The Apostles presented a type, maintaining in their own persons a certain archetype. Consider how austere their life was, as if offering an archetype, and example, and living laws. For they set forth to all, through their deeds, that which the Scripture said. This is the best teaching, which has power to lead the disciple. You may talk and use fine words, but if your actions do the contrary you are no teacher. The disciple thinks very little of fine words; they should be accompanied by the teaching and leading of works: this makes both the master venerable, and disposes the disciple to agree with him. How so? When he hears a man making a display of words, he says that he has enjoined what is impossible, and that he who is not a doer is the first to prove their impracticability. Now, if he saw a man practising goodness in deed, he would not be able to say this. Moreover, supposing the master’s life be careless, let us rouse ourselves, and listen to the Prophet, saying, _All shall be taught by God_, and again, _They shall teach_ _no more every man his brother, saying: Know the Lord; for all shall know Me, from the least of them even to the greatest_. Have you no righteous teacher? You have the real Master, Him Whom alone you may call Master, learn of Him. _He_ said, _Learn of Me, for I am meek_. Cleave, then, to no teacher, but to Him and to His teaching. Take your model from Him; you have a most excellent one; fashion yourself after it. The Scripture offers us numberless examples of a holy life; choose which you will, and follow the Master with His disciples. One shone by poverty, another through riches; for instance, Elias by poverty, Abraham by his wealth; choose whichever you think the easier and securer. Again, the one was holy through marriage, the other through virginity, as Abraham and Elias: choose your road, for each leads to heaven. John was holy by fasting, and Job without it. Job, moreover, was what he was by despising wife, and sons, and daughters, and house, having great wealth, whilst John possessed nothing except his sheep-skin. And why do I speak of house and abundance and money, since a king has it in his power to win goodness for himself. A royal palace would be found to be far more troublesome than any private house. David, then, shone in his royalty, and his purple and his crown impeded him in nothing: another was entrusted with the leadership of a whole people—I mean Moses—which is a more difficult thing. In the latter, power was greater, therefore the difficulty was greater. Do you see men who gained a good name both in riches and in poverty, in marriage and in continency? Now look, on the other hand, at those who were lost both in marriage and in continency, in riches and in poverty. For instance, many men, living in the married state, have been lost, like Samson, not because of marriage, but through their own will; in virginity, too, as the five virgins; in abundance, as