Letter 1097: Scripture speaks with precision to those who read carefully.
Isidore of Pelusium→Poluchronios (correspondent of Isidore of Pelusium)|c. 421 AD|Isidore of Pelusium|To Poluchronios (recipient)|AI-assisted
monasticism
On the Epistle to the Romans. On the text: "God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do," and so forth [Romans 1:28].
Since you have written asking for what reason God gave them over to a reprobate mind, I will say this: if you read what comes next, you will both understand and be freed from all uncertainty. For Scripture says, "filled with all unrighteousness" [Romans 1:29]. For after naming the whole of vice in a general way, he then goes through it kind by kind in what follows. If, then, it was not men who were going to be filled, but men already filled, that he gave over, what absurdity would he have committed? But if you think the passage obscure-though in fact it is clear-I will try to interpret it for you more plainly. He did not say, "After they were given over, they were filled," nor again, "They were given over already filled," but, "He gave over men already filled"; that is, he let them go, stripping them of his own help-just as a general, when soldiers will not obey his orders but are defeated through their own fault, abandons them, stripping them of his own skill [strategy]. For those who were already filled with all vice from within themselves, he reasonably gave over by abandoning them, not pushing them into the reprobate mind, but letting go of men who were rushing into it of their own accord.
[Editorial apparatus-variant readings and notes from the printed edition follow:]
(90) After "if indeed" he omits "where," putting in its place "for where." Possinus.
(91) After "premise" he adds "may be granted," or rather transfers it here from the following verse. In the last verse, for "to give forth" he puts "to be." The same [editor].
(92) Not because the prophets foretold future events did those events come to pass; rather, because they were going to come to pass, the prophets foresaw and foretold them. In short, foresight and prediction impose no necessity whatever upon the outcomes of events. This is also the opinion of Athanasius in his homily on the Passion and the Cross of the Lord: "The prophets are foretellers of things to come; for it is not because they speak that the things which happen come to pass, but because they are going to happen, for this reason they foretell them; and it is necessary that the prophets not lie, for they truly see. If [one says], 'Take away the deeds of the Jews,' then Isaiah would certainly not have prophesied such things about them." If again, after certain remarks are interposed: "For since he truly saw, for this reason it was impossible for him to be deceived; for he saw in no other way than as it came to pass; and all the things written beforehand have been fulfilled; for it was not because it was written that they therefore died, but because these things were entirely going to happen, for this reason they were foretold." Ritter.
(94) [marginal variant: "stripping."] [End of editorial apparatus.]
---
60. TO THEOLOGIUS THE DEACON.
On the text: "They not only do these things" [Romans 1:32].
Since you have once again set us to tracking down apostolic treasures (for you said: What is the meaning of, "They not only do these things, but also give approval to those who practice them"? and you added: If giving approval is more grievous than doing, for what reason did Paul rank it in this way?), gather your mind together a little, so as to hunt down the apostolic meaning that flees from us, and listen. Now some, not understanding what was said, but being perplexed just as you are, and supposing that the apostolic wording had been corrupted, interpreted it thus: "Not only those who do these things, but also those who give approval to those who practice them." For so, they said, the ancient copy read, so that doing might be greater than giving approval. [Perhaps... (the text here is corrupt: there follows a passage in which Isidore declines to attack those who did not grasp the meaning, allowing that even if he has the advantage in this matter, they may have the advantage in others, and may have understood things that he himself never even came to conceive)... having stated what is to be understood, I will leave the verdict to those who read it. I say, then, that since to praise those who do wrong is far more grievous than to do wrong oneself, and counts for more toward punishment, it was reasonably said: "They not only do these things, but also give approval to those who practice them." For the one who, after doing wrong, condemns his own sin will be able in time to recover himself, having in the condemnation of his sin the greatest aid toward repentance; but the one who praises wickedness deprives himself of the aid that comes from repenting. Since, therefore, this verdict belongs to a corrupted judgment and to a soul incurably sick, the one who praises the sin is reasonably judged to be far more lawless than the one who does the wrong. For the one will most quickly depart from sin, but the other will not depart from it at all-if indeed each verdict prevails.
On the Epistle to the Romans. On the text: "God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do," and so forth [Romans 1:28].
Since you have written asking for what reason God gave them over to a reprobate mind, I will say this: if you read what comes next, you will both understand and be freed from all uncertainty. For Scripture says, "filled with all unrighteousness" [Romans 1:29]. For after naming the whole of vice in a general way, he then goes through it kind by kind in what follows. If, then, it was not men who were going to be filled, but men already filled, that he gave over, what absurdity would he have committed? But if you think the passage obscure-though in fact it is clear-I will try to interpret it for you more plainly. He did not say, "After they were given over, they were filled," nor again, "They were given over already filled," but, "He gave over men already filled"; that is, he let them go, stripping them of his own help-just as a general, when soldiers will not obey his orders but are defeated through their own fault, abandons them, stripping them of his own skill [strategy]. For those who were already filled with all vice from within themselves, he reasonably gave over by abandoning them, not pushing them into the reprobate mind, but letting go of men who were rushing into it of their own accord.
[Editorial apparatus-variant readings and notes from the printed edition follow:] (90) After "if indeed" he omits "where," putting in its place "for where." Possinus. (91) After "premise" he adds "may be granted," or rather transfers it here from the following verse. In the last verse, for "to give forth" he puts "to be." The same [editor]. (92) Not because the prophets foretold future events did those events come to pass; rather, because they were going to come to pass, the prophets foresaw and foretold them. In short, foresight and prediction impose no necessity whatever upon the outcomes of events. This is also the opinion of Athanasius in his homily on the Passion and the Cross of the Lord: "The prophets are foretellers of things to come; for it is not because they speak that the things which happen come to pass, but because they are going to happen, for this reason they foretell them; and it is necessary that the prophets not lie, for they truly see. If [one says], 'Take away the deeds of the Jews,' then Isaiah would certainly not have prophesied such things about them." If again, after certain remarks are interposed: "For since he truly saw, for this reason it was impossible for him to be deceived; for he saw in no other way than as it came to pass; and all the things written beforehand have been fulfilled; for it was not because it was written that they therefore died, but because these things were entirely going to happen, for this reason they were foretold." Ritter. (94) [marginal variant: "stripping."][End of editorial apparatus.]
---
60. TO THEOLOGIUS THE DEACON. On the text: "They not only do these things" [Romans 1:32].
Since you have once again set us to tracking down apostolic treasures (for you said: What is the meaning of, "They not only do these things, but also give approval to those who practice them"? and you added: If giving approval is more grievous than doing, for what reason did Paul rank it in this way?), gather your mind together a little, so as to hunt down the apostolic meaning that flees from us, and listen. Now some, not understanding what was said, but being perplexed just as you are, and supposing that the apostolic wording had been corrupted, interpreted it thus: "Not only those who do these things, but also those who give approval to those who practice them." For so, they said, the ancient copy read, so that doing might be greater than giving approval. [Perhaps... (the text here is corrupt: there follows a passage in which Isidore declines to attack those who did not grasp the meaning, allowing that even if he has the advantage in this matter, they may have the advantage in others, and may have understood things that he himself never even came to conceive)... having stated what is to be understood, I will leave the verdict to those who read it. I say, then, that since to praise those who do wrong is far more grievous than to do wrong oneself, and counts for more toward punishment, it was reasonably said: "They not only do these things, but also give approval to those who practice them." For the one who, after doing wrong, condemns his own sin will be able in time to recover himself, having in the condemnation of his sin the greatest aid toward repentance; but the one who praises wickedness deprives himself of the aid that comes from repenting. Since, therefore, this verdict belongs to a corrupted judgment and to a soul incurably sick, the one who praises the sin is reasonably judged to be far more lawless than the one who does the wrong. For the one will most quickly depart from sin, but the other will not depart from it at all-if indeed each verdict prevails.
AI-assisted translation - This translation was produced with AI assistance and has not been peer-reviewed. See the 19th-century translation or original Latin/Greek below for scholarly use.