1 Corinthians 10:28Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

It has no power at all. Nevertheless, on the ground that it has no power, do not eat it indifferently, since it is the table of enemies and the impious. Therefore he adds, “Do not eat for the sake of the one who informed you, and for conscience’ sake. For the earth is the Lord’s, and the fullness thereof.” Do you see how, both when permitting them to eat and when commanding them to abstain, he gives the same proof? I forbid it, he says, not because it is something alien, for “the earth is the Lord’s.” Rather, as has been said, it is for conscience’ sake, that no harm be done. Must one then inquire?

Therefore, to the rule concerning eating, the Apostle immediately joins this also: “Give no offense either to Jews or to Greeks or to the Church of God, just as I also please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved” (1 Cor 10:32-33). “Be imitators of me, as I also am of Christ” (1 Cor 11:1).

Another matter is eating at home whatever is sold in the market, even if something there happens to have been sacrificed to idols. There everything may be eaten without fear, by virtue of the moral and religious awareness, or conscience, that everything belongs to God and can serve for men’s benefit as His gift. One may be guided by the same awareness while at the table of unbelievers. But when someone there points to something as sacrificed to idols, one must then refrain from eating. This is not because one’s conviction changes about all things belonging to God. It is so as not to give a bad example to a weak Christian. It is also so as not to give a pagan occasion to think badly of Christian convictions and rules, thereby lowering the lofty dignity of Christianity in general. Chrysostom, as though bringing all these thoughts of the Apostle to their proper conclusion, interprets: “What do the words mean, ‘Why am I blasphemed for that for which I give thanks?’ I. He says, thank God that He has so exalted me and placed me so far above Jewish abasement, for among them there is ‘Do not touch,’ and the like, that nothing can harm me. But the pagans, not knowing my philosophy, will suspect the opposite and say: Christians desire what is ours. They are hypocrites. They revile demons and turn away from them, yet they flock to their tables. What could be more unreasonable than this? Therefore do not receive food when they tell you that it has been sacrificed to idols. Christ gave you grace, so exalted you, and placed you above every harm, not so that you might give occasion for evil report against yourself. Nor did He do this so that, by the very privileges for which you give thanks, you should so offend others that they may blaspheme.”

But the Apostle writes a rule not for one case, but for all. In all cases it could happen that sometimes a weak Christian says this, and sometimes a pagan. Therefore let us suppose that either a weak Christian or a tempting pagan says, "This has been offered to idols."

Do not eat, says the Apostle. Do not eat for the sake of the one who disclosed it, that is, sparing him.

It is clear how the weak Christian is spared. If the strong man, after being informed, were to eat, the weak man could no longer refuse to eat. Having begun to eat, he would eat it as something religiously significant, and would thereby defile his conscience.

But if the strong man refuses to eat, he will give the weak man courage to abstain also, and thus will save him from the staining of his conscience.

But in what way is the pagan spared? If a pagan says this to a Christian, he plainly says it with the thought that the Christian ought not to eat it. Such is the form taken by his pagan conscience.

If the Christian nevertheless began to eat, the pagan might think: what is this? Christians boast of the loftiness of their faith and moral teaching, yet show them only a tasty morsel, and they are ready to live again at peace with our gods.

For him, what has been offered to idols is something sacred. In some manuscripts it stands as ιεροθυτον. Eating of it, in his view, anoints a person with the blessing of the gods. The same, in his thinking, will pass to the Christian.

How is this, he will think? From an unfavorable thought about the Christian, he will pass to an unfavorable thought about Christianity.

Consequently, to eat after such a notice will mean degrading oneself as a Christian. It will mean degrading all Christians in one's own person, and degrading Christianity itself.

Therefore one's dignity as a Christian, the honor of Christians, and the honor of Christianity itself require that one not taste such food once it is said to have been offered to idols.

This must be done for the sake of the one who disclosed it, for the sake of others like him, and for the sake of the disclosure itself.

With what thought should this be done? To show contempt for everything connected with idol service. Not because what has been offered to idols is anything, but because, insofar as it belongs to idol service, it is abominable.

Out of contempt for idol service, I also despise this thing offered to idols. Thus Chrysostom says: "The Apostle commands abstinence from idol sacrifices, not as though they possessed power, but as things worthy of abhorrence.

"Avoid what has been offered to idols, he says, not because it can cause harm. It has no power whatever. Avoid it because it is contemptible.

"Nevertheless, on the ground that it has no power, do not eat it indifferently. It is the table of enemies and of the impious."

Thus this abstinence before the pagans will be an instructive preaching about the dignity of Christianity and the contemptible character of idol service.

"For the sake of the one who disclosed it" will mean, in this case, so as not to close to him the door of ascent to clear knowledge of the height of Christianity, and thereby the door of faith.

For eating would confuse all his concepts and darken the radiant countenance of the faith of Christ.

And conscience. Whose conscience? The Apostle explains below: not one's own conscience, but another's. In the two preceding cases (1 Cor 10:25, 27), one's own conscience was meant. Here, another's is meant.

Whose, then? Most directly, the conscience of the one who disclosed it. Whether a pagan says, "This has been offered to idols," or a weak Christian says it, not eating this idol-offering will be healing for the conscience of both.

"For the earth is the Lord's, and the fullness thereof." This must be connected with the course of the discourse in this way: I mean not your conscience, but another's.

For your conscience, the conviction remains unchanged that in the Kingdom of the Lord all is good, and nothing is to be rejected.

"I do not forbid it," he says, "as though it were something alien, for the earth is the Lord's, but on account of conscience, that is, lest harm be done.

"Then should one investigate? No, he says. I mean not your conscience, but another's, for I have already said, 'for the sake of the one who disclosed it'" (Chrysostom).