The battle against gluttony is one of the most poorly fought, because it almost always begins with a smile. Of all the capital sins, gluttony has become the most harmless in the eyes of common sense: it has been made into a "pet sin," a bon vivant's quirk, almost a table virtue. Yet tradition gives it a very different gravity. Saint Thomas Aquinas defines it precisely — not the mere fact of eating, but the "disordered desire" for food and drink, the appetite that departs from reason[1]; and Saint Paul, speaking of the "enemies of the cross of Christ," gives it the harshest formula of the New Testament:
"Their god is their belly, and their glory is in their shame; their minds are set on earthly things." — Letter to the Philippians 3:19[2]
It is also, of all spiritual vocabulary, the most misidentified vice. The word immediately evokes the glutton, the gormandizer gorging himself at table: a caricature in which no one recognizes themselves, so that everyone believes they are safe. Yet true gluttony is not first a matter of quantity; it hides under respectable clothes — refinement, delicacy of palate, attachment to "eating well," the inability to deprive oneself. Spotting it first requires sweeping away the false ideas that mask it.
This article reviews the most frequent misconceptions about the battle against gluttony, grouped according to whether they concern its nature, discernment (what gluttony is not), the battle itself and its remedies, or the fault and its duration. For each, it states the error in its common formulation, shows why it is appealing, why it is false, and then recalls what the Church and the saints truly teach.
This is neither a practical guide nor an anthology: for the detailed nature of gluttony, its roots, its "daughters," its five forms and the concrete means to combat it, see How to grow in the battle against gluttony; for the distinctive voice of the Fathers, doctors and mystics, see What the saints say about the battle against gluttony. For misconceptions about deprivation itself, refer to Common mistakes regarding fasting and Common mistakes regarding temperance. Here, as in the twin article Common mistakes regarding the battle against avarice, we clear the ground: we first learn to recognize the enemy in order to then wage the true battle.
Why is the battle against gluttony so misunderstood?
A vice thought to be reserved for gluttons
The first misunderstanding is one of portrait. Gluttony is filed among spectacular faults: the glutton who gorges himself, the enormous belly, the endless feast, the ogre at table. As almost no one recognizes themselves in this caricature, everyone concludes that gluttony is other people's vice — and believes themselves exempt. The error relieves: it files the battle among problems one does not have.
But the gluttony defined by the Fathers and doctors is not first a volume swallowed: it is a disorder of desire. Saint Thomas calls it a "disordered" appetite for food and drink, "departing from the order of reason"[3] — an attachment that needs no enormous quantities to exist. Tradition, following Saint Gregory the Great, distinguishes five forms of it that cannot be reduced to excess of quantity: eating "too soon," before the hour (praepropere); seeking "overly refined" dishes (laute); eating "too much" (nimis); eating "too eagerly" (ardenter); demanding "overly elaborate" preparations (studiose)[4]. Four of these five forms have nothing to do with visible gorging: one can eat little but always the best, nibble constantly before the hour, burn with impatience before a dish, or make the quality of one's table a daily preoccupation. The gorging glutton is only a coarse, minority variety of gluttony; its most widespread form is discreet, and all the more tenacious for disguising itself as mere good taste. Believing gluttony is recognized by the quantity ingested is mistaking the disease for one of its rarest symptoms.
A battle thought to be laughable
Second misunderstanding: gluttony would be a pet sin, a gourmet's quirk beside "serious" sins. One fights pride, impurity, anger; gluttony, by contrast, raises a smile — a sign of the bon vivant, of conviviality, of love of life. The error appeals because it removes guilt and flatters: who reproaches themselves for liking a good meal?
But Scripture and tradition hold gluttony to be a fearsome vice, precisely because it begets other sins. The Church ranks it among the seven capital sins[5] — "capital," says the Catechism, "because they engender other sins, other vices." The desert Fathers made it the first of the eight evil "thoughts": Evagrius Ponticus opens his list with it[6], and Cassian places it first in the monastic battle, teaching that one cannot conquer the higher passions without first mastering the appetite of the belly[7]. Saint John Climacus calls it "that pitiless mistress which is the belly," mother of lust[8]. Minimizing this vice is therefore not neglecting a harmless quirk: it is leaving open a door through which enter dullness of mind, idle talk, dissipation and, more gravely, the flesh.
Errors about the nature of gluttony
"Gluttony is eating a lot"
This is the root error, the matrix of all the others: gluttony would be the act of eating too much, measurable by the quantity ingested. It is imagined visible, weighable, reserved for big appetites. The error appeals because it is convenient — it makes the vice external, hence easy to avoid, and easy to recognize… in others.
But the object of gluttony is not the quantity absorbed: it is the disordered desire for the pleasure of the table, whether expressed by excess or by any other disorder. The tradition's five forms say it plainly enough[9]: one sins by gluttony as to time (eating before the hour, nibbling constantly), as to quality (constantly seeking the finest dishes), as to manner (eating with ravenous eagerness), as to care (making the delicacy of one's table an obsession) — and not only as to quantity. Cassian already noted it: man's first fall came through a single fruit, not a feast, "to show that gluttony is not a matter of quantity but of disordered desire"[10]. One can eat very little and be profoundly gluttonous within — the ascetic obsessed with the quality of his single meal, the delicate eater who tolerates only the best, are gluttonous in their own way, as much as the ogre with his portion. Reducing gluttony to gorging is hunting only its caricature, and leaving free its most common form: the one hiding under refinement.
"It is a gourmet's sin: loving good cooking"
A direct variant: gluttony would be love of good cheer, pleasure of the palate, taste for good things. Liking to cook, appreciating a great wine, savoring a refined dish would already be sinning. The error appeals because it seems austere and demanding — but it confuses pleasure with its disorder.
Yet the pleasure of eating is not evil: it is willed by God, who attached flavor to food and joy to meals. Saint Paul affirms it against the rigorists of his time:
"Everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected when received with thanksgiving, for it is made holy by the word of God and prayer." — First Letter to Timothy 4:4-5[11]
Gluttony does not begin with pleasure, but with its derangement: when pleasure ceases to be the meal's companion and becomes its end, when one eats "for" pleasure and no longer "with" pleasure, when the palate commands reason instead of serving it. The "gourmet" who enjoys a good meal with gratitude, without making it an idol or enslaving himself to it, does not sin; refinement becomes vice when it degenerates into anxious pursuit of the ever-better, contempt for the simple, inability to be content with the ordinary. The boundary is not between "liking good cooking" and "eating bland food," but between a pleasure received as a gift and ordered to God, and a pleasure become master that enslaves the heart.
"The pleasure of eating is suspect: to be holy, one must despise the table"
The opposite error, frequent among fervent souls: if gluttony is a vice, then every pleasure of the table would be suspect, and holiness would consist in eating without taste, always depriving oneself, holding the table for a trap. The error appeals because it looks radical and mortified — but it mistakes the target and flirts with an old heresy.
Yet Christ himself "came eating and drinking," to the point of being slandered:
"The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Look, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!'" — Gospel according to Saint Matthew 11:19[12]
Jesus multiplied the loaves, changed water into wine at the wedding of Cana, accepted meals at Levi's, Zacchaeus's and the Pharisees'; his sovereign freedom at table scandalized precisely the rigorists. Despising food on principle, holding every pleasure of the table for a sin, is not holiness: it is often another form of obsession with the belly, in negative — and it is, doctrinally, the trap denounced by Saint Paul against those "who forbid certain foods"[13]. Holiness is not tasting nothing anymore, but giving thanks: "Whether you eat or drink, do everything for the glory of God"[14]. The blessing of the table, thanksgiving before and after the meal, do not abolish pleasure: they convert it into praise. On the misconceptions proper to deprivation, see Common mistakes regarding fasting.
Errors of discernment: what gluttony is not
Here lies the heart of the matter, and the ground where most damage is done. For fear of gluttony, upright souls condemn in themselves perfectly healthy acts — savoring a dish, sharing a festive meal, giving thanks for the taste of food — and lock themselves into scrupulosity; while others, reassured at not gorging, fail to see the real gluttony inhabiting them in the form of refinement or attachment. One fights well only what one has first well identified — and gluttony is neither pleasure, nor conviviality, nor legitimate care of the body.
"Taking pleasure in eating is already gluttony"
A frequent error among scrupulous souls: every pleasure felt at table would be suspect; to be detached, one would have to eat without sensing anything, as one swallows a tasteless remedy. Pleasure is confused with disordered complacency. The error appeals because it seems purer — tasting nothing seems more mortified than savoring.
But Saint Augustine, who searched his conscience to the point of scrupulosity, fixed the just distinction forever. Pleasure, he says, is attached by God to need as a servant — good while she serves, dangerous when she takes the mistress's place:
"You have taught me to approach food as I would medicine. But even as I pass from the discomfort of need to the repose of satiety, in that very passage the snare of concupiscence lies in wait for me." — Saint Augustine, Confessions, X, 31[15]
The pleasure of eating, Augustine observes, legitimately accompanies the taking of necessary food; the sin is not feeling it, but seeking it for itself beyond need. The difficulty, he admits, is that the boundary shifts: "the measure sufficient for health is not the one sufficient for pleasure," and one does not always know, in the moment, whether it is still the body's need or "the deceitful seduction of concupiscence" asking. But this very uncertainty proves that pleasure, in itself, is not the fault: the fault lies in consenting to make it an end. Sensing the flavor of a good dish, rejoicing in it, giving thanks for it: nothing of this is gluttony. The scrupulosity that sees a sin in every pleasure confuses God's gift with its derangement.
"A fine festive meal, taking care over a dish, is gluttony"
A variant of the previous one, on the ground of conviviality: preparing a beautiful meal, celebrating a feast at table, taking care over a dish for those one loves would pass for concessions to gluttony. In the name of sobriety, one would come to suspect every shared joy around a table. The error appeals because it confuses feasting with excess.
But Scripture is woven with feasts of joy willed by God: the feasts of the Old Testament, the fattened calf killed for the son who was found, the wedding at Cana where Christ pours a better wine, down to the banquet of the Kingdom as an image of Heaven. The shared meal is a place of communion, and the care put into it can be an act of charity toward one's guests. Saint Paul recalls it: it is not food that sanctifies or defiles, for "the Kingdom of God is not a matter of food and drink, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit"[16]. Feasting has its days, distinct from days of fasting; alternating them is the very wisdom of the Church, which knows Lent but also Easter. Gluttony does not hide in the joy of a feast honestly celebrated, but in the habit of making every day a feast for oneself alone, in the inability to return to the ordinary, in the banquet that forgets the poor. Taking care over a meal for one's own has nothing of sin; making it a perpetual, solitary pursuit of the best does.
"A severe fast proves one is not gluttonous"
A subtle error, and particularly deceptive: since gluttony is excess at table, its opposite — hard fasting, pushed austerity, displayed contempt for food — would prove one is freed from it. Virtue is measured by the harshness of deprivation. The error appeals because it flatters: visible austerity gladly mistakes itself for holiness.
But tradition holds false rigorism to be another imbalance, sometimes more dangerous than gluttony itself, for it feeds pride. Cassian makes discernment (discretio) the sovereign rule: he condemns immoderate austerity as much as softness, austerity that ruins health and swells vainglory[17]. Saint Francis de Sales, with his customary finesse, recommends a sobriety "without scruple or singularity," adapted to one's state of life, and holds it a rule to "eat what is set before you" with simplicity rather than seeking, by affected mortification, the worst morsel[18]. The heroic fast of a Saint Benedict Joseph Labre is a particular vocation, not the common measure. More subtle still: one can be austere out of gluttony — gluttonous for one's own rigor, attached to one's reputation as a mortified soul, incapable of simply receiving what is offered. False rigorism thus returns to its starting point: food becomes an obsession again, in hollow form this time. True freedom lies neither in gorging nor in crisped austerity, but in the measure that knows how to fast on fast days and rejoice on feast days. On this point, see Common mistakes regarding temperance.
"I eat normally: so I am not concerned"
The opposite error of the previous ones, and just as harmful: since one does not gorge, since one eats "like everyone else," one believes oneself quit of gluttony. It is measured by the absence of visible gorging. The error appeals because it takes an appearance of normality for a disposition of the heart.
But the most widespread gluttony is not gorging: it is the refinement of the delicate, the daily attachment to the pleasure of the table in banalized forms. Perpetual nibbling, the inability to skip a pleasure, the mood that sours when the meal disappoints, the mind returning ceaselessly to what one will eat, attachment to one's little gustatory habits to the point of being unable to renounce them: so many discreet faces of gluttony that "normality" covers. Saint Gregory expressly ranks among its forms eating "too soon" and seeking "overly elaborate" dishes[19] — two failings perfectly compatible with an appearance of moderation. The test is therefore not the quantity displayed, but inner freedom: am I capable of depriving myself without suffering disproportionately? Does missing a habitual pleasure trouble me more than it should? Does thought of the table occupy in my heart a place that belongs to God? The gluttony that ignores itself is that of the attached heart which believes itself sober because it does not gorge.
Errors about the battle and its remedies
Once the enemy is identified, one can still mistake the weapon — and gluttony is so cunning that several "remedies" that suggest themselves are precisely what leaves it intact, or displaces it elsewhere.
"To conquer gluttony, it suffices to fast a great deal"
The error of generous souls: since gluttony is excess at table, the only true remedy would be the hardest possible fast; the more one deprives oneself, the more virtuous one would be. The means is confused with the end. The error appeals because it is measurable and heroic — but it discourages the weak and sometimes swells the strong.
Yet fasting is not an end: it is a means subordinated to charity, and a means that can turn back if poorly ordered. Cassian says it bluntly:
"Less is gained by fasting than is lost by a movement of anger. […] Secondary things — fasts, vigils, retreat and meditation on the Scriptures — should be referred to our principal goal, that is, purity of heart, which is charity." — Saint John Cassian, Conferences, I[20]
Purely exterior fasting, without conversion of heart, is precisely what God rejects through Isaiah's mouth: "Is not this the fast that I choose: to share your bread with the hungry?"[21]. A hard fast that makes one hard, that sours character, that feeds vainglory or ruins health, misses its goal. The true battle against gluttony is not an escalation of austerity: it is learning measure under the conduct of discernment[22], the mastery of will over instinct that the Church calls temperance[23], and converting the meal into thanksgiving. Fasting has its full place there — it "takes back the helm" of the body — but as servant of charity, never as an autonomous exploit. On the right use of fasting, see Common mistakes regarding fasting.
"Having willpower and thinking about it less suffices"
An interior error: fighting gluttony would consist in stiffening oneself, in "thinking less" about food, in counting on mere strength of character. One works on the mental disposition. The error appeals because it is convenient and invisible — it supposes neither method nor life of prayer.
But one does not free oneself from attachment to the table by thinking about it less, for "thinking about it less" is still thinking about it, in hollow form; and will alone, without grace or interior life, quickly exhausts itself. The saints' remedy is not crisped voluntarism: it is made of discernment, thanksgiving and regular small renunciations. Saint Augustine taught taking "food as medicine"[24] — eating for the end (living, serving God) rather than for pleasure alone. The ancients advised rising from table still a little hungry[25], not out of harshness, but to keep the heart free and the mind clear. And the great positive weapon is gratitude: receiving each meal as a gift from God and thanking Him for it disarms gluttony by turning it back toward its author — "do everything for the glory of God"[26]. Deciding to "think about it less" without changing anything concrete is treating a habit with a mere wish. The concrete means are detailed in How to grow in the battle against gluttony.
"The battle of the mouth is secondary: let us start with the great vices"
An error of strategy: gluttony being a small sin, it would be better to attack the noble vices first — pride, impurity, anger — and postpone mastery of the belly. One ranks upside down. The error appeals because it seems to aim high — but it neglects the ground where everything begins.
Yet the masters of the spiritual life teach the reverse: the battle of the mouth is the first, not by dignity, but by pedagogical order. Cassian places gluttony first among the eight vices because it is the most rooted in nature and the most immediate; the subtler battles, he says, cannot be undertaken until one has first conquered, "on the manifest ground," the appetite of the belly[27]. The reason is profound: an overfed body weighs down the mind. Saint Thomas ranks among the "daughters" of gluttony "dullness of mind" (hebetudo mentis)[28], and Christ himself warns:
"Beware that your hearts do not become drowsy from carousing and drunkenness and the anxieties of daily life." — Gospel according to Saint Luke 21:34[29]
More gravely still, gluttony opens directly onto lust: "from belly to flesh," the passage is short, and Saint John Climacus teaches that "he who has tamed his belly strides toward chastity"[30]. Far from secondary, the battle of the mouth is therefore the door to be held first, on pain of waging the battles above in vain. On the link between gluttony and lust, see Common mistakes regarding the battle against lust.
Errors about fault and duration
"Gluttony is never more than a venial sin"
A reassuring error: gluttony being the lightest of the capital sins, it could never be more than a venial sin, an imperfection without gravity. It is held always benign. The error appeals because it soothes conscience cheaply.
But the Church distinguishes degrees, and gluttony can become grave. Saint Thomas teaches that it is of itself a venial sin, but becomes mortal when attachment to the pleasure of the table prevails over love of God — when one is ready to transgress a divine commandment for that pleasure, or abandons oneself to it in contempt of reason and health. Drunkenness is its clearest case: Scripture warns that "the drunkard and the glutton will come to poverty"[31], and the Catechism ranks among those who "become gravely guilty" those who, by abuse of table and alcohol, endanger their own safety and that of others[32]. Drunkenness that voluntarily deprives of the use of reason, excess that ruins health, gorging that hardens against the starving poor — like the rich man "who feasted sumptuously every day" while ignoring Lazarus at his door[33] — are not mere imperfections. Holding gluttony always venial is ignoring that a "small" vice, left free, can lead to grave fault.
"The slightest gluttonous pleasure is a sin"
The opposite error, which tortures delicate souls: since gluttony is a vice, the slightest pleasure felt at table, the slightest satisfaction in a good dish, the slightest regret before a missed delicacy would prove one has already sinned. Temptation is confused with fault, and one sinks into scrupulosity. The error appeals because it takes sin seriously — but it places it too early.
Yet the Church carefully distinguishes temptation from consent. For mortal sin, three conditions are jointly required: "a grave matter, committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent"[34]; and "mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent"[35]. The first movement of desire, the spontaneous attraction of a dish, satisfaction rising before any deliberation are therefore not yet sins: they become so only if the will takes complacent delight in them and consents beyond measure. As one can be tempted without sinning, one can feel the attraction of a pleasure without consenting to it in a disordered way. Augustine himself acknowledged that pleasure legitimately accompanies necessary food[36]. The scrupulosity that sees a grave sin in every satisfaction at table confuses God's gift with disordered consent; instead, that first movement must be seized as the occasion of battle — the instant when, spotting it, one refers it to God and gives thanks for it.
"Once gluttony is mastered, it is won"
A last error, and the most convenient: the battle against gluttony would be a stage crossed once and for all — a few months of discipline, and one would have "become sober," safe, dispensed from watching. One believes oneself arrived after an effort — and that is precisely when the vice reforms. The error appeals because it turns a permanent battle into an acquired title.
But gluttony clings to an appetite rooted in the very nature of the body, reborn each day with hunger. Unlike a vice that can be cut at its root, the appetite for eating remains as long as one lives, and with it the possibility of derangement. The heart disciplined for a time can relax the next day, and fervent souls have been seen becoming gluttonous again by way of "small" habits. That is why the saints make it a battle of one's whole life: not a battle won, but a measure to be relearned at each meal. Saint Paul, the victorious apostle, did not believe himself dispensed from vigilance: "I drive my body and train it, for fear that, after having preached to others, I myself should be disqualified"[37]. One day's sobriety does not dispense from tomorrow's temperance; and he who believes himself healed because he knew how to deprive himself for a time exposes himself to letting gluttony return through the door of daily pleasures. Gluttony is not a state one leaves: it is a slope to watch until the last day.
Error and truth at a glance
The table below sums up the misconceptions covered: on the left, the error in its common formulation; in the center, what makes it false; on the right, what the Church and the saints truly teach, with their source. It reads line by line, like a quick antidote to received ideas.
| The common error | Why it is false | What the Church and the saints teach |
|---|---|---|
| Gluttony is eating a lot | The object is disordered desire, not quantity | "Disordered desire for food" (Thomas, q. 148)[38] |
| It is a gourmet's sin: loving good cooking | It is the derangement of pleasure, not pleasure, that is at stake | "Everything created by God is good" (1 Tim 4:4)[39] |
| The pleasure of eating is suspect; the table must be despised | Christ "came eating and drinking" | "A glutton and a drunkard," slander against Jesus (Mt 11:19)[40] |
| Taking pleasure in eating is already gluttony | Pleasure accompanies need; fault lies in consent | "Food as medicine" (Augustine)[41] |
| A festive meal, taking care over a dish, is gluttony | Feasting and conviviality are willed by God | "The Kingdom of God is not a matter of food" (Rom 14:17)[42] |
| A severe fast proves one is not gluttonous | False rigorism is another imbalance, fed by pride | Discernment, the rule of fasting (Cassian)[43] |
| I eat normally, I am not concerned | Refinement and attachment are hidden gluttony | Five forms: too soon, too elaborate… (Gregory)[44] |
| To conquer, it suffices to fast a great deal | Fasting is subordinated to charity | "Less is gained by fasting…" (Cassian)[45] |
| Having willpower suffices | One heals through discernment and thanksgiving | "Do everything for the glory of God" (1 Cor 10:31)[46] |
| The battle of the mouth is secondary | It is the "gateway of the vices," to be held first | First of the eight vices (Cassian); mother of lust (Climacus)[47] |
| Gluttony is never more than a venial sin | It becomes mortal (drunkenness, contempt of God) | "The drunkard and the glutton will come to poverty" (Prov 23)[48] |
| The slightest gluttonous pleasure is a sin | Temptation is not fault: all lies in consent | Full knowledge and complete consent required (CCC § 1859)[49] |
| Once mastered, it is won | Appetite is reborn each day: a lifelong battle | "I drive my body and train it" (1 Cor 9:27)[50] |
Gluttony, pleasure of the table, conviviality, temperance, rigorism: not to be confused
Many errors come from a blurry vocabulary, where one word is taken for another. A few classical distinctions suffice to dispel the haze. Gluttony is the disordered desire for food and drink, the appetite departing from the order of reason and making the pleasure of the table an end[51] — the depth of the vice, that movement which puts in the belly the place belonging to God (Phil 3:19). False rigorism is, not its virtuous opposite, but the opposite excess: immoderate austerity that despises the body, ruins health and feeds vainglory, which Cassian condemns as much as softness[52]. Between these two excesses, temperance holds the just middle: the moral virtue that "moderates the attraction of pleasures and provides balance in the use of created goods"[53], that knows how to fast and rejoice each in its proper hour.
Beside these three, two healthy realities must not be confused with the vice. The pleasure of the table — savoring a good dish, appreciating the flavor of a gift from God — is not a fault, but the legitimate accompaniment of need, to be received with thanksgiving[54]. And conviviality — the festive meal, shared joy, care taken in receiving — is not gluttony but a share of charity, in the image of the feasts willed by God and the wedding at Cana. These words are therefore not synonymous: only gluttony and false rigorism are excesses to flee; temperance is the virtue to acquire; the pleasure of the table is a gift to receive with gratitude; and conviviality, a joy to honor. Confusing them risks fighting an innocent gift — the pleasure of a meal — or letting gluttony triumph under the reassuring name of "conviviality."
| Disposition | Object | Spiritual judgment | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vice by excess | Gluttony | Seeking the pleasure of the table beyond reason | Capital sin, "gateway of the vices" |
| Opposite vice | False rigorism | Despising the body, fasting without measure | Contrary excess, fed by pride |
| Virtue | Temperance | Moderating pleasure, balancing use | Just middle (CCC § 1809) |
| Gift to receive | Pleasure of the table | Savoring food with gratitude | Good, "made holy" (1 Tim 4:4) |
| Joy to honor | Conviviality | Sharing the meal, celebrating the feast | Charity (wedding at Cana, Lk 15) |
Restoring the true light to the battle against gluttony
Once the misconceptions are set aside, the battle against gluttony appears in its just light. Far from a war against the pleasure of eating, or contempt for the table, or an escalation of fasts, it is the restoration of food to its just place: servant of life and not mistress, occasion of gratitude and not idol of the belly. Conquering it is not depriving oneself by calculation nor torturing oneself with scruples; it is converting the meal — receiving food as a gift from God, taking it with measure, and making it an act of praise.
That is why the term of the battle is not the sadness of deprivation, but a new freedom and lightness: he who no longer serves his belly is no longer at the mercy of his appetites. The glutton was a slave — of his habits, of the mood that a pleasure gives or withdraws, of thought circling around the table; the temperate heart breathes, savors without being enslaved, can fast without collapsing and feast without excess, because its food is no longer its god. And the most precious fruit is clarity of mind for prayer, the lightened body weighing no more on the soul, and compassion for those who hunger — for he who has learned to deprive himself a little better understands the poor. Such is the truth the caricatures had masked: the battle against gluttony is not hatred of the table, but the path by which a heart ceases to seek in the pleasure of the belly what God alone can give.
"So whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do everything for the glory of God." — First Letter to the Corinthians 10:31[55]
Where gluttony weighs down and enslaves, temperance lightens and frees; where the belly silences the mind, sobriety makes the heart attentive to God and neighbor. "Man shall not live by bread alone": the whole battle lies in uprooting that appetite which wants to reign and putting it back in its servant's place — and in discovering, by eating "for the glory of God," that one is not impoverished, but recovers the freedom of God's children, masters of their table because servants of their Father.
For further reading
- How to grow in the battle against gluttony — the practical guide: nature of gluttony, its five forms, its roots, its "daughters," its biblical figures (Eve, Esau, the quails in the desert), and the concrete means (fasting, abstinence, mortification of the mouth, thanksgiving, discretion) to gluttony conquered in the Divine Will.
- What the saints say about the battle against gluttony — the anthology: the voice of the Fathers, doctors and mystics, from Cassian and Evagrius to Gregory the Great, Climacus, Benedict, Augustine, Thomas Aquinas and Francis de Sales.
- Common mistakes regarding fasting — the misconceptions about deprivation, gluttony's proper remedy: purely exterior fasting, escalation of austerity, fasting without charity.
- Common mistakes regarding temperance — the misconceptions about right measure, the virtue of which gluttony is the failing.
- Common mistakes regarding the battle against lust — the flesh to which gluttony opens the door ("from belly to flesh").
- Common mistakes regarding penance — the misconceptions about mortification, of which the battle of the mouth is the first school.
- Common mistakes regarding the battle against avarice — the twin article of the same series on battles against the capital sins.
Notes and References
Saint Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274), Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 148 (De gula), a. 1: "Gula non nominat quemlibet appetitum edendi et bibendi, sed inordinatum. Dicitur autem appetitus inordinatus ex eo quod recedit ab ordine rationis, in quo bonum virtutis moralis consistit." ("Gluttony does not designate every desire to eat and drink, but a disordered desire; and a desire is said to be disordered because it departs from the order of reason, in which consists the good of moral virtue.") Ed. Summa Theologiae, Cerf; Latin on corpusthomisticum.org; French trans. on docteurangelique.free.fr.
1 3 38 51Letter to the Philippians 3:18-19, official liturgical translation (AELF, English adaptation): "Many conduct themselves as enemies of the cross of Christ. They will end in destruction. Their god is their belly, and their glory is in their shame; their minds are set on earthly things." The Greek koilia (belly) erected into theos (god): the harshest formula of the New Testament on idolatrous gluttony.
2Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 148, a. 4, following Saint Gregory the Great, Moralia in Job, XXX, ch. 18 (no. 60): one sins by gluttony in five ways — "praepropere, laute, nimis, ardenter, studiose": as to time (eating too soon, before the hour), quality (overly refined dishes), quantity (too much), manner (with too much eagerness), and excessive care in preparation (over-delicately prepared dishes). Latin on corpusthomisticum.org; Moralia, Sources Chretiennes 525 (Cerf, 2009) and Patrologia Latina vol. 76.
4 9 19 44Catechism of the Catholic Church, § 1866: "Vices can be […] classified according to the virtues they oppose, or be linked to the capital sins which Christian experience has distinguished, following St. John Cassian and St. Gregory the Great. They are called 'capital' because they engender other sins, other vices." They are pride, avarice, envy, anger, lust, gluttony, sloth or acedia. Official English edition.
5Evagrius Ponticus (346-399), Practical Treatise (Praktikos), § 6: enumeration of the eight generic "thoughts" (logismoi) in order — gluttony (gastrimargia), fornication, avarice, sadness, anger, acedia, vainglory, pride. Gluttony opens the list: it is the first door of battle. Sources chretiennes edition no. 171 (Cerf).
6Saint John Cassian (c. 360-435), Institutes, Book V, "On the spirit of gluttony" (De spiritu gastrimargiae): Cassian places the battle against gluttony first in the monastic struggle, teaching that the higher passions — first fornication — cannot be conquered without first mastering, "on the manifest ground," the appetite of the belly. The order of the eight vices is thus pedagogical. Sources chretiennes edition no. 109 (Cerf).
7 27Saint John Climacus (c. 579-649), The Ladder (Klimax), step 14, "On that pitiless mistress which is the belly" (gastrimargia): Climacus teaches there that gluttony is the mother of lust, and that "he who has tamed his belly strides toward chastity." The Ladder, written at Mount Sinai for monks, ranks gastrimargia and lust among the passions aimed at the body. French trans. on livres-mystiques.com; Spiritualite orientale edition (Bellefontaine).
8 30 47Saint John Cassian, Institutes, Book V: Cassian observes that man's first fall came through food — "a single fruit, not a feast" — to show that gluttony is not a matter of quantity but of disordered desire. The second Adam, Christ, reverses this defeat by fasting in the desert (Mt 4). Sources Chretiennes 109.
10First Letter to Timothy 4:1-5, official liturgical translation (AELF, English adaptation): against those who "forbid certain foods," Saint Paul affirms: "Everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected when received with thanksgiving, for it is made holy by the word of God and prayer." Scriptural foundation for refusing dietary rigorism: evil is not in food, but in disordered desire.
11 13 39 54Gospel according to Saint Matthew 11:19, official liturgical translation (AELF, English adaptation): "The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, 'Look, a glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!'" Christ, who truly ate and drank, shows that the pleasure of the table is not in itself a sin; the accusation against him is slanderous. A key verse for distinguishing conviviality from gluttony.
12 40First Letter to the Corinthians 10:31, official liturgical translation (AELF, English adaptation): "So whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do everything for the glory of God." Charter of thanksgiving that sanctifies the meal and disarms gluttony by orienting toward God the pleasure received from His gifts; foundation of the table blessing (Benedicite).
14 26 46 55Saint Augustine (354-430), Confessions, Book X, ch. 31, nos. 43-47: "Hoc me docuisti, ut quemadmodum medicamenta sic alimenta sumpturus accedam" ("You have taught me to approach food as I would medicine"); but the passage from the discomfort of need to the repose of satiety is itself a pleasure where "the snare of concupiscence lies in wait for me" ("in ipso transitu mihi insidiatur laqueus concupiscentiae"), for "the measure sufficient for health is not the one sufficient for pleasure," and one does not always know whether it is still the body's need or "the deceitful seduction of concupiscence" asking. Pleasure attaches itself to need "like a dangerous servant." Latin text on augustinus.it / thelatinlibrary.com; service translation.
15 24 36 41Letter to the Romans 14:17, official liturgical translation (AELF, English adaptation): "The Kingdom of God is not a matter of food and drink, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit." Saint Paul reminds the Romans, divided over permitted foods, that holiness does not lie in what one eats, but in charity. Text on aelf.org.
16 42Saint John Cassian, Institutes, Book V, and Conferences, II (on discretion): Cassian makes discernment (discretio) the sovereign rule of fasting. He condemns softness as much as immoderate austerity, which ruins health and feeds pride. The just measure: take enough to sustain the body without weighing down the mind, and rise from table before full satiety. Sources Chretiennes 109 and 54.
17 22 25 43 52Saint Francis de Sales (1567-1622), Bishop of Geneva and Doctor of the Church, Introduction to the Devout Life (1609), Part III, ch. 23, "On sobriety and temperance in drinking and eating": Francis recommends a sobriety "without scruple or singularity," adapted to one's state of life, and holds it a rule to "eat what is set before you" with simplicity rather than seeking, by affected mortification, the worst morsel. True mortification of the mouth, he says, is "free" and discreet. Text on abbaye-saint-benoit.ch and jesusmarie.com.
18Saint John Cassian, Conferences, I (Conference of Abbot Moses on the goal and end of the monk), Sources chretiennes 42 bis, Editions du Cerf, 2008, p. 101: "Less is gained by fasting than is lost by a movement of anger […] It is fitting, therefore, to refer secondary things — fasts, vigils, retreat and meditation on the Scriptures — to our principal goal, that is, purity of heart, which is charity." Fasting is expressly subordinated there, as a means, to charity.
20 45Book of Isaiah 58:6-7, official liturgical translation (AELF, English adaptation): the Lord denounces purely exterior fasting and declares: "Is not this the fast that I choose: […] to share your bread with the hungry, to bring the homeless poor into your house?" Founding text of the link between fasting and charity: Christian deprivation has value only joined to almsgiving. Taken up by the Catechism (CCC 2447) and the Lenten liturgy.
21Catechism of the Catholic Church, § 1809: "Temperance is the moral virtue that moderates the attraction of pleasures and provides balance in the use of created goods. It ensures the will's mastery over instincts and keeps desires within the limits of what is honorable." Gluttony is the vice opposed to temperance in the use of food and drink. Text on vatican.va.
23 53Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 148, a. 6, following Saint Gregory the Great, Moralia, XXXI, 45: the "daughters" of gluttony are "inepta laetitia, scurrilitas, immunditia, multiloquium, hebetudo mentis circa intelligentiam" — disordered joy, buffoonery, impurity, idle talk, and dullness of mind as to intelligence. The last — the dulling of the mind by the overfed body — is the gravest for spiritual life. Latin on corpusthomisticum.org.
28Gospel according to Saint Luke 21:34, official liturgical translation (AELF, English adaptation): "Beware that your hearts do not become drowsy from carousing and drunkenness and the anxieties of daily life, and that day catch you by surprise." A verse quoted by Saint Benedict (Rule, ch. 39) against crapula; Christ expressly links heaviness of heart to excess at table.
29Book of Proverbs 23:20-21, official liturgical translation (AELF, English adaptation): "Do not join those who drink too much wine, or gorge themselves on meat, for the drunkard and the glutton will come to poverty, and drowsiness will clothe them in rags." One of many sapiential warnings against excess at table and in drink.
31 48Catechism of the Catholic Church, § 2290: "The virtue of temperance disposes us to avoid every kind of excess: the abuse of food, alcohol, tobacco, or medicine. Those incur grave guilt who, by drunkenness or a love of speed, endanger their own and others' safety […]" Text on vatican.va.
32Gospel according to Saint Luke 16:19-31, official liturgical translation (AELF, English adaptation), parable of the rich man and poor Lazarus: "There was a rich man who dressed in purple garments and fine linen and dined sumptuously each day." Saint John Chrysostom (Homilies on Lazarus) stresses that the rich man is not accused of open injustice, but of enjoying his table while ignoring the poor man lying at his door: gluttony as hardness of heart.
33Catechism of the Catholic Church, § 1857: "For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: 'Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent.'" Official English edition.
34Catechism of the Catholic Church, § 1859-1860: "Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent…" And § 1860: "The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense." The first movement of desire or the spontaneous attraction of a pleasure at table, not consented to, is therefore not mortal sin: fault engages the will only at the moment of deliberate consent.
35 49First Letter to the Corinthians 9:27, official liturgical translation (AELF, English adaptation): "I drive my body and train it, for fear that, after having preached to others, I myself should be disqualified." Saint Paul applies to spiritual combat the image of the training athlete; a founding verse of Christian bodily asceticism, whose first application is sobriety at table. The battle remains to be fought to the end, even for the apostle.
37 50