NOTES for Rom 2:1-2

Paul's words that the one that judges others, has nothing to defend himself (it is in particular like that can be translated literally this Greek word, which in the translation King James Version is transmitted as "inexcusable"), remind the words of the Savior about the Judgment, that each will be judged in the same way he judges the neighbor. But the apostle accentuates here one concrete aspect of the problem connected to the fact that only the one who does not commit what the defendant is charged has the morale right to judge others. At first sight, there is nothing here which could prevent the judgment and the condemnation. Indeed, not all people on earth are thieves, murderers, debauchees or blasphemers.

But Paul, as we see, has another Christian vision on righteousness, which is required from the man, pretending for the Kingdom (and every Christian pretends to it by definition) complete freedom from sin. Of course, according to the not transformed world such kind of request loses any sense. In practice it would end simply in the impunity justified by the principle emitted by Dostoevsky in the mouth of one of his heroes, saying that "everyone is guilty before everyone". That sounds good, but in practice "everyone before everyone" usually means "nobody owes anything before any body". The world not transformed admits the evaluation not of man, but only his concrete act, and asks in particular for such evaluation, an evaluation of a concrete sin or crime committed by man. But the Torah supposes all the same that such an evaluation is given by the righteous man.

And for Paul righteousness is in particular the freedom from sin, because he speaks about the Kingdom, and not about the not transformed world. And nobody of those who seek for the Kingdom cannot boast of such a freedom, because seek for it fallen people. And if we evaluate man and his works from the point of view of the Kingdom, from the point of view that who and to what extent is ready to enter there, it will simply not remain those worthy. Except, of course the Christ Himself, Who came, however, not to judge, but to save. That is why the apostle says that should not judge others the one who commits the same sin of which he condemns. In the Kingdom can judge only the one who has no sin. For others it is better to be more modest. And do not think about the sins of others, but about one’s own salvation.

The list of “depravities of mind” in the Letter to the Romans is impressive. Perhaps we do not find all of them in ourselves, but we will certainly find some. The apostle Paul says that the voice of conscience condemns all people, regardless of their “religion.” This concerns not so much deeds as an inner orientation toward sin; Jesus says the same thing in the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus also emphasizes the importance of remaining faithful within our existing relationships rather than seeking new ones. All our indecency and unfaithfulness evaporate when true love moves us.

Returning to the image of the two ways, the way of righteousness and the way of ungodliness, the apostle further develops the theme of universalism that he began in his reflections on natural knowledge of God and on the "natural Torah." He speaks of things that would appear self-evident, reminding his readers that one should not condemn others for sins from which one is not free oneself (vv. 1-2). In the letter, as we can see, he is speaking about people who test God's patience in precisely this way (vv. 3-8). And from the context it becomes clear that this condemnation had formally religious grounds: those who condemned others set themselves against others on the basis of belonging either to the Jewish people or to the Church. The first is more plausible, judging by the apostle's equalizing in righteousness "Jews" and "Greeks" (vv. 9-11), that is, Jews and Gentiles. Of course, such religious pride in no way justified before God those who gave themselves over to it; it only added one more sin to the sins they were already committing.

But the issue was not only hypocrisy and the vain hope that belonging to the Jewish people would in itself prove to be a kind of indulgence. The issue was the very understanding of righteousness held by those who took this position. For them, evidently, righteousness was inseparable from belonging to a particular national and religious community, so that those who belonged to it should by definition be judged by God according to some special, perhaps gentler, laws. Paul, however, from the very beginning sees righteousness exclusively in the context of a person's relationship with God. For him the Torah is universal; it is given to everyone regardless of national or religious belonging and is not the exclusive property of any religious community.

A Gentile can follow the Torah, and then he will find Christ and enter the Kingdom, although of course it is easier for a Jew to do this, since he studies the Torah from childhood. But if a Jew violates the Torah, the demand made of him will not be less than that made of a Gentile, but greater, although a Gentile who has had the experience of natural revelation will also answer for the evil deeds he committed, deeds he knew were evil. Paul has no doubt that the Kingdom Christ brought into the world is one for all. But then righteousness too must be one for all. And so must the Torah.

It is not the existence of the law or formal adherence to it that justifies, but its fulfillment; the deeds of those under the authority of the law will be judged by that same law. But why must those who sinned without having the law perish without the law? Is the legal principle “ignorance of the law is no excuse” consistent with the highest mercy?

Paul also answers this question and another one that is constantly asked: what will happen to those who did good deeds without knowing the commandments? They did not know them intellectually, indeed, but the law of conscience lived in their hearts, intelligible to everyone who has not stifled it within themselves. In practice, such people may fulfill the unwritten law more fully than some experts in the written law. It is not said of such people that they do not come into judgment; it is those who have believed who do not come into judgment (Jn 3:18). But at the judgment they will be able to present the good deeds they performed at the prompting of conscience. We do not know what the verdict will be in each individual case, but we believe that the verdict of the One who shows no partiality cannot fail to be just.