HOMILY XII.] HOMILIES ON TIMOTHY. 447 is of no solid advantage, though it is attended with many toils, whilst the latter has a lasting and abundant good. As when he bids women " adorn themselves, not with broidered hair, or gold, or costly array : but which becometh women possessing godliness ; with good works." (i Tim. ii. 9, 10.) MORAL. " This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation. For therefore we both labor and suffer reproach." Did Paul then suffer reproach, and art thou impatient? Did Paul labor, and wouldest thou live luxuriously? But had he lived luxuriously, he would never have attained such great blessings. For if worldly goods, which are uncertain and perishable, are never gained by men without labor and pains, much less are spiritual. Well, saith one, but some inherit them. Yet even when inherited they are not guarded and preserved without labor, and care, and trouble, no less than those have that have gained them. And I need not say that many who have toiled and endured hardships have been disappointed at the very entrance of the harbor, and an adverse wind has caused the wreck of their hopes, when they were upon the point of possession. But with us there is nothing like this. For it is God who promised, and that " hope maketh not ashamed." (Rom. v. 5.) Ye who are conversant with worldly affairs, know ye not how many men. after infinite toils, have not enjoyed the fruit of their labors, either being previously cut off by death, or overtaken by misfortune, or assailed by disease, or ruined by false accusers, or some other cause, which amidst the variety of human casualties, has forced them to go with empty hands ? But do you not see the lucky men, says one, who with little labor acquire the good things of life ? What good things ? Money, houses, so many acres of land, trains of servants, heaps of gold and silver ? Can you call these good things, and not hide your head for shame ? A man called to the pursuit of heavenly wisdom, and gaping after worldly things, and calling them " goods," which are of no value ! If these things are good, then the possessors of them must be called good. For is not he good, who is the possessor of what is good? But when the possessors of these things are guilty of fraud and rapine, shall we call them good? For if wealth is a good, but is increased by grasping, the more it is increased, the more will its possessor be considered to be good. Is the grasping man then good ? But if wealth is good, and increases by grasping, the more a man grasps, the better he must be. Is not this plainly a contradiction? But suppose the wealth is not gained wrongfully. And how is this possible? So destructive a passion is avarice, that to grow rich without injustice is impossible. This Christ declared, saying, " Make to yourselves friends of the Mammon of unrighteousness." (Luke xvi. 19.) But what if he succeeded to his father s inheri tance ? Then he received what had been gath ered by injustice. For it was not from Adam that his ancestor inherited riches, but, of the many that were before him, some one must probably have unjustly taken and enjoyed the goods of others. What then? he says, did Abraham hold unrighteous wealth ; and Job, that blameless, righteous, and faithful man, who " feared God and eschewed evil " ? Theirs was a wealth that consisted not in gold and silver, nor in houses, but in cattle. Besides this, he was enriched by God. 1 And the author of that book, relating what happened to that blessed man, mentions the loss of his camels, his mares and asses, but does not speak of treasures of gold or silver being taken away. The riches of Abraham too were his domestics. What then ? Did he not buy them? No, for to this very point the Scripture says, that the three hundred and eighteen were born in his house. (Gen. xix. 14.) He had also sheep and oxen. Whence then did he send gold to Rebekah ? (Gen. xxiv. 22 ; xii. 1 6.) From the gifts which he received from Egypt without violence or wrong. Tell me, then, whence art thou rich? From whom didst thou receive it, and from whom he who transmitted it to thee ? From his father and his grandfather. But canst thou, ascending through many generations, show the acquisition just? It cannot be. The root and origin of it must have been injustice. Why? Because God in the beginning made not one man rich, and another poor. Nor did He afterwards take and show to one treasures of gold, and deny to the other the right of searching for it : but He left the earth free to all alike. Why then, if it is common, have you so many acres of land, while your neighbor has not a portion of it ? It was transmitted to me by my father. And by whom to him? By his forefathers. But you must go back and find the original owner. Jacob had wealth, but it was earned as the hire of his labors. But I will not urge this argument too closely. Let your riches be justly gained, and without rapine. For you are not responsible for the covetous acts of your father. Your wealth may be derived from rapine ; but you were not the plunderer. Or granting that he did not obtain it by robbery, that his gold was cast up some where out of the earth. What then? Is wealth therefore good? By no means. At the same time it is not bad, he says, if its possessor be not covetous ; it is not bad, if it be distributed