For it has been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them who are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.
Read Chapter 1
Ambrosiaster
AD 400
Some people think that “Chloe’s people” are those who remain faithful and bear fruit in the faith of Christ. Others think that Chloe is a place, as if one were to say “Antioch’s people,” for example. But others think that she was a woman devoted to God, in whose company there were many faithful worshipers. Commentary on Paul’s Epistles.
For it hath been declared unto me by them of Chloë. Some think that Chloë is the name of a place, but this place is nowhere else mentioned; nor does the Greek well allow Chloë to be a place. Whence more truly Chrysostom and the Syriac suppose it to be the name of a family or of a woman, and then the meaning Isaiah , I have heard from the family of Chloë. By a similar Greek idiom it is said, Romans 16:10-11: "Salute them which are of Aristobulus, of Narcissus," viz, of the house and family.
Of Chloe. It is worthy our observation, that St. Paul does not here mention any one person in particular, lest he might expose any one to the resentment of the rest, but mentions only in general terms the house of Chloe. (St. Chrysostom; Theophylactus)
Paul is careful to mention who his informers are without singling out one particular person. This gives his criticisms plausibility without allowing the Corinthians to direct their feelings toward any one person.
For it has been signified unto me concerning you, my brethren, by them which are of the household of Chloe. Neither did he say this at the very beginning, but first he brought forward his charge; as one who put confidence in his informants. Because, had it not been so, he would not have found fault: for Paul was not a person to believe lightly. Neither then did he immediately say, it has been signified, lest he might seem to blame on their authority: neither does he omit all mention of them, lest he should seem to speak only from himself. And again, he styles them brethren; for although the fault be plain, there is nothing against calling people brethren still. Consider also his prudence in not speaking of any distinct person, but of the entire family; so as not to make them hostile towards the informer: for in this way he both protects him, and fearlessly opens the accusation. For he had an eye to the benefit not of the one side only, but of the other also. Wherefore he says not, It h...
