1 Corinthians 9:7Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

“Or does not the law also say the same? For it is written in the law of Moses: You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain” (1 Cor 9:8-9).

Why does he mention this, when he has the example of the Jewish priests? In order to prove his thought more strongly.

Then, lest someone object, “What concern is it to us what is said about oxen?” he explains it in detail and says: “Is it for oxen that God cares?”

Tell me, then, does God not care for oxen? He cares, but not so as to establish a special law about them alone.

If God had not had something more important in view, and if He had not wished by the example of irrational animals to teach the Jews love for mankind and also remind them of teachers, He would not have shown such care for oxen as to prescribe a law about not muzzling their mouths.

From this another thing is also evident: how great the labor of the teacher is and ought to be. And there is still something else. What is it?

What is said in the Old Testament concerning care for animals chiefly concerns the edification of men. So also everything else, such as what is said about different garments, vineyards, seeds, not sowing land with different seeds, leprosy, and, one might say, all the rest.

Since the hearers were rough people, He spoke to them in this way, so as to raise them little by little to understanding. Nevertheless, the Apostle does not prove what is clear and evident in itself.

Who, tending a flock, does not eat of the milk of the flock? He did not say, “sells the sheep,” or “eats them,” or “takes all the milk,” but “some of the milk.”

By this he shows us that the teacher must be content with a small reward and necessary maintenance. By the name “shepherd” he indicates that the teacher must have great care.

The flock is such because the Church is the flock of Jesus Christ, concerning which He says: “And other sheep I have which are not of this fold. Them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice, and there will be one flock and one shepherd” (Jn 10:16).

Truly, none of the commanders and soldiers is maintained at his own expense, but always at the public expense. Truly, everyone who plants a vineyard partakes of its fruit. Likewise, he who tends a flock uses its milk.

Paul brings these examples here first to show that the leaders of the Church must necessarily have the courage of a soldier, the diligence of a husbandman, and the watchfulness of a shepherd.

Second, he did not say “eat the fruit,” but “of the fruit.” He did not say “eat the milk,” but “of the milk.”

Thus he shows that those who cultivate and shepherd the Church of Christ have the right to take not all the fruit and not all the milk, but only a portion, as much as they need.

Here he presents another proof of the same thing from the books of the law: 1 Cor 9:8-9. “Do I say these things as a man? Or does not the law also say the same? For it is written in the law of Moses: You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain. Is it for oxen that God cares?”

Of course, in that case he could not serve. The Apostle speaks of a soldier without doubt because he finds similarity between his service and the service of an Apostle and preacher.

They are alike in that both services occupy all a man’s time. They are also alike in that both the soldier of an earthly king and the soldier of the Heavenly King need ready maintenance.

“Who, having planted a vineyard, does not eat of its fruit?” In this parabolic saying, the vineyard means the Christian community. The planter of the vineyard means the Apostle or pastor.

The fruits mean good works, alms, and aid to brothers in the faith (chapter 16; 2 Cor 8:9). Is it possible that only the pastors of the Church, who plant and water the vineyard of Christ (1 Cor 3:6), should be deprived of the use of the fruits of its faith and love, namely offerings, assistance, and recompense?

Preachers of the truths of the faith must likewise have their recompense. This natural right is proved by the law, according to which oxen had to be fed as they walked over a threshing floor spread with sheaves of wheat.

By doing this, they threshed it (Deut 25:4), and at the same time they could eat.

According to Saint John Chrysostom, “The Apostles were soldiers, husbandmen, and shepherds. They dealt not with earth, not with irrational animals, not with sensible enemies, but with rational souls and demonic armies.”

“From sowing the Apostle passes to threshing. By this he indicates how great are the labors of teachers, who both plow and thresh.”

The law about not muzzling an ox while it treads out the grain means nothing other than this: laboring teachers must receive recompense.

He is not satisfied with one comparison. For a simple and rough man is more quickly persuaded when he sees that God’s commandments agree with commonly accepted customs.

He brings another and says: ‘Who plants a vineyard and does not eat of its fruit?’ By the first comparison he expressed dangers. By the second, labor, zeal, and diligence.

Then he adds a third comparison: ‘Who,’ he says, ‘tends a flock and does not eat of the milk of the flock?’ By this he indicates the great care which a teacher ought to have for his disciples.

The Apostles were soldiers, husbandmen, and shepherds. They dealt not with earth, not with irrational animals, not with sensible enemies, but with rational souls and demonic armies.

Notice how the Apostle everywhere preserves proportion, striving to say only what is useful, and not what is excessive. He did not say, ‘What soldier serves and does not become rich?’ but, ‘Who ever goes to war at his own expense?’

He did not say, ‘Who plants a vineyard and extracts gold, or gathers all the fruit?’ but, ‘does not eat of its fruit?’

He did not say, ‘Who tends a flock and does not sell the lambs?’ But how does he speak? ‘Does not eat of the milk of the flock?’

Not of the lambs, but of the milk. He expresses that the teacher must be content with small consolation and only necessary food.

By such comparisons the Apostle teaches not only this, but also shows what a priest ought to be. He must have the courage of a soldier, the laboriousness of a husbandman, and the care of a shepherd.

And with all this, he must desire nothing beyond what is necessary” (Chrysostom).

The Apostle takes the third argument from the typological meaning of the Mosaic law’s decree about not muzzling an ox while it treads out the grain, in verses 9-10. “Having proved, both by the example of the Apostles and by comparisons from ordinary life, that a teacher is not forbidden to receive, Saint Paul proceeds to the third proof and says” (Chrysostom).