Main news for 23 April 2025

Paul draws attention to what can destroy peace within the church community. What should be done if observant Jews, for whom all the religious prescriptions of Judaism matter, and Gentiles, who care nothing about these prescriptions, sit at one table during the meal of the breaking of bread?

May non-kosher food be put on the table simply because questions of kashrut are no longer relevant for Christians? On the one hand, it may be, and the one who refuses kosher food cannot be accused of apostasy. But on the other hand, there are also the relationships among members of the community. Relationships of mutual love. The apostle understands perfectly well that a person clings to religion not from strength but from weakness.

From spiritual weakness, which, by not allowing a person to experience relationship with God and with Christ in all its fullness, forces him to seek support in what has no direct relation either to the Kingdom or to spiritual life.

Religion is crutches. But can one take crutches away from someone who cannot get along without them simply because others, healthy and strong, get along perfectly well without them? Clearly not. And even showing off one's strength and health before those deprived of them is not especially brotherly. Of course, the point is not that the healthy should pretend to be sick or behave like the sick.

But if it has turned out that the road must be shared with those who cannot get along without crutches, it is the healthy who must adjust their pace on the road to the sick, not the other way around. Of course, a person who feels his strength always wants to give it free rein and express himself in all fullness. But then he will have to forget about the weak, about those who cannot keep up with the strong. And together with them he will have to forget about love, without which no strength is worth anything.

Continuing the discussion of religion in its relation to the Kingdom, Paul proposes criteria that can guide one in matters of religious obligations. First of all, he draws attention to the fact that in the Kingdom there is, in principle, and can be nothing that is sinful or unclean in itself, since sin and uncleanness cannot be part of the Kingdom by definition. The problem arises when someone living in the Kingdom begins to see sin or uncleanness where there is none; in this case, for the person who sees the situation this way, they can become a reality, making life in the Kingdom problematic for him (v. 14). Of course, if the Kingdom were already now revealed to the world in all its fullness, problems of this kind would only be the problems of separate, specific people. But the Kingdom has not yet fully unfolded; it is only conquering the world, and the former order of things, not yet fully transformed, can influence the minds not only of those seeking the Kingdom, but also of those who have already come into contact with it. Not everyone who has gained the Kingdom is yet so rooted in it that everything connected with the former order of things, including religion, has become spiritually indifferent to him, and this has to be taken into account so that someone does not lose the Kingdom simply because those living near him did not consider it necessary to take his weakness into account (vv. 15-16).

The problem of religion here, as we can see, is no longer connected with the spiritual content of religiosity as such, but with its effect on the souls of those seeking the Kingdom and those who have only just gained it (v. 13). But there is also another criterion that allows one to be convinced of one's own sincerity before God. This concerns doubts that can appear quite naturally in someone who does not follow generally accepted religious norms. And here the apostle is quite categorical: if there is even the slightest doubt about one's rightness, then this is precisely a violation of the norm, not the freedom proper to those living in the Kingdom (vv. 21-22).

Indeed, generally accepted norms can simply be violated without regard for them, or one can be above them. But the experience of the Kingdom excludes doubt, and if doubts still appear, then one can say with confidence that what is at issue is precisely a violation of the norm. But since the person living in the Kingdom does not ignore generally accepted religious norms and rules, but simply feels completely free where religion is concerned, it is not difficult for him to follow them for the spiritual benefit of his neighbor. The main task in relations with one's neighbor for those living in the Kingdom is the preservation of that peace and joy without which there is no Kingdom, not the struggle against religiosity as such. That is why it is not difficult for them to follow religious norms and rules if doing so makes life easier for their neighbor (vv. 17-21).

“Blessed is the one who does not condemn himself for what he approves.” To condemn oneself is to fail to carry out what we undertake before God. Not to condemn ourselves in our choice means not looking back or indulging in fantasies, not wondering, “What would have happened if...?” It is the habit of walking directly before God in the secret of the heart. It is the ability to live patiently and not envy those who live differently. Sometimes we look at people who do not keep the fast and think that their lives are easier, more cheerful, and simpler. We retreat from our choice of Christ. Through doubt and fantasy, we let deceit and distrust of God into our lives.