Receiving the Weak in Faith Without Disputes (Romans 14:1–5)

This failing consisted in the fact that they did not relate properly to one another on account of differences in the eating of food. Some of them refrained from certain foods either always or only on certain days, while others made no distinction regarding foods. Both groups, considering their way of acting to be right, condemned those who did not follow it and thus violated the law of brotherly love and peace. The Apostle now corrects this failing. He leaves undetermined which way of acting is better, but directs all attention to the bad feeling with which they related to one another over this matter. Do not judge, he says; it is not your business. Let each one act as his conscience dictates.

Who were these abstainers, the Apostle does not indicate. Judging by what occurred in other Churches, we can suppose that they were either Jews strictly observing the law concerning foods, or pagans who, believing that an idol was something, thought that sacrifices offered to them received something from them and were defiled, and therefore did not dare eat other foods, fearing lest they be idol-offerings, as happened in the Corinthian Church. All our interpreters see the former here, while Clement of Alexandria and the blessed Augustine, as one interpreter notes, saw the latter. One can understand both: for there are expressions that can be referred either only to the former or only to the latter. The Apostle himself did not indicate whom he meant; for this was not required to confirm the rule he prescribed.

Rom. 14:1. Him that is weak in the faith receive you, but not to doubtful disputations.

“Him that is weak”, ἀσθενοῦντα—one who lacks strength in faith. The Law has now ceased, and true faith releases the conscience from any feeling of obligation in respect to it. But weak faith does not give the conscience such release and makes it weak too. One suffering from such weakness is worthy of all brotherly forbearance and attention. Receive, says the Apostle, welcome him into brotherly fellowship, do not turn away from him, do not shun him, do not push him away from yourselves. The words: “but not to doubtful disputations”—are not entirely clear. Μὴ εἰς διακρίσεις διαλογισμῶν.—Διάκρισις—reasoning; hence, on the one hand—hesitation, wavering in thoughts and doubt, and on the other hand—examination, judgment, and condemnation.—Hence various interpretations. The blessed Photius at Oecumenius writes: “Do not condemn him, but receive him as one weak in brotherhood.” And the blessed Theophylact paraphrases these words differently: “Do not condemn him, do not be offended, do not be troubled by many thoughts, but in every way strive to heal him as one weak.” It could also mean: without disputes about opinions, as in the Russian translation, or thus: not examining according to what thoughts he does this or that, or: not condemning such thoughts. God will judge them. You see only one thing—his abstinence, which in itself is worthy of praise.

Saint Chrysostom says on this passage: “I know that these words are difficult for many to understand. Therefore it is necessary first to set forth what gave occasion for these instructions and what the Apostle wishes to correct with these words. What then does he wish to correct? Many of those who believed from among the Jews, even after receiving faith, having their conscience bound by the Law, observed strict discernment in food, because they did not dare completely abandon the Law. Moreover, in order not to incur reproach merely by refraining from pork, they began to refrain from all meat and eat only vegetables, under the pretext of observing a fast rather than Jewish discernment in food according to the Law. On the other hand, there were those more perfect in faith who themselves observed no such discernment in food, and they troubled and grieved those who did observe it with their reproaches and censures and even cast them into despair. Therefore the blessed Paul was concerned lest those who intended to correct this unimportant shortcoming might spoil everything—lest in wishing to accustom the weak in faith to disregard food, they would lead them to fall away from the faith, and in prematurely trying to bring all to perfection, would upset the good they should expect from them at this time, that is, lest by constant reproaches they would shake them in the confession of Christ, so that afterwards neither one nor the other could be corrected. See then how wisely the Apostle acts and with his characteristic wisdom cares for the benefit of both sides! He does not dare say to those who reproached: you are doing wrong; for this would give the others cause to hold to their discernment. Neither does he say: you are doing well; for then they would attack even more strongly. On the contrary, he admonishes both as it should be done, and although apparently he rebukes the stronger party, yet this very rebuke falls also on the opposite party. This is the gentlest and most imperceptible way of correction, when, addressing one, you strike another. Then you do not give the one being corrected reason to be angry and imperceptibly pour into him the medicine of correction. Notice how wisely and timely the Apostle does this! Having said: ‘make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof’, he suddenly turns to the present discourse, so that one might not think he is speaking in favor of those who forbid discernment and commanded to eat all. The weak side must always be protected more; therefore the Apostle addresses his rebuke to the stronger side and says: ‘Him that is weak in the faith receive you.’ But do you see that by this a blow is already struck also at the one observing discernment? By calling him weak, the Apostle makes him feel that he is sick. Then he strikes another blow, saying: ‘receive you.’ By this he shows that much care must be exercised over him; and this is a sign of extreme sickness. ‘but not to doubtful disputations’: here is the third blow struck! From these words it is evident how important his matter is; for it raises doubt even in those who do not participate in it (probably causing them to think: really, should we too not keep such discernment?). Do you observe how he apparently speaks to some while at the same time imperceptibly and without giving offense corrects others?”

Rom. 14:2. For one believes that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eats herbs.

The Apostle indicates whom he means by the strong and whom by the weak. The strong one is he who “eats all things;” but he is not strong because he eats all things, but because, without wavering, he believes that “every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving” (1 Tim. 4:4). And the weak one is he who “eats herbs,” but he is not weak because he eats herbs—for such can be stronger than “those eating all things”—but because from weakness of faith he supposes that food can “commend us to God” (1 Cor. 8:8) and that there are foods which can defile a man. He is weak not from eating little but from weakness of faith: “for not having perfect faith, he thinks that he is defiled by some food” (the blessed Theodoret). The perfect one, daring by faith, nourishes himself with all things indiscriminately, while the imperfect one, as weak, eats herbs. Therefore the latter deserves healing, not rebuke (the blessed Theophylact). “He, believing what is written in Scripture, does not doubt eating all that is given for human use. For he reads in the book of Genesis that all created by God, ‘is very good’ (Gen. 1:31). Therefore nothing should be rejected. And we do not read that Enoch, who first pleased God, or Noah, who alone was found righteous at the time of the flood, or Abraham, the friend of God, or Isaac and Jacob, righteous and friends of God, among whom Lot was, or other righteous ones, refrained from any foods. But another supposes that he cannot eat everything indiscriminately and eats herbs. And let him eat. There is no need to compel him to eat meat, lest he eat with a doubting and troubled conscience and sin because he did not keep his conviction or his intention” (Ambrosiaster). We should suppose that those eating only herbs showed themselves at certain common meals. Here a believing Jew ate no meat at all, lest he appear to abstain from other foods out of respect for the Law; and some, whether Jews or pagans, did not eat, fearing to happen upon idol-offerings.

Rom. 14:3. Let not him that eats despise him that eats not; and let not him which eats not judge him that eats: for God has received him.

You, who believe that all may be eaten and who eat all, do not despise him who thinks differently and holds it to his conscience and therefore does not eat all. And you, who do not eat all, do not judge him who eats all. Among the Romans, however, “it happened that as the more perfect (those eating all) despised those not eating all, considering them weak in faith, not true Christians, harboring a hidden malady within and still holding to Judaism; so the latter condemned the former, considering them transgressors of the Law or even given to gluttony” (Saint Chrysostom). The very acts of both, namely eating and not eating, the Apostle does not touch; for judging abstractly, “it is left to man’s will to eat or not to eat, and no questions or disputes regarding this are proper. All created things are subject to man’s dominion and entrusted to his will” (Ambrosiaster). But, directing attention to what is in the hearts of the two groups, he says to one: do not despise, and to the other: do not judge. Whether there is sin in eating and not eating, none of you can say definitively, but in despising and judging there is already apparent sin. Where there is greater harm and where it is more evident, there he hastens to avert and stop it.

“for God has received him”—“that is, the Gentile. The Apostle continues his discourse addressed to the Jew” (the blessed Theodoret). Do not judge him, Jew, when God has received him in His grace, not making it an obstacle to this reception that he was not under the Law and consequently under the Law regarding the distinction of foods—and after receiving him has not imposed upon him any burden of the Law. “Why do you speak to him about the Law as if he were a transgressor? God received him, that is, He showed upon him His unspeakable grace and freed him from all guilt” (Saint Chrysostom).

But perhaps the words: “for God has received him”—refer to both, thus: the one who eats does not despise the one who does not eat; “for God has received him,” and the one who does not eat does not judge the one who eats; “for God has received him.” You are both in God’s grace, received into His Kingdom, honored with adoption: do not cast each other out of this saving enclosure over such trifles as distinction and non-distinction of foods. It was no obstacle to the Jew being received into grace that he held to discernment of food. Why do you think it will hinder him from remaining in grace? It was no obstacle to the Gentile being received into grace that his freedom in eating. Why do you think it will hinder him from remaining in it? Have this grace in your hearts and give thanks to God. Mutual recrimination and condemnation, which breeds divisions and dries up love, will sooner cast you out of God’s enclosure than discernment and non-discernment of foods.

These words: “for God has received him”—can be used as medicine against condemnation in general. You condemn a sinner for the sin he has committed, but you do not take into account what is in his soul after the sin. He has already sighed to God, been broken by contrition, wept for his sin, and God has received him back into His mercy, and you condemn him.—Do you see what an incongruity? Therefore, never condemn anyone.

Rom. 14:4. Who are you that judge another man’s servant? to his own master he stands or falls. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.

This is a general basis for non-condemnation not just in the present case but in every other. All men are God’s, as God’s creatures; to God they ought to serve and before Him alone are they accountable. Whether he acts rightly and stands, or acts wrongly and falls, is no concern of yours. Before the Lord he is good or bad—the Lord is his Judge. Just as it is inappropriate to judge the servants of another after entering another’s house, so it is inappropriate to judge men in their relations to God or in the actions of their conscience. The Apostle commands us not to judge. He says as it were: “I command you not to judge another not because his way of acting does not deserve condemnation, but because he is another’s servant, that is, not yours but God’s. Whether he stands or falls, both concern the Lord. If he falls, it is loss to God; equally, if he stands, it is gain to God.—See then how strongly the Apostle’s words should have shamed the one who reproached! If God, reasons the holy Paul, although He sustains a loss, yet does not make reproaches, how unseasonably you act and how far you overstep your bounds and meddle in another’s affairs, thus torturing and troubling your weak brother in faith!” (Saint Chrysostom). “A servant should not judge a fellow servant: authority for this is not given to him. What conscience one eats or does not eat with—God is the Judge for this, whose servant is he that acts one way or another” (Ambrosiaster).

“Yea, he shall be holden up.” You have suddenly become firm on the foundation of faith, while he still wavers. Not wavering in faith generally, but only in respect to that circle of acts about which you condemn him. Being firm in the general faith, he will gradually grow strong also in this respect and will be no worse than you. Although he is weak in this part, he does not fall away from God. And God, seeing his adherence to Himself, will help him be freed from the weakness deemed reproachful. For in being weak, he is not pleasing himself but thinks he is rendering service to God—he acts thus from reverence toward God (Photius at Oecumenius), fearing to offend Him by improper conduct. God will not abandon him but will stretch out His helping hand and raise him up.

Rom. 14:5. One man esteems one day above another: another esteems every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

“One man esteems one day above another”—that is, he distinguishes days and sometimes eats, sometimes does not eat certain foods. “another esteems every day alike”—he regards every day as equal and either eats every day or does not eat certain foods. But it is possible that the Apostle is also speaking here of fasting and non-fasting on certain days or constantly, as Saint Chrysostom remarks: “Here, I think, the Apostle makes a slight hint also about fasting. Probably some of those who fasted constantly condemned those who did not fast (and vice versa); or perhaps even among those discerning in food there were those who observed discernment on certain days and not on others.”

“But the force of the Apostle’s discourse does not lie in this, but in the principle expressed regarding things indifferent: let each one act according to his conscience. What is appointed by commandment and what is established by dogma, hold to that and fulfill it unfailingly. There is no need to question here whether it is your conviction or your conscience. Even if all your inner and outer disposition went against it, do not depart. God so commanded: even if you die, remain faithful to what was commanded. It is different regarding acts and things indifferent. There let your conviction and your conscience determine how to act and how to think. Only in everything keep in view the glory of God, not self-pleasing—neither to your mind nor to your heart. And many things have been left to freedom of judgment: only do not allow anything that would be directly or indirectly contrary to dogmas or inconsistent with them. And many acts have been left to freedom: only in nothing permit yourself merely to please and allow feelings and dispositions that could not be pleasing before God. The blessed Theodoret writes: ‘Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind’—The Apostle did not speak thus generally; for concerning Divine dogmas he does not command such reasoning, but utters anathema against those who permit themselves to teach contrary to the truth and says: ‘though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than that which we have preached to you, let him be accursed.’ (Gal. 1:9). Therefore, only concerning foods does he give the right to each one’s reason to judge. For this custom remains also to this day in the Churches: one loves abstinence, another fearlessly partakes of all foods, and the latter does not condemn the former, and the former does not censure the latter, but both boast in the law of being of one mind.”