Commentary on Romans, Treatise · Chapter 14 · Dialogue 7
DIAL. VII.
Verse 17. For the kingdom of God is not meates & drinks, but righteousnesse, peace, and ioy in the holy Ghost.
Tim.
VVHat containes this Text?
Silas.
A new argument to disswade the strong from striuing about the vse of meats, and such things to the offence of the weake. The argument is more forcible then any of the former. It is this, the kingdome of Heauen stands not in these indifferent things, therefore wee may not with the scandall and destruction of our Brethren contend about them. In which reason, the Apostle seemeth somewhat closely to insinuate vntounto the rebuke of the: strong, as if they had beene too eager and earnest in these externall matters, placing piety, and pleasing of God in them, as if all our good and happinesse had depended on them; not so (saith Paul,) the kingdom consisteth in more waightie things, as righteousnes, peace, and ioy in the Spirit; and not in such outward indiffrent matters, as meates and dayes, and the like, which in no whit appertaine to Gods worship and mans saluation. The parts of this 17. verse bee two; the one affirmatiue, the other negatiue. In this latter, it is denied, that the kingdome of God is meate and drinke; in the other, it is affirmed, that it is in righteousnesse, peace, and ioy. The holy Ghost (who as an efficient cause) distinguisheth worldly righteousnesse, peace and ioy, from that which is both Religious and Christian, comming not of the Flesh, but from the Spirit, being in spirituall, not carnall things; and therefore, the fit and meete matter of the Kingdome of GOD, which consisteth not of this world.
Tim.
Interprete the words, what signifies the [Kingdome of God?]
Silas.
Amongst sundrie acceptions, there bee two especially, whereof I now make vse. First, the estate of grace, whereby Christraigneth in our hearts by his Spirite: this is called [Kingdome,] because it is the enterance into, and the way vntounto the Kingdome aboue. Secondly, Kingdome signifieth the estate of glorie and blisse in heauen, where because God shall fully reigne in his Saints, and immediately; not as heere vnperfect and by meanes of the word: therefore it is tearmed also, and more cheefly the Kingdom of God. I see nothing against it, why the Text may not bee expounded in both these sences, without wrong to phrase, or circumstance, or scope. For following the first sence, putting kingdome for that grace whereby we are reconciled to God, or able to please him, then the meaning is; that since there is no necessity of meates to this purpose, as to bring vsus to Gods fauour, and make vsus acceptable to him, 1 Cor. 8, 8. (which teacheth, that meates nor drinkes make vsus neither more nor lesse acceptable vntounto God;) therefore there ought to be no difference about them, to the scandall one of another (especially if wee embrace the latter sence) our saluation is neither hindred nor furthred by meates and drinkes: therefore a folly it is to contend about these things which shall not bee necessarie in the kingdome of heauen, as one saith; nor of any vse in our celestial conuersation, (as Origen writeth) nor the things that must bring vsus to heauen, as Chrysostom speaks, nor the cause of our reigning there. There is a Synecdoche in these tearmes of meates and drinkes, for they are put for all other things of a middle Nature; whatsoeuer they be, they do no whit at al belong to Gods worship now, or mans felicity heereafter, being simply considered in themselues.
Tim.
What are the Doctrines to bee learned out of the first part of this verse thus opened?
Silas.
Euen this, that things that be indifferent, are of no necessity vntounto the seruice of God, or sauing of our soules. The proofes heereof, first from authority of Scripture, Mat. 15, 11. 1 Cor. 8, 8. Heb. 13, 9. 1 Tim. 4, 4. 8. According to these Scriptures, our English Church hath iudged these meates, &c. to be vnnecessary in their own Nature, either to holinesse or happinesse, the cleare light of the word hauing taught vsus: as the words of the statute be, An. 3. of Edw. 6. that one day, or one kinde of meate of it selfe, is not more holy, pure, or cleane then another; and that no meates at any time, can defile any Christian, and that all meates are lawful, so they be not vsed in disobedience and vice, but be receiued with sobrietie and thankesgiuing to God, and sanctified by the word and prayer: therefore, howsoeuer with a ciuill abstinence at certaine seasons is well commanded, and ought accordingly to be practised: yet no Religion is to be placed in such abstinence from meats: whereof this reason may bee rendred, that by meates neither is the heart strengthened in grace, or polluted with sinne, made neyther wiser nor better, holier or happier.
Tim.
How then doth the Apostle reck on vppe gluttonie and1 Cor. 6, 9. drunkennesse amongest the sinnes which barre vsus from GodsGal. 5, 21. kingdome? and on the other side, seeing murther is a Capitall sinne, and men may commit it vponupon themselues by Fasting and Abstinence, how may it then be truly saide, that the kingdome of God is not meates and drinkes?
Silas.
It is true, that by excesse in meates and drinkes, the Kingdome may be lost, 1 Cor. 6. 10. Galat. 5, 21. but meates and drinkes themselues taken, or not taken, doe not exclude vsfrom in the kingdom, nor giuegive vsus enterest vntounto it. Howsoeuer the abuse, by the defect, not vsing thē at al, or in the excesse, vsing them intemperatly, may and doth deserue damnation, and will certainly draw it vponupon the heads of all such which repent not of their immoderatenesse about these externall thinges, yet a man doth not please God, or shalbe saued, because he eateth Fish rather then Flesh, and drinketh Beere, and not Ale.
Tim.
Shew vsus what vse Christians are to make of this doctrine.
Silas.
It serues for confutation of the Manichees, affirmingVse. some meates in their owne nature to bee euill, as Flesh, Egges, Milke, and Wine, saying of Wine, that it is the gall of the Prince of darknesse; dishonouring the Creator, and … this Text, which plainely faith The Kingdom of God is not meates. Also, the … their …. fellowes, who defend, that it were as good to eate and deuoure a soule, as to eate things that had bloud and life.
These put sinne and damnation in meats euen directly: and so do the Papistes indirectly, and by necessarie consecution. For whilst they doe auouch in worde and writing, that howsoeuer no creature is impure by creation, but so confesse all to bee good which God hath made: yet that to eate flesh or white meates at certaine time, as Lent, Ember Weekes, Fasting daies, &c. is a matter against Religion displeasing to God, yea a mortal (that is, in their construction) a heynous sinne, and no lesse fault then to kill a man: holding them for best christians, which doe put most Religion in abstinence from meates, which they reckon as a thing not acceptable alone, but meritorious and satisfactory to Gods Iustice, both for themselues and others; & all vponupon this pretence to tame the flesh, which in the meane time they pamper with manifold delicacies, great prouokers of lust. What is this else, but to fulfill the prophesie of the Apostle, 1. Tim. 4, 2. in hypocrisie and coloured wordes to make all meates vncleane at some time, and to some men at all times, as if meates were the Kingdome of God, or if the kingdome were to be won or lost by meates or drinkes?
Tim.
What other Lesson from these words?
Silas.
That meates and whatsoeuer other indifferent things are more slight, then that Christians ought to contend about them: for seeing they are no parts, either of Law or Gospell, what reason hauehave Christians to dissent for them? Indeed for such things that please or displease God, as precepts of the Law, promises of the gospell, faith, and obedience, towards God, we are strongly to stand, and earnestly to contend for such things, Iude 3. whereof we hauehave Paul for example, Galat. 2, 11. What may wee iudge then of those Papistes and Protestants, which chafe and fret for neglect of a humane Ceremony, being colde and carelesse about Christian duties, tything Mint, and Annice, and neglecting greater things of the Law, stumbling at strawes, and leaping ouer blockes? Also what folly to make such adoo about titles, precedencie, and such other toyes, as if Heauen did lye vponupon it. This very distinction of things vnnecessary to the kingdome, and necessary, well and duely considered, would cut off diuision and debate among brethren; who howsoeuer there may be some reason for differences, about the inheritance and their fathers goods, yet for chips and feathers to contend, may argue lacke of wit or good will or of both.