I have been asked if any of the early church fathers believed they had to follow dietary laws. Specifically, the person asking wants to know the views of influential early Christians such as Clement of Alexandria.

I have found information regarding fasting within the early church on Wednesdays and Fridays: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Didache

I understand that in the early ages of Christianity, fasting included also the abstaining from wine, as found in the writings of St. Cyril of Jerusalem, St. Basil, St. John Chrysostom, Theophilus of Alexandria, and others. About the 9th century, some relaxation began to be introduced in the Latin Church. The Eastern Christians kept it up much longer, but even with them it has ceased to be considered as obligatory.

My view is that it is impossible for any person to keep the Mosaic Law. ALL of the Mosaic Law has to be kept – including the dietary rules and regulations. Failure to keep even one law leads to death. Only Jesus could keep the Mosaic Law perfectly and that is why he said: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfil them” (Matthew 5:17). But I am not being asked about that.

The question I have been asked is specifically about any obligation for Christians to follow dietary laws and what the early church fathers said about it. I am not looking for information on fasting or feast days.

This is not a subject on which I am qualified to answer, which is why I have come to Christianity Stack Exchange. Also, I have a limited amount of time in which to respond so I could do with some help!

Edit: During my research I found this: First Timothy 4:3 says that, in later times, false teachers will “forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth.” This could refer to the 'Judaizers' referred to in Mike Borden's comment.

  • 1
    This is no answer as I am not familiar enough with the Church Fathers, but you asked for time sensitive help so... If there are any dietary obligations it is certain they do not stick to Gentile believers (Acts 10-11, 15:22-29). I reckon obligations to circumcision, fasting, diet (and many other things) within the Church as holdover effects from the encroachment of Judaizers. Commented Jul 3, 2021 at 11:31
  • Fasting is not a dietary law. It is a spiritual exercise in abstinence and self-control, explicitly recommended in the New Testament. Also, by definition, the church fathers are supporters of the established orthodoxy; since Christian orthodoxy, since its inception, has explicitly decided to not impose Jewish dietary laws unto Christian non-Jews, then, by mere logic, no person can be regarded as church father, if his beliefs go against that of the entire church (Acts 15 & Paul's letters).
    – user46876
    Commented Jul 3, 2021 at 11:41
  • What exactly did he mean by dietary laws ? Adventists abstaining from pork products ? Puritan views on alcohol consumption ? Fasting for Lent ?
    – user46876
    Commented Jul 3, 2021 at 15:32
  • @Lucian No mention is made of fasting or the consumption of alcohol. The question I have been asked is this: "Do we have any information that any of the early important Christians outside of the Bible believe that Christians had to follow dietary laws? I would really like to hear about the views of influential early Christians such as Clement of Alexandria." The person asking this question seems sincere but I know nothing about the views of the early church fathers (pre A.D. 325) in general and Clement of Alexandria in particular on the topic of dietary laws.
    – Lesley
    Commented Jul 3, 2021 at 16:16
  • 1
    They might not answer your question directly, but there could be related useful information in these two publications: What Does the Bible Teach About Clean and Unclean Meats? | United Church of God and Biblical Principles of Health | Living Church of God. Commented Jul 13, 2021 at 18:27

3 Answers 3


Did any of the early church fathers believe they had to follow dietary laws?

The short answer is that some did and others did not!

What was common amongst the Church Fathers is that they all encouraged the faithful to pray and ask God’s blessings over the food that they were about to consume (Grace before Meals).

They generally had specific dietary rules for what to eat on days of fasting.

  • Some of the Early Church Fathers favoured vegetarianism.
  • Some gave instructions for the blessing of food.
  • There were specific rules fasting days.
  • Gluttony was to be absolutely avoided.

Tertullian was one of four early church fathers who wrote extensively on the subject of vegetarianism. According to Tertullian, flesh-eating is not conducive to the highest life, it violates moral law, and it debases man in intellect and emotion.

Responding to the apparent permissiveness of Paul, Tertullian argued: "and even if he handed over to you the keys of the slaughter house...in permitting you to eat all things...at least he has not made the kingdom of Heaven to consist in butchery: for, says he, eating and drinking is not the Kingdom of God."

Tertullian similarly scorned those who would use the gospel to justify gratifying the cravings of the flesh:

"How unworthily, too, do you press the example of Christ as having come ‘eating and drinking’ into the service of your lusts: He who pronounced not the full but the hungry and thirsty ‘blessed,’ who professed His work to be the completion of His Father’s will, was wont to abstain—instructing them to labor for that ‘meat’ which lasts to eternal life, and enjoining in their common prayers petition not for gross food but for bread only."

Tertullian made his case for moderate eating by referring to the history of the Israelites (Numbers 11:4-34): "And if there be ‘One’ who prefers the works of justice, not however, without sacrifice—that is to say, a spirit exercised by abstinence—it is surely that God to whom neither a gluttonous people nor priest was acceptable—monuments of whose concupiscence remain to this day, where lies buried a people greedy and clamorous for flesh-meats, gorging quails even to the point of inducing jaundice.

"It was divinely proclaimed," insisted Tertullian, "’Wine and strong liquor shall you not drink, you and your sons after you.’ Now this prohibition of drink is essentially connected with the vegetable diet. Thus, where abstinence from wine is required by the Deity, or is vowed by man, there, too, may be understood suppression of gross feeding, for as is the eating, so is the drinking.

"It is not consistent with truth that a man should sacrifice half of his stomach only to God—that he should be sober in drinking, but intemperate in eating. Your belly is your God, your liver is your temple, your paunch is your altar, the cook is your priest, and the fat steam is your Holy Spirit; the seasonings and the sauces are your chrisms, and your belchings are your prophesizing..."

Tertullian sarcastically compared gluttons to Esau, who sold his birthright in exchange for a meal. "I ever recognize Esau, the hunter, as a man of taste and as his were, so are your whole skill and interest given to hunting and trapping...It is in the cooking pots that your love is inflamed—it is in the kitchen that your faith grows fervid—it is in the flesh dishes that all your hopes lie hid...Consistently do you men of the flesh reject the things of the Spirit. But if your prophets are complacent towards such persons, they are not my prophets...Let us openly and boldly vindicate our teaching.

"We are sure that they who are in the flesh cannot please God...a grossly-feeding Christian is akin to lions and wolves rather than God. Our Lord Jesus called Himself Truth and not habit."

In general, Tertullian railed against gluttony, and taught that spiritual life consists of simple living. He explained, "if man could not follow even a simple taboo against eating one fruit, how could he be expected to restrain himself from more demanding restrictions? Instead, after the Flood, man was given the regulation against blood; further details were length to his own strength of will."

Clement of Alexandria (AD 150-220), or Titus Flavius Clemens, founded the Alexandrian school of Christian Theology and succeeded Pantaenus in AD 190. In his writings, he referred to vegetarian philosophers Pythagoras, Plato, and even Socrates as divinely inspired. But the true teachings, he insisted, are to be found in the Hebrew prophets and in the person of Jesus Christ.

Clement taught that a life of virtue is one of simplicity, and that the apostle Matthew was a vegetarian. According to Clement, eating flesh and drinking wine "is rather characteristic to a beast and the fumes rising from them, being dense, darken the soul...Destroy not the work of God for the sake of food. Whether ye eat or drink, do all to the glory of God, aiming after true frugality. For it is lawful for me to partake of all things, yet all things are not expedient...neither is the regimen of a Christian formed by indulgence...man is not by nature a gravy eater, but a bread eater.

"Those who use the most frugal fare are the strongest, the healthiest and the noblest...We must guard against those sorts of food which persuade us to eat when we are not hungry," warned Clement, "bewitching the appetite...is there not within a temperate simplicity, a wholesome variety of eatables—vegetables, roots, olives, herbs, milk, cheese, fruits...?

"But those who bend around inflammatory tables, nourishing their own diseases, are ruled by a most licentious disease which I shall venture to call the demon of the belly: the worst and most vile of demons. It is far better to be happy than to have a devil dwelling in us, for happiness is found only in the practice of virtue. Accordingly the apostle Matthew lived upon seeds, fruits, grains and nuts and vegetables, without the use of flesh."

Clement acknowledged the moral and spiritual advantages of the vegetarian way of life:

"If any righteous man does not burden his soul by the eating of flesh, he has the advantage of a rational motive...The very ancient altar of Delos was celebrated for its purity, to which alone, as being undefiled by slaughter and death, they say that Pythagoras would permit approach.

"And they will not believe us when we say that the righteous soul is the truly sacred altar? But I believe that sacrifices were invented by men to be a pretext for eating flesh."

St. Basil (AD 320-79) taught, "The steam of meat darkens the light of the spirit. One can hardly have virtue if one enjoys meat meals and feasts...In the earthly paradise, there was no wine, no one sacrificed animals, and no one ate meat. Wine was only invented after the Deluge...

"With simple living, well being increases in the household, animals are in safety, there is no shedding of blood, nor putting animals to death. The knife of the cook is needless, for the table is spread only with the fruits that nature gives, and with them they are content."

St. Basil prayed for universal brotherhood, and an end to human brutality against animals:

"The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness Thereof. Oh, God, enlarge within us the Sense of fellowship with all living Things, our brothers the animals to Whom Thou gavest the earth as Their home in common with us

"We remember with shame that In the past we have exercised the High dominion of man and ruthless Cruelty so that the voice of the earth Which should have gone up to Thee in Song, has been a groan of travail.

"May we realize that they live not For us alone but for themselves and For Thee and that they love the sweetness Of life."

According to St. Gregory Nazianzen (AD 330-89):

"The great Son is the glory of the Father and shone out from Him like light... He assumed a body to bring help to suffering creatures...

"He was sacrifice and celebrant sacrificial priest and God Himself. He offered blood to God to cleanse the entire world."

"Holy people are most loving and gentle in their dealings with their fellows, and even with the lower animals: for this reason it was said that ‘A righteous man is merciful to the life of his beast,’" explained St. John Chrysostom (AD 347-407). "Surely we ought to show kindness and gentleness to animals for many reasons and chiefly because they are of the same origin as ourselves."

Writing about the Christian saints and ascetics, Chrysostom observed: "No streams of blood are among them; no butchering and cutting of flesh...With their repast of fruits and vegetables even angels from heaven, as they behold it, are delighted and pleased."

Chrysostom considered flesh-eating a cruel and unnatural habit for Christians: "We imitate the ways of wolves, the ways of leopards, or rather we are worse than these. For nature has assigned that they should be thus fed, but us God hath honored with speech and a sense of equity, yet we are worse than the wild beasts."

In a homily on Matthew 22:1-4, Chrysostom taught: "We the Christian leaders practice abstinence from the flesh of animals to subdue our bodies...the unnatural eating of flesh-meat is of demonical origin...the eating of flesh is polluting." He added that "flesh-meats and wine serve as materials for sensuality, and are a source of danger, sorrow, and disease."

In a homily on II Corinthians 9, Chrysostom distinguished between nourishment and gluttony:

"No one debars thee from these, nor forbids thee thy daily food. I say ‘food,’ not ‘feasting’; ‘raiment’ not ‘ornament,’...For consider, who should we say more truly feasted—he whose diet is herbs, and who is in sound health and suffered no uneasiness, or he who has the table of a Sybarite and is full of a thousand disorders?

"Certainly the former. Therefore, let us seek nothing more than these, if we would at once live luxuriously and healthfully. And let him who can be satisfied with pulse, and can keep in good health, seek for nothing more. But let him who is weaker, and needs to be dieted with other vegetable fruits, not be debarred from them."

In a homily on the Epistle to Timothy, Chrysostom described the ill effects of becoming a slave to one’s bodily appetites:

"A man who lives in selfish luxury is dead while he lives, for he lives only to his stomach. In other senses he lives not. He sees not what he ought to see; he hears not what he ought to hear; he speaks not what he ought to speak. Nor does he perform the actions of living.

"But as he who is stretched upon a bed with his eyes closed and his eyelids fast, perceives nothing that is passing; so is it with this man, or rather not so, but worse. For the one is equally insensible to things good and evil, while the other is sensible to things evil only, but as insensible as the former to things good.

"Thus he is dead. For nothing relating to the life to come moves or affects him. For intemperance, taking him into her own bosom as into some dark and dismal cavern full of all uncleanliness, causes him to dwell altogether in darkness, like the dead. For, when all his time is spent between feasting and drunkenness, is he not dead, and buried in darkness?

"Who can describe the storm that comes of luxury, that assails the soul and body? For, as a sky continually clouded admits not the sunbeams to shine through, so the fumes of luxury...envelop his brain...and casting over it a thick mist, suffers not reason to exert itself.

"If it were possible to bring the soul into view and to behold it with our bodily eyes—it would seem depressed, mournful, miserable, and wasted with leanness; for the more the body grows sleek and gross, the more lean and weakly is the soul. The more one is pampered, the more the other is hampered."

The orthodox, 4th century Christian Hieronymus connected vegetarianism with both the original diet given by God and the teachings of Jesus:

"The eating of animal meat was unknown up to the big Flood, but since the Flood they have pushed the strings and stinking juices of animal meat into our mouths, just as they threw quails in front of the grumbling sensual people in the desert. Jesus Christ, who appeared when the time had been fulfilled, has again joined the end with the beginning, so that it is no longer allowed for us to eat animal meat."

St. Jerome (AD 340-420) wrote to a monk in Milan who had abandoned vegetarianism:

"As to the argument that in God’s second blessing (Genesis 9:3) permission was given to eat flesh—a permission not given in the first blessing (Genesis 1:29)—let him know that just as permission to put away a wife was, according to the words of the Saviour, not given from the beginning, but was granted to the human race by Moses because of the hardness of our hearts (Matthew 19:1-12), so also in like manner the eating of flesh was unknown until the Flood, but after the Flood, just as quails were given to the people when they murmured in the desert, so have sinews and the offensiveness been given to our teeth.

"The Apostle, writing to the Ephesians, teaches us that God had purposed that in the fullness of time he would restore all things, and would draw to their beginning, even to Christ Jesus, all things that are in heaven or that are on earth. Whence also, the Saviour Himself in the Apocalypse of John says, ‘I am the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end.’ From the beginning of human nature, we neither fed upon flesh nor did we put away our wives, nor were our foreskins taken away from us for a sign. We kept on this course until we arrived at the Flood.

"But after the Flood, together with the giving of the Law, which no man could fulfill, the eating of flesh was brought in, and the putting away of wives was conceded to hardness of heart...But now that Christ has come in the end of time, and has turned back Omega to Alpha...neither is it permitted to us to put away our wives, nor are we circumcised, nor do we eat flesh."

St. Jerome was responsible for the Vulgate, or Latin version of the Bible, still in use today. He felt a vegetarian diet was best for those devoted to the pursuit of wisdom. He once wrote that he was not a follower of Pythagoras or Empodocles "who do not eat any living creature," but concluded, "And so I too say to you: if you wish to be perfect, it is good not to drink wine and eat flesh." - Early Church Fathers

On the blessing of foods:

Instructions for the blessing of food by the bishop in church: All shall be diligent to offer to the bishop the first fruits of the fruits of the first harvest. He shall bless them, saying, “We give thanks to you, God, and offer to you the first fruits of the fruits which you have given to us as food, having nourished them by your word, commanding the earth to bring forth all kinds of fruit for the pleasure and nourishment of men and all animals. For all this we praise you, God, in which you have been our benefactor, adorning all creation for us with various fruits, through your Son Jesus Christ our Lord, through whom to you be glory throughout the ages of the ages. Amen.”

These are the fruits which he shall bless: the grape, fig, pomegranate, olive, pear, apple, blackberry, peach, cherry, almond, and plum. But not the pumpkin, melon, cucumber, onion, garlic, or any other vegetable. Sometimes flowers also are offered. The rose and lily may be offered, but no other flowers. With all foods, give thanks to the Holy God, eating them to his glory. —Attributed to Hippolytus, Apostolic Tradition (3rd century); translated by Kevin Edgecomb

When you sit down to eat, pray. When you eat bread, do so thanking Him for being so generous to you. If you drink wine, be mindful of Him who has given it to you for your pleasure and as a relief in sickness. —Basil of Caesarea, Homily V, In martyrem Julittam (4th century), translated by Orthodox Church Quotes

Eating (and not eating) with the Church Fathers

On gluttony:

O glutton, bent on the worship of your own belly! It is better for you to cast a live coal into your stomach than the fried foods of rulers and princes. —Isaac the Syrian, Homily 17, Ascetical Homilies (7th century), translated by Arent Jan Wensinck

Eating (and not eating) with the Church Fathers

Fasting can take up a significant portion of the calendar year. The purpose of fasting is not to suffer, but according to Sacred Tradition to guard against gluttony and impure thoughts, deeds and words. Fasting must always be accompanied by increased prayer and almsgiving (donating to a local charity, or directly to the poor, depending on circumstances). To engage in fasting without them is considered useless or even spiritually harmful. To repent of one's sins and to reach out in love to others is part and parcel of true fasting.

Vegetables and water seem to be the main staple on fast days. Sorry no meat or wine. I guess that means, in modern days no hot dogs, hamburgers, coke or bear! Years ago I can remember buying fish dogs for Fridays, but they are not popular nowadays. I imagine some still make their own fish dogs, for days of abstinence and/or fasting days.

From Fasts Absolute Tertullian Comes to Partial Ones and Xerophagies

This principal species in the category of dietary restriction may already afford a prejudgment concerning the inferior operations of abstinence also, as being themselves too, in proportion to their measure, useful or necessary. For the exception of certain kinds from use of food is a partial fast. Let us therefore look into the question of the novelty or vanity of xerophagies, to see whether in them too we do not find an operation alike of most ancient as of most efficacious religion. I return to Daniel and his brethren, preferring as they did a diet of vegetables and the beverage of water to the royal dishes and decanters, and being found as they were therefore more handsome (lest any be apprehensive on the score of his paltry body, to boot!), besides being spiritually cultured into the bargain. For God gave to the young men knowledge and understanding in every kind of literature, and to Daniel in every word, and in dreams, and in every kind of wisdom; which (wisdom) was to make him wise in this very thing also — namely, by what means the recognition of mysteries was to be obtained from God. Finally, in the third year of Cyrus king of the Persians, when he had fallen into careful and repeated meditation on a vision, he provided another form of humiliation. In those days, he says, I Daniel was mourning during three weeks: pleasant bread I ate not; flesh and wine entered not into my mouth; with oil I was not anointed; until three weeks were consummated: which being elapsed, an angel was sent out (from God), addressing him on this wise: Daniel, you are a man pitiable; fear not: since, from the first day on which you gave your soul to recogitation and to humiliation before God, your word has been heard, and I am entered at your word. Thus the pitiable spectacle and the humiliation of xerophagies expel fear, and attract the ears of God, and make men masters of secrets.

I return likewise to Elijah. When the ravens had been wont to satisfy him with bread and flesh, why was it that afterwards, at Beersheba of Judea, that certain angel, after rousing him from sleep, offered him, beyond doubt, bread alone, and water? Had ravens been wanting, to feed him more liberally? Or had it been difficult to the angel to carry away from some pan of the banquet-room of the king some attendant with his amply-furnished waiter, and transfer him to Elijah, just as the breakfast of the reapers was carried into the den of lions and presented to Daniel in his hunger? But it behooved that an example should be set, teaching us that, at a time of pressure and persecution and whatsoever difficulty, we must live on xerophagies. With such food did David express his own exomologesis; eating ashes indeed as it were bread, that is, bread dry and foul like ashes: mingling, moreover, his drink with weeping — of course, instead of wine. For abstinence from wine withal has honourable badges of its own: (an abstinence) which had dedicated Samuel, and consecrated Aaron, to God. For of Samuel his mother said: And wine and that which is intoxicating shall he not drink: for such was her condition withal when praying to God. And the Lord said to Aaron: Wine and spirituous liquor shall you not drink, you and your son after you, whenever you shall enter the tabernacle, or ascend unto the sacrificial altar; and you shall not die. So true is it, that such as shall have ministered in the Church, being not sober, shall die. Thus, too, in recent times He upbraids Israel: And you used to give my sanctified ones wine to drink. And, moreover, this limitation upon drink is the portion of xerophagy. Anyhow, wherever abstinence from wine is either exacted by God or vowed by man, there let there be understood likewise a restriction of food fore-furnishing a formal type to drink. For the quality of the drink is correspondent to that of the eating. It is not probable that a man should sacrifice to God half his appetite; temperate in waters, and intemperate in meats. Whether, moreover, the apostle had any acquaintance with xerophagies — (the apostle) who had repeatedly practised greater rigours, hunger, and thirst, and fasts many, who had forbidden drunkennesses and revellings — we have a sufficient evidence even from the case of his disciple Timotheus; whom when he admonishes, for the sake of his stomach and constant weaknesses, to use a little wine, from which he was abstaining not from rule, but from devotion — else the custom would rather have been beneficial to his stomach — by this very fact he has advised abstinence from wine as worthy of God, which, on a ground of necessity, he has dissuaded.

  • Appreciate the quotes but were these views about vegetarianism part of church dietary laws, either then or now? Your contribution is helpful as it pertains to what the early church fathers thought about diet, however.
    – Lesley
    Commented Jul 4, 2021 at 7:46

Some early Christians believed that they should follow the law in its entirety. The Gospel of Matthew comes from a community holding this view:

Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dod, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so [i.e. Paul] shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5.17-20)


The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat; so practice and observe whatever they tell you. (Matthew 23.2-3)

The Gospel of Mark indicates that there was debate in the early church about the food laws:

Do you not see that whatever goes into a man from outside cannot defile him, since it enters, not his heart but his stomach, and so passes on? (Thus he declared all foods clean.) (Mark 7.18-19)

The Evangelist would not have had to add "thus he declared all foods clean" unless there was a debate about whether some foods were clean or not. The Gospel of Matthew, coming from a law-keeping community, does not include the note.

The Didache, too seems to come from a community that practices some of the laws:

If you can shoulder the Lord's yoke in its entirety, then you will be perfect; but if that is too much for you, do as much as you can. As regards diet, keep the rules as far as you are able; only be careful to refuse anything that has been offered to an idol, for that is the worship of dead gods. (Didache 6).

Others of the fathers were against the distinction of meats. We read in the Letter to Diognetus

As for their [the Jews'] scrupulousness about meats, and their superstitions about the Sabbath, and their much-vaunted circumcision, and their pretentious festivals and new-moon observances...I hardly think you need instruction from me. For how can it be anything but impious to accept some of the things which God has created for our use and assert their creation to have been commendable, but to reject others as being needless and good-for-nothing? (Letter to Diognetus 4).

And in the Letter of Barnabas

And now for that saying of Moses, You are not to eat of swine; nor yet of eagle, hawk, or crow; nor of any fish that has not got scales. In this there are three distinct moral precepts which he had received and understood. (For God says in Deuteronomy, I will make a covenant with this people that will embody my rules for holiness; so, you see, the divine command is in no sense a literal ban on eating, and Moses was speaking spiritually.) The meaning of his allusion to swine is this: what he is really saying is, 'you are not to consort with the class of people who are like swine, inasmuch as they forget all about the Lord while they are living in affluence, but remember him when they are in want--just as a swine, so long as it is eating, ignores its master, but starts to squeal the moment it feels hungry...In these dietary laws, then, Moses was taking three moral maxims and expounding them spiritually, though the Jews, with their carnal instincts. took him to be referring literally to foodstuffs. (Letter of Barnabas 10).

So the status of the dietary laws, and all the laws, was not settled in the earliest Christianity. As Christianity became a primarily Gentile movement, however, and Paul's teaching became generally accepted, the debate came to be settled on the side of those who held that Christians did not need to keep the dietary laws.

  • unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven - Christ's (re)interpretation of the Torah had very little to do with Pharisaic legalism and literalism, as can be seen from the very Gospel you're quoting (e.g., 12:1-14). The question is not whether or not to fulfill the commandments, but how.
    – user46876
    Commented Jul 3, 2021 at 20:21
  • +1 for the biblical quotes as well as from other sources. Your final paragraph is a good overview of the situation back then during the early church. Thank you.
    – Lesley
    Commented Jul 4, 2021 at 7:52

Did any of the early church fathers believe they had to follow dietary laws ?

No. They believed that there is only one God (Mark 12:29-32), and that He wasn't the same as our appetites (Matthew 6:24; Luke 16:13), and that serving the latter would constitute spiritual idolatry (Philippians 3:19); as such, fasting always constituted a spiritual discipline (Matthew 6:16-18; Acts 13:2-3, 14:23), but regarding it as a dietary law sounds ridiculous; it's as if calling almsgiving or not stealing financial laws, or some such nonsense. The reason lies in the fact that it is not the object of abstinence that is regarded as evil (per Judaism's utterly absurd obsession with clean and unclean meats: Matthew 15:16-17; Mark 7:18-19; 1 Corinthians 6:13 — see also Mockingbird's answer for post-apostolic patristic quotes), but our mental enslavement to it, from which Christ Himself set us free, primarily by bringing His own body under subjection (Matthew 4:1-4; Luke 4:1-4). It is in this way that the patristic quotes that you either provided or alluded to, are meant to be read and interpreted (at least according to the traditional teachings of the Eastern church).

  • Thank you, Lucian. I fully understand that fasting is not the issue here. I suspect the question I was asked has to do with following the dietary laws given by God to Moses. I will seek clarification from that source.
    – Lesley
    Commented Jul 5, 2021 at 10:15

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .