may be noticed that in the sequel we hear of a brother's being
'grieved' first, and then of his being 'overthrown.' In any case,
there is no mistake about the principle laid down and repeated in
verse 21. It is a hard saying for some of us. Is my liberty to be
restricted by the narrow scruples of 'strait-laced' Christians? Yes.
Does not that make them masters, and attach too much importance to
their narrowness? No. It recognises Christ as Master, and all His
servants as brethren. If the scrupulous ones go so far as to say to
the more liberal, 'You cannot be Christians if you do not do as we
do' then the limits of concession have been reached, and we are to do
as Paul did, when he flatly refused to yield one hair's-breadth to
the Judaisers. If a man says, You must adopt this, that, or the other
limitation in conduct, or else you shall be unchurched, the only
answer is, I will not. We are to be flexible as long as possible, and
let weak brethren's scruples restrain our action. But if they insist
on things indifferent as essential, a yet higher duty than that of
regard to their weak consciences comes in, and faithfulness to Christ
limits concession to His servants.

But, short of that extreme case, Paul lays down the law of curbing
liberty in deference to 'narrowness.' In verse 14 he states with
equal breadth the extreme principle of the liberal party, that
nothing is unclean of itself. He has learned that 'in the Lord
Jesus.' Before he was 'in Him,' he had been entangled in cobwebs of
legal cleanness and uncleanness; but now he is free. But he adds an
exception, which must be kept in mind by the liberal-minded
section--namely, that a clean thing is unclean to a man who thinks it
is. Of course, these principles do not affect the eternal
distinctions of right and wrong. Paul is not playing fast and loose
with the solemn, divine law which makes sin and righteousness
independent of men's notions. He is speaking of things
indifferent--ceremonial observances and the like; and the modern
analogies of these are conventional pieces of conduct, in regard to
amusements and the like, which, in themselves, a Christian man can do
or abstain from without sin.

Verse 15 is difficult to understand, if the 'for' at the beginning is
taken strictly. Some commentators would read instead of it a simple
'but' which smooths the flow of thought. But possibly the verse
assigns a reason for the law in verse 13, rather than for the
statements in