Romans 14:9–18

The creation was made by Christ the Lord, but because of sin it has become separated from its maker and taken captive. But God the Father sent his Son from heaven to earth to teach his creation what to do in order to escape the hands of its captors, so that his work should not perish. For this reason he allowed himself to be killed by his enemies, so that by going down to hell he could condemn sin, because he was killed as an innocent man, and liberate those whom the devil held there. Therefore, since he showed the way of salvation to the living and offered himself for them and also delivered the dead from hell, he is Lord of both the living and the dead. For he has turned the lost into his servants.

As it has been clearly demonstrated that the Word, who existed in the beginning with God, by whom all things were made, who was also always present with mankind, was in these last days, according to the time appointed by the Father, united to His own workmanship, inasmuch as He became a man liable to suffering, [it follows] that every objection is set aside of those who say, "If our Lord was born at that time, Christ had therefore no previous existence." For I have shown that the Son of God did not then begin to exist, being with the Father from the beginning; but when He became incarnate, and was made man, He commenced afresh the long line of human beings, and furnished us, in a brief, comprehensive manner, with salvation; so that what we had lost in Adam-namely, to be according to the image and likeness of God-that we might recover in Christ Jesus.

For as it was not possible that the man who had once for all been conquered, and who had been destroyed through disobedience, could reform himself, and obtain the prize of victory; and as it was also impossible that he could attain to salvation who had fallen under the power of sin,-the Son effected both these things, being the Word of God, descending from the Father, becoming incarnate, stooping low, even to death, and consummating the arranged plan of our salvation, upon whom [Paul], exhorting us unhesitatingly to believe, again says, "Who shall ascend into heaven? that is, to bring down Christ; or who shall descend into the deep? that is, to liberate Christ again from the dead." Then he continues, "If thou shall confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised Him from the dead, thou shall be saved." And he renders the reason why the Son of God did these things, saying, "For to this end Christ both lived, and died, and revived, that He might rule over the living and the dead."

"For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that He might be Lord both of the dead and living."

And so let us at least convince thee, that He is thoughtful for our salvation. For had He not had this great care for us, where were the need of the Dispensation (or Incarnation)? He then that hath shown so much anxiety about our becoming His, as to take the form of a servant, and to die, will He despise us after we have become so? This cannot be so, assuredly it cannot! Nor would He choose to waste so much pains. "For to this end" (he says) "he also died," as if any one were to say, Such an one will not have the heart to despise his servant. For he minded his own purse. (Cf. Ex. xxi. 21.) For indeed we are not so much in love with money, as is He with our salvation. Wherefore it was not money, but His own Blood that He gave as bail for us. And for this cause He would not have the heart to give them up, for whom He had laid down so great a price. See too how he shows that His power also is unspeakable. For he says, "to this end He both died and revived, that He might be Lord both of the dead and the living." And above he said, "for whether we live or die, we are His." See what a wide extended Mastery! see what unconquerable might! see what exact providence over us! For tell me not, he means, of the living. Even for the departed He taketh care. But if He doth of the departed, it is quite plain that He doth of the living also. For He hath not omitted any point for this Mastery, making out for Himself more claims than men do, and especially beside all other things in order to take care of us. For a man puts down money, and for this clings strongly to his own slave. But He Himself paid down His death; and the salvation of one who was purchased at so great a price, and the Mastery over whom He had gained with so much anxiety and trouble, He is not likely to count of no value. But this he says to make the Judaizer abashed, and to persuade him to call to mind the greatness of the benefit, and how that when dead he had come to be alive, and that there was nothing that he gained from the Law, and how that it would be the last degree of unfeelingness, to leave Him Who had shown so much care toward him, and run away back to the Law. After attacking him then sufficiently, ...

The saint says at the end: The words, "For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that He might be Lord both of the dead and living," must be taken as referring to souls and bodies; the souls being the living, as being immortal, and the bodies being dead.

For none of us lives to himself, and none dies to himself; whether therefore we live, we live to the Lord; or whether we die, we die to the Lord. Whether therefore we live, or whether we die, we are the Lord's. For to this end Christ both died and lived, that he might have dominion over both the dead and the living. What it is to live in Christ, and what it is to die in Christ, has often been said by us in the exposition of this Epistle, and especially in that place where we attempted to explain the saying of the Apostle in which he says: But if we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live together with him. If therefore we remember what was said in that place, from those very things the present saying of the Apostle set before us will become plainer and clearer — how none of us lives to himself, and none dies to himself. For each one does not give to himself, but takes from Christ the example of death — he who alone died to sin — so that he too, by imitation of him, may be able to be made a stranger to sin and dead to it. But we do not have the example of life from ourselves either; rather we receive it from the resurrection of Christ, as the same Apostle says: That as Christ rose from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life. Therefore the newness of life by which we live in Christ through faith in his resurrection is reckoned to the Lord, because it takes its beginning not from us but from him; and therefore: Whether we live, we live to the Lord; or whether we die, we die to the Lord. Whether therefore we live, or whether we die, we are the Lord's. For he calls that death by which, buried together with Christ, as we said, and baptized into his death, we have died to sin; and that life by which, made strangers to this world, and, as he himself says, living from the dead, we live not to ourselves, that is, not to the flesh, but to God, according to what he joins in what follows. For to this end, he says, Christ died and lived, that he might have dominion over both the dead and the living. He says that Christ died, without doubt by the dispensation of the passion; but that he lived, through the mystery of the resurrection. Whence he left us also the example first of passion and mortification, and afterward also of resurrection and newness of life. But perhaps it may trouble someone that the Apostle says he died and lived for this reason, that he might have dominion over the dead and the living; as though he had given this to be understood, that unless he had died, he would not have had dominion over the dead; and unless after death he had lived again, he would not have held dominion over the living. But to these things I think we must reply as follows. Christ's dominion over every creature is established in two ways. In one, by which, as Creator of all and wielding power over all things, he holds all things subject by the force of his majesty and the necessity of his power; and by this mode he has dominion not only over good and holy minds and spirits, but also over the wicked and the apostate, and over those whom divine Scripture has called malignant angels. For it is on this account that he is called all-holding, or almighty, according to what John designates in the Apocalypse, saying: These things says he who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty. This then is one mode by which Christ has dominion over all. But there is another, by which, as one who is good and the Son of a good Father, he does not wish to bend rational spirits by violence to the obedience of his law, but waits until they come of their own accord, so that they may seek the good by will and not by necessity, and so that he may persuade by teaching rather than by commanding, by inviting rather than by extorting. From this, finally, it comes that he deigns to go even to death, that he may leave an example of obedience, and a pattern of dying, to those who are willing to die to sin and to vices. And for this reason in the present passage the Apostle writes that he died and lived for this end, that he might have dominion over both the living and the dead: over the living, assuredly those who by the example of his resurrection lead a new and heavenly life on earth; over the dead, without doubt those who carry about the mortification of Christ in their own body, and mortify their members which are upon the earth.

The coming of Christ will find people alive and will bring the dead back to life. It does not matter whether he brings you back to life or finds you alive, as long as you appear righteous before him.

This, he says, let it assure you that the Lord cares about the correction of the weak. For He Who shed His blood and died in order to be our Lord, can He not care for those who have become His servants? This is similar to how we commonly say: is it possible that someone would not care for his servant, for whom he paid so dearly? And if, he says, He cares for the dead, then all the more for the living. All this is said with the aim of shaming the Judaizing Christian and persuading him to consider how ungratefully he acts toward Christ Who died for him, by continuing to hold to the law.

Second, he assigns the cause of this condition, saying: for to this end Christ died and rose again, i.e., by his death and resurrection he obtained the right to be Lord of the living, because he rose to begin a new and perpetual life, and of the dead, because by dying he destroyed our death: he died for all that those who live might live no longer for themselves, but for him who for their sake died and arose (2 Cor 5:15).

Thus, therefore, by all the foregoing the Apostle has proved that each one stands or falls before his master, namely, by the fact that believers give thanks to God and that they live and die to the Lord and that in life and in death we are the Lord's.

Once again Paul takes up his earlier theme and by adding the word brother shows how inappropriate this kind of judging is.

"But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother?"

And so he seems to be setting them upon a level, but from that he has said, he shows that the difference between them is great. First then by the appellation of "brother" he does away with disputatiousness, and then also by calling that awful day to their mind. For after saying, "Why dost thou set at nought thy brother?" he proceeds, "For we shall all stand before the judgment-seat of Christ."

And he seems indeed to be again rebuking the more advanced in saying this, but he is putting the mind of the Judaizer to confusion by not only calling for his reverence to the benefit that had been done him, but also making him afraid of the punishment to come. "For we shall all," he says, "stand before the judgment-seat of Christ."

But if these things are so: Why, he says, do you judge your brother? Or why do you despise your brother, since, whether there is in you a mortification of the flesh and of the vices, it did not arise from you but was bestowed by the death of Christ; or whether you have newness of life and, walking on earth, have your conversation in heaven, you have merited this by Christ's resurrection? And he has aptly marked the character of each fault by a homely designation, saying to the one: Why do you despise? and to the other: Why do you judge your brother? For those who seem to have advanced somewhat in knowledge are accustomed to despise and to count as nothing those who are less capable of a higher understanding; and, on the contrary, the unskilled and the untaught are accustomed to judge — that is, to accuse and condemn — those who search out things loftier and deeper than they themselves can grasp or attain. And therefore the Apostle, wishing to cut away the fault arising on either side, charges the former not to despise and look down upon their inferiors, and the latter not to judge their superiors, since they do not possess the competence to judge. Although, then, he rebukes both — both the one who despises the inferior brother and the one who judges the superior — nevertheless, in order to show that the latter sins more gravely in judging than the former in despising his brother, he passes over the fault of contempt and enlarges upon the presumption of the brother who judges; and therefore in what follows he adds: For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God. For it is written: As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. And so each one of us shall render an account for himself to God. Let us therefore no longer judge one another; but judge this rather, that you place no offense or stumbling block before your brother. The Apostle, taking up the causes drawn from those matters in which those who judge their brothers do not judge rightly, introduces the form of the right and just divine judgment, and says: For we must all stand before the judgment seat of God — so that, namely, he who judges his brother may know that he incurs so great a crime of arrogance as to seem to himself to usurp the judgment seat of God and to forestall the judgment of the Only-begotten. But let us see what this very thing means that the Apostle mentions the judgment seat of God, and how it is to be understood. For not only in this passage, but also in writing to the Corinthians, he makes mention nonetheless of a judgment seat, where he says: Wherefore we strive, whether present or absent, to please him. For we must all be made manifest before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive through the body according to what he has done, whether good or evil. Moreover, in the prophet Daniel too we find certain such things described concerning the manner of judging. I beheld, he says, and lo, thrones were set, and the Ancient of days was seated, and his garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like clean wool. His throne was a flame of fire, its wheels a blazing fire, a river of fire ran before him. Thousands of thousands ministered to him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him. He appointed judgment, and the books were opened. In the book of the twelve prophets also it is said under a mystery that in the valley of Josaphat the Lord judges his people; and that same valley of Josaphat he shortly afterward names the valley of judgment. But it seems a long task to discuss now each of these things which we have brought forward for the sake of comparison. Nevertheless, comparing those things which we said the Apostle wrote to the Corinthians with the present passage, or with the rest which we have recalled as written among the prophets, we see it declared from all of them most certainly that there will be a judgment of God; and in order that the manner of it might become better known to men, the form of judging has been taken from the things that are transacted among men — so that, namely, we might know that, just as that earthly judge ascends a certain loftier place which is called a tribunal, in order that from it he may be higher and more eminent than the rest who are to be judged, lest either the punishments of the guilty or the pleas of the innocent escape his sight; so we may understand that Christ also, the judge of all, eminent above all in nature and majesty, looks into the hearts and consciences of individuals, brings hidden things to light and reveals what is covered, so that he may both bestow praise on good deeds and that the wicked may receive the punishment they deserve. But if the future judgment of God awaits us — and such a judgment in which not only will each one receive according to his deeds, but will also render an account for every idle word, according to the Lord's sentence — evil thoughts too will be confuted, with conscience convicting them, and in all things each one of us will render an account for himself to God. Therefore, he says, let us no longer judge one another, as he also says elsewhere: And so do not judge anything before the time, until the Lord comes, who will illuminate the hidden things of darkness and make manifest the counsels of hearts; and then there will be praise for each one from God. For our heart will be laid bare, as I think, to every rational creature, and the hidden things will be revealed, or even made manifest. For there is a difference. For those things which are revealed seem to pertain to the wicked, of whom it is said: For it shall be revealed in fire; but those which are made manifest, to the good; and therefore it is said: For everything that is made manifest is light. And, like certain written books, or engraved tablets containing the letters of our deeds and thoughts, they will be read over by every rational creature, as we have said. And this is what I think is indicated through Daniel where he says: And the books were opened — those, namely, which are now folded up and covered over in the heart, containing indeed the records of what we do, and furrowed with certain marks of conscience, yet known to none but God alone. These books, then, of our soul, or these pages of our heart, will be opened in the sight of the flaming throne and of the wheels of burning fire, and of the fiery river running before the Ancient of days. The angels will see and even read these things, and those thousands of thousands and ten thousand times ten thousand thousands of ministering angels; and thus, of our crimes — in which now we are ashamed to endure even a single witness — we shall then endure innumerable throngs of heavenly powers as witnesses. But since Paul says that we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God, and since he associates himself with those who will stand before the judgment seat of God, who is there who would so deceive and delude himself as to suppose that he will not come to the judgment of Christ and to the tribunal of his examination, or suppose that he will not be made manifest in those things which he has committed, whether rightly or less rightly? But as to the fact that in the present passage he set down the judgment seat of God, while to the Corinthians the judgment seat of Christ, I for my part think there is no difference to prevent one and the same tribunal being named both the tribunal of Christ and the tribunal of God, according to what the Savior himself says in the Gospel: All things that the Father has are mine; and again: Father, all mine are yours, and yours mine. If, however, anyone thinks — since in Paul's discourses there is not even an idle syllable in his writings — that the reasons for this variation must be sought out, he will perhaps be able to say something of this sort: The name of Christ, so far as pertains to the proper meaning of the appellation itself, is an indication of the Word set in the flesh and reconciling the world to God, as the same Paul also says, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself; but the intervals of this reconciliation are stretched out and made longer by the delay of our conversion and the negligence of our amendment; and until he brings to nothing all principalities and powers, and puts all enemies under his feet, and destroys the last enemy, death, he must so reign as to carry out the mystery of the dispensation undertaken in the flesh, and to make the good manifest, while the culpable receive each one according to his works; but when he shall have handed over the kingdom to God and the Father — that is, when he shall have offered to God all who are converted and amended, and shall have fulfilled entirely the mystery of the reconciliation of the world — then, he says, all stand before the judgment seat of God, so that this which follows may be fulfilled: As I live, says the Lord, that every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.

By what authority do you condemn your brother as a voracious glutton? For what reason do you despise him, as if he were weak or his fast were pointless? The Lord will judge our consciences to see with what sort of desire and intention we did what we did.

"Why do you pass judgment on your brother?" was said to the Jews. "Why do you despise your brother?" was said to the Gentiles. Neither of you should do either, says Paul, because you are under obligation to maintain Christ's standards of behavior in your life.

Paul addresses these words to the Jews.

You, the non-eater, why do you condemn your brother who eats, as lacking self-control, because he eats? He is your brother; you must not despise your own member. Will you give an answer for him? He himself will stand before the judgment and will bear the punishment himself. Do you see how, in addressing the mature one, he strikes fear into the very one who Judaizes, as one who must give an account at the dreadful judgment?

Then when he says, but you, why do you judge, he presents the third reason, which is based on the future judgment. In regard to this he does three things: first, he suggests that a judgment at present is unnecessary, saying: but you, why do you judge, i.e., of what use or need is your judgment, your brother, rashly judging hidden matters not committed to your judgment? Or you, who are judged, why do you despise your brother, regarding as nothing the fact that you are judged by him? Why does each one despise his brother? (Mic 2:10).

Second, he foretells the future judgment of Christ: As if to say: I am correct in stating why you pass judgment, because you should not fear that anyone will remain unjudged. For we shall all stand before the tribunal of Christ. The tribunal of Christ is so called on account of his judiciary power, as it says in Matthew: when the Son of man comes in his glory and all the angels with him, then he will sit on the glorious throne (Matt 25:20).

He says that we shall all stand, as if to be judged, both good and evil in regard to reward or punishment: we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive good or evil according to what he has done in the body (2 Cor 5:10).

But as to the proceedings, not all will stand to be judged, but some will sit as judges: you will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt 19:28).

For having been killed, the future Judge rose from the dead, and therefore he rightly said: "As I live." … For not only do I live, but I will come to judge, and my enemies will confess my name and kneel before me, acknowledging that I am God from God.

"For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to Me, and every tongue shall confess to God. So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God."

See how he again puts his mind into confusion, while he seems to be rebuking the other. For he intimates some such thing, as if he had said, How does it affect you? Are you to be punished for him? But this he does not say, but hints at it by putting it in a milder form, and saying, "For we shall all stand before the judgment-seat of Christ:" and, "So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God." And he introduces the prophet in witness of the subjection of all to Him, yea a subjection extended even to those in the Old Testament, and of all absolutely. For he does not barely say every one shall worship, but "shall confess," that is, shall give an account of what he has done. Be in anxiety then as seeing the Master of all sitting on his judgment-seat, and do not make schisms and divisions in the Church, by breaking away from grace, and running over to the Law. For the Law also is His. And why say I so of the Law? Even those in the Law and those before the Law are His. And it is not the Law that will demand an account of thee, but Christ, of thee and of all the human race. See how he has released us from the fear of the Law. Then that he may not seem to be saying this to frighten them for the occasion, but to have come to it in the course he had proposed himself, ...

But if these things are so: Why, he says, do you judge your brother? Or why do you despise your brother, since, whether there is in you a mortification of the flesh and of the vices, it did not arise from you but was bestowed by the death of Christ; or whether you have newness of life and, walking on earth, have your conversation in heaven, you have merited this by Christ's resurrection? And he has aptly marked the character of each fault by a homely designation, saying to the one: Why do you despise? and to the other: Why do you judge your brother? For those who seem to have advanced somewhat in knowledge are accustomed to despise and to count as nothing those who are less capable of a higher understanding; and, on the contrary, the unskilled and the untaught are accustomed to judge — that is, to accuse and condemn — those who search out things loftier and deeper than they themselves can grasp or attain. And therefore the Apostle, wishing to cut away the fault arising on either side, charges the former not to despise and look down upon their inferiors, and the latter not to judge their superiors, since they do not possess the competence to judge. Although, then, he rebukes both — both the one who despises the inferior brother and the one who judges the superior — nevertheless, in order to show that the latter sins more gravely in judging than the former in despising his brother, he passes over the fault of contempt and enlarges upon the presumption of the brother who judges; and therefore in what follows he adds: For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God. For it is written: As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. And so each one of us shall render an account for himself to God. Let us therefore no longer judge one another; but judge this rather, that you place no offense or stumbling block before your brother. The Apostle, taking up the causes drawn from those matters in which those who judge their brothers do not judge rightly, introduces the form of the right and just divine judgment, and says: For we must all stand before the judgment seat of God — so that, namely, he who judges his brother may know that he incurs so great a crime of arrogance as to seem to himself to usurp the judgment seat of God and to forestall the judgment of the Only-begotten. But let us see what this very thing means that the Apostle mentions the judgment seat of God, and how it is to be understood. For not only in this passage, but also in writing to the Corinthians, he makes mention nonetheless of a judgment seat, where he says: Wherefore we strive, whether present or absent, to please him. For we must all be made manifest before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive through the body according to what he has done, whether good or evil. Moreover, in the prophet Daniel too we find certain such things described concerning the manner of judging. I beheld, he says, and lo, thrones were set, and the Ancient of days was seated, and his garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like clean wool. His throne was a flame of fire, its wheels a blazing fire, a river of fire ran before him. Thousands of thousands ministered to him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him. He appointed judgment, and the books were opened. In the book of the twelve prophets also it is said under a mystery that in the valley of Josaphat the Lord judges his people; and that same valley of Josaphat he shortly afterward names the valley of judgment. But it seems a long task to discuss now each of these things which we have brought forward for the sake of comparison. Nevertheless, comparing those things which we said the Apostle wrote to the Corinthians with the present passage, or with the rest which we have recalled as written among the prophets, we see it declared from all of them most certainly that there will be a judgment of God; and in order that the manner of it might become better known to men, the form of judging has been taken from the things that are transacted among men — so that, namely, we might know that, just as that earthly judge ascends a certain loftier place which is called a tribunal, in order that from it he may be higher and more eminent than the rest who are to be judged, lest either the punishments of the guilty or the pleas of the innocent escape his sight; so we may understand that Christ also, the judge of all, eminent above all in nature and majesty, looks into the hearts and consciences of individuals, brings hidden things to light and reveals what is covered, so that he may both bestow praise on good deeds and that the wicked may receive the punishment they deserve. But if the future judgment of God awaits us — and such a judgment in which not only will each one receive according to his deeds, but will also render an account for every idle word, according to the Lord's sentence — evil thoughts too will be confuted, with conscience convicting them, and in all things each one of us will render an account for himself to God. Therefore, he says, let us no longer judge one another, as he also says elsewhere: And so do not judge anything before the time, until the Lord comes, who will illuminate the hidden things of darkness and make manifest the counsels of hearts; and then there will be praise for each one from God. For our heart will be laid bare, as I think, to every rational creature, and the hidden things will be revealed, or even made manifest. For there is a difference. For those things which are revealed seem to pertain to the wicked, of whom it is said: For it shall be revealed in fire; but those which are made manifest, to the good; and therefore it is said: For everything that is made manifest is light. And, like certain written books, or engraved tablets containing the letters of our deeds and thoughts, they will be read over by every rational creature, as we have said. And this is what I think is indicated through Daniel where he says: And the books were opened — those, namely, which are now folded up and covered over in the heart, containing indeed the records of what we do, and furrowed with certain marks of conscience, yet known to none but God alone. These books, then, of our soul, or these pages of our heart, will be opened in the sight of the flaming throne and of the wheels of burning fire, and of the fiery river running before the Ancient of days. The angels will see and even read these things, and those thousands of thousands and ten thousand times ten thousand thousands of ministering angels; and thus, of our crimes — in which now we are ashamed to endure even a single witness — we shall then endure innumerable throngs of heavenly powers as witnesses. But since Paul says that we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God, and since he associates himself with those who will stand before the judgment seat of God, who is there who would so deceive and delude himself as to suppose that he will not come to the judgment of Christ and to the tribunal of his examination, or suppose that he will not be made manifest in those things which he has committed, whether rightly or less rightly? But as to the fact that in the present passage he set down the judgment seat of God, while to the Corinthians the judgment seat of Christ, I for my part think there is no difference to prevent one and the same tribunal being named both the tribunal of Christ and the tribunal of God, according to what the Savior himself says in the Gospel: All things that the Father has are mine; and again: Father, all mine are yours, and yours mine. If, however, anyone thinks — since in Paul's discourses there is not even an idle syllable in his writings — that the reasons for this variation must be sought out, he will perhaps be able to say something of this sort: The name of Christ, so far as pertains to the proper meaning of the appellation itself, is an indication of the Word set in the flesh and reconciling the world to God, as the same Paul also says, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself; but the intervals of this reconciliation are stretched out and made longer by the delay of our conversion and the negligence of our amendment; and until he brings to nothing all principalities and powers, and puts all enemies under his feet, and destroys the last enemy, death, he must so reign as to carry out the mystery of the dispensation undertaken in the flesh, and to make the good manifest, while the culpable receive each one according to his works; but when he shall have handed over the kingdom to God and the Father — that is, when he shall have offered to God all who are converted and amended, and shall have fulfilled entirely the mystery of the reconciliation of the world — then, he says, all stand before the judgment seat of God, so that this which follows may be fulfilled: As I live, says the Lord, that every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.

Now every creature will bend the knee to God in the name of Jesus, through whom it has been reconciled to him, according to what the same Apostle says, that in the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, of things heavenly, things earthly, and things under the earth. The bending of the knee, indeed, and every tongue confessing to God, the Apostle has taken over from the words of the prophet Isaiah. This, however, is not to be understood in a fleshly way, as though we should suppose that even the heavenly beings, which he says bend the knee, are believed to do this with fleshly limbs — for instance, that the sun, or the moon, or the stars, or even the angels, and whatever things there are that are named heavenly, should be thought to adore with bodily knees bent, or even to be thought to confess God with a fleshly tongue and with such a member as we men speak with — beings of whom it is said that they are spirit and fire, according to what the Prophet says: Who makes his angels spirits, and his ministers a burning fire. And what knees shall be believed to exist in spirits? Or what tongue shall be looked for in the form of fire? Rather, "to bend the knee" declares that all things are made subject and obey the worship of God.

This shows that we must all account for our actions to the Lord alone.

That we will be judged, as slaves by a master, the prophet testifies to this, he says. And with the words "before Me every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall confess God" he showed the highest degree of submission. "Shall confess," that is, shall give an account of what he has done. – To whom? Not to the law, but to Christ. So then, why do you submit yourself to the law?

Third, when he says, for it is written, he proves what he had said: first, he appeals to an authority; second, he draws the conclusion, at therefore every one of us.

First, therefore, he says: I have stated that all of us will stand before the tribunal of Christ. This is clear from the testimony of Sacred Scripture: for it is written: as I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God (Isa 45:23). Our text has this: I have sworn by myself that to me every knee shall bow and every tongue shall swear.

Three things are stated in these words: first, the oath sometimes used by God to show that what is said is as solid as the unchangeableness of God's plan and not changeable as things foretold according to lower causes, as prophecies that threaten. Hence it says in a psalm: the Lord has sworn and will not change his mind (Ps 110:4). But men, as the Apostle says in Hebrews, swear by someone greater than themselves (Heb 6:16). But because God has none greater than himself on which the strength of his truth depends, he swears by himself. Furthermore, God is life itself and the source of life, as it says in Deuteronomy: he is your life and the length of your days (Deut 30:20); with you is the fountain of life (Ps 36:9). Therefore, the formula of the Lord's oath is, as I live. As if to say: I swear by the life I uniquely live.

Second, the coming subjection of the creature to God is foretold, when it is said: every knee shall bow to me, i.e., to Christ. In this is designated the complete subjection of the rational creature to Christ. For men are wont to signify subjection by bending the knee. Hence it says in Philippians: at the name of Jesus every knee shall bend in heaven and on the earth and under the earth (Phil 2:11).

Third, he foretells the confession of faith by which all will confess the glory of Christ. Hence he continues: and every tongue shall confess to God, i.e., will confess that Christ is God, as it says in Philippians: every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father (Phil 2:11). Every tongue can be understood as the expression of the knowledge of men or of angels, as it says in 1 Corinthians: if I speak in the tongues of men and of angels (1 Cor 13:1).

This is fulfilled now in this life, not as to each man but as to the classes of each man. From each class of men some are not subjected to Christ and confess him by faith, but in the future judgment all and each will be subjected to him: the good voluntarily and the evil unwillingly. Hence, it says in Hebrews: now in subjecting everything to him, he left nothing outside his control (Heb 2:8).

Since we are not going to give account of each other, says Paul, let us not condemn one another over the issues mentioned above.

I have replied, dearest son, to your letter, so far as my poor ability prevailed; and I have shown, as far as I could, what I think; prescribing to no one, so as to prevent any prelate from determining what he thinks right, as he shall give an account of his own doings to the Lord, according to what the blessed Apostle Paul in his Epistle to the Romans writes and says: "Every one of us shall give account for himself: let us not therefore judge one another."

A brother asked Ammon, 'Speak a word to me.' He said to him, 'Go and meditate like the criminals in prison. They keep asking, where is the judge, when will he come? and because they are waiting for him they dread their punishment. The monk should always be waiting for his trial, chiding his soul, saying: "Alas, how shall I stand before the judgement seat of Christ? How shall I give an account of my actions?" If you always meditate like this, you will be saved.'

But if these things are so: Why, he says, do you judge your brother? Or why do you despise your brother, since, whether there is in you a mortification of the flesh and of the vices, it did not arise from you but was bestowed by the death of Christ; or whether you have newness of life and, walking on earth, have your conversation in heaven, you have merited this by Christ's resurrection? And he has aptly marked the character of each fault by a homely designation, saying to the one: Why do you despise? and to the other: Why do you judge your brother? For those who seem to have advanced somewhat in knowledge are accustomed to despise and to count as nothing those who are less capable of a higher understanding; and, on the contrary, the unskilled and the untaught are accustomed to judge — that is, to accuse and condemn — those who search out things loftier and deeper than they themselves can grasp or attain. And therefore the Apostle, wishing to cut away the fault arising on either side, charges the former not to despise and look down upon their inferiors, and the latter not to judge their superiors, since they do not possess the competence to judge. Although, then, he rebukes both — both the one who despises the inferior brother and the one who judges the superior — nevertheless, in order to show that the latter sins more gravely in judging than the former in despising his brother, he passes over the fault of contempt and enlarges upon the presumption of the brother who judges; and therefore in what follows he adds: For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God. For it is written: As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. And so each one of us shall render an account for himself to God. Let us therefore no longer judge one another; but judge this rather, that you place no offense or stumbling block before your brother. The Apostle, taking up the causes drawn from those matters in which those who judge their brothers do not judge rightly, introduces the form of the right and just divine judgment, and says: For we must all stand before the judgment seat of God — so that, namely, he who judges his brother may know that he incurs so great a crime of arrogance as to seem to himself to usurp the judgment seat of God and to forestall the judgment of the Only-begotten. But let us see what this very thing means that the Apostle mentions the judgment seat of God, and how it is to be understood. For not only in this passage, but also in writing to the Corinthians, he makes mention nonetheless of a judgment seat, where he says: Wherefore we strive, whether present or absent, to please him. For we must all be made manifest before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive through the body according to what he has done, whether good or evil. Moreover, in the prophet Daniel too we find certain such things described concerning the manner of judging. I beheld, he says, and lo, thrones were set, and the Ancient of days was seated, and his garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like clean wool. His throne was a flame of fire, its wheels a blazing fire, a river of fire ran before him. Thousands of thousands ministered to him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him. He appointed judgment, and the books were opened. In the book of the twelve prophets also it is said under a mystery that in the valley of Josaphat the Lord judges his people; and that same valley of Josaphat he shortly afterward names the valley of judgment. But it seems a long task to discuss now each of these things which we have brought forward for the sake of comparison. Nevertheless, comparing those things which we said the Apostle wrote to the Corinthians with the present passage, or with the rest which we have recalled as written among the prophets, we see it declared from all of them most certainly that there will be a judgment of God; and in order that the manner of it might become better known to men, the form of judging has been taken from the things that are transacted among men — so that, namely, we might know that, just as that earthly judge ascends a certain loftier place which is called a tribunal, in order that from it he may be higher and more eminent than the rest who are to be judged, lest either the punishments of the guilty or the pleas of the innocent escape his sight; so we may understand that Christ also, the judge of all, eminent above all in nature and majesty, looks into the hearts and consciences of individuals, brings hidden things to light and reveals what is covered, so that he may both bestow praise on good deeds and that the wicked may receive the punishment they deserve. But if the future judgment of God awaits us — and such a judgment in which not only will each one receive according to his deeds, but will also render an account for every idle word, according to the Lord's sentence — evil thoughts too will be confuted, with conscience convicting them, and in all things each one of us will render an account for himself to God. Therefore, he says, let us no longer judge one another, as he also says elsewhere: And so do not judge anything before the time, until the Lord comes, who will illuminate the hidden things of darkness and make manifest the counsels of hearts; and then there will be praise for each one from God. For our heart will be laid bare, as I think, to every rational creature, and the hidden things will be revealed, or even made manifest. For there is a difference. For those things which are revealed seem to pertain to the wicked, of whom it is said: For it shall be revealed in fire; but those which are made manifest, to the good; and therefore it is said: For everything that is made manifest is light. And, like certain written books, or engraved tablets containing the letters of our deeds and thoughts, they will be read over by every rational creature, as we have said. And this is what I think is indicated through Daniel where he says: And the books were opened — those, namely, which are now folded up and covered over in the heart, containing indeed the records of what we do, and furrowed with certain marks of conscience, yet known to none but God alone. These books, then, of our soul, or these pages of our heart, will be opened in the sight of the flaming throne and of the wheels of burning fire, and of the fiery river running before the Ancient of days. The angels will see and even read these things, and those thousands of thousands and ten thousand times ten thousand thousands of ministering angels; and thus, of our crimes — in which now we are ashamed to endure even a single witness — we shall then endure innumerable throngs of heavenly powers as witnesses. But since Paul says that we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God, and since he associates himself with those who will stand before the judgment seat of God, who is there who would so deceive and delude himself as to suppose that he will not come to the judgment of Christ and to the tribunal of his examination, or suppose that he will not be made manifest in those things which he has committed, whether rightly or less rightly? But as to the fact that in the present passage he set down the judgment seat of God, while to the Corinthians the judgment seat of Christ, I for my part think there is no difference to prevent one and the same tribunal being named both the tribunal of Christ and the tribunal of God, according to what the Savior himself says in the Gospel: All things that the Father has are mine; and again: Father, all mine are yours, and yours mine. If, however, anyone thinks — since in Paul's discourses there is not even an idle syllable in his writings — that the reasons for this variation must be sought out, he will perhaps be able to say something of this sort: The name of Christ, so far as pertains to the proper meaning of the appellation itself, is an indication of the Word set in the flesh and reconciling the world to God, as the same Paul also says, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself; but the intervals of this reconciliation are stretched out and made longer by the delay of our conversion and the negligence of our amendment; and until he brings to nothing all principalities and powers, and puts all enemies under his feet, and destroys the last enemy, death, he must so reign as to carry out the mystery of the dispensation undertaken in the flesh, and to make the good manifest, while the culpable receive each one according to his works; but when he shall have handed over the kingdom to God and the Father — that is, when he shall have offered to God all who are converted and amended, and shall have fulfilled entirely the mystery of the reconciliation of the world — then, he says, all stand before the judgment seat of God, so that this which follows may be fulfilled: As I live, says the Lord, that every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.

Something further moves me out of those things which we took up from the Epistle to the Corinthians, where he says: That each one may receive the proper things of the body, according as he has done, whether good or evil — namely, whether it is because in all men it is necessary that there be something of good and something of evil, and that no one is found among the good who has not had something of evil also, or again anyone among the evil who has not had something of good also, on account of the Scripture which says: For an incorruptible spirit is in men — whether for this reason he said that each one should receive both good things for his good deeds and evil things for his evil ones; or whether he calls those good to whom nothing evil is to be ascribed, and those evil to whom nothing at all of good is owed. But if we suppose this latter, we shall seem to go against evident reason. For no one, as I have said, will be found so good that there is not something of evil implanted in him, as seems very easily to be gathered from the examples of many saints; and again there is no one among the worst — even if Judas himself be set forth, who was impious beyond all impiety — who does not seem to have had something of good even he. For, to pass over those things which he did while placed among the apostles as one of them (although even there evils were already mingled with his goods, for he was greedy of money), nevertheless this very thing, that led by repentance he carried back the thirty pieces of silver to the priests and said: I have sinned in betraying righteous blood, was something of good. From all of which it seems to me that, since one and the same person cannot simultaneously receive both good things and evil (for no one can at the same time be sent both into paradise, or into the kingdoms of the heavens, and into hell), only in those in whom evils greatly preponderate is no account taken of the good; and in those in whom good things preponderate, and in whom the repentance of conversion has abolished the traces of evils, no account is taken of the evil.

We shall account to God for those things about which the law is silent. But if we do not rebuke someone when we see him sinning, we shall also give an account to the Lord for that.

And let the presbyters be compassionate and merciful to all, bringing back those that wander, visiting all the sick, and not neglecting the widow, the orphan, or the poor, but always "providing for that which is becoming in the sight of God and man;" abstaining from all wrath, respect of persons, and unjust judgment; keeping far off from all covetousness, not quickly crediting [an evil report] against any one, not severe in judgment, as knowing that we are all under a debt of sin. If then we entreat the Lord to forgive us, we ought also ourselves to forgive; for we are before the eyes of our Lord and God, and "we must all appear at the judgment-seat of Christ, and must every one give an account of himself." Let us then serve Him in fear, and with all reverence, even as He Himself has commanded us, and as the apostles who preached the Gospel unto us, and the prophets who proclaimed beforehand the coming of the Lord [have alike taught us]. Let us be zealous in the pursuit of that which is good, keeping ourselves from causes of offence, from false brethren, and from those who in hypocrisy bear the name of the Lord, and draw away vain men into error.

Then when he says, therefore every one of us, he draws the conclusion from the foregoing.

First, the conclusion intended from what he had just said, saying: therefore, from the fact that every knee will bend before Christ, every one of us shall render an account to God for himself, i.e., before the tribunal of Christ: on the day of judgment every man shall render an account for every careless word he uttered (Matt 12:36); the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his servants (Matt 18:23).

But it seems that not everyone will give an account of himself, but one for someone else: obey your leaders and submit to them. For they are keeping watch over your souls, as men who will have to give an account (Heb 13:17). The answer is that in the very fact that prelates will render an account for others, they will render an account for their own actions, which they should have performed for their subjects. For if they have done what their duties demanded, they will not be held accountable, if their subjects perished. But they would be held accountable, if they neglected to do what their office required. Hence it says in Ezekiel: if I say to the wicked, 'you shall surely die,' and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, in order to save his life, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity, but his blood I shall require at your hand. But if you warn the wicked and he does not turn from his wickedness, he shall die in his iniquity, but you will have saved your life (Ezek 3:18ff.).

Is not each party innocent in its temperamental preference but grossly culpable if it allows anything so subjective, contingent, and (with a little effort) conquerable as a temperamental preference to become a cause of division among brethren? If we cannot lay down our tastes, along with other carnal baggage at the church door, surely we should at least bring them in to be humbled and, if necessary, modified, not to be indulged?

Joseph asked Poemen, 'Tell me how to become a monk.' He said, 'If you want to find rest in this life and the next, say at every moment, "Who am I?" and judge no one.'

"Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumbling-block or an occasion to fall in his brother's way."

This does not apply to one less than the other: wherefore it may well fit with both, both the advanced man that was offended at the observance of meats, and the unadvanced that stumbled at the vehement rebuke given him. But consider, I pray you, the great punishment we shall suffer, if we give offence at all. For if in a case where the thing was against law, yet, as they rebuked unseasonably, he forbade their doing it, in order that a brother might not be made to offend and stumble; when we give an offence without having anything to set right even, what treatment shall we deserve? For if not saving others be a crime (and that it is so, he who buried the talent proves), what will be the effect of giving him offence also? But what if he gives himself the offence, you may say, by being weak? Why this is just why thou oughtest to be patient. For if he were strong, then he would not require so much attention. But now, since he is of the feebler sort, he does on this ground need considerable care. Let us then yield him this, and in all respects bear his burdens, as it is not of our own sins only that we shall have to give an account, but for those also wherein we cause others to offend. For if that account, were even by itself hard to pass, when these be added too, how are we to be saved? And let us not suppose, that if we can find accomplices in our sins, that will be an excuse; as this will prove an addition to our punishment. Since the serpent too was punished more than the woman, as was the woman likewise more than the man (1 Tim. ii. 14); and Jezebel also was punished more severely than Ahab, who had seized the vineyard; for it was she that devised the whole matter, and caused the king to offend. (1 Kings xxi. 23, 25, 29.) And therefore thou, when thou art the author of destruction to others, wilt suffer more severely than those who have been subverted by thee. For sinning is not so ruinous as leading others also into the same. Wherefore he speaks of those who "not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." (Rom. i. 32.) And so when we see any sinning, let us, so far from thrusting them on, even pull them back from the pit of iniquity, that we may not have to be punished for the ruin of others besides ourselves.

But if these things are so: Why, he says, do you judge your brother? Or why do you despise your brother, since, whether there is in you a mortification of the flesh and of the vices, it did not arise from you but was bestowed by the death of Christ; or whether you have newness of life and, walking on earth, have your conversation in heaven, you have merited this by Christ's resurrection? And he has aptly marked the character of each fault by a homely designation, saying to the one: Why do you despise? and to the other: Why do you judge your brother? For those who seem to have advanced somewhat in knowledge are accustomed to despise and to count as nothing those who are less capable of a higher understanding; and, on the contrary, the unskilled and the untaught are accustomed to judge — that is, to accuse and condemn — those who search out things loftier and deeper than they themselves can grasp or attain. And therefore the Apostle, wishing to cut away the fault arising on either side, charges the former not to despise and look down upon their inferiors, and the latter not to judge their superiors, since they do not possess the competence to judge. Although, then, he rebukes both — both the one who despises the inferior brother and the one who judges the superior — nevertheless, in order to show that the latter sins more gravely in judging than the former in despising his brother, he passes over the fault of contempt and enlarges upon the presumption of the brother who judges; and therefore in what follows he adds: For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God. For it is written: As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. And so each one of us shall render an account for himself to God. Let us therefore no longer judge one another; but judge this rather, that you place no offense or stumbling block before your brother. The Apostle, taking up the causes drawn from those matters in which those who judge their brothers do not judge rightly, introduces the form of the right and just divine judgment, and says: For we must all stand before the judgment seat of God — so that, namely, he who judges his brother may know that he incurs so great a crime of arrogance as to seem to himself to usurp the judgment seat of God and to forestall the judgment of the Only-begotten. But let us see what this very thing means that the Apostle mentions the judgment seat of God, and how it is to be understood. For not only in this passage, but also in writing to the Corinthians, he makes mention nonetheless of a judgment seat, where he says: Wherefore we strive, whether present or absent, to please him. For we must all be made manifest before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive through the body according to what he has done, whether good or evil. Moreover, in the prophet Daniel too we find certain such things described concerning the manner of judging. I beheld, he says, and lo, thrones were set, and the Ancient of days was seated, and his garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like clean wool. His throne was a flame of fire, its wheels a blazing fire, a river of fire ran before him. Thousands of thousands ministered to him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him. He appointed judgment, and the books were opened. In the book of the twelve prophets also it is said under a mystery that in the valley of Josaphat the Lord judges his people; and that same valley of Josaphat he shortly afterward names the valley of judgment. But it seems a long task to discuss now each of these things which we have brought forward for the sake of comparison. Nevertheless, comparing those things which we said the Apostle wrote to the Corinthians with the present passage, or with the rest which we have recalled as written among the prophets, we see it declared from all of them most certainly that there will be a judgment of God; and in order that the manner of it might become better known to men, the form of judging has been taken from the things that are transacted among men — so that, namely, we might know that, just as that earthly judge ascends a certain loftier place which is called a tribunal, in order that from it he may be higher and more eminent than the rest who are to be judged, lest either the punishments of the guilty or the pleas of the innocent escape his sight; so we may understand that Christ also, the judge of all, eminent above all in nature and majesty, looks into the hearts and consciences of individuals, brings hidden things to light and reveals what is covered, so that he may both bestow praise on good deeds and that the wicked may receive the punishment they deserve. But if the future judgment of God awaits us — and such a judgment in which not only will each one receive according to his deeds, but will also render an account for every idle word, according to the Lord's sentence — evil thoughts too will be confuted, with conscience convicting them, and in all things each one of us will render an account for himself to God. Therefore, he says, let us no longer judge one another, as he also says elsewhere: And so do not judge anything before the time, until the Lord comes, who will illuminate the hidden things of darkness and make manifest the counsels of hearts; and then there will be praise for each one from God. For our heart will be laid bare, as I think, to every rational creature, and the hidden things will be revealed, or even made manifest. For there is a difference. For those things which are revealed seem to pertain to the wicked, of whom it is said: For it shall be revealed in fire; but those which are made manifest, to the good; and therefore it is said: For everything that is made manifest is light. And, like certain written books, or engraved tablets containing the letters of our deeds and thoughts, they will be read over by every rational creature, as we have said. And this is what I think is indicated through Daniel where he says: And the books were opened — those, namely, which are now folded up and covered over in the heart, containing indeed the records of what we do, and furrowed with certain marks of conscience, yet known to none but God alone. These books, then, of our soul, or these pages of our heart, will be opened in the sight of the flaming throne and of the wheels of burning fire, and of the fiery river running before the Ancient of days. The angels will see and even read these things, and those thousands of thousands and ten thousand times ten thousand thousands of ministering angels; and thus, of our crimes — in which now we are ashamed to endure even a single witness — we shall then endure innumerable throngs of heavenly powers as witnesses. But since Paul says that we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God, and since he associates himself with those who will stand before the judgment seat of God, who is there who would so deceive and delude himself as to suppose that he will not come to the judgment of Christ and to the tribunal of his examination, or suppose that he will not be made manifest in those things which he has committed, whether rightly or less rightly? But as to the fact that in the present passage he set down the judgment seat of God, while to the Corinthians the judgment seat of Christ, I for my part think there is no difference to prevent one and the same tribunal being named both the tribunal of Christ and the tribunal of God, according to what the Savior himself says in the Gospel: All things that the Father has are mine; and again: Father, all mine are yours, and yours mine. If, however, anyone thinks — since in Paul's discourses there is not even an idle syllable in his writings — that the reasons for this variation must be sought out, he will perhaps be able to say something of this sort: The name of Christ, so far as pertains to the proper meaning of the appellation itself, is an indication of the Word set in the flesh and reconciling the world to God, as the same Paul also says, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself; but the intervals of this reconciliation are stretched out and made longer by the delay of our conversion and the negligence of our amendment; and until he brings to nothing all principalities and powers, and puts all enemies under his feet, and destroys the last enemy, death, he must so reign as to carry out the mystery of the dispensation undertaken in the flesh, and to make the good manifest, while the culpable receive each one according to his works; but when he shall have handed over the kingdom to God and the Father — that is, when he shall have offered to God all who are converted and amended, and shall have fulfilled entirely the mystery of the reconciliation of the world — then, he says, all stand before the judgment seat of God, so that this which follows may be fulfilled: As I live, says the Lord, that every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.

But that we may return to the end and conclusion of the chapter set before us: since, he says, so great is the truth of judgment with God and with his Christ, so great the searching out of the future examination — therefore, he says, let us no more judge one another. But judge this rather, that you place not an occasion of stumbling before a brother, or a scandal. "Judge this," that is, determine this, that you do not by the observance of foods generate offenses or scandals for your brothers. Concerning offense or scandal we have already said above that a scandal is when in the road along which one is walking something is found placed in the way, against which the feet of those climbing or walking strike. This, then, is what those suffer who have lately entered upon the way of faith: they are offended by the contentions, or the negligences, or the contempt and arrogance of those who came before them, and, struck back by their examples, are turned away from the faith.

From here on, Paul subtly begins to recommend abstinence and says that even though those who eat are strong, they ought to abstain in case the weak are subjected to a stumbling block by their example.

And thus my mind has been thrown into confusion, in the fear that, having exhorted you myself to perseverance in single husbandhood and widowhood, I may now, by the mention of precipitate marriages, put "an occasion of falling" in your way.

Paul is saying this to the Gentiles, even if it appears that he is speaking to the Jews.… For the Gentiles at Rome were doing many things deliberately in order to upset the Jews, partly because they were the majority in the church and partly because they were of a higher social class.

Both of you, he says, cease the quarrel that exists between you, and neither should you, who eat all things, give the weaker one an occasion for stumbling, as though severely reproaching him, nor should you, who do not eat all things, give your brother an occasion for scandal, as though observing Jewish practices. Stumbling and scandal are mutually fitting to both persons.

Second, he draws the conclusion chiefly intended from the entire preceding part, saying: let us not therefore judge one another any more, i.e., with a rash judgment, which is included in the reason given above: do not pronounce judgment before the time (1 Cor 4:5).

After forbidding human judgments, the Apostle now forbids putting stumbling blocks before one's neighbor. First, he presents his proposition; second, he clarifies it, at for if, because of food. In regard to the first he does three things.

First, he teaches that stumbling blocks must be avoided, saying: I have said that you should not judge one another, but everyone ought to judge his own actions, lest they be a scandal unto others. And this is what he says: but judge this rather, that you put not a stumbling block or a scandal in your brother's way. A scandal, as Jerome says in his commentary on Matthew, means a hindrance or injury which we can call a 'striking of the foot.' Hence a scandal is an illegal word or deed presenting the occasion of ruin to someone after the manner of a stone against which one strikes his foot and falls.

A scandal is more serious than a hindrance, for the latter can be anything which merely retards forward movement; but a scandal, i.e., a striking, seems to exist when someone is disposed for a fall. Therefore, we should not place a hindrance before our brother by doing anything that will draw him from the path of justice: take the hindrance out of my people's path (Isa 57:14). Nor should we place a scandal before a brother by doing something that might incline him to sin: woe to the man by whom scandal comes (Matt 18:7).

Christ had said: "Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man but what comes out of the mouth—this defiles a man." This applies to food as well.

This means that nothing is common or unclean when eaten with faith in Christ.

After first rebuking the person who judgeth his brother, and moving him to leave off this reproaching, he then explains himself further upon the doctrinal part, and instructs in a dispassionate tone the weaker sort, displaying in this case too a great deal of gentleness. For he does not say he shall be punished, nor anything of the sort, but merely disburdens him of his fears in the matter, and that with a view to his being more easily persuaded with what he tells him; and he says, "I know, and am persuaded." And then to prevent any of those who did not trust him saying, And what is it to us if thou art persuaded? for thou art no trustworthy evidence to be set in competition with so great a law, and with oracles brought down from above, he proceeds, "in the Lord." That is, as having learned from Him, as having my confidence from Him. The judgment then is not one of the mind of man. What is it that thou art persuaded of and knowest? Tell us. "That there is nothing unclean of itself." By nature, he says, nothing is unclean but it becomes so by the spirit in which a man uses it. Therefore it becomes so to himself only, and not to all. "For to him that esteemeth anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean." What then? Why not correct thy brother, that he may think it not unclean? Why not with full authority call him away from this habit of mind and conception of things, that he may never make it common? My reason is, he says, I am afraid to grieve him.

It is evident that all these foods enjoy again the blessings they received at their creation, now that the law has ended. We must not return to the legal prohibition of foods commanded for certain reasons and which evangelical liberty, setting us free from its bondage, has now discontinued.

I know and am confident in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is common through itself, except to him who reckons anything to be common — to him it is common. We have said elsewhere also that in the holy Scriptures, by a kind of vernacular appellation, whatever is not holy or clean is called "common"; which appellation, however, is more frequently found in the New Testament, whereas in the Old I do not recall that it is anywhere so named — as in the Gospel the Savior says, that from the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, fornications, adulteries, thefts, false testimonies: and these are the things that make a man common. But to eat with unwashed hands does not make a man common. Although in some Latin copies they have put "defile" instead of "make common," and although the force is the same, nevertheless the proper sense of the word is "make common." But also in the Acts of the Apostles the Lord says to Peter: What God has cleansed, do not you call common. I think, therefore, that the use of this expression was taken from this: that, for example, the vessels set apart for the ministry of the temple were without doubt called vessels of the Lord, while by distinction from these the remaining vessels were called common; so also, by distinction of foods, from those which Scripture set apart as clean and to be eaten according to the law, all the rest were called common. But the Jews, not knowing the force of the word, whence a man was called common whom they called common, held to the use of the expression without understanding of its meaning. For the foods which God created, whether taken in ignorance or in simplicity, could not make a man common and unclean; but that mind of man which is set apart for God alone is rightly called clean; whereas that which is alien from God, since it is possessed not by one unclean spirit but by many, for that reason such a man is called common, as being the slave of many vices or of many demons, according to him who, when asked, What is your name? answered, Legion: for we are many; and according to that which is said by the Savior, that when the unclean spirit has gone out from a man, he goes about dry places seeking rest, and not finding it he returns; and finding the house empty and swept with brooms, he takes with him seven other spirits worse than himself, and entering in they dwell there. And without doubt such a man is called common, having plainly been made the slave of all those malignant spirits which dwell in him. Rightly, therefore, Paul, knowing that this is the reason of this expression, says: I know and am confident in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is common through itself. For nothing among the creatures of God is unclean by its own nature (for it is established that all things created by the good God are good and clean); but, he says, to him who reckons anything to be common, to him it is common; that is, to him who with the intention of his heart thinks something unclean and admits the observance of distinctions, as he also says in what follows: But he who discerns, if he eats, is condemned; because it is not of faith. For everything that is not of faith is sin. Nor yet in these words did he exclude the distinction of the law, so as to say absolutely that nothing is common or unclean among those things which the law defined as unclean. For he set down beforehand the reason why nothing is called common through itself. I know, he says, and am confident in the Lord Jesus. In the Lord Jesus, therefore, . . . this by its own nature [ . . . ] nothing is common through itself, it is said; but to him, he says, who reckons, and who thinks something to be common, to him it is common. And do not wonder that the thought of the mind makes polluted a food which by its own nature is not common or polluted, when on the contrary simplicity of mind, with no scrupulosity of thought injected, absolves from all suspicion of contamination a food that is truly polluted (for that is truly polluted which is sacrificed to idols). And again, even if the food be clean, yet if someone suffers a suspicion that it has been sacrificed to idols, it is said to be polluted on account of the scruple of conscience.

Paul is not saying here that there is anything which is unclean but that for someone with a tender conscience things do become unclean, for even after coming to faith in Christ he is still judging according to Jewish custom.

Having taught that one must not reproach the weak, he finally teaches about food and instructs the weaker person not to fear or dread it as unclean. I, he says, know and am convinced not by human reasoning, but in the Lord Jesus, that is, having been taught and assured by the Lord Jesus, "that nothing is unclean in itself," that is, nothing is unclean by nature, but becomes unclean from the intention of the one who uses it. For him alone it is both defiled and unclean, and not for all.

Second, he teaches that what was considered a stumbling block was of its very nature and in itself lawful. In regard to this it should be noted that, as was stated above, there were among the Romans some Jews converted to Christ, who distinguished among foods according to the law; but others, having a perfect faith, used all foods without distinction, which of itself was lawful. Hence he says: I know and am confident in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is common of itself.

On this point it should be known, as Jerome says in his Commentary on Matthew, that the Jewish people, boasting that they are God's portion, call unclean the food which all men use, e.g., the flesh of swine, hares, and food of that sort. Furthermore, the nations which used such foods were not God's portion; consequently, such food was unclean. The words nothing is common amount to the same thing as saying nothing is unclean.

The Apostle says that nothing is unclean, because he knows that it is so according to the nature of things, as he says in 1 Timothy: everything created by God is good and nothing is to be rejected, if it is received with thanksgiving (1 Tim 4:4). Second, he says that he is persuaded in Christ Jesus that in itself nothing is unclean, namely, because foods of their very nature never were unclean, but they were avoided for a time as unclean in keeping with a commandment of the law as a figure. But Christ removed this by fulfilling all figures. Therefore, the Apostle, relying on his confidence in the Lord Jesus, asserts that nothing is common or unclean of itself: what God has cleansed, you must not call common (Acts 10:15).

Third, he shows how this could be unlawful accidentally, inasmuch as it is against the conscience of the eater. Hence he says: It has been stated that nothing is common; but it must be understood that if one has an erroneous conscience and thinks that some food is unclean, then for him it is common and so it is unlawful for him, as if the food were really unclean: to the pure all things are pure, but to the corrupt and unbelieving nothing is pure; their minds and consciences are corrupted (Titus 1:15).

So it is clear that something licit in itself becomes illicit for one who does it against his conscience, even though his conscience is erroneous. It is reasonable that this be so, for acts are judged according to the will of the performer. But the will is moved by the thing apprehended. Hence the will tends toward what the apprehensive power represents to it, and it is according to this that the action is qualified or specified. Therefore, if a person's reason judges that something is sinful and the will is drawn to it as something to be done, it is clear that the person has a will to commit a sin. For this reason his external action, which is informed from the will, is a sin. For the same reason, if one thinks that something venially sinful is a mortal sin, if he does it while his conscience is in that state, it is clear that he has chosen to sin mortally; consequently, his action is a mortal sin on account of his choice.

But if someone afterwards has an erroneous conscience through which he believes that something lawful he did was a sin, or something venial was mortal, it is not on that account a sin or mortal, because the will and the action are not informed by a succeeding apprehension but by the one preceding the will and the action.

There is no doubt about what we have said, but there can be doubt whether if someone has an erroneous conscience whereby he believes that something which is a mortal sin is necessary for salvation; for example, if he thinks that he is sinning mortally, unless he steals or fornicates, should such a conscience bind him, so that if he acted against it, he would sin mortally. It would seem that he would not be bound. First, because God's law, which forbids stealing and fornication, bind him more strongly than conscience. Second, because this position would put him in a perplexed state, for he would sin by fornicating and by not fornicating.

The answer is that an erroneous conscience binds, even in matters evil in themselves. For conscience, as has been said, binds to such an extent that from the fact that one acts against his conscience, it follows that he has the will to sin. Therefore, if someone believes that not to fornicate is a sin and chooses not to fornicate, he chooses to sin mortally; and so he sins mortally. This also applies to what the Apostle says here. For it is clear that distinguishing among foods as though necessary for salvation was unlawful, because even before the spreading of the Gospel, it was not lawful for the converted Jews to observe the practices of the law by putting their hope in them, as though they were necessary for salvation, as Augustine said above. Yet the Apostle says here that if a person's conscience compels him to distinguish between foods, i.e., to regard some food as unclean, and he does not distinguish among them, i.e., by abstaining from them, he sins as though he were eating unclean food. And so an erroneous conscience obliges, even in matters that are per se illicit.

The answer to the first objection about the law of God is that the binding force of even an erroneous conscience and that of the law of God are the same. For conscience does not dictate something to be done or avoided, unless it believes that it is against or in accordance with the law of God. For the law is applied to our actions only by means of our conscience.

The answer to the second objection is that nothing forbids a person to be perplexed in certain circumstances, although no one is perplexed absolutely. For example, a fornicating priest sins mortally whether he celebrates Mass or does not celebrate, when he is obliged by his office. Yet absolutely speaking, he is not perplexed, because he can confess and then celebrate. Similarly, someone can get rid of an erroneous conscience and abstain from sin.

There is still another difficulty. For one is not said to place a stumbling block by doing a good work, even though someone takes the good work as a stumbling block, as Matthew says that the Pharisees took the words of Jesus as a stumbling block (Matt 15:12). But not to discriminate among foods is a good work; therefore, it should not be avoided just because someone with an erroneous conscience makes a stumbling block of it. For according to this, Catholics would have to abstain from meat and marriage to prevent heretics from being offended according to their erroneous conscience.

The answer is that someone can place a stumbling block before another not only by doing something evil but also by doing something which has the appearance of evil: abstain from all appearances of evil (1 Thess 5:22). Now something is said to have the appearance of evil in two ways: first, according to the opinion of those cut off from the Church; second, according to the opinion of those still tolerated by the Church. But those weak in faith, considering that the practices of the law should be observed, were still tolerated by the Church before the spread of the Gospel. Therefore, foods forbidden by the law were not to be eaten, if they were a stumbling block. Heretics, however, are not tolerated by the Church; therefore, this reasoning does not apply to them.

In another epistle Paul says: Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food, and God will destroy both one and the other. Since God does not care one way or the other about food, Paul tells us to maintain a spirit of charity, by which God has seen fit to deliver us from sin.

The Christian must serve everyone who is upset with him in every way, at least insofar as he can.

Look at how wonderfully Paul develops his argument. He starts off at the bottom, by referring to food. Then he goes on to call the person who is sinned against a "brother." Then he calls what has been done to him "destruction." Fourth, he says that this outrage has been committed against someone "for whom Christ died." Fifth, he says that someone who does this causes godliness to be blasphemed, and sixth, that we have not come to faith in Christ in order to be able to enjoy this or that but in order to be able to share in righteousness, which means in sinlessness, peace and joy.

You see how far, for the present, he goes in affection for him, showing that he makes so great account of him, that with a view not to grieve him he does not venture even to enjoin things of great urgency, but by yieldingness would rather draw him to himself, and by charity. For even when he has freed him of his fears, he does not drag him and force him, but leaves him his own master. For keeping a person from meats is no such matter as overwhelming with grief. You see how much he insists upon charity. And this is because he is aware that it can do everything. And on this ground he makes somewhat larger demand upon them. For so far he says from its being proper for them to distress you at all, they ought even, if need be, not to hesitate at condescending to you. Whence he proceeds to say, "Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died." Or dost thou not value thy brother enough even to purchase his salvation at the price of abstinence from meats? And yet Christ refused not to become a slave, nor yet to die for him; but thou dost not despise even food, that thou mayest save him. And yet with it all Christ was not to gain all, yet still He died for all; so fulfilling His own part. But art thou aware that by meat thou art overthrowing him in the more important matters, and yet makest a disputing? And him who is the object of such care unto Christ, dost thou consider so contemptible, and dishonor one whom He loveth? Yet He died not for the weak only, but even for an enemy. And wilt not thou refrain from meats even, for him that is weak? Yet Christ did what was greatest even, but thou not even the less. And He was Master, thou a brother. These words then were enough to tongue-tie him. For they show him to be of a little spirit, and after having the benefit of great things from God, not to give in return even little ones.

For if because of food your brother is grieved, you are no longer walking according to charity. Do not by your food destroy him for whom Christ died. When he had determined by apostolic teaching that through the Lord Jesus nothing is to be thought common or unclean by its own nature, and had granted to all the faithful the most complete liberty with regard to the use of foods, he again cuts back the license of that liberty for the building up of brotherly love, and says: Even if nothing is common, and the use of all foods is freely permitted, nevertheless if, because of a food which you think may lawfully be taken, you scandalize your brother, who is not yet capable of this knowledge, you are no longer walking according to charity, nor do you show in yourself the affection of brotherly love. For what harm do you suffer if, in order not to grieve your brother, you abstain even from what is lawful? For to abstain from lawful things is no crime for you; but for him, in matters where he discerns and thinks it not lawful, the use is condemnable. For he who discerns, if he eats, is condemned. But if you do this, you assuredly destroy your brother for whom Christ died, and you procure for him the causes of destruction. And more magnificently the same Paul, writing to the Colossians, says about these matters: Let no one therefore judge you in food, or in drink, or in respect of a feast day, or of new moons, or of a Sabbath, which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ. Let no one seduce you, willing it in humility of heart and religion of angels, exalting himself in what he has not seen, vainly puffed up by the mind of his flesh, and not holding the head; and a little later: If therefore you are dead with Christ to the elements of the world, why, as though living in this world, do you decree: Touch not, taste not, handle not — which things are all unto corruption by the very use, according to the precepts and doctrines of men: which things have indeed a show of wisdom in the observance of religion, and in humility through the affliction of the body, not in any honor unto the satisfying of the flesh. To discuss these things one by one is not the business of the present work; for it is those things which the Apostle writes to the Romans that we are now attempting to expound. This, however, is what is asserted by the present example also: that we should not be judged by anyone in food, or in drink, or in observances of this kind, which among the Jews is thought to be as it were a religion of angels. For they exalt themselves in the things that are seen, and are puffed up about visible things. Yet this elation is not according to the wisdom of the spirit, but according to the sense of the flesh. But it was not concerning fleshly things that the precept was given: Touch not, handle not, taste not. For all these things, that is, fleshly things, have been given for this corruptible use; and what observance of purity can there be in corruption? But whereas the law prescribes these things concerning rational realities, which, if they are unclean, are truly not to be touched nor tasted, lest they make us partakers of their sin and uncleanness, they, forsaking the precepts and doctrines of men, transferred this spiritual sense to these fleshly and bodily things, which have a show of wisdom in the observance of religion and in humility of the body — yet not so that on the occasion of such observance some honor among men and the delights of the flesh should be sought after, while in place of the abstinence of a few, many and choice foods are required. But true observance is where food is so taken, and all things are so done, that it may not be said of such persons: Whose God is their belly. For it is fitting to abstain from every food which concupiscence and lust presumes upon, which delicacies prepare, which luxury devises. For we must look not only to what kind of food we use, but also to how much, and at what time, and how sparingly. For thus all things become clean to clean minds; but to the contaminated, as the Apostle says, and to unbelievers nothing is clean. In which he shows that even those things which among the Jews are named clean in the matter of foods cannot be clean to a man if he is contaminated and unbelieving. It will follow, therefore, that if the things which are clean are made unclean to the contaminated, so also the things which are called unclean become clean to the holy and the faithful. For they are sanctified through the word of God and prayer, because every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be cast away which is received with thanksgiving. And they are sanctified by the prayer not of just anyone, but of those who lift up pure hands without anger and disputing. But do you wish to be taught still more magnificently concerning clean and unclean things, that they are spoken of not concerning bodies but concerning souls and minds? Hear the judgment of the Lord and Savior himself in the Gospel, saying: Not the things which enter into the mouth make a man common, but the things which proceed out of the mouth; since from within, out of the heart, come forth evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, and the rest. It is therefore the thought and the mind not rightly disposed that pollutes a man, not the quality of foods, which, of whatever sort it may be, will fulfill the use of corruption by one and the same outcome. And it is no wonder if a holy man sanctifies by the word of God and by prayer the food which he takes, when even the very garments with which he is clothed are holy. Paul's handkerchiefs, in fine, and his aprons had received so much from the purity of his sanctification that, when applied to sick bodies, they put diseases to flight and restored health. For what shall I say of Peter, whose very bodily shadow carried so much sanctification that whomever, as he passed by, not he himself but his shadow alone had touched, they were straightway relieved of every sickness? But we have digressed a little too widely in discussing clean and common foods, in order that we might consider, as far as is possible, the more exalted meaning of the Apostle.

Paul did not say that a brother is distressed because of fasting but because of food; therefore you should not incite or constrain anyone by the example of what you eat. If your neighbor eats something which is not good for him against his will, you are no longer loving him as yourself if you are not thinking of his good as much as of your own.

For "if for the sake of meat our brother be made sad, or shocked, or made weak, or caused to stumble, we are not walking in the love of God. For the sake of meat you cause him to perish for whose sake Christ died." For, in "thus sinning against your brethren and wounding their sickly consciences, you sin against Christ Himself. For, if for the sake of meat my brother is made to stumble," let us who are believers say, "Never will we eat flesh, that we may not make our brother to stumble." [1 Corinthians 8:12-13] These things, moreover, does ever one who truly loves God, who truly takes up his cross, and puts on Christ, and loves his neighbour; the man who watches over himself that he be not a stumbling-block to any one, that no one be caused to stumble because of him and die because he is constantly with maidens and lives in the same house with them — a thing which is not right — to the overthrow of those who see and hear. Evil conduct like this is fraught with stumbling and peril, and is akin to death. But blessed is that man who is circumspect and fearful in everything for the sake of purity!

Here he turns his speech to the perfect one, teaching: even if foods were a thousandfold not unclean by nature, you still ought to have abstained from pork, so that your brother who is scandalized would not be grieved, if only you wish to preserve love. You, he says, by a dispute over food are ruining and corrupting a brother who is so precious in the eyes of Christ that He died for him. For that person, noticing that you eat pork in opposition to him, becomes more obstinate and therefore, fearing lest he fall away from Christ, ultimately attaches himself entirely to the law.

Then when he says, for if, because of food, he clarifies what he had said: first, that scandals must not be placed before a brother; second, how something is common, at all things indeed are clean.

In regard to the first he presents four arguments, the first of which is taken on the part of charity, saying: for if your brother be grieved by the fact that he thinks you are sinning because of food which you eat, which he considers unclean, you no longer walk according to charity, according to which a person loves his neighbor as himself. So you should avoid saddening him and not prefer food to your brother's peace of mind: love does not seek its own (1 Cor 13:5).

Then when he says, destroy not him with your food, he presents the second argument taken on the part of Christ's death. For he seems to put little value on Christ's death who voids its fruit for the sake of food. Hence he says: with your food, of which you eat all without distinction, destroy not him, i.e., be a stumbling block for whom, i.e., for whose salvation, Christ died: Christ died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust (1 Pet 3:18). He says that the victim of the stumbling block suffers ruin, because it involves him in sin. For the victim is one who makes a stumbling block the occasion of ruin: so by your knowledge this weak man is destroyed, the brother for whom Christ died (1 Cor 8:11).

Since God's teaching is good and salutary, it should not be blasphemed, because of something trivial. Yet it is blasphemed when doubts are cast on the goodness of God's creation.

For the supper is made for love, but the supper is not love; only a proof of mutual and reciprocal kindly feeling. "Let not, then, your good be evil spoken of; for the kingdom of God is not meat and drink," says the apostle, in order that the meal spoken of may not be conceived as ephemeral, "but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost." He who eats of this meal, the best of all, shall possess the kingdom of God, fixing his regards here on the holy assembly of love, the heavenly Church.

By their "good," he means here either their faith, or the hope of rewards hereafter, or the perfectness of their religious state. For it is not only that you fail to profit your brother, he means, but the doctrine itself, and the grace of God, and His gift, you cause to be evil spoken of. Now when thou fightest, when thou quarrellest, when thou art vexatious, when thou makest schism in the Church, and reproachest thy brother, and art distant with him, those that are without will speak evil of you. And so good is so far from coming of this, that just the opposite is the case. For your good is charity, love of the brotherhood, being united, being bound together, living at peace, living in gentleness. He again, to put an end to his fears and the other's disputatiousness, says, "For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink." Is it by these, he means, that we are to be approved? As he says in another passage too, "Neither if we eat are we the better, neither if we eat not are we the worse." And he does not need any proof, but is content with stating it. And what he says is this, If thou eatest, does this lead thee to the Kingdom? And this was why, by way of satirizing them as mightily pleased with themselves herein, he said, not "meat" only, but "drink." What then are the things that do bring us here? "Righteousness, and peace, and joy," and a virtuous life, and peace with our brethren (whereto this quarrelsomeness is opposed), the joy from unanimity, which this rebuking puts an end to. But this he said not to one party only, but to both of them, it being a fit season for saying it to both. Then as he had mentioned peace and joy, but there is a peace and joy over bad actions also, he adds, "in the Holy Ghost." Since he that ruins his brother, hath at once subverted peace, and wronged joy, more grievously than he that plunders money. And what is worse is, that Another saved him, and thou wrongest and ruinest him. Since then eating, and the supposed perfect state, does not bring in these virtues, but the things subversive of them it does bring in, how can it be else than right to make light of little things, in order to give firmness to great ones? Then since this rebuking took place in some degree out of vanity, ...

Even if you are teaching correctly, your argument may become the cause of blasphemy.

Therefore let not our good be blasphemed. I ask in what way our good can be blasphemed. It is a good thing to understand the law spiritually, and to avoid, as unclean and polluted foods, the impious and foolish teachings of the heretics or of those who pursue a false philosophy. For this is what is enjoined by the spiritual law. Nevertheless, if someone from among the Jews, for example, or from those who are called Encratites, should wish to believe in Christ, yet should suppose that no small importance lies in the observance of abstinence — whether from those foods which are forbidden by the law, or from those which some think should be shunned as opposed to chastity, even on the authority of the Scriptures — if you press such a man to the foods common to all, and tell him that he cannot otherwise be saved, or attain to the faith and grace of Christ, unless he takes the foods he shrinks from, then truly the good of the spiritual understanding is blasphemed, since the man you are pressing supposes that this is the faith held among us: that we believe no one can be saved unless he feeds on the flesh of swine, or on other such common and indifferent foods.

What is good is our freedom, which we have in the Lord, so that everything is clean to us. We should not use our freedom in such a way that we appear to be living for the stomach and for feasts.

Paul is saying that he praises their faith but does not want it to become the cause of cursing and damnation.

That is, you have perfection in faith (for he called it "good"). Therefore do not abuse your perfection and do not give occasion for it to be blasphemed. For if you, being perfect, destroy the imperfect one, then you have given occasion to blaspheme the good that you possess. But you understand that our teaching is also good, and that it does not wish to be subjected to blasphemy from unbelievers when they see divisions and stumbling blocks concerning food.

Then when he says, let not then, he presents the third reason, which is taken on the part of the gifts of spiritual grace. First, he shows what impropriety follows against such gifts from the fact that we place a stumbling block; second, he clarifies what he had said, at for the kingdom of God; third, he draws a conclusion, at therefore, let us follow after the things that are of peace.

In regard to the first it should be noted that because some ate all foods without distinction in the early Church and thus set an obstacle before the weak, this impropriety followed, namely, that the weak blasphemed the faith of Christ, asserting that it fostered greediness in regard to food, contrary to the commandment of the law. Therefore, the Apostle says: Although the Lord Jesus declared that nothing is unclean, we let not then our good, i.e., the faith and grace of Christ, though which you have obtained freedom from the ceremonies of the law, be evil spoken of by the weak who declare that it caters to man's gluttony: they blaspheme that honorable name by which you are called (Jas 2:7); concerning this good it says in a psalm: for me it is good to be near God (Ps 73:6).

By "the kingdom of God" Paul means the church, in which God reigns.

Furthermore, the selfsame man cried aloud that "the kingdom of God does not consist in food and drink," not indeed in abstinence from wine and meat, "but in righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit." Which of them goes about like Elijah clad in a sheepskin and a leather girdle? Which of them goes about like Isaiah, naked except for a piece of sacking and without shoes? Or clothed merely in a linen loincloth like Jeremiah? Which of them will imitate John's gnostic way of life? The blessed prophets also lived in this manner and were thankful to the Creator.

He who eats of this meal, the best of all, shall possess the kingdom of God, fixing his regards here on the holy assembly of love, the heavenly Church. Love, then, is something pure and worthy of God, and its work is communication. "And the care of discipline is love," as Wisdom says; "and love is the keeping of the law."

That too great lust of food is not to be desired. In Isaiah: "Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we shall die. This sin shall not be remitted to you even until ye die." Also in Exodus: "And the people sate down to eat and drink, and rose up to play." Paul, in the first to the Corinthians: "Meat commendeth us not to God; neither if we eat shall we abound, nor if we eat not shall we want." . And again: "When ye come together to eat, wait one for another. If any is hungry, let him eat at home, that ye may not come together for judgment." Also to the Romans: "The kingdom of God is not meat and drink, but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost." In the Gospel according to John: "I have meat which ye know not of. My meat is, that I should do His will who sent me, and should finish His work."

And he adds to these things: For the kingdom of God is not food and drink, but righteousness, peace, joy in the Holy Spirit. In which again I greatly admire the wisdom of Paul, who restrains the faults of the present time by the authority of the sacrament to come, and, in order to establish the pattern of the Church, discloses the mystery of the kingdom of heaven. He says therefore: What need is there to disturb brotherly peace and charity so greatly over foods and the qualities of meats, when the kingdom of God, for the sake of which we labor and run, consists neither in foods nor in drink — but rather these things are foreign to the kingdom of God and to that future manner of life? For there, just as they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God, so neither do they take food nor drink, but are as the angels of God. Therefore it has been settled by a most absolute doctrine and a plain declaration of the Apostle that in the kingdom of God neither bodily foods nor drink have a place, but righteousness and peace in the Holy Spirit; and for that reason he exhorts us to exercise ourselves in those things, and to strive to possess those goods already here, and to own that substance which can pass over with us into the kingdoms of heaven. Peace, therefore, and righteousness, and whatever things of this kind are sought out through the Holy Spirit — these very things will be our food and our substance in the kingdom of God: and therefore by these words he teaches that we must take thought not for the accounts of bodily foods, which will be none in the world to come, but for the virtues, which remain with us both in the present life and in the future in the kingdom of God.

We are not justified by food. But one should also note that Paul did not say that "fasting and temperance" are not the kingdom of God but rather food and drink. The gifts of the Holy Spirit are more easily maintained through abstinence, for where there is righteousness (by loving one's neighbor as oneself) there is also peace, and where there is peace there is also spiritual joy, because distress and trouble always arise out of discord.

For a defiled spirit cannot be acknowledged by a holy Spirit, nor a sad by a joyful, nor a lettered by a free.

And if he has "delivered you the keys of the meat-market," permitting the eating of "all things" with a view to establishing the exception of" things offered to idols; "still he has not included the kingdom of God in the meat-market: "For," he says, "the kingdom of God is neither meat nor drink; " and, "Food commendeth us not to God"-not that you may think this said about dry diet, but rather about rich and carefully prepared, if, when he subjoins, "Neither, if we shall have eaten, shall we abound; nor, if we shall not have eaten, shall we be deficient," the ring of his words suits, (as it does), you rather (than us), who think that you do "abound" if you eat, and are "deficient if you eat not; and for this reason disparage these observances.

We ought to laugh at those who think that after the resurrection we shall eat and drink, when Paul's words so clearly say the opposite.

Not by this do we earn favor with God. If, he says, you do not eat, will this really bring you into the Kingdom? Rebuking them for considering this important, he also mentioned drink. Into the Kingdom of God one is led by "righteousness," that is, all the virtues, a blameless life, and peace with one's brother rather than enmity, and "joy" that comes from harmony rather than sorrow that comes from reproach. Since peace and joy can also occur in evil deeds, he added: "in the Holy Spirit." My discourse, he says, is about peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. The great Chrysostom profoundly explained why Paul mentioned righteousness. It was, he says, in order to show that the one who does not abstain from swine's flesh wrongs his brother with respect to the salvation that Christ acquired for him by His death. Therefore, conversely, the one who abstains for the sake of his brother preserves righteousness, which bestows the eternal Kingdom.

Then when he says, for the kingdom, he explains what he had said, namely, in what our good consists.

First, he shows in what it does not consist, saying: for the kingdom of God is not food and drink. Here the kingdom of God means that through which God reigns in us and through which we arrive at his kingdom. Matthew says of this: your kingdom come (Matt 6:10) and Micah: the Lord will reign over them in Mount Zion (Mic 4:7). We are joined to God and subjected to him through our intellect and affections, as it says in John: God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth (John 4:24). This is why the kingdom of God is considered mainly in things interior to man and not exterior. Hence Luke says: the kingdom of God is within you (Luke 17:21).

But things which are exterior and pertain to the body pertain to the kingdom of God to the extent that through them the interior affections are ordered or disordered in regard to those things in which the kingdom of God mainly consists. Hence, since food and drink pertain to the body, they do not of themselves pertain to the kingdom of God, but only inasmuch as we use them or abstain from them. Hence it says in 1 Corinthians: food will not commend us to God. We are no worse off if we do not eat, and no better off if we do (1 Cor 8:8).

Yet the use of or abstinence from food and drink pertains to the kingdom of God, insofar as a man's affections are ordered or disordered in regard to them. Hence Augustine says in Questions on the Gospel, and is provided here in the Gloss: wisdom is justified in her children who understand that justice does not consist in eating or in abstaining, but in tolerating need with equanimity and in temperance not destroying itself by abundance and by unsuitable ways of eating. It makes no difference, as is said in the Gloss how, what, or how much one takes, provided he does it according to the habits of the men among whom he lives and for the needs of his person and health; but with how much power and severity of mind he suffers the lack of these, either when he should or of necessity must be deprived of them.

Second, he shows in what our good consists, namely, in the kingdom of God, saying: justice and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. Here justice refers to external works, whereby a man renders to each person what is his due and the intention of doing such works, as it says in Matthew: seek first the kingdom of God and his justice (Matt 6:33). Peace refers to the effect of justice. For peace is particularly disturbed, when one man does not give to another what he owes him. Hence it says in Isaiah: peace is a work of justice (Isa 32:17). Joy must be referred to the manner in which the works of justice are to be accomplished; for as the Philosopher says in book one of the Ethics, a man is not just who does not take joy in acts of justice. Hence a psalm says: serve the Lord with gladness (Ps 100:2).

The cause of this joy is expressed when he says: in the Holy Spirit. For it is by the Holy Spirit that the love of God is poured into us, as was said above (Rom 5:5). For joy in the Holy Spirit is what charity produces; for example, when one rejoices in the good of God and neighbor. Hence it says in 1 Corinthians: charity does not rejoice at wrong, but rejoices in the right (1 Cor 13:6), and in Galatians: the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace (Gal 5:22).

The three things mentioned here are possessed imperfectly in this life, but perfectly when the saints will possess the kingdom God prepared for them, as it says in Matthew (Matt 25:34). In that kingdom perfect justice will exist without any sin: all your people are righteous (Isa 60:21). There will be perfect peace without any disquiet or fear: my people will abide in a peaceful habitation (Isa 32:18). There will be joy there: they shall obtain joy and gladness, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away (Isa 35:1).

The man who is acceptable to God is approved by men. Why? Because he has accepted the gift through which he appears worthy in the sight of God.

For they will not admire thee so much for thy perfect state, as all will for peace and amity. For this is a goodly thing, that all will have the benefit of, but of that not one even will.

And therefore he says that he who in this serves Christ pleases God, and is approved by men. This is what he says elsewhere of himself: Just as I also, he says, please all men in all things, not seeking what is useful to me, but what is useful to many. For this reason, even though he was an apostle of Christ, he became a Jew to the Jews — without doubt so that by pleasing the Jews he might save them; and to those who were without the law he himself became without law, that by pleasing them he might save them. But he says that he pleases men in this way: not by indulging their vices, but by supporting their weaknesses through patience. But let us not pass over even this idly, that he says: For he who in this — that is, in the Holy Spirit — serves Christ pleases God, and is approved by men. He speaks of serving Christ in the Holy Spirit according to what he also says elsewhere: No one says "Lord Jesus" except in the Holy Spirit. Paul himself therefore serves Christ in the Spirit, who, having received the grace of the Holy Spirit, serves the Word of God, serves wisdom, serves righteousness, and all the virtues together, which Christ is recorded to be. And therefore he is said to please God in these things who fulfills the will of God, according to the word which He Himself pronounced, saying: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear Him. He therefore who hears God, and serves Christ in whom God was well pleased, pleases God, and is approved by men.

No one can doubt that a person like this is holy.

Here he hints that the mature were reproaching the weak out of vainglory. If you wish, he says, to become an object of admiration for people, then arouse their admiration for you not so much by your perfection as by peace and other virtues. It is precisely by these things that one should serve and please God, and not by the fact that you eat pork without discrimination.

Then he proves what he had said, namely, that the kingdom of God consists in these things. For the man who seems to belong to the kingdom of God is one who is pleasing to God and approved by holy men. But this happens to the man in whom are found justice, peace, and joy. Therefore, the kingdom of God consists in them. He says, therefore: it has been stated that the kingdom of God is justice, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit; for he who in this serves Christ, who is the king of this kingdom: he has transferred us into the kingdom of his beloved Son (Col 1:13), so that one who lives in justice, joy, and peace pleases God, who is the founder of this kingdom: there was one who pleased God and was loved by him (Wis 4:10) and is approved by men, i.e., approved by the members of this kingdom: who has been tested by it and found perfect (Sir 31:10).