454 WORKS OF ST. CHRYSOSTOM. [HOMILY XIV. of luxury and self-indulgence, he says that it is not for this only that such a woman is punished, because she is luxurious, but because her luxury compels her to neglect her household. This he says with reason ; for she that liveth to the belly, perishes hereby also, as "having denied the faith." But how is she worse than an infidel? Because it is not the same thing to neglect our kindred, as to neglect a stranger. How should it be? But the fault is greater here, to desert one known than one who is unknown to us, a friend than one who is not a friend. Ver. 9, 10. " Let not a widow be taken into the number under threescore years old, having been the wife of one man. Well reported of for good works." He had said, " Let them learn first to show piety at home, and to requite their parents." He had also said, " She that liveth in pleasure is dead whilst she liveth." He had said, " If she 1 provides not for her own she is worse than an infidel." Having mentioned the qualities which not to have would render a woman unworthy to be reckoned among the widows, he now men tions what she ought to have besides. What then? are we to receive her for her years? What merit is there in that? It is not her own doing that she is threescore years old. There fore he does not speak of her age merely, as, if she has even reached those years, she may not yet, he says, without good works, be reckoned among the number. But why then is he par ticular about the age? He afterwards assigns a cause not originating with himself, but with the widows themselves. Meanwhile let us hear what follows. " Well reported of forgood works, if she have brought up children." Truly, it is no unimportant work to bring up children ; but bringing them up is not merely taking care of them ; they must be brought up well ; as he said before, " If they continue in faith, and charity, and holiness." (i Tim. ii. 15.) Ob- . serve how constantly he sets kindnesses to our own relatives before those to strangers. First, he says, " If she have brought up children," then, " If she have lodged strangers, if she have washed the Saints feet, if she have relieved the afflicted, if she have diligently followed every good work." But what if she be poor? Not even in that case is she debarred from bringing up children, lodging strangers, relieving the afflicted. She is not more destitute than the widow who gave the two mites. Poor though she be, she has an house, she does not lodge in the open air. " If," he says, " she have washed the Saints feet." This is not a costly work. "If she have diligently followed every good work." What precept does he give here? He 1 The feminine is not marked, but implied by his comment; see p. 450. exhorts them to contribute bodily service, for women are peculiarly fitted for such attendance, for making the bed of the sick, and composing them to rest. Strange ! what strictness does he require of widows ; almost as much as of the Bishop him self. For he says, " If she have diligently fol lowed every good work." This is as though he meant that, if she could not of herself perform it, she shared and cooperated in it. When he cuts off luxury, he would have her provident, a good economist, and at the same time con tinually persevering in prayer. Such was Anna. Such strictness does he require of widows. Greater even than of virgins, from whom he yet requires much strictness, and eminent virtue. For when he speaks of "that which is comely," and "that she may attend upon the Lord with out distraction " (i Cor. vii. 35), he gives, in a manner, a summary of all virtue. You see that it is not merely the not contracting a second marriage that is enough to make a widow, many other things are necessary. But why does he discourage second marriages ? Is the thing con demned? By no means. That is heretical. Only he would have her henceforth occupied in spiritual things, transferring all her care to virtue. For marriage is not an impure state, but one of much occupation. He speaks of their having leisure, not of their being more pure by remaining unmarried. For marriage certainly implies much secular engagement. If you abstain from marriage that you may have leisure for the service of God, and yet do not so employ that leisure, it is of no advantage to you, (if you do not use your leisure,) to perform all services to strangers, and to the Saints.2 If you do not thus, you abstain from marriage not for any good end, but as though you condemned the state. So the virgin, who is not truly cruci fied to the world, by declining marriage, appears to condemn it as accursed and impure. Observe, the hospitality here spoken of is not merely a friendly reception, but one given with zeal and alacrity, with readiness, and going about it as if one were receiving Christ Himself. The widows should perform these services them selves, not commit them to their handmaids. For Christ said, " If I your Master and Lord have washed your feet, ye ought also to wash one another s feet." (John xiii. 14.) And though a woman may be very rich, and of the highest rank, vain of her birth and noble family, there is not the same distance between her and others, as between God and the disciples. If thou receivest the stranger as Christ, be not ashamed, but rather glory : but if you receive J The sense is clear, but the Greek admits of no grammatical construction. Downes, as usual, alters it boldly. This translation supposes an abrupt construction, reading fni&ftKvvfi.