Now him that is weak in faith, take unto you: not in disputes about thoughts.

“But what a thing it is, to assert and contend that they who are not born in the Church can be the sons of God! For the blessed apostle sets forth and proves that baptism is that wherein the old man dies and the new man is born, saying, "He saved us by the washing of regeneration." But if regeneration is in the washing, that is, in baptism, how can heresy, which is not the spouse of Christ, generate sons to God by Christ? For it is the Church alone which, conjoined and united with Christ, spiritually bears sons; as the same apostle again says, "Christ loved the Church, and gave Himself for it, that He might sanctify it, cleansing it with the washing of water." If, then, she is the beloved and spouse who alone is sanctified by Christ, and alone is cleansed by His washing, it is manifest that heresy, which is not the spouse of Christ, nor can be cleansed nor sanctified by His washing, cannot bear sons to God.”

“I Am aware that to most what is here said is a difficulty. And therefore I must first give the subject of the whole of this passage, and what he wishes to correct in writing this. What does he wish to correct then? There were many of the Jews which believed, who adhered of conscience to the Law, and after their believing, still kept to the observance of meats, as not having courage yet to quit the service of the Law entirely. Then that they might not be observed if they kept from swine's flesh only, they abstained in consequence from all flesh, and ate herbs only, that what they were doing might have more the appearance of a fast than of observance of the Law. Others again were farther advanced, and kept up no one thing of the kind, who became to those, who did keep them, distressing and offensive, by reproaching them, accusing them, driving them to despondency. Therefore the blessed Paul, out of fear lest, from a wish to be right about a trifle, they should overthrow the whole, and from a wish to bring them to indifferency about what they ate, should put them in a fair way for deserting the faith, and out of a zeal to put everything right at once, before the fit opportunity was come, should do mischief on vital points, so by this continual rebuking setting them adrift from their agreement in Christ, and so they should remain not righted in either respect: observe what great judgment he uses and how he concerns himself with both interests with his customary wisdom. For neither does he venture to say to those who rebuke, Ye are doing amiss, that he may not seem to be confirming the other in their observances; nor again, Ye are doing right, lest he should make them the more vehement accusers: but he makes his rebuke to square with each. And in appearance he is rebuking the stronger, but he pours forth all he has to say against the other in his address to these. For the kind of correction most likely to be less grating is, when a person addresses some one else, while he is striking a blow at a different person, since this does not permit the person rebuked to fly into a passion, and introduces the medicine of correction unperceived. See now with what judgment he does this, and how well-timed he is with it. For after saying, "make not provision for the flesh to fulfil the lusts thereof," then he proceeds to the discussion of these points, that he might not seem to be speaking in defence of those who were the rebukers, and were for eating of anything. For the weaker part ever requires more forethought. Wherefore he aims his blow against the strong, immediately saying as follows, "Him that is weak in the faith." You see one blow immediately given to him. For by calling him weak, he points out that he is not healthy. Then he adds next, "receive," and point out again that he requires much attention. And this is a sign of extreme debility. "Not to doubtful disputations." See, he has laid on a third stroke. For here he makes it appear that his error is of such a nature, that even those who do not transgress in the same manner, and who nevertheless admit him to their affection, and are earnestly bent upon curing him, are at doubt. You see how in appearance he is conversing with these, but is rebuking others secretly and without giving offence. Then by placing them beside each other, one he gives encomiums, the other accusations. For he goes on to say, "One believeth that he may eat all things," commending him on the score of his faith. "Another who is weak, eateth herbs," disparaging this one again, on the score of his weakness.”

“After the Apostle has shown how someone ought to become perfect, here he shows how the perfect ought to conduct themselves toward the imperfect. And first he shows that they ought not to scandalize or judge them; second, he shows that they ought to sustain them, in chapter 15, where it says, "but we who are stronger," and so on. Concerning the first he does two things. First he forbids disordered judgments; second he forbids the scandals of the weak, where it says, "but judge this rather," and so on. Concerning the first he does three things. First he sets forth an admonition; second he explains it, where it says "for one," etc.; third he assigns the reason, where it says "for God has," and so on. Concerning the first, it must be considered that in the primitive Church some of those converted from the Jews to Christ believed that the legal observances had to be kept along with the Gospel, as is evident in Acts 15:1ff. And these the Apostle calls weak in the faith of Christ, as not yet perfectly believing that the faith of Christ suffices for salvation. But he calls perfect or strong in the faith those who believed that the faith of Christ was to be kept without the legal observances. Of both sorts, however, there were some at Rome among the faithful of Christ. The Apostle therefore addresses those perfect in faith, saying: it has been said that you ought thus to put on the Lord Jesus Christ; now take up — that is, join to yourselves in the affection of charity so as to support — the one weak in faith, as has been explained, concerning whom that saying in Wisdom 9:5 can be understood: "a weak man, and of short time, and too little for the understanding of judgment and laws." Below, in chapter 15:7: "receive one another, as Christ also has received you." Ecclesiasticus 29:12: "for the commandment's sake take up the poor man." And this not in disputes about thoughts — that is, not disputing on the ground that one thinks against another, namely, insofar as those who kept the legal observances judged as transgressors those who did not keep them, while those who did not keep them despised as erring and ignorant those who did keep them. Above, in chapter 2:15: "of thoughts mutually accusing or else defending one another," and so on. Then, when he says "for one," etc., he explains what he had said. And first he shows who are the weak in faith; second he shows how disputes about thoughts are to be avoided, where it says "he who eats," and so on. Concerning the first it must be considered that among the other legal observances one was the distinction of foods, because of certain foods prohibited in the Law, as is evident in Leviticus 11:2ff.; and indeed this observance was to be used or not used daily. And therefore the Apostle made mention of this specifically, saying: "for one," among you — namely, he who is perfect in the faith — "believes that he may lawfully eat all things," because he does not reckon himself bound to the legal observances. Matthew 15:11: "what goes into the mouth does not defile a man." 1 Timothy 4:4: "every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be rejected that is received with thanksgiving," and so on. Now in the old Law certain foods were prohibited, not because they were naturally unclean. For just as in words this name "fool" signifies something evil, although the name itself is good, so among things a certain animal is good according to nature but by signification is evil, as the pig, which signifies uncleanness. And therefore the eating of those meats was prohibited to the ancients, so that in their avoidance the avoidance of uncleanness might be signified. For the whole life of that ancient people was figural, as Augustine says in the book Against Faustus. But when Christ came, who is the truth, the figures ceased. He then adds, as regards the weak one: "but he who is weak, let him eat herbs" — as if to say: let him make use of those foods in which nothing unclean prohibited in the Law is encountered. For among the several kinds of animals — those of the land, those of the air, and those of the water — certain kinds were permitted and certain prohibited; but among plants and trees nothing was prohibited, as is evident in Leviticus 11. And there can be a twofold reason for this. One is that the things springing from the earth were granted to man for eating from the beginning, according to Genesis 1:29: "behold I have given you every herb bearing seed upon the earth, and all trees that have in themselves seed of their own kind, that they may be to you for food." But only after the flood do we first read that the eating of flesh was granted to man. Whence it is said in Genesis 9:3: "even as the green herbs have I delivered all to you" — namely, the kinds of animals. The other reason is that man had transgressed the first prohibition concerning abstaining from certain things springing from the earth in Paradise, as is evident in Genesis 3; and on this account a similar prohibition did not need to be repeated for him. But since the legal observances ceased at the passion of Christ, it seems unfitting that the Apostle should permit the weak in faith to abstain from foods prohibited in the Law, since this is now not upheld among Christians by the Church. But a threefold time must be distinguished, according to Augustine, as regards the legal observances. Of these, the first is the time before the passion of Christ, in which the legal observances retained their force as though still alive. The second time is after the passion of Christ but before the promulgation of the Gospel, in which time indeed the legal observances were dead, because no one was bound to them, nor did their observance confer anything on anyone; yet they were not yet deadly, because the Jews converted to Christ could observe the legal observances without sin — and it is for that time that the Apostle speaks here. The third time is after the promulgation of the Gospel, in which the legal observances are not only dead but deadly, so that whoever observes them sins mortally. But it is also explained otherwise in the Gloss, so that the weak one is said to be he who is prone to the lapses of carnal vices, and it is to be advised for him that he eat herbs — that is, meager and dry foods which are not fuel for the vices — and abstain from those things by which lust is aroused. But the other, who is stronger, believes that he can eat all things without danger. And this difference appears between the disciples of Christ, who did not fast, as being comforted by the presence of Christ, and the disciples of John the Baptist, who did fast. Whence also those doing penance abstain from certain foods, not because of their uncleanness, but in order to restrain lust. Then, when he says "he who eats," etc., he explains how the disputes about thoughts are to be avoided. And first as regards the perfect, he says: "he who eats" — namely, with a secure conscience, all things, or even without danger of lust — "let him not despise him who does not eat" — namely, all things indifferently — as one weak in the faith, or as one prone to vices. Isaiah 33:1: "woe to you who despise, shall not you also be despised?" Luke 10:16: "he who despises you, despises me." Second he speaks as regards the weak, saying: "and let him who does not eat" — namely, all things indifferently, either because he is weak in the faith, of which the Apostle speaks, or also because he is prone to lust — "not judge him who eats" — namely, all things indifferently — as a transgressor of the Law, or as one headlong into lust. Matthew 7:1: "judge not, and you shall not be judged." Above, in chapter 2:1: "you are inexcusable, O man, whoever you are that judge." Then, when he says "for God has taken him to himself," etc., he assigns three reasons on account of which we ought to abstain from false judgment. The second is set forth where it says "to his own lord," etc.; the third, where it says "but you who judge," and so on. The first reason is taken from the authority of the one judging. Whence first he shows that this charity befits God; second he concludes that judgment does not pertain to men, where it says "who are you," and so on. He says therefore first: it has rightly been said that he who does not eat should not judge him who eats, "for God has taken him to himself" — namely, as a servant to be judged by himself. Zechariah 11:7: "I took to myself two rods" — that is, two peoples. Psalm 17:17: "he took me out of many waters." But he who is taken up to the judgment of a superior ought not to be judged by an inferior. And therefore he concludes: "who are you" — that is, of what authority or power are you — "who judge another's servant?" That is, your neighbor, who is the servant of God? For authority is required in one who judges, according to Exodus 2:14: "who made you a prince and a judge over us?" And Luke 12:14: "who has appointed me a judge or a divider over you?" But from this reason it seems to follow that the judgment of one man about another is unlawful. But it must be said that the judgment of man is lawful to the extent that it is exercised by authority granted from on high. Whence it is said in Deuteronomy 1:16: "hear them, and judge that which is just," and afterward it follows "for the judgment is God's" — that is, it is exercised by divine authority. But if anyone should wish to usurp for himself judgment over those things which have not been divinely granted to him to judge, it is a rash judgment, just as if some judge delegated by the Pope should wish to overstep the bounds of his mandate in judging. But God has reserved to himself alone the judging of hidden things, which are especially the thoughts of hearts and future things. And therefore if anyone should presume to judge concerning these, it is a rash judgment. Whence Augustine says in the book On the Sermon of the Lord on the Mount: "in these two matters judgment is rash, namely, when it is uncertain with what mind a thing was done, or when it is uncertain what sort of person he who now appears either good or bad will turn out to be." Then, when he says "he stands or falls to his own lord," etc., he sets forth the second reason, which indeed is taken from the end of merit or demerit. Someone could say that although a man does not have judiciary authority, nevertheless he ought to concern himself with the judgment of another because of the harm or the benefit that results from it; but the Apostle shows that this pertains rather to God than to men. And thus also on this account we ought to leave the judgments of our neighbors to God, except insofar as we act in his stead in judging through an authority committed to us. Concerning this he does three things. First he sets forth what he intends; second he gives an example, where it says "for one judges," etc.; third he proves his proposition, where it says "he who is mindful of the day," and so on. Concerning the first he sets forth two things. First, that whatever happens concerning a man pertains to God, when he says "he stands to his own lord" — namely, by acting rightly, Psalm 121:2: "our feet were standing in your courts, O Jerusalem"; "or he falls" — namely, by sinning, Amos 5:1: "the house of Israel has fallen, and it shall no more rise." Now he sets it forth under a disjunction, "he stands or falls," on account of uncertainty, because many who stand seem to fall, and conversely, according to Ecclesiastes 8:10: "I saw the wicked buried, who even while they were yet living were in the holy place, and were praised in the city as though of just works." Now the Apostle speaks here according to the likeness of a man who is a servant, to whose lord pertains everything that is done concerning the servant. Nor is it to be understood that anything profits or harms God, whether a man stands or falls. For it is said in Job 35:6: "if you sin, what shall you harm him? Or if you act justly, what shall you give him?" But as regards men, that which we do justly pertains to the glory of God. Matthew 5:16: "that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven." But that we fall by sinning is an occasion for men to blaspheme God. Above, in chapter 2:24: "the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you." Or what he says, "he stands or falls to his own lord," is to be explained as meaning: in the judgment of his own lord. 1 Corinthians 4:4: "he who judges me is the Lord." Second, he shows that it pertains to God to judge the state of a man, saying "but he shall stand" — as if to say: even if someone should now fall through sin, nevertheless it can be that he will stand again. And this will be wholly fulfilled if he is predestined. Psalm 40:9: "shall not he who sleeps rise again?" Micah 7:8: "rejoice not, my enemy, over me, because I have fallen; I shall rise again." And on this account, if we see someone manifestly falling, we ought not to despise him, rashly judging of him that he will never rise again, but rather we ought to presume that he will stand again, not from consideration of the human condition, but by considering the divine power. Whence when he says "for God is able to make him stand," on account of God's goodness we ought to presume that he will make him stand again. Ezekiel 3:24: "the spirit entered into me, and set me upon my feet," just as has also been said above: "if they do not continue in unbelief, they will be grafted in; for God is able to graft them in again." Then, when he says "for one judges," etc., he gives an example of what has been said. And first he sets forth the diversity of human judgment, saying: therefore I say that he stands or falls to his own lord, "for one judges between day and day" — that is, judges between one day and another, namely, so as to abstain on one day and not on another. This indeed seems to pertain to the one weak in the faith, who still reckons that the legal observances are to be kept. For it is said in Leviticus 23:27: "the tenth day of this seventh month shall be the day of atonement, and you shall afflict your souls therein." And it is said in Judith 8:6 that Judith fasted all the days of her life except the sabbaths, and the new moons, and the feasts of the house of Israel. But another judges that every day is to be observed indifferently as regards the ceremonial matters of the Law, which have already ceased. Whence this seems to pertain to him who is perfect in the faith. Psalm 144:2: "every day will I bless you." This can also be referred to the abstinences that are done for the sake of restraining lust, in which some engage every day — for instance those who abstain perpetually from meats or wine, or fast — while others abstain on alternating days and cease from abstinence, according to Ecclesiastes 3:1: "all things have their season." Second he shows that all these things can pertain to the glory of God, saying "let each abound in his own sense" — that is, let him be left to his own sense. For to abound in one's own sense is to follow one's own sense. Ecclesiasticus 15:14: "God from the beginning made man, and left him in the hand of his own counsel." Or "in his own sense" — that is, let him strive to abound according to his own sense unto the glory of God, according to 1 Corinthians 14:12: "seek that you may abound unto the edifying of the Church." But this seems to have a place in those things which are not evil in themselves. In those things, however, which are evil in themselves, a man is not to be left to his own sense. But that someone should judge between one day and another seems to be evil in itself, according to the first explanation. For it is said in Galatians 4:10-11: "you observe days, and months, and times, and years; I fear lest I have labored in vain among you." And there he speaks literally of those who said that days were to be observed according to the ceremonies of the Law. But it must be said that the Apostle here speaks according to that time in which, the Jews having been converted to the faith, it was lawful to observe the legal observances, as has been said. But as regards the second explanation it seems to be unlawful, what he says: "another judges every day." For there are certain days on which it is not lawful to fast. For Augustine says in the letter to Casulanus: "whoever should think that the Lord's Day ought to be appointed for fasting would be no small scandal to the Church, and not undeservedly. For on those days on which the Church or the divine Scripture has determined nothing certain, the custom of the people of God and the institutions of our elders are to be held as law." And in the Decretals it is said, Distinction 30: "if any presbyter, on account of a public penance received from a priest, without any other necessity should fast on the Lord's Day out of a certain religious scruple, like the Manichaeans, let him be anathema." But it must be understood that here the Apostle speaks as regards those abstinences which can lawfully be done on any day whatsoever, without dissonance from common custom, or from those things instituted by our elders. Then, when he says "he who is mindful of the day," etc., he proves his proposition — namely, that each one stands or falls to his own lord — and this in three ways. First through the act of the faithful; second through their intention, where it says "for none of you," etc.; third through their condition, where it says "whether therefore we live, or die," and so on. He proves therefore first how each of the faithful stands or falls to his own lord, through the fact that he gives thanks to God for all things which he does according to his conscience. Whence he says "he who is mindful of the day" — namely, so as to abstain on one day and to cease from abstinence on another — "is mindful unto the Lord" — that is, he distinguishes foods out of reverence for God, just as we too distinguish the vigils of feasts on which we fast from the feast days on which we release the fast, out of reverence for God. Ecclesiasticus 33:7: "why does one day excel another, and again one light excel another light?" Then he speaks as regards those who judge every day alike, some of whom ceased from fasting on every day, as it is said in Matthew 9:14, that the disciples of Christ did not fast. Whence he says "and he who eats" — namely, every day — "eats unto the Lord" — that is, unto the glory of the Lord, which is evident from this, that he gives thanks to God — namely, for the food taken. 1 Timothy 4:3: "to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by the faithful." Psalm 21:27: "the poor shall eat and shall be filled," and so on. Further, as regards him who so judges every day alike, that he abstains on every day, he adds "and he who does not eat" — that is, abstains on every day — "unto the Lord" — that is, to the honor of the Lord — "does not eat." And this is evident from the fact that he gives thanks to God, who gave him the will and the power of abstaining. 1 Thessalonians, last chapter: "in all things give thanks." But what the Apostle says here of those who either abstained or ceased from abstinence on every day must be understood as regards that time in which this was not contrary to the statutes of our elders, nor to the common custom of the people of God. Then, when he says "for none of you lives to himself," etc., he proves the same thing from the intention of the faithful. And first he excludes a disordered intention, saying: I rightly say that each one stands or falls to his own lord, "none of us lives to himself" — either the natural life or the spiritual life, of which it is said in Habakkuk 2:4: "but my just man lives by faith." "To himself" — that is, for his own sake, because this would be to enjoy himself. 1 Corinthians 10:33: "not seeking what is profitable to myself." Psalm 113:9: "not to us, O Lord, not to us," etc.; or "to himself" — that is, according to his own rule, as those say who say in Wisdom 2:11: "let our strength be the law of injustice"; or "to himself" — that is, by his own judgment, 1 Corinthians 4:3: "but neither do I judge my own self." "And none dies" — namely, by bodily death, or by spiritual death through sinning, or also by that spiritual death by which one dies to vices, for instance in Baptism, according to that which is said above in chapter 6:7: "he who is dead is justified from sin"; or "to himself" — that is, by his own judgment, or for his own sake, or by his own example; but by the example of Christ someone dies to vices. Romans 6:10: "for in that he died to sin, he died once"; and below: "so also do you reckon that you are dead to sin." Second he shows what the right intention of the faithful is, saying "for whether we live" — the bodily life — "we live unto the Lord" — that is, unto the glory of the Lord; "or whether we die" — the bodily death — "we die unto the Lord" — that is, unto the honor of the Lord. Philippians 1:20: "Christ shall be magnified in my body, whether it be by death, or by life." Or it may be explained thus: what he says, "we live" and "we die," is to be explained of spiritual life and death, and what he says "unto the Lord" is to be explained as meaning: unto the judgment of the Lord, who has been appointed by God judge of the living and the dead, as is said in Acts 10:42. Then, when he says "whether therefore we live," etc., he shows his proposition from the condition of the faithful. And first he concludes from the foregoing the condition of the faithful, namely, that they are not their own, but another's. For those who are their own, as free men, live to themselves and die to themselves. Because therefore it has been said that the faithful do not live or die to themselves but to the Lord, he concludes thus: "whether therefore we live, or die, we are the Lord's" — as it were servants of him who has power of life and death. 1 Corinthians 7:23: "you are bought with a price, do not become the servants of men." 1 Corinthians 6:20: "for you are bought with a great price." 1 Chronicles 12:18: "we are yours, O David, and with you, son of Jesse." Second he assigns the cause of this condition, saying "for to this end Christ died, and rose again" — that is, this he obtained by his death and resurrection — "that he might have dominion over the living" — because he rose again, beginning a new and everlasting life — "and over the dead" — because by dying he destroyed our death. 2 Corinthians 5:15: "for whom Christ died, that they who live may now not live to themselves, but unto him who died for them, and rose again." Thus, therefore, through all the aforesaid the Apostle has proved that each one stands or falls to his own lord, namely through this, that the faithful give thanks to God, and that they live and die unto the Lord, and that they are the Lord's both in death and in life. Then, when he says "but you, why do you judge," etc., he sets forth the third reason, which is taken from the future judgment. And concerning this he does three things. First he sets forth the superfluity of present judgment, saying "but you, why do you judge" — that is, by what utility or necessity do you judge — "your brother" — rashly, concerning hidden things, which have not been committed to your judgment? "Or you" — the other who is judged — "why do you despise your brother" — reckoning him as nothing, as judged by him? Malachi 2:10: "why does every man despise his brother?" Second he foretells the future judgment of Christ, as if to say: I rightly say why you judge, because you ought not to fear that it will remain without judgment, "for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ." For his judiciary power is called the judgment seat of Christ, just as also in Matthew 25:31 it is said: "when the Son of man shall come in his majesty, then he shall sit upon the seat of his majesty." Now he says "we shall all stand" — as to be judged, both good and bad, as regards reward or punishment. 2 Corinthians 5:10: "for we must all be manifested before the judgment seat of Christ, that everyone may receive the proper things of the body, according as he has done, whether it be good or evil." But as regards the discussion, not all shall stand as to be judged, but some shall sit together as judges. Matthew 19:28: "you shall sit upon seats, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." Third, where it says "for it is written," etc., he proves what he had said. And first he adduces an authority; second he draws the conclusion, where it says "therefore each one," and so on. He says therefore first: it has been said that we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ, and this is evident through the authority of sacred Scripture. "For it is written," Isaiah 45:23, "as I live, says the Lord: for to me every knee shall be bowed, and every tongue shall confess to God." Our own text has it thus: "I have sworn by myself, that to me every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall swear." Now three things are set down in these words. First indeed an oath, which is at times set down in the words of God to show that what is said is firm by the immutability of the divine counsel, and not mutable as those things which are foretold according to lower causes, as a prophecy of threat. Whence it is said in Psalm 109:4: "the Lord has sworn, and he will not repent." But men, as the Apostle says in Hebrews 6:16, "swear by one greater than themselves." But because God does not have anyone greater in whom a greater firmness of truth might consist, he swears by himself. Now he himself is life itself and the fount of life, according to that which is said in Deuteronomy 30:20: "for he is your life, and the length of your days," etc., Psalm 35:10: "with you is the fountain of life," etc.; and therefore the form of the Lord's oath is "as I live" — as if to say: I swear by the life by which I alone live in a singular way. Second, the subjection of the common creature to Christ is foretold, when it is said "for to me" — namely to Christ — "every knee shall be bowed." In which the perfect subjection of the rational creature to Christ is designated. For men are accustomed, as a sign of subjection, to bend the knee to their superiors. Whence in Philippians 2:10 it is said: "in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, on earth, and under the earth." Third he foretells the confession of faith by which all will confess the glory of Christ. Whence it follows "and every tongue shall confess to God" — that is, shall confess Christ to be Lord, according to that which is said in Philippians 2:11: "let every tongue confess, that our Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father." For "every tongue" can be understood as the expression of knowledge, whether of men or of angels, according to that which is said in 1 Corinthians 13:1: "if I speak with the tongues of men and of angels," and so on. Now this is fulfilled now in this life, not as regards individual men, but as regards the kinds of individuals. For of every kind of man some are now subjected to Christ and confess him through faith, but in the future judgment all and each shall be subjected to him — the good indeed willingly, but the wicked unwillingly. Whence it is said in Hebrews 2:8: "for in that he has subjected all things to him, he has left nothing not subject to him; but now we see not yet all things subjected to him." Then, when he says "therefore each one," etc., he draws the conclusion from what has been said. And first the conclusion intended from that which he had immediately said, saying "therefore" — since to Christ every knee is bowed — "each one of us shall render account for himself to God" — namely, before the judgment seat of Christ. Matthew 12:36: "for every idle word that men shall speak, they shall render an account for it in the day of judgment." And 18:23: "the kingdom of heaven is likened to a king who would take account of his servants." But it seems that not each one shall render account for himself, but one for another. Hebrews, last chapter: "obey your prelates, and be subject to them. For they watch as being to render an account for your souls." But it must be said that in this very thing, that prelates shall render an account for others, they shall render an account for their own acts which they ought to have performed concerning their subjects. For if they did what pertained to their office, it shall not be imputed to them if their subjects perish. But it would be imputed to them if they neglected to do what their office required. Whence it is said in Ezekiel 3:18-19: "if, when I say to the wicked, you shall surely die, you declare it not to him, he shall die in his iniquity, but his blood I will require at your hand. But if you declare it to the wicked, and he be not converted, he indeed shall die in his iniquity, but you have delivered your soul." Second he draws the conclusion principally intended in the whole preceding part, saying "let us not therefore judge one another anymore" — namely, by rash judgment, which is included in the reasons given above. 1 Corinthians 4:5: "judge not before the time," and so on.”

“We have in this chapter, I. An account of the unhappy contention which had broken out in the Christian church. Our Master had foretold that offences would come; and, it seems, so they did, for want of that wisdom and love which would have prevented discord, and kept up union among them. 1. There was a difference among them about the distinction of meats and days; these are the two things specified. There might be other similar occasions of difference, while these made the most noise, and were most taken notice of. The case was this: The members of the Christian church at Rome were some of them originally Gentiles, and others of them Jews. We find Jews at Rome believing, Act 28:24. Now those that had been Jews were trained up in the observance of the ceremonial appointments touching meats and days. This, which had been bred in the bone with them, could hardly be got out of the flesh, even after they turned Christians; especially with some of them, who were not easily weaned from what they had long been wedded to. They were not well instructed touching the cancelling of the ceremonial law by the death of Christ, and therefore retained the ceremonial institutions, and practised accordingly; while other Christians that understood themselves better, and knew their Christian liberty, made no such difference. (1.) Concerning meats (Rom 14:2): One believeth that he may eat all things - he is well satisfied that the ceremonial distinction of meats into clean and unclean is no longer in force, but that every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused; nothing unclean of itself, Rom 14:14. This he was assured of, not only from the general tenour and scope of the gospel, but particularly from the revelation which Peter, the apostle of the circumcision (and therefore more immediately concerned in it), had to this purport, Act 10:15, Act 10:28. This the strong Christian is clear in, and practises accordingly, eating what is set before him, and asking no question for conscience' sake, Co1 10:27. On the other hand, another, who is weak, is dissatisfied in this point, is not clear in his Christian liberty, but rather inclines to think that the meats forbidden by the law remain still unclean; and therefore, to keep at a distance from them, he will eat no flesh at all, but eateth herbs, contenting himself with only the fruits of the earth. See to what degrees of mortification and self-denial a tender conscience will submit. None know but those that experience it how great both the restraining and the constraining power of conscience is. (2.) Concerning days, Rom 14:5. Those who thought themselves still under some kind of obligation to the ceremonial law esteemed one day above another - kept up a respect to the times of the passover, pentecost, new moons, and feasts of tabernacles; thought those days better than other days, and solemnized them accordingly with particular observances, binding themselves to some religious rest and exercise on those days. Those who knew that all these things were abolished and done away by Christ's coming esteemed every day alike. We must understand it with an exception of the Lord's day, which all Christians unanimously observed; but they made no account, took no notice, of those antiquated festivals of the Jews. Here the apostle speaks of the distinction of meats and days as a thing indifferent, when it went no further than the opinion and practice of some particular persons, who had been trained up all their days to such observances, and therefore were the more excusable if they with difficulty parted with them. But in the epistle to the Galatians, where he deals with those that were originally Gentiles, but were influenced by some judaizing teachers, not only to believe such a distinction and to practise accordingly, but to lay a stress upon it as necessary to salvation, and to make the observance of the Jewish festivals public and congregational, here the case was altered, and it is charged upon them as the frustrating of the design of the gospel, falling from grace, Gal 4:9-11. The Romans did it out of weakness, the Galatians did it out of wilfulness and wickedness; and therefore the apostle handles them thus differently. This epistle is supposed to have been written some time before that to the Galatians. The apostle seems willing to let the ceremonial law wither by degrees, and to let it have an honourable burial; now these weak Romans seem to be only following it weeping to its grave, but those Galatians were raking it out of its ashes. 2. It was not so much the difference itself that did the mischief as the mismanagement of the difference, making it a bone of contention. (1.) Those who were strong, and knew their Christian liberty, and made use of it, despised the weak, who did not. Whereas they should have pitied them, and helped them, and afforded them meek and friendly instruction, they trampled upon them as silly, and humoursome, and superstitious, for scrupling those things which they knew to be lawful: so apt are those who have knowledge to be puffed up with it, and to look disdainfully and scornfully upon their brethren. (2.) Those who were weak, and durst not use their Christian liberty, judged and censured the strong, who did, as if they were loose Christians, carnal professors, that cared not what they did, but walked at all adventures, and stuck at nothing. They judged them as breakers of the law, contemners of God's ordinance, and the like. Such censures as these discovered a great deal of rashness and uncharitableness, and would doubtless tend much to the alienating of affection. Well, this was the disease, and we see it remaining in the church to this day; the like differences, in like manner mismanaged, are still the disturbers of the church's peace. But, II. We have proper directions and suggestions laid down for allaying this contention, and preventing the ill consequences of it. The apostle, as a wise physician, prescribes proper remedies for the disease, which are made up of rules and reasons. Such gentle methods does he take, with such cords of a man does he draw them together; not by excommunicating, suspending, and silencing either side, but by persuading them both to a mutual forbearance: and as a faithful daysman he lays his hand upon them both, reasoning the case with the strong that they should not be so scornful, and with the weak that they should not be so censorious. If the contending parties will but submit to this fair arbitration, each abate of his rigour, and sacrifice their differences to their graces, all will be well quickly. Let us observe the rules he gives, some to the strong and some to the weak, and some to both, for they are interwoven; and reduce the reasons to their proper rules. 1. Those who are weak must be received, but not to doubtful disputations, Rom 14:1. Take this for a general rule; spend your zeal in those things wherein you and all the people of God are agreed, and do not dispute about matters that are doubtful. Receive him, proslambanesthe - take him to you, bid him welcome, receive him with the greatest affection and tenderness; porrigite manum (so the Syriac): lend him your hand, to help him, to fetch him to you, to encourage him. Receive him into your company, and converse, and communion, entertain him with readiness and condescension, and treat him with all possible endearments. Receive him: not to quarrel with him, and to argue about uncertain points that are in controversy, which will but confound him, and fill his head with empty notions, perplex him, and shake his faith. Let not your Christian friendship and fellowship be disturbed with such vain janglings and strifes of words. - Not to judge his doubtful thoughts (so the margin), "not to pump out his weak sentiments concerning those things which he is in doubt about, that you may censure and condemn him." Receive him, not to expose him, but to instruct and strengthen him. See Co1 1:10; Phi 3:15, Phi 3:16. 2. Those who are strong must by no means despise the weak; nor those who are weak judge the strong, Rom 14:3. This is levelled directly against the fault of each party. It is seldom that any such contention exists but there is a fault on both sides, and both must mend. He argues against both these jointly: we must not despise nor judge our brethren. Why so? (1.) Because God hath received them; and we reflect upon him if we reject those whom he hath received. God never cast off any one that had true grace, though he was but weak in it; never broke the bruised reed. Strong believers and weak believers, those that eat and those that eat not, if they be true believers, are accepted of God. It will be good for us to put this question to ourselves, when we are tempted to behave scornfully towards our brethren, to disdain and censure them: "Hast not God owned them; and, if he has, dare I disown them?" "Nay, God doth not only receive him, but hold him up, Rom 14:4. You think that he who eateth will fall by his presumption, or that he who eateth not will sink under the weight of his own fears and scruples; but if they have true faith, and an eye to God, the one in the intelligent use of his Christian liberty and the other in the conscientious forbearance of it, they shall be held up - the one in his integrity, and the other in his comfort. This hope is built upon the power of God, for God is able to make him stand; and, being able, no doubt he is willing to exert that power for the preservation of those that are his own." In reference to spiritual difficulties and dangers (our own and others), much of our hope and comfort are grounded upon the divine power, Pe1 1:5; Jde 1:24. (2.) Because they are servants to their own master (Rom 14:4): Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? We reckon it a piece of ill manners to meddle with other people's servants, and to find fault with them and censure them. Weak and strong Christians are indeed our brethren, but they are not our servants. This rash judging is reproved, Jam 3:1, under the notion of being many masters. We make ourselves our brethren's masters, and do in effect usurp the throne of God, when we take upon us thus to judge them, especially to judge their thoughts and intentions, which are out of our view, to judge their persons and state, concerning which it is hard to conclude by those few indications which fall within our cognizance. God sees not as man sees; and he is their master, and not we. In judging and censuring our brethren, we meddle with that which does not belong to us: we have work enough to do at home; and, if we must needs be judging, let us exercise our faculty upon our own hearts and ways. - To his own master he stands or falls; that is, his doom will be according to his master's sentence, and not according to ours. How well for us is it that we are not to stand nor fall by the judgment one of another, but by the righteous and unerring judgment of God, which is according to truth! "While thy brother's cause is before thy judgment, it is coram non judice - before one who is not the judge; the court of heaven is the proper court for trial, where, and where only, the sentence is definitive and conclusive; and to this, if his heart be upright, he may comfortably appeal from thy rash censure." (3.) Because both the one and the other, if they be true believers, and are right in the main, have an eye to God, and do approve themselves to God in what they do, Rom 14:6. He that regards the day - that makes conscience of the observance of the Jewish fasts and festivals, not imposing it upon others, nor laying a stress upon it, but willing to be as he thinks on the surer side, as thinking there is no harm in resting from worldly labours, and worshipping God on those days - it is well. We have reason to think, because in other things he conducts himself like a good Christian, that in this also his eye is single, and that he regardeth it unto the Lord; and God will accept of his honest intention, though he be under a mistake about the observance of days; for the sincerity and uprightness of the heart were never rejected for the weakness and infirmity of the head: so good a master do we serve. On the other hand, he that regards not the day - that does not make a difference between one day and another, does not call one day holy and another profane, one day lucky and another unlucky, but esteems every day alike - he does not do it out of a spirit of opposition, contradiction, or contempt of his brother. If he be a good Christian, he does not, he dares not, do it from such a principle; and therefore we charitably conclude that to the Lord he does not regard it. he makes no such difference of days only because he knows God hath made none; and therefore intends his honour in endeavouring to dedicate ever day to him. So for the other instance: He that eateth whatever is set before him, though it be blood, though it be swine's flesh, if it be food convenient for him, he eateth to the Lord. He understands the liberty that God has granted him, and uses it to the glory of God, with an eye to his wisdom and goodness in enlarging our allowance now under the gospel, and taking off the yoke of legal restraints; and he giveth God thanks for the variety of food he has, and the liberty he has to eat it, and that in those things his conscience is not fettered. On the other hand, he that eatest not those meats which were forbidden by the ceremonial law, to the Lord he eateth not. It is for God's sake, because he is afraid of offending God by eating that which he is sure was once prohibited; and he giveth God thanks too that there is enough besides. If he conscientiously deny himself that which he takes to be forbidden fruit, yet he blesses God that of other trees in the garden he may freely eat. Thus, while both have an eye to God in what they do, and approve themselves to him in their integrity, why should either of them be judged or despised? Observe, Whether we eat flesh, or eat herbs, it is a thankful regard to God, the author and giver of all our mercies, that sanctifies and sweetens it. Bishop Sanderson, in his 34th sermon, upon Ti1 4:4, justly makes this observation: It appears by this that saying grace (as we commonly call it, perhaps from Co1 10:30) before and after meat was the common known practice of the church, among Christians of all sorts, weak and strong: an ancient, commendable, apostolical, Christian practice, derived down from Christ's example through all the ages of the church, Mat 14:19; Mat 15:36; Luk 9:16; Joh 6:11; Mat 26:26, Mat 26:27; Act 27:35. Blessing the creatures in the name of God before we use them, and blessing the name of God for them after, are both included; for eulogein and eucharistein are used promiscuously. To clear this argument against rash judging and despising, he shows how essential it is to true Christianity to have a regard to God and not to ourselves, which therefore, unless the contrary do manifestly appear, we must presume concerning those that in minor things differ from us. Observe his description of true Christians, taken from their end and aim (Rom 14:7, Rom 14:8), and the ground of it, Rom 14:9. [1.] Our end and aim: not self, but the Lord. As the particular end specifies the action, so the general scope and tendency specify the state. if we would know what way we walk in, we must enquire what end we walk towards. First, Not to self. We have learned to deny ourselves; this was our first lesson: None of us liveth to himself. This is a thing in which all the people of God are one, however they differ in other things; though some are weak and others are strong, yet both agree in this, not to live to themselves. Not one that hath given up his name to Christ is allowedly a self-seeker; it is contrary to the foundation of true Christianity. We neither live to ourselves nor die to ourselves. We are not our own masters, nor our own proprietors - we are not at our own disposal. The business of our lives is not to please ourselves, but to please God. The business of our deaths, to which we are every day exposed and delivered, is not to make ourselves talked of; we run not such hazards out of vain-glory, while we are dying daily. When we come to die actually, neither is that to ourselves; it is not barely that we would be unclothed, and eased of the burden of the flesh, but it is to the Lord, that we may depart and be with Christ, may be present with the Lord. Secondly, But to the Lord (Rom 14:8), to the Lord Christ, to whom all power and judgment are committed, and in whose name we are taught, as Christians, to do every thing we do (Col 3:17), with an eye to the will of Christ as our rule, to the glory of Christ as our end, Phi 1:21. Christ is the gain we aim at, living and dying. We live to glorify him in all the actions and affairs of life; we die, whether a natural or a violent death, to glorify him, and to go to be glorified with him. Christ is the centre, in which all the lines of life and death do meet. This is true Christianity, which makes Christ all in all. So that, whether we live or die, we are the Lord's, devoted to him, depending on him, designed and designing for him. Though some Christians are weak and others strong, - though of different sizes, capacities, apprehensions, and practices, in minor things, yet they are all the Lord's - all eying, and serving, and approving themselves to Christ, and are accordingly owned and accepted of him. Is it for us then to judge or despise them, as if we were their masters, and they were to make it their business to please us, and to stand or fall by our dooms? [2.] The ground of this, Rom 14:9. It is grounded upon Christ's absolute sovereignty and dominion, which were the fruit and end of his death and resurrection. To this end he both died, and rose, and revived (he, having risen, entered upon a heavenly life, the glory which he had before) that he might be Lord both of dead and living - that he might be universal monarch, Lord of all (Act 10:36), all the animate and inanimate creatures; for he is head over all things to the church. He is Lord of those that are living to rule them, of those that are dead to receive them and raise them up. This was that name above every name which God gave him as the reward of his humiliation, Phi 2:8, Phi 2:9. It was after he had died and risen that he said, All power is given unto me (Mat 28:18), and presently he exerts that power in issuing out commissions, Rom 14:19, Rom 14:20. Now if Christ paid so dearly for his dominion over souls and consciences, and has such a just and undisputed right to exercise that dominion, we must not so much as seem to invade it, nor intrench upon it, by judging the consciences of our brethren, and arraigning them at our bar. When we are ready to reproach and reflect upon the name and memory of those that are dead and gone, and to pass a censure upon them (which some the rather do, because such judgments of the dead are more likely to pass uncontrolled and uncontradicted), we must consider that Christ is Lord of the dead, as well as of the living. If they are dead, they have already given up their account, and let that suffice. And this leads to another reason against judging and despising, (4.) Because both the one and the other must shortly give an account, Rom 14:10-12. A believing regard to the judgment of the great day would silence all these rash judgings: Why dost thou that art weak judge thy brother that is strong? And why dost thou that art strong set at nought thy brother that is weak? Why is all this clashing, and contradicting, and censuring, among Christians? We shall all stand before the judgment-seat of Christ, Co2 5:10. Christ will be the judge, and he has both authority and ability to determine men's eternal state according to their works, and before him we shall stand as persons to be tried, and to give up an account, expecting our final doom from him, which will be eternally conclusive. To illustrate this (Rom 14:11), he quotes a passage out of the Old Testament, which speaks of Christ's universal sovereignty and dominion, and that established with an oath: As I live (saith the Lord), every knee shall bow to me. It is quoted from Isa 45:23. There it is, I have sworn by myself; here it is, As I live. So that whenever God saith As I live, it is to be interpreted as swearing by himself; for it is God's prerogative to have life in himself: there is a further ratification of it there, The word is gone out of my mouth. It is a prophecy, in general, of Christ's dominion; and here very fully applied to the judgment of the great day, which will be the highest and most illustrious exercise of that dominion. Here is a proof of Christ's Godhead: he is the Lord and he is God, equal with the Father. Divine honour is due to him, and must be paid. It is paid to God through him as Mediator. God will judge the world by him, Act 17:31. The bowing of the knee to him, and the confession made with the tongue, are but outward expressions of inward adoration and praise. Every knee and every tongue, either freely or by force. [1.] All his friends do it freely, are made willing in the day of his power. Grace is the soul's cheerful, entire, and avowed subjection to Jesus Christ. First, Bowing to him - the understanding bowed to his truths, the will to his laws, the whole man to his authority; and this expressed by the bowing of the knee, the posture of adoration and prayer. It is proclaimed before our Joseph, Bow the knee, Gen 41:43. Though bodily exercise alone profits little, yet, as it is guided by inward fear and reverence, it is accepted. Secondly, Confessing to him - acknowledging his glory, grace, and greatness - acknowledging our own meanness and vileness, confessing our sins to him; so some understand it. [2.] All his foes shall be constrained to do it, whether they will or no. When he shall come in the clouds, and every eye shall see him, then, and not till then, will all those promises which speak of his victories over his enemies and their subjection to him have their full and complete accomplishment; then his foes shall be his footstool, and all his enemies shall lick the dust. hence he concludes (Rom 14:12), Every one of us shall give account of himself to God. We must not give account for others, nor they for us; but every one for himself. We must give account how we have spent our time, how we have improved our opportunities, what we have done and how we have done it. And therefore, First, We have little to do to judge others, for they are not accountable to us, nor are we accountable for them (Gal 2:6): Whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me, God accepteth no man's person. Whatever they are, and whatever they do, they must give account to their own master, and not to us; if we can in any thing be helpers of their joy, it is well; but we have not dominion over their faith. And, Secondly, We have the more to do to judge ourselves. We have an account of our own to make up, and that is enough for us; let every man prove his own work (Gal 6:4), state his own accounts, search his own heart and life; let this take up his thoughts, and he that is strict in judging himself and abasing himself will not be apt to judge and despise his brother. let all these differences be referred to the arbitration of Christ at the great day. (5.) Because the stress of Christianity is not to be laid upon these things, nor are they at all essential to religion, either on the one side or on the other. This is his reason (Rom 14:17, Rom 14:18), which is reducible to this branch of exhortation. Why should you spend your zeal either for or against those things which are so minute and inconsiderable in religion? Some make it a reason why, in case of offence likely to be taken, we should refrain the use of our Christian liberty; but it seems directed in general against that heat about those things which he observed on both sides. The kingdom of God is not meat, etc. Observe here, [1.] The nature of true Christianity, what it is: it is here called, The kingdom of God; it is a religion intended to rule us, a kingdom: it stands in a true and hearty subjection to God's power and dominion. The gospel dispensation is in a special manner called the kingdom of God, in distinction from the legal dispensation, Mat 3:2; Mat 4:17. First, It is not meat and drink: it does not consist either in using or in abstaining from such and such meats and drinks. Christianity gives no rule in that case, either in one way or another. The Jewish religion consisted much in meats and drinks (Heb 9:10), abstaining from some meats religiously (Lev 11:2), eating other meats religiously, as in several of the sacrifices, part of which were to be eaten before the Lord: but all those appointments are now abolished and are no more, Col 2:21, Col 2:22. The matter is left at large. Every creature of God is good, Ti1 4:4. So, as to other things, it is neither circumcision nor uncircumcision (Gal 5:6; Gal 6:15; Co1 7:19), it is not being of this party and persuasion, of this or the other opinion in minor things, that will recommend us to God. It will not be asked at the great day, "Who ate flesh, and who ate herbs?" "Who kept holy days, and who did not?" Nor will it be asked, "Who was conformist and who was non-conformist?" But it will be asked, "Who feared God and worked righteousness, and who did not?" Nothing more destructive to true Christianity than placing it in modes, and forms, and circumstantials, which eat out the essentials. Secondly, It is righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. These are some of the essentials of Christianity, things in which all the people of God are agreed, in the pursuit of which we must spend our zeal, and which we must mind with an excelling care. Righteousness, peace, and joy, are very comprehensive words; and each of them includes much, both of the foundation and the superstructure of religion. Might I limit the sense of them, it should be thus: - As to God, our great concern is righteousness - to appear before him justified by the merit of Christ's death, sanctified by the Spirit of his grace; for the righteous Lord loveth righteousness. As to our brethren, it is peace - to live in peace and love, and charity with them, following peace with all men: Christ came into the world to be the great peace-maker. As to ourselves, it is joy in the Holy Ghost - that spiritual joy which is wrought by the blessed Spirit in the hearts of believers, which respects God as their reconciled Father and heaven as their expected home. Next to our compliance with God, the life of religion consists in our complacency in him; to delight ourselves always in the Lord. Surely we serve a good Master, who makes peace and joy so essential to our religion. Then and then only we may expect peace and joy in the Holy Ghost when the foundation is laid in righteousness, Isa 32:17. Thirdly, It is in these things to serve Christ (Rom 14:18), to do all this out of respect to Christ himself as our Master, to his will as our rule and to his glory as our end. That which puts an acceptableness upon all our good duties is a regard to Christ in the doing of them. We are to serve his interests and designs in the world, which are in the first place to reconcile us one to another. What is Christianity but the serving of Christ? And we may well afford to serve him who for us and for our salvation took upon him the form of a servant. [2.] The advantages of it. He that duly observeth these things, First, Is acceptable to God. God is well pleased with such a one, though he be not in every thing just of our length. He has the love and favour of God; his person, his performances, are accepted of God, and we need no more to make us happy. If God now accepts thy works, thou mayest eat thy bread with joy. Those are most pleasing to God that are best pleased with him; and they are those that abound most in peace and joy in the Holy Ghost. Secondly, He is approved of men - of all wise and good men, and the opinion of others is not to be regarded. The persons and things which are acceptable to God should be approved of us. Should not we be pleased with that which God is pleased with? What is it to be sanctified, but to be of God's mind? Observe, The approbation of men is not to be slighted; for we must provide things honest in the sight of all men, and study those things that are lovely and of good report: but the acceptance of God is to be desired and aimed at in the first place, because, sooner or later, God will bring all the world to be of his mind. 3. Another rule here given is this, that in these doubtful things every one not only may, but must, walk according to the light that God hath given him. This is laid down Rom 14:5, Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind; that is, "Practise according to your own judgment in these things, and leave others to do so too. Do not censure the practice of others; let them enjoy their own opinion; if they be persuaded in their own mind that they ought to do so and so, do not condemn them, but, if your sober sentiments be otherwise, do not make their practice a rule to you, any more than you must prescribe yours as a rule to them. Take heed of acting contrary to the dictates of a doubting conscience. First be persuaded that what you do is lawful, before you venture to do it." In doubtful things, it is good keeping on the sure side of the hedge. If a weak Christian doubts whether it be lawful to eat flesh, while he remains under that doubt he had best forbear, till he be fully persuaded in his own mind. We must not pin our faith upon any one's sleeve, nor make the practice of others our rule; but follow the dictates of our own understanding. To this purport he argues, Rom 14:14 and Rom 14:23, which two verses explain this, and give us a rule not to act against the dictates, (1.) Of a mistaken conscience, Rom 14:14. If a thing be indifferent, so that it is not in itself a sin not to do it, if we really think it a sin to do it it is to us a sin, though not to others, because we act against our consciences, though mistaken and misinformed. He specifies the case in hand, concerning the difference of meats. Observe, [1.] His own clearness in this matter. "I know and am persuaded - I am fully persuaded, I am acquainted with my Christian liberty, and am satisfied in it, without any doubt or scruple, that there is nothing unclean of itself, that is, no kind of meat that lies under any ceremonial uncleanness, nor is forbidden to be eaten, if it be food proper for human bodies." Several kinds of meat were forbidden to the Jews, that in that, as in other things, they might be a peculiar and separate people, Lev 11:44; Deu 14:2, Deu 14:3. Sin had brought a curse upon the whole creation: Cursed is the ground for thy sake; the use of the creatures and dominion over them were forfeited, so that to man they were all unclean (Tit 1:15), in token of which God in the ceremonial law prohibited the use of some, to show what he might have done concerning all; but now that Christ has removed the curse the matter is set at large again, and that prohibition is taken away. Therefore Paul says that he was persuaded by the Lord Jesus, not only as the author of that persuasion, but as the ground of it; it was built upon the efficacy of Christ's death, which removed the curse, took off the forfeiture, and restored our right to the creature in general, and consequently put a period to that particular distinguishing prohibition. So that now there is nothing unclean of itself, every creature of God is good; nothing common: so the margin, ouden koinon; nothing which is common to others to eat, from the use of which the professors of religion are restrained: nothing profane; in this sense the Jews used the word common. It is explained by the word akatharton, Act 10:14, nothing common or unclean. It was not only from the revelation made to Peter in this matter, but from the tenour and tendency of the whole gospel, and from the manifest design of Christ's death in general, that Paul learned to count nothing common or unclean. This was Paul's own clearness, and he practised accordingly. [2.] But here is a caution he gives to those who had not that clearness in this matter which he had: To him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, though it be his error, yet to him it is unclean. This particular case, thus determined, gives a general rule, That he who does a thing which he verily believes to be unlawful, however the thing be in itself, to him it is a sin. This arises from that unchangeable law of our creation, which is,”

“Him that is weak in the faith,.... This address is made to the stronger and more knowing Christians among the Romans, how to behave towards those that were inferior in light and knowledge to them, with regard to things of a ritual and ceremonial kind: and by "him that is weak in the faith", is meant, either one that is weak in the exercise of the grace of faith, who has but a glimmering sight of Christ; who comes to him in a very feeble and trembling manner; who believes his ability to save him, but hesitates about his willingness; who casts himself with a peradventure on him; and who is attended with many misgivings of heart, faintings of spirit, and fluctuation of mind, about his interest in him: or one that is weak in the doctrine of faith; has but little light and knowledge in the truths of the Gospel; is a child in understanding; has more affection than judgment; very little able to distinguish truth from error; cannot digest the greater and more sublime doctrines of grace; stands in need of milk, and cannot bear strong meat; is very fluctuating and unsettled in his principles, and like children tossed to and fro with every wind of doctrine: or rather one that is weak in his knowledge of that branch of the doctrine of faith, which concerns Christian liberty; and that part of it particularly, which respects freedom from the ceremonial law: it designs one, and chiefly a Jew, who though a believer in Christ, and an embracer of the other truths of the Gospel, yet had but very little knowledge of Gospel liberty; but though that believers were to observe all the rituals of the Mosaic dispensation, not knowing that they were abolished by Christ. The phrase is Jewish; it is (m) said, "what is the meaning of the phrase, in Rephidim, Exo 17:1 it signifies such as are of weak hands; as if it had been said, because the Israelites were , "weak in their faith".'' The advice the apostle gives, in reference to such a person, is to receive him; not only into their affections, and love him equally, being a believer in Christ, as one of the same sentiments with them, only in this matter, but also into church fellowship with them. The Syriac version reads it, , "give him the hand": in token of communion, a form used in admission of members. The Gentiles were apt to boast against, and look with some contempt upon the Jews, and were ready to object to their communion, because of their want of light and knowledge in these matters; but this was no bar of communion, nor ought a person to be rejected on account of his weakness, either in the grace, or in the doctrine of faith, when it appears he has the true grace of God; and much less on account of his weakness in that branch of it, concerning Christian liberty; for since Christ does not break the bruised reed, nor quench the smoking flax, nor despise the day of small things, churches should not: it may also intend a receiving of such into intimate conversation, at their private meetings and conferences; taking particular notice of them; giving them proper instructions; praying with them and for them; endeavouring to build them up in their most holy faith, and to bring them into the knowledge of those things they are weak in; bearing their weaknesses patiently, and bearing with them in great tenderness: thus such should be received, but not to doubtful disputations; to vain jangling and perverse disputings, such as will rather perplex than inform them; and will leave their minds doubtful and in suspense, and do them more harm than good. (m) Tzeror Hammor, fol. 77. 1.”

“Him that is weak in the faith - By this the apostle most evidently means the converted Jew, who must indeed be weak in the faith, if he considered this distinction of meats and days essential to his salvation. See on Rom 14:21 (note). Receive ye - Associate with him; receive him into your religious fellowship; but when there, let all religious altercations be avoided. Not to doubtful disputations - Μη εις διακρισεις δια λογισμων. These words have been variously translated and understood. Dr. Whitby thinks the sense of them to be this; Not discriminating them by their inward thoughts. Do not reject any from your Christian communion because of their particular sentiments on things which are in themselves indifferent. Do not curiously inquire into their religious scruples, nor condemn them on that account. Entertain a brother of this kind rather with what may profit his soul, than with curious disquisitions on speculative points of doctrine. A good lesson for modern Christians in general.”

“Not in disputes about thoughts. [1] That is, without blaming or condemning the thoughts, and reasonings (as it appears by the Greek) of those new converts, who had been Jews, and who were still of this opinion, that they ought to abstain from meats forbidden by the Jewish law, and observe the Jewish festival days. You must charitably bear with the weakness of such converts. (Witham) — Be tender with him who is weak in faith; enter not into disputes with him, which only serve to extinguish charity, and create inveterate prejudices.”