Lectio 5 Lecture 5 Immolationes daemoniis Sacrifices to devils ^10:18 Videte Israël secundum carnem: nonne qui edunt hostias, participes sunt altaris? [n. 555] ^10:18 Behold Israel according to the flesh. Are not they that eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar? [n. 555] ^10:19 Quid ergo? dico quod idolis immolatum sit aliquid? aut quod idolum, sit aliquid? [n. 556] ^10:19 What then? Do I say that what is offered in sacrifice to idols is anything? Or that the idol is anything? [n. 556] ^10:20 Sed quae immolant gentes, daemoniis immolant, et non Deo. Nolo autem vos socios fieri daemoniorum: ^10:20 But the things which the heathens sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils and not to God. And I do not want you to be made partakers with devils. ^10:21 non potestis calicem Domini bibere, et calicem daemoniorum; non potestis mensae Domini participes esse, et mensae daemoniorum. [n. 558] ^10:21 You cannot drink the chalice of the Lord and the chalice of devils: you cannot be partakers of the table of the Lord and of the table of devils. [n. 558] ^10:22 An aemulamur Dominum? numquid fortiores illo sumus? [n. 559] ^10:22 Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he? [n. 559] ^10:23 Omnia mihi licent, sed non omnia expediunt. Omnia mihi licent, sed non omnia aedificat. [n. 561] ^10:23 All things are lawful for me: but all things are not expedient. All things are lawful for me: but all things do not edify. [n. 561] ^10:24 Nemo quod suum est quaerat, sed quod alterius. ^10:24 Let no man seek his own, but that which is another’s. 555. Superius monuit abstinere a comestione idolothitorum, primo ex timore poenae consimilis, secundo ex communione altaris; hic tertio monet ad idem ex similitudine sacrificii legalis. Ubi primo excitat attentionem; secundo ostendit propositum, ibi nonne qui edunt hostias. 555. Above he warned them to refrain from eating the food of idols, first out of fear of a like punishment, second, by the sharing of the altar; here he advises the same thing in a third way, by the likeness to a sacrifice of the law. Here he first catches their attention; second he shows his aim, at are not they that eat of the sacrifices. Dicit ergo videte. Hoc dupliciter legitur. Uno modo de sacrificiis Iudaeorum, alio modo de ritu gentilium. Primo modo hoc, quod dico Israel, est accusativi casus, alio modo vocativi. Primo modo sic, quasi dicat: multi unum corpus sumus, qui de uno pane, et de uno calice participamus. Et hoc patet per hanc similitudinem videte Israel secundum carnem, supple ambulantem, id est carnalibus sacrificiis deservientem. Hoc dicit ad differentiam Israel secundum spiritum. De utroque Rom. II, 28: non enim qui in manifesto Iudaeus, et cetera. Nonne qui edunt hostias, legales, participes sunt altaris, legalis? Sicut qui edunt Carnem Christi et Sanguinem, participes sunt corporis eius. Therefore he says behold. This can be read in two ways. In the first, it is about the sacrifices of the Jews; in the other, it is about the rites of the gentiles. In the first way, so that Israel is in the accusative case; in the second way, it is in the vocative. Thus in the first reading, it is as if he says: we, being many, are one body, who partake of one bread and one chalice. And this is clear by that comparison, behold Israel according to the flesh; namely, walking according to the flesh, that is, serving carnal sacrifices. He says this to differentiate Israel according to the spirit. About both it is said: for he is not a Jew who is one outwardly (Rom 2:28). Are not they that eat of the sacrifices—the sacrifices of the law—partakers of the altar—the altar of the law? Just as the ones who eat the Flesh of Christ and his Blood, are partakers of his body. Secundo modo legitur sic: videte, o Israel, o vos qui estis Israel, spiritualis videntis, scilicet Deum; videte, inquam, ea quae sunt secundum carnem, id est, in idololatriae ritu carnali. Nonne qui edunt hostias, idolis scilicet immolatas, participes sunt altaris, daemonum et idolorum? Quasi dicat: sic. Est ergo sua ratio talis: qui edunt hostias oblatas altari, participes sunt altaris. A simili qui edunt hostias immolatas idolis, participes sunt idolorum sive daemoniorum. The second way is read like this: behold, O Israel, O you who are of the spiritual Israel, because you see God; behold, I say, those things that are according to the flesh, that is, in the carnal rituals of idolatry. Are not they that eat of the sacrifice—that is, sacrificed to idols—partakers of the altar—the altar of demons and idols? As though he said: yes. Therefore his argument is as follows: those who eat sacrifices poured out on the altar, are partakers of the altar. By the same token, whoever eats sacrifices sacrificed to idols, is a partaker of idols and demons. 556. Deinde cum dicit quid ergo dico, etc., superius posuit monitionem cavendi ab idolothitorum comestione, hic ponit causam admonitionis. Ponit autem quatuor causas quare debent ab idolothitis abstinere: primo propter vitandam daemonis societatem, secundo propter vitandam sacrae communionis exclusionem, ibi quia non potestis calicem Domini bibere, etc., tertio propter vitandam Dei indignationem, ibi an aemulamur Dominum, etc., quarto propter fratrum laesionem, ibi omnia mihi licent, et cetera. 556. Next he says what then? Do I say; above, he set forth the warning to be wary of eating food of idols, and here he gives the reason for the admonition. But he gives four reasons why they should abstain from the food of idols; first in order to avoid the company of demons; second, in order to avoid being excluded from the sacred communion, at you cannot drink the chalice of the Lord; third, in order to avoid offending God at do we provoke the Lord to jealousy; fourth, in order to avoid injuring our brother, at all things are lawful for me. 557. In prima, primo ostendit per hoc, quod non dicit hoc, eo quod alicuius virtutis reputet idolum, vel idolothitum; secundo, quod potius ideo, quia daemonibus est immolatum, ibi sed quae immolant, etc.; tertio, quod non vult eos esse socios daemonum, ibi nolo autem vos socios, et cetera. 557. In the first reason, he first shows by this, that he does not say this from the fact that he considers an idol to have any power, or the food of idols; second, that rather because it is sacrificed to demons, at but the things which the heathens sacrifice; third, that he does not wish them to be partners with demons, at but I do not want you to be partakers. Dicit ergo: quid ergo? Quasi dicat: moneo cavere ab idolothitis. Quid ergo dico? Id est, quid dicere videor hoc monendo? Numquid hoc, supple quod illud, quod idolis est immolatum, sit aliquid, vel alicuius virtutis, ut noceat, aut quod idolum sit aliquid veneratione dignum? Quasi dicat: non. Ps. CXXXIV, 17: neque enim est spiritus in ore ipsorum. Sed hoc potius dico quod quae immolant gentes, idolo, daemoni immolant, et non Deo. Ps. XCV, 5: omnes dii gentium daemonia. Deut. XXXII, 17: immolaverunt daemonibus, et non Deo. Then he says, what then? as though saying: I warn you to stay away from food of idols. What then do I say? That is, what do I seem to say by this warning? Surely not this, that what is offered in sacrifice to idols is anything, or has any power, that it may harm, or that the idol is anything worthy of veneration? As though he said: no. For neither is there any breath in their mouths (Ps 135:16). But rather I say this, that the things which the heathens sacrifice to an idol, they sacrifice to devils and not to God. All the gods of the gentiles are demons (Ps 96:4). They have sacrificed to demons, and not to God (Deut 32:17). Deinde cum dicit nolo autem vos fieri, etc., ostendit, quod non vult eos fieri socios daemonum, quod fieret si communicarent mensae idolorum. Et hoc est, quod dicit nolo autem vos, qui fideles estis, socios fieri daemonum, edendo scilicet de his, quae idolis immolantur. II Cor. VI, 14 s.: quae societas lucis ad tenebras, aut quae conventio Christi ad Belial? Next when he says, I do not want you to be made, he shows that he does not want them to become the coworkers of demons, which would happen if they shared the table of idols. And this is why he says I do not want you, who are members of the faithful, to be made partakers with devils, by eating of those things which were sacrificed to idols: what society does light have with darkness, or what agreement can there be between Christ and Belial? (2 Cor 6:14). 558. Deinde cum dicit non potestis calicem, et cetera. Ecce secunda ratio quare abstinendum est ab idolothitis, quae est talis: omne quod excludit a communione Corporis et Sanguinis Christi, vitandum est: comestio idolothitorum est huiusmodi; ergo vitanda est. Primo ergo ostendit, quod huiusmodi comestio excludit a communione Sanguinis Christi; secundo, quod et a communione Corporis Christi, ibi non potestis mensae Domini participes, et cetera. 558. Next when he says you cannot drink the chalice. Here is the second reason for abstaining from the food of idols, which is this: everything that shuts one off from the communion of the Body and Blood of Christ, must be avoided: eating the food of idols is one of these things; therefore it must be avoided. Therefore, first he shows that eating this kind of thing shuts one off from the communion of the Blood of Christ; second, it also shuts one off from the communion of the Body of Christ, at you cannot be partakers of the table of the Lord. Dicit ergo non potestis, etc., quasi dicat: nolo vos fieri socios daemoniorum. Hoc autem ideo dicit quia non potestis calicem Domini bibere, potu spirituali, non sacramentali tantum, Ps. CXV, 13: calicem salutaris accipiam, et calicem daemoniorum, simul: et hoc quoad sacramentum Sanguinis. Non potestis mensae Domini participes esse, quoad sacramentum corporis, et mensae daemoniorum. Matth. VI, 24: nemo potest duobus Dominis servire. He says therefore, you cannot, as though saying: I do not want you to be made partakers with devils. But he says this because you cannot drink the chalice of the Lord, with a spiritual drink, not only a sacramental one: I will take the chalice of salvation (Ps 116:13), and the chalice of devils at the same time: and this has to do with the sacrament of the blood. You cannot be partakers of the table of the Lord—and this has to do with the sacrament of the body—and the table of devils: no one can serve two masters (Matt 6:24). Ecce ergo calix fructuosus, quia ad bibendum spiritualiter pretiosus, quia Domini specialiter purus et mundus, quia non datur immundis utiliter. Similiter potest dici de mensa. Here is the fruitful chalice, because it is precious for drinking spiritually, because it is the Lord’s; it is especially pure and clean, because it is not given effectively to the unclean. The same thing is said of the table. 559. Deinde cum dicit an aemulamur Dominum, etc., ecce tertia ratio, talis: omne illud quod provocat iram Dei, vitandum est; comestio idolothitorum est huiusmodi, ergo vitanda est. Primo ergo ostendit, quod Deus provocatur ex tali comestione; secundo, quod stultum est eum provocare, ibi numquid fortiores illo, et cetera. 559. Next when he says do we provoke the Lord to jealousy, here is the third reason, thus: everything that provokes the wrath of God must be avoided; eating the food of idols is one of these things; therefore it must be avoided. Therefore he shows that God is provoked by that kind of eating; second, that it is stupid to provoke him, at are we stronger than he? Dicit ergo an aemulamur, id est, ad iram provocare volumus Dominum, comedendo idolothita? Vel sic an aemulamur Dominum, id est, invidemus ei, ut quasi in contemptum eius hoc faciamus? Deut. XXXII, v. 16: provocaverunt eum in diis. Numquid, quasi dicat: non debemus eum provocare. Numquid illo fortiores sumus? Quasi dicat: non. Iob IX, 19: si fortitudo quaeritur, robustissimus est. Fatuum est enim provocare fortiorem se. He says therefore do we provoke, that is, do we wish to provoke the Lord to anger, by eating the food of idols? Or like this: do we provoke the Lord to jealousy, that is, do we envy him, that almost in contempt of him we do this? They provoked him by their gods (Deut 32:16). Are we stronger, as though to say: we should not provoke him. Are we stronger than he? As though to say: no. If you look for strength, he is the strongest (Job 9:19). For it is foolish to provoke someone stronger than oneself. 560. Notandum super illud nolo autem vos socios fieri, quod est societas bona et mala, et utraque quadruplex. 560. It should be noted concerning I do not want you to be made partakers, that there is good and bad association, and either one is of four kinds. Est ergo societas bona, prima personarum divinarum, de qua I Io. I, 3: ut societatem habeamus cum Deo, et societas nostra sit cum patre et cum Filio eius Iesu Christo. Et hoc exigit summa iucunditas, quia nullius rei sine socio iucunda est possessio. The first good association, therefore, is the one we have with the divine persons, of which it is said: that we may have fellowship with God, and our fellowship may be with the father and his Son Jesus Christ (1 John 1:3). And this requires the greatest delightfulness, because the possession of no thing is delightful without someone to share it. Secunda angelorum sanctorum, de qua Tob. V, 27: credo enim, quod angelus Dei bonus comitetur ei, et hoc exigit hominis dignitas. Hieronymus: magna est dignitas animarum, et cetera. The second is the association of the holy angels, of which it is written: for I believe that a good angel of God accompanies him (Tob 5:27), and this requires the dignity of man. Jerome says: great is the dignity of our souls. Tertia virorum iustorum, de qua Gal. c. II, 9: Iacobus et Ioannes dextras dederunt mihi et Barnabae societatis, et hoc exigit nostra utilitas. Eccle. IV, 9: melius est duos, et cetera. The third is the association of just men, of which it is said: James and John gave to me and Barnabas their right hands in fellowship (Gal 2:9), and this depends on our worth: it is better that two should be together (Eccl 4:9). Quarta beatorum, de qua Apoc. I, 9: ego Ioannes socius vester et frater in tribulatione et regno, et hoc exigit communis felicitas; quia si socii sumus passionis, erimus et consolationis, II Cor. I, 7. The fourth is the association of the blessed, about which is written: I John, your brother and your partner in tribulation, and in the kingdom (Rev 1:9), and this requires shared happiness; for if we are sharers of the suffering, we will be sharers of the consolation as well (2 Cor 1:7). Societas mala similiter quadruplex: prima a parte malorum, de qua Is. I, 23: principes tui infideles socii furum. Haec est societas Herodis et Pilati in crucifixione Christi. There are likewise four kinds of bad association: the first, by association with evil men, about which is written: your leaders are faithless, the partners of thieves (Isa 1:23). This is the partaking that Herod and Pilate had in the crucifixion of Christ. Secunda hypocritarum, de qua Iob XXX, 29: frater fui draconum et socius struthionum, quae alas habere videtur et volare non potest. Haec est societas vulpis et lupi. The second is the association of hypocrites, about which is written: I was brother of dragons and the companion of ostriches (Job 30:29), which seem to have wings but cannot fly. This is the companionship of the fox and the wolf. Tertia daemonum, de qua Iob XVIII, 15: habitent in tabernacula eius socii eius, qui non est. Haec societas catti et muris, carnificis et bovis. The third is the association of demons, of which it is written: let the companions of him who is no longer, live in his tent (Job 18:15). This is the companionship of cat and mouse, butcher and cow. Quarta damnatorum, de qua II Cor. c. VI, 14: quae societas lucis ad tenebras? Haec est societas incarceratorum in igne. The fourth is the society of the damned, about which is written: what fellowship has light with darkness? (2 Cor 6:14). This is the companionship of those imprisoned in fire. 561. Deinde cum dicit omnia mihi licent, etc., ponitur quarta ratio talis: omne illud quod laedit proximorum salutem vitandum est; sed comestio idolothitorum est huiusmodi, ergo vitanda. Primo ostendit, quod talis comestio comedenti non proficit; secundo, quod alterum laedit, ibi omnia mihi licent, et cetera. 561. Next when he says all things are lawful for me, he sets forth the fourth reason thus: everything that injures the salvation of my neighbor must be avoided; but eating the food of idols is that sort of thing, and therefore to be avoided. First he shows that this kind of eating does not profit the one eating; second, that it injures others at all things are lawful for me. Dicit ergo omnia mihi, etc., quasi dicat: si illos peccare dicam, qui comedunt idolothita, non tamen dico cibos in se illicitos, quia omnia quae ad escam pertinent, mihi licent. Vel: et si omnia mihi licent, sed non omnia expediunt, id est, adiuvant me in cursu meo. Simile supra VI, 12. Omnia mihi licent, id est, et si omnia mihi licerent sed non omnia aedificant proximos, sed ea, quae caritatis sunt, supra VIII, 1: scientia inflat, caritas aedificat. Et quia non omnia aedificant, nemo quod suum est quaerat tantum, caritas enim non quae sua sunt quaerit, infra XIII, 5, sed quod alterius, id est, quod alteri proficit. Sed heu. Phil. II, 21 dicitur: omnes quae sunt sua quaerunt. Audiendus est ergo Apostolus, qui et docet verum, et monet bonum. Docet verum duplex, scilicet expedientiae sibi, quia omnia licent, sed non expediunt, et aedificationis aliis, quia omnia licent, sed non omnia aedificant. Monet bonum duplex, scilicet expedientiae sibi nemo quod suum est quaerat, et aedificationis aliis sed quod alterius. Therefore he says all things are lawful for me, as though he said: if I say that those people sin who eat the foods of idols, nevertheless I do not call the food illicit in itself, because all things that have to do with food are lawful for me. Or: all things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient, that is, helpful to me in my race. The same thing is said above at (1 Cor 6:12). All things are lawful for me, that is, even if all things were lawful for me, but all things do not edify my neighbors, except those things which are of charity, as was said above: knowledge puffs up but charity edifies (1 Cor 8:1). And because not all things edify, let no man seek only his own— for as said below, charity seeks not her own (1 Cor 13:5)—but that which is another’s, that is, what profits the other. But alas it is said: all seek the things that are their own (Phil 2:21). Therefore the Apostle must be heeded, who both teaches the truth and advises the good. He teaches a double truth, namely one’s own expedience, because all things are lawful . . . but all are not are expedient, and the edification of others, because all things are lawful . . . but all do not edify. He advises a twofold good, namely, one’s own expedience, let no man seek what is his own, and the edification of others, but that which is another’s. Lectio 6 Lecture 6 Quaestio conscientiae Question of conscience ^10:25 Omne quod in macello venit, manducate, nihil interrogantes propter conscientiam. [n. 562] ^10:25 Whatever is sold in the markets, eat: asking no question for conscience’s sake. [n. 562] ^10:26 Domini est terra, et plenitudo ejus. ^10:26 The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof.