Commentary on 1 Corinthians (Super I Epistolam ad Corinthios Lectura)

With the error concerning the correction of crimes excluded, in chapters V and VI; likewise concerning virginity and marriage, in chapter VII; here he excludes the error concerning the eating and abstaining from foods, in this chapter, and IX and X, speaking of those things which were sacrificed to idols, from which — although lawful in themselves — he counsels abstaining: first, by alleging to them the scandal of the weak, in this chapter; second, the example of himself, who on account of others abstains from receiving lawful wages, in chapter IX; third, the example of the punishment of the Jews, laid low in the desert after so many benefits of God, in chapter X. Therefore, on account of the scandal of the neighbor, by the example of the apostle, and not on account of fear of punishment, we ought sometimes to abstain from foods that are lawful.

In the first part he shows that the eating of things offered to idols is lawful in itself; second, he counsels nevertheless to abstain on account of the scandal of the weak brothers, where: "see lest perhaps," etc.

In the first, first he proposes that the greater among them have knowledge concerning things offered to idols; second, he shows what kind of knowledge they have concerning them, where: "but concerning the foods that are sacrificed to idols," etc.; third, that certain weak ones lack this knowledge, where: "but knowledge is not in all," etc.; fourth, that others ought not to eat things offered to idols in their presence, where: "food however does not commend us to God."

In the first, first he says that they have knowledge concerning things offered to idols; second, that they have it uselessly without charity, where: "but knowledge puffs up," etc.; third he shows by whom this knowledge is had insufficiently, where: "but if any man think"; fourth, by whom sufficiently, where: "but if any man love," etc.

He says therefore, "but concerning these things," etc., as if to say: concerning the aforesaid things you asked of me, namely concerning things pertaining to marriage; but concerning other things, as concerning things sacrificed to idols, it was not necessary to ask, because you all know the truth on this matter. And this is what he says: "but concerning these things that are sacrificed to idols," whether it is lawful to eat or not, I and you know that it is lawful to eat them, according to that word to Titus 1:15: "all things are clean to the clean." "We know that we all have knowledge" — namely I and you who are perfect among others — that is, knowledge concerning the creator and creatures; and therefore we are less excusable if we do evil.

Then, when he says "but knowledge puffs up," etc., here he shows how they have knowledge uselessly without charity, as if to say: you indeed have knowledge, but it does not avail you, because from it you grow proud against the ignorant; but knowledge, if it stands alone, puffs up. Ecclesiastes 1:18: "in much wisdom there is much indignation." Acts 26:24: "much learning doth make thee mad." For this was the plague of the Egyptians, that is, of the wise of this world: "swelling blisters," Exodus 9:9. But charity builds up the weak, which lets go of what could harm them, because it does not seek the things that are its own. Whence charity must be added to knowledge. Augustine: "add therefore charity to knowledge, and knowledge will be useful." In itself indeed it is useless, but from charity it is useful. The Philosopher: "to know profits either nothing, or little, toward virtue."

Then, when he says "but if any man think," etc., here he shows by whom this knowledge is had insufficiently, namely by those who use it to the harm of the neighbor. And his reasoning is this: whoever has knowledge and not the manner of using it, has knowledge insufficiently; but he who has knowledge without charity is of this kind; therefore he who has knowledge without charity, has knowledge insufficiently. First, therefore, he supposes knowledge without charity; second, he shows the insufficiency of such knowledge, where: "he hath not yet known," etc.; third, the reason of the insufficiency, where: "as it behooveth," etc.

He says therefore, "but if any man," etc., as if to say: you have knowledge, but not sufficient, because if any of you thinks that he knows, having knowledge without charity, he knows something, namely that it is lawful to eat things offered to idols. Nevertheless he has not yet known, because he shows by his deed that he does not know how it behooves him to know, that is, how he ought to use knowledge — namely unto edification, not unto the harm of others. But to know happens in two ways, namely to have knowledge and to use knowledge: just as to see is to have sight, and to use sight. The Gloss of Bernard: here the apostle does not approve one who knows many things, if he has not known the manner of knowing. For the manner of knowing is that you know in what order, with what zeal, to what end it behooves each thing to be known: in what order, so that what is more urgent unto salvation comes first; with what zeal, so that what is more efficacious unto love be sought more ardently; to what end, so that you do not wish to know something for empty glory or curiosity, but for the edification of yourself and your neighbor. For there are those who wish to know for this end only, that they may know, and it is curiosity; some, that they may be known, and it is vanity; some, that they may sell their knowledge, and it is base gain; some, that they may be edified, and it is prudence; some, that they may edify, and it is charity.

Then, when he says "but if any man love," etc., here he shows by whom this knowledge is had sufficiently, namely by those who use it out of charity. First, therefore, he supposes knowledge with charity; second, he shows the sufficiency of such knowledge, where: "the same is known." He says therefore, "if any man," etc., as if to say: he does not know perfectly who does not know how it behooves him to know. "But if any man love God," and thus has charity together with knowledge, "the same is known" — that is, approved — by him. "For the Lord knoweth who are his," 2 Timothy 2:19. Whence such a one truly knows, with God approving, because he uses knowledge well on account of the charity joined to it.

It should be noted here that for someone to know how it behooves him to know, nine things are necessary. First, humbly, without puffing up. Philippians 4:12: "I know how to be humbled." Psalm 130:2: "if I did not feel humbly." Second, soberly, without presumption. Above, chapter 2:2: "I did not judge myself to know." Romans 12:3: "not to be wiser than it behooveth." Third, with certainty, without hesitation. 2 Timothy 1:12: "I know whom I have believed, and I am certain." Fourth, truly and without error. 2 Timothy 3:7: "ever learning, and never attaining to the knowledge of the truth." Fifth, simply, without deception. 1 Timothy 6:20: "oppositions of knowledge falsely so called." Sixth, wholesomely, with charity and love. Below, 13:2: "if I should have all knowledge, but should not have charity." Seventh, usefully, with the edification of neighbors. Below, 12:8: "to another is given the word of knowledge in the same spirit." Eighth, liberally, with free communication. Wisdom 6:24: "I will place her wisdom in the light." Ninth, effectively, with good work. James 4:17: "for to him that knoweth good, and doth it not, it is sin to him." The first, namely the humility of knowledge, reproves the proud wise; sobriety, the curious; certainty, the doubtful; truth, the heretics; simplicity, the advocates; wholesomeness, the great; usefulness, the wicked; liberality, the avaricious; effectiveness, the idle.

Then, when he says "but concerning the foods that are sacrificed to idols," etc., here he shows what kind of knowledge they have concerning things offered to idols, showing first that they know an idol to be nothing; second, that they know all things to be from God, where: "for although there be that are called gods." In the first, first he says that an idol is nothing; second, next to this, for the sake of clarification, he shows that God is only one, where: "and that there is no God," etc.

He says therefore, "but concerning the foods," etc., as if to say: in the aforesaid ways knowledge does not avail, but nevertheless, concerning the foods that are sacrificed to idols, we know — namely with true knowledge — that they are in themselves lawful, nor are they unclean on account of the idol; and this because an idol is nothing in the world. This is explained in three ways. In the first way, thus: an idol is nothing in the world, that is, among the creatures of the world as regards the form of the idol; for although the matter of the idol is something, namely gold, or silver, or the like, nevertheless the form is nothing — namely that which is believed to be there by the idolaters, who believe the idol to be God. Isaiah 41:24: "behold you are of nothing, and your work of that which hath no being." In the second way, thus: an idol is nothing, namely a subsisting person made of an image and a presiding spirit; for from these two nothing comes to be, as is thought by the idolaters. Jeremiah 10:14: "every artificer is confounded by the graven thing, for that which he hath cast is false, and there is no spirit in it." In the third way, thus: an idol is nothing in the world, that is, having the likeness of no thing that is in the world. For there is a difference between an idol and an image, because an image is said to be that which is made to the likeness of some natural thing; but an idol is the likeness of no thing, as if a horse's head were added to a human body. Isaiah 40:18: "to whom then have you made God like," etc. And we know also that there is no God but one. Deuteronomy 6:4: "hear, Israel, the Lord thy God is one God."

Then, when he says "for although there be that," etc., here he shows that they know all things to be from God, not from gods so-called or adopted, as are idols, or the saints, but from the one most high. First, therefore, he tells how a plurality of gods can be understood, namely through adoption or naming; second, how there is a unity of divinity, namely through essence, where: "yet to us there is but one God," etc. Where first he touches the unity in the Father; second in the Son, where: "and one Lord," etc. In the first he touches three things, namely essence, because "one God"; person, because "the Father"; power, "of whom are all things"; clemency, because "and we in him"; and he likewise touches these same things in the Son.

He says therefore, "for although there be," etc., as if to say: and truly there is but one God, for although there be that are called gods — truly by participation in the divinity, as the saints, Psalm 81:6: "I have said, you are gods," whether "in heaven," as the saints in possession, or "in earth," as the saints on the way — since indeed there are many gods truly by participation in the divinity, as the saintly and just lords, apostles, and prelates — yet to us, etc. In another way it is read thus: "for although there be that are called gods" by the gentiles, namely by false naming, whether "in heaven," as the sun and moon, or "in earth," as Mercury and Diana. "If indeed there be gods many" — namely only by naming, according to the gentiles. Psalm 95:5: "the gods of the gentiles are devils." "And lords many," who rule over others — "yet to us there is but one God" essentially, namely the Father, "of whom are all things" according to nature and through paternal authority, Romans 11:36: "of whom are all things," and we in him through grace. Acts 17:28: "in him we live, and move, and are." And one, with the Father, God, the Lord Jesus Christ. John 10:30: "I and the Father are one." "By whom are all things," namely made according to nature, John 1:3: "all things were made by him." "And we by him," namely we are in God through grace. Romans 1:5: "by whom I have received grace," etc. Therefore the most high creator of all is one, omnipotent. From these things such a reasoning is drawn: there is but one God who made all things, but idols are many; therefore they are not the God who made all things, nor are they believed to be anything; therefore they are nothing.

"But knowledge is not in all." Having established that the greater among them have knowledge concerning things offered to idols, here he shows that the lesser lack this knowledge. Where first he shows that in certain ones the aforesaid knowledge concerning things offered to idols was lacking; second, that on account of this — namely the eating of things offered to idols — their conscience is polluted. Where first he touches the reason of the polluted conscience; second, the pollution itself, where: "and their conscience," etc.

He says therefore, "but not in all," etc., as if to say: this we know, namely that an idol is nothing, but not in all, as in the weak, is this knowledge. And truly it is not in all: "some however," etc. Or thus: we know that an idol is nothing in the world; for some, "with the conscience of the idol" — because, namely, they think the idol to be something divine — "even until now," that is, after their conversion, just as before, "eat the thing offered to idols," that is, of things consecrated to idols, and this not as food simply, but as a thing offered to an idol, namely in reverence of the idol; and "their conscience, being weak, is defiled" — namely by those who have right knowledge, but not with charity, by whom the weak are led into this error. Deuteronomy 27:19: "cursed be he that maketh the blind to wander in the way." Here he hints that it is not the food, but the conscience, that is polluted through sin, by eating according to the example of the wicked.

Then, when he says "but food does not commend," etc., here, fourthly, he shows that they ought not to eat things offered to idols in their presence. Where first he shows that eating of this kind profits nothing before God; second, he proves that it confers no increase of good, where: "for neither if you eat not."

He says therefore, "but food," etc., as if to say: your eating harms them, but it does not profit you. "For food does not commend us to God," but right faith in eating. For neither was Esau justified by the eating of lentils, nor was Elijah defiled by the eating of meats. Romans 14:17: "the kingdom of God is not meat and drink." Hebrews, last chapter: "it is good to establish the heart with grace, not with meats."

Then, when he says "for neither, if we shall not eat," etc., here he proves what he proposed, and his reasoning is this: not to eat a thing offered to idols does not diminish good, to eat it does not increase good; therefore such food, taken or not taken, profits nothing before God. And this is what he says: "for neither, if we shall not eat, shall we fail" — that is, shall we have less on that account — "nor if we shall eat, shall we abound" in virtues, because food profits the belly, not the mind; and thus, since it does not pertain to the truth of life, justice, and doctrine, it is to be given up on account of scandal.

This is the second part of this chapter; for above he showed that the eating of things sacrificed to idols is licit in itself, here he warns to abstain from it on account of the scandal of the weak. Here, first he warns them not to offend the brethren by their eating; second, in what way one can give offense, at *if anyone sees*, etc.; third, he shows the evil that can arise from it, at *and the weak one will perish*, etc.; fourth, he offers himself as an example of those who abstain, at *wherefore if food scandalizes*, etc. He says therefore: *see*, because as far as we are concerned the food itself neither profits nor harms, but nevertheless see lest perhaps this license of yours, by which you know it is lawful for you to eat of things sacrificed to idols, become a stumbling block to the weak in faith, who do not yet know that an idol is nothing. Leviticus 19: *you shall not put a stumbling block before the blind*. Then when he says *if anyone sees*, etc., here he shows in what way they can give offense, namely by eating a thing sacrificed to idols in the presence of the weak: here four things concurring toward scandal are implied. First, the knowledge of the greater ones; second, the public eating of the thing sacrificed to idols, at *reclining in the idol's temple*; third, the occasion of scandal received, at *will not his conscience?* He says therefore *if for anyone*, etc.; as if to say: and truly it can be a stumbling block, for if some weak person sees him who has knowledge reclining in the idol's temple, that is, in the presence of the idol, will not his conscience, since it is weak, be built up, that is, through your act, to the eating of things sacrificed to idols, that is, things sacrificed in reverence of the idol? As if to say: for seeing a brother skilled eating things sacrificed in the idol's temple, he himself begins to eat not with that conscience by which the other eats, namely for the sake of expertise, but he thinks that to be a divinity in whose reverence this is done. Then when he says *and the weak one will perish*, here he shows the evil that can arise from it, and this is twofold: first the scandal of the neighbor; second the offense of the neighbor, at *but thus sinning*, etc. In the first, three things are implied: the condition of the one sinning, because he is weak; the occasion of sinning, because it is in your conscience; the aggravation of the sin, because it is on account of him for whom Christ died. He says therefore: *and thus the weak one will perish*, in faith, that is, in your knowledge, *the brother*, that is, by the occasion taken from your knowledge, because he sees you, the wise one, eating, thinking that you eat under the veneration of the idol, *for whom, to be saved, Christ died*, and thus you sin gravely. Romans 14: *do not by your food destroy him for whom Christ died*. *But thus sinning against the brethren*, by the sin of scandal, *and wounding their weak conscience*, by the sword of bad example, Amos 9: *strike the hinge*, that is, the conscience, *and the lintels shall be shaken*, that is, the understanding and the affection; *you sin against Christ*, whose members they are. He does not say "against Christ" absolutely, according to the Gloss, because to sin against Christ is to deny Christ, that is, to sin in faith. To sin *in Christ* is to sin in the things that are Christ's, namely in morals; just as one who is under the law is said to sin under the law, but one who is not under the law is said to sin against the law. Then when he says *wherefore if food*, etc., here at last he sets himself forth as an example of abstinence, where first he implies scandal; second from this he explains his resolve of abstinence, at *I will not eat*, etc.; third he forestalls a doubt, at *lest my brother*, etc. He says therefore: *wherefore*, namely lest I sin against Christ, *if food scandalizes my brother, I will not eat any flesh*, not only things sacrificed to idols, *forever*: if therefore on account of the scandal of the brethren one must abstain as it were from the necessities of life, much more from the superfluous things. And this, not because food is evil in itself, but lest I scandalize my brother. For *whoever shall scandalize one of these little ones, it is expedient for him that a millstone be hung about his neck*, etc., Matthew 18:6. Romans 14:20: *all things are clean to the clean, but it is evil for the man who eats with offense*.

Here a question is raised about that saying *knowledge puffs up*, the Gloss: *knowledge in itself is useless*. On the contrary, knowledge is in itself good, therefore also useful. Response. It is useless for salvation, yet useful for many other things. Likewise, *charity builds up*. On the contrary: just as knowledge puffs up, not through cause, but through occasion, so also does charity. Response. It is not alike, because knowledge manifests itself to the one who has it, but charity does not so manifest itself, because no one is certain of his charity. Likewise on that saying *an idol is nothing*, the Gloss: *God formed the nature, but the folly of men gave the form*. On the contrary: every being is from God, therefore every form. Response. The Gloss speaks of a putative form in nature, not a true one. Likewise in the same place, the Gloss: *the form of a man in an idol was not made through the Word*. On the contrary, John 1:3: *all things were made through him*. Response: although the form of a man in that idol was made through the Word, yet not in the idol, that is, for the purpose of being worshipped. Likewise in the same place, the Gloss: *an idol is nothing, because it has the likeness of no thing that is in the world*. On the contrary: an artisan cannot conceive or form anything except such things as he has seen. Response. It does not have a likeness in whole, but in its parts. Likewise on that saying *no God but one*, the Gloss: *this he says lest it be thought that there is a God in the idol*. On the contrary: God, although he is one, is nevertheless everywhere. Response. He is in the idol through power, not through presence or union, as the gentiles thought. Likewise in the same place, the Gloss: *a part of the Trinity cannot be whichever one among the three*. On the contrary: of any number whatsoever, unity is a part. Response. The Trinity is not a number simply, but a number of persons. Likewise on that saying *and if there are those who are called gods*, the Gloss: *by participation in divinity*. On the contrary: divinity is unparticipable. Response. This participation is through cause, not through essence. Likewise in the same place, the Gloss asks whether angels are to be called gods. Response. Although they participate in divinity, nevertheless, according to the Gloss, they are not to be called gods on account of the danger of adoration. Likewise on that saying *yet to us there is one Father*, the Gloss: *the Trinity is to us one Father, yet not he who is the third person in the Trinity, another*. On the contrary: the same and the diverse divide being. I respond, that although the same and the diverse divide created being, they do not divide the uncreated, because there identity in essence exists together with diversity in persons. Likewise, *not in all is there knowledge*. On the contrary, above in the same place: *we all have knowledge*. Response. That is not understood universally, but of the greater part. Likewise on that saying *food does not commend us to God*, the Gloss says, *whether taken or not taken*. On the contrary: therefore abstinence merits nothing. Response. Not the virtue of food, but the virtue of abstinence profits. Likewise, *if food scandalizes*, etc. On the contrary: therefore for the scandal of a brother one must abstain from bread and wine in perpetuity. Response: it is not alike concerning necessary things and superfluous things; or he is speaking here of active scandal, not passive. Or this belongs to perfection, not to necessity.

It should be noted here on that saying *one God*, that "God" can be taken in many ways: namely by false naming, and thus idols are called gods. Psalm 95:5: *all the gods of the gentiles are demons*; Jeremiah 10:11: *the gods who did not make heaven and earth shall perish from the earth*. By true adoption, and thus the saints are called gods. Psalm 81:6: *I have said: you are gods, and all of you sons of the Most High, but you like*, etc. By worldly preeminence, and thus prelates are called gods. Exodus 22:28: *you shall not speak ill of the gods*. John 10:35: *if he called them gods, to whom*, etc. By property of essence, and thus the Trinity is called God. Deuteronomy 6:4: *hear, Israel, the Lord your God is one*.

Likewise it should be noted that Christ is called one without equal in many ways. First, one God on account of the nature of divinity; hence in this way no one is God but one. Second, one creator on account of the infinity of power. Sirach 1:8: *one is the most high creator of all things*. Third, one man on account of the singular eminence of holiness. Psalm 13:1: *there is none who does good*, etc. John 11:50: *it is expedient that one man die*. Fourth, one lord on account of the governance of preeminence. Ephesians 4:5: *one lord, one faith*, etc. And in this way, one lord Jesus Christ. Fifth, one master on account of the infusion of knowledge. Matthew 23:10: *be not called masters, for one is your master, Christ*. Sixth, one father on account of the production of the universe. Matthew 23:9: *for one is your father, who is in heaven*. Seventh, one shepherd on account of the general refreshment of the faithful people. John 10:16: *there shall be one fold and one shepherd*. Eighth, one victim on account of the singular price of our redemption. Hebrews 10:14: *for by one oblation he has perfected forever those who are sanctified*.