Cornelius a Lapide
Table of Contents
Synopsis of the Chapter
On the occasion of the contest, in which the abstinent and those who contend lawfully are rewarded, while the slothful and those given over to luxury are reprobated and put to confusion — of which he treated at the end of the preceding chapter — the Apostle here digresses to the customs, lusts, and vices of the ancient Hebrews, chiefly their idolatry; their punishment and reprobation alike; that by this example he may teach the Corinthians how vices and temptations, above all idolatry, must be guarded against.
Hence, following on this, at verse 18 he descends and returns to things sacrificed to idols, and concludes the question about them which he had begun in chapter 8; and first, he teaches that it is not lawful to eat them insofar as they are things offered to idols, or sacrificed to idols: for this would be to consent to the idolatrous immolation and sacrifice, and to profess idolatry.
Secondly, at verse 22, he teaches that it is not lawful to eat things sacrificed to idols where the weaker are scandalized by this. Whence, at verse 31, he chiefly commends edification to the Corinthians, and that they should do all things to the glory of God and the salvation of their neighbors.
Vulgate Text: 1 Corinthians 10:1-33
1. For I would not have you ignorant, brethren, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea: 2. and all in Moses were baptized, in the cloud, and in the sea: 3. and all ate the same spiritual food, 4. and all drank the same spiritual drink (and they drank of the spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ); 5. but with most of them God was not well pleased, for they were overthrown in the desert. 6. Now these things were done in a figure of us, that we should not covet evil things, as they also coveted. 7. Neither become ye idolaters, as some of them: as it is written: The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play. 8. Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed fornication, and there fell in one day three and twenty thousand. 9. Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them tempted, and perished by the serpents. 10. Neither do you murmur, as some of them murmured, and were destroyed by the destroyer. 11. Now all these things happened to them in figure: and they are written for our correction, upon whom the ends of the ages are come. 12. Wherefore, he that thinketh himself to stand, let him take heed lest he fall. 13. Let no temptation take hold on you, but such as is human: and God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that which you are able, but will make also with temptation issue, that you may be able to bear it. 14. Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from the service of idols. 15. I speak as to wise men: judge ye yourselves what I say. 16. The chalice of benediction which we bless, is it not the communion of the Blood of Christ? And the bread which we break, is it not the participation of the Body of the Lord? 17. For we, being many, are one bread, one body, all that partake of one bread. 18. Behold Israel according to the flesh: are not they that eat of the sacrifices, partakers of the altar? 19. What then? Do I say that what is offered in sacrifice to idols is anything? Or that the idol is anything? 20. But the things which the heathens sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God. And I would not have you become partakers with devils. You cannot drink the chalice of the Lord and the chalice of devils: 21. you cannot be partakers of the table of the Lord and of the table of devils. 22. Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than He? All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient. 23. All things are lawful for me, but all things do not edify. 24. Let no man seek his own, but that which is another's. 25. Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, eat: asking no question for conscience' sake. 26. The earth is the Lord's, and the fullness thereof. 27. If any of them that believe not invite you, and you are willing to go: eat of any thing that is set before you, asking no question for conscience' sake. 28. But if any man say: This has been sacrificed to idols: do not eat of it, for his sake that told it, and for conscience' sake: 29. conscience, I say, not thy own, but the other's. For why is my liberty judged by another man's conscience? 30. If I partake with thanksgiving, why am I evil spoken of, for that for which I give thanks? 31. Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatsoever else you do, do all to the glory of God. 32. Be without offence to the Jews, and to the Gentiles, and to the Church of God: 33. as I also in all things please all men, not seeking that which is profitable to myself, but to many: that they may be saved.
Verse 1: For I Would Not Have You Ignorant, Brethren, That Our Fathers Were All Under the Cloud
For the word "for" gives the reason for what was said at the end of the preceding chapter, as if to say: Therefore I said that after baptism Christians must contend in the contest, lest they become reprobates and lose the prize, because in like manner the Hebrews, after their typical baptism and heavenly food, namely the manna, lost the land of promise and the prize through their sloth by their sins, and out of six hundred thousand only Joshua and Caleb entered the promised land. Beware therefore, O Corinthians, lest you likewise, on account of sloth and a life unconformable to faith and baptism, be excluded from heaven. So Chrysostom and Anselm. He argues from the type or figure to the thing prefigured.
Our Fathers. — The fathers of the Jews, of whom I am one, and many among you, O Corinthians.
Under the Cloud. — This cloud was the pillar overshadowing the Hebrews like a cloud by day, shining like fire by night, which led them through the desert for forty years, brooding over the ark, and preceding their camp, and protecting it from the heat by spreading itself over the entire camp — its mover and as it were charioteer being an angel: of which see more in Exodus 13.
And All Passed Through the Sea (the Red Sea, or the Arabian gulf), — with dry foot, Moses striking and dividing the waters with his rod.
Verse 2: And All Were Baptized Into Moses in the Cloud and in the Sea
Exodus 14. Note that the passage of the Red Sea was a type of baptism, in which we are reddened with the Blood of Christ, and we drown the Egyptians, namely our sins; Moses is a type of Christ; the cloud is the Holy Spirit, who cools the heat of concupiscence and illumines us. Whence Theodoret: "Those things, he says, were a type of ours: for the sea imitated the pool or font, the cloud the grace of the Spirit; Moses the priest, the rod the cross; Israel signified those who are baptized; the pursuing Egyptians filled out the figure of demons; and Pharaoh himself was the image of the devil."
Note secondly: In place of "in Moses," the Greek has εἰς Μωυσῆν, "into Moses," that is, into the lawgiver, namely into the Mosaic law: under a certain appearance of baptism, by passing through the sea, the Hebrews were initiated; just as we are baptized into Christ, that is, are initiated and incorporated into Christ and Christianity through baptism. Whence in Exodus 14, after the passage of the Red Sea, it is added: "They believed the Lord, and Moses His servant," that is, His lawgiver. So some.
But our baptism was not a type of the Hebrews' baptism in the Red Sea; rather, on the contrary, the Hebrews' passage through the sea was a type of our baptism. Add to this, that in this passage the Hebrews were not initiated into the Mosaic law — indeed, they had not yet received it — but afterwards at Sinai.
I say therefore more simply, "in Mosem" means "in Moses": for the Apostle often uses εἰς in the place of ἐν. Now "in Moses" means, as the Syriac, Chrysostom, and Theophylact have it, "through Moses," with Moses as their leader. The sense therefore is, as if to say: All the Hebrews were baptized through Moses spiritually and typically, or bore the type of our baptism, in this very fact that, when they saw the sea divided through Moses, and Moses first passing through the sea, says Chrysostom, they themselves also dared to entrust themselves to the sea; and that "in the cloud," that is, under the leadership and protection of the cloud going before; "and in the sea," namely, in which, when the Egyptians had been submerged as a sign of the future baptism, they passed from Egyptian servitude into liberty and newness of life, just as we through the waters of baptism pass from the servitude of the devil into the kingdom of Christ. So Anselm, Chrysostom, Ambrose, Theophylact.
Here note with Chrysostom that Scripture attributes the name of the type to the antitype, and conversely. So here the passage of the Red Sea is called baptism, because it was a type of baptism. Whence verse 6 is explained: "These things, he says, were done in figure of us."
Verse 3: And All Ate the Same Spiritual Food
"The same," not the same as ours, as Calvin would have it, as though both Christians and Hebrews ate not the true Body of Christ, but a typical one.
You will say: St. Augustine, in tract 25 on John, and St. Thomas explain "the same" as the same as ours. I answer: They understand "the same" analogically, because the Hebrews receive in sign what we do in fact. But this is beside the mind of the Apostle, who understands "the same" best — not as the same with us, but as the same among themselves — as if to say: All the Hebrews, both good and bad, ate the same food, that is, the same manna. This is plain from the text and what follows, for he says: "But with most of them God was not well pleased," as if to say: Although all ate the same manna and drank the same water from the rock, yet not all pleased God. As therefore they had one baptism and one spiritual food, just as we do, and yet not all were saved, but many of them perished: so also it is to be feared lest many of us perish, although we have the same Sacraments in common among ourselves. So Chrysostom, Theophylact, Anselm, and others.
With them note that the manna is here called "spiritual food," that is, mystical or typical, because the manna was a type and figure of the Eucharist. So the water of the rock is called "spiritual drink," because it was a type of the Blood of Christ. Others interpret "spiritual" as miraculous, namely produced not by the power of nature, but by spirits, namely God and the angels. For such was the manna, of which the Psalmist sings: "Man ate the bread of angels," Psalm 77:25.
Note: The manna allegorically signified Christ in the Venerable Sacrament, as is clear from John 6:49 and 50; but above all the manna signified the thing contained and the effect of the sacrament, as Chrysostom, Theophylact, and Cyril teach at length on the cited passage of John. Whence the Apostle here too says: "All ate the same spiritual food, and drank the same spiritual drink." Calvin too takes this of the holy Supper, and says that the manna was a type of the Body of Christ. From which you may rightly conclude that in the Venerable Sacrament there is truly the Flesh of Christ, since the manna was a symbol of a thing truly existing, not of a chimerical one; for otherwise both we and the Jews would eat spiritual food, that is, a typical and symbolical flesh, nor would we have more of the signified truth than the Jews themselves — nay, much less. For the manna was tastier than our bread, and represented the Body of Christ far more clearly than dry bread. This consequence, as being plain, a certain Minister of recent date out of this new flock has conceded.
But who does not see that this contradicts both Holy Scripture and reason? For the new law is more excellent than the old law; therefore the new sacraments also surpass the old. Whence the Apostle says: "These things were done in figure of us." Now the thing figured is nobler than its figure, just as a body is nobler than its shadow, and a man than his image: therefore the Sacraments of the new law, and especially the Eucharist, as the thing figured, must be nobler than the Sacraments of the old law, and than the manna itself, which was only a type and figure of our Eucharist. Again, in John 6, Christ most explicitly prefers His Body in the Eucharist to the manna itself, verses 48 and 59: "This is the bread, He says, which came down from heaven: not as your fathers ate manna, and died: he that eats this bread (namely the divine bread, consecrated and transubstantiated into the Body of Christ) shall live forever." But that the manna more clearly represents the Body of Christ than does bread, who does not see? For this can be shown in many ways.
Whence note secondly: The manna most aptly agrees with the Body of Christ in the Eucharist, and most beautifully prefigured it. First, the color of the species of the Eucharist and of the manna is the same. Second, both have a sweet taste. Third, neither is found, nor tastes well, except when the Egyptian flesh-pots and the pleasures of the flesh have been left behind. Fourth, to the unbelieving and avaricious both alike are turned into a worm and into judgment. Fifth, the manna was not given until after the passage of the sea; the Eucharist is not given until after baptism. Sixth, after the manna the Hebrews fought against Amalek, whereas before God alone had fought for them against the Egyptians: they fought, I say, and conquered; so too the impediments of the heavenly life and the temptations, which God allows to be set only against the more steadfast, are overcome by the power of the Eucharist. Seventh, the manna was a bread made without seed, without ploughing or other human labor, by the angels; so the Body of Christ was born of the Virgin alone and the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit. Eighth, the manna gave to the good and pious every variety of taste. Whence in Wisdom 16:20 it is said of the manna: "You nourished Your people with the food of angels, and gave them bread from heaven prepared without labor, having in itself all delight and all sweetness of taste." So Christ is milk to little ones, vegetables to babes, solid food to the perfect, says Nyssen. Ninth, the manna was small; Christ is contained in a small Host. Tenth, the manna was beaten with a pestle; Christ was stripped of mortality by the pestle of the Cross. Eleventh, the faithful, in admiration, exclaim man hu! what is this, that God is with us! Twelfth, all gathered an equal measure of manna, namely one gomor: so all receive the whole Christ equally, even though the species or Host be greater or less. So Rupert. Thirteenth, the manna was gathered in the desert only for six days: so in the sabbath of eternity and in the land of promise the veil of the Sacrament shall cease, and we shall enjoy Christ face to face in the highest rest. Fourteenth, the manna was melted by the sun: so when the species are dissolved by heat, the Sacrament is dissolved. These things and many more I have spoken of and shown in Exodus 21.
Verse 4: And They Drank of the Spiritual Rock That Followed Them
(That is, typical.) For the rock which gave water to the Hebrews was a type of Christ, who is the true Rock, from which flowed the Blood that quenches the thirst of our concupiscence. But how is this rock said to be "following" — that is, having followed — the Hebrews?
The Hebrews and the Chaldee at Numbers 21:16 reply and hand down that this rock by a miracle continually followed the Jews in the desert as far as Canaan, and gave them water. Whence the Syriac here translates: "They drank of the spiritual rock that came with them." And Tertullian, in the book On Baptism, ch. 9, calls this rock a companion: "This, he says, is the water that flowed down from the companion rock to the people;" but immediately he interprets this rock as Christ, who in His divinity accompanied and led the Hebrews through the desert. Whence the same author, book III Against Marcion, ch. 5: "The Rock, he says, allegorically was Christ, accompanying them by supplying drink." And St. Ambrose on Psalm 38, vol. II: "The shadow, he says, was in the rock, which poured forth water and followed the people. Was not the water from the rock a shadow, as it were blood from Christ, who followed the peoples fleeing from Him, that they might drink and not thirst, that they might be redeemed and not perish? Yet he likewise takes Christ through the rock." Book V On the Sacraments, ch. 1: "Not immovable, he says, was the rock that followed the people. And do you also drink, that Christ may follow you." But I would like more certain authors of this tradition; for it is opposed by the fact that, after this water from the rock, in Numbers 20:11, they murmured again because of lack of water, Numbers 21:5. Whence in verse 16, God gave them a well of water.
Hence others now soften this, and explain it thus: "Of the rock that followed," because, they say, the waters bursting forth from the rock flowed for a long distance and made as it were a torrent, which followed the Hebrews until they came to the place where there was abundance of waters: for if this had been a benefit of one day only, on the next day, and the third, and the fourth, the rock would always have had to be struck again to draw waters from it. And this exposition is confirmed: for the manna is here taken materially, therefore the rock too, and the drink, must be understood materially: but those things which we said are opposed to the previous opinion are likewise opposed to this one.
Third, Photius for "following" translates "obeying," as if to say: This rock obeyed the Hebrews' thirst and desire; but the Greek ἀκολουθεῖν properly means to follow and to come after, not to obey.
Fourth, therefore I more surely and aptly take these things of the spiritual rock, that is, the typical, but signified, not the signifying, namely Christ (see Canon 3), as if Paul were saying: By the power of the divinity of Christ, which was the spiritual Rock signified by the rock that gave water to the Hebrews and ever as a companion followed the Hebrews through the desert, water was given to the Hebrews from that material rock. So St. Chrysostom, Ambrose, Anselm, Oecumenius.
You will say: By "spiritual food" the Apostle takes manna, not the Body of Christ; and by "spiritual drink" he takes the water itself signifying the Blood of Christ, not the signified Blood itself: therefore in like manner by "the spiritual rock" he takes the real rock signifying Christ, not Christ Himself signified by the rock.
I answer: I deny the consequence, because the Apostle in the case of the rock inverts the phrase, and crosses over from the sign to the thing signified. This is plain, because, in explaining this spiritual rock, he says: "And the Rock was Christ," as if to say: When I say spiritual rock, I mean Christ: what is clearer? For it was not the material and signifying rock, but the spiritual and signified rock, that was Christ.
You will press the point: The Greek for "and they drank" has ἔπινον γάρ, "for they drank": therefore they understand such a rock as the drink they understand, as if to say: They drank a spiritual drink, that is, a typical one: for the rock too giving this drink was spiritual, that is, typical. For what would be the connection and reason to say: They drank a typical drink, because the typical rock was Christ?
I answer: The connection and reason are apt, because the word ["for"] gives and assigns the efficient cause of so great a miracle, and of so miraculous a drink — as if to say: The Hebrews drank typical water: for Christ, prefigured by the typical rock which sent forth this water, miraculously gave them this typical water, that they might recognize and worship Christ as the giver of it; which, however, as follows, very many of them did not do.
Note: That rock giving water allegorically signified Christ, because of course Christ as a most firm rock sustains the Church, and being "struck," that is, slain, "by Moses," that is, by the Jews, and that "with a rod," that is, with the Cross, He poured forth the most abundant "waters" of graces — to unbelievers, the waters of "contradiction"; to the faithful, of "sanctification" — and especially the waters of His own Blood in the Eucharist, with which He gives us drink in this desert of life, that, strengthened by them, we may make our way to our city in the heavens. Whence Christ Himself says in John 7:37: "If any man thirst, let him come to Me and drink." And in John 4:14: "The water that I shall give him, shall become in him a fountain of water springing up unto life everlasting." So St. Augustine, book XVI Against Faustus, ch. 15.
You will say: Some Catholics, according to the first exposition given, explain it thus: "The Rock was Christ," that is, a type of Christ; therefore in like manner it will be possible to say of the Eucharist: "This is My Body," that is, a figure of My Body.
I answer first: I deny the consequence, because a rock is a thing disparate from Christ — such that one cannot be the other, just as a stone cannot be wood: but this pronoun is not disparate from the Body of Christ; nay, it designates the Body itself. The case would be similar if Christ had said: This spiritual or typical bread is My Body; for then it would have to be expounded thus: This bread is a figure of My Body. Add to this that the Apostle explains himself as speaking not of a true rock, but of a spiritual one; for he says: "And they drank of the spiritual rock that followed them; and the rock," namely that spiritual one already mentioned, "was Christ." For it is called a spiritual rock, that is, typical, because it was a type of Christ and typically represented Christ: but Christ does not so speak, nor St. Paul, of the Eucharist; rather both He Himself and all the Evangelists consistently relate that Christ said: "This is My Body;" and not: This is My spiritual or typical Body. Secondly, to the antecedent I answer that the explanation of some is hardly probable: for that spiritual rock, that is, typical and signified, was truly Christ, not a type of Christ, as I have said. For the words of St. Paul clearly prove this, as I have already shown.
Verse 5: For They Were Overthrown in the Desert
For all the Hebrews who came out of Egypt under the leadership of Moses died in the desert because of their sins, especially their murmuring, except Joshua and Caleb, who alone, together with the new offspring of those who died, entered the promised land, Numbers 14:29.
Verse 6: Now These Things Were Done in a Figure of Us
"Figure" here signifies both an example and a type. For God willed to set the Hebrews before Christians as an example, that from their punishment they might learn to revere God and to obey Him, on which more at verse 10. Whence follows:
As They Also (our fathers, of whom I spoke at verse 1, namely the ancient Hebrews) Coveted — the delicacies of flesh-meats, in the place which from this was called "The Graves of Lust," because the Hebrews were there slain by God on account of this craving for flesh-meats, Numbers 11:33 and 34.
Verse 7: Neither Become Ye Idolaters, As Some of Them, As It Is Written: The People Sat Down to Eat and Drink, and Rose Up to Play
(Exodus 32:6.) Namely, when the Hebrews cast, dedicated, and adored the golden calf: for then they closed the joy of this their idol and feast with a merry banquet. Whence the people began to eat of the peace offerings sacrificed to the calf, that thus they might celebrate and complete the solemnity of this their new god, after the manner of the Egyptians and other Gentiles, by a common and sacred banquet, and likewise by games. Whence also "they rose up to play," namely by dancing and forming choruses: for Moses, coming down a little later from the mountain, saw them, Exodus 32:19; for so the Gentiles, after sacrifices, used to perform games in honor of their gods, often most obscene ones. Whence the Rabbis, and Tertullian in his book On Fasting against the Psychics, interpret this play of the Jews as fornication and unchastity. They also enjoyed public spectacles, which Tertullian teaches in his book On the Spectacles (which he wrote for this very reason) are forbidden to Christians, because they were dedicated to idols, just as things sacrificed to idols are. But soon the wrath of God raged against the people who were sporting like calves and being lascivious, with twenty-three thousand men slain by the Levites at the command of Moses. Paul inculcates these things upon the Corinthians, because it is likely that in their pagan state they had engaged in similar games and banquets, and had eaten things sacrificed to idols in honor of their gods, especially of Venus, to whom they exposed a thousand girls daily for prostitution, and were most prone to luxury and lust. Whence at the next verse, and at chapter 6, verses 9 and following, he so greatly deters them from fornication, as I have said there — Paul as if to say: See therefore, O Corinthians, that you do not return to idols, nor eat things sacrificed to them, lest you become partakers of idolatrous sacrifices; nor give yourselves over to play, luxury, and lust: otherwise, just like the Hebrews, as apostates and idolaters, as gluttons and bellies, you will be punished by God.
Verse 8: As Some of Them Committed Fornication
Namely, when the Hebrews worshipped Baal-peor, that is, Priapus, and in his favor and worship committed fornication with the daughters of Moab, Numbers 25.
And There Fell in One Day Three and Twenty Thousand. — Chrysostom, Anselm, and Cajetan refer this to the plague on account of the fornication with the daughters of Moab, of which I have already spoken, which is recounted in Numbers 25; but there, in verse 9, twenty-four thousand are said to have been slain, while here there are only "twenty-three thousand": some answer that twenty-three thousand were slain in one day only, but one thousand were slain on the day before. But this is said gratuitously: for Scripture says nothing of the kind. Vatablus translates "burning"; the Septuagint render διανύοντας, that is, putting to death. Secondly, Cajetan answers that 23 is put for 24 by an error of the scribes. Thirdly, Oecumenius says that some read 23 thousand at Numbers 25, just as here. Fourthly, others answer that the Apostle speaks truly, because the larger number, namely 24, includes the smaller, namely 23. But we will say more clearly and openly that the Apostle is referring to Exodus 32:28, where on account of the worship of the calf 23 thousand are said to have been slain, as the Roman Bibles have it. This punishment, therefore, Paul does not refer to the fornicators immediately preceding, but more remotely, in the manner of the Hebrews, to the idolaters of whom he treated in verse 7; for having omitted to set forth the punishment inflicted for so great a crime, he hands it down as it were after the fact: for so in the following crimes he always appends the punishment; and this in order the more to turn the Corinthians away from idols and meats sacrificed to idols; especially because the idolatry of the calf and the luxury, with the worship and fornication of Baal-peor, agree closely both in guilt and in punishment. Indeed Paul's Greek words agree with the Greek of Exodus, so that I think that of old the Greek of Exodus had altogether what Paul now has: namely, εἴκοσι τρεῖς χιλιάδες, that is, twenty-three thousand; and not εἰς τρισχιλίους, that is, to three thousand, as the Greek of Exodus now has, corrupted, as it seems, by an easy and neighboring slip of letters.
Verse 9. Neither Let Us Tempt Christ, — as if distrusting His promises, as some of the Corinthians were doubting about the resurrection, as appears in chapter 15, and therefore let us seek signs, II Peter 3:4. As Some of Them Tempted, — He cites Numbers 21:5, where it is said: "And the people grew weary of the journey and labor, and speaking against the Lord and Moses, said: Why did you bring us out of Egypt, that we should die in the wilderness? There is no bread, there is no water: our soul now loathes this very light food." Where note the words "against the Lord." For Paul here explains this Lord to be Christ; therefore Christ is Lord and God. Hence the Greek Fathers teach that the angel who appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and led the Hebrews out of Egypt, bore the type of Christ to come in the flesh, that is, of the second Person in the Most Holy Trinity, namely the Son: for He is Christ.
And They Perished From Serpents. — This appears in Numbers 21, where after the murmuring of the Hebrews already mentioned, God inflicted this punishment on them in verse 6: "Wherefore, it says, the Lord sent fiery serpents among the people." Where note that the serpents are called "fiery," not because they were of a fiery nature: for this is repugnant to the nature of serpents; but from the effect, because by their bite and very hot breath they induced so much heat that those bitten by them seemed to themselves to be burning. For which reason in Greek they are called Prasteres and Causones, the kind that are produced in Libya and Arabia, through which the Hebrews were passing into Palestine. Hence for "fiery," the Hebrew is שרפים seraphim, which Scripture so calls them.
Verse 10: As Some of Them Murmured, and Perished by the Destroyer
Namely an angel, through whom God inflicted punishments on the murmuring Hebrews, so that Korah with his followers was swallowed alive by the earth, and another 14,700 perished by fire, Numbers 16:30, 35, 40, 45. So Anselm, and it is clear from Wisdom 18:20. This angel seems to have been Michael, the leader of the people, and the giver and avenger of the law on Sinai, Exodus 23:21, and the type of Christ, as I said in verse 9. To others this "destroyer" seems to have been an evil angel, or demon, and Psalm 77:49 seems to favor this, where it says: "He sent upon them (the Egyptians) wrath and indignation," namely the plagues inflicted by Moses, "through evil angels." But the Psalmist there is speaking of the plague upon the Egyptians; Paul however speaks of that which was inflicted upon the Hebrews by God. Add that it is more true that the plagues inflicted on the Egyptians were by good angels, not evil: for, as St. Augustine notes on this verse of Psalm 77, it is sufficiently clear that through good angels Moses turned the waters into blood and produced frogs and gnats: for with these prodigious punishments Moses and the good angels contended with the magicians of Pharaoh and their demons: whence they, conquered in the third prodigy of the gnats, exclaimed: "The finger of God is here." Therefore the good angels are called in Psalm 77:49 evil, that is, bringing in evils and torments, and harming the Egyptians by them. Hence the Hebrew is מלאכי רעים malache raim, that is, angels of evils, and as Symmachus translates, through angels inflicting evils.
Note: The Hebrews very often murmured in the desert, and God almost always punished them, to show how greatly murmuring and rebellion displeased Him beyond other sins. So in Numbers 11, He killed those murmuring out of craving for flesh, and from this the place was called "Graves of craving." So He shut out all those murmuring at the report of the spies, who said the land of Canaan was unconquerable, and slew them in the desert, and out of six hundred thousand only Joshua and Caleb entered it, Numbers 14:29. So most clearly and most severely He punished the murmuring of Korah with his followers, as has been said.
Verse 11: Now All These Things Happened to Them in Figure
"All these things," namely those I have just spoken of; but not absolutely everything that is described in the Old Testament, as if there were nothing in it that did not figuratively signify something to come in the New Testament. For St. Augustine truly says, book XVII On the City of God, chapter 5: "To me it seems that those greatly err who think that no events in that kind of literature signify anything beyond what was done in that manner: so likewise those who dare too much, who contend that absolutely everything there is wrapped up in allegorical significations."
In Figure. — Gabriel Vasquez correctly notes in part 1, Question I, article 10, disputation 14, chapter 6, that "figure" here does not so much signify the allegorical or mystical sense, as an example which by accommodation is most effective for persuading. Hence explaining "figure" Paul adds: "But they are written for our correction," or, as the Greek has it, νουθεσίαν, that is, our admonition, as if to say: God punished the Hebrews as a figure of us, that is, for our example, that we may grow wise from their punishment. Hence the Greek in this verse and in verse 6 has ταῦτα δὲ τύποι ἡμῶν ἐγενήθησαν, which the Syriac translates: these were figures, types for us; and, as Vatablus, examples: namely, that they might be examples to us of life, and of fleeing from sins and the punishments which God inflicts on sins.
Upon Whom the Ends of the Ages Have Come. — "The ends of the ages" means the last age of the world. For from this the prophets call the time of the Messiah "the last time;" and at I John, ch. 2, 18: "The last hour;" "hour," that is, time, by synecdoche. Ambrose and Chrysostom add that the Apostle is accustomed so to speak, as though the end of the world were imminent, in order to keep all in suspense, fearing lest the day of judgment be at hand, that each one may continually prepare for it. Concerning this, more at I Thessalonians 4:15.
Verse 12: Let Him Who Thinks He Stands, Take Heed Lest He Fall
It is useful, says St. Augustine, book On the Good of Perseverance, chapter 8, that all, or nearly all, should not be able to know what kind they will be in the future, so that each one, while he does not know whether he will persevere in good, may humbly and anxiously implore the grace of God, and with it strive to avoid a fall and to persevere in grace.
Verse 13: Let No Temptation Take Hold of You Except What Is Human
The Greek now, Chrysostom and the Syriac read, εἴληφεν, in the past, that is "has taken hold of," not εἰληφέτω, in the imperative, that is "let it take hold." Hence also St. Cyprian, book III to Quirinus, chapter 91, reads: "Temptation has not seized you, except such as is human," as if to say: Be it so, O Corinthians, that you are tempted and solicited to schisms, to disputes, to luxury and lust, to idols and meats sacrificed to idols; yet remain steadfast: for these temptations which seize and occupy you are common and human, which you will easily overcome if you will.
But correct with the Romans, and read "let it not take hold": that is, when, as often happens, some temptation from those I have just mentioned, or any other, creeps into the mind, do not foster it and grasp it, so that it gradually grows and becomes finally insuperable: for to exclude human and light temptations altogether, so that you never feel them, is impossible. For it is demonic, says Anselm, to be conquered by malignant temptation, and to sin out of malice; it is angelic not to feel it; it is human to feel and to conquer. The same is found in St. Gregory, Pastoral Care, part I, chapter 11.
God Is Faithful, Who Will Not Allow You to Be Tempted Beyond What You Are Able. — Hence first I infer: if God does not allow us to be tempted beyond our strength, therefore much less, indeed in no way does God impel us to sins, as Calvin would have it. Secondly, therefore God does not command impossible things, as Luther wills, nor indeed does He permit them. Thirdly, from this it follows that we can be tempted so strongly by the demon and the flesh that we cannot resist unless God's grace come to our aid. So Chrysostom, Anselm. Fourthly, in fact no temptation is so great that it cannot be overcome by God's grace. Fifthly, the best remedy for temptation is prayer, that we may invoke God's help and grace, distrustful of our own strength, Matt. 26:41. Sixthly, that this grace is promised here and elsewhere not only to the elect, but to all who rightly invoke God. So the Council of Trent, session XXIV, canon 9, and session VI, canon 11. For the Apostle is speaking to the faithful who were at Corinth, many of whom were not elect, but some contentious, scandalous, drunken, as appears in chapter 11, verse 21; nay, none of them knew himself to be elect, that he could appropriate this consolation to himself. Seventhly, from this it follows that it is in the power of every Christian to have sufficient aid to overcome all temptations and sins. For God, as faithful, binds His faithfulness to them for this purpose, as the Apostle teaches here, as if to say: Let no temptation seize you on your part and through your negligence except human; for on God's part I am thus indebted, that God who is faithful, just as He has promised, so will He perform, that He will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, that is, He will permit you to be tempted only by a human temptation. Understand, if you implore His grace and help as is fitting, and cooperate with it. "God," says St. Augustine, book On Nature and Grace, chapter 43, and from him the Council of Trent, session VI, canon 11, "God, I say, does not command impossible things (when He commands us to resist any temptation); but by commanding He admonishes you both to do what you can, and to ask what you cannot, and He helps so that you can." Hence Christ, Matt. 11: "My yoke," He says, "is sweet, and My burden light." And I John 5:3, it is said: "His commandments are not heavy."
St. Ephrem, in his tract On Patience, declares this saying of the Apostle by a beautiful comparison of beasts of burden and the potter's vessels: For if, he says, men do not impose more burden on their beasts than they can bear, much less will God impose more temptations on men than they can bear. Again, if the potter bakes his vessels in the fire only until they are duly baked, and does not take them out earlier lest they be undercooked and not solid; nor again does he leave them longer in the fire, lest they be burned and become useless: much more will God do the same, so that He bakes us in the fire of temptations only until He bakes us thoroughly and perfects us; but He will not allow us to be burned and consumed beyond that by temptation.
But Will Also Make With the Temptation a Way of Escape, That You May Be Able to Bear It. — In Greek it is ποιήσει σὺν τῷ πειρασμῷ καὶ τὴν ἔκβασιν, He will make with the temptation also a way out; and, as St. Augustine in Psalm 61 and epistle 89 reads, "an outcome"; and, as Erasmus, "an event," as if to say: God, who allows you to fall into temptation, will likewise make the temptation end well: and, as Anselm, He will make it turn out as is expedient for you and your salvation, so that you may emerge from it without harm, nay with victory and glory: and this our "outcome" signifies. Therefore the Greek ἔκβασις means this.
First, as Theophylact, Oecumenius, and the Greeks, a happy issue of the temptation, so that it may turn out well and lead to good: because God will bring it about that either the temptation quickly ceases, nor is it allowed on the fourth day to suffer it, since it is known that one cannot bear it beyond three days, says Ambrose; or, if it be longer, He gives the ability to endure it, says the same Ambrose and Anselm.
Secondly, the Greek ἔκβασις does not signify any sort of escape, but that by which a soldier emerges from battle or duel as victor, more glorious and stronger: for such Saints have come out of temptation, which our translator, shrewdly observing, renders "proventus" (outcome/advance). Hence the Greek ἔκβασις here in reality is the same as πρόβασις or πρόσβασις, that is progress, as if to say: God will make the temptation not only not harm you, but even yield to progress, that is, to an increase of fortitude, virtue, grace, victory, and glory, so that you may advance more on the way of virtue, and the way to heaven and glory. So Photius. Hence it follows: "That you may be able to endure," where for "endure" the Greek has ὑποφέρειν, that is, so to endure that strength still remains for bearing something more: thus God confers such and so great aid that one is able to overcome the temptation with a great excess. Hence the Fathers everywhere note that through temptations man especially advances in virtue, and that through them virtues are increased and strengthened; and the reason is that they cannot be resisted except by contrary acts of the virtues, and those strong and intense, which while the tempted one elicits them, through them he more strongly fortifies and increases the habits of these virtues.
Secondly, because the just man by such acts merits, obtains, and receives from God an increase of the same virtues and grace infused into him.
Verse 14: Wherefore, My Dearly Beloved, Flee from the Worship of Idols
14. WHEREFORE, MY DEARLY BELOVED, FLEE FROM THE WORSHIP OF IDOLS, — not only that you worship them not with express sacrifice or invocation, but also that you eat not the idolothytes, that is, sacrifices offered to them, as though they were holy things and sacrifices, as the Gentiles eat them after the sacrifice is performed at the altars, or in the temples of idols: for thus you would participate in these their sacrifices, and would be reckoned to consent to them, and tacitly to praise them, nay even to offer them. For the Apostle descends to the eating of idolothytes in what follows. From which it is clear that the Apostle, after long digressions in chapter ix about stipends and gratuitous preaching, and about the Christian contest, prize, and athletes, and in this chapter x about the deeds and punishments of the Hebrews, to which He digressed on occasion of the idolothytes, here returns to the same matter, and concludes in this place the question about idolothytes begun in chapter viii. Hence by "wherefore" he signifies that he has said all the preceding for this purpose, to deter them from idolatry and idolothytes.
Verse 16. THE CUP OF BLESSING, WHICH WE BLESS, IS IT NOT THE COMMUNION OF THE BLOOD OF CHRIST? — The sense is, as if to say: "The cup of blessing," that is, the drink of the cup blessed by the priest, and consequently the cup itself containing this blessed drink, does it not communicate to us the very blood of Christ? It can secondly be called the cup of blessing, because it blesses us and heaps grace upon us. So Anselm and Chrysostom. Thirdly and precisely, it is called "the cup of blessing," because Christ before the consecration blessed it, that is, prayed for God's help for the coming transformation both of the bread and of the cup, Matt. xxvi, 26.
Hence note from the history of Christ's Last Supper, which Matthew describes in chapter xxvi, Luke in chapter xxii, and Paul here and in chapter xi, that Christ before the consecration of the Eucharist first gave thanks to God the Father, as Luke and Paul have it, and this with His eyes raised to heaven according to His custom, as it is in our canon and in the Liturgy of St. James. Hence this Sacrament has been called Eucharist, that is, thanksgiving, because it itself is the greatest grace, and consequently is to be received with the greatest thanksgiving.
Secondly note that Christ blessed, not the Father, as heretics wish, but bread and wine, as Paul expressly has it here: Τὸ ποτήριον, he says, τῆς εὐλογίας, ὃ εὐλογοῦμεν, that is, the cup of blessing which we bless. Now Christ blessed the bread and the cup, that is, He invoked God's blessing and omnipotence over bread and wine, that it might be present, both now and in all future consecrations, for converting the bread into the body, and the wine of the cup into the blood of Christ, when the words of consecration are legitimately pronounced. Similar was the blessing of the loaves in Luke ix, 16. Therefore this blessing was not the consecration, although D. Thomas wishes it, III part, Question lxxviii, art. 4, ad 1, but a preliminary prayer. So the Council of Trent, session XIII, canon 4. Hence in the Liturgy of St. James, Basil, and ours, after Christ's example we pray that God may bless these gifts, so that divine power may descend upon the bread and cup to complete the consecration: and from this it is called the cup of blessing, that is, blessed by Christ.
IS IT NOT THE COMMUNION OF THE BLOOD OF CHRIST? — Κοινωνία, that is, communion, or communication of the body and blood of Christ, not only signifies that we take the same body and the same blood of Christ, but also that we are made one body and one blood, as he explains in verse 17. Therefore, not a type of blood, as Calvin would have it, but it is the very blood of Christ, and is communicated to us in the cup of the Eucharist. If I say "I give you a gold piece," you would understand a real one, not a painted one; if I had invited you to dinner and to a feast of a hare or stag caught in the hunt, and instead of a hare and stag I were to set before you in the dish a picture of a hare, and a stag painted, would I not be ridiculous to you? would I not be heard as a deceiver? Are not, then, the Innovators ridiculous, who transform the blood and flesh which Christ asserts He is giving into a type and figure of blood and flesh? Do they not make Christ a deceiver?
Secondly, if this cup is only a type of the blood, as the Innovators wish, then we have no more, indeed less in the Eucharist than the Jews had in the manna and the drink of miraculous water; and the Apostle ought to have said that we eat a spiritual body and drink the spiritual blood of Christ, that is, a typical one, just as he said that the Jews ate spiritual food, that is, manna, and drank spiritual drink, that is, water from the rock: but in fact he opposes the blood and flesh of Christ in the Eucharist, as the body and the thing signified, to the manna and water themselves, as a spiritual figure and type signifying the flesh and blood of Christ; and he calls the manna spiritual food, that is, typical, and the water he calls spiritual drink: but the flesh of Christ in the Eucharist he calls body, and the blood he calls blood. Who, then, doubts that, just as the manna was truly a type and shadow, so in the Eucharist there is truly the blood, flesh and body of Christ?
The same is proved thirdly from this, that, as I said, Theodoret, Theophylact, Anselm, and St. Thomas explicitly explain this passage. "He did not say," says Theophylact, "μετοχή, that is, participation, but κοινωνία, that is, communication, so as to indicate something more excellent, namely the highest union; what he says is of this sort: That which is in the cup is that which flowed from Christ's side; and receiving from it we communicate, that is, are united to Christ: are you not ashamed, O Corinthians, to have recourse to the cup of idols, away from this cup which has liberated us from idols?"
But most plainly St. Chrysostom here, in the moral part of homily 24, where exhorting Christians through the sacred Synaxis to mutual charity, thus says: "When we understand this, therefore, dearly beloved, let us also will to keep unity with one another: for to this that fearful and wondrous sacrifice leads us, which commands us to approach Him with the greatest concord and charity, and being made eagles in this life, to fly to heaven itself, or rather above heaven." And further on, what and of what kind is the body of Christ in the Eucharist he so explains: "If no one would lightly touch a man's garment, how do we receive with such ignominy the pure and immaculate body of the Lord, which partakes of that divine nature, on account of which we both exist and live, on account of which the gates of hell were broken and those of heaven opened? This body, fixed, beaten, was not overcome by death: this body the sun, seeing crucified, turned away its rays: on account of this the veil of the temple was rent, and the rocks, and the whole earth trembled: this same body, bloodied and wounded by the lance, poured forth fountains of blood and water salutary to the whole world."
And below, that the body of Christ in the Eucharist is the same as that which was in the manger, He so teaches: "This body the Magi reverenced in the manger, and with much fear and trembling adored it: but you behold it, not in the manger, but on the altar; not a woman holding it in her arms, but a present priest and the Spirit poured out abundantly over the Sacrament set forth. Let us therefore be roused and shudder, and bear greater piety than those barbarians." And after some intervening matter, he most clearly asserts that in the Eucharist we touch and eat God Himself, and receive from Him all goods, saying: "This table is the strength of our soul, the sinews of the mind, the bond of confidence, the foundation, our hope, salvation, light, our life. If, fortified by this sacrifice, we depart hence, with the greatest confidence we shall ascend the holy vestibule. And why do I mention things to come? for while we are in this life, this mystery makes earth heaven for us: for just as in the heavens, so on earth the royal body is set before you to be seen: not angels, not Archangels, not the heavens, not the heaven of heavens, but the Lord Himself of all these I show you; nor do you only behold Him, but you touch and eat Him, and you receive not the royal child of a man, but the only-begotten Son of God; how do you not shudder? and cast away the love of all worldly things?" These and more St. Chrysostom.
A certain new herald of the new Word of God recently replied that these things are said by St. Chrysostom in oratorical fashion. But this evasion is as foolish as it is null. For St. Chrysostom is an orator, I admit, but he is also a doctor: he is an orator, but a Christian and truthful orator. Hence in the commentary itself he speaks dogmatically, because he is acting as the literal interpreter of the Apostle: in the moral part he sometimes amplifies oratorically, but in such a way that he does not amplify beyond and against the truth of the matter, so as to say, e.g., that a stone is wood, that man is a brute, that bread is flesh: for otherwise he would not be a preacher, but an impostor and a liar, and that in matters of faith. For just as he would be a lying and stupid preacher who would say that the water of baptism is the very blood of Christ which flowed from the side of Christ, which the Jews drew forth from the body of Christ with their nails and blows, understanding indeed that the water of baptism is a type of the blood of Christ, and applies it to us for washing away sins: so truly is he a liar and stupid who says that bread and wine are the very blood, the very body of Christ which was adored in the manger by the Magi, which was suspended on the cross, which was scourged, bloodied, crucified by the Jews, nay is the very Lord of all things, and the only-begotten Son of God, as St. Chrysostom speaks here. I appeal to you, reader, who with sincere eye and impartial mind read these words of Chrysostom: are these things true of the manna, of the paschal lamb, or any other figure and type? would Chrysostom have said these things of those types? would Calvin, Viret, Zwingli, or anyone else of their flock, however eloquent a preacher, say these things of their supper? If it is permitted thus to disparage and pervert the opinions of authors, the words of the Fathers, it will be permitted to overturn all faith, all history, all their dogmas, and to twist them quite into the contrary sense. Finally, all these things will appear more clearly in the following verses.
THE BREAD WHICH WE BREAK, IS IT NOT THE PARTICIPATION OF THE BODY OF THE LORD? — The sense is, the communication or eating of the bread which we break communicates to us the very body of Christ, so that we each truly participate in it in the Eucharist.
You will say: The Eucharist is here called bread, therefore it is not the flesh of Christ. I answer: "Bread" by Hebraism signifies any food, as is clear from IV Kings vi, 22 and 23. So in John vi, 31, the manna, and verse 41, Christ Himself is called bread: for bread is the common and necessary food of all. Add that it is not called bread bare; but, "the bread which we break," that is, the Eucharistic, or transubstantiated, which is the body of Christ, yet retains the appearance and operation of bread. So all the Fathers and orthodox Doctors.
Note: Christ is said to have broken and distributed bread both at other times and at the Last Supper according to the custom of the Hebrews, among whom the master of the house, blessing the table, was accustomed to break bread and divide the foods to the reclining guests: for the Orientals did not have raised loaves, as we have, such that a knife would be needed to cut them; but they kneaded broad ones, and thin like a wafer, whence they broke them with their hands, as among others the heterodox Stückius noted, book II Convivalia, ch. III. Hence in Scripture "to break bread" signifies to feast, and "the breaking of bread" signifies any banquet, supper, refreshment; and in the New Testament it is appropriated to this, that it signifies the supper and communion of the Eucharist. Hence to break bread is an ecclesiastical and sacramental term. Whence Paul here calls the Eucharist "the bread which we break," namely, breaking and eating the species of Christ's body in the Sacrament; and in the sacrifice offering, taking, and consuming them; of which more in the next chapter, verse 24.
Verse 17: For We Being Many Are One Bread, One Body, All That Partake of One Bread
17. FOR WE BEING MANY ARE ONE BREAD, ONE BODY, ALL THAT PARTAKE OF ONE BREAD. — That, just as out of many grains is made one bread, so out of many faithful one sacred and living bread is made, namely one mystical body of Christ, that is, the Church, not only generally and mystically, but properly and corporeally, because all are really united to the body of Christ, and become one with it in the Eucharist, just as food becomes one with the eater. Hence rightly against the Innovators it can be inferred:
Therefore we all truly eat the same body of Christ. They themselves answer, that in the Eucharist all Christians become one, because all eat the same sacramental bread, which is a type of the body of Christ. But on the contrary: Who ever would say of such fellow-diners that they become one body, and one bread, because they eat from the same table and bread? for this is said falsely and ineptly: but truly and rightly it is said of the body of Christ, that we all eat the same in number; especially because this sacred bread, as St. Augustine says, when eaten is not changed into our substance, but rather changes us into itself, unites us to itself and makes us like it, which common bread does not do. Whence Cyril of Alexandria, book IV on John, ch. xvii: "As wax," he says, "is mingled with wax, and leaven with bread, so we too with the body of Christ;" and Cyril of Jerusalem, catechesis 4: "In holy communion," he says, "we are made not only Christ-bearers, but also con-corporeal and con-sanguineous with Christ;" because in it both Christ is mingled with us, and we with the flesh of Christ, and consequently with His Person, and divinity, and omnipotence. The same is asserted by Irenaeus, book IV, ch. xxxiv; Hilary, On the Trinity, book VIII, and Chrysostom here.
For this reason the Eucharist is called by the Fathers "communion," because it really unites all to the body of Christ, so that in it, and with it, all are one, as if to say: Communion, that is, the common union of the faithful, who, by eating the same true body of Christ in the Eucharist, are made one mystical body of Christ, that is, one Church. So Bede from St. Augustine. Whence also the Council of Trent, session XIII, ch. VIII, says: "This Sacrament (of the Eucharist) is a sign of unity, a bond of charity, a symbol of peace and concord;" because indeed in a singular way it signifies and perfects the unity of the body of Christ, namely of the faithful of the Church. Hence also infants of old were given the Eucharist after baptism, that they might be perfectly incorporated into Christ: for, as Christ says, John vi, 55: "He who eats My flesh, and drinks My blood, abides in Me, and I in him." Finally for this reason the Eucharist was called by St. Dionysius "synaxis," that is congregation, because the faithful were accustomed to congregate in the Church to receive the Eucharist; nay Tertullian, book On Prayer, last chapter, says that prayer must be discharged after the body of the Lord has been received. Whence in the next chapter, verse 20, the Apostle says: "When you come together as one, it is no longer to eat the Lord's supper." For although the Church through faith and baptism is made the body of Christ, yet it is more really and properly made the very body of Christ in the Eucharist.
Heretics object: Therefore only the good and just are parts and members of the Church, because the Apostle says: "We all are one bread;" but bread is made from grains of wheat, not from chaff: therefore also the Church is composed of the just, and not of the unjust: for the just are the grains, the unjust are the chaff. I answer first: I deny the consequence, because a likeness need not be similar in all respects.
Secondly, I deny the antecedent, because often chaff, sand, lentils are mixed with wheat, and combine with it to make bread. Whence the Apostle, ch. xi, 29, says that even the wicked eat of this bread; but here he says that all who partake of this bread are one body of Christ, which is the Church: therefore even the wicked, who eat this bread, are of the Church. See St. Cyprian, book I, epistle 6 to Magnus.
Verse 18: Behold Israel According to the Flesh: Are Not They Who Eat the Sacrifices Partakers of the Altar?
18. BEHOLD ISRAEL ACCORDING TO THE FLESH: ARE NOT THEY WHO EAT THE SACRIFICES PARTAKERS OF THE ALTAR? — "Of the altar," that is, of the victim offered on the altar: for he puts "altar" for the sacrifice which is offered on the altar; it is a metonymy. All these things have this aim, that the Apostle may prove that idolothytes are not to be eaten, and the sense is: See, O Christian Corinthians, the carnal Israelites: when they eat the victims offered to God, are they not reckoned partakers of the sacrifice offered to God on the altar, and to consummate the sacrifice itself, and through this in a certain manner to sacrifice? as if to say: In the same way those who eat of the Eucharistic bread are partakers of the Eucharistic sacrifice; and those who eat idolothytes participate in the idolatrous sacrifices, and consummate them, and through this in a manner sacrifice to idols. He proves it from the example of the Jews, that those who eat of idolothytes consent to the sacrifices of idols, and as it were tacitly sacrifice to idols. So the Fathers.
Verse 19. WHAT THEN? DO I SAY THAT WHAT IS OFFERED TO IDOLS IS ANYTHING? OR THAT THE IDOL IS ANYTHING? — As if to say: By no means: for the idol, and consequently the idolothyte, is nothing, has nothing of divinity or power, as I said in chapter viii, verse 4.
Verse 20. BUT (I say that those things) WHICH THE GENTILES SACRIFICE, THEY SACRIFICE TO DEMONS, AND NOT TO GOD. AND I WOULD NOT HAVE YOU BECOME PARTNERS OF DEMONS. 21. YOU CANNOT DRINK THE CUP OF THE LORD, AND THE CUP OF DEMONS; YOU CANNOT BE PARTAKERS OF THE TABLE OF THE LORD, AND OF THE TABLE OF DEMONS. — Of the table, namely the sacred one, that is the altar, which is as it were the table of God, on which God as it were feasts with us, as I said on Leviticus I, and is clear from Malachi I, 12. So Ambrose, Anselm and the Council of Trent, session XXII, ch. I, where from this place it teaches that the Eucharist is a sacrifice. That the Apostle is treating of it, not of the sacrifice of the cross, is clear first, because the victim of the cross has passed and long since ceased: but here the Apostle is treating of a sacrifice in which the Corinthians were daily partakers.
Secondly, from the word "bread and table of the Lord," that is, of the altar: for where there is an altar, there is also a priest and a sacrifice; for these three are correlatives. If therefore the Corinthians had an altar, they had also a sacrifice; assuredly no other than that of the Eucharist.
Thirdly, "the cup of the Lord" signifies nothing other than the cup sacrificed to the Lord: for "the cup of demons" is no other than that which is offered and sacrificed to them.
Fourthly, from the very comparison and argumentation of the Apostle, which is such: as the Jews, eating the peace victims, participate and consent in their sacrifice offered to God on the altar; so also those eating idolothytes in the idol-temple participate and consent in their sacrifice offered to demons on the altar: so also Christians receiving the Eucharist are partakers of the Eucharistic sacrifice, and through the priest sacrifice the Eucharist to God; and consequently it is altogether unbecoming that the same persons should sacrifice to the demon, by this very fact that they participate in idolothytes, as a part and consummation of the idolatrous sacrifice. For no one can sacrifice to God and to the demon at the same time. So St. Augustine, book I Against the Adversary of the Law and the Prophets, ch. xix, tome VI; Chrysostom in the Moral part, Anselm; and Theophylact, Oecumenius, Ambrose, Theodoret hint at the same. But St. Cyprian explicitly teaches the same, and confirms it by many examples of those who, after eating idolothytes, on approaching the Eucharist were punished by God, in his sermon On the Lapsed; and he adds: An earthly Emperor would not bear that any of his soldiers should defect by flight to the camps of his enemies; how much less will God permit that His own approach the banquets of demons?
Note first: After the sacrifice was performed, the flesh sacrificed to the idol was transferred from the altar and table of the idol to a table of men, set near the altar or temple, that those who had offered it might eat from it, together with their friends and guests. For they were accustomed to close sacrifices and feasts with this sacred banquet. So in Aeneid VIII Virgil teaches that Evander and Aeneas did so after the sacrifice, saying:
Then chosen youths in rivalry, and the priest of the altar,
bring the roasted entrails of bulls, and load the baskets
with gifts of wrought Ceres, and serve out Bacchus:
Aeneas feasts, and likewise the Trojan youth,
on the chine of a perpetual bullock, and on lustral entrails.
So also the Jews used to eat from the sacrifices they had offered in the atrium before the temple, as appears from I Kings ix, 13 and elsewhere. So also Christ closed the Eucharistic sacrifice with its banquet and distribution among the Apostles: hence in the primitive Church all the faithful communicated at Mass, that they might be partakers of the sacrifice, and close it with this banquet. Again, the Gentiles, who offered and sacrificed victims to their idols, after the sacrifice carried home with them ἀπαρχάς, that is portions, from them, that they might distribute them to their household, and send them to friends, and so make those absent partakers of the sacrifice, as Giraldus teaches from Herodotus and others in De Diis Gentium, at the end of the work. In like manner the Christians, in time of persecution, brought the Eucharist home, nay sent it to those absent, as a symbol of friendship and communion, and that they might make them partakers of the sacrifice.
Verse 22: Are We Jealous of the Lord? Are We Stronger Than He?
22. ARE WE JEALOUS OF THE LORD? — In Greek παραζηλοῦμεν, that is, do we provoke the Lord to anger and jealousy? Do we set up a rival and competitor against the Lord? So that, as though abandoning Him as our spouse, we might cling to the demon and his idol-offerings, or at least cling to both, wishing to join the demon with God? Thus Chrysostom, Anselm, Theophylact. Paul alludes to Deut. XXXII, 21, where it is said: "They have provoked Me in him who was not God, and have stirred Me to wrath in their vanities (idols)." Rightly does St. Jerome on Habakkuk II say that unclean spirits sit beside all idols, answering those who invoke the idols, giving oracles, or bringing aid.
ARE WE STRONGER THAN HE? — That is to say, by no means; therefore that rivalry, and that provocation of God to anger, of which I have already spoken, will not pass unpunished for us.
Verse 23: All Things Are Lawful for Me, but Not All Things Are Expedient
23. ALL THINGS ARE LAWFUL FOR ME. — "All things," namely indifferent things, such as eating things sacrificed to idols, not as sacred or as idol-offerings, but as common food. Note here: up to this point Paul has been treating of things sacrificed to idols as such, and so forbade eating them; whence at v. 14: "Flee," he says, "from the worship of idols," that is, lest you become partakers of the table and the cup of demons, as he explains at v. 20 — namely, by eating foods offered to idols in such a manner and circumstances as to be reckoned eating them as sacred, or as idol-offerings to be eaten in honor of the idol. But in this verse he passes to the second case, in which the idol-offering is eaten not formally as an idol-offering, but materially as food or flesh, and concerning this he says: "All things are lawful for me, but not all things are expedient;" because, as follows, not all things edify, that is, materially it is lawful in itself to eat of an idol-offering, but accidentally it is not lawful if scandal should follow, as is clear from vv. 27, 28, 33. Truly Clement said, in Strom. Bk. III after the beginning: "Those who do whatever is lawful easily slip into doing what is not lawful;" Theophylact explains this otherwise, but contrary to the Apostle's mind.
You will say: St. Augustine, Epistle 154, and in De Bono Conjugali XVI, and in Bk. XXXII Contra Faustum XIII, asks whether a Christian traveler pressed by hunger, if he finds nothing but food set in an idol-temple, and no one is present, may eat it, or whether it is better to die? And he answers: either it is certain to be an idol-offering, or it is certain not to be, or it is unknown: if it is certain that it is, it is better to refuse it from Christian virtue; if however it is known not to be, or is unknown, it may be taken without any scruple of conscience for use of necessity; otherwise, as I said, it is better to refuse it, lest the eater seem to have communed with idols. Therefore, if it is established that something is an idol-offering, one must abstain from it.
I answer: St. Augustine does not say: One must abstain from an idol-offering if it is certain it is one; but he says: "It is better to refuse it from Christian virtue:" therefore he sufficiently implies that it is lawful to eat of it, but that he would act better and more nobly who abstained from it, and would prefer to die rather than eat it. The case is similar with the Carthusian: for it is permitted to him in extreme necessity to eat meat in order to preserve his life; yet he will act better and more holily if, by reason of his profession, he abstains from it, and so dies, as Victoria teaches in his Relection On Temperance, n. 8; Azorius, Moral. Bk. V, ch. 6, at the end, and others. For he is not bound to preserve his life in every way and at every time, but he may subordinate it to the sanctity of his vow, or rather of his profession, and that for the sake of giving others an example of virtue and of confirming the discipline and rigor of his Order: for the Carthusians do not make an express vow of abstaining from meat, but only this abstinence is prescribed by their constitutions.
Verse 24: Let No One Seek What Is His Own, but What Is Another's
24. LET NO ONE SEEK WHAT IS HIS OWN, BUT WHAT IS ANOTHER'S. — That is to say: let no one seek out or buy meat — for instance, that has been offered to idols — for his own convenience, pleasure, savor, or low price; but in this matter and in others like it, let him seek the edification of another, that is, of his neighbor, so that he does not buy and eat it with his neighbor's scandal and spiritual harm. Thus Theophylact.
Verse 25: Whatsoever Is Sold in the Meat-Market, Eat, Asking No Questions
25. WHATSOEVER IS SOLD IN THE MEAT-MARKET, EAT, ASKING NO QUESTIONS. — "Whatsoever," that is, all things, eat indifferently, whether sacrificed to idols or not. "Asking no questions," in Greek μηδὲν ἀνακρίνοντες, that is, judging nothing, or discerning nothing; Ambrose: investigating nothing; Theophylact: hesitating in nothing.
IN THE MEAT-MARKET. — In Greek ἐν μακέλλῳ, for ἐν κρεοπωλίῳ; the Syriac likewise retains the Latin word macellum: thus also praetorium, Caesar, denarius, speculator, etc., are used in Greek by the Evangelists although they are Latin words, because the Greeks adopted them from the Latins and Romans who ruled over them, as if they were common parlance.
Note from Herodotus in the Clio, and from St. Augustine, in his unfinished exposition of the Epistle to the Romans, ch. 128: The Gentiles used to send the meats sacrificed and offered to idols, those that were left over after the sacrifice and the banquet, to the meat-market to be sold, the proceeds of which were turned over to the priests. In the meat-market, therefore, they were considered to revert, like other meats, to profane and common use. "Some," says St. Augustine, "being weaker at that time, abstained from meats and wine, lest unawares they fall upon those things that had been sacrificed to idols; for at that time all sacrificial meat was sold in the meat-market, and the Gentiles poured out libations of the firstfruits of wine to their idols, and some made sacrifices upon the very wine-presses." Hence the Apostle, dispelling this scruple, advises that they buy and eat indiscriminately whatever is set out in the meat-market, discerning or asking nothing as to whether or not it comes from an idol-temple, for conscience' sake — as though those things would be polluted for them if they came from the idol-temple. The Christians of Antioch followed this instruction of the Apostle when Julian the Apostate sought to compel and ensnare them, as it were, into idolatry through idol-offerings. Theodoret narrates the affair thus, in Bk. III, ch. 15: "Julian," he says, "first contaminated the fountains with wicked victims, so that each one who tasted the water might be infected with a foul stain of wickedness. Then he polluted the things displayed in the marketplace with the same stain of crime; for breads, meats, fruits, vegetables, and all other foodstuffs were sprinkled with lustral water; and the Christians, when they saw this, although they could not but groan and detest those crimes, nevertheless ate of the same, obeying the Apostle's command which thus enjoins: Whatsoever is sold in the meat-market, eat, asking no questions for conscience' sake."
AND FOR CONSCIENCE' SAKE. — That is, lest you wound the conscience of your brother who is weak in faith, sitting beside you at table, when by your example you provoke him to eat idol-offerings against his own conscience. Whence explaining this the Apostle adds: "But I speak of the conscience, not thine own, but the other's." For conscience' sake — as though a scruple were to be made, if they sell idol-offerings, and you would have to ask whether the meats you wish to buy have been offered to idols, and whether it would be lawful to buy and eat such things. So Anselm, Ambrose, Theodoret. Hence it is clear that Paul is not speaking of the fasts of the Church, as though on any day, even a fast day, it were lawful to eat meats sold in the meat-market. For these fasts and abstinences are not indifferent matters but are commanded by the Church. Wherefore Paul, in Acts XV and XVI, ordered that the decree of abstinence from blood and what is strangled be observed: which is purely positive law and sanctioned by the Apostles alone.
Verse 26: The Earth Is the Lord's, and the Fulness Thereof
26. THE EARTH IS THE LORD'S, AND THE FULNESS THEREOF. — That is to say: every creature, because it is the Lord's, is good and clean; so too things sacrificed to idols are not unclean, as you think them to be because they have been offered to a demon, but they are clean because they have been created by the Lord. So Chrysostom, Theophylact, Anselm. Theophylact adduces an additional sense besides, to this effect: Abstain from this food sacrificed to idols, for the whole earth is the Lord's, and you may abundantly satisfy and fill yourself from elsewhere; for in the Greek manuscript of Theophylact, instead of ἄνωθεν, that is, from above, it seems we ought to correct to ἄλλοθεν, that is, from elsewhere. But this sense does not aptly cohere with what preceded: "Whatsoever is sold in the meat-market, eat."
Verse 27: If Any of the Unbelievers Invite You, and You Are Willing to Go: Eat Whatever Is Set Before You
27. IF ANY OF THE UNBELIEVERS INVITE YOU (TO DINNER OR SUPPER, AS SOME MANUSCRIPTS READ HERE), AND YOU ARE WILLING TO GO: EAT WHATEVER IS SET BEFORE YOU (EVEN THOUGH IT BE SACRIFICED TO AN IDOL), ASKING NO QUESTIONS FOR CONSCIENCE' SAKE — namely, in the sense that I have already brought forward; and this, says Theophylact: "Lest by too anxious care or excessive curiosity you appear to dread idols, and that you may keep your conscience free and unharmed." For if you ask, and it is answered to be an idol-offering, your conscience will be bound, and you will not be able to eat of it, whence follows:
Verse 28: But If Any One Says: This Has Been Sacrificed to Idols, Do Not Eat
28. BUT IF ANY ONE SAYS (AT DINNER OR SUPPER): THIS HAS BEEN SACRIFICED TO IDOLS, DO NOT EAT, ON ACCOUNT OF HIM WHO POINTED IT OUT, — that is, that this meat has been offered to idols and is sacred, and consequently must be eaten religiously, that is, if the one who points it out is an infidel who has invited you to dinner, or another idolater: for if after his indication you eat of it, he will think you become with him a partaker of idolatry; but if the one indicating it is a Christian and scrupulous, thinking it not lawful to eat them as polluted by idolatry, then after his indication do not eat of them, lest you scandalize him; otherwise, if all scandal of both faithful and infidels ceases, it is lawful to eat even of idol-offerings indicated and known as such, as I said in ch. VIII at the beginning.
AND FOR CONSCIENCE' SAKE. —
Verse 29: For Why Is My Liberty Judged by Another's Conscience?
29. FOR WHY IS MY LIBERTY JUDGED BY ANOTHER'S CONSCIENCE? — That is to say: Why should I use my liberty with scandal, so as to be condemned by another's conscience? For that conscience, since it is weak and untrained, thinks me to be doing a damnable thing if I eat idol-offerings — i.e., this is by no means to be done. Thus Ambrose.
Verse 30: If I Partake with Thanksgiving, Why Am I Blasphemed for That for Which I Give Thanks?
30. IF I PARTAKE WITH THANKSGIVING, WHY AM I BLASPHEMED FOR THAT FOR WHICH I GIVE THANKS? — That is to say: Although it is lawful for me, by the grace of Evangelical liberty, to eat idol-offerings while giving thanks to the Lord, yet why, doing this with scandal, should I be "blasphemed," that is, expose myself to the curses of others, that they should speak ill of me as though I were an idolater, or polluted by communion with idols? It could secondly be taken thus: "with grace," that is, with thanksgiving. Whence follows by way of explanation: "For that for which I give thanks." From this it is gathered that it was the custom of the ancients to bless the table before the meal and to give thanks to God after it; concerning which I shall say more on 1 Timothy ch. IV, vv. 4 and 5.
Verse 31: Whether You Eat or Drink, or Do Anything Else: Do All to the Glory of God
31. WHETHER YOU EAT OR DRINK, OR DO ANYTHING ELSE: DO ALL TO THE GLORY OF GOD. — This is of counsel, not of precept: for we are not bound to do all things actually, nor even virtually, for God's glory, although it is most pious to do so. Similarly in ch. XVI he says: "Let all your things be done in charity." Secondly, if anyone wishes to make it a precept, let him expound it with Anselm, Ambrose, and Cajetan in terms of aptitude and capability, that is to say: So eat, drink, and do all your things in such a way that they be apt and capable of promoting the glory of God — namely, such as that God may be glorified by them, no one offended, and God's glory not injured; but rather all edified, and consequently God's glory celebrated and propagated. And that this is the more fitting sense here is clear from what precedes, where the avoidance of scandal is treated. Whence also follows: "Be without offense to Jews, and to Gentiles, and to the Church of God." For Paul opposes the glory of God to the glory of demons, which is served by those who eat idol-offerings in honor of an idol, or with scandal to their neighbors; whereas, on the contrary, those serve God's glory who abstain from idol-offerings, and eat and do those things which help and promote God's honor and worship and the salvation of their neighbors.
St. Thomas (I-II, Q. 100, art. 10, ad 2) answers otherwise: that it is a precept that at some time a man should refer himself and all that is his, in general, to the glory of God as to his ultimate end. But the Apostle here is not speaking of one or another act, but of what one ought to do continually and always.
Thirdly, the fuller sense will be if you expound it thus: So zealously promote God's glory in all things (which is of counsel), and altogether take care that you do nothing which is opposed to God's glory, or that you give scandal in the eating of idol-offerings (for it is to this that it properly looks) or in any other matter, by which God might be reproached — which is of precept. For although this saying and counsel of the Apostle is affirmative, nevertheless it includes a negative precept. Hence it does not follow from this that all the works of unbelievers are sins because they do not perform them for the glory of the true God, since they do not know Him: because, as I have said, to do all one's works and to refer them actually to God's glory is not of precept but of counsel.
Morally, on this Tertullian (in De Corona Militis) and St. Jerome (Ad Eustochium) assert that it was the custom among Christians at that time to sign themselves with the cross at the beginning of every work, as if to say: Let this work be done to the glory of God in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. St. Basil asks in his Shorter Rules, Rule 196, How does one eat and drink to the glory of God? He answers: if, mindful of God's benefits, he is so composed in mind and body that he does not eat as one altogether unconcerned, but as one who has God for his observer, and if he resolves to eat not as a slave of his belly for pleasure but as a worker of God, that he may have strength to serve Him more vigorously and to carry out the works and commands of Christ; this is (to put it most briefly) if he refers his eating and drinking to the praise of God, not seeking the pleasure of food but ordering and offering it to God's glory — which, indeed, all should fittingly do and accustom themselves to do, not only Religious, but also Christians and true worshipers of God. Wherefore the same Basil beautifully exhorts us, in his homily on the Martyr Julitta, citing this passage of the Apostle: "Whether you eat or drink, or do anything else, do all to the glory of God," thus: "Sitting down at table, pray; eating bread, render thanks to the giver; you drink wine, remember Him who gave it to you for joy and the comfort of your infirmities; you put on a tunic, give thanks to the kindly giver; you look up at heaven and the beauty of the stars, fall down before God, and worship Him who made all these things in wisdom. In like manner, at the rising and setting of the sun, in sleep and waking, give thanks to God, who created and ordained all these things for your benefit, that you might acknowledge, love, and praise the Creator."
Verse 33: As I Also in All Things Please All Men
33. AS I ALSO IN ALL THINGS PLEASE ALL MEN, — that is, I try and strive to please, so that I may edify all, offend and scandalize no one; although in fact I displease some who are either ignorant, or rivals, or perverse. For "I please" here signifies the inchoate act, or the endeavor to please, according to Canon 32. Whence the Apostle explains, adding: "Not seeking that which is profitable to myself, but to many, that they may be saved."