There are two issues explored in
Romans 14 which were divisive in the Early Church. The first was whether or not Christians should eat meat that had been sacrificed to idols, and the second whether or not Christians should worship God on certain required Jewish holy days. Both were linked to the Mosaic Law which made it clear that meat sacrificed to idols was unclean and which required worship on Jewish holy days. So, the broader background to these issues is the extent to which Christians are bound by the Mosaic Law or set free from its requirements by Christ.
‘
Some believed that there was nothing wrong with eating meat that had been offered to an idol because they knew that the idols were worthless. Others carefully checked the source of their meat or gave up eating meat altogether. The problem was especially serious for Christians who had once been involved in idol worship. For them, being reminded of their former days was too much temptation. It weakened their newfound faith. Likewise, for some Christians who had once worshiped God on the required Jewish holy days, it caused them to feel empty and unfaithful if they didn't dedicate those days to God.’
Paul’s approach to these issues gave the Early Church, and by extension ourselves, several principles, which if applied seriously and conscientiously, help to enable debate and discussion of difficult issues in ways that prevent situations from becoming explosive.
The first principle is that each person ‘should firmly make up our own minds.’ He encouraged everyone to think about the issues and to decide in their own mind what it was right for them to think and do. Paul didn’t appeal for people to sit on the fence on these issues. He wanted people to take time to think them through and arrive at an opinion.
However, by itself, this principle extends the sense of division by encouraging people on both sides of argument to clarify their positions. So, by itself, it is not a solution to the issue. By itself, it leaves the discussion and debate as being about taking sides and producing winners and losers, which is not where Paul wanted to go.
His second principle is that, whichever side of the debate you are on, you should not judge or despise the views of those on the other side of the debate. They are fellow Christians and they have in conscience arrived at their understanding of the issue on the basis of their faith. So he writes, speaking equally to those of both sides of the debate, ‘You then, who eat only vegetables—why do you pass judgment on others? And you who eat anything—why do you despise other believers?’
He is saying it is vital to recognise the validity and legitimacy of a brother or sister in Christ holding a view that is different from yours. Particularly, when they have in conscience arrived at that view before God. So, that is his second principle; do not judge or despise those who think differently from you.
Finally, he moves beyond respect for each other to the place of love in debate and disagreement. So he writes, ‘you should decide never to do anything that would make others stumble or fall into sin’ and ‘we must always aim at those things that bring peace and that help strengthen one another.’
Paul is clear about his position on these debates. He writes that ‘All foods may be eaten,’ so he is on the side of the debate which argues that Christians are set free from the requirements of the Mosaic Law by Christ but he also says that ‘it is wrong to eat anything that will cause someone else to fall into sin.’ The right thing to do, he suggests, is ‘to keep from eating meat, drinking wine, or doing anything else’ if that ‘will make other believers fall.’ So, out of love for his brothers and sisters on the other side of the debate, he will not fully exercise the freedom which he believes he has in Christ until such a time as using that freedom will not hurt a fellow Christian.
Why does he take that position? It is because he believes it is the loving thing to do. Care of others takes priority in his thinking over the exercise of personal conscience: ‘If you hurt others because of something you eat, then you are no longer acting from love ...Do not let what you regard as good get a bad name.’
Paul is, therefore, putting into practice what Jesus taught his disciples at the Last Supper. In
John 13, we read, ‘I give you a new commandment: love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. If you have love for one another, then everyone will know that you are my disciples.’
Jesus says that it is love for each other which will be our witness to the world: ‘If you have love for one another, then everyone will know that you are my disciples.’ That applies just as much when we discuss, debate and disagree, as when we are united and harmonious. Paul knows that the issues he is giving guidance on are public issues. That the way in which the Christian community deals with these issues would have been seen by those who attended the pagan temples where food was sacrificed to idols and by those who attended the synagogue where the Jewish hold days were observed.
The witness to Christ that Paul is calling for in this situation is not a church where everyone things the same way on these issues. Instead he is pleading for a church where everyone examines the issues conscientiously in order to make up their own mind on the issue, respects and honours those who think differently from them on those issues and constrains their actions in order to show love to those who think differently. He is calling for a church that can discuss and debate and disagree in love, as doing so shows the wider community that we are indeed Christ’s disciples and that the message of Christ is real love which changes our behaviour even when we disagree.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jackson Browne -
Doctor My Eyes.
.JPG)
