He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord. And he that eateth, eateth to the Lord: for he giveth thanks to God. And he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth thanks to God.

“"Let him who eateth, not despise him who eateth not; and let him who eateth not, not judge him who eateth." And a little way on he explains the reason of the command, when he says, "He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, and giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks." So that the right food is thanksgiving. And he who gives thanks does not occupy his time in pleasures.”

“"He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it." And, "He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks." He still keeps to the same subject. And what he means is about this. The thing is not concerned with fundamentals. For the thing requisite is, if this person and the other are acting for God's sake, the thing requisite is, if both terminate in thanksgiving. For indeed both this one and that give thanks to God. If then both do give thanks to God, the difference is no great one. But let me draw your notice to the way in which here also he aims unawares a blow at the Judaizers. For if the thing required be this, the "giving of thanks," it is plain enough that he which eateth it is that "giveth thanks," and not "he which eateth not." For how should he, while he still holds to the Law? As then he told the Galatians, "As many of you as are justified by the Law are fallen from grace" (Gal. v. 4); so here he hints it only, but does not unfold it so much. For as yet it was not time to do so. But for the present he bears with it: but by what follows he gives it a further opening. ...”

“For freedom is above the law, and therefore it is the same to thee whether thou eatest, or whether thou eatest not, even as Paul spake concerning this freedom of the spirit, saying, "He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord, and he that regardeth it not, regardeth it not unto the Lord; and he that eateth not eateth not unto God; and he that eateth, eateth unto God, and giveth thanks unto the Lord;" so then it belongeth unto us by this freedom to eat, or not to eat. And for this reason He did not make a difference between meats severally mentioned by the law, that they might not be distinguished before us by lust or by the absence of lust, and that we should not excuse ourselves from eating that for which we lust as if through uncleanness, whether it be rare or whether it be common, or whether it be permitted to be eaten according to custom or not; so then that from the eating of which lust ariseth not in us we may eat as of that which is clean, without our conscience pricking us during the eating thereof.”

“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.”

“He that regardeth the day, regardeth it to the Lord,.... The apostle strengthens the above advice with this reason, because what is done both by one and the other, is done unto the Lord. The weak brother that esteems one day above another, and regards the passover, pentecost, and feast of tabernacles, a new moon, or a seventh day sabbath, does it in obedience to the commands of the Lord, which he thinks are still binding, not knowing that they are disannulled by Christ; and the worship performed by him on any of those days is done in the name and strength of the Lord, with a view to his glory, and as believing it was pleasing in his sight; and whether he is right or wrong, it is to the Lord he does it, and to his own master he stands or falls. The following clause is omitted in the Alexandrian copy and some others, and in the Vulgate Latin and Ethiopic versions, but is in most Greek copies, and retained in the Syriac and Arabic versions. And he that regardeth not the day, the Lord he doth not regard it; believing it is the will of the Lord, that all distinction of days should cease; and that the law of commandments contained in ordinances, respecting such Jewish days, is abolished by the Lord Jesus Christ; and that it is to the honour the Lord not to observe them: for to regard the days of the feast of tabernacles, is tacitly to say, that the Word has not tabernacled among us; and to observe he days of the passover, is virtually to deny that our passover is sacrificed for us; and to keep the day of Pentecost, is all one as to affirm, that the firstfruits of the Spirit have not been given; and to regard a new moon, is in effect to say, that the church has not received evangelical light from Christ, the sun of righteousness; and to keep a seventh day sabbath, is a strong insinuation, as if Christ the true sabbath, in whom we have our spiritual and eternal rest, is not come; however, it is to the Lord that the stronger brother and more confirmed believer disregards any of those days; and it is to his own master he stands or falls, nor is he to be judged of man's judgment: and the same is the case of the eater, or non-eater of meats forbidden by the law: he that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks. The man that is strong in faith, and is fully persuaded by the Lord Jesus that all distinction of meats, as of days, is ceased, eats any thing, and every sort of food, that comes in his way, without making any difference; and when he eats or drinks at any time, it is all to the glory of God; which is a clear case, by his giving God thanks, as becomes him, for the food he eats: he acknowledges that these are the creatures of God, and his gifts to him; he gives him thanks for the right he has given him to eat of them, and for taking away the distinction of meats, and giving him the free use of his creatures; and the more thankful he is when he considers how unworthy he is of the least of these mercies: and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth, or, and giveth God thanks. The man that is weak in faith, that eateth not food forbidden by the law, abstains from such food, purely on account of the Lord, in obedience to his will, and with a view to his glory, supposing such a law to be in full force; and is thankful to God for the herbs he allows him to eat, or for other food not forbidden by the law: and therefore since each party shows such a religious concern for the glory of the Lord, the apostle argues they ought to be easy one with another. The Alexandrian copy reads, "and giveth the Lord thanks".”

“He that regardeth the day - A beautiful apology for mistaken sincerity and injudicious reformation. Do not condemn the man for what is indifferent in itself: if he keep these festivals, his purpose is to honor God by the religious observance of them. On the other hand, he who finds that he cannot observe them in honor of God, not believing that God has enjoined them, he does not observe them at all. In like manner, he that eateth any creature of God, which is wholesome and proper food, gives thanks to God as the author of all good. And he who cannot eat of all indiscriminately, but is regulated by the precepts in the Mosaic law relative to clean and unclean meats, also gives God thanks. Both are sincere; both upright; both act according to their light; God accepts both; and they should bear with each other.”

“He that regardeth the day, regardeth it to the Lord--the Lord CHRIST, as before. and he . . . not, to the Lord he doth not--each doing what he believes to be the Lord's will. He that earth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks--The one gave thanks to God for the flesh which the other scrupled to use; the other did the same for the herbs to which, for conscience' sake, he restricted himself. From this passage about the observance of days, ALFORD unhappily infers that such language could not have been used if the sabbath law had been in force under the Gospel in any form. Certainly it could not, if the sabbath were merely one of the Jewish festival days; but it will not do to take this for granted merely because it was observed under the Mosaic economy. And certainly, if the sabbath was more ancient than Judaism; if, even under Judaism, it was enshrined among the eternal sanctities of the Decalogue, uttered, as no other parts of Judaism were, amidst the terrors of Sinai; and if the Lawgiver Himself said of it when on earth, "The Son of man is LORD EVEN OF THE SABBATH DAY" (see Mar 2:28) --it will be hard to show that the apostle must have meant it to be ranked by his readers among those vanished Jewish festival days, which only "weakness" could imagine to be still in force--a weakness which those who had more light ought, out of love, merely to bear with.”