Kevin B. McCruden, «Judgment and Life for the Lord: Occasion and Theology of Romans 14,1–15,13», Vol. 86 (2005) 229-244
This article explores Paul’s discussion
concerning the strong and the weak in Rom 14,1–15,13. My thesis is that Paul’s
comments in this section of the letter function neither completely as a response
to an actual problem in Rome, nor as entirely general paraenesis. Rather, Paul’s
comments function simultaneously on both a situational and non-situational level.
Considering that specific concerns over food were likely operative in the Roman
congregation, Paul employs non-specific language in this section in order to espouse
a larger theological vision of the essential unity of Jew and Gentile under God’s
salvation in Christ.
230 Kevin B. McCruden
in an impasse (6). An interpretation is needed that adequately represents
the polyvalent occasion of the letter: an occasion inclusive of the
historical, rhetorical, and theological dimensions of Romans. In
particular, recent scholarship on Romans has emphasized the impor-
tance of discerning the deeper theological intention of the letter for the
purpose of explicating its occasion (7). Continuing this approach, I will
explore in this article the theological significance of Paul’s discussion
concerning the strong and the weak found in Romans 14,1–15,13 for
the insight it yields into the occasion of Romans and the theology of
the letter as a whole.
Integral to the scholarly debate over the occasion of Romans are
Paul’s comments addressed to the strong and the weak in Romans
14,1–15,13. 1) Do these chapters reveal an actual conflict within the
Roman community? 2) Should the strong be understood as Gentiles
and the weak as Jewish Christians? 3) Or can the categories of strong
and weak best be understood as classifications of status inclusive of
both Jews and Gentiles (8)? Although the specific terminology of the
strong and the weak seemingly affords a desired specificity into the
letter ’s historical setting (9), commentators frequently struggle with the
patently general tone of the passage (10). To be sure, textual references
to such details as the eating of vegetables (Rom 14,2), the observance
of special days (Rom 14,6), and the consuming of meat and wine (Rom
14,21) have suggested to some commentators communal disputes over
Jewish dietary laws or even syncretistic expressions of asceticism (11).
Undoubtedly, the most specific evidence suggestive of a conflict
over food issues is Paul’s use of the adjective koinovn in verse14.
Functioning as a technical term current in Hellenistic Judaism, this
adjective certainly functioned to denote something as ritually
tainted (12). The weak, therefore, may have feared that meat available to
the community had been slaughtered improperly or been associated
(6) See R.E. BROWN – J.P. MEIER, Antioch & Rome (New York 1982) 111.
(7) DONFRIED, The Romans Debate, lxi-lxii.
(8) M. REASONER, The Strong and the Weak. Romans 14.1–15.13 in Context
(Cambridge 1999) 45-63.
(9) U. Wilckens, for example, sees a clear problem in view: Der Brief an die
Römer (EKK 6.3; Neukirchen-Vluyn 1982) 79.
(10) J. FITZMYER, Romans. A New Translation with Introduction and
Commentary (AB 33; New York 1992) 687; J.D.G. Dunn, Romans 9–16 (WBC
38B; Dallas 1988) 795.
(11) B. BYRNE, Romans (Sacra Pagina 6; Collegeville 1996) 404.
(12) See WILCKENS, Der Brief an die Römer, 90.