Cornelius a Lapide
Table of Contents
Synopsis of the Chapter
He treats the second general question put to him by the Corinthians concerning things sacrificed to idols, whether it is lawful to eat them. And he answers first, that in itself this is not unlawful, since an idol is nothing. Secondly, however, he teaches that it is unlawful if done against conscience, or with scandal to the weak, which he insists must be greatly avoided.
Vulgate Text: 1 Corinthians 8:1-13
1. Now concerning the things that are sacrificed to idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but charity edifies. 2. And if any man think that he knoweth anything, he hath not yet known as he ought to know. 3. But if any man love God, the same is known by Him. 4. But as for the meats that are sacrificed to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no God but one. 5. For although there be that are called gods, either in heaven or on earth (for there be gods many and lords many), 6. yet to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things and we unto Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things and we by Him. 7. But there is not knowledge in every one. For some until this present, with conscience of the idol, eat as a thing sacrificed to an idol; and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. 8. But meat doth not commend us to God. For neither, if we eat, shall we have the more; nor, if we eat not, shall we have the less. 9. But take heed lest perhaps this your liberty become a stumblingblock to the weak. 10. For if a man see him that hath knowledge sit at meat in the idol's temple, shall not his conscience, being weak, be emboldened to eat those things which are sacrificed to idols? 11. And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died? 12. Now when you sin thus against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ. 13. Wherefore, if meat scandalize my brother, I will never eat flesh, lest I should scandalize my brother.
Introduction: On Things Sacrificed to Idols
For the understanding of the three following chapters, note: Things sacrificed to idols are what was immolated to idols, for instance flesh, bread, wine, etc., which were offered to idols: they are so called ἀπὸ τοῦ εἴδωλον καὶ θύειν, from immolating to idols. To eat these idol-sacrifices was not in itself a sin, as St. Thomas teaches I II, Quest. CIII, art. 4, ad 3.
Yet it was a sin: first, if it were done out of unbelief, for instance if an idolater ate them for the worship of the idol, or if it were done from weakness of faith, which was frequent in Paul's time. For many were recently converted and untaught, who either had not entirely cast off their opinion concerning idols and idol-sacrifices, as if these had something of divinity or godhead in them; or who from former custom could not overcome their imagination concerning their gods, Jupiter, Minerva, Mars (whom shortly before they had worshipped as gods), and concerning the holiness of foods consecrated to them. For they always pictured these foods as holy and consecrated, even though the faith of Christ dictated the opposite to them.
Secondly, from an erroneous conscience: if anyone, thinking it unlawful to eat an idol-sacrifice, should eat it against conscience, supposing namely that this is communion with idols and a profession of idolatry; or that the flesh is contaminated by the idol, or demon, to which it has been offered, and contaminates the eater, as the Apostle taught, Rom. xiv.
Thirdly, from scandal: if anyone, knowing the idol to be nothing, nevertheless eats idol-sacrifices in front of the weak in order to show his knowledge and liberty, and so provokes them (says Paul, verse 10) either to eat the same against conscience, or to think that the one who eats them is sinning against the faith, or returning to the worship of idols, and is drawing others into the same.
Fourthly, by Apostolic precept, by which the Apostles in Acts xv, 19, forbid the eating of things sacrificed to idols. Fifthly, if a person eats them in such a manner and with such circumstances, e.g., in the idol-temple, while an idolatrous sacrifice is being performed, that it is judged done for the worship of idols, and the eater is judged to profess idolatry; just as he who comes to the Calvinist supper is judged to profess Calvinism. Concerning which case St. Augustine says, in book On the Good of Marriage, chapter xvi, which is cited at 32, Quest. IV, chapter Sicut satius: "It is better to die of hunger than to eat things sacrificed to idols."
How the Emperor Julian, in order to compel the Catholics of Constantinople to some outward show of idolatry, forced all to eat idol-sacrifices. The matter is thus narrated by Nectarius, Bishop of Constantinople, in an oration which he gave at the beginning of the Lenten fast: "He infected and polluted, he says, all the food which was customarily put up for sale publicly in the markets, with sacrifices immolated to the gods, so that all might be forced to eat sacrificial food unless they wished to be consumed by hunger. By an oracle of the martyr Theodore, it was divinely shown how the faithful, who were endangered by hunger, ought to be advised: namely, that then, in place of bread, all should use boiled wheat for food, which the wealthier liberally distributed to the poorer for the whole week, until Julian, despairing of being able to accomplish what he wished, overcome by the continence and constancy of the Christians, again ordered pure food, without any defilement, to be set out in the markets."
Note that he says "overcome by the continence of the Christians": for great and spontaneous was this abstinence of theirs. For although they could have eaten food contaminated by Julian as common food, yet they refused, and that out of hatred for Julian and the idols. That they could lawfully have eaten them is clear, because Julian could not by this contact spoil common food, or render it sacred to demons, in such a way that one who ate it would be judged to worship idols and to profess idolatry. For granted that Julian intended this, yet he alone was one man, nor could he change the common judgment of men, who held that this thing was not idolatrous, but indifferent.
Hence the citizens of Antioch, when Julian had in similar fashion infected their food and drink, freely and without scruple ate and drank the same, as Theodoret narrates, in book I of his History, chapter xiv. Hence St. Augustine, in epistle 154, teaches that it is lawful to eat the herb which grows in an idol's garden, and to drink from the well or fountain which is in the temple of the idol, or into which an idol-sacrifice has fallen. On this matter I will say more in chapter x, verse 21.
Note secondly: At Corinth there were some more learned ones who knew and understood that this was the case, namely that idols together with idol-sacrifices had no power: so they ate them even with scandal to the untaught and weak, and that to display their knowledge and liberty. Others, however, more untaught, either had not entirely cast off their opinion concerning idols and idol-sacrifices, or certainly from former custom regarding them as holy and sanctified could not overcome their imagination as I have said: hence they could easily relapse into them. Hence the Apostle, fearing for them the danger of idolatry, in chapter x, 14, says: "Flee from the worship of idols." So the Corinthians put this question to the Apostle, whether it is lawful to eat idol-sacrifices?
Note thirdly: The Apostle here answers that question first, that the idol and idol-sacrifices have no power; secondly, that idol-sacrifices must be abstained from where there is scandal, and this he does in this chapter. Note fourthly, that the Apostle here only begins his answer to the question of eating idol-sacrifices: for he completes that answer, and replies perfectly in chapter x, verses 20 and 21; for not only is it unlawful to eat them on account of scandal, but also, even when scandal ceases, it is absolutely unlawful to eat them in the idol-temples, that is in the temples, altars, or tables of idols, where they were customarily eaten, in the presence of the idolaters who were offering them. For this would be to profess idolatry, and to worship the idol by the banquet which consummates the sacrifice offered to it: for this banquet was a certain part and perfection of the sacrifice. And so Apoc. II, 14 and 20 must be understood, where the angel, that is the Bishop, of Pergamum and of Thyatira is reproved for having permitted his people to eat of idol-sacrifices, namely as if they were sacred and divine foods, and that in honor of idols. For this was the scandal which King Balak, at the instigation of Balaam, set before the children of Israel; for by these idol-sacrifices the children of Israel were enticed to the worship and adoration of Beelphegor, Num. xxv, 2. For the same reason idol-sacrifices are forbidden in the Council of Gangra, chapter II, and in the III Council of Orleans, chapter XIX.
Note fifthly, that the Apostle is silent about the precept of the Apostles in Acts xv, by which the Apostles absolutely forbid the eating of idol-sacrifices: because that precept was directed only to the Antiochians and their neighbors (as is clear from verse 23 there), where there were very many Jews who execrated idols and idol-sacrifices. For these, together with the Gentiles, had sent envoys to Jerusalem to the Apostles, that they might decide the question concerning the keeping of the legal observances: to whom the Apostles answer that the legal observances are not to be kept; but nevertheless that abstinence is to be made from the eating of idol-sacrifices, and this for the sake of concord between the Jews and Gentiles: although afterwards even other Gentiles, very far removed from Antioch, embraced this Apostolic precept of their own accord, out of reverence for the Apostles, as Baronius shows, in the year of Christ 51, after the middle, p. 441.
Verse 1: Now Concerning Those Things Which Are Sacrificed to Idols
1. NOW CONCERNING THOSE THINGS WHICH ARE SACRIFICED TO IDOLS, WE KNOW — namely, that things immolated to idols do not differ from other foods, nor have they more of divinity or religion, as some of you, O Corinthians, seem persuaded. See Chrysostom.
BECAUSE WE ALL (well and fully instructed in the faith of Christ) HAVE knowledge (that is, sufficient knowledge of Christian things), — by which we know idol-sacrifices to be indifferent.
Knowledge puffs up. — As if to say: This knowledge of yours, by which you know that idols are nothing, and consequently that it is lawful to eat idol-sacrifices, and you eat them with scandal of those ignorant of this: this knowledge, I say, makes you proud against the ignorant, and to despise them. For "puffs up" the Greek is φυσιοῖ, that is, swells up, distends like a bellows stretched out by the wind. For such is windy knowledge. Hence the proud devil is called δαήμων, as it were δαίμων, that is, learned, skilled, knowing, says Plato in the Cratylus. Truly St. Augustine in his Sentences, n. 241: "It is the virtue of the humble, he says, not to glory in knowledge, because it is common to all, just as light, so participation in truth."
Hence it is clear that this puffing-up knowledge is contrary to charity: for it induces contempt of one's neighbors, whereas charity is solicitous for one's neighbors, that it may edify them. Aptly St. Bernard, sermon 36 on the Canticle: "As, he says, undigested food generates bad humors, and does not nourish the body but corrupts it, so from much knowledge ingested into the stomach of the soul (which is memory), if it has not been cooked by the fire of Christ, and so transfused and digested through certain limbs of the soul (namely, behaviors and acts), shall it not be reckoned as sin, as food converted into perverse and noxious humors?"
Verse 2: If Any Man Think That He Knoweth Anything
2. IF ANY MAN THINK THAT HE KNOWETH ANYTHING, HE HATH NOT YET KNOWN AS HE OUGHT TO KNOW. — That is, he who, thinking that he knows something, is thereby puffed up, this man does not yet know what is the end, use, and measure of knowledge, namely, that through knowledge you should not be proud, that you should benefit those whom you can, harm no one, scandalize no one; and so be acknowledged and loved by God, as follows. He notes those who display their knowledge concerning idol-sacrifices, that it is lawful to eat them, and who eat them with scandal to the more untaught.
Beautifully St. Bernard, sermon 36 already cited, explaining this passage of the Apostle: "You see, he says, that he does not approve one who knows much, if he has not known the measure of knowing. The measure is that you know in what order, with what zeal, and to what end each thing is to be known. In what order? that what tends more readily to salvation should come first. With what zeal? that what tends more vehemently to love should be sought more ardently. To what end? that not for vainglory, curiosity, or anything similar, but only for the edification of yourself or your neighbor. For there are those who want to know for the end only of knowing, and that is base curiosity. And there are those who want to know that they themselves may be known, and that is base vanity, who certainly will not escape the mocking Satirist: 'Your knowing is nothing, unless another knows that you know this.' And there are those who want to know in order to sell their knowledge, and that is base gain. But there are also those who want to know in order to edify, and that is charity: and likewise those who want to know in order to be edified, and that is prudence. Of all these, only the last two are not found in the abuse of knowledge, since they wish to understand for this purpose: that they may do good." The same author, in book On Conscience, chapter II: "Many, he says, seek knowledge, few seek conscience. If indeed conscience were sought with as much zeal and care as worldly and vain knowledge is sought, it would be more quickly attained, and more usefully retained."
Verse 3: If Any Man Love God
3. IF ANY MAN LOVE GOD (and for God's sake his neighbor, so that he does not scandalize him by eating idol-sacrifices or by any other thing, but edifies him), THIS MAN IS KNOWN BY HIM, — that is, this man is approved and beloved by God; in his knowledge God is well-pleased.
Note: He who loves God also loves his neighbor, because the love of God commands and orders that one's neighbor be loved for God's sake; and in the love of one's neighbor the love of God is proved and discerned, as John says, Epist. I, chapter iv, 20.
Verse 4: Concerning the Foods Which Are Immolated to Idols
4. CONCERNING THE FOODS WHICH ARE IMMOLATED TO IDOLS, WE KNOW THAT AN IDOL IS NOTHING (as if to say: The idol is not what it is supposed to be, and what it represents is not God. Whence in explaining he adds), AND THAT THERE IS NO GOD BUT ONE. — As if to say: The idol is nothing, that is, it is nothing such as it presents itself to be, because it has no divinity in it; materially it is wood, formally nothing: because it is the image of a false thing, or of a God who does not exist; and consequently the idol-sacrifice as such is nothing, that is, has no divinity or holiness from the idol to which it has been offered.
The Apostle alludes to the Hebrew אליל elil: for an idol is called אליל elil, that is, vanity, an empty, vain thing: or rather, that elil be a diminutive from אל el, that is, strong God, as if to say Elil, that is, a little god, a little strong one: or, as others, elil as if אל אל al el, that is, not God, not having the power and strength of God, helpless to console and aid, as if to say: The idol is not God, but a vain, false, and empty shadow of God. Thus among the ancient Greeks an idol was any empty and lying image, such as vain phantasms, spectres, shades of the dead, and as Virgil says: "Slender lives without body," and "hollow under the image of form." This is clear from Plato in the Theaetetus, from Lucian in the dialogue On the Dead, from Homer Odyssey XI, and Eustathius, in the same place.
"Εἶδος in Greek means form, from which by diminution εἴδωλον is derived, which is the same as little form," says Tertullian, in book On Idolatry, chapter III. Whence Holy Scripture and ecclesiastical writers have restricted the name "idol" to the image of a god who is held to be God but really is not, as is clear here from the Apostle. And throughout the Septuagint in the Old Testament they translate and call the simulacra and gods of the Gentiles "idols."
Therefore Henri Estienne and Johann Scapula in their lexicons are deceived and deceive others when they assert that an idol is called by ecclesiastical writers every simulacrum representing some divinity, which we deem worthy of honor and worship. For not every simulacrum or image of any divinity whatsoever is an idol, but only of a false divinity. So Cyprian, On the Exhortation of the Martyrs, chapter I; Tertullian, in book On Idolatry; Athanasius, oration Against the Idols, near the end.
Therefore that fraud of the Innovators must be guarded against, who confuse an idol with an image, so that, when idols are forbidden in the Scriptures, they conclude that all images are forbidden. See Bellarmine, in book II On Images, chapter v, where he solidly demonstrates that an idol is a likeness of a false thing, but an image is of a true thing.
Verse 5: For Although There Be That Are Called Gods
5. For although there be that are called gods (by the Pagans, and among them are many gods and lords, as follows: gods, I say, both heavenly, such as the sun, moon, stars; and earthly, such as Jupiter, Apollo, Hercules), 6. YET TO US THERE IS BUT ONE GOD, THE FATHER, OF WHOM ARE ALL THINGS, AND WE UNTO HIM, — namely, we are created for His glory and worship.
Note: Scripture attributes to the Father the preposition "of," as to the first principle; to the Son "through," because He is the Idea and the Word, through whom all things were made. Whence the Apostle here: "And one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we through Him," namely we have been created and redeemed. To the Holy Spirit He attributes "in," because the Holy Spirit is the bond and love of the Father and the Son. See what was said on Rom. chapter XI, last verse.
Note against the Arians: When Paul says, "One God," He excludes only false gods, not the Son and the Holy Spirit; likewise when he adds, "One Lord Jesus," he excludes only false lords, that is, gods, not the Father and the Holy Spirit.
Verse 7: But Knowledge Is Not in All
7. BUT KNOWLEDGE IS NOT IN ALL, — namely, the knowledge already mentioned, that the idol and idol-sacrifice are nothing. For, as follows:
BUT SOME (that is, "for some," according to Canon 25) WITH CONSCIENCE OF THE IDOL (from an erroneous conscience supposing that the idol has something of divinity) EAT AS A THING SACRIFICED TO AN IDOL, — that is, with reverence, as a venerable thing, as if it had been offered and sanctified to a divinity hidden in the idol. So Anselm.
Theophylact explains otherwise, as if Paul said: Some eat the idol-sacrifice with an erroneous conscience, by which they think that the idol-sacrifice has been changed by the idol, and physically breathed upon by the demon, just as if it were infected by a diabolical breath, or certainly as if it were morally vitiated and polluted from this — that it is judged to be already a thing of the devil and food of the demon, and so changes and contaminates the eater; therefore they eat the idol-sacrifice with CONSCIENCE OF IT, BEING WEAK, IS POLLUTED. — "In the idol-temple," that is, says Erasmus, at the banquet of the idols; secondly, properly, "in the idol-temple," that is, in the temple or table consecrated to the idols. For there they reclined in order to eat the idol-sacrifices: for that such banquets, being sacred, were customarily set up in the temple, Herodotus teaches in his Clio, Virgil in Aeneid VIII, in the sacrifice of Evander and the banquet with the Trojans. So also the Jews ate peace-offering victims in the court of the temple, Deut. xvi, 11. Hence the Syriac here translates, "if anyone see you reclining among the idols."
Whence it is clear that eating idol-sacrifices in the idol-temple is evil not only on account of scandal, but also in itself, because it is a profession of idolatry, as will be said in chapter x.
Tropologically Anselm: The knowledge of idol-sacrifices is the knowledge of the vanity of the philosophers, poets, and orators of the Gentiles; this must be guarded against. Far be it that there should sound from a Christian mouth: "Jupiter omnipotent," and "By Hercules," and "By Castor," and the rest — portents rather than divinities.
Note: "Will be edified," that is, will be provoked, raised up to eat the idol-sacrifices as if sacred, and as if about to receive some grace thence; or about to sacrifice to some divinity, and so return to idolatry. Others say: "Will be edified," that is, will be provoked, to eat against conscience — by which he thinks that food offered to the idol has been breathed upon and contaminated by it, and that he himself will be thereby contaminated when he eats — as I said in verse 7.
AS THEIR CONSCIENCE IS WEAK (not fully instructed in the faith concerning idol-sacrifices), IT IS POLLUTED. — Because they eat idol-sacrifices against conscience, by the example of others. So Chrysostom.
The Libertines rave, when from this passage they teach that neither fornication, nor drunkenness, nor anything else is a sin unless one forms in himself a conscience and scruple of sin in the matter. They therefore counsel that all conscience must be laid aside, so that you do not sin whatever you do. Therefore the Libertines have no conscience; and consequently they seem to have stripped off both manhood, reason, and every virtue: what madness it is to attribute this to the Apostle! For who does not see that the Apostle here speaks not of sins or unlawful things, but of indifferent things, such as eating idol-sacrifices.
Verse 8: But Food Does Not Commend Us to God
8. BUT FOOD DOES NOT COMMEND US TO GOD. — As if to say: The eating of idol-sacrifices, or of other foods, in itself does nothing for the piety by which God is pleased; therefore we, the stronger ones, should not, as if for piety's sake, wish to use all things indifferently in every place. For here the Apostle turns to the more perfect, warning them to avoid the scandal of the weak. Therefore foolishly, indeed perversely, do the heretics abuse this passage against the choice of foods and the fasts of the Church: for food does not commend us to God, because it is not a virtue: but abstinence from forbidden food is an act of temperance, obedience, and religion, and therefore commends us to God, just as it commended Daniel with his companions, the Rechabites, John the Baptist, and others. See what is said on Rom. xiv, 17.
FOR NEITHER, IF WE EAT (idol-sacrifices), SHALL WE ABOUND, — namely in virtue, merit, and grace, which would commend us before God, as preceded — as if to say: By eating idol-sacrifices nothing great, abundant, copious, nothing of spiritual grace will come to us, so that we should not be eager for them. So Chrysostom.
Secondly, and more simply, that it is a new reason dissuading the eating of idol-sacrifices. The sense is, as if to say: Whether we eat idol-sacrifices, we shall not for that reason abound in foods and delights and goods; or whether we do not eat them, we shall not for that reason lack foods and delights: for it will be permitted to eat others. So we commonly say, whether I am called to this banquet or not, I shall not for that reason be filled or hungry, I shall not for that reason be fatter or thinner, richer or poorer. He shows how foods are paltry and slight things, and therefore are to be omitted on account of scandal, and put after the edification of one's neighbors. So Anselm.
Verse 9: See Lest This Liberty of Yours Become a Stumbling-Block
9. SEE LEST THIS LIBERTY OF YOURS (of eating idol-sacrifices) BECOME A STUMBLING-BLOCK TO THE WEAK. 10. For IF ANYONE SEE HIM WHO HAS KNOWLEDGE (that an idol-sacrifice is nothing), RECLINING IN THE IDOL-TEMPLE: WILL NOT HIS CONSCIENCE, BEING WEAK, BE EMBOLDENED TO EAT IDOL-SACRIFICES?
Verse 12: Thus Sinning Against the Brethren, You Sin Against Christ
12. THUS SINNING AGAINST THE BRETHREN AND WOUNDING (scandalizing, and through scandal wounding) THEIR WEAK CONSCIENCE, YOU SIN AGAINST CHRIST. — For Christ claims as done to Himself what is done to one of His least, Matt. xxv, 40. Again, those who scandalize their neighbor sin against Christ: because by their bad example they destroy and overturn Christ's edifice — namely, the integrity and salvation of one's neighbors — which Christ built with His blood.
Verse 13: If Meat Scandalize My Brother, I Will Never Eat Flesh
13. WHEREFORE IF MEAT SCANDALIZE MY BROTHER: I WILL NEVER EAT FLESH. — "This (says Chrysostom) is the duty of the best teacher, to teach by his own example what he commands. And he does not say, whether justly or unjustly, but in any way whatsoever. And I do not say, he says, an idol-sacrifice, which is prohibited for another reason as well: but if what is lawful and permitted scandalizes, I abstain even from that; and not for one or another day, but for the whole time of my life. 'For I will not eat,' he says, 'flesh forever.' And he does not say, 'Lest I destroy my brother,' but simply: 'That I may not scandalize.' For it is of the utmost madness, when the things that are most precious to Christ are such that He did not refuse to undergo death for their sake, that we should consider them so utterly contemptible as not to abstain from foods on that account."
See concerning scandal St. Basil in the Shorter Rules, Rule 64, where in the end he says that scandal is the more grievous, the greater the knowledge or rank of the one who gives it; and he adds that God will require and demand from his hand the blood of those who sin, who follow his bad example.