✠ daily readings

jump to a date

readings are available from 2025-01-01 through 2026-12-31.

search

search by feast, season, or scripture reference.

type to search…

←
Thu · Sep 10, 2026 · Ordinary Time

Thursday of the 23rd week of Ordinary Time

→
USCCB ↗

First Reading · 1 Corinthians 8:1b-7, 11-13

1Now concerning those things that are sacrificed to idols: we know we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up: but charity edifieth.2And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he hath not yet known as he ought to know.3But if any man love God, the same is known by him.4But as for the meats that are sacrificed to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world and that there is no God but one.5For although there be that are called gods, either in heaven or on earth (for there be gods many and lords many):6Yet to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we unto him: and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.7But there is not knowledge in every one. For some until this present, with conscience of the idol, eat as a thing sacrificed to an idol: and their conscience, being weak, is defiled.11And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ hath died?12Now when you sin thus against the brethren and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ.13Wherefore, if meat scandalize my brother, I will never eat flesh, lest I should scandalize my brother.

commentary

Calmet takes "an idol is nothing in the world" (v. 4) back to the Greek: eidōlon means a false representation, the word used of ghosts said to appear at night — umbræ tenues, simulacra luce carentium, thin shades, images of things without light. Lapide traces it to eidos, appearance, and insists on a precision the lexicographers lost: not every image of a god is an idol, only the image of a false one, materially wood and formally nothing at all. Then the argument turns on a second word. "Knowledge puffeth up" (v. 1): the verb, Lapide notes, points to a bladder distended with wind, and that is what he calls it — windy knowledge. Two nothings, an idol that is nothing and a knowledge that is only air, against the one thing in the passage that is unmistakably solid: the weak brother "for whom Christ died" (v. 11).

Calmet reconstructs the quarrel behind the letter. Part of a sacrifice was regularly kept back for a supper — at home, among friends, sometimes in the temple — and some Corinthian Christians attended without scruple while others read it as tacit approbation of idolatry. Lapide, citing Aquinas, grants that such eating is not in itself a sin, then sets out when it becomes one: if done by converts who still half-thought idol-food holy; if done against one's own conscience; if done ostentatiously before weak brethren; above all if done at the idol's table during the sacrifice, the banquet being part of the sacrifice and its completion. There the act states something no private intention can retract — Lapide's comparison is that a man who takes part in a Calvinist supper is understood to be professing Calvinism, which is why Augustine could write that it is better to die of hunger than eat of things offered to idols. What decides is not the matter but the public meaning of the act, which no individual fixes alone. Even the scruple in v. 7 is disputed: Anselm has the weak eating with reverence, as though the idol held something divine, Theophylact in dread of food breathed upon by a devil.

Bernard refuses to praise the man who knows a great deal if he is ignorant of the measure of knowing. Some wish to know only that they may know — vile curiosity; some that they may be known — contemptible vanity; some that they may sell what they know — chaffering; and some that they may edify, which is charity. Lapide blocks the opposite abuse as firmly. Libertines rave, he says, when they infer from v. 7 that nothing is sin so long as the conscience raises no scruple: that is advice to get rid of conscience in order to sin at pleasure, and Paul is discussing things indifferent, not forbidden ones. Corinth's dinner has its modern form in the display of being unembarrassed by a scruple someone else still holds, performed where that person can see it. Witham draws out the stake: a weak brother may perish, and Christ died for him — so Christ died also for those who will in fact be lost. Basil raises it further, the offence being greater in proportion to the knowledge or rank of the man who gives it, and God requiring at his hand the blood of the sinners who follow his example. Chrysostom hears the vow in v. 13 without qualification. Paul does not say justly or unjustly, and promises abstinence not for a day or two but for his whole life; it would be the height of folly to treat as worthless what was so dear to Christ that he refused not to die for it. Rather than trip one man at one supper, Paul will eat no flesh while the world stands.

· sources ·

The complete public-domain commentary this reading's note draws from, unabridged. Every claim in the note traces to a passage here.

First Reading 1 Corinthians 8:1b-7, 11-13

Haydock Catholic Bible Commentary · Public Domain
8:1

Now concerning those things. It appears from this whole passage that the Corinthians had, in a former letter, consulted this apostle, upon the subject of eating meats offered to idols. It was not unusual to reserve some part of the sacrifice of which they made a supper, either in their own family, with their friends, or sometimes even in the temple. Some of the Christians of Corinth attended without scruple at these sorts of feasts, and eat of the meats offered to idols; whilst others, on the contrary, took scandal at this conduct, and thought it a tacit approbation of idolatry. St. Paul being consulted upon this difficulty, gives them his advice in this chapter. (Calmet) --- We know that we all have knowledge about it. That is, all we, who are sufficiently instructed, have knowledge enough to be convinced, that idols are nothing in themselves, nor the meats offered to them better nor worse upon that account. (Witham) --- Knowledge puffeth up, &c. Knowledge, without charity and humility, serveth only to puff persons up. (Challoner)

8:4

An idol is nothing. The apostle seems to allude in this place to the Greek signification of this word, Greek: eidolon, signifying a false representation; as for instance in ghosts, which are said to appear sometimes at night. Umbræ tenues, simulacra luce carentium. (Calmet)

8:5

Many gods, &c. Reputed for such among the heathens. (Challoner)

8:6

To us there is but one God, the Father; of whom all things, and we unto him. Of or from the Father are all things, even the eternal Son and the Holy Ghost, though they are one and the same God with the Father. --- And one Lord Jesus Christ: by whom are all things, and we by him. All things were created by the Son of God, the eternal and uncreated wisdom of the Father, from whom he proceeds from eternity, and also by the Holy Ghost, all creatures being equally the work of the three divine persons. The Arians and Socinians pretend from this place, that only the Father is truly and properly God. The Catholics answer, that he is called the God, of whom all, because from him always proceeded, do proceed, and shall always proceed the Son and the Holy Ghost, though one and the same God in nature, substance, &c. And that when he is called the one God, by these words are excluded the false gods of the heathens, not the Son, and the Holy Ghost, who are but one God with the Father. St. John Chrysostom also here observes, (hom. xx.) that if the two other persons are excluded, because the Father is called one God, by the same way of reasoning it would follow, that because Jesus Christ is called the one Lord, neither the Holy Ghost, nor even the Father, are the one Lord, whereas the Scriptures many times express the divine majesty, as well by the word Lord as by the word God. (Witham)

8:7

But knowledge is not in every one, &c. The new converts, who had been Jews, thought that things which had been offered to idols were defiled, unclean, and could not be lawfully eaten: they who had been Gentiles looked upon them as victims offered to idols, in which there was some virtue of enchantment, &c. Their weak consciences judged they could not be lawfully eaten: and when they were induced to eat them by the example of others, it was still against their consciences. The infidels also might sometimes think that the Christians, in eating such things, honoured their idols; in such cases, they who were better instructed, were to abstain, not to give offence to weak consciences, and lest they should make them sin. And a weak brother shall perish, for whom Christ died; where we may learn, that Christ died also for those the shall perish, and not only for the predestinate. (Witham)

8:13

If meat scandalize. That is, if my eating cause my brother to sin. (Challoner) --- Can we put any meat, or life itself, in competition with a soul, and the blood of Christ, which has been shed for that soul, when we know the value of each!