Ambrosiaster : The Corinthians were wrong in two ways. First, they were unfaithful, and second, they were expounding God's laws with a show of respect but in reality attributing their authority to idols. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL'S EPISTLES Apostolic Constitutions : It is therefore a noble encomium for a Christian to have no contest with any one; but if by any management or temptation a contest arises with any one, let him endeavour that it may be composed, though thereby he be obliged to lose somewhat; and let it not come before an heathen tribunal. Nay, indeed, you are not to permit that the rulers of this world should pass sentence against your people; for by them the devil contrives mischief to the servants of God, and occasions a reproach to be cast upon us, as though we had not "one wise man that is able to judge between his brethren," or to decide their controversies. — Apostolic Constitutions (Book II), Section 6, XLV Clement of Alexandria : One passage, accordingly, I shall in the briefest terms advert to, so as not to leave the topic unexplained. For in the first Epistle to the Corinthians the divine apostle says: "Dare any of you, having a matter against the other, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints? Know ye not that the saints shall judge the world?" and so on. The section being very long, we shall exhibit the meaning of the apostle's utterance by employing such of the apostolic expressions as are most pertinent, and in the briefest language, and in a sort of cursory way, interpreting the discourse in which he describes the perfection of the Gnostic. For he does not merely instance the Gnostic as characterized by suffering wrong rather than do wrong; but he teaches that he is not mindful of injuries, and does not allow him even to pray against the man who has done him wrong. For he knows that the Lord expressly enjoined "to pray for enemies." To say, then, that the man who has been injured goes to law before the unrighteous, is nothing else than to say that he shows a wish to retaliate, and a desire to injure the second in return, which is also to do wrong likewise himself. And his saying, that he wishes "some to go to law before the saints," points out those who ask by prayer that those who have done wrong should suffer retaliation for their injustice, and intimates that the second are better than the former; but they are not yet obedient, if they do not, having become entirely free of resentment, pray even for their enemies. — The Stromata Book 7 Cyprian : That believers who differ among themselves ought not to refer to a Gentile judge. In the first Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: "Dares any of you, having a matter against other, to discuss it among the unrighteous, and not among the saints? Know ye not that the saints shall judge this world? " And again: "Now indeed there is altogether a fault among you, because ye have judgments one against another. Wherefore do ye not rather suffer injury? or wherefore are ye not rather defrauded? But ye do wrong, and defraud, and this your brethren. Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not obtain the kingdom of God? " — Treatise XII Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews John Chrysostom : "Dare any one of you, having a matter against his brother, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints?" Here also he again makes his complaint upon acknowledged grounds; for in that other place he says, "It is actually reported that there is fornication among you." And in this place, "Dare any one of you?" From the very first outset giving signs of his anger, and implying that the thing spoken of comes of a daring and lawless spirit. Now wherefore did he bring in by the way that discourse about covetousness and about the duty of not going to law without the Church? In fulfilment of his own rule. For it is a custom with him to set to right things as they fall in his way; just as when speaking about the tables which they used in common, he launched out into the discourse about the mysteries. So here, you see, since he had made mention of covetous brethren, burning with anxiety to correct those in sin, he brooks not exactly to observe order; but he again corrects the sin which had been introduced out of the regular course, and so returns to the former subject. Let us hear then what he also says about this. "Dare any of you, having a matter, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints?" For a while, he employs those personal terms to expose, discredit, and blame their proceedings: nor does he quite from the beginning subvert the custom of seeking judgment before the believers: but when he had stricken them down by many words, then he even takes away entirely all going to law. "For in the first place," says he, "if one must go to law it were wrong to do so before the unrighteous. But you ought not to go to law at all." This however he adds afterwards. For the present he thoroughly sifts the former subject, namely, that they should not submit matters to external arbitration. "For," says he, "how can it be otherwise than absurd that one who is at variance with his friend should take his enemy to be a reconciler between them? And how can you avoid feeling shame and blushing when a Greek sits to judge a Christian? And if about private matters it is not right to go to law before Greeks, how shall we submit to their decisions about other things of greater importance?" Observe, moreover, how he speaks. He says not, "Before the unbelievers," but, "Before the unrighteous;" using the expression of which he had most particular need for the matter before him, in order to deter and keep them away. For see that his discourse was about going to law, and those who are engaged in suits seek for nothing so much as that the judges should feel great interest about what is just; he takes this as a ground of dissuasion, all but saying, "Where are you going? What are you doing, O man, bringing on yourself the contrary to what you wish, and in order to obtain justice committing yourself to unjust men?" And because it would have been intolerable to be told at once not to go to law, he did not immediately add this, but only changed the judges, bringing the party engaged in the trial from without into the Church. — Homily on 1 Corinthians 16 Pelagius : This proves that there were no Christian judges at that time, because Paul refers to them all as "unrighteous." — COMMENTARY ON THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS 6 Tertullian : And she will have to go forth (from her house) by a gate wreathed with laurel, and hung with lanterns, as from some new consistory of public lusts; she will have to sit with her husband ofttimes in club meetings, oft-times in taverns; and, wont as she was formerly to minister to the "saints," will sometimes have to minister to the "unjust." And will she not hence recognise a prejudgment of her own damnation, in that she tends them whom (formerly) she was expecting to judge? whose hand will she yearn after? of whose cup will she partake? What will her husband sing to her, or she to her husband? From the tavern, I suppose, she who sups upon God will hear somewhat! From hell what mention of God (arises)? what invocation of Christ? Where are the fosterings of faith by the interspersion of the Scriptures (in conversation)? Where the Spirit? where refreshment? where the divine benediction? All things are strange, all inimical, all condemned; aimed by the Evil One for the attrition of salvation! — To His Wife Book II Tertullian : Whence the apostle withal judges, and that in a case of fornication, that "such a man must be surrendered to Satan for the destruction of the flesh; " chiding them likewise because "brethren" were not "judged at the bar of the saints: " for he goes on and says, "To what (purpose is it) for me to judge those who are without? ""But you remit, in order that remission may be granted you by God. — On Modesty Theodore of Mopsuestia : Paul did not want them to be judged by outsiders because he did not want the shortcomings of those who had been taught propriety and righteousness to become a scandal to those outside the church. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH