Romans 14:2

This difference may be explained by the different quality and aspect of the controversies. In Galatia the question was of primary principle; at Rome and Corinth it was, on the whole, of secondary practice. How to be justified before Godwas the Galatian problem. How the justified should livewas, at least in the main, the problem at Rome and Corinth. For there is no proof that the "weak brethren" differed from the "strong" on the great principle of Justification by Faith. Their error was that the path of duty, laid before the justified, included a moral obligation on the obedient children of God to abstain from certain sorts of food and to keep the Mosaic feasts. Allthe Roman Christians agreed that the justified must notlie nor steal; but the "weak brethren" held that, in the same way, they must nottaste "unclean" food, nor neglect the festivals. The error in Galatia affected the very principle of the work and grace of Christ; the error at Rome did not, at all necessarily, do so. St Paul was thus perfectly consistent in writing Galatians 1:6-9, and Romans 14:1-10.

believeth that he may eat Lit. believeth to eat; i.e. has faith which leads him tosee that sorts of food are no longer a matter of religious scruple.

who is weak i.e. in his faith. See on Romans 14:1.

eateth herbs This is given as an extreme case. Anxious scrupulosity would adopt vegetarianism as the simplest solution of the questions raised by the Mosaic precepts, complicated by the possible "defilement" of animal-food by idol-sacrifices.