for having imprudently fallen; and when he rebuked false teachers, he proved that verse by saying that the Cretans were called deceitful because they had built the empty tomb of Jupiter. For they say that Epimenides or Callimachus accused the Cretans of being deceitful and dangerous beasts and lazy gluttons, because they do not feel the divine; and (even though) they create Jupiter, who reigns in heaven, buried on their own island; and this that they said is confirmed by the view of the Apostles: thus it follows that Jupiter is not dead, but alive. Therefore, it was unskillful of Paul, the destroyer of idolatry, while fighting against perverse teachers, to assert that the gods which he was attacking did exist. To this we must briefly respond that, in the case where he said "Evil company corrupts good morals," he did not immediately approve Menander's entire comedy or Aratus' book, but rather he used an opportunity provided by a verse. Similarly, in the present case, he did not confirm the entire work of Callimachus or Epimenides, whose one praises Jupiter and the other writes about oracles through one verse; rather, he only rebuked the Cretans as liars, blaming them for the vice of their people, not due to their opinion, which is praised by poets, but due to their innate ease of lying. But those who think that the whole book ought to be followed by the one who has made use of a part of the book, seem to me to admit the Apocryphal Book of Enoch, ((or of the Enochs)), concerning which Judas the Apostle gave testimony in his Epistle, among the sacred Scriptures of the Church; and many other things which the Apostle Paul spoke of in a hidden way. For we can say this by way of argument: that since he said that he worshipped the unknown God among the Athenians, whom they had written on an altar, Paul ought to follow and do those things also which were written on the altar, and those things which the Athenians were doing, since he had come to an agreement with them in part regarding the worship of an unknown God. Far be it from me to draw argument and scholastic elegance into calumny. There is no one so wicked, so much of a criminal, so much of a poisoner, who has not done something good at some time. Therefore, if I approve of one good thing of his, when I see it, and it is necessary for me to support the rest, which were bad, what is that to be blamed? If he is accused by an enemy against us and cries out, will he not speak some truth among the words of conflicts? And this too, is not always blamed by us against whom he speaks. So Callimachus and Epimenides, did not say that Jupiter is a god, and the rest that is contained in their poems, because the Cretans are deceitful; but they only spoke the truth, because they were expressing the inborn vice of the Cretans in terms of lies: because they are deceitful, they did not always speak the truth. For Jupiter would not cease to be a god even if the Cretans spoke the truth; but nevertheless, while they were silent, he who was dead would not have the name of a god. Finally, let us know that the Apostle spoke against the Cretans not by chance, and not incidentally (as they think), but carefully and watchfully, and defending himself in every way against the Cretans: This is a true testimony, he says; not the whole poem from which the testimony is taken, not the whole work: but only this testimony, this verse in which they are called liars. And certainly he who agreed only in one part of the poem, is to be believed to have refuted the rest. However, we have discussed in the Epistle of Paul to the Galatians how either the Cretans are deceitful and foolish, or the Galatians are hard-necked, or each province is represented by its own vice. And since there is nothing else we can add here, we are content with that. Therefore rebuke them sharply, he says, they are liars and evil beasts, and lazy gluttons, who deceive with falsehoods and thirst for the blood of the deceived like wild animals, and not working in silence, eat their own bread, whose god is their belly, and their glory is in their shame, and rebuke them so that they may be sound in the faith. Speak of the health of faith and what follows: that old men be sober, honorable, chaste, sound in the faith and love and patience, to whose faith the health of teachings is also called. For a time will come, he says, when they will not listen to sound doctrine. There are also speeches of health, of which he speaks in the first letter to Timothy: if anyone teaches differently and does not agree to the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and to the teaching that is according to piety (1 Tim. 6:3). And in the second: Holding the example of sound words that you have heard from me (2 Tim. 1:13). Those who have this health of faith and doctrine and sound words, do not heed Jewish fables and the commands of men who turn away from the truth. Let us acquiesce for a short time to the Jews, and listen patiently to their foolishness, and then we will understand what the Jewish tales are which have no authority from Scripture, nor any rational basis, but are the product of the fables and imaginations of certain people about animals and legends, of whom Isaiah prophesied, saying: "This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. They worship me in vain, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men" (Isaiah 29:13). This is confirmed by the testimony of the Savior in the Gospel, who accuses them of giving preference to the commandments of men over the Law of God. For God said, "Honor your father and mother." They, on the other hand, say, "Whatever gift you might have received from me is Corban, that is, an offering to God" (Mark 7:11-12). Anyone who falls short of circumcision after the coming of Christ is a slave to Jewish myths and the commandments of men, who turn away from truth. For it is not the one who appears to be a Jew outwardly who is, but the one who is in secret; and circumcision is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. Whoever keeps the Passover, but not in the sincerity and truth of unleavened bread, so that he may purge out of his soul all the old leaven of wickedness and malice: this person attends to fables, and follows shadows, neglecting the truth. Whoever does not rise with Christ, nor seek the things that are above, but those that are below, saying, "Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle," which all perish with use, according to the commandments and doctrines of men: this person follows not good justices and not good precepts. But where is truth, and where is the spiritual law, where there are good justification, and the best of precepts is observed, and whoever does them shall live in them.

Source: Commentary on Titus
[AD 428] Theodore of Mopsuestia on Titus 1:12
Having criticized the dangers that arise from Christians of Jewish background, Paul now does the same with Gentile believers. “Of their own” does not refer to the Jews but to a poet or prophet of Gentile background, even one of the Cretans. He wished to criticize the Cretans because they believed they could show the tomb of Jove, even though Jove existed not as a man (as the poet thought) but as a god.

Source: Commentary on Titus
[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Titus 1:12
If you were to hear, even from one who was profane, the prayer of the priest couched in words suitable to the mysteries of the gospel, can you possibly say to him, “Your prayer is not true,” though he himself may be not only a false priest but not a priest at all? The apostle Paul said that certain testimony of a Cretan prophet (he knew not which) was true, though he was not reckoned among the prophets of God.… If, therefore, the apostle himself bore witness to the testimony of some obscure prophet of a foreign race because he found it to be true, why do not we, when we find in any one what belongs to Christ and is true even though the man with whom it may be found is deceitful and perverse? Why do we not in such a case make a distinction between the fault which is found in the man and the truth which he has not of his own but of God?

Source: The Letters of Petilian the Donatist 2.30.69
[AD 458] Theodoret of Cyrus on Titus 1:12
The quote is from Callimachus, who is not a Jewish prophet but a pagan poet. He calls the Cretans liars on account of a tomb of Jove. Paul is not here offering fables but insisting on the inconsistency of the Cretans, for it is true that the one they call Jove is in another place dead and they have built him a tomb.

Source: Interpretation of the Letter to Titus
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:13
Ver. 13. "Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith."

This he says, because their disposition was froward, deceitful, and dissolute. They have these numberless bad qualities; and because they are prone to lying, deceiving, gluttonous, and slothful, severe reproof is necessary. For such characters will not be managed by mildness, "therefore rebuke them." He speaks not here of Gentiles, but of his own people. "Sharply." Give them, he says, a stroke that cuts deep. For one method is not to be employed with all, but they are to be differently dealt with, according to their various characters and dispositions. He does not here have recourse to exhortation. For as he who treats with harshness the meek and ingenuous, may destroy them; so he who flatters one that requires severity, causes him to perish, and does not allow him to be reclaimed.

"That they may be sound in the faith."

This then is soundness, to introduce nothing spurious, nor foreign. But if they who are scrupulous about meats are not sound, but are sick and weak; for, "Them that are weak," he says, "receive, but not to doubtful disputations" [Romans 14:1]; what can be said of those who observe the same fasts, (with the Jews,) who keep the sabbaths, who frequent the places that are consecrated by them? I speak of that at Daphne, of that which is called the cave of Matrona, and of that plain in Cilicia, which is called Saturn's. How are these sound? With them a heavier stroke is necessary. Why then does he not do the same with the Romans? Because their dispositions were different, they were of a nobler character.

Source: Homily 83 on Titus
[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Titus 1:14
Let us see, however, what sort of rule of interpretation the apostle Paul taught us about these matters. Writing to the Corinthians he says in a certain passage, “For we know that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all were baptized in Moses in the cloud and in the sea, and all ate the same spiritual food and all drank the same spiritual drink. And they drank of the spiritual rock which followed them, and the rock was Christ.” Do you see how much Paul’s teaching differs from the literal meaning? What the Jews supposed to be a crossing of the sea, Paul calls a baptism. What they supposed to be a cloud, Paul asserts is the Holy Spirit.… What then are we to do who received such instructions about interpretation from Paul, a teacher of the church? Does it not seem right that we apply this kind of rule which was delivered to us in a similar way in other passages? Or as some wish, forsaking these things which such a great apostle taught, should we turn again to “Jewish fables”?

Source: HOMILIES ON EXODUS 5.1
[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Titus 1:14
But the apostles, who were about to say, “If you are circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing,” and who were also about to say, “Let no one judge you in food, or in drink, or in participation of a feast day, or in new moons, or sabbaths, which are shadows of what will be,” they are prohibited from having two tunics so that they might inwardly and completely repudiate observances of this kind according to the letter of the law and not concern the disciples “with Jewish myths” and “place a yoke on them which neither they nor their fathers would have been able to bear.” But one is sufficient for them, and this one “inward.” For they do not want this tunic of the law that is external but that which comes from above. For Jesus permits them to have one, and that one is “interior.”

Source: HOMILIES ON LEVITICUS 6.3
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:14
Ver. 14. "Not giving heed," he says, "to Jewish fables."

The Jewish tenets were fables in two ways, because they were imitations, and because the thing was past its season, for such things become fables at last. For when a thing ought not to be done, and being done, is injurious, it is a fable even as it is useless. As then those ought not to be regarded, so neither ought these. For this is not being sound. For if you believe the Faith, why do you add other things, as if the faith were not sufficient to justify? Why do you enslave yourself by subjection to the Law? Have you no confidence in what you believe? This is a mark of an unsound and unbelieving mind. For one who is faithful does not doubt, but such an one evidently doubts.

Source: Homily 83 on Titus
[AD 458] Theodoret of Cyrus on Titus 1:14
Paul uses the term “Jewish fables” not to describe the law but the interpretation of the law put forward by the Jews. The Lord accuses them of this very thing when he says, “Why do you transgress the law for the sake of your own traditions?”

Source: Interpretation of the Letter to Titus
[AD 258] Cyprian on Titus 1:15
For, with respect to what you say, that the aspect of an infant in the first days after its birth is not pure, so that any one of us would still shudder at kissing it, we do not think that this ought to be alleged as any impediment to heavenly grace. For it is written, "To the pure all things are pure." Nor ought any of us to shudder at that which God hath condescended to make. For although the infant is still fresh from its birth, yet it is not such that any one should shudder at kissing it in giving grace and in making peace; since in the kiss of an infant every one of us ought for his very religion's sake, to consider the still recent hands of God themselves, which in some sort we are kissing, in the man lately formed and freshly born, when we are embracing that which God has made. For in respect of the observance of the eighth day in the Jewish circumcision of the flesh, a sacrament was given beforehand in shadow and in usage; but when Christ came, it was fulfilled in truth. For because the eighth day, that is, the first day after the Sabbath, was to be that on which the Lord should rise again, and should quicken us, and give us circumcision of the spirit, the eighth day, that is, the first day after the Sabbath, and the Lord's day, went before in the figure; which figure ceased when by and by the truth came, and spiritual circumcision was given to us.

Source: Epistle LVIII
[AD 373] Athanasius of Alexandria on Titus 1:15
All things made by God are beautiful and pure, for the Word of God has made nothing useless or impure.… But since the devil’s darts are varied and subtle, he contrives to trouble those who are of simpler mind, and tries to hinder the ordinary exercises of the brethren, scattering secretly among them thoughts of uncleanness and defilement. Come, let us briefly dispel the error of the evil one by the grace of the Savior and confirm the mind of the simple.… For tell me, beloved and most pious friend, what sin or uncleanness there is in any natural secretion—as though a man were minded to make a culpable matter of the cleanings of the nose or the sputa from the mouth? And we may add also the secretions of the belly, such as are of a physical necessity of animal life. Moreover if we believe man to be, as the divine Scriptures say, a work of God’s hands, how could any defiled work proceed from a pure Power?… But when any bodily excretion takes place independently of will, then we experience this, like other things, by a necessity of nature.

Source: LETTERS TO AMUN 48
[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Titus 1:15
Everything created by God is good; for those who do not know this, they become impure.

Source: Commentary on the Letter to Titus
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:15
Ver. 15. "Unto the pure," he says, "all things are pure."

You see that this is said to a particular purpose.

"But unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure."

Things then are not clean or unclean from their own nature, but from the disposition of him who partakes of them.

"But even their mind and conscience is defiled."

Source: Homily 83 on Titus
[AD 420] Jerome on Titus 1:15
"All things are clean to the clean, but to the unclean and unbelieving nothing is clean; instead, both their mind and their conscience are corrupted." For he had said earlier: "For there are many rebellious people who deceive others with their empty talk and false teaching. This is especially true of those who insist on circumcision for salvation. They must be silenced, because they are turning whole families away from the truth by their false teaching. And they do it only for money." So he is telling Titus to sharply rebuke them, so that their faith will be healthy and they will not waste their time in endless discussion of myths and spiritual pedigrees. This kind of talk only leads to meaningless speculations, which don't help people live a life of faith in God. The Bible clearly states that all things are clean to those who believe in Jesus Christ and know that everything God created is good. But to those who are defiled by sin and unbelief, nothing is clean; in fact, both their mind and their conscience are corrupted. Therefore, even things that are clean by nature become unclean to them. This is not because there is anything inherently unclean or clean, but because of the kind of people who eat them. So, the clean remain clean for the clean, and the unclean become defiled for those who are defiled. Otherwise, even the unbelievers and defiled do not benefit from the bread of blessing and the Lord's cup; for whoever eats of that bread and drinks from the cup unworthily eats and drinks judgment upon themselves (1 Cor. 11). Everything has been cleansed by the coming of Christ. We cannot partake of what He has purified. But let us consider that in handling this, we do not give occasion to that heresy which, according to the Apocalypse (Chapter 2) and even the Apostle Paul himself writing to the Corinthians, thinks that it is right to eat of things offered to idols because all things are clean to the clean (1 Cor. 8). For the Apostle did not intend to discuss those things which are sacrificed to demons, but rather those who, according to the discipline of the abolished Law, regarded some things as clean and others as unclean. For we cannot partake of the Lord's table and the table of demons: nor can we drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons at the same time (1 Cor. 10:20-21). Therefore, it is up to us to eat clean or unclean. For if we are clean, then the creature is clean for us. But if we are unclean and faithless, then all things become common to us, whether through the heresy that dwells in our hearts or through the consciousness of sins. Moreover, if our conscience does not condemn us, and we have confidence in God's mercy, then we will pray with our spirit and with our mind, we will sing praises with our spirit and with our mind (1 Corinthians 14), and we will be far from those of whom it is now written: "Their mind and conscience are defiled."

Source: Commentary on Titus
[AD 425] Severian of Gabala on Titus 1:15
God has made all things pure. If anything is unclean, the use to which it is put makes it so.

Source: PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH
[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Titus 1:15
With all this, no one is pressed to endure hardships for which he is unfit. Nothing is imposed on anyone against his will, nor is he condemned by the rest because he confesses himself too feeble to imitate them. They bear in mind how strongly Scripture enjoins charity on all.… Accordingly, all their endeavors are concerned not about the rejection of kinds of food as polluted but about the subjugation of inordinate desire and the maintenance of brotherly love.

Source: The Morals of the Catholic Church 1.33.71
[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Titus 1:15
The Jews, you see, had accepted that there were certain animals which they could not eat, and others from which they must abstain. The apostle Paul makes it clear that they received this law as a symbolic sign of future realities.

Source: SERMONS 149.3
[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Titus 1:15
But now, when you abstain for the sake of chastising the body from various kinds of food that are in themselves quite permissible, remember that “to the pure all things are pure”; don’t regard anything as impure except what unbelief has defiled; “for to the impure and unbelievers,” the apostle says, nothing is pure. But naturally, when the faithful are reducing their bodies to slavery, whatever is deducted from bodily pleasure is credited to spiritual health.

Source: SERMONS 208.1
[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Titus 1:15
Those likewise are to be detested who deny that our Lord Jesus Christ had Mary as his mother on earth. That dispensation did honor to both sexes male and female and showed that both had a part in God’s care; not only that which he assumed but that also through which he assumed it, being a man born of a woman.… Nor should our faith be lessened by any reference to “a woman’s internal organs,” as if it might appear that we must reject any such generation of our Lord because sordid people think that sordid. “The foolishness of God is wiser than men”; and “to the pure all things are pure.”

Source: On Faith and the Creed 4.9-10
[AD 450] Abba Poemen on Titus 1:15
“If a man has attained to that which the apostle speaks of ‘to the pure, everything is pure,’ he sees himself less than all creatures.” The brother said, “How can I deem myself less than a murderer?” The old man said, “When a man has really comprehended this saying, if he sees a man committing a murder he says, ‘He has only committed this one sin, but I commit sin every day.’ ”

Source: SAYINGS OF THE FATHERS 97
[AD 604] Gregory the Dialogist on Titus 1:15
For, as in the Old Testament outward acts were attended to, so in the New Testament it is not so much what is done outwardly as what is thought inwardly that is regarded with close attention, that it may be punished with searching judgment.

Source: LETTERS 64
[AD 215] Clement of Alexandria on Titus 1:16
"For who of those who are wise would not choose to reign in God, and even to serve? So some "confess that they know God "according to the apostle; "but in works they deny Him, being abominable and disobedient, and to every good work reprobate."
[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Titus 1:16
Ver. 16. "They profess that they know God; but in works they deny Him, being abominable, and disobedient, and to every good work reprobate."

The swine therefore is clean. Why then was it forbidden as unclean? It was not unclean by nature; for, "all things are pure." Nothing is more unclean than a fish, inasmuch as it even feeds upon human flesh. But it was permitted and considered clean. Nothing is more unclean than a bird, for it eats worms; or than a stag, which is said to have its name from eating serpents. Yet all these were eaten. Why then was the swine forbidden, and many other things? Not because they were unclean, but to check excessive luxury. But had this been said, they would not have been persuaded; they were restrained therefore by the fear of uncleanness. For tell me, if we enquire nicely into these things, what is more unclean than wine; or than water, with which they mostly purified themselves? They touched not the dead, and yet they were cleansed by the dead, for the victim was dead, and with that they were cleansed. This therefore was a doctrine for children. In the composition of wine, does not dung form a part? For as the vine draws moisture from the earth, so does it from the dung that is thrown upon it. In short, if we wish to be very nice, everything is unclean, otherwise if we please not to be nice, nothing is unclean. Yet all things are pure. God made nothing unclean, for nothing is unclean, except sin only. For that reaches to the soul, and defiles it. Other uncleanness is human prejudice.

"But unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled."

For how can there be anything unclean among the pure? But he that has a weak soul makes everything unclean, and if there be set abroad a scrupulous enquiry into what is clean or unclean, he will touch nothing. For even these things are not clean, I speak of fish, and other things, according to their notions; (for "their mind and conscience," he says, "is defiled,") but all are impure. Yet Paul says not so; he turns the whole matter upon themselves. For nothing is unclean, he says, but themselves, their mind and their conscience; and nothing is more unclean than these; but an evil will is unclean.

"They profess that they know God, but in works they deny Him, being abominable and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate."

Source: Homily 83 on Titus
[AD 420] Jerome on Titus 1:16
"They confess to know God, but deny Him with their deeds: abominable and disobedient, and disqualified for every good deed." Those whose mind and conscience are defiled confess to know God, but deny Him with their deeds, according to what is said in Isaiah: This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me (Isaiah 29:13). Therefore, just as someone who honors with their lips but moves far away in heart, so anyone confessing God with their words but denying Him with his deeds is. But he who denies God with his deeds, and with a deceitful confession is rightly accursed and profane, and having no reasonable conviction of truth, he is called disobedient and incredulous. So it happens that he is disqualified for every good work: namely, that even those things which he may have done well, having been overcome by his own natural goodness, are not good, while they are corrupt by his distorted state of mind. Some think that only if someone, when captured by Gentiles during persecution, denies themselves as Christians that they would be denying God. But behold the Apostle asserts that God is denied by all perverse deeds. Christ is wisdom, justice, truth, holiness, and strength. Wisdom is denied through foolishness, justice through iniquity, truth through lies, holiness through depravity, and strength through weakness of the soul. And as often as we are overcome by vices and sins, we deny God. Conversely, as often as we do good, we confess God. And it is not to be judged that only those who denied Christ in martyrdom will be denied by the Son of God on the day of judgment, but in all works, words, and thoughts, Christ, either denied, denies or confessed, confesses. Regarding this confession, He commanded His disciples, saying, “You will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth” (Acts 1:8), so that in all good works and words the mind dedicated to Christ may confess Him. There is also a commendable denial, of which the Apostle himself says: "As we deny impiety and worldly desires, we should live chastely, justly, and piously in the present age, while awaiting the blessed hope and coming of our God and Savior" (Titus 2:12). Whoever denies this denial and wants to follow the Savior speaking these words, "Whoever wishes to come after me, let him deny himself" (Luke 9:23), stripped of his old self with its works, and putting on the new, shall follow his God. But how one is to deny oneself must be considered. The chaste denies the fornicator he once was; the wise, the foolish; the just, the unjust; the brave, the weak. In general, we deny ourselves as often as we, trampling on our former vices, cease to be what we were and begin to be what we were not before.

Source: Commentary on Titus
[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Titus 1:16
All the heresies … they all say, “Jesus is Lord.” And he’s not, of course, going to eliminate from the kingdom of heaven those whom he finds to be in the Holy Spirit; and yet he did say, “Not everyone who says to me, Lord, Lord, will enter into the kingdom of heaven.” But: “Nobody can say: Jesus is Lord, except in the Holy Spirit”;40 nobody at all, evidently; but in the sense in which it was meant, that is in deeds.… The same apostle, you see, also says of some people, “They claim to know the Lord but deny it by their deeds.” As it can be denied by deeds, so it can be said by deeds.

Source: SERMONS 269.4
[AD 461] Leo the Great on Titus 1:16
Our peace also has its dangers, dearly beloved. In vain do people feel secure as a result of freedom for their faith if they do not resist the desires of vice. By the quality of works is the human heart made known, and outward actions disclose the beauty of souls. There are some, as the apostle says, who “profess to know God but deny him through their deeds.” Truly the guilt of denial is incurred when the ears have heard what is good but the conscience does not hold on to it. The frailty of the human condition easily slides into sin.

Source: SERMONS 36.4