Romans 14 – A question on the weak and the strong
Tuesday, August 31st, 2010
How should we respond on issues we are weak on?
Yeah – it was tricky – I was trying to illustrate contemporary examples of differences between Christians whilst at the same time attempting to show they are not exactly the same.
So – the Jew Gentile differences around food were matters of gospel freedom. You could eat as much pork as you like with no fear of it ever being close to sin. By contrast, alcohol is not bad (indeed it is considered God’s gift in the Scriptures), but drunkenness is bad. So wisdom would dictate thinking through how to stay well clear of that.
For some Christians, they decide to never drink, for others they might choose to set themselves a limit. They are both trying to avoid an agreed danger – over indulging– but drawing different boundaries. The boundaries are protective – they are not God given. Some Christians will take a more conservative line (ie. a barrier further from the ‘cliff edge’), others will take a more libertine approach (ie. a barrier quite close to the ‘cliff edge’).
The difference should be clear. Both are issues of freedom. The Christian is free to both drink alcohol and eat pork. Yet – clean / unclean foods are not conservative / libertine distinction. With Jesus – you cannot sin by eating unclean food (insert caveat here from Romans 14 about concern for your brother / sisters conscience; perhaps also overeating / greed!). The food itself does not contaminate you (compare Jesus’ words in Mark 7).
So there are similarities and differences with are situation that are important to understand. In both situations Paul would probably encourage you to make up your mind and then stay relatively silent on your decision. But for different reasons – in Romans 14 – because you are waiting for your Christian brother to catch up on your understanding. With alcohol issues today – it is because you are making personal decisions about what is helpful for you and others around you – there is no absolute rule the Scripture gives.
As an illustration of how that works out…when working with halls students in Australia they had an annual pub crawl in the Orientation week. As a Christian worker in the hall I wanted to get to know the students, but was frustrated by a ‘drinking culture’ the hall created. In the end I went to some pubs along the way – but made sure I was seen to be only drinking orange juice. That was part of concern for students who may never touch alcohol – to be considerate of them. Later on in our home we may have offered wine during a meal if we thought a person would have no concerns in this area – and to perhaps quietly model a different usage of alcohol.
On your question – “How should we respond on issues we are weak on?”
In Romans 14 terms – you won’t know that you are weak. The weaker brothers ironically would have thought of themselves as morally superior and the others as pretty dodgy. That’s the trick – it’s an issue of mature understanding – and hence the need to educate the conscience. Partly that will be carefully listening to your brothers and sisters when they attempt to explain how they read the Scriptures – to hear their rationale for their behaviour, rather than imposing your own framework on them. That underlines the value of consistent teaching of the Scriptures to a church – to gradually but intentionally work through the Scriptures. That is something that will grow the unity of a group.
That’s different to the drinker / non drinker of alcohol…that’s not a weak / strong issue (unless they believe the Bible bans all alcohol) – it’s a question of wisdom.

If you’ve read Canta #18 you’re probably a little annoyed to hear in the editorial that Canta won’t be publishing a response from Scott Mackay to the anonymous article entitled ‘Come to the Dark side! We have Pre Marital Sex! and Led Zeppelin!’.
Great when Jesus makes it to the front of Canta isn’t it?!
