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.
234 Kevin B. McCruden
opens 2,1-11 with the generalized apostrophe: w\ a[nqrwpe pa'" oJ
krivnwn. Similarly, in Rom 14,2 Paul introduces the strong and the
weak person in a quite general fashion by employing either a relative
pronoun or a present participle used attributively: o}" me;n pisteuvei
fagei'n pavnta, oJ de; ajsqenw'n lavcana ejsqivei. Perhaps the strongest
parallel in terms of both indefinite phrasing and similar subject matter
can be seen in Rom 14,4 and Rom 2,1. In Rom 2,1 we read: Dio;
ajnapolovghto" ei\, w\ a[nqrwpe pa'" oJ krivnwn: ejn w/| ga;r krivnei" to;n
e{teron, seauto;n katakrivnei", ta; ga;r aujta; pravssei" oJ krivnwn. In
Rom 14,4 we read: su; tiv" ei\ oJ krivnwn ajllovtrion oijkevthn; In both
verses the activity of judgment is central; moreover, in both verses
Paul takes exception to the one who presumes to engage in such an
activity.
On the basis of these observations might we contend that Romans
14 shares something of the same diatribal tone of Rom 2,1-11, if not
the more formal characteristics? Clearly, the diatribal style of 2,1-11 is
more patent. Still, in addition to the judgment vocabulary it cannot be
denied that throughout Paul’s discussion of the strong and weak a no
less dialogical encounter of direct address is maintained. As in 2,1-11,
where Paul addresses the fictive Jew, so Paul addresses both the strong
and the weak brother: “Who are you who judges the servant of
another?†su; tiv" ei\ oJ krivnwn ajllovtrion oijkevthn; (Rom 14,4); “Why
do you judge your brother?†Su; de; tiv krivnei" to;n ajdelfovn sou; (Rom
14,10). These verses reveal a diatribal tone not only in their quality of
direct address, but also in their phrasing as pointed questions; indeed
such confrontational questions characterize the diatribal style (25).
Lastly, we should note the tone of the foregoing questions as well
as the tone of Romans 14 taken as a whole. Paul endeavors in his
argument to criticize on principle such displays of presumptuous and
arrogant behavior in the community, just as he endeavors to criticize
hypocritical behavior in Romans 2,1-29. As well as functioning,
therefore, as an instructive tool, the diatribal style serves as an
argumentative aid for checking arrogance and presumption (26). Such
an admonishing tone is present in Romans 14 and further strengthens
the instructive function of this chapter by illustrating the inherent
presumption of inappropriate judgment against the brother. That Paul
(25) See A. MALHERBE, Moral Exhortation. A Graeco-Roman Sourcebook
(Philadelphia 1986) 219.
(26) J.D.G. DUNN, “The Formal and Theological Coherence of Romansâ€,
Romans Debate, 245-250, here 249.