1 Cor 9:11 11 If we have sown spiritual things for you, is it a great thing if we reap your material things? 12 If others are partakers of this right over you, are we not even more?
What does it mean "reap material things"
Please answer that question.
Second request.
According to the Church Fathers, this passage refers to the need for Christian clergy, including monastics, to be sustained. Specifically, quoting the Orthodox Study Bible, “Clergy must be given material support to be free to sow spiritual things. God saw to this under the Old Covenant (vv. 8, 9), and Paul implies that most Christian pastors are similarly supported (vv. 5, 6).”
But we interpret the following verses as referring to asceticism (which they clearly are).
The context you’re missing with this pericope is that St. Paul is responding to an attack on his apostolate in Corinth in addition to problems with gross immorality in that church, with one particular member, and a refusal to adhere to tradition (1 Corinthians 11:2) which threatened the integrity of the Body of Christ, which is the subject of the Epistle entire, and posed a real danger to those partaking of the Eucharist, to the extent that, according to 1 Corinthians 11:27-34, some of the laity were ill, and some had perished, from partaking unworthily.
If any of my Orthodox, Catholic, Anglican or Lutheran friends have a different interpretation (
@prodromos,
@FenderTL5 ,
@Xeno.of.athens ,
@RileyG ,
@chevyontheriver ,
@Jipsah ,
@MarkRohfrietsch ,
@ViaCrucis or
@Ain't Zwinglian ) I would love to hear it.
My goal is to repeat only the Patristic views on subjects like these, hence my desire to make sure my interpretation is correct; this may surprise you
@Always in His Presence but I try to avoid forming my own opinion about Scripture as much as possible; I have the freedom of Theologoumemna where there is a lack of a defined Orthodox doctrine, which covers quite a lot of material, but wherever a Patristic consensus exists, I would rather take the view of the Church Fathers than risk a novel interpretation, for the latter is to my mind like building a house with a foundation laid upon sand rather than rock. The Fathers and the ecumenical councils and the ancient liturgy are the bedrock of my faith (indeed, the hymns of the Orthodox Church contain the entirety of our doctrine, thus, websites like st-sergius.org , which host all of our service books, such as the complete Monthly Menaion, which would if purchased in a printed edition cost over $1,000 for all twelve volumes, are invaluable (although the most important subjects would be covered by a used copy of the Book of Prayers and Divine Services of the Catholic Orthodox Church of Christ by Fr. Seraphim Nasser, nicknamed the Nasser Five Pounder for its weight (and its published in quarto format, so its quite bulky to handle; finding one with an intact binding in good condition is difficult; they probably should have printed it as a folio, but hindsight is 20/20).
Also given that Lutheran monasticism is a thing, but that confessional Lutherans incline towards monergism, I would be very interested to hear a Lutheran view on the OP of this thread as well; from my perspective, imitatio Christi is not “works righteousness” or implicated as Pelagian, but rather theosis, a fruit of a salvific faith, and what another member says about consolation from illness knowing that Christ suffered alongside us is also a great consolation. In addition Martih Luther did live under ascetic conditions for much of his life, even after he separated from the Roman church.
