any thing that is good Beza 5. To iustifie is taken three wayes first to make one actually and verily iust so if any man could perfectly keepe the lawe he should thereby get an habituall and inherent iustice secondly it signifieth to be counted and declared iust as wisedome is said to be iustified of her children and thirdly it signifieth to forgiue discharge and acquite sinnes and so is it taken here that no man is iustified by the workes of the lawe that is thereby findeth forgiuenesse of his sinnes and so is taken for iust before God but this iustification is by faith in Christ by whome we are acquited of our sinnes and cloathed with his righteousnesse Martyr 6. The Apostle addeth in his sight to shewe a difference betweene iustification and righteousnesse before men which may be attained vnto by workes and the perfect righteousnesse which God requireth sometime this phrase in Gods sight is vsed to shewe a difference betweene that righteousnesse which is but in shewe and hypocrisie and that which it in truth as in this sense Zacharie and Elizabeth are said to haue beene iust before God Luk. 1.6 sometime it distinguisheth betweene the righteousnesse euen of good men and the righteousnesse before God as the Apostle graunteth that Abraham had wherein to glorie before men in respect of his workes but not before God Rom. 4.1 and so the Apostle taketh it here It is Christ onely that maketh vs holy and vnblameable in the sight of God Coloss. 1.22 Beza And further these reasons may be yeelded hereof why none can be iustified by works in Gods sight though before men they may 1. in respect of the Maiestie of God and most perfect puritie of his nature before whom the verie Angels doe couer their faces and feete Isay 6. and the heauens are not cleane in his eyes how much more is man abhominable Iob. 15.15 2. God looketh not vnto the outward shew but to the inward disposition of the heart which is perfect in none 3. the lawe of God is spirituall and requireth exact obedience of Gods commandements so that he which offendeth in one is guilty of all Iam. 2.10 this perfection none can attaine vnto Pareus Quest. 24. How the Apostle here denieth iustification by workes seeing he said before c. 2. v. 13. that the doers of the Lawe are iustified 1. The ordinar gloss giueth this solution secundum ceremonialia intellige vnderstand this according to the ceremonials he thinketh that the Apostle speaketh here of the ceremoniall workes of the lawe whereby none are iustified but in the other place of the morall workes which doe instifie But the Apostle here euen excludeth morall workes for of the morall lawe the words following are specially vnderstood by the lawe commeth the knowledge of sinne 2. Caietan thinketh that the Apostle speaketh here of iustification before God there of the iustice of workes before men but the verie words of the text doe ouerthrowe this interpretation for euen in that place the Apostle speaketh of those which are righteous before God which are not the hearers but the doers of the lawe 3. Ambrose to this purpose lex temporalem habet iustitiam fides aeternam the law may giue a temporall kind of iustice but faith an euerlasting be thinketh that men are said here not to be iustified by workes that is without faith but yet a temporall kind of iustice they might haue by the lawe without faith But the Apostle in both places as hath beene said speaketh of true iustice and righteousnesse before God 4. The moderne Papists tell vs here of two iustifications the first which is by faith onely without workes the second which is by workes which proceede of faith and grace of the first speaketh the Apostle here as they thinke and of the other in the former place Rom. 2.13 Perer. disput 8. to the same purpose Tolet that the Apostle speaketh here of workes going before faith which doe not iustifie there of workes which followe faith the other doe iustifie in encreasing iustification which was begunne before by faith annot 13. Contra. 1. This is but a Popish fiction of the first and second iustification the Apostle is saying Rom. 8.30 whom he iustified he glorified maketh but one iustification after the which followeth glorification 2. euen the Apostle excludeth here the workes of the regenerate which may appeare by these reasons 1. because there neede no question to be made of the workes of carnall men which are euill because they are without faith there can be no shewe at all that such workes should iustifie 2. the workes of Abraham were the workes of grace which the Apostle excludeth from iustification c. 4.2 3. This is the reason why workes cannot iustifie that all occcasion of reioycing may be taken away from men and euerie mouth may be stopped but now if men might be iustified by their works after they are called and haue faith they might glorie in such works by the which they say they doe merit and which in their opinion proceede in part from mans owne free will 5. Some thinke that the Apostle Rom. 2.13 speaketh ex hypothesi by way of supposition that the doers of the lawe shall be iustified that is if any could keepe and performe the lawe they should thereby be iustified But here he simply denieth iustification to workes because no man is able to keepe the lawe Pareus This is a good distinction and in other places it may well be receiued where the Scriptures seeme to attribute much vnto the law as he that doth these things shall liue thereby But here it is not so fit for in that place Rom. 2.13 the Apostle encreateth not of the causes of iustification but onely sheweth who they are which shall be iustified not hearers and professors but doers and followers 6. Peter Martyr saith that when iustification seemeth to be ascribed vnto workes it must be vnderstood in respect of faith and grace wherewith they are ioyned as a man is said to be a reasonable creature yet in respect of his soule onely though he consist both of soule and bodie yet it is faith properly that iustifieth and not workes which followe faith But the Apostle doth not at all in that place or any other ascribe iustification before God vnto workes 7. Wherefore the best solution is this that here S. Paul disputeth indeede of the proper and true causes of iustification which he simply denieth vnto workes and giueth vnto faith but there he sheweth who and vpon what condition men are iustified and who are not iustified namely such as hauing a liuely faith doe bring sorth the fruits thereof and doe their endeauour to keepe the lawe are iustified as the Apostle in the same sense had said before c. 2.6 that God will reward euerie man according to his workes And in the like sense Christ shall say vnto the righteous in the day of iudgement Matth. 25.34 Come ye blessed of my father inherite the kingdome
euill but all good workes are of grace for God worketh in vs both the will and the deed Phil. 2.13 and that euen good workes which are of grace are excluded the Apostle sheweth elsewhere Ephes. 2.8 By grace are ye saued c. not of workes least any man should boast of himselfe for ye are his workemanship created in Christ Iesus vnto good workes c. 2. The Apostle indeed speaketh of the election of grace but yet the rule is generall that grace and workes in the matters of saluation cannot be matched together for he prooueth election to be of grace and not of workes by his generall axiome or proposition because that which is of grace cannot be of workes and if election be of grace and not of workes then euerlasting life also which dependeth of our election must of necessitie be of grace also Argum. 4. That which is of workes is by debt as the Apostle saith Rom. 4.4 To him that worketh the wages is not counted by fauour but by debt But God is endebted to no man therefore life eternall is not of workes because it is not by debt Answer Pererius here answereth by indistinction that there is a lawfull kind of meriting de condigno of worthines the one is perfect and absolute which presupposeth no gift of grace whereof it dependeth such were the workes of Christ which were absolutely meritorious ex rigore iustitiae euen according to the strict rule of iustice by the reason of the excellencie of his diuine nature beeing vnited in one person to his humanitie there is another kind of merit ex suppositione diuinae gratiae vpon the presupposall of diuine grace so the workes of men proceeding of grace and their free will working together are merita apud Deâ—â—â— merites with God like as naturall things though they haue that vertue and actiuitie from God are the true causes of their effects Pere disput 10. numer 53. Contra. 1. This answer ouerthroweth it selfe for if mens good workes proceed of the grace and gift of God then cannot God be any waies endebted for his owne as Dauid saith 1. Chron. 29.14 All things come of thee and of thine owne hand haue we giuen thee and the Apostle saith Rom. 11.35 Who hath giuen vnto him first and he shall be recompenced if then we might challenge any thing at Gods hands as a debt by way of recompence we must first giue vnto him 2. There is not the like reason of naturall and supernaturall things the naturall causes haue their vertue at once from God and then they afterward worke according vnto that nature and propertie wherewith they were once endued but in supernaturall the grace of God is necessarie ad omnes actus to euery act as the horse when he goeth of his owne accord is the naturall cause of his going but the order that directeth him is the cause of his going in the way and of his going to such a place so grace is the cause of our well doings we concurre indeed as naturall causes of the action but the goodnes of the action is onely from God 3. God then is not endebted vnto man for the merite of his worke neither in iustice in respect of vs is he bound to recompence vs but yet he is another way endebted in respect of his promise and so it is iust with him in regard of his word and promise to performe that which he hath promised which promise he made onely of his free grace and this point is touched also by Pererius praesertius vero adiuncta Dei promissione de remunerandis c. especially the promise of God being adioyned for the rewarding of the good workes of the righteous c. in regard of this promise we graunt which is meerely of grace not for the merite of the worke the Lord worketh himselfe a voluntarie debter of eternall life Argum. 5. The Apostle saith Rom. 8.18 That the afflictions of this present life are not worthie of the glorie which shall be shewed c. here he euidently sheweth that our workes are not meritorious or worthy of eternall life Answer Pererius here also thus distinguisheth that workes may three wayes be considered in respect of the naturall cause as they proceed from mans freewill in respect of the matter wherein they are expressed and the time of continuance which are but temporall and for a time and thirdly as they are wrought in vs by the grace of God in the two first respects they haue no cause of merit but in the third conuenientem habent proportionem equalitatis dignitatis c. they haue a fit proportion of equalitie and worthines with the reward of eternall life thus Pere disput 11. Contra. 1. The verie scope of the place taketh away this distinction for the Apostle v. 17. saith If we suffer with Christ c. he speaketh of such sufferings and afflictions as are endured for Christ which are the workes of grace for a man of himselfe without grace cannot suffer for Christ therefore euen good workes as they proceed in vs of grace are not meritorious or worthy of eternall life 2. Good workes are so farre from beeing meritorious causes of eternall life that they are not alwaies and in all causa sine qua non the cause without the which we cannot attaine vnto life as in infants and in them which are of yeares though without good workes they cannot be saued yet good workes are rather a beginning of eternall life then the cause thereof 3. To conclude this point therefore in a merit there must fowre things concurre 1. it must be a free seruice which we otherwise are not bound vnto 2. it must be of our owne 3. it must be perfect 4. it must be proportionable to the reward But our workes faile in all these 1. we can performe nothing vnto God but that we are alreadie bound to doe 2. neither haue we any good thing of our owne which we haue not receiued 3. and our best workes are imperfect 4. and betweene our temporall seruice and an euerlasting reward there is no proportion therefore we cannot merite See more hereof Synops. Centur. 4. er 79. 6. Morall obseruations Observ. 1. Of perseuerance v. 4. So we also walke in newnes of life Origen hence well collecteth that this newnes of life semel facta non sufficiat once done sufficeth not ipsa novitas innovanda est this newnes must still be renewed from day to day as the Apostle saith 2. Cor. 4.16 our inward man is renewed daily for as that which waxeth old is euery day oulder and oulder so that which is new must continually be renewed otherwise it ceaseth to be new so that we must walke on still perseuere and encrease in this newnes of life Observ. 2. Of the continuall strife with sinne v. 13. Neither giue your members weapons The Apostle vsing this phrase of weapons sheweth that there is a warre in vs some fight for sinne and make their members weapons
sancti because they are the sighes of the spirit 2. August epist. 121. c. 15. saith they cannot be expressed because we desire that we know not so also Anselme and the ordinarie gloss that cannot be expressed which we know not 3. Lyranus referreth is to the vnspeakeable desire of the Angels concerning mans saluation 4. some giue this sense they are vnspeakeable in respect of the obiect because they are de re inenarrabili of a thing not to be vttered that is eternall life Gorrhan 5. Pererius vnderstandeth it of the vnspeakable worke of the spirit in the heart of man which is such as cannot be vttered 6. Tolet thus annot 27. because the spirit after an vnspeakeable manner praieth for vs with sighes when we seeme to aske the contrarie as when Ieremie and Iob complained and were impotent in their praiers and in their heate and passion seemed to aske one thing yet the inward intention meaning sighing and groning of the heart obtained an other 7. But we neede not goe farre for the meaning of these words they haue relation to the greatnes of the troubles and afflictions of the Saints which are such as cannot be vttered and expressed by words but onely by inward sighes and grones facit gemere plus quà m dici possit c. the spirit causeth to sigh and grone more then can be expressed gloss ordinarie when as the tongue verbum proferre nequit cannot bring forth a word but the heart sigheth within Pareus Quest. 42. Of these words v. 27. He that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the meaning of the spirit c. 1. Chrysostome vnderstandeth it as before de corde spirituali of the spirituall heart endued with the gift of praier not of the holy Ghost for then the Apostle would haue said he that knoweth the spirit not he which searcheth the heart But if the Apostle should speak here of spirituall man that hauing the gift of prayer prayeth for the congregation his sighs are not such as cannot be expressed for he vttereth them by prayer 2. the Apostle maketh mention of the heart because the spirit immediatly maketh not request but by the moouing and stirring of the heart 2. Origens exposition also is somewhat strange who interpreteth these words he maketh request according to God of the diuine nature that the spirit maketh request not according to the flesh but according to God whereas Christ died not according to God that is as he was God but according to the flesh and he maketh an other difference betweene the interpellation of the spirit and our redemption by Christ for Christ died for the vngodly as Saint Paul saith but the spirit maketh request onely for the Saints These are dangerous and violent expositours according to God here signifieth nothing else but according to the will of God as Haymo saith ea facit nos postulare quae Deo placent the spirit maketh vs to aske those things which are pleasing vnto God 3. Here then are three reasons couched together to assure vs of the efficacie and fruite of our prayers 1. from the nature and propertie of God who although the inward sighes of the heart cannot be expressed by vs nor made knowne vnto man yet God knoweth the meaning of the spirit which mooueth vs to sigh and make inward requests from the manner and matter of our praiers that are according to the will of God as the spirit teacheth and directeth vs 3. from the obiect of our prayers which are made for the Saints for such as are sanctified by the spirit of God and so acceptable vnto him in Christ. Quest. 43. Of the nature condition and propertie of a true and liuely prayer out of v. 27. In this one verse are expressed 1. the efficient cause of prayer which is the spirit of God which is said to make request that is to stirre vs vp vnto prayer 2. the obiect of our praiers to whom they must be directed onely to God the searcher of the heart 3. The forme of our prayer which must be made according to the will of God 4. The instrument and organe of the spirit is the inward meaning sighing and sobbing of the heart and inward man although there be no vow at all expressed 5. The helping and vnderworking causes are the Saints so then impious and prophane persons cannot truly pray for they are not guided by the spirit of grace who is the author of praier in vs and the moouer of vs to euerie good worke Gryneus Quest. 44. How all things make together for the best to those that loue God 1. Caietanus because the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worketh together is in the singular number he referreth it vnto God and putteth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all in the accusatiue not in the nominatiue case that it is God which worketh all things for the best vnto his seruants But the vsuall reading is better that all things worke together c. for God is not so fitly said to worke together with his creatures 2. And they are said to worke together 1. either among themselues as Origen saith collaborant they labour together 2. or in respect of the Saints themselues which aske these things of God they worke together with them Haymo 3. or rather they doe concurre or worke together cum causa piorum salutem operante with the cause which worketh their saluation namely God Pareus and before him Haymo cooperatur Deus God worketh together in fulfilling all things belonging to their saluation 4. but Pererius sense we refuse they are said to worke together quia concurrere debet bonus vsus liberi arbitrij because the good vse of our freewill must concurre c. for what is mans freewill without the spirit of grace it is able to doe no good thing of it selfe as the Apostle said before v. 26. that the spirit helpeth our infirmities for we know not what to pray as we ought 3. All things 1. which is either to be taken so generally as Origen comprehendeth euen the spirit also that helpeth our infirmities for the Apostle would not so shuffle together the Creator and the creature 2. neither yet is Augustines exposition so fit that extendeth it â—â—o the sins of the Saints which also profit vnto their saluation quia inde humiliores rediunt doctores because after their repentance and rising againe they returne more humble and better instructed lib. de corr grat c. 9. so also Lyran. who addeth further that the remembrance of their former sins maketh for their glorie as the scarre of the soldiers wound setteth with his valure But this is not agreeable to the Apostles mind who speaketh not here of the sinnes but of the sufferings of the Saints 3. As these make the Apostles words too general so Haymo doth too much restraine them to the prayers of the Saints that if they chaunce to aske vnaduisedly yet God turneth it to their good either in not graunting that they aske or
and iustice are contrarie therefore they are not both naturally in God 4. Naturall properties are not vnequally in God but his iustice and mercie are vnequall for his mercie exceedeth his iustice 5. Mercie is nothing els but a griefe conceived vpon an others miserie but there is no such thing in God Contra. Before these arguments be answeared these considerations must be premised 1. that mercie is otherwise in God then in man in man indeede it is a griefe or compassion conceiued vpon an others miserie but in God it is onely a propension and readinesse of the diuine will to helpe those which are in miserie 2. Mercie in God either signifieth the inclination power facultie and propertie to shewe mercie and this is naturall in God or the act and exercising of that propertie toward the creature and this is so naturall in God as yet it is directed by his will 3. a thing is said to be naturall two wayes either that which onely proceedeth from the instinct of nature as the fire naturally burneth or that whereunto nature inclineth yet not without direction of the will as thus a man is said to speake to vnderstand naturally So God is both wayes naturally mercifull in himselfe the first way toward his creatures the second now to the arguments we answear 1. The Apostle speaketh not of the naturall propertie but of the act of mercie which is directed by the will of God 2. all the naturall properties which are in God he alwaies vseth not nor towards all as his iustice power long animitie mercie they are alwaies in God but he exerciseth them as it pleaseth him 3. iustice and mercie are not contrarie but crueltie is opposed to mercie neither is there any contrarietie in God but in the effects in diuerse subiects as the Sunne with the same heat mollifieth the waxe and hardeneth the clay 4. neither are these properties vnequall in God but the effects and acts onely are vnequall as it pleaseth God to dispose in his freewill 5. humane mercie is such as is described but the diuine mercie is of an other nature as hath beene shewed now the contrarie arguments that mercie is a naturall propertie in God are these 1. The Scripture describeth God by his mercie Exod. 34. he is called the father of mercie rich in mercie God is described by his naturall properties 2. all vertues in God are essentiall and naturall but mercie is one of Gods vertues 3. iustice is naturall in God but mercie is a part of Gods vniuersall iustice 4. mercie and compassion is naturall in men they which haue it not are called inhumane they are beasts rather then men therefore much more is it naturall in God for euery good thing in the creature proceedeth from the fountaine of goodnes in the Creator See more hereof in Pareus dub 12. Controv. 13. Whether the mercie of God in the forgiuenesse of sinne be an effect of Gods free and absolute will onely and be not grounded vpon Christ against the heresie of Socinus and Ostorodius v. 18. He hath mercie on whom he will Blasphemous Socinus and Ostorodius a Samosatenian heretike directly impugning the eternall dietie of Christ by occasion of these words doe affirme that God of his free mercie without any satisfaction purchased by Christs death forgiueth sinnes vnto the penitent Socinus first maketh these and such like obiections 1. The Apostle here saith he hath mercie on whom he will therefore of his owne will be remitteth sinnes without Christ. 2. He doth forgiue sinnes for his owne sake Isai. 43.25 therefore not for Christ. 3. If God should forgiue sinnes for Christs satisfaction then both mercie and iustice should be seene at once in the worke of our saluation by Christ. 4. God may remit sinnes without satisfaction for he may depart from his right and remit of his owne as it pleaseth him 5. God requireth onely repentance and innocencie of life in them whose sinnes are pardoned and he forgiueth onely for that which he requireth 6. Many examples are extant in the old Testament of sinnes pardoned and mercie shewed without Christ as in Abel Henoch and others that pleased God by faith beleeuing onely that God is that he is a rewarder of the righteous Heb. 11.6 therefore without Christ. 7. God promiseth Ierem. 31. to be mercifull vnto their iniquites and to remember them no more but where he requireth satisfaction for sinne he remembreth it and is not mercifull vnto it 8. We are commanded one to forgiue an other as God in Christ forgaue vs but we must forgiue without any satisfaction Ergo so God forgaue vs. 9. The remission of the debt excludeth all payment and satisfaction for it to this purpose Socinus lib. de Servator The other impious heretike thus also obiecteth 1. Gods loue is set forth to vs in Scripture before Christ died for vs Ioh. 3.16 Ephe. 1.4 but Christs satisfaction sheweth that God was offended with vs before 2. God did remit our sinnes freely by grace Rom. 3.24 but grace and satisfaction are contrarie 3. This doctrine of satisfaction by Christs death maketh God cruell that would not receiue mankind vnto his fauour but by the most cruell death of his Sonne 4. It maketh God a Tyrant in punishing the innocent for offenders 5. The Sonne should be more mercifull then his Father for he forgiueth without satisfaction so doth not his Father 6. If Christ had truely satisfied for vs he should haue suffered eternall death and so neuer haue risen againe which had beene impossible these and other such obiections this wicked Ostorodius hath in a booke written in the Germane tongue against Tradelius cited by Pareus dub 13. Contra. Before we come to answear these obiections the state of the question must first be opened 1. the question here is not of the power propertie and facultie of shewing mercie which is naturall in God and absolute in him without any condition 2. but of the act and exercising of this propertie which is either generall toward all creatures and toward all men both good and bad vpon whom he suffereth the sunne to shine and the raine to fall Matth. 5.45 or speciall toward the elect in giuing them his grace and forgiuing their sinnes whereof the Apostle speaketh Tit. 3.4 When the bountifulnes and loue of God our Sauiour toward men appeared c. according to his mercie be saued vs. 3. this speciall act of Gods mercie must be considered two wayes according to the causes foregoing which are none other but onely the good pleasure of God no merit of any creature no not of Christ himselfe was the cause of his mercie toward the elect but as the Apostle saith he hath mercie on whom he will but there are certaine conditions which doe accompanie or followe this free act of Gods loue and mercie for the effecting of the worke thereof in the sanctification and glorification of the elect which are these three the ransome made by Christ faith in the
to either of them but of that which by them redounded to many and this similitude and correspondencie is ex contrarijs by the contrarie as Origen well obserueth and that in these three respects what they are in themselues considered what to their posteritie and wherein 1. They were both authors and beginners Adam was the beginning of mankind quoad esse naturae in respect of the naturall generation Christ is the beginning quoad esse gratiae in respect of the spirituall regeneration by grace Lyran. 2. as Adams sinne did not hurt himselfe onely but his posteritie so the grace of Christ is communicated to all his spirituall generation 3. as death and sinne came in by Adam so life and righteousnes by Iesus Christ as the Apostle followeth this comparison in the rest of this chapter and â—â— large 1. Cor. 2.15 Here follow certaine questions touching this comparison made by the Apostle betweene Adam and Christ. 31. Quest. Of the names and tearmes which the Apostle vseth in this comparison 1. In the transgression and fall of Adam the Apostle vseth diuers words and tearmes which either expresse the cause of Adams fall the ruine and fall it selfe and the fruits for iâ— these three are Adam and Christ compared together 1. the cause is set forth in generall tearmes as it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sinne v. 12. or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 transgression v. 14. or more speciall as it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 disobedience v. 19. 2. the fall of man is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lapsus the fall or ruine of man v. 15. 3. the effect are either the guiltines of sinne called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 16 or the punishment which is either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 death v. 12. or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 condemnation euerlasting death v. 16. 2. In the iustification purchased by Christ are likewise expressed the causes the worke it selfe and the effects which follow 1. the causes the efficient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the grace of God v. 15. called also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the abundance or redounding of grace v. 17. the formall cause is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the obedience of Christ v. 19. 2. the worke of our iustification is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the gift v. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the gift by grace v. 15. and the gift of righteousnes v. 17. 3. then the fruit and effect thereof is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the iustification of life or vnto life v. 18. 3. But yet if we will more exactly distinguish these words this difference may be made betweene them these three words which the Apostle vseth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 15 16. the first signifying grace the other two beeing translated the gift doe thus differ the first sheweth the grace and fauour from the which the benefit proceedeth the second is the coâ—â—lation of the benefit the third betokeneth the benefit it self which is conferred as if a Prince should giue a great treasure to redeeme one out of captiuitie this fauour of the Prince is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the grace the free giuing of it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the donation the others enioying of it and receiuing of this libertie is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the benefit or gift Beza 4. So these other 3. words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iustifying iustification iustice doe thus differ the first signifieth the merit of Christs iustice whereby we are iustified the second the action it selfe of iustification whereby Christs iustice is communicated to vs the third the iustice it selfe which is imputed and communicated vnto vs Tolet. annotat 24. Quest. 33. Of the comparison betweene Adam and Christ in generall 1. Origen well obserueth that this comparison is per genus similis per speciem contraria it is alike in the generall resemblance but contrarie in the particular in two things there is a generall agreement and resemblance 1. that there is one that giueth beginning and is the author vnto the rest 2. in plures aliquid diffundtur on both sides as the beginning is from one so there is somewhat conueyed vnto many 2. The specificall difference consisteth in the contrarietie and disparitie and the excellencie the disparitie is that one was the author of sinne vnto condemnation the other of righteousnesse vnto life the excellencie is in that the gift is not so as the offence but much more powerfull and abundant of both these the disparitie and excellencie more followeth to be added in the two next questions So then here are three things to be considered in this comparison as Photius obserueth cited by Oecumenius similitudo contrarietas excellentia the similitude or likenes the contratietie and disparitie and the excellencie 3. Now whereas the Apostle from this verse vnto the 19. v. seemeth to vse diuerse iterations of the same thing we shall finde by a dilligent viewe and examination of the Apostles sentences that he doth not repeate the same things as Pellicane thinketh eadem repetit propter infirmas conscientias c. he repeateth the same things because of weake consciences which often thinke that sinne is more powerfull then grace c. But Oecumenius saith better nequaquam iterum atque iterum eadem repetit Apostolus c. the Apostle doth not againe and againe repeat the same things as one would thinke but diligentissime copulat he doth most dilligently couple and ioyne the principall heads together Quest. 34. Of the disparitie and vnlikenesse betweene Adam and Christ in this comparison The difference and disparitie betweene them is in these sixe seuerall points 1. In the persons compared Adam is considered as a meere man v. 12. but Christ was both God and man he is called Iesus Christ our Lord v. 21. 2. They differ in that which is conferred Adam propagateth to his posteritie sinne and death v. 12. Christ communicateth to his righteousnesse and life v. 15.16 3. The meanes are farre different Adams disobedience brought in sinne Christs obedience procureth life v. 18.19 4. The persons vpon whom these things are conferred differ for from Adam death and sinne are deriued vpon all in generall v. 12.18 but righteousnesse is communicated onely to those which receiue the abundance of grace by faith v. 17. 5. The manner how these things are conueyed are diuerse Adams sinne is transmitted by naturall propagation but life and righteousnesse by Christ are communicated by grace v. 15. the gift is by grace 6. The sequele and endes are contrary the offence is vnto condemnation v. 16. but iustification by Christ is vnto life eternall v. 18. Quest. 35. Of the excellencie and superioritie which the benefit by grace in Christ hath beyond our fall and losse in Adam 1. The first excellencie is generally in the power and efficacie of the worker for it was necessarie that he that should ouercom sinne and death should be superiour to both for if he had beene of equall power he could not haue dissolued
omnium operum prouisionem before the foresight of any workes Bellar. lib. 2. de grat c. 10. and Pererius is of the same iudgement disput 22.23 vpon this chapter but our Rhemists are more grosse in this point they say that Christ hath not appointed men by his absolute election c. without any condition or respect of their workes Hebr. c. 5. sect 7. Now this opinion that predestination is grounded vpon the foresight of faith or good workes is thus euidently confuted Argum. 1. That which is Gods worke in man is no cause in mans behalfe why he should be elected but faith and to beleeue is the worke of God Ioh. 6.29 This is the worke of God that yee beleeue c. Ephes. 2.8 By grace are ye saued through faith not of your selues it is the gift of God therefore the foresight of faith is not the cause of election 2. Argum. That which is the effect of predestination is not the cause but faith and good workes are the fruit and effect as Act. 13.48 As many as were ordained to eternall life beleeued he saith not as many as were foreseene to beleeue were ordained c. Eph. 2.4 He hath chosen vs that we should be holy it is the end and fruit of our election our holines therefore not the procuring or inducing cause 3. Argum. There is one and the same reason and manner and cause of election vnto all but some are saued without prouision or foresight of their workes as infants which die in their infancie for their good workes which are not could not be foreseene it cannot be here answered that their good workes are foreseene which they would haue done if they had liued for if one may be elected for the foresight of good workes which he might haue done by the same reason one might be condemned vpon the foresight of euill works which he might haue committed but this standeth not with the iustice of God 4. Argum. First the end is propounded then the meanes are thought of as tending to that end the meanes are no inducement to decree or set downe the end of a thing life eternall is the end the meanes and way thereunto are faith and vertuous workes these then foreseene of God could not be a motiue to decree the end 5. Augustine was sometime of opinion that although God hath not chosen the good workes of men in his prescience elegit tamem fidem in praescientia yet in his prescience he made choice of faith in exposition huius epistol But afterward Augustine retracteth this opinion lib. 1. Retractat c. 23. ingeniously confessing nondum diligenter quaefieram c. quaenam sit electio gratiae I had not diligently enquired not found out what is the election of grace which is no grace si vlla merita praecedant if any merits goe before 6. Some Popish writers haue deuised how to reconcile Augustine with the rest of the fathers and they haue found out this distinction that there are two kinds of predestination one ad gratiam to receiue grace and this they say is without any foresight of faith or works and the other is ad gratiam vnto glorie and life eternall which proceedeth from the foresight of faith and workes of this kind of predestination speake the Greeke fathers and Augustine of the other Thus Ruard Tapper Dryedon Gabriel Vasquez as they are cited and approoued by Parerius disput 24. Contra. 1. Augustine euidently speaketh of predestination to eternall life where he deliuereth his first opinion of the foresight of faith for these are his words Quid elegit Deus in eo what did God elect in him whom he did predestinate vnto life eternall 2. That is a vaine and idle distinction for predestination comprehendeth both the ende and the meanes thereunto as the Apostle saith Ephes. 1.11 in whom we are chosen when we were predestinate c. that we which first trusted in Christ should be to the praise of his glorie here both the meanes to beleeue or trust in Christ and the end euerlasting glorie are both comprehended vnder predestination 3. in this distinction there is a vaine and absurd tautologie for who would aske this question whether the foresight of grace and faith in a man were the cause that God ordained him to haue grace and faith 7. Tolet to helpe out this matter saith that the foresight of faith as a motiue vnto election and the election by grace may well stand together for here faith foreseene is not considered as a merit but as causa sine qua non a cause without the which God hath purposed not to call those which shall be saued but notwithstanding it is bene placitum the good pleasure of God not the merit of man annot 31. Contra. In this question of predestination we must distinguish betweene the decree it selfe and the execution of the decree in the execution good workes are required not as a meritorious cause of life eternall but onely as such a cause without the which life eternall cannot be â—â—ad and this we graunt but if Gods decree should arise of any such foresight it is now an inducement and motiue not a cause onely sine quae non without the which not and so Gods good pleasure should not be the first cause higher then the which the Apostle goeth not Ephes. 1.5 if the foresight of faith or good workes should induce the Lord to elect for now election should not stand vpon the will and pleasure of God but vpon the will and inclination of man Controv. 17. Against the opinion of Ambrosius Catharinus concerning predestination This Popish writers opinion is that God hath ordained all men vnto eternall life yet with this difference Some he hath absolutely appointed vnto saluation without any condition whose head is Christ and then the blessed Virgin Marie the number of those thus predestinate is certaine and none of them can perish there is an other sort of men which are ordained vnto saluation not absolutely but vnder condition of their obedience vpon the foresight of their merits and some of those come vnto eternall life some doe not of this opinion Sixtus Senensis Catharinus scholar professeth himselfe to haue beene Biblioth lib. 6. annot 248. and that he preached it for tenne yeares together and in diuerse cheefe cities of Italie till he saw the inconuenience and manifold difficulties that would follow vpon that doctrine and then he gaue ouer Contra. This opinion hath diuerse absurdities 1. it alloweth some to be saued which are not predestinate vnto life contrarie to the Scripture which onely promiseth euerlasting deliuerance and saluation vnto them which are written in the booke of life Dan. 12.1 Reuel 17.8 c. 20.12 2. It maketh Gods ordinance and decree to be vncertaine that many whom he appointeth to saluation yet are not saued 3. it maketh a diuersitie in the ordinance of God to saluation that some are absolutely elected some vpon condition onely whereas there is one end and the
Trinitie concurreth in their diuine power and essence as they are one God yet with a speciall relation to their persons as God the Father Sonne and holy Ghost both created redeemed the world and sanctifie the elect but the worke of the creation is specially ascribed to the person of the Father the redemption to the person of the Sonne the worke of sanctification to the person of the holy Ghost considered together with their infinite and omnipotent Godhead Quest. 17. Whether to beleeue in the heart be not sufficient vnto salvation without confession of the mouth v. 10. With the heart man beleeueth vnto righteousnesse and with the mouth he confesseth to salvation 1. Lyranus thinketh that the Apostle onely giueth instance here of those which are in casis mortis at the point of death in whom it is sufficient to beleeue and confesse when they haue no time to worke But the Apostle describeth one generall way and rule whereby all are iustified 2. The Greeke scholiast thinketh that whereas the beleefe of the heart is sufficient yet mention is made of confession in two respects both in regard of others which by this confession are to be instructed and the time of persecution when it is necessarie to make publike confession of the faith But this which the Apostle requireth is to be performed of euerie beleeuer and at all times 3. Bellarmine inferreth out of this place fidem non sufficere ad salutem that faith is not sufficient vnto saluation but that the confession of the mouth and other works are also required as causes concurring vnto saluation which place he saith is so euident that in the colloquie at Altenburge one for ad salutē to saluation would haue put de salute of saluatiō But we are not driuen to such a straight as to vse any such shift we will send Bellarmine to his auncient Cardinal Tolet who vpon this place thus writeth oris confessio nos non iustificat à peccato c. sed iustificati tenemur eam palam profiteri c. the confession of the mouth doth not iustifie vs but beeing iustified we are bound publikely to professe it that we may obtaine euerlasting saluation c. confession then of the mouth is not required as a cause of saluation because it is no part of iustificatiō but as a necessary effect that followeth 4. Pet. Martyr thinketh that by saluation here is not vnderstood as in the former verse the remission of sinnes but vlteriorem perfectionem a further degree of perfection in them that are iustified as the Apostle in the same sense biddeth vs to works out our saluation with trembling and feare Phil. 2. so also Gorrhan interpreteth ad salutem to saluation ad salutis perfectionem to the perfection of saluation But this were to giue way vnto them which ascribe onely the beginning of saluation vnto faith and the perfection vnto works 5. Wherefore the Apostle maketh not here confession the cause of saluation as beleefe is of iustification but faith is the cause also of confession which is required not as a cause but tanquam medium as a way and meane vnto saluation for iustification and saluation are here to be considered as the beginning and ende by faith we are iustified which faith must bring forth liuely fruits as the confession of the mouth and the profession of the life before we can attaine to saluation to this purpose Pareus dub 8. likewise M. Calvine saith the Apostle sheweth onely how a true faith may be distinguished from a fained faith the faith which iustifieth must be such a faith as bringeth forth liuely fruits as the franke confession of the mouth And Beza addeth that the Apostle maketh faith and beleefe here the cause both of iustification and of saluation because the confession of the mouth to the which saluation is ascribed is an effect and fruit of faith and so according to that rule in Logike causa causae est causa causati the cause of the cause is the cause of that which is caused by that cause And so as Beza well concludeth confession is via qua pervenitur the way whereby we come vnto eternall life as also other good workes in the life are the way but not the cause which as Origen collecteth are here also included vnder confession for he can not confesse Christ to be risen from the dead which doth not walke in newnes of life as the Apostle saith which God hath ordained for vs to walke in them Eph. 2.10 now we vse to walke in the way 18. Quest. Of these words Whosoeuer calleth vpon the name of the Lord shall be saued v. 13. 1. The word here translated saued in that place of the Prophet Ioel 2.32 signifieth to be deliuered which in effect is all one the Septuagint reading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall be saued doe put the consequent for the antecedent for he that is deliuered shall consequently be saued the Prophet there prophesieth of the spirituall benefits which the Church of God should receiue by the Messiah and so we are here to vnderstand not any temporall but a spirituall and eternall deliuerance 2. This sentence is brought in by the Apostle vpon these two occasions both to prooue his former generall proposition that God is rich in mercie to all both Iew and Gentile for the Prophet generally saith whosoeuer excluding none whether Iew or Gentile Calvin as also the Apostle sheweth the difference betweene the iustice of the lawe which requireth doing and the iustice of faith which requireth nothing but beleeuing and confession in the invocating of the name of God Melancth 3. Calleth 1. Gryneus thinketh that invocation the principall part of the worship of God is here taken for the whole as also Origen saith invocare nomen adorare Deum vnum to invocate the name of God and to worship God are one and the same But as Pet. Martyr thinketh invocation here rather is taken properly for the prayers of the faithfull 2. neither doth he speake of any invocation but of that which is in faith whereof the Apostle maketh mention 1. Cor. 12.3 No man can say that Iesus is the Lord but by the holy Ghost so the ordinar gloss he that prayeth invocateth but this he can not doe nisi prius credat vnlesse he beleeue before 4. Shall be saued He saith not he shall obtaine that which he prayeth for for many times one may pray ignorantly for that which is not meet for him but yet by his faithfull prayer he shall come vnto saluation Mart. 5. By the name of the Lord Origen well vnderstandeth Christ Iesus as he sheweth by that place of S. Paul 1. Cor. 1.3 with all that call on the name of our Lord Iesus and he further thus inferreth if that Enoch Moses Aaron did call vpon God and he heard them sine dubio c. without doubt they called vpon the Lord Iesus and Gorrhan giueth this reason why Christ is said to be the
seueritie but toward thee kindnes if thou continue in his kindnes or els thou also shalt be cut off 23 And they also if they abide not still in vnbeleefe shall be graffed in for God is able to graffe them in againe 24 For if thou wast cut out of the wild oliue tree by nature and contrarie beside B.S. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to nature wast graffed in a right oliue tree good oliue Gr. how much more shall they which are by nature be graffed into their owne Oliue tree 25 For I would not brethren that ye should be ignorant of this secret mysterie Gr. that ye should not be wise arrogant B. G. A. in your selues in your owne conceits B. that obstinacie blindnes L.V. see before v. 7. in part is come to Israel vntill the fulnes of the Gentiles be come in 26 And so all Israel shall be saued as it is written The deliuerer shall come out of Sion and shall turne away vngodlines from Iacob 27 And this is my couenant testament V.S.L.P. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth both but the first is fitter here to them when I shall take away their sinnes 28 As concerning the Gospel they are enemies for your sakes but as touching the election they are beloued for their fathers sakes 29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance such as he cannot repent him of B. V. God changeth not in his gift S. 30 For euen as ye in times past haue not beleeued God obeyed Be. S. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it signifieth both but the first is more proper here yet haue now obtained mercie thorough their vnbeleefe 31 Euen so now haue they not beleeved not obeyed Be. haue beene contumacious S. see the former verse by the mercie shewed vnto you your mercie Gr. that they also may obtaine mercie not beleeued the mercie B. A. in the mercie L. not beleeued because of your mercie V.S. Beza referreth it to the latter clause that by your mercie they might obtain mercy 30 For God hath shut vp all in vnbeleefe contumacie or disobedience S.B. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth both the first rather here for the Apostle still vrgeth the necessitie of beleefe as c. 9.32 that he might haue mercie on all 33 O the deepenes of the riches both of the wisdome and knowledge of God◠and of the wisdome and knowledge of God L. see 32. quest how vnsearchable incomprehensible L. are his iudgements and his waies past finding out 34 For who hath knowne the minde of the Lord or who was his counseller 35 Or who hath giuen vnto him first and he shall be recompensed 36 For of him and thorough him in him S. and for him are all things to him be glorie for euer Amen 2. The Argument Method and Parts THe Apostle in this Chapter treateth of the calling of the Gentiles and of the reiection of the Iewes yet so as that he both exhorteth the Gentiles not to insult ouer the Iewes because they are reiected for a time and to the comfort of the Iewes he sheweth that they are neither totally nor finally reiected but shall in the ende be conuerted Tehre are ◠parts of the chapter the first is doctrinall shewing that the Iewes are not totally reiected to v. 11. the second is exhortatorie both to Iewes and Gentiles to v. 33. the third is the conclusion v. 33. 1. In the Doctrinall part 1. he sheweth that all the Iewes are not reiected by these reasons 1. by his own example that was a Iew. 2. by the immutabilitie of Gods foreknowledge v. 2. 3. by an argument à pari taken from the like in Elias time the antecedent containeth Elias complaint vnto God v. 3. and Gods answer to him v. 4. the consequent sheweth the application euen so now a remnant shall be saued v. 5. as in Elias time this is amplified by setting forth the efficient cause of their election the grace of God which can not fall away which is enlarged by the contrarie not of works v. 6. 2. Then the Apostle speaketh of the part of the Iewes reiected which is propounded by the contrarie v. 7. and proued by testimonies of Scripture one of Isay v. 8. the other of the Prophet Dauid v. 9 10. 2. In the exhortation 1. he moueth the Gentiles that they should not insult ouer the Iewes to v. 25. 2. he comforteth the Iewes by a propheticall prediction of their conuersion to v. 33. 1. The summe of the Apostles exhortation is set forth v. 18. that the Gentiles to whom he directeth his speach v. 13. should not beast themselues nor be high minded v. 20. or arrogant in themselues v. 25. This exhortation is strengthened by diuers arguments 1. from a double end of the reiection of the Iewes one to bring saluation to the Gentiles the other that the Iewes might emulate the example of the Gentiles these two ends are propounded v. 11. and then amplified the first v. 12. by an argument from the lesse to the greater that if the world gained so much by the reiection of the Iewes much more by their conuersion the other ende is vrged by shewing the ende of the Apostles ministerie among the Gentiles which was to prouoke the Iewes to emulation to saue some of them v. 13 14. 2. Argument from the hope of the conuersion of the Iewes v. 15. which is grounded vpon the force of the Couenant they are branches of an holy roote v. 16. therefore let not the Gentiles insult 3. Arg. from the former state and condition of the Gentiles they were as a wild oliue tree v. 17. 4. Arg. the Gentiles should shew themselues vnthankfull to insult against the roote which did beare the branches v. 18. 5. Arg. the Gentiles might be cast off themselues therefore they were not to boast which he prooueth by an argument from the greater to the lesse If God spared not the naturall branches much lesse the vnnaturall v. 19 20 21. 6. Arg. from the cause or originall of the vocation of the Gentiles the bountie and mercie of God therefore they were not to boast v. 22. 7. Arg. from the hope of the conuersion of the Iewes which was touched before v. 15. which is amplified by the efficient the power of God and by an argument from the lesse to the greater v. 24. The propheticall prediction of the conuersion of the Iewes for their comfort followeth which is propounded v. 25. as before he shewed that the reiection of the Iewes was not totall so here he prooueth that it shall not be finall but that Israel shall be called againe 1. by two testimonies of the Prophet Isai v. 26 27. 2. from the dignitie of the Iewes depending vpon Gods grace and election which was infallible v. 18 19. 3. à pari from the like as the Gentiles sometimes beleeued not but were receiued to mercie so the Iewes then beleeued but should receiue mercie v. 30 31. 4. from the ende God hath shut vp all in vnbeleefe that all might
inconuenience that if grace be ioyned with workes then worke were no more worke for if the reward be of grace it is not by the merite of the worke and the assumption and second part he prooueth by an other absurditie for then grace should be no more grace for that which is giuen to the merit of the worke is giuen of debt not of fauour as before the Apostle reasoned c. 4.4 this clause then is neither impertinent nor yet superfluous 3. This place of the Apostle meeteth with diuerse cauills 1. The Greeke scholiast saith that we need no workes to come vnto Christ sed sola voluntas mentis intentio sat est the will and intention onely of the mind is sufficient But I aske this will and intention whether it is Gods worke or mans if it be Gods worke as the Apostle saith that God worketh both the will and the deed Phil. 2.13 then is it of grace if it be mans then is it a worke but all workes are here excluded 2. beside this grace cannot be here vnderstood to be a thing infused into and inherent in man as the Romanists for then it were a worke Osiander but grace is here conceiued to be subiective in Deo in God as a subiect as worke is subiective in man as a subiect 3. Ghorrans conceit here hath no place that a worke may be said to merit and it shall be of grace because it meriteth of grace for the verie opposition betweene grace and worke one excluding the other alloweth no such permission 4. worke and grace may stand together but not as ioynt causes but workes must follow grace â—â— accepta gratia sit inanis that the grace receiued be not in vaine as Origen saith and though the reward follow works yet the merit of the work is not the cause but the grace fauour of God which hath appointed such a way and order that the faithfull after they haue wrought and laboured should be rewarded it is consecutio ordo a thing that followeth and an order which God hath appointed not any merit Mar. 4. Though the Apostle especially entreat here of election that it is of grace yet because the Apostles rule is generall ad totam salutis nostrae rationem extendi debet it must be extentended to the whole manner and way of saluation Calvin for as election is by grace not by workes Rom. 9.11 so our calling is by grace not by workes 2. Tim. 1.9 Who hath called vs with an holy calling not according to our workes our iustification also is by faith without workes Rom. 3.24.28 Quest. 8. How it is said Israel obtained not that he sought v. 7. The doubt is mooued because our B. Sauiour saith Matth. 7.7 aske and it shall be giuen you seeke and you shall finde c. 1. The answer is there are two kinds of seeking God a lawfull right and true seeking of God wherein must be considered both the manner which must be faith and the end which is to the glorie of God and the other seeking is not right which sayleth of either of these as the Iewes failed in both for they sought not righteousnesse by faith c. 9.23 and therefore missed of that which they sought for and beside they went about to establish their owne righteousnesse and would not submit themselues to the righteousnesse of God c. 10. 3. that is they sought their owne praise and glorie and not Gods and therefore it was no maruell if they failed of their desire 2. Like vnto those were they which sought and followed Christ Ioh. 6. but it was to haue their bellies filled and fed by him so Saint Iames saith c. 4.3 You aske and receiue not because ye aske amisse that you may consume it on your lusts in like manner the Prophet Hosea rebuked the old Israelites They shall goe with their sheepe and bullockes to seeke the Lord but they shall not find him because he hath withdrawne himselfe from them Hosh. 5.6 3. Chrysostome somewhat otherwise sheweth the reason why they obtained not that they sought Iudaeus sibi ipse repugnat c. the Iew is contrarie to himselfe for they sought righteousnes and yet when it was offered them they reiected it they looked for the Messiah and yet when he came they would none of him like as wanton children that call for bread and when it is giuen them they cast it away Quest. 9. Of these words v. 8. As it is written God hath giuen them the spirit of slumber whence it is taken 1. Origen is of opinion that these words can no where be found in the old Scriptures Ero hactenus invenire non potui I could not find them out yet saith he and therefore he thinketh that the Apostle addeth these words of his owne and followeth the sense of the Prophet rather then the words But if it were so the Apostle would not haue set this sentence before as it is written if it were not so written as it is here alleadged Erasmus thinketh that Saint Paul deliuereth the sense of that place Isai. 6.9 as likewise he doth Act. 28.27 but in that place there is no mention made of the spirit of slumber or compunction some thinke that the Apostle citeth not here any particular place but alludeth onely vnto the like places of the Prophet Isai as c. 19.14 The Lord hath mingled among them the spirit of errors ecclestic expos but that place is spoken of the Egyptians and therefore could not properly be applied by Saint Paul to the Iewes therefore I subcribe rather to Pareus and Tolet who thinke that this testimonie is taken out of two places of the Prophet Isai the first c. 29.10 the Lord hath couered you with a spirit of slumber the other part is found c. 6.9 2. But there is some difference both betweene the translation of the Septuagint and the Hebrew and betweene Saint Pauls citation and the Septuagint and betweene S. Pauls allegation and the originall 1. The Septuagint in that place Isai. 19.14 vse the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he hath made them drunke with the spirit of slumber but in the Hebrew it is he hath couered of the word nasaph to hide or couer the Apostle vseth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he hath giuen in the other place Isai. 6.9 the originall vseth the imperatiue moode make their hearts heauie and shut their eyes the Septuagint expresse it by the actiue applying it to the people they haue shut their eyes and so doth S. Luke cite it Act. 28.27 and Matth. 13.16 but Saint Paul referreth it vnto God he hath giuen c. as Ioh. 12.40 it is said he hath blinded their eyes wherein the Apostle followeth the sense of the Prophet for as Pet. Martyr well obserueth quod Dei imperio fit à Deo fieri dicitur that which is done by the commandement of God is said to be done by God 3. But there is some difference yet in the word tardemah slumber
is subsequens gratia subsequent or following grace whereby the Lord assisteth those which are called as Augustine saith gratia praevenit vt velimus subsequiâ—â—â—â— frustrà velimus grace preuenteth vs that we may be willing and it followeth vs that our will be not in vaine 3. the cause of the grace of God is his owne mercie the Apostle saith here v. 35. who hath giuen vnto him first the internall motiue is the free loue of God the externall impulsiue and moouing cause is the merit of Christ. 4. the effects of the grace and fauour of God are either externall as election predestination or such as are brought forth in time as vocation iustification sanctificatioÌ„ 5. the graces in the second sense which are the gifts of the spirit are either salutis the graces belonging to saluation as knowledge faith hope or they are vocationis such as appertaine vnto our vocation and calling which are either extraordinarie as were the miraculous and propheticall gifts which the Prophets and Apostles had or ordinarie as are the knowledge of arts the gift of vtterance and such like which now are attained vnto by diligent labour and industrie Doct. 5. Concerning good workes the qualitie and kinds thereof the causes and effects v. 6. But if of workes c. 1. The works of men are either naturall as to sleepe or ciuill as to buy to sell which are indifferent or they are morall which are either good or evill 2. the efficient cause of good works is first God moouing by his spirit then the will of man converted and prepared by grace the helping causes are instruction exhortation faithfull endeauour prayer 3. the matter of good works is the internall and externall act of the will and mind heart and bodie the forme is the consent and agreement with the lawe of God 4. the effects of good works are toward God our obedience which in Christ is pleasing and acceptable to him in our selues the fruits and testimonie of our faith toward our brethren their edification they are stirred vp by our good conuersation to glorifie God Doct. 6. We must compare the present state of the Church with the times past v. 5. Euen so now at this present time As S. Paul compared the estate of the Church then present with the times of Elias so we are taught to comfort our selues in the afflictions of the Church of God in these dayes with looking backe into the times past for God doth after the same manner gouerne his Church So Origen well obserueth sicut factum est sub Helsa c. as it was vnder Helias so it was in the comming of Christ and in S. Pauls time c. like as the small number of true professors was then no preiudice to the truth no more ought it to be now Doct. 7. Of the priviledge of the seede of the faithfull v. 16. If the first fruits be holy so is the whole lumpe like as the Iewes which were descended of Abraham were within the couenant and so vnto them belonged circumcision the signe of the couenant the paschal lambe the Temple and sacrifices vnto the which the seede of the Gentiles which were not of Abraham had no right so now the seede and ofspring of Christians are counted holy vnto them belongeth baptisme and other Sacraments and rites of Christian profession for they are an holy seede as the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 7.14 Els were your children vncleane but now are they holy Doct. 8. How the Church or a righteous man is resembled to a tree v. 16. If the roote be holy so are the branches c. 1. a iust man is resembled to a tree 1. propter pedis i. fidei immobilitatem for the stedfastnes of his foot that is his faith v. 20. thou standest by faith 2. propter stipitis i. spei erectionem c. for the erecting of the stalke or truncke which signifieth hope and therefore Iob saith 19.10 he hath remooued my hope like a tree 3. the roote is charitie Eph. 4. beeing rooted and grounded in loue 4. The branches are his vertues Hosh. 14.7 His branches shall spread and his beautie shall be as the olive tree 5. the bloomes and blossomes are his sweete manners 6. the leaues his gracious words 7. the fruit good workes 8. the shadowe of the tree is his mercie Hosh. 14.7 They that dwell vnder his shadowe shall returne Gorrhan Doct. 9. The old Testament and the newe one and the same in substance v. 18. Thou bearest not the roote but the roote thee c. There was then the same roote both of the Iewes and beleeuing Gentiles the same faith the same Mediator the same substance efficacie and force of the Sacraments though the externall rites and symboles were diuerse Martyr so S. Paul Ephes. 4. There is one bodie one spirit c. one Lord one faith c. Doct. 10. Of Gods omnipotencie v. 23. God is able to graffe them in againe The Apostle prooueth the returne and graffing in of the Iewes by the power of God though simply and generally this is no good argument God can doe it therefore it shall be yet here is a sufficient reason because there was no doubt of Gods will seeing the Iewes were his people of old otherwise Gods power is not limited to his will for he can doe more then he will it is contrariwise with man who willeth many things that he cannot effect and so his will is larger then his power Martyr Doct. 11. Christ prooued to be God by the remission of sinnes v. 27. This is my couenant when I shall take away their sinnes c. This sheweth Christ to be God who onely is able to forgiue sinnes men may remit the punishment that it be not inflicted but the guilt of sinne is onely purged by God the keyes are indeede committed to the Church in the preaching of the word but they are the instruments onely whereby God forgiueth sinnes the Ministers are onely the proclaymers of Gods will herein they cannot remit sinnes but onely ministerially as the instruments Doct. 12. Of the excellencie of the knowledge of God v. 33. O the depth of the riches of the wisedome and knowledge of God c. Gods knowledge is excellent 1. for the largenes of it in knowing all things 2. the perfection of it he knoweth all things perfitly 3. the manner he needeth no meanes of his knowledge but himselfe 4. the celeritie of it he knoweth all things in a moment 5. the certaintie of it it cannot be deceiued 6. the eternitie it was from the beginning 7. the efficacie it is the cause of all things 8. the secunditie of it all things are lightened by his knowledge 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. That none which are elected can finally fall away v. 2. Whereas the Apostle saith God hath not cast away his people which he knewe before c. Hence it may be obiected thus God knewe his people before that is elected them vnto saluation but
visible Churches are now extinguished but we must distinguish betweene the externall and internall calling they which haue the first without the second may fall away but where the externall and internall are ioyned together as they shall concurre in the conuersion of the Iewes there they are vnchangeable 3. If that were the Apostles meaning that God repenteth not of his gifts bestowed vpon any because if they refuse them they may redound to the benefit of others this had bin very impertinent to the Apostles purpose who hereby intendeth to prooue the vocation of the Iewes because the Lord had so promised and purposed whereof he vseth not to repent 4. Wherefore I preferre herein the iudgement of Tolet a more worthie man both for his iudgement and dignitie in the Papall Church who thus interpreteth these gifts not to be repented of quia quos Deus his semel prosequi decrevit non deserit because whome God once decreed to bestow them vpon be forsaketh not so likewise Lyranus expoundeth this place the gifts and calling of God are without repentance that is sine mutabilitate c. without change or mutabilitie for with God there is no changing c. so also Haymo poenitentiaâ— pro mutatione accipitur c. repentance is taken in the Scripture for change as the Lord said to Samuel It repenteth me that I haue made Saul king c. igitur sine mutatione c. therefore without change are the gifts and calling of God in those things whereof we read before whome he hath predestinate he hath called c. not in them of whome it is said many be called few be chosen c. 18. Controv. Against election vpon the foresight of works and against merits Whereas the Apostle saith v. 35. who hath giuen vnto him first Calvin vrgeth this place against merits for if God should giue saluation vnto man for his good works homo prior daret bona opera Deo c. it would follow that man should first giue good works vnto God likewise Beza prooueth by this place that election is not vpon the foresight of faith or works for then we should giue vnto God first Pet. Martyr also doth applie this place both against merits and election by works But Pererius disput 4. numer 15. vpon this chapter chargeth Calvin and Beza either with ignorance or malice for this collection and to make his matter good he bringeth in this distinction that there is duplex salus hominis a twofold saluation of man one is begunne in this life the other is perfected in the next the first is conferred onely by the franke mercie and goodnes of God the other is giuen vpon respect of merits and yet though life euerlasting be merited man can not be said to giue vnto man first quia prior Deus gratiam dedit c. because God gaue vnto him grace first whereby he might merit likewise he distinguisheth of election there is one election ad primam gratiam to the first grace and that is without respect vnto works there is an other election vnto eternall life and thereof causa est praevisio honorum operum the cause is the foresight of good works Contra. 1. If good works are the gift of God and God must first giue grace to doe good works then can they not merit for he that meriteth must doe it ex proprio of his owne if it be not his owne then he can not challenge any merit as the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 4.7 what hast thou which thou hast not receiued if thou hast receiued it why reioycest thou as though thou hadst not receiued it c. 2. though God giue grace at the first yet if man after doe bring merits and then eternall life followeth he doth giue vnto God first in respect of the finall reward though not in respect of the precedent grace 3. The Apostle acknowledgeth but one kind of predestination whereupon vocation followeth and then iustification and last of all glorification Rom. 8.30 whence this argument may be framed that predestination which is vnto saluation is also vnto glorification but predestination vnto vocation which is vnto the first grace is by our aduersaries owne confession without respect of works therefore so is the predestination vnto glorification 19. Controv. Against vniversall grace Whereas the Apostle saith v. 32. God hath shut vp all in vnbeleefe that he might haue mercie on all c. the Patrons of vniuersall grace doe thus reason against particular election onely of some they whome God hath mercie on are elected not damned but God hath mercie vpon all therefore all are elected and none decreed to be damned Ans. 1. That all are not elected but onely a certaine number and the rest are reiected it is euident out of the Scriptures Rom. 9.18 He hath mercie on whome he will and whome he will he hardeneth therefore he hath not mercie on all and Rom. 11.7 Election hath obtained it and the rest haue beene hardened and againe many are called few chosen all then are not chosen for if God had elected all to saluation and yet all not saued it would argue either a change in Gods will or a want of power in God that he can not bring his purpose to effect and that the goodnes of his will should be ouercome by the malice of mans will but none can resist the will of God Rom. 9.19 2. Concerning the argument first the proposition is not true for there are certaine common mercies which God may shew euen toward those that are excluded from saluation it is true onely of those speciall mercies which belong vnto saluation but those are not extended vnto all 3. Neither is the assumption true in their sense God doth not shew mercie indifferently vpon all in calling them to saluation but this particle all must be vnderstood here distributive by way of distribution by all the Apostle meaneth both Iewes and Gentiles all kinds and sorts of men 6. Morall obseruations 1. Observ. Ministers must not leaue their calling v. 4. What saith the answer of God P. Martyr here noteth how the great Prophet Elias herein shewed his infirmitie that beeing wearied with the incredulitie and obstinacie of the people he desired to die and so would shake off his calling which infirmitie the Lord here correcteth in the Prophet whereby Ministers are taught that they should not be dismaied and discouraged to leaue their places notwithstanding the obstinacie of the people as long as there be any which will heare them Theodoret lib. 2. c. 31. maketh mention of one Molitius who did leaue a certaine Church in Armenia beeing offended with the frowardnes and disobedience of the people who afterward was chosen Bishop of Antioch and for defending the orthodoxall faith against the Arrians was banished which might be thought to haue happened vnto him as a chastisment from God because he forsooke his former charge Martyr 2. Observ. That we must wholly be addicted to the seruice of God v.
haec vera est c. this is the true renovation of the minde to preferre the will of God before our owne c. and Beza maketh it a part of the exhortation be ye transformed c. and doe your endeauour to prooue what Gods will is c. that like as they which fashion themselues to the world followe the will thereof so you should transforme your selues by the newenes of your minde to the will of God and this sense is most agreeable so this is added both as a principall part and cause of our renovation and it is a fruit also thereof a further degree of more perfect knowing the will of God as our Sauiour saith Ioh. 9.17 If any man doe his will he shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God 2. May prooue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. he neither meaneth a curious probation to trie whether a thing be so or not for this were to doubt of the will of God whether it were good and perfect 2. neither is it taken onely for to search and consider for a man cannot be renewed at all that hath not alreadie searched out the good will of God 3. not yet doe we vnderstand a bare knowledge of the will of God for many which are not regenerate doe knowe Gods will and yet doe it not as the Apostle c. 2. reprooued the Iewes for teaching the lawe to others and not knowing it themselues 4. nor yet doth it signifie onely an experimentall knowledge as the interlinearie gloss and Lyranus for he that is renewed cannot but haue experience of the will of God 5. but this probation signifieth a discerning with iudgmēt of those things which are good as S. Paul saith Phil. 1.10 that ye may discern things that are excellent as he that hath a perfect tast discerneth of the goodnes of meates 3. What is the good will of God and acceptable and perfect 1. Concerning the reading of these words some will not haue these epithets good perfect acceptable to be ioyned vnto the will of God but to be referred to all the cause before going as to the offring vp of their bodies a liuing seruice not to fashion themselues to this world and to be renewed in the mind all this is good acceptable and perfect so Augustine epist. 85. and Ambrose some doe make it an absolute sentence by it selfe adding the coniūction and and what is good acceptable perfect c. Bucer But the vsuall reading is the best which the vulgar Latine followeth to make these three epithets and attributes of the will of God thus also reade Clemens lib. 2. stromat Basil regul brev resp 276. Chrysost. serm 12. Cyprian epist. 77.2 by the will of God we vnderstand not here that facultie and power in God whereby he willeth but the thing which he willeth in which sense we say in the Lords prayer thy will be done Matth. 6. and Matth 12.50 Whosoeuer doth the will of my father c. 4. The good will c. 1. Origen here distinguisheth betweene the will of God simply so called and his good and acceptable will for it is the will of God when he inflicteth punishment but that is his good and acceptable will when he doth any thing in mercie 2. Chrysostome also will haue the old lawe to be the good will of God but the acceptable and perfect will of God is his will reuealed in the new testament 3. Basil regul brev 276. make three degrees of things agreeable to Gods will some good some are better some best of all which are called perfect as Tolet giueth this instance to loue our friend is a good thing to doe well vnto him is better to loue our enemie is the best and most perfect 4. Anselme referreth it to the three states incipientium proficientium perfectorum of beginners of those that goe forward and of such as are perfect or to three conditions of life of the married the continent and virgins 5. Lyranus vnderstandeth the first of bona natura the good things of nature the second of the good things of grace the third of the good things appertaning to glorie But all these observations are curious neither to the Apostles minde who doth here commend vnto vs the will of God reuealed in the old and newe testament as a perfect rule of all our actions which is called good because the word of God prescribeth nothing but that which is good and it is acceptable because nothing is pleasing vnto God but that which he himselfe prescribeth and is agreeable to his will this rule also is perfect because the word of God containeth all things which tend to the perfection of the creature so that all other helpes are vaine idle and superfluous Quest. 9. What the Apostle vnderstandeth by grace I say by grace c. 1. Origen by grace vnderstandeth virtutem sermonis the vertue and power of speach which was giuen to the Apostle one may speake eloquently and learnedly and yet not with grace to edifie the hearers 2. Ambrose interpreteth grace of the gift of wisedome giuen to the Apostle this sense Haymo also followeth as S. Peter giueth this testimonie of S. Paul how he wrote according to the wisedome of God giuen vnto him but Chrysostome refuseth this the Apostle saith not I say by the wisedome giuen vnto me 3. he therefore as also Theodoret vnderstandeth the grace of the spirit 4. but more particularly the Apostle vnderstandeth the speciall grace of his Apostleship which was committed vnto him in which sense the Apostle saith Rom. 11.16 Thorough the grace that is giuen me of God that I should be the minister of Iesus Christ so here is a metonymie the cause is put for the effect and that the Apostle ascribeth his calling vnto grace he thereby both freeth himselfe from all ambition that he intrudeth not himselfe as also presseth his Apostolike authoritie that they might more readily obey Mart. Calv. I say which some thinke to be an exposition of the former words that now the Apostle beginneth to shew what the good and perfect will of God is Tolet but the Apostle rather entreth into a newe matter that as hitherto he had generally exhorted to common duties so now he descendeth to speciall Mart. and here dicere to say is taken for iubere to command Calvin Gorrhan taketh it for prohibeo I forbid but there followe many precepts as well as prohibitions to the which this preface of the Apostle hath reference To everie one among you the Latine translator readeth to all but not so fitly for now the Apostle in saying to euerie one speaketh to all in generall and to euerie one in particular Origens obseruation here is somewhat curious all among you that is they which are in God that is the faithfull for they onely are said to be the Apostle noteth all indifferently noble vnnoble high or lowe which were among them Chrysostome Quest. 10. What it is to vnderstand aboue that which is meete
to vnderstand v. 3. 1. This word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to sauour or vnderstand is sometime taken in the worst part as Matth. 16.23 to sauour the things which are of men not the things which are of God sometime it is vsed in the better sense as in this place to vnderstand according to sobrietie 2. Here diuerse interpretations are brought of this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to vnderstand aboue or beyond that which is meete to be vnderstood and what it is to vnderstand according to sobrietie 1. Origen vnderstandeth here the generall vertue of temperance that a measure is to be kept in euerie vertue as if a man exceede in iustice he becommeth cruell if in fortitude he is audacious and rash and thus a temper and measure must be kept in euerie action but the words following as God hath dealt to euerie one the measure of faith c. doe not fauour this interpretation 2. and Hierome likewise is more deceiued who lib. 1. contra Iovinian doth apply this place to the commendation of virginitie and so he readeth here sapere ad pudicitiam to be wise vnto chastitie but the words following do ouerthrow this sense also 3. Ireneus lib. 5. c. 20. doth vnderstand this place of the curious enquirie and search after the mysteries of religion so also Hilarie de Trinitat l. 10. Erasmus misliketh this sense because he thinketh the Apostle here speaketh not of the knowledge but of that opinion which a man hath of himselfe but this may verie well be here comprehended as a part of the Apostles meaning to condemne curiositie so Martyr Pareus this fault is committed when men doe vpon confidence of their owne wit seeke out those things quae investigari sequeant which cannot be sought out 4. Tolet most approoueth Basils sense regul brev respons 264. then a man doth vnderstand more then it meete when he doth leaue his owne calling se ingerit rebus alienis and doth intermeddle with things belonging to other callings as Vzzia the king of Iudah that would haue vsurped the Preists office so that here the fault called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is to be a busie-bodie in other mens matters should be touched by the Apostle 5. Chrysostome vnderstandeth the Apostle to speake against the elation and arrogancie of the minde when men doe arrogate all to themselues and detract from others this best liketh Erasmus Beza Osiander and this arrogancie is of two sorts when men doe either arrogate to themselues that they haue not or are proude of that which they haue Beza this pride and selfe loue hath beene the mother of all heresies when men not content with the simplicitie of truth nor to keepe in the beaten tract haue invented new doctrines Haymo Faius 6. All these then may well be receiued that exceedeth the bounds of sobrietie who either diueth curiously into Gods secrets or is drunken with an ouerweening conceit of himselfe or intrudeth into other mens gifts and office which last seemeth to be most agreeable to that which followeth because euerie man hath receiued a certaine measure of faith a portion of gifts wherewith he must rest contented by sobrietie then as Chrysostome saith the Apostle vnderstandeth modestie and he thus deriueth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sobrietie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because such haue their minds sound and in a good temper so he meaneth the soundnes of the minde not of the bodie for he that is arrogant and hath no modestie neque mente valere queat hath a distempered minde and this as Chrysostome sheweth is worse then for one to be naturally a foole naturae stulium fieri nihil habet criminis for one to be a foole by nature is without his fault but for one through an ouerweening wit to exceed the bounds of modestie and sobrietie venia priuat it deserueth no pardoÌ„ Quest. 11. What is vnderstood by the measure of faith v. 3. As God hath dealt to euerie one the measure of faith c. 1. Concerning the words 1. the vulgar Latine addeth and to euerie one c. which maketh the sentence imperfect 2. Origen will haue somewhat to be supplyed to make vp the sentence custodiat let him keepe as to euery one c. so Pet. Martyr concurring with him would haue somewhat supplied as neque sibi plus arroget neither let him arrogate more to himselfe c. 3. Erasmus thinketh the sentence to be imperfect and that the Apostle respected the sense rather then the words which stand thus in the originall to euerie one as God hath distributed but here is an euident traiection of the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as which is put after to euerie one which is familiar with the Apostle as 1. Cor. 3.5 to euerie one as God hath giuen so that the sense is full enough without any supply as Beza well obserueth 2. By faith 1. Some vnderstand iustifying faith faith working by loue which faith is giuen not to all alike but in measure to euerie one gloss interlin But Pet. Martyr refuseth this because many had these gifts and graces which had not iustifying faith as they which in the day of the Lord shall say haue we not in thy name prophecied and cast out deuills Matth. 7. and yet shall be refused 2. Chrysostome taketh this to be vnderstood causally as faith for the gifts of faith whereby miracles are wrought so also Origen vnderstandeth the graces of the spirit obtained by faith 3. Tolet by faith vnderstandeth fidelitie which euerie one must vse in the exercising of his gift but fidelitie is not the cause of the measure of graces which are giuen freely 4. faith then here is both taken by a meâ—onymie for the gifts and effects of faith as Mart. as also Beza it comprehendeth by a Synecdoche the knowledge of Christ whereof the habite of iustifying faith is a fruite and effect as also the gifts and graces of the spirit which were conferred vpon the faithfull Beza Pareus and so the Apostle here meaneth no other thing by faith then the gifts and graces of the spirit conferred vpon the faithfull that beleeued in Christ neither iustifying faith is excluded not yet onely here included the like saying to this the Apostle hath Eph. 4.7 To euerie one of vs is giuen grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ so here by faith we are to vnderstand the gifts of faith either because faith is the gift of God by which other graces are obtained as Chrysostome doni causa fides faith is the cause of the gift or because these gifts are giuen habentibus fidem to those which haue faith Haymo 3. So here there are as many arguments as words to perswade vnto a sober vse of the gifts receiued dantis immensitas the greatnes of the giuer which is God dandi liberalitas the liberalitie in giuing he hath distributed according to measure doni excellentia the excellencie of the gift which is faith
opinion examined that our sinnes are remitted onely by Christs death not for the the obedience and merit of his life Controversies vpon the 5. Chapter 1. contr Whether a good conscience and integritie of life be the cause of peace with God 2. contr Against invocation of Saints 3. contr Of the certaintie of salvation and of perseverance 4. contr That the tribulation of the Saints is not meritorius though it be said to worke patience 5. contr That we are not iustified by the inherent habite of charitie 6. contr Against the heresie of impious Socinus who denieth that Christ died for our sinnes and payed the ransome for them 7. contr Against other obiections of Socinus and other impugning the fruit and efficacie of Christs death in reconciling vs to God his Father 8. con That Christs death was a full satisfaction for our sins against Socinus his cauils 9. contr That Christs death was not onely satisfactorie but meritorious against Socinus Certaine controversies touching Originall sinne 10. cont That there is originall sinne in men by the corruption of nature against the opinion of the Hebrewes 11. contr That Adaws sinne is entred into his posteritie by propagation not imitation onely against the Pelagians 12. contr Of the manner how originall sinne is propagated against the Pelagians where it is disputed whether the soule be deriued from the Parents 13. contr Against the Pelagians and Papists that originall sinne is not quite taken away in Baptisme 14. contr What originall sinne is against the Romanists and some some others and specially against them which hold it to be Adams sinne imputed onely to his posteritie 15. contr That originall sinne is not onely the privation of originall iustice 16. contr Of the wicked heresie of Marcion and Valentinus with the blasphemous Manichees 17. cont That all sinnes are mortall and worthie of death by nature 18. contr That Henoch and Elias are not yet aliue in the bodie 19. contr The Virgin Marie conceiued in originall sinne 20. contr Againe meritts 21. contr That the punishment of originall sinne is euerlasting death 22. contr That Christs essentiall iustice is not infused into vs. 23. contr Against the Patrons of vniuersall grace 24. contr Against the Popish inherent iustice 25. contr That we are iustified both by the actiue and passiue obedience of Christ. 26. contr Against the Philosophers who placed righteousnes in their owne workes 27. contr Against the Manichees and Pelagians the one giuing too much the other too little to the lawe 28. contr Of the assurance of salvation 29. contr Of the diuerse kinds of grace against the Romanists Controversies out of the 6. Chapter 1. contr Against the administring of the Sacraments in an vnknowne tongue 2. contr Concerning inherent iustice 3. contr That the Sacrament of Baptisme doth not conferre grace by the outward worke 4. contr That Baptisme serueth as well for the remission of sinnes to come as of sinnes past 5. contr Whether in Baptisme our sinnes be cleane taken away 6. contr Of the baptisme of infants 7. contr Of the assurance of salvation 8. contr That Christ shall not die in the next world againe for those which were not healed here 9. contr Against the Sacrifice of the Masse 10. contr Concerning freewill 11. contr That concupiscence remaining in the regenerate is properly sinne 12. contr Whether a righteous man may fal into any mortall or deadly sinne 13. contr Against the Manichees 14. contr Concerning inherent iustice 15. contr Against the power of freewill in the fruits of righteousnesse 16. contr Whether all death is the wages of sinne 17. contr Against the distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes 18. contr That everlasting life cannot be merited by good workes Controversies vpon the 7. Chapter 1. contr Against Purgatorie 2. contr Of the lawfulnes of second marriage 3. contr Whether the marriage bond be indissoluable before the one partie be dead 4. contr That the disparitie of profession is no cause of the dissolution of marriage 5. contr Whether the bill of diuorce permitted to the Iewes did lawfully dissolue matrimonie vnder the Law 6. contr Against the workes of propitiation 7. contr Against the Heretikes which condemned the Lawe 8. contr That we are freed by grace from the strict and rigorous observation of the lawe 9. contr That concupiscence though it haue no deliberate consent of the will is sinne forbidden by the commandement 10. contr That the commandement thou shalt not lust is but one 11. contr Against freewill Controversies out of the 8. Chapter 1. contr That concupiscence remaining euen in the regenerate is sinne and in it selfe worthie of condemnation 2. controver That none are perfect in this life 3. controver That regeneration is not the cause that there is no condemnation to the faithfull 4. contr Against the Arrians and Eunomians concerning the dietie of the holy Ghost 5. contr Against the Pelagians that a man by nature cannot keepe and fulfill the lawe 6. contr The fulfilling of the lawe is not possible in this life no not to them which are in the state of grace 7. con That not the carnall eating of Christs flesh is the cause of the resurrection but the spirituall v. 11. 8. contr Against merits 9. contr Whether in this life one by faith may be sure of salvation 10. contr Against the invocation of Saints 11. contr That a strange tongue is not to be vsed in the seruice of God 12. contr That euerlasting glorie cannot be merited 13. contr That hope iustifieth not 14. contr Whether hope relie vpon the merit of our workes 15. contr Against the naturall power and integritie of mans will 16. contr That predestination dependeth not vpon the foresight of faith or good workes 17. contr Against the opinion of Ambrosius Catharinus concerning predestination 18. contr That election is certaine and infallible of grace without merit and of some selected not generally of all 19. contr That the elect cannot full away from the grace and fauour of God and be wholly giuen ouer vnto sinne 20. contr Whether a reprobate may haue the grace of God and true iustice 21. contr That the elect by faith may be assured of euerlasting salvation Controversies out of the 9. Chapter 1. contr That succession of Bishops is no sure note of the Church of Christ. 2. contr Against the old heretikes the Manichees Arrians Nestorians confuted out of the 5. ver 3. contr Against the prophane and impious collections of Eniedinus and Socinus late heretikes 4. contr That the water in baptisme doth not sanctifie or giue grace 5. contr Against the vaine observation of Astrologers in casting of nativities 6. contr That the soules had no beeing in a former life before they came into the body 7. contr Whether the foresight of faith or workes be the cause of election 8. contr That not onely election vnto grace but vnto glorie also is onely of the good will of God 9. contr That the Apostle treateth as well of
in faith Pareus 4. And although S. Paul had giuen such excellent commendation before of their faith yet they might notwithstanding haue neede to be strengthened as Peter when he beganne to sinke in the waters had faith when he cried to Christ Saue me or els I perish yet Christ saith vnto him Why didst thou doubt O thou of little faith his faith had neede to be encreased 5. So here are three reasons of the Apostles desire to see them 1. that he might bestow vpon them some spirituall gift 2. to confirme and strengthen them 3. to be mutually comforted with them Aretius 33. Quest. Of the impediments whereby S. Paul was letted to come vnto the Romanes v. 13. I haue oftentimes purposed to come vnto you but haue beene let hitherto 1. Chrysostome thinketh he was hindred and letted by the Lord and so also Theophylact Dei iussis prohibeor I am inhibited by the commandement of God as Origen giueth instance of that place Act. 16.7 where Paul was not suffered by the spirit to goe into Bithynia 2. But Basil thinketh he was hindred by Satan as the Apostle saith he was letted by Sathan to come vnto the Thessalonians 1. Thessalon 2.18 where is to be considered a double difference betweene Gods hindering and Sathans first Sathan may hinder the outward actions but the inward purpose and desire he can not let but God can stay both secondly when Sathan hindereth it is by Gods permission for otherwise he could doe nothing but God often hindereth without the ministerie of Sathan at all Now in this place the first opinion is more agreeable because he entreated of God by prayer that he might haue a prosperous iourney therefore it seemeth that he letted him vnto whome he praied that he might haue opportunitie giuen him Tolet. 3. Origen ioyneth both together that he might be hindered first in the Lords purpose and then impediments might be cast in his way by Sathan so also Pareus Genevens and Aretius But for the former reason the first opinion is rather to be receiued 4. It beeing resolued vpon that God staied S. Pauls comming yet there is some diuersitie concerning the causes why the Lord should thus let him â—â— Sedulius thinketh that God saw not the hearts of the Romanes yet prepared to beleeue and therefore the Lord sent Paul then and not before quando praescâ—â—t eos creditâ—nos when he foresaw that they would beleeue But Sedulius is herein deceiued thinking that it was in the Romanes free-will to prepare their owne hearts to beleeue whereas euery good gift is of God Sam. 1.17 And if it were in mans power to beleeue every one might attaine vnto faith that would but the Apostle saith 2. Thess. 3.2 all men haue not saith And againe seeing the Apostle giueth such commendation of the Romanes saith there is no doubt but God had prepared their hearts 2. Hugo thinketh that Saint Paul was prohibited propter peccata Romanorum because of the sinnes of the Romanes This indeede sometimes is a let as Paul and Barnabas did shake off the dust of their feete against the Iewes and would no more preach vnto them because of their obstinacie and wilfull refusal Act. 13.51 Hyperius But this seemeth not to haue beene the cause here seeing the Apostle giueth such commendation of their faith v. 8. and of their goodnes c. 15.14 and obedience to the faith c. 16.19 3. There are also externall lets and impediments as his bonds imprisonment persecution Tolet. and he suffered by the way shipwracke and other casualties Aretius 4. But the most likely reason why the Lord staied S. Pauls comming to Rome was the necessitie of other Churches which the Lord would haue first established Gregorie teacheth this reason lib. 21. Moral c. 13. that God therefore letted him that he might more profit those Churches where he remained and S. Paul himselfe rendreth this reason Rom. 15.20 Therefore I haue beene oft let to come vnto you but now seeing I haue no more place in these quarters and also haue beene desirous many yeares againe to come vnto you c. his employment in other Churches deferred his comming to Rome Beza annot 34. Quest. Why S. Paul expresseth not the cause in particular which letted him 1. Gualter giueth this reason why the Apostle hauing diuers lets as namely new occasions continually offered in preaching the Gospel and beside his persecutions and afflictions and manifold troubles yet he maketh mention of none of these quia de his non poterat sine iactantiae suspicione because he could not speake of these things without suspition of boasting 2. But I rather approoue Chrysostomes reason non scrutatur Dominipropositum the Apostle doth not search into Gods purpose why such an Apostle was kept so long from such a famous citie when there was great hope of winning many vnto Christ it was sufficient that he was letted he is not curious to know the cause teaching vs thereby ne factorum rationem vnquam à Deo exigamus that we neuer require a reason of Gods works 3. And indeede Gods secret counsell herein is diuers waies vnsearchable 1. in respect of the teachers why sometime God sendeth many sometime few why some and not others why some are true pastors some wolues some true teachers some false 2. in regard of them which be taught why God sendeth preachers to one place and not vnto an other why Christ wrought miracles in Corazin and Bethsaida not in Tyrus and Sidon to bring them to repentance Matth. 11.21 3. and for the places why the Spirit suffered not Paul to preach in Asia and Bithynta Act. 16.6 7. And why in our daies in some certaine cities as at Constance God suffered the preaching of his Gospel to be intermitted 4. for the time why the Gospel is preached in some age and not in an other and some enioy it long some but a short time 5. for the manner why sometime the Gospel is preached obscurely and darkely sometime openly and manifestly why some preach it of enuie some of sincerities All these considerations doe set forth vnto vs how the iudgements of God are hid and vnsearchable Gryneus 4. And by this reason may the like obiection be answered why the Apostle was letted seeing his purpose was good that he might haue some fruite among them Because the Apostle beeing the Lords minister was not to prescribe the times and occasions fittest for the worke of the Gospel but to depend vpon God therein who best knewe how to sort out the best time for euerie purpose Quest. 35. Whether S. Pauls desire to goe to Rome beeing therein letted were contrarie to Gods will and so sinned therein 1. S. Pauls desire was not absolute but conditionall if it were the will of God for so he saith that I might haue a prosperous iourney by the will of God to come vnto you 2. But here we must consider of the will of God as it is secret and hid and as it is manifest and
with the singular vertues of God But Tolet obiecteth that the word quoque also is here a note non declarationis sed adiectionis not of declaration but of addition Contra. Though the vulgar Latine so translate quoque also yet in the originall the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is as much as nempe or videlicet that is to say as Vatablus and the Syrian interpreter read so likewise Beza 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the world created These words are diuersly expounded for whereas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth both the very act of creating of the world and the creature it selfe that was made as Erasmus noteth hereupon these diuers interpretations are giuen 1. Some read by the creation of the world Beza Genevens and Aretius thus distinguisheth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is tota mundi fabrica the whole frame of the world taken together but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the workes afterward mentioned are the speciall workes as the starres the elements and such like But if by the creation the workes themselues created should be vnderstood then the Apostle should seeme superfluously afterward to make mention of the workes are vnderstood by the workes Perer. Tolet. and beside 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put in the genitiue and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the datiue and therefore they can not be ioyned appositiuely together by way of declaration Pareus 2. The Latine translatour readeth à creatura of the creature which Anselme and the ordinarie glosse following vnderstand of man in which sense it is taken Mark 16.15 preach the Gospel to euery creature And man is so called the creature by a certaine excellencie because he hath some agreement with euery creature he is in a place as other bodies he hath sense as beasts and vnderstanding as Angels But as Tolet well noteth the other word which is ioyned with creature of the world excludeth this particular sense and application vnto man 3. Therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is here better taken for the world created and is referred vnto the time à mundo condito since the world was created Pareus à fundamentis mundi from the foundation of the world as the Syrian interpreter for so the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from is taken as Matth. 13.35 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the foundation of the world Tolet so that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here signifieth not the act of the creation for it is taken for the world created afterward in this epistle Rom. 8.20 nor yet for the creatures simply but for the state of the world when it was created from the world created à constitutione mundi from the constitution of the world as Chrysostome is translated 3. Beeing vnderstood by his workes Non corporea vel imaginaria visione sed intellectuali not by a corporeal or imaginarie vision are they seene but by an intellectual gloss interlin as the cause is vnderstood by the effect Lyran. like as by an image representing one that is absent we are brought to the knowledge and remembrance of him so God is seene in his workes Perer. 4. To wit his eternall power and Godhead 1. Some by the inuisible things of God vnderstand the person of God the father by the vertue or power the person of the Sonne by the deitie the holy Ghost which interpretation Theophylact mentioneth here onely Gorrham seemeth to follow it But this reason maketh against it that the mysterie of the Trinitie is to high a matter to be searched out by the light of nature that knowledge commeth onely by reuelation Perer. 2. These three things then are here vnderstood the eternitie power and diuine maiestie of God the knowledge whereof man is lead vnto in part by his naturall instinct Perer. 3. And vnder the deitie or Godhead are vnderstood the rest of his attributes his wisdom goodnes iustice which are seene in the administration of the world whereby his Godhead which is in it selfe incomprehensible is knowne as by the effects Pareus 52. Quest. Of the knowledge which the Philosophers had of God and by what meanes they attained vnto it 1. Theodoret rehearseth fiue waies whereby the Philosophers were brought to the knowledge of the Creator 1. by the contemplation of the heauens and the starres and their orderly motion 2. by the consideration of the elements the fire the aire the water the earth 3. by the admirable frame and workemanship of mans bodie 4. by the operation of mans hands and by the manifold arts inuented by man 5. by the dominion which man hath ouer the creatures Theodor. in serm de provid But some Philosophers had their speciall and peculiar reasons beside which induced them to thinke there was a God 2. Socrates especially considered the prouidence of God in prouiding so bountifully for man as he bringeth Euthydemus by this particular induction to acknowledge that God hath speciall care of man as he hath giuen him the light and day to guide him the night for him to rest in the fire to warme him the fruits of the earth to nourish him And whereas Euthydemus obiected that these things were common vnto men with bruit beasts Socrates sheweth that euen the beasts themselues also are for mans vse and beside God hath giuen more excellent gifts vnto man then to any other creature as vnderstanding memorie speach wherein Gods speciall care appeareth more to man then toward any other creature This was Socrates inducement ex Grynaeo 3. The Platonists did finde out God by comparing the Godhead with other things first they were perswaded that God was not a bodie secondly they held God to be immutable and so they sought not God in the soule of man or among the mutable spirits and therefore they held God to be an infinite and immutable essence beyond them all to this purpose August lib. 8. de civ Dei c. 6. And further they rose vp thus by degrees to finde out the Godhead first they held spirituall things to be better then corporall then the things that had life they preferred before those that had no life and of the things that had life them that had sense and motion and of these they held to be most perfect the things that were endued with reason and of the things hauing reason such as were intellectuall spirits such as are the Angels and among those he to be most perfect that was totus actus onely in act void of all passiue qualitie which is God for the other spirits doe consist partly in act partly in a possibilitie as they may not be But it is impossible that God should not be and thus by these steppes did they ascend to the contemplation of the diuine nature Faius 4. Aristotle was perswaded that there was a God and that all things consisted by the diuine power because it was haereditaria fama omnium mortalium an hereditarie opinion of all mortall men lib. 12. Metaphys c. 6 7. lib. 7. Ethicor. c. 13. thereupon
the iust shall liue by faith haue no other meaning but this iustum secundum fidei norman vitam dirigere that the iust doth direct his life according to the rule of faith Contra. 1. He doth not place the words aright for thus are the words to be ioyned together the iust by faith shall liue so that by faith hath rather connexion with the first word the iust then with the last shall liue 2. the Apostle by life here vnderstandeth euerlasting saluation not our conuersion here as is said before v. 16. that the Gospell is the power of God to saluation to euerie one that beleeueth faith then bringeth to euerlasting saluation 2. The Rhemists haue this shift that faith together with workes must be here vnderstood to iustifie the Apostle saith not the iust shall liue by faith onely to this purpose also Bellarmine lib. 1. de iustificat c. 20. Contra. 1. If the whole life of the soule depended not vpon faith but partly vpon faith partly vpon workes then it might as well be said the iust shall liue by workes which were an absurd speach and not farre from blasphemie 2. the Apostle c. 3.28 excludeth works concluding that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the lawe then to liue by faith is to liue onely by faith as we are iustified onely by faith without workes 3. Nowe although the iust liue by faith and not by workes yet faith liueth by workes it must be a liuely and effectuall faith working by loue by the which the iust man liueth and not a dead faith 3. Pererius here slyeth to their old distinction of iustification the first which is by faith the second is perfited by workes so faith is said to iustifie a man because it is exordium fundamentum radix iustificationis the beginning foundation and roote of iustification Perer. dâ—sput 8. in 1. ad Roman sect 46. Contra. 1. That which he calleth the second iustification is properly satisfaction which is the fruit of iustification as the Apostle saith Rom. 6.22 beeing now freed from sinne and made seruants vnto God you haue your fruit in holines and the end euerlasting life where the whole state of the faithfull man is diuided into these three parts his iustification and freedome from sinne which is by faith the fruit of his iustification which is holynesse and the ende or reward which is euerlasting life 2. to liue by faith sheweth that not the beginning but the perfection of our life is by faith and by nothing but faith as the Apostle saith the iustice of God is reuealed from faith to faith faith is the beginning and end of this iustice there is no time wherein saluation is giuen vnto any but by faith as Thomas expoundeth see before quest 42. 4. Bellarmine hath an other deuise he maketh this the meaning the iust shall liue by faith that is ex fide patienter expectare quae Deus promisit by faith he doth patiently expect those things which God hath promised So he would haue it vnderstood rather of patient wayting and expecting then of iustifying lib. 2. de effect sacram c. 9. Contra. This patient expecting of Gods promises is indeede a fruit of iustifying faith for it is the ground of things hoped for and he that is iustified by faith hath this grace also of patient expectation but to liue by faith comprehendeth more 2. and that by this phrase to liue by faith the Apostle vnderstandeth to be iustified by faith is euident Gal. 2.20 Thus I liue not I now but Christ liueth in me and in that I now liue in the flesh I liue by the faith if the Sonne of God c. 3. And whereas Bellarmine further obiecteth that the Prophets meaning from whom the Apostle taketh this saying is none other but to note their patience that waited for the Lords promises it hath beene shewed before qu. 44. that the Apostle keepeth the Prophets sense and doth most fitly apply this sentence to iustification by faith 5. But the Romanists against iustification by faith onely thus obiect 1. It seemeth a verie absurd thing to make men beleeue that they shall be iustified by faith onely without either satisfaction for their sinnes or the workes of righteousnesse by this meanes nothing could be easier then by faith to be saued 2. And this doctrine will make men presumptuous that they will care for no good workes and so there should be no more vse either of precepts to exhort them vnto the workes of pietie nor of threatnings to terrifie them from sinne Contra. 1. Though that faith neede no satisfaction for sinne in our selues nor good workes as helping vnto iustification yet it apprehendeth the satisfaction made by Christs suffering for our sinnes and workes are also necessarie as testimonies of our faith though not as helpes of our iustification neither is such a faith liuely and effectuall so easie a thing seeing man hath no power of himselfe to attaine vnto it vnlesse God doe giue it and to beleeue in Christ as a Christian ought is found to be the hardest thing in the whole world 2. Neither is this a doctrine of presumption nor yet doth it make voide precepts and comminations for faith though it require not workes as causes and helpes to saluation yet it cannot be without them as fruits and effects so that the lawe of faith establisheth the lawe of workes as the Apostle sheweth c. 3.31 doe we then make the lawe of none effect through faith God forbid yea we establish the lawe Pareus Controv. 17. How the Gospel is the power of God to saluation to everie one that beleeueth v. 16. This and such like places which ascribe iustification and saluation to faith as Ioh. 3.16 that whosoeuer beleeueth in him should not perish Act. 13.39 by him euerie one that beleeueth is iustified Bellarmine would thus elude 1. he saith that these Scriptures must be vnderstood negatiuely that without faith none are iustified not that onely by faith they are iustified 2. then by all are vnderstood all nations that there is no difference between Iew and Gentile but that one common way to saluation is propounded to them all 3. And it beeing applyed to euerie particular man the meaning is that not faith of it selfe alone but with other things as hope charitie iustifieth Bellar. lib. 1. de iustifie c. 22. Contra. 1. Yes these sayings hold affirmatiuely that faith is sufficient vnto saluation for our Sauiour saith Iohn 5. he that beleeueth c. hath euerlasting life and is passed from death to life that which giueth a man a present assurance and reall possession of euerlasting life is alone availeable to saluation 2. True it is that none of what nation soeuer are excluded but euerie one that beleeueth wheresoeuer is iustified this confirmeth the doctrine of iustification by faith that there is no other way to saluation either for Iewe or Gentile 3. And if the Gospell be the power of God to saluation
iudged in this that he beleeued not though for other things which he doth he shall not be iudged as it is said he that beleeueth shall not be iudged or condemned that is he shall not be iudged secundum hoc quod credit in that that he beleeueth yet in other things he shall be iudged 2. Such an one not beleeuing in Christ yet doing well though he haue not eternall life yet gloria operum poterit non perire by the glorie of his workes he may be kept from perishing to this purpose Origen lib. 2. in c. 2. ad Roman 2. Contra. 1. The first position of Origen that any thing done without faith can be acceptable to God is contrarie to the Scripture Heb. 11.6 Without faith it is impossible to please God neither doth that argument followe from the contrarie for one euill worke is sufficient to condemne a man but one good worke is not sufficient to obtaine reward for he that doth one good worke may haue many euill workes beside for the which he deserueth to be punished that other glosse of his of the iudging of beleeuers and the not iudging of vnbeleeuers is coÌ„futed by the words of our Sauiour Ioh. 5.24 he that beleeueth hath euerlasting life and shall not come into condemnation he is not freed then from iudgement onely in part because he beleeueth but simplie he shall neuer enter into condemnation for he which hath a liuely faith which is effectuall working by loue hath not onely a naked faith but is full of good workes and where he is wanting his imperfect obedience is supplied by the perfect obedience of Christ apprehended by faith 2. Neither doth the Scripture allowe any third place beside heauen and hell after this life that any not hauing eternall life should be preserued from perishing for they which are not counted among the sheepe at the right hand of Christ for whom the kingdome is prepared they belong vnto the goates at the left hand and shall goe into euerlasting fire prepared for the deuill and his Angels 3. This straight and inconuenience Origen is driuen vnto because he taketh these Iewes and Grecians to be vnbeleeuers whereas the Apostle vnderstandeth such among the Gentiles as beleeued in God and liued thereafter such were they which liued with Melchisedek Iob the Niniuites Cornelius as Chrysostome vpon this place sheweth whom Faius followeth 22. Quest. Of the diuerse acceptions of the word person v. 11. This word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is either giuen vnto God or to creatures and the same either without life or to such as haue life as to man 1. It is attributed to God three wayes 1. the face of God signifieth his iudgement against sinners 1. Pet. 3.12 the face of God is against those which doe euill 2. it is taken for the spirituall presence of Christ 2. Cor. 2.10 I forgaue it for your sakes in the sight or face 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Christ. 3. it is taken for the diuine hypostasis in the Trinitie as Christ is said to be the engraued forme of the person of his father Heb. 1.3 2. Things without life are said to haue a certaine face as Luke 12.56 the face of heauen 3. Properly this word face is giuen vnto man and it 1. either signifieth his countenance as Iesus is said to haue fallen vpon his face Matth. 26.39 2. or the bodilie presence as the Apostle saith he was kept from the Thessalonians concerning his face but not in heart 1. Thessal 2.17.3 or it is taken for some respect of the gifts of bodie minde or some externall condition as of honour riches or such like in this sense it is said of Christ Mark 12.14 thou carest not for the person of any and S. Iude saith of certaine false teachers that they haue mens persons in admiration for aduantage sake Iud. v. 16 and in this sense it is taken here Gryneus 4. The person then of man betokeneth some qualitie or condition in him for the which he is respected either naturall as the gifts of the minde sharpnes of wit memorie vnderstanding or of the bodie as strength come lines beutie or such as are attained vnto by labour and industrie as learning knowledge of arts wisdome or externall in worldly respects as if he be rich honourable of authoritie or such like 5. Further some respect of persons is necessarily ioyned with the cause as a fault in an aged man or minister or one that hath knowledge is greater then a slippe of a young man or one that is ignorant some respect of persons is diuided from the cause as whether he be rich or poore honourable or base and in this sense persons are not to be respected Martyr 23. Qu. How God is said not to accept the persons of men The Apostle hauing made mention of the equall condition of the Iewes and Gentiles both in punishment and reward addeth this as a reason because God is no accepter of persons in respect of their nation and kinred So S. Peter saith God is no accepter of persons 〈◊〉 in euery nation he that feareth God c. is accepted with him Act. 10.34 35 here the respecting of persons is vnderstood of the nation or countrey likewise S. Paul saith Gal. 3.28 that in Christ There is neither Iew nor Grecian bond nor free male nor female that is in Christ there is no respect of persons Deut. 16.19 Thou shalt not accept any person neither take any reward to preferre any for gifts or rewards beside the merit of his cause is to haue respect of persons God then accepteth no mans person he preferreth not any for his riches countrey honour strength or any other such qualitie but iudgeth euery man as his cause is and aâ— his works are But thus it will be obiected on the contrarie 1. Obiect Moses entreateth the Lord to spare his people for Abraham Isaak and â—â—kobs sake Exod. 32. herein then the Lord had respect of persons Ans. Some giue this answer that in temporall things such as was the forbearing to punish the people God may haue respect to persons but not in eternall Mart. But it may be better answered that God had not respect to the persons of these Patriarks but to his gracious promise which he had made vnto them as there Moses saith Remember Abraham c. to whome thou swarest by thy selfe c. 2. Obiect S. Paul would haue vs doe good to all but specially to the houshold 〈◊〉 faith Gal. 6.10 here the person is respected Ans. The person is not respected here but the cause for the faithfull are preferred in respect of their faith which is the cause why they haue the preheminence 3. Obiect But God doth elect some vnto saluation some are reiected whereas all by nature are the children of wrath and in the same common condition to giue then vnequall things as life or death to those which are in the same equall condition seemeth to be done with respect of persons Ans. 1.
two kinds of circumcisions rather then two parts of one and the same circumcision which are sometime ioyned together both the inward and outward as they were in Abraham sometime separate one from the other and this separation is of two sorts it is either salutaris healthfull or not for when the inward circumcision is without the outward it is profitable as in Noah but when the outward is and not the inward it is vnprofitable as in Iudas Iscariot 6. Origens obseruation seemeth here to be somewhat curious thus distinguishing the circumcision of the flesh that because there is some part of the flesh cut off and lost some part remaineth still the lost and cut off part saith he hath a resemblance of that flesh whereof it is said all flesh is grasse the other part which remaineth is a figure of that flesh whereof the Scripture speaketh all flesh shall see the saluation of God But thus Origen confoundeth the circumcision of the flesh and the spirit making them all one Further to shewe these two circumcisions of the heart and spirit he alleadgeth how the Israelites were circumcised againe by Iosuah who was a type of Christ that circumciseth the heart who were circumcised before by Moses in the desert wherein Origen is greatly deceiued for it is euident by the text Iosuah 5.5 that they which were circumcised by Iosuah had not beene circumcised before 4. Places of doctrine 1. Doct. v. 1. In that thou iudgest another thou condemnest thy selfe he which doth giue sentence vpon another for that wherein he is guilty therein is a iudge against himselfe so Iuda did iudge Thamar for her incontinencie beeing in greater fault himselfe and Dauid pronouncing sentence of death against him that had taken away his poore neighbours sheepe did by his owne mouth condemne himselfe Piscator see further addition 1. following 2. Doct. v. 11. There is no respect of persons with God c. In that God freely without respect vnto any workes electeth some vnto eternall life it is done without respect of persons for though God decree vnequall things vnto those that are in equall case for all by nature are the children of wrath yet it followeth not that God hath respect of persons for he doth it not either against any law for God is not tied vnto any lawe nor yet vpon any finiâ—ter cause either for feare for there is none greater than God to be feared of him or sauour for there are no merits or deserts which God respecteth in his election And when God commeth to giue the reward then he distributeth vnto euerie man according to their workes see further addit 3. following 3. Doct. v. 16. At the day when God shall iudge here the certaintie of the day of iudgement is expressed with the manner thereof 1. who shall iudge God 2. whom men and what not their open and manifest workes onely but their secret things 3. by whome in Iesus Christ in his humane shape 4. According to what rule namely the Gospell is be saith Ioh. 12. that his word shall iudge them Gualter 4. Doct. v. 21. Thou which teachest another c. the carnall Iewe though he did not himselfe as he taught yet was not his teaching and doctrine therefore to be refused so our Sauiour saith Matth. 23.3 Whatsoeuer they bid you obserue and doe but after their workes doe ye not Mart. 5. Doct. v. 25. Circumcision is profitable c. Baptisme succeedeth in the place of circumcision as the Apostle sheweth Coloss. 2.11 In whom ye are circumcised c. thorough the circumcision of Christ in that yee are bound in him thorough baptisme c. then like as infants were circumcised so are they now to be baptised but baptisme is not now tied vnto the eight day as it was then for by the libertie of the Gospell are we deliuered from the obseruation of the circumstances of the time and place 6. Doct. v. 28. Neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh as these were not two diuerse circumcisions but two acts of the one and same circumcision the internal and externall so there are two acts in one and the same baptisme there is the baptisme of the spirit and the baptisme of water which both are ioyned together in the lawfull vse they haue the baptisme of the spirit to whom the Sacrament is vpon vrgent necessitie denied but infidels vnbeleeuers and euill liuers haue onely the baptisme of water for he that beleeueth not shall be condemned Pareus 7. So likewise in the Eucharist there is an externall act of eating and an internall the vnworthie receiuers haue onely the latter the faithfull when they communicate haue both and in case the Sacrament be denied they may spiritually eat Christ without the Sacrament our Sauiour saith Ioh. 6.54 Whosoeuer eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternall life And though they doe spiritually eate Christ before they receiue the Sacrament for otherwise they would not desire it yet the Sacrament also must be celebrated for their further comfort and strengthening and the testifying of their faith Gryneus Certaine additions to the former doctrines Addit 1. Concerning the iudgement which a man giueth against himselfe which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thus much may further be obserued out of the 1. verse 1. What it is namely the testimonie of ones conscience of his owne guiltinesse before God 2. Whence it is partly by the prouidence of God which striketh into a mans conscience this sense of sinne partly by the force of the conscience it selfe conuincing one of sinne 3. Of whom it is namely of all men 4. It is necessarie and profitable to diuerse ends 1. to humble vs in respect of Gods iudgement for if our conscience condemne vs God can much more who is greater then our conscience 1. Ioh. 3.20 2. It is for our comfort working in vs bouldnesse if our hearts condemne vs not 1. Ioh. 3.21 3. it will make vs not to be too seuere in iudging of others our owne heart condemning vs. Addit 2. Out of the 5. v. concerning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the hardnesse of the heart we are to consider 1. What it is namely the contumacie and rebellion of the heart against the lawe of God 2. Whence it is originally by the corruption of mans nature Sathan concurreth as the efficient the occasion are the externall obiects and God by his secret iudgement yet most iust hath an ouerruling hand herein 3. the effect is the treasuring vp of the wrath of God 4. it is curable not by mans free will for it is not subiect to the lawe of God neither can be Rom. 8.8 but by the grace of Gods spirit as Dauid prayeth Psal. 51.12 Create in me a newe heart Addit 3. The accepting or respect of persons called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is when things equal are giuen to them which are vnequall or contrariwise things vnequall to them which are equall onely
to their faith which sheweth it selfe by their works 3. some he saith thus interpret he shall render according to their workes that is post opera sua after their works 4. some say they shall be rewarded according to their works but with the temporall blessings in this world not with life eternall 5. some graunt that the righteous shall be rewarded according to their workes if any could be found that had such workes which are worthie of reward the like answers Pererius imagineth to be made by the Protestants numer 39. but neither of them name what Protestants they are that thus answer we insist vpon none of these solutions 2. But we can otherwise satisfie all these reasons obiected 1. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to render signifieth not onely a iust retribution but a gift of fauour as in that place giuen in instance Matth. 20.8 the reward is said to be rendred not onely to them which had laboured first which might seeme to haue deserued it but vnto those that came at the last houre to whome it was giuen of fauour and therefore simply v. 14. it is expressed by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to giue 2. In that place Matth. 25. it is shewed to whome not for what the reward shall be giuen good works are required as a condition in those which are to be saued not as a meritorious cause of their saluation Pareus for in the same place our Sauiour sheweth the originall and fountaine of their saluation Come ye blessed of my father inherit the kingdome prepared for you from the foundations of the world their saluation then dependeth vpon the free and gratious election of God not vpon their works Faius 3. The argument followeth not from the merit of euill workes to the merit of good workes for there is great difference in the way of meriting betweene them 1. good works are the gifts of God and proceede from him but euill workes haue their beginning from man 2. good works are imperfect and therefore merit not euill workes are perfectly euill and therefore are worthie of punishment 3. good works are commanded and so it is our dutie to doe them and therefore thereby we doe not merit but euill workeâ— are forbidden and there is no dutie but rather the transgression of dutie in doing them Gryneus 4. And concerning this place it prooueth no merit of workes the Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to workes not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 propter opera for workes so that this sheweth the measure rather then the merit of workes As this phrase is taken Matth. 9.29 according to your faith be it vnto you and Matth. 22.3 according to their workes doe not And this phrase is thus expounded Revel 22.12 My reward is with me to render vnto euery one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according as his worke is Pareus so then according to their workes noteth the qualitie not the merit of their worke that is good workes shall be recompensed with reward and euill workes with punishment Faius And mention is made here of works that God shall iudge according as he findeth mens works to shew that he is no accepter of persons neither regardeth the outward appearance but that which is in truth Gualter And that it is not one and the same thing to reward for works and according to works Gregorie well sheweth in Psal. 149. v. 9. aliud est secundum opera reddere aliud pâ—â—pter ipsa opera reddere in eo enim quod secundum opera dicitur ipsa operum qualitas intell giuer c. it is one thing to render according vnto works an other for works for in that it is said according vnto works the qualitie of the worke is vnderstood that whose works appeare to be good his recompence should be glorious c. Pererius thus answereth to this place of Gregorie that he speaketh of the substance quantitie and qualitie of works in themselues which beeing compared with the celestiall glorie are not worthie thereof but as they are considered in Christ by whose vertue and merit they are made meritorious so are they worthie of that euerlasting reward to the same purpose also Tolet. annotat 6. Contra. But Gregorie must be vnderstood to speake of the works of the faithfull which receiue all their actiuitie worthines and acceptance from Christ and the Apostle likewise speaketh of the faithfull Rom. 8.18 I account that the afflictions of this present time are not worthie of the glorie which shall be shewed vs euen then the works and sufferings of the faithfull are excluded from meriting Faius 3. Now further that no works of the Saints are meritorious it may further be shewed by these reasons 1. there must be a proportion betweene the merit and the reward but betweene our works and the euerlasting reward there is no proportion the reward by many degrees exceeding the worthines of the best works 2. there are no good works without faith for without faith it is impossible to please God Heb. 11.6 wherefore whatsoeuer is promised to works per fidem consequimur we doe obtaine by faith 3. that which a man meriteth must be of his owne not of his of whome he meriteth now our good works are of God they are not of our selues and therefore by them we can not merit at Gods hand 4. that wherein men are endebted vnto God can not merit for then be should be endebted vnto vs not we vnto him for the wages is not of fauour but of debt Rom. 4.4 But all which we can doe is no more but our dutie we owe our best seruice vnto God as our blessed Sauiour saith When ye haue done all those things which are commanded you say we are vnprofitable seruants we haue done that which was our dutie to doe Luk. 17.10 But here some will answer that we are said to be vnprofitable seruants onely in respect of God because he is not profited or furthered by our seruice but yet good works are profitable to our selues Contra. True it is that good works are profitable because thereby we testifie our faith we doe good vnto others and make our owne saluation sure but it followeth not because they are profitable that therefore they merit eternall life Martyr they are as Bernard saith via regui non causa regnandi the way vnto the kingdome not the cause of the kingdome 4. Controv. Which are to be counted good workes v. 7. Which by continuance in good works seeke c. The Romanists doe not hold those onely to be good works which are commanded by God but such also as are enioyned by the Church and the gouernors thereof Concil Tridentiâ— sess 6. c. 10. And according to this rule they count the saying and hearing of Masse going in pilgrimage inuocating of Saints praying for the dead offering vnto images good works Contra. There are two euident rules to examine good works by 1. because God onely is good and the fountaine and author of
acception of the word hath no place here for this declaration of one to be iust by works is before men before God there neede no such declaration for he knoweth what is in man but this iustification is before God which the Apostle here speaketh of it is therefore iustification in deede and not the declaration of it onely 6. Some thinke that the Apostle speaketh of the legall iustification which is by works which if any could doe they should be iustified thereby but it is impossible for any to keepe the law Calv. Pareus Beza annotat But it is euident that the Apostle speaketh not here of a thing impossible to be done and of iustification vpon that supposall if any could be doers of the law but he setteth this downe affirmatiuely and positiuely that they which liued according to the law should be iustified as he said before v. 6. that God will reward euery one according to his workes And as the hearers of the law onely are not iustified so the hearers and doers are iustified but some heare the law in fact verily and in deede therefore some also were verily and in deede doers of the law 7. The meaning then of this sentence is the same with that v. 6. God will approoue iustifie reward them that doe the works of the law whether Iew or Gentile yet it followeth not that a man is therefore iustified by the workes of the law But God approoueth and rewardeth the workers not the hearers or professors so here the Apostle entreareth not of the cause of iustification which is faith without the works of the law but of the difference betweene such as shall be iustified and such as are not Faius they onely which haue a liuely faith which worketh and keepeth the law in part and supplieth the rest which is wanting in themselues by the perfect obedience of Christ they shall be iustified not those which onely professe the law and keepe it not the Apostle then here sheweth who shall be iustified not for what 8. But this place maketh nothing at all for iustification by works 1. if a man is iustified by doing the works of the law either he is iust before he doe the works or nor iust if he be iust then he is iustified before he doe those workes then is he not iustified by those workes if he be not iust then can he doe no good workes whereby he is made iust for the workes done before faith as Tolet himselfe confesseth non possunt iustum afficere can not make one iust Here the Romanists haue no better answer then to confesse fidem sine operibuâ— primaâ— efficere iustificationem that faith without workes doth effect the first iustification which is encreased by workes which they call the second iustification Tolet. ibid. And thus they are driuen to consent with Protestants that iustification is by faith without works as for that distinction of the first and second iustification the vanitie of it is shewed before 2. If workes did iustifie then it would followe that the iustice whereby we are made iust should be an actuall iustice not habituall because that is actuall which worketh the contrarie whereof is maintained by Bellarmine who prooueth by sundrie reasons that one is formally made iust not by an actuall but an habituall iustice wherewith the minde is endued lib. 2. de iustific c. 15. Controv. 8. That it is not possible in this life to keepe the lawe 1. Pererius disput 7. numer 55. taketh vpon him to prooue against Calviu legem divinam impleri posse that the lawe of God may be kept in this life he meaneth by a man in the state of grace 1. Otherwise Dauid had not said true Psal. 18.21 I kept the wayes of the Lord and did not wickedly against my God 2. S. Paul saith he that loueth his brother hath fulfilled the Lawe Rom. 13. 3. What wisedome were there in God to command things impossible vnto man or what iustice to punish him for not keeping of that which was not in his power 2. Contra. 1. Dauids keeping of the wayes of God must be vnderstood either of some particular act of his obedience wherein he behaued himselfe vprightly as Psal. 7.3 If I haue done this thing or if there be any wickednesse in mine hands or els it must be vnderstood of his faithfull endeauour as farre as he was enabled by grace for Dauids sinnes which are mentioned in the Scripture doe euidently shewe that he did not keepe all the wayes of God 2. If a man could perfectly loue his brother as he ought he might fulfill the lawe but so can no man doe and there is as Hierome distinguisheth 2. kinds of iustice or fulfilling the lawe there is a perfect iustice which was onely in Christ and an other iustice quae nostrae competit fragilitati which agreeth vnto our frailtie dialog 1. cont Pelagian and thus may the lawe be fulfilled 3. The commandements are not simply impossible for man in his creation had power to keepe them if he would Gods wisedome is seene in giuing his lawe vnto man beeing vnable in himselfe to keepe it that it might be a schoolemaster to bring him vnto Christ Galat. 3.19 and his iustice appeareth in punishing man for transgressing that lawe which sometime he was able as he was created of God to keepe and now may perfectly performe it by faith in the obedience of Christ who hath deliuered vs from the curse of the lawe 3. Now that it is not possible for a man no not in the state of grace to keepe the lawe of God it is thus shewed out of the the Scripture 1. S. Paul saith Rom. 7.19 To will is present with me but I finde no meanes to performe that which is good a man regenerate now can doe no more then S. Paul could who confesseth that he was vnable to doe that which was good and agreeable to the lawe 2. If a man by grace could keepe the law by grace he hath power to redeeme himselfe from the curse of the lawe for as he which keepeth not euerie thing contained in the law is vnder the curse so he that keepeth all things which the lawe commandeth is free from the curse but no man can redeeme himselfe from the curse of the lawe for Christ hath redeemed vs from the curse of the lawe Galat. 3.13 3. Further The lawe is not of faith Galat. 3.12 but if the lawe might be kept by grace and faith then should it be of faith 4. And if a man regenerate were able to keepe the lawe then it were possible for a man in this life to be without sinne for where no transgression of the lawe is there should be no faâ—e for sinne is the transgression of the law 1. Ioh. 3.4 see more hereof Synops. Centur. 4. â—rr 63. pag. 916. Controv. 9. Whether by the light of nature onely a man may doe any thing morally good Bellarmine hath this position that a man if no tentation doe vrge
his wrath and make his power knowne suffer with long patience the vessels of wrath prepared to destruction â—ere God should seeme to doe that which is euill as to prepare the vessels of wrath to destruction for a good ende namely to declare his power 2. Likewise to permit and suffer euill to be done in the world to exercise his iudgâ—ments or declare his prouidence seemeth to be euill as when he suffered Iosephs brethâ—â—â— to sell him into Egypt that Iacobs familie by this meanes might be prouided for for he which suffereth euill to be done when he may hinder it seemeth to consent vnto it and so is accessarie thereunto as a Magistrate sinneth in suffering adulterie murther and other sinnes to goe vnpunished Ans. Concerning the first obiection it is not euill that some are vessels of wrath prepared to destruction 1. because it is Gods will which is alwaies iust and holy yea Gods will is a perfect rule of iustice 2. and that which tendeth to Gods glorie can not be euill as God getteth himselfe glorie in the condemnation of the wicked 3. that which is lawfully done can not be euill but God in reiecting some doth that which he may doe by lawfull right to dispose of his owne as it pleaseth him as no man can reprooue the potter in making some vessels of honour some of dishonour of the same piece of clay 4. but seeing in the ende Gods reiecting and reprobating of some namely such as by their sinnes deserued eternall death appeareth to be most iust it must needs also be good for that which is iust is good 2. To the other obiection of Gods permission it may be likewise answered 1. to permit euill to be done and to consent to euill doe not necessarily follow one the other he that permitteth onely hath a will not to hinder but he that consenteth approoueth that which is done 2. and that God consenteth not to that which he permitteth is euident because he punisheth sinne which he suffreth to be done 3. God in permitting euill to be done onely consenteth to that good which he draweth out of euill and for the which he suffreth the same to be done 4. the case is not like betweene God permitting euill to be done and the Magistrate for 1. God is free and is not tied to any lawe but the Magistrate suffring euill therein doth contrarie to Gods lawe or mans 2. Man oftentimes of some sinister affection suffreth euill either because he is hindered by some greater power and cannot punish it or he is corrupted and so winketh at sinne but none of these are incident to God 3. If the Magistrate propound vnto himselfe some good ende in vsing connivence iâ— some sinnes yet he is not sure to effect it as God is 4. Beside it belongeth vnto the Creator to giue vnto his creatures freely to worke according to their nature for otherwise he should restraine the ordinarie course of things But this no way concerneth the Magistrate in his connivence ex Pareo Quest. 14. In what sense the Apostle denieth the lewes to be more excellent then the Gentiles v. 9 v. 9. What then are we more excellent there is a double sense of these words some thinke that this is spoken in the person of the faithfull which were vncircumcised as though they were more excellent then the Iewes which abused the blessings which the Lord had bestowed vpon them but if the Apostle had spoken here of the vncircumcised he would not haue named himselfe as one of them are we more excellent therefore the other sense is better that the Apostle speaketh here in the person of the Iewes least they might haue gloried too much in their preheminence and prerogatiues which the Apostle had yeelded vnto them before the Gentiles v. 1. 2. Now the Apostle in denying vnto the Iewes that excellencie which he before had yeelded vnto them v. 1. is not contrarie to himselfe for the reconciling whereof 1. Some thinke that S. Paul before spake of the excellencie of the Iewes beyond the Gentiles before the comming of Christ but here of their state in the Gospell when they had no such preheminence as the Apostle saith Coloss. 3. that in Christ there is neither Iewes transgressing against the lawe were no better then the Gentiles as Ezech. 5.10 she hath changed my iudgements into wickednesse more then the nations c. 2. Some giue this solution that then preheminence was in respect of the promises on Gods behalfe which he made vnto the Iewes but in respect of their owne nature they were sinners as well as others Thomas Pererius they had no preheminence by their owne merits to this purpose Gualter Hyperius Aretius with others But Tolet refuseth this vpon this reason because in this sense neither should a Christian man haue any preheminence before a Gentile seeing the one meriteth more at Gods hand then the other these things wherein they excell non 〈◊〉 proprijs acciperunt they haue not receiued by their owne merits annotat 6. 3. The preheminence then before graunted and now denied is neither in respect of the diuers times nor of their persons but of the cause in hand that although the Iewes had some ciuill and Ecclesiasticall prerogatiues they had the law circumcision which the Gentiles had not yet concerning their manner of iustification before God it was all one the Iew was no more iustified by works then the Gentile but both of them were iustified onely by faith Par. Tol. 15. Quest. Of the meaning of certaine phrases which the Apostle vseth v. 9. We haue alreadie prooued and vnder sinne 1. The Greeke word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. some translate criminati sumus we haue accused Greeke schol Beza Pareus but it had beene sufficient to haue said we haue shewed both Iewes and Gentiles to be vnder sinne this was a sufficient accusation it selfe without any such expresse addition that he had accused them Tolet. 2. Pererius maketh this the sense I haue alleadged this as a cause that all are vnder sinne namely as the cause and occasion why the Iewes in the matter of iustification are not preferred before the Gentiles Per. Haymo but that the Apostles speach should be imperfect saying thus much in effect we haue shewed this as the cause that all are vnder sinne not shewing whereof it should be a cause 3. Tolet deuiseth an other sense expounding it by the passiue we haue beene all accused that both Iewes and Gentiles are vnder sinne but the Greeke construction will not suffer this sense for Iewes and Gentiles is put in the accusatiue and so can not answer vnto the word accused 4. Some thus interpret causis redditis ostendimus we haue shewed by rendring the cause why all should be vnder sinne that the Apostle had not onely shewed this but tendred also the cause Chrysost. Ambr. Sedul Erasm. Vatabl. but Beza thinketh that the word is not found in that sense 5. Wherefore the best interpretation is this
Abraham obeied God to goe out of his countrey and to dwell in a strange land Heb. 11.8 and other promises as Gen. 12.3 and 13.16 also Abraham beleeued wherein he shewed his faith yet Moses reserueth this commendation of Abrahams faith to this place for these reasons 1. Moses would not straight vpon the first promise made Gen. 12. speake of Abrahams iustification by faith before he had brought forth diuers excellent and glorious works that his iustification might appeare to be of his faith not by works so Faius and Tolet. annot 5. 2. Neither would Moses deferre this testimonie of Abrahams faith vnto that act of his in offering his Sonne to be sacrificed but he setteth it downe here as soone as he had receiued an expresse promise concerning his seede which was Christ that it might appeare to be faith in Christ and none other whereby he was iustified before this Abraham had receiued some generall promises concerning Christ as that in Abraham all the families of the earth should be blessed Gen. 12.3 and that his seede should be as the dust of the earth but the seede out of his owne bowels was not promised vntill now Tolet. Faius 3. Further then was his faith commended because it had at that time beene throughly tried when he thought that Eliezer his seruant should be his heire 4. And though Abraham had faith before yet was it still more perfected and Abraham was now more certenly perswaded of his iustification and therefore he is said now first to be iustified though indeede by the same faith he had beene iustified before Pareus dub 2. Quest. 8. What imputation is and what to be imputed 1. This word is distinguished according to that which is imputed as sometime that which is euill is said to be imputed sometime that which is good 1. An euill thing is imputed two wayes either rightfully as when a sinne is worthily imputed to him that committed it as Quintilian putteth this case lib. 5. c. 10. vtrum caedes ei imputanda sit c. whether the murther be to be imputed to him that beganne the strife or it is imputed wrongfully as adulterie was imputed to Susanna her charge without cause 2. a good thing is imputed three wayes 1. iure by right as the reward is imputed to the worke by debt as the Apostle vseth the word here v. 4. but then this word imputed is taken for to giue and it is improperly called an imputing 2. iniuria by wrong as when innocencie is imputed to a malefactor which is forbidden Prou. 17.15 to iustifie the wicked 3. gratia by grace and fauour a thing is imputed but not against right propter alienum meritum for an others merit and so are we said to be iustified by faith in Christ Pareus like as when a Creditor of grace and fauour accepteth a debt to be paied and accounteth it discharged when yet the partie indebted is not able to pay it in this sense is the word taken Numb 18.27 Your offring shall be reckoned vnto you as the corne of the barne it shall be so counted or be in stead of it though it be not it Faius 2. This word to be imputed likewise is taken either Physice in a Phisicall sense as when a plant is said to be imputed that is set in or graft into the stocke or relate by way of relation when a thing is imputed by way of acceptation and fauour as when the victorie archieved by the soldiers is for honors sake ascribed vnto the captaine though absent or when the captaine to whom the spoyle belongeth giueth it vnto the souldiers that did not fight for it and thus is the righteousnesse of Christ which we wrought not our selues imputed vnto vs by faith 3. And thus for faith to be imputed for righteousnesse or to be iustified by faith of faith or thorough faith are with S. Paul taken for one and the same thing Quest. 9. How Abrahams faith was imputed to him for righteousnesse 1. Origen thinketh that Abrahams faith was imputed to him now for righteousnesse because it was perfect whereas before vntill now it was onely in part and hereof it is that whereas it is said of the Israelites Exod. 14.31 they beleeued the Lord and his seruant Moses yet they are not said to be iustified by this faith it was for that their faith was not perfect as was Arahams But 1. no mans faith can be perfect here for as we knowe in part 1. Cor. 13.12 so is our faith in part 2. that beleefe which there Moses speaketh of was of an other kind it was not a iustifying faith which is ioyned with confidence for they reposed not their trust in Moses but it was onely a beleeuing and giuing credit vnto God and his minister Moses 2. Neither was Abraham iustified merito fidei by the merit and worthinesse of his faith as by the worke and act thereof as the Romanists teach and Origen gaue occasion of this error who thinketh as it is here said of faith it was imputed for righteousnesse idem de alijs vertutibus dici potest that the same thing may be said of other vertues as humilitie wisedome may be reputed vnto iustice c. But this is a manifest error for faith or any other vertue as it is a worke cannot iustifie because it is but an act of one vertue and so not obedience and conformitie to the whole lawe and beside we are said to be iustified by faith without workes then neither faith nor any vertue iustifieth as a worke 3. Neither yet is faith taken here by a synecdoche when one part is taken for all as including workes as P. Martyr reporteth their error for faith cannot include that which it excludeth if faith iustifie without workes then vnder workes cannot faith be comprehended 4. Here also we refuse that corrupt note of the ordinarie glosse that to him which beleeueth si non habet tempus operandi if he haue not time to worke faith onely sufficeth to righteousnesse but to him that hath time to worke the reward shall be giuen not according to his beleefe onely sed secundum debitum operationis but according to the debt of his worke But two wayes is this glosse erroneous 1. because it flatly contradicteth the Apostle who affirmeth where faith is counted for righteousnesse there is no reward due by any debt v. 4.5 2. it is impossible that he which hath a iustifying faith should be without some workes as euen the theife vpon the crosse shewed his faith by his workes in confessing his sinne and honouring Christ. 5. Tolet also here is verie nice and curious he will not haue the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here to be interpreted by the word imputo to impute but by the word reputo to repute the difference betweene the which two is this reputatur id quod tale non est ac si tale esset c. that is reputed which is not such as though it were such to
risen but his bodie might haue beene kept incorruptible in his graue vnto the ende of the world and then he might haue risen and we with him but then should we haue beene iustified he rose therefore for our iustification not for our resurrection 4. Some will haue these two benefits of remission and iustification to be indifferently referred as well to the death as to the resurrection of Christ as Theophylact mortuus est exe tatus à morte c. he died and was raised from death to free and exempt vs from our euill works and to make vs iust to the same purpose Haymo vt credentes eum passum c. that beleeuing him to haue suffered for our saluation and to haue risen from the dead per hanc fidem mereamur iustificari we may be counted worthie to be iustified by this faith So Emmanuel Sa. vtrunque factum propter vtrunque both of these were wrought by both these But if both these benefits were in like sort and manner wrought by both those actions of Christ there should appeare no reason of this distinction which the Apostle vseth 5. An other exposition is Christ rose for our iustification that is ad eam demonstradam for the manifestation and demonstration of it Piscator he had purchased indeede both our redemption from our sinnes and our iustification by his death and passion but resurrectione gloriosa testatus est he witnessed by his resurrection that he had ouercome hell and death for vs Osiand But the Apostle sheweth the very reall cause of our iustification not the testification onely thereof by Christs resurrection as his deliuering to death was the very cause of the remission of our sinnes 6. Some giue this sense he is said to haue risen for our iustification quia salutis predicatio redemptionis applicatio generalis c. because the preaching of saluation and the generall application of redemption was to followe after the resurrection Tolet. annot 25. to the same purpose Pet. Martyr our redemption was purchased by the death of Christ but that the same might be applyed vnto vs spiritu sancto opus fuit it was needefull the spirit of God should be sent These by iustification vnderstand the application publication and preaching of iustification But this seemeth not be so fit neither for as in the one part of the sentence the Apostle toucheth the true working and efficient cause of the remission of sinnes Christs deliuering vnto death and not the application or publication so must the other part of our iustification be vnderstood And Christ might if it had pleased him haue giuen his Apostle a commission to preach his death and passion before his resurrection yet had we not beene fully iustified vntill he had risen againe 7. But among the rest that exposition which goeth vnder the name of Ambrose in the commentarie vpon this place seemeth to be most vnreasonable that the Apostle thus deuideth these benefits to shewe that as many as were baptized before the passion of Christ solam remissionem peccatorum accepisse receiued onely remission of sinnes but after Christs resurrection as well they which were baptized before as after esse omnes vere iustification were all truely iustified This one place doth giue iust occasion of suspition that those commentaries were not composed by Ambrose for remission of sinnes cannot be separated from iustification whosouer hath the one hath likewise the other because they are pronounced blessed whose sinnes are remitted before ver 7. but there can be no blessednesse without iustification 8. Hugo is somewhat curious to shewe the reason why remission of sinnes is ascribed vnto Christs passion and iustification vnto his resurrection first he saith that Christs passion is both causa meritum figura the cause merit and figure or forme of remission but it is the cause and merit onely of iustification and newenesse of life not the forme it is the cause moouing that we should liue in sinne for which Christ hath died and Christ by his death merited forgiuenesse of our sinne and he hath giuen in his death a forme that as he died in respect of his bodily life so we should die vnto sinne now of newenesse of life Christs death is both the cause mouing and meriting of newenesse of life but not a figure so it agreeth in three points with the remission of sinnes and in two onely with iustification Likewise Christs resurrection was both the cause mouing vnto newenesse of life are the forme and figure that as Christ rose againe so we should rise vnto newenesse of life but of remission of sinnes it was onely the cause moouing not the forme but of neither was it any meritorious cause for Christ hauing put off his mortall bodie in the resurrection was not in statu merendi in the state of meriting so the resurrection of Christ agreeth with iustification in two points in beeing the cause and figure or forme but with remission of sinnes onely in one in beeing the cause therefore iustification is rather ascribed to Christs resurrection then vnto his passion to this purpose Hugo But he faileth in this his subtile and curious distinction 1. for seeing that the passion of Christ in two points as be himselfe obserueth agreeth with iustification namely in beeing the cause and merit thereof and the resurrection in two likewise in beeing the cause and figure or forme iustification should rather in this regard be ascribed vnto Christs passion because it was merited by it and not by the other and the rather because the Apostle hath nothing to doe with the exemplarie forme of the one or the other but to shewe the true causes and so the passion of Christ shall agree in two respects with iustification and the resurrection of Christ but in one 9. To drawe then this question to an ende there are two answers which I insist vpon as the best and so I will ioyne them both together 1. The Apostle doth put iustification vnto the resurrection of Christ because although it were merited by his death yet it had the complement and perfection by the resurrection of Christ for if Christ had not risen againe he had not shewed himselfe conquerour of death and so the worke of our redemption had beene vnperfect thus Calvin Beza Gualter and to this purpose Rollecus distinguisheth well betweene meritum efficacia the merit of iustification in respect of Christ and the efficacie thereof in respect of vs Christ did meritoriously worke our iustification and saluation by his death and passion but the efficacie thereof and perfection of the worke to vs-ward dependeth vpon his resurrection the like distinction the Apostle vseth saying Rom. 10.10 With the heart man beleeueth vnto righteousnes and with the mouth man confesseth to saluation not really distinguishing them in the causes one from the other but shewing that the complement and perfection of the worke consisteth in both 2. Hereunto adde that although these two benefits of our
redemption remission of sinnes and iustification are in themselues and in the vse of them common and vndeuided and are indifferently sometime ascribed to Christs death and passion Rom. 3.24 Ephes. 1.7 and sometime to his resurrection Rom. 10.9 yet in respect of their proper causes they are discerned rather then distinguished as the remission of sinnes is properly referred to Christs passion iustification to his resurrection Pareus and the reason is yeelded by Thomas effectus habet aliqualiter similitudinem causae the effect hath in some sort the similitude of the cause our mortification in the remission of sinne answeareth to Christs death our iustification and spirituall life to Christs rising againe to life Mart. Thus the workes of our creation redemption sanctification are indifferently ascribed to the whole Trinitie as works of their deitie and yet are discerned in respect of their seuerall persons And this shall suffice of this intricate and difficult question 4. Places of doctrine Doct. 1. Iustification by workes sheweth pride and vaine-glorie v. 2. If Abraham were iustified by workes he hath wherein to reioyce or glorie c. It is euident then that for one to stand vpon the iustice of his workes it commeth of pride and vaine boasting it maketh a man to extoll and advance himselfe against the grace of God but God resisteth the proude and giueth grace to the humble the proud Pharisie was not iustified but the humble Publican then let proud Pharisies and vaine-glorious Papists knowe that as long as they stand vpon the merit of their workes they shall neuer be truely iustified But yet whereas the Apostle addeth he hath wherein to reioyce but not with God we learne that all reioycing in good workes and in the keeping of a good conscience is not denyed we may modestly professe and protest before men what the grace of God hath wrought in vs but we must not glorie therein as thereby iustified before God as the Apostle else where saith 1. Cor. 4.4 I knowe nothing by my selfe yet am I not thereby iustified Pareus Doct. 2. Of the nature and substance of the Sacraments v. 11. Circumcision is called the seale of the righteousnes of faith this is not proper and peculiar to circumcision but it sheweth the vse and end of all sacraments which is to seale confirme vnto vs the promises of God in Christ So here are collected all the causes of the Sacraments 1. the efficient cause and author is God onely because he onely is able to giue efficacie and vertue vnto the sacraments as God was the author of circumcision so of all other the Sacraments both of the old and newe Testament 2. the materiall cause is the visible and externall signe 3. the forme is the rite and manner of institution 4. the ende to seale vnto vs the promises of God for remission of our sinnes in Christ Faius pag. 238. Doct. 3. Of the baptisme of infants From the circumcision of infants in the old Testament is inferred the baptisme also of infants vnder the newe for there is the same reason of both the Sacraments and S. Paul doubteth not to call baptisme circumcision Col. 2.11 And if circumcision beeing graunted to infants then baptisme should be denied nowe this were to make God more equall vnto the Iewes and their seede which were the carnall offspring of Abraham then vnto beleeuing Christians which are the spirituall sonnes of Abraham If it be obiected that we knowe not whether infants haue rem sacramenti the thing represented in the Sacrament neither should we put to the signe we answear 1. that this were to reason against God for the same question may be mooued concerning circumcision 2. no more doth the minister know the minde and intention of all those which communicate in the Lords Supper 3. infants are baptized though they haue no vnderstanding as yet of the Sacrament to shewe that they belong vnto the couenant of grace whence their saluation dependeth and not of the outward signe and both presently the Church receiueth edifying when they see infants baptized and the children themselues are admonished and stirred vp when they come to yeares of discretion to learne the true signification and vse of their baptisme which they receiued in their infancie Peter Martyr Doct. 4. Of the vnitie of the Church and the communion of Saints v. 11. That he should be the father of all them that beleeue In that Abraham is called the father of all that beleeue whether of the circumcision or vncircumcision hence it is euident that there is but one Church and one way of iustification for all whether circumcised or vncircumcised vnder the Lawe or the Gospel and that there is a communion and common fellowship of all beleeuers as beeing all brethren and children of faithfull Abraham So the Apostle saith Ephes. 4.4 There is one bodie one spirit c. one Lord one faith one baptisme Doct. 5. Faith requisite in those which are made partakers of the Sacraments v. 11. The seale of the righteousnesse of faith which he had Circumcision profited not Abraham without faith neither can any Sacrament to them which are of discretion and able to vnderstand and discerne be of any force without faith and therefore S. Pauls rule is 1. Cor. 11.28 That a man should examine himselfe when he commeth to the Lords table and to this examination it belongeth to prooue whether they be in faith 2. Cor. 13.5 Doct. 6. The faithfull are the true owners and heares of the world the wicked are vsurpers v. 13. The promise to be heire of the world was made to Abraham thorough faith to them then that beleeue who are the right seede of faithfull Abraham doe the promises belong both of this life and of the next as the Apostle saith 1. Tim. 4.8 That godlinesse haue both the promise of this life and of that which is to come the faithfull then may vse the blessings of this life with a good conscience as pledges of the life to come but the wicked are vsurpers and therefore defile themselues in abusing the things of this life Gryneus Doct. 7. The difference betweene the true God and the false v. 17. He beleeued God who quickeneth the dead Hence are gathered three arguments of the Godhead 1. his omnipotencie both in giuing a beeing vnto things which are not be calleth the things that are not as though they were and in restoring vnto things the beeing which they had 2. his eternitie he is the first and the last both at the first he created all things and shall in the last day raise them vp to life againe 3. his omniscience he can foretell things to come in calling them that is giuing them a beeing which yet are nothing These things cannot idols doe nor any strange gods by these arguments the Prophet Isa confoundeth the Idols of the heathens shewing that they are not like vnto the true God Isa. 44.6 I am the first and the last and without me there is no
purpose alleadge Augustine who vnderstandeth here the loue non qua ipse nos diligit sed qua facit nos dilectores sui not wherewith God loueth vs but whereby he maketh vs louers of of him c. and he would prooue the same by the Apostles phrase absurdissime dicitur c. that is most absurdly said to be shed in our hearts quod extra nos est c. which is without vs onely in God Contra. 1. Against Oecumenius we set Chrysostome an other Greeke father who vnderstandeth the Apostle to speake of the loue of God toward vs dilectioni Dei rem omnem acceptam fert he ascribeth the whole matter vnto the loue of God 2. Augustine shall answear Augustine who elsewhere interpreteth this place of the loue of God toward vs as where he thus saith ipse spiritus sanctus dilectio est non enim habet homo vnde Deum diligâ—â— nisi ex Deo vnde Apostolus the holy spirit himselfe is this loue for man cannot tell how to loue God but from God whereupon the Apostle saith the loue of God is shed abroad c. 3. And in this verie place of Augustine he speaketh of such loue of God in vs whereby the Lord maketh vs loue him so that he includeth also the loue of God first toward vs whence issueth our loue toward him 4. And the loue of God in God toward vs may without absurditie at all be said to be shed abroad in our hearts as in true friendship the loue of a friend may be said to be shedde on him whom he loueth so Gods loue is shed forth in vs by the fruits and effects which it worketh in vs Pareus dub 4. 2. Some thinke that both the loue of God toward vs and our loue toward God are comprehensive in the Apostles speach as Origen vpon this place alloweth both so also Gorrhan and Pererius disputat 2. numer 9. who hereupon inferreth that there may be more literall senses then one of one place of Scripture Contra. One Scripture may haue one generall sense which may comprehend diuers particulars or it may haue one literall sense with diuers applications as typicall or tropologicall figuratiue or morall but it can not haue more then one literall sense or exposition specially one beeing different from the other not any scales included in it or inferred or diducted out of it for then the spirit in the Scripture should speake doubtfully and ambiguously like vnto the oracles of Apollo which were so deliuered as that they might be taken in a diuers yea a contrarie sense See further of this point Synops. Centur. 1. err 7. But that the loue wherewith man loueth God is not here at all vnderstood it shall appeare by diuers reasons here following 3. The best interpretation then is that the Apostle speaketh here of the loue of God wherewith we are beloued of him in Christ. 1. Beza vrgeth this reason because afterward v. 8. the Apostle speaketh of that loue God setteth forth his loue toward vs c. and in both places mention is made of the same loue of God the ground and foundation whereof is Christ that was giuen to die for vs. 2. Pareus insisteth vpon this reason the loue of God here spoken of is alleadged as the cause of our reioycing and of the steadfastnes of our hope but our loue of God beeing weake and imperfect can not be that cause 3. Peter Martyr and Pareus doe further presse the scope of the place the Apostle assumeth this as an argument of our hope because Christ was giuen to die for vs which proceeded not from the loue of vs toward God but from his loue toward vs. 4. Faius vrgeth the force of the Apostles phrase this loue is said to be shed abundantly in our hearts but our loue toward God is not such an abundant and surpassing loue it is a slender scant and weake loue he meaneth then the superabundant loue of God toward vs which as the Apostle saith Phil. 4.7 passeth all vnderstanding 5. I will adioyne also Tolets reason annot 5. in c. 5. the charitie and loue whereby we loue God is but one grace and vertue but the Apostle speaking of the shedding forth of this loue by the holy Ghost meaneth the effusion and powring out of all the graces which are wrought in vs by the spirit he meaneth then the loue of God toward vs from which fountaine issue faith all the graces and gifts of the spirit 6. Adde hereunto the consonant exposition of many of the Fathers as of Chrysostome cited before of Hierome who thus writeth quomodo Deus nos diligat ex hoc cognoscimus c. how God loueth vs we know by this that he hath not onely by the death of his Sonne forgiuen our sinnes but hath also giuen vs the holy Ghost c. Likewise Ambrose pignus charitatis Dei bohemus in nobis c. we haue the pledge of the loue of God by the holy spirit giuen vnto vs c. Theophylact also interpreteth de charitate Dei quam erga nos ostendit c. of the loue of God which he sheweth toward vs c. Likewise expound Theodoret Sedulius with others 8. Quest. Why the loue of God is said to be shed abroad in our hearts 1. Some doe giue this sense effusa est sicut oleum c. this loue is shed abroad like oyle 〈◊〉 cor occupando in possessing and occupying the whole heart according to that saying Matth. 22. Thou shalt loue the Lord thy God with all thy heart Gorrh. but the loue of 〈◊〉 is not here taken actively for that loue whereby we loue God as is shewed in the former question 2. Tolet thus expoundeth it abundantissime facti sunt amici Dei they are not sparingly but abundantly made the sonnes of God likewise the ordinarie glosse referreth it to the greatnes of Gods loue late nos diligit he doth loue vs largely that is greatly 3. Some referre it to the cleare manifestation of the loue of God in our hearts clare nobis manifeâ—â—ta sicut cum lux diffunditur c. the loue of God is clearely manifested to vs as when the â—ight is spread and dispersed abroad Gorrhan 4. But hereby rather is expressed the abundance of those graces which are powred vpon vs by the spirit so Chrysostome non moâ—ce nos honoravit c. he hath not sparingly honoured vs but he hath shed forth vpon vs his loue as the fountaine of all good things so also Oecumenius quia vbere datus est c. because the spirit is plentifully giuen vs and in the same sense the Prophet saith Ioel 2. I will powre out my spirit vpon all flesh Faius 9. Quest. Why it is added by the holy Ghost which is giuen vs. 1. The spirit of God is mentioned as the efficient cause of this worke the loue of God is said to be shed in our hearts by the holy Ghost because the spirit of God beareth witnes
but euen swallowe vp Calvin and in respect of our selues who the more we feele the burthen and ouerflowing of our sinne the more we haue occasion to extoll and magnifie the grace of God Osiander So here are two ends of the lawe expressed the neâ—â—â—â— ende is the manifestation and encrease of sinne the remote ende is the more abounding of grace but here is the difference the first ende is vniuersall for in all men both beleeuers and vnbeleeuers the law worketh the encrease insight and knowledge of sinne but the other ende is particular and peculiar 〈◊〉 to the faithfull that by the abounding of sinne grace may more abound toward them which is not properly caused by the encrease of sinne but thorough the mercie of God Pareus Quest. 44. Of the raigne of sinne vnto death and of grace vnto life 1. Before the Apostle had ascribed the kingdome vnto death v. 14. Death raigned from Adam c. but here vnto sinne because death indeede raigneth by sinne as the Apostle saith The sting of death is sinne 1. Cor. 15.56 death could haue no power ouer vs but thorough sinne Martyr 2. But to speake more distinctly where the Apostle giueth the kingdome vnto death he speaketh of the times before the law when as death did apparantly raigne in the world but sinne was not so apparant till the lawe came but sinne is said to haue raigned after the lawe was giuen because sinne then more abounded So that three estates of the world are here described the first from Adam to Moses when sinne was in the world but death raigned the third is from the comming of Christ who raigned by righteousnesse vnto life destroying both the kingdome of sinne and death Tolet. 3. By death Chrysostome seemeth to vnderstand the death of the bodie mors ex haec presenti vita eijcit death doth cast vs out of this life c. but eternall death is here also comprehended potestatem habuit deijciendi c. it had power to cast vs downe to eternall death Lyran. as may appeare by the other opposite part of eternall life Piscator 4. But whereas in the first clause mention is made onely of the raigning of sinne vnto death but in the other there are three mentioned grace righteousnesse and life Origen thinketh that the deuill must be vnderstood to be set against the grace of Christ ab inuentis rebus author inventi nominatur the author of the invention is named in the things invented c. for sinne came in by the deuill some thinke that the wrath of God must be supplied which raigned by sinne Piscator but I thinke rather with Calvin that beside the necessarie parts of the comparison the Apostle maketh mention of grace vt fortius in figuret memoria c. that it might better sticke in our memorie that all is of grace 5. The Apostle speaketh of the time past sinne had raigned because that although sinne doe still raigne in the children of disobedience yet in the faithfull it raigneth no more Par. 6. By righteousnesse some vnderstand iustitiam operum the righteousnesse of 〈◊〉 gloss interlin so also Bellarmine lib. 2. de iustificat c. 6. but the iustice of Christ is rather vnderstood as the Greeke interpreters well expound and as is euident by the clause in the ende By our Lord Iesus Christ who is notwithstanding both our iustification and sanctification 7. The ordinarie glosse here well obserueth that in the kingdome of sinne mention is not made of Adam from whom sinne came because the Apostle speaketh not onely of originall but of actuall sinnes both which are remitted in Christ. 8. Thorough Iesus Christ our Lord Iesus per gratiam Dominus per iustitiam nostre per gloriam Iesus by grace Lord by his iustice and ours because he bringeth vs to glorie Gorrhan 4. Places of Doctrine Doct. 1. Of the difference betweene Christian and worldly hope v. 5. Hope maketh not ashamed This is the propertie of the hope of Christians that is neuer confoundeth them or maketh ashamed because it is founded vpon Gods promises who both is immutable and changeth not and is also omnipotent able to performe whatsoeuer he promiseth But so it is not in humane or worldly hope for that often putteth man to rebuke because he is deceiued in his hope and faileth in the thing hoped for and the reason is for that he reposeth his confidence in man who is either deceitfull and hopeth not his promise or is not of power to performe it therefore the Prophet saith Cursed be the man that trusteth in man and maketh flesh his arme Ierem. 17.5 Doct. 2. Of the properties and effects of faith v. 2. Beeing iustified by faith 1. Vnto faith is ascribed iustification as in these words and remission of sinnes in purifying the heart Act. 15.9 2. faith is the foundation of thing hoped for Heb. 11.1 3. it is the cause of the producing and bringing forth of good fruit Iam. 2.8 Shewe me thy faith out of thy workes c. 4. it ouercommeth the tentations of Sathan for by the sheild of faith we quench all his fierie darts Ephes. 6.18 5. by faith we attaine vnto the vnderstanding of the word of God which otherwise is vnprofitable Isay. 7.9 Vnlesse yee beleeue ye shall not vnderstand as some translations doe reade and the Apostle saith that the word did not profit the Israelites because it was not mixed with faith Heb. 4.2 6. faith obtaineth our requests in prayer Iam. 2.16 the prayer of faith saueth the sicke 7. it worketh the saluation of the soule Luk. 7.50 Thy faith hath saued thee Doct. 3. Of the raigne and dominion of death v. 14. Death raigned from Adam to Moses Before sinne entred into the world death had no dominion but now it hath gotten a tyrannicall and generall dominion ouer men both of all sorts and conditions both young and old and in all ages as here it is said to raigne euen from Adam to Moses that age was not exempted from the dominion of death wherein sinne seemed least to abound but Christ hath ouercome death and destroyed the dominion thereof both in that he hath taken away the sting thereof which is sinne that death is not hurtfull vnto them that beleeue but bringeth their soules vnto euerlasting rest and in the generall resurrection our bodies which death had seazed on shall be restored vnto life as our Blessed Sauiour saith I am the resurrection and the life c. Ioh. 15.25 Doct. 4. Of the difference of sinnes v. 14. Euen ouer them that sinned not after the like manner c. Here the Apostle setteth downe this distinction of actuall and originall sinne some doe sinne in like manner as Adam did that is actually some not in like manner that is there is a secret and hid sinne in the corruption of nature which is not actuall but in time breaketh forth into act as the seede sheweth it selfe in the hearbe Doct. 5. There is no saluation
or life without Christ. v. 17. Much more shall they which receiue c. raigne in life c. As in Adam sinne and death entred and so raigned ouer all so life raigneth by Iesus Christ then they which are not graft by faith into Christ but remaine onely in Adam cannot be pertakers of life they are still vnder the kingdome of sinne and death wherefore the Turkes Iewes and all other that are without the knowledge and faith of Christ howsoeuer they dreame of a kind of Paradise and terrene happinesse after this life yet they can haue no assurance of life seeing they are strangers from Christ So S. Peter saith Act. 4.12 That there is no other name giuen vnder heauen whereby we must be saued Doct. 6. That life doth accompanie righteousnesse v. 17. The Apostle saith that they which receiue the gift of righteousnesse shall raigne in life then as sinne raigned vnto death so righteousnesse raigneth vnto life wheresoeuer then righteousnesse is found whether inherent as in the Angels or imputed as in the faithfull who haue the righteousnesse of Christ imputed vnto them by faith there is the kingdome of life then they which doe feele the kingdome of righteousnesse to be begunne in them who both by faith are iustified in Christ and their faith is effectuall working by loue they are assured to enter into life as S. Paul knewe after he had kept the faith and fought a good fight that there was a crowne of righteousnesse laid vp for him 2. Tim. 4.8 Doct. 7. Of the vse of the lawe v. 20. The lawe entred c. that the offence should abound c. This is the proper vse of the lawe to bring a man to the knowledge of his sinne and to shewe him in what state he standeth by nature a transgressor of the lawe and so subiect to the curse but we must not rest in this vse of the lawe there is a second and more principall ende that by the abounding of sinne grace may more abound and in this sense the Apostle calleth the lawe a schoolemaster to bring vs to Christ Galath 3.19 that we by the lawe seeing our owne weakenesse and vnsufficiencie should seeke vnto Christ Iesus to finde righteousnes in him which cannot be obtained by the lawe 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. Whether a good conscience and integritie of life be the cause of peace with God Pererius disput 1. in c. 5. numer 2. vrgeth that place of the Prophet Isay c. 32.17 s he worke of iustice shall be peace euen the worke of iustice and quietnesse and assurance for euer whereupon he inferreth that opera iustitiae c. the workes of iustice and the keeping of Gods commandements doe worke in vs this tranquilitie and peace of the minde Contra. It might be here answeared that peace of conscience is the worke of our true iustice that is Christ who is called the Lord our iustice or righteousnesse Ierem. 23.10 but that this interpretation agreeth not with the former words v. 16. Iudgement shall dwell in the desert and iustice in the fruitfull field where the Prophet speaketh of the externall practise and exercise of iustice 2. Iunius seemeth to vnderstand these disiunctiuely the fruites of the spirit which should be powred vpon them v. 15. should bring faith iustice peace as the Apostle sheweth these to be the fruites of the spirit Rom. 14.17 righteousnesse peace ioy in the holy Ghost so also Faius But this distinction here cannot be admitted because it is directly said the worke of iustice shall be peace tranquilitie 3. But the best answer is that righteousnesse procureth peace not effective because it worketh this inward peace which is wrought in vs by the grace of iustification but declarative it declareth confirmeth and assureth vnto vs our peace as S. Peter exhorteth that we make our election and calling sure by good workes 2. Pet. 1.9 not that our workes make our election sure in it selfe which dependeth on the purpose of God but it is made sure vnto vs so the peace of conscience wrought in vs by faith is confirmed and ratified vnto vs by a good life euen as good workes are testimonies of our faith and in that sense are said by S. Iames c. 2. to iustifie Controv. 2. Against invocation of Saints 1. By whome we haue accesse through faith this text is well vrged by Peter Martyr and Pareus against the invocation of Saints for if by Christ we haue accesse vnto God what neede we the helpe of other mediators and intercessours the Papists then doe much derogate vnto the glorie of Christ in bringing an other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to enter vs and cause vs to haue accesse vnto God And further two arguments may be vrged out of the Apostles words he saith we haue accesse by him through faith but Saints are not the obiect of our faith we must onely beleeue in God Ioh. 14.1 Ye beleeue in God beleeue also in me 2. we haue accesse vnto this grace namely whereby we are iustified but by the Saints we are not iustified therefore by them we haue not accesse and entrance Controv. 3. Of the certaintie of saluation and of finall perseuerance v. 5. We haue accesse vnto this grace wherein we stand Calvin out of this place refuteth two errors of Popish sophistrie the one that the faithfull for the present cannot be certaine of the grace of God and of the remission of their sinnes the other that they are not sure of finall perseuerance But to stand in grace signifieth to be sure of the grace and fauour of God one may attaine vnto the fauour of the Prince but he is not sure to continue in it But Gods fauour in Christ is most constant whom Christ loueth he loueth to the end Iob. 13.1 Tolet here foisteth in one of his Popish drugs that tranquilitie and peace of conscience and certaintie of remission of sinnes is not the fruit or worke of faith in the faithfull for the wicked that knowe not their sinnes haue also a quiet conscience Tolet. annot 1. Contra. There is great difference between a senslesse and a quiet cōscience the wicked feele not the pricke of conscience because their sinnes are concealed from them but the faithfull haue peace of conscience after the sight of their sinnes which they know to be remitted in Christ So Paul was aliue without the law but afterward when sinne reviued he died Rom. 7.9 where then the conscience is cast into a slumber of securitie sinne reviuing awaketh troubleth it but where sinne is remitted in Christ the conscience ceaseth to be troubled and perplexed as in the wicked Controv. 4. That the tribulation of the Saints is not meritorious though it be said to worke patience We must vnderstand that the Apostle diuersely vseth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worketh for it is sometime ascribed vnto the principall efficient cause as vnto God the author and worker of all good things in vs 2. Cor. 5.5 sometime
the grace working together is that wherewith the will of man worketh for the effecting of that which it willeth This distinction must be qualified for to make the will of man a ioynt worker with grace is against the Apostle who saith that it is God which worketh in vs both the will and the deede Philip. 2.13 But thus it may be admitted that mans will beeing once mooued and regenerate by grace is not idle but then worketh with grace not of it owne strength but as it is still mooued and stirred by grace see further hereof Synops. Centur. 4. err 30. 3. Of this sort is that distinction of grace praeveniens subsequens grace preuenting and going before and following grace which are not indeede two diuerse or seuerall graces but diuerse effects of one and the same grace Gods grace preuenteth mans will and changeth it of vnwilling making it willing and then it followeth to make the will of man fruitful and effectuall and this we acknowledge but the grace subsequent or following is not merited or procured by the well vsing of the first preventing grace in which sense this distinction is to be reiected 6. Morall obseruations Observ. 1. To followe the workes of the flesh is enmitie against God v. 10. When we were yet enimies c. They which delight in such workes as God hateth are enimies to God whereupon Origen giueth this note quomodo reconciliat us est qui causam mimici secum gerit c. how can he be said to be reconciled to God which yet retaineth the cause of enmitie c. he then which continueth in such workes as are hatefull vnto God cannot be said to be reconciled by the blood of Christ as the Apostle further sheweth That no vnrighteous person shall inherite the kingdome of God 1. Cor. 6.9 Observ. 2. Of the reconciling of enemies v. 10. When we were enemies we were reconciled c. As God did reconcile vs to himselfe beeing yet his enemies so we are taught herein to be like vnto our heauenly father to be willing to be reconciled and to be at atonement with our enemies as Abraham made a league with Abimelech and as Iacob did the like with Laban who pursued him to haue wrought him some mischiefe Observ. 3. Wherein we ought to reioyce v. 11. We reioyce in God through our Lord Iesus c. The Apostle here sheweth wherein the ioy of a Christian consisteth that whereas the world reioyceth some in riches some in honour some in pleasure some in their strength humane wisedome and the like the Christian man is taught to reioyce in his redemption and saluation in Christ as our Blessed Sauiour would haue his Apostles to reioyce because their names were written in heauen Luk. 10.20 Obser. 4. Of the two kingdomes of grace and sinne life and death v. 17. If by one offence death raigned c. The Apostle here pointeth our two kingdomes the one of sinne and death the other of righteousnesse and life there are node in the world but belong vnto one of these kingdomes Therefore it must be our great care to examine our selues vnto which kingdome we are subiects by nature all are vnder the kingdome of darkenesse and from thence we cannot be deliuered but by Christ as the Apostle saith Coloss. 1.13 who hath deliuered vs from the Prince of darkenesse and hath translated vs to the kingdome of his deare Sonne we must therefore examine our selues whether we haue faith in Christ 2. Cor. 13.5 Observ. 5. Why the Lord suffereth his sometime to fall and to be plunged in sinne v. 20. Where sinne abounded there grace abounded much more c. God then sometime seemeth to leaue his children to themselues that they afterward beeing recouered and restored by grace may haue more experience of the goodnesse and mercie of God and of the excellencie of grace as Dauid after his fall repenting of his sinne celebrateth the multitude of Gods mercies Psal. 51.1 and Peter after he was converted was bid to strengtheâ— his brethren Luk. 22.32 as then beeing more able to comfort others by the experience of Gods mercie which he had himselfe receiued Observ. 6. None ought to despaire of forgiuenesse of sinne v 20. Grace abounded much more Grace is more predominant then sinne and the Apostle in the comparison set forth betweene Christ and Adam sheweth before that grace in Christ is more able to saue vs then sinne was in Adam to condemne vs let no man then despare of mercie and say with Cain his sinne is greater then can be forgiuen but rather with S. Paul Iesus Christ came into the world to saue sinners of whom I am chiefe 1. Tim. 1.15 CHAP. VI. 3. The text with the diuerse readings WHat shall we say then shall we continue in sinne that grace may abound or be encreased Be. 2. God forbid let it not be Gr. we that are dead to sinne how yet shall we liue therein 3. Knowe ye not brethren L. addit that as many of vs as haue beene baptized all we which haue beene baptized B. G. but the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into Iesus Christ haue beene baptized into his death 4 We are buried together with him by baptisme into his death that like as Christ was raised did rise vp S. L. but the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was raised vp to the glorie Be. S.G. by the glorie L. B. V. but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by is here taken for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in of the father so we also should walke in newenesse of life 5 For if we be graft together with him G. Be. ad by the similitude of his death Be. S. B. rather then to the similitude G.L. for we are graft into Christ not into thâ—â— similitude so shall we be by the similtude which must be supplied out of the former clause some insert be partakers B. V. but the other word graft is better vnderstood of his resurrection 6 Knowing this that our old man is crucified with him that the bodie of sinne might be destroyed or abolished S.V. that henceforth we should not serue sinne 7 For he that is dead is iustified L.V. S.B. freed G.S. Be. but the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly signifieth is iustified from sinne 8 Wherefore if we be dead with Christ we beleeue that we shall also liue with him 9 Knowing that Christ beeing raised not rising S. L. see ver 4. from the dead dieth no more death hath no more dominion ouer him 10 For in that he died he died once to sinne but in that he liueth he liueth vnto God 11 Likewise thinke yee also that yee are dead to sinne but are aliue to God in Iesus Christ our Lord. 12 Let not sinne therefore raigne in your mortall bodie that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof obey the lusts thereof S. L. but here the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is omitted 13 Neither yeeld your
harder to say that the deuill had dominion then death ouer Christ. 3. Origen hath an other exposition that Christ dominatum pertulerit mortis quia formam servi susceperat did beare the dominion of death because he tooke vpon him the forme of a seruant and vpon all such death hath dominion but it was not necessarie that Christ should haue died though he had taken vpon him our nature seeing he was without sinne which causeth death 4. Wherefore death is said to haue had dominion quia sponte volens se subiecit mâ—rti because he willingly submitted himselfe to death for our sinne Mart. Calvin Quest. 14. How Christ is said to haue died to sinne v. 10. 1. Hilarie lib. 9. de Trinitat thus readeth that which died died once to sinne and vnderstandeth it of Christs bodie making the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a relatiue of the neuter gender so also Laurentius Valla and Iacobus Stapulens but this would seeme to fauour the Nestorian heresie that diuideth Christs person to say that Christ died not but his bodie died and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be taken for the coniunction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that he died as Galath 2.20 in that now I liue to this purpose Erasmus Beza 2. For the meaning Hilarie thus expoundeth Christ died to sinne quia mortuus corpore because he died in the bodie wherein was the similitude of sinne lib. 9. de Trinit so also Augustine in Enchirid. 3. Haymo thus mortuus est semel peccato id est semper he died once to sinne that is alwaies because he neuer had sinne at all 4. Some vnderstand sinne as the cause wherefore Christ died that the sinnes of the world were the cause why Christ died so Ambrose he died for sinne that is for or because of sinners serm 18. in Psal. 18. 5. But the better sense is that Christ died to sinne that is tollendo to take away sinne so Chrysostome mortuus est vt illud tollerat he died for sinne to take it away Christ died otherwise to sinne then we doe ille expiando nos amitiendo he to expiate and purge our sinnes we to leaue it Pareus Quest. 15. How Christ is said now to liue vnto God ver 10. 1. Oecumenius thus vnderstandeth he liueth to God eo quod sit Deus because he is God that is by his diuine vertue 2. Pareus thus ad gloriam Dei patris he liueth to the glorie of God his father that by his life the Church should be glorified but thus Christ liued in the dayes of his flesh both by the power of God and to the glorie of his father as our Blessed Sauiour himselfe saith Ioh. 6.57 As the liuing father hath sent me so liue I by the father 3. Neither is Christ said so to liue vnto God as we are said in the next verse to be aliue vnto God that is by the spirit of grace for so Christ liued vnto God all the dayes of his flesh 4. Chrysostome thus expoundeth it to liue to God sine fine vinere is to liue without ende that is eternally neuer any more to die 5. But not onely the eternitie of Christs life is hereby expressed but the glorie and maiestie also as Haymo interpreteth he liueth in gloriam paternae maiestatis in the glorie of the maiestie of his father as Reuel 18. And am aliue but was dead and behold I am aliue for euermore c. 6. And by this phrase is expressed the indissoluble vnion which Christ hath with God the father the Apostle hereby doth not onely signifie that he now liueth in eternall happines sed indivulse Deo haerere but is inseparably ioyned vnto God Martyr Quest. 16. Of these words v. 11. likewise thinke yee c. 1. Likewise thinke ye 1. Origen saith the Apostle vseth this word because this death which he speaketh of namely dying to sinne in cogitatione consistit non in effectu consisteth in the cogitation not in any externall effect 2. Chrysostome because that which he speaketh of non potest ad oculum repraesentari cannot be represented to the eye but is apprehended by faith 3. Haymo giueth this sense they must in memoriam reducere often bring to remembrance and bethinke themselues that they are dead to sinne so also Tolet annot 15. and Faius 4. but the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth rather collect yee gather ye it is the inference of the conclusion from the head to the members that we are certainely dead by the commemoration of his death so is the word vsed c. 3.28 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we conclude Beza Pareus 2. Dead to sinne but aliue to God Some doe interpret this of the life of the Saints in the resurrection when they shall liue to God for euer neuer to die any more but the Apostle speaketh of the life of grace as the next verse sheweth 3. In Iesus Christ c. 1. Origen maketh this the sense to liue in righteousnesse holines peace is to liue in Christ because Christ is all these and to the same purpose Chrysostome he that hath obtained Christ hath receiued euery vertue and grace with him 2. Gorrhan referreth it to the imitation of Christ making the seuere parts of Christs life an example of so many degrees of our spirituall life to his conception answeareth propositum the purpose of newe life to his natiuitie our regeneration to his death our labour in dying to sinne to his sepulture cessatio vitiorum the ceasâ—ing of sinne to his resurrection answeareth nova vita iustorum the newe life of the righteous to his asscention processus virtâ—tum our proceeding in vertue to his sitting at the right hand of God gloria beatorum the glorie of the Blessed Saints 3. But here is more signified then a similitude or conformitie to and an imitation of Christ the Apostle expresseth the author and efficient cause of our dying vnto sinne and liuing vnto God namely Christ Iesus Christo auxiliante Christ helping vs Oecumen Christi opere by the worke of Christ gloss interlin per Christum mediatorem by Christ our Mediator Lyran. as the Apostle saith Galath 2.20 I liue by faith in the Sonne of God Bucer Pareus with others Quest. 17. How sinne is said not to raigne c. ver 12. 1. Chrysostome and Theodorets obseruation seemeth here to be somewhat curious that the Apostle speaketh of the raigning not of the tyrannizing of sinne the difference betweene which two is this the one is of necessitie the other is voluntarie he would not haue them willingly to submit themselues in obedience vnto sinne although it doe play the tyrant in suggesting euill thoughts and desires yet they should resist them and not suffer sinne to haue a peaceable kingdome to this purpose Theodoret But this distinction is not necessarie for the kingdome of sinne in man is a meere tyrannie the kingdome properly in man is peculiar to the spirit because sinne vsurpeth vpon them that by right are
synecdoche the principall part beeing taken for the whole the minde regenerate for all the regenerate part both in the minde and bodie because it chiefly sheweth it selfe there and the flesh for that part which is vnregenerate in the whole man both in the minde and bodie because it is chiefly exercised and executed by the bodie see before Quest. 26. 2. We are not to vnderstand here two distinct and seuerall parts the one working without the other as the Romanists which will haue the inner man to be the minde and the sensuall part the flesh for in this sense neither doth the minde alwaies serue God wherein there is ignorance infidelitie error nor yet doth the sensuall part alwaies serue sinne for many vertuous acts are exercised thereby see this opinion before confuted Quest. 31. But these two parts must be vnderstood as working together the flesh hindreth the spirit and blemisheth our best actions Faius 3. And whereas the Apostle saith that in my flesh I serue the law of sinne we must not imagine that the Apostle was giuen ouer vnto grosse carnall works as to commit murther adulterie but he sheweth the infirmitie of his flesh and specially he meaneth his naturall concupiscence and corruption of nature in the which he gaue instance before against the which pugnabat luctabatur he did striue and fight Martyr 4. Neither yet must we thinke that the Apostle seruing the spirit one way and the flesh an other was as a mutable or inconstant man or indifferent like as Ephraim is compared to a cake but turned and baked on the one side Hos. 7.8 or as they which Revel 3. are said to be luke warme neither hoat nor cold for these of a set purpose were such and willingly did dissemble but the Apostle setteth forth himselfe as a man neither perfectly sound nor yet sicke but in a state betweene both that although he laboured to attaine to perfection yet he was hindred by the infirmitie of his flesh like as an Israelite dwelling among the Iebusits Faius 5. And whereas the Apostle said before v. 15. it is not I that doe it but sinne that dwelleth in mee and yet here he saith I my selfe c. in my selfe serue the law of sinne the Apostle is not contrarie to himselfe for he speaketh here of his person that doth both there of of the cause Tolet. annot 25. and so he sheweth secundum repugnantia principia se repugnantia habere studia that according vnto the contrarie beginnings or causes he hath contrarie desires Pareus 36. Quest. Of that famous question whether S. Paul doe speake in his owne person or of an other here in this 7. chapter There are of this matter diuers opinions which yet may be sorted into these three orders 1. Some thinke that the Apostle speaketh in the person of a man not yet in the state of grace 2. Some of a man regenerate from v. 14. to the ende 3. Some that the Apostle indifferently assumeth the person of all mankind whether they be regenerate or not And in euery of these opinions there is great diuersitie 1. They which are of the first opinion 1. Some thinke that the Apostle speaketh in the person of a naturall man and sheweth what strength a mans free will hath by nature without grace so Iulianus the Pelagian with other of that sect whose epistles Augustine confuteth so Lyranus he speaketh in the person generis humani lapsi of humane kind after their fall 2. Some will haue the person of a man described sub lege ante legem degentis not liuing onely before the law but vnder it hauing some knowledge of sinne so Chrysostome Theophylact whome Tolet followeth annot 4. 3. Some thinke that the Apostle describeth a man not altogether vnder the law nor yet wholly vnder grace but of a man beginning to be conuerted quasi voluntate proposito ad meliora conversi as converted in minde and desire vnto better things Origen so also Basil. 〈◊〉 â—egal breviar and Haymo saith the Apostle speaketh ex persona hominis poenitentiam agentis in the person of a man penitent c. 2. They of the second sort doe thus differ 1. Augustine confesseth that sometime he was of opinion that the Apostle speaketh in the person of a carnall and vnregenerate man but afterward he changed his minde vpon better reasons thinking the Apostle to speake of a spirituall man in the state of grace lib. 1. Retract c. 23. lib. 6. cont Iulian. c. 11. but Augustine reteining this sense thinketh that the Apostle saying v. 15. I allow not that thing which I doe speaketh of the first motions onely of concupiscence quando illis non consenttatur when no consent is giuen vnto them lib. 3. cont Iulian. c. 26. which concupiscence the most perfect man in this life can not be void of so also Gregorie vnderstandeth simplices motus ceruis contra voluntatem the simple motions of the flesh against the will and hereunto agreeth Bellarm. lib. 5. de amission grat c. 10. Rhemist sect 6. vpon this chapter 2. Cassianus collat 23. c. 15. vnderstandeth a man regenerate but then by the inner man he would haue signified the contemplation of celestiall things by the flesh curam rerum temporalium the care of earthly things 3. Some thinke that the Apostle so describeth a regenerate man as yet that he may sometime become in a manner carnall we see in this example euen of Paul regenerate etiam regeneratum nonnunquam mancipium fieri peccati that a regenerate man may sometime become the slaue of sinne Rolloch 4. But the founder opinion is that the Apostle in his owne person speaketh of a regenerate man euen when he is at the best that he is troubled and exercised with sinnefull motions which the perfectest can not be ridde of till he be deliuered from his corruptible flesh of this opinion was Hilarie habemus nunc nobis admistam materiam quae mortis legi peccato obnoxia est c. we haue now mixed within vs a certaine matter which is subiect to the law of death and sinne c. and vntill our bodie be glorified non potest in nobis verae vita esse natura there can not be in vs the nature and condition of true life Hilar. in Psal. 118. Of the same opinion are all our foundest new writers Melancthon Martyr Calvin Beza Hyperius Pareus Faius with others 3. Of the third sort 1. some are indifferent whether we vnderstand the person of the regenerate or vnregenerate gloss ordinar and so Gorrhan sheweth how all this which the Apostle hath from v. 18. to the end may in one sense be vnderstood of the regenerate in an other of the vnregenerate 2. Some thinke that some things may be applied vnto the regenerate as I am carnall sold vnder sinne but some things onely can be applied to the regenerate as these words I delight in the law of God c. Perer. disput 21. num 38. and yet he
The spirit maketh request with sighes The meaning is this that many times when the children of God are ouerwhelmed with griefe and knowe not themselues what they pray but onely sobbe and sigh that the spirit vnderstandeth their meaning and euen those sighs and groanes which come of the spirit doe pray for them Augustine writeth excellently hereof epist. 121. that the brethren in Egypt are said crebras habere orationes sed eas brevissimas raptim iaculatas to make often prayers but the same verie short and as it were of a sudden cast out c. whereupon he thus inferreth hanc intentionem sicut non est obtrâ—denda si per durare non potest ita si perduraverit non esse cito rumpendam the intention of prayer as it must not be forced if it doth not continue so if it hold still it must not suddenly be interrupted and broken off and so he concludeth ab sit ab oratione multa locutio sud non desit multa precatso in our prayer let there be absent much speach but let there not be wanting much praying c. for as long as the intention and devotion holdeth the prayer cannot be too much but to goe on still in words the intention beeing slacked is much babling and talking not praying 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. That concupiscence remaining euen in the regenerate is sinne and in it selfe worthie of condemnation v. 1. There is no condemnation Bellarmine hence inferreth the contrarie that in these words the Apostle doth not so much shewe that there is no condemnaâ—on to those that are iustified as that there is no matter of condemnation in them nihil condemnatione dignum nothing worthie of condemnation l. 5. de amiss grat c. 7. arg 3. and consequently concupiscence in them is not sinne Contra. 1. The contrarie rather is inferred out of the Apostles words that concupiscence is in it selfe worthie of condemnation of the which the Apostle treated before in the former chapter but it is not vnto damnation neither it nor any other sinne vnto those which are iustified by faith in Christ. 2. and the Apostle expresseth the verie cause they are iustified in Christ and therefore though sinne remaine in them yet it is not imputed therefore it is great bouldnes to denie that which the Apostle in so direct words expresseth that vnto those which are iustified in Christ there is no condemnation not for that there is nothing worthie of condemnation in them for then they should be altogether without sinne but because they are iustified 3. the Apostle saith not there is no sinne but no condemnation Melancth not that the same sinnes remaine in those which are iustified which were in them before as Pererius slanndereth Calvin to say disput 1. numer 5. but there be still some imperfections and reliques of sinne remaining but not raigning which notwithstanding are not imputed vnto the faithfull neither are able to condemne them and Calvin saith no more but that the Apostle ioyneth three things together imperfectionem the imperfections which are alwayes in the Saints Dei indulgentiam Gods indulgence whereby their sinnes are forgiuen and regenerationem spiritus the regeneration of the spirit for carni suae indulgens he that is giuen to the flesh doth flatter himselfe in vaine to be freed from his sinne Calvin then cannot the same sinnes remaine seeing in the regenerate the flesh is mortified and sinne subdued Controv. 2. That none are perfect in this life Origens ouersight is here to be noted who thinking that the Apostle spake in the former chapter of those which partly serued the lawe of God in the spirit and partly the Lawe of sinne in the flesh saith that now he speaketh of those which ex integro in Christo sunt which wholly are in Christ not partly of the spirit partly of the flesh but are perfect Contra. 1. First Origen confoundeth iustification and sanctification for the faithfull are indeed wholly graft into Christ by faith and yet they may haue some infirmities of the flesh remaining 2. there neuer liued any of that perfection neuer to be tempted of the flesh but onely Christ but yet they which are in Christ doe not walke after the flesh that is non carnem ducem sequuntur they doe not followe the flesh as their guide though they be sometime tempted of the flesh but they follow the guiding and direction of the spirit Beza in annot 3. and it hath beene sufficiently shewed before quest 36. of the former chapter that the Apostle there speaketh in his owne person as of a man regenerate and so in this place he meaneth the same whom in his owne person he described before Controv. 3. That regeneration is not the cause that there is no condemnation to the faithfull The Romanists doe make this the cause why there is no condemnation to those which are in Christ because they walke not after the flesh but after the spirit Tolet. annot 1. Bellarm 5. de amission grat c. 10. respons ad obiect 7. so likewise Stapleton Antidot p. 435. who thus obiecteth 1. Ob. He vrgeth the Apostles words here there is no condeÌ„nation c. which walke not after the flesh therefore for that they walke not after the flesh there is no condemnation to such Contra. The Apostle saith not there is no condemnation because they walke not but to them that walke not regeneration is required as a necessarie condition annexed to iustification not as the cause so that here is an answear to two questions together how we are iustified namely by faith in Christ and who are iustified they which bring forth good fruits the one is internall their iustification the other externall namely sanctification Beza 2. Ob. The Apostle saith that the lawe of the spirit which Beza interpreteth to be the grace of regeneration doth free vs from the lawe of sinne and death v. 2. Ergo it is the cause of iustification Contra. 1. This interpretation beeing admitted that followeth not which is inferred for the words are not from sinne but from the lawe of sinne that is from the dominion of sinne and so indeede the grace of regeneration freeth vs that sinne hath no more dominion ouer vs. 2. but it is better with Ambrose to vnderstand by the law of the spirit legem fidei the lawe of faith whereby we are freed from sinne and death 3. Ob. If righteousnesse beeing present do not iustifie vs then beeing absent it condemneth not Contra. 1. Is followeth not for a thing may be insufficient to a worke beeing present and yet if it be remooued it is sufficient to hinder the worke as good diet in a sicke man may hinder his recouerie and yet if he vse it it is not alwayes sufficient to helpe him 2. and yet here is a difference in this example for good diet is an helping cause vnto health but good workes are no cause of saluation but onely a condition necessarily required and annexed 4.
Obiect The Apostle saith v. 15. If ye liue after the flesh yee shall die but if ye mortifie the deedes of the bodie ye shall liue therefore mortification is the cause of life and saluation Contra. 1. Hence followeth that mortification is necessarie vnto saluation yet not as a cause but as a necessarie condition without the which there is no faith and consequently no saluation 2. eternall life is the gift of God c. 6.23 therefore not due vnto our merits euill workes are the cause of damnation because they iustly deserue it but it followeth not that good workes are the cause of saluation for they are both imperfect and so vnproportinable to the reward and they are due otherwise to be done and therefore merite not Controv. 4. Against the Arrians and Eunomians concerning the deitie of the holy Ghost v. 2. The law of the spirit of life c. hath freedome Chrysostome homil de adorand spirit from this place prooueth the deitie of the spirit against the Arrian and Eunomiâ—au heretikes who made great difference in the persons of the Trinitie the Sonne they affirmed to be a creature and much inferiour to the Father and the holy Ghost they made servum ministrum silij a seruant and minister of the Sonne Chrysostome confuteth them by this place for if the spirit be the author of libertie and freedome to others then is he most free himselfe and not a minister or seruant as the Apostle saith 2. Cor. 2.17 where the spirit of the Lord is there is libertie Controv. 5. Against the Pelagians that a man by nature cannot keepe and fulfill the law This error is confuted by the expresse words of the Apostle who saith that the law was weake by reason of the flesh and so not able to iustifie vs by the flesh the Apostle vnderstandeth not substantiam caruis the substance of the flesh as the Maniches were readie to catch at these and the like places to confirme their wicked opinion who held the flesh of man to be euill by nature nor yet the carnall rites and obseruations of the law which were not able to cleanse the obseruers of them as Origen here interpreteth and Lyranus following him But by the flesh we vnderstand with Chrysostome carnales sensus the carnall affections carnalitatem quae rebellabat the carnalitie of man which rebelled against the spirit gloss ordinar concupisentias carnis the concupiscence of the flesh Haymo prauitatem naturae the pravitie of nature Martyr which hindereth that none can keepe the law to be iustified by it This then manifestly conuinceth the Pelagians for if the flesh make the law weake and vnable to be kept then none by the strength of their nature and flesh can fulfill the law Controv. 6. The fulfilling of the law is not possible in this life no not to them which are in the state of grace 1. The Romanists out of these words of the Apostle v. 4. That the righteousnesse of the law may be fulfilled in vs which walke not after the flesh doe inferre that they which walke not after the flesh may fulfill the law so that either it must be denied that none in this life walke after the spirit or it must be graunted that by such the law may be fulfilled Pere disput 5. Bellarmine addeth that if the law cannot be fulfilled Christus non obtinuit quod vâ—luit Christ hath not compassed or obtained that which he intended for therefore he died that the iustice of the law might be fulfilled Contra. 1. Indeed Origen whose errors and erroneous interpretations our aduersaries themselues will be ashamed of sauing where they serue their turne first deuised this interpretation who by the law here vnderstandeth the law of the mind which is fulfilled quando lex peccati in membris c. when the law of sinne in the members resisteth it not and Haymo hath this glosse that we beeing redeemed by Christ might spiritually fulfill the workes of the law per cuius impletionem possumus iustificari by the fulfilling whereof we may be iustified But this place is better vnderstood of the obedience of Christ who fulfilled the law which is imputed vnto vs by faith and thus doe not onely expound our new writes Melancthon Bucer Hyperius Calvin Beza with others but some of the auncient expositors as Theophylact quae lex facere nitibatur ea Christus nostri gratia executus est those things which the law endeuoured Christ hath performed for vs so also Oecumenius scotus finis legis per Christum partus est exhibitus the scope and end of the law is obtained exhibited by Christ yet we must endeuour to keepe those things which are deliuered per conuersationem bonam fidem by a good conuersation and faith 2. And that this is the meaning of the Apostle 1. the phrase sheweth that the law might be fulfilled in vs he saith not by vs Beza 2. because there is none so perfect in this life that neither in thought word nor deed transgresseth not the law 3. The law was weake through the infirmitie of the flesh but the infirmitie and weakenes of the flesh remaineth still euen in the regenerate therefore neither in them the righteousnesse of the law can be fulfilled 4. To the contrarie arguments thus we answer 1. the Apostle saith not that they which walke after the spirit fulfill the law but the law is fulfilled in them that is imputed vnto them by faith in Christ. 2. though the faithfull cannot fulfill the law yet Christ performed what he intended that he might keepe the law for them and they be iustified by faith in him 3. this clause then which walke not after the flesh is added to shew who they are for whom Christ hath fulfilled the law and to what end namely to such as walke in newnes of life 5. Some doe thinke that the Apostle speaketh here of two kinds of fulfilling the law one imputatione by imputation of Christs obedience which is our iustification the other inchoatione by a beginning onely which is our sanctification begunne in this life and perfited in the next when it shall be fulfilled Martyr Pareus But the other sense is better for the Apostle speaketh of a present fulfilling of the law in them which walke according to the spirit not of a fulfilling respited and excepted in the next life which is most true but not agreeable to the Apostles meaning here 6. So the Apostle in this place setteth forth three benefits purchased vnto vs by Christ 1. remission of our sinnes in that Christ bare in himselfe the punishment due vnto our sins 2. then the imputation of Christs obedience and performing of the law 3. our sanctification that we by the spirit of Christ doe die vnto sinne and rise vnto newnes of life which our sanctification is necessarily ioyned with our iustification but no part thereof 1. because it is imperfect in this life it is perfect after a sort perfectione partium by
of merit is an act of iustice and iustice is a kind of equalitie where there is no equalitie there is no iustice and so no merit Thom. in 1. secund qu. 114. ad 1. 4. If the sufferings of this life are neither in quantitie nor qualitie proportionable to the glorie which shall be reuealed then can they not be meritorious for betweene the merite and reward there must be a proportionable equalitie and an equall proportion Notwithstanding then all these cauillous answers this place of the Apostle that the sufferings of this time present are not worthie of the glorie is verie pregnant to ouerthrow the merite of the sufferings and other workes whatsoeuer of the Saints in respect of the reward of euerlasting life Controv. 13. That hope iustifieth not v. 24. We are saued by hope by this place both the Rhemists here in their annotations and Pererius numer 82. doe inferre that faith doth not onely iustifie but that hope and charitie doe iustifie as well as faith as here the Apostle saith we are saued by hope Contra. This cauill may diuersely be remooued 1. by beeing saued the Apostle vnderstandeth not to be iustified for our iustification is presently had and possessed but by saluation he signifieth the perfection and accomplishment of our redemption and adoption in Christ therefore they would deceiue vs by the homonymie and diuerse takings of the word to be saued sometime signifieth to be iustified Tit. 3.5 but so it is not here 2. We must vnderstand the Apostle to speake of hope as ioyned with saith hope hath relation to faith by the which we are iustified freely D. Fulk And when as these things as our iustification saluation are ascribed to hope or charitie we must so take it that the manner of our iustification is shewed not by the causes but by the effects like as then in the will we looke to the foundation in a tree to the roote so when the Scripture setteth forth any commendation of hope and loue we must looke vnto faith from whence they spring and without the which they cannot stand Mar. 3. The Apostle doth not here treat of the cause of iustification sed quo fulcro in ea iustitia sustentemur quae nobis per fidem obtingit but by what prop we are sustained and vpheld in that righteousnesse which happeneth vnto vs by faith Gualter so that hope is not the cause of saluation but it is as the way and meanes whereby saluation begunne in vs by faith is brought vnto perfection Controv. 14. Whether hope doth relie vpon the merite of our workes The Master of the sentences affirmeth lib. 3. sperare sine meritis non spem esse sed praesumptionem that to hope without merits is not hope but presumption so also Gorrhan illud quod ex meritis patienter expectatur c. that which is patiently expected by merits is most certainely had and obtained of God they reason thus Argum. 1. S. Paul affirmeth that patience bringeth forth experience or triall or probation and experience hope Rom. 5.4 if hope then arise of our patience and experience it hath dependance of our workes Ans. 1. It is euident that Saint Paul doth not in that place make his gradation by the causes for tribulation is not the cause of patience seeing many by tribulation are driuen to despaire but the Apostle onely setteth downe the order of those instruments which the spirit of God vseth to worke hope in vs thereby 2. and properly hope causeth patience not patience hope for the Martyrs if they were not thereto enduced by hope could neuer endure such vnspeakeable torments like as the Marchant would neuer put himselfe into such daungers by Sea if the hope of gaine mooued him not thereunto and so S. Iames sheweth that the probation and triall of our faith bringeth forth patience c. 3. faith beeing tried and prooued by affliction worketh patience and faith bringeth forth hope 3. yet we denie not but that as hope originally causeth patience so by our patience and experience our hope is also the more strengthened and confirmed Now on the contrarie that it is but a weake and indeed a false hope which dependeth vpon workes it is thus euident 1. because by this meanes hope should be contrarie to faith which iustifieth a man freely without relation to his workes if hope then should be tied to the condition of workes it should be opposite to faith 2. our workes are imperfect if hope be built vpon an imperfect and vncertaine ground it can haue no certaintie in it selfe 3. Some are conuerted to God hauing no good workes as the theefe vpon the crosse yet he had hope in Christ praying vnto him to be remembred in his kingdome Controv. 15. Against the naturall power and integritie of mans will v. 26. We know not what to pray as we ought this ouerthroweth that error of the Pelagians who ascribed vnto man power by nature to keepe the law of God but how can this be seeing a man cannot tell how to pray as he should if he be not ayded by the grace of Gods spirit he must needes come short of keeping the law that faileth in this principall part of Gods seruice namely prayer for if a man know not of himselfe how to pray and so cannot serue God as he ought he faileth in a cheef part of the law of God And wheras there are three degrees in the proceeding of euery action the thought conceiueth the wil consenteth the act work persiteth none of al these are in mās power not the first we are not able of our selues to thinke any thing and it is God which worketh both the other namely the will and the deed Phil. 1.13 And as these places doe exclude this heresie of the Pelagians who extoll the power of nature altogether so also they ouerthrow the error of the Semipelagians the Papists who ioyne freewill and grace as workes together Controv. 16. That predestination dependeth not vpon the foresight of faith or good workes v. 16. Those whom he knew before he also predestinate Chrysostome and other Greeke expositors following him as Theophylact Theodoret Oecumenius hence inferre that Gods prescience is the cause of predestination praeuidet Deus c. God first foreseeth who are meete and worthy to be called and then he doth predestinate them so also Ambrose and Heirome in their Commentaries vpon this place doe interpret that to be the purpose of God whereby he decreed to call vnto the faith those whom he foresaw would beleeue Lyranus saith that Gods prescience is praeambulum ad praedestinationem a preamble and as an inducement to predestination The Lutherans doe somewhat incline vnto this opinion as Osiander in his annotation here quos antequam nascerentur c. praeuidit c. whom in his infinite wisedome he foresaw such as should please God c. The moderne Papists are not here all of one opinion The most learned among them doe affirme election by grace ante
of predestination c. 8.30 whereupon iustification by faith is grounded he in this Chapter doth handle at large this mysterie of Gods free and gracious election and the Chapter consisteth of three parts 1. because he was to treat of the reiection of the Iewes and calling of the Gentiles be doth first vse a pathetical insinuation protesting his desire toward the saluation of the Iewes to v. 6. 2. Then he handleth the mysticall doctrine of election remooving diuerse obiections to v. 24. 3. then he declareth the vse of this doctrine in the vocation of the Gentiles and the reiection of the Iewes 1. In the insinuation 1. the Apostle setteth forth his griefe the truth of it v. 1. the greatnes v. 2. 2. then his desire v. 3. euen to be separated from Christ for the saluation of the Iewes with the reasons thereof 1. because they were his kinsmen after the flesh v. 3. 2. they were the people of God which he prooueth by fiue priuiledges and immunities v. 4. 3. of them were the fathers of whom Christ descended 2. The mysterie of the doctrine of predestinaion is handled by remoouing certaine obiections which are three 1. Obiect Is propounded v. 6. if the Iewes be reiected and become an anathema to whom Gods promises were made it would followe that God should be mutable and inconstant in his promises Answ. 1. He denieth the consequent it followeth not if many of the Israelites be reiected that therefore God should faile in his word v. 6. 2. he sheweth the reason the promise was made onely vnto the true seede of Abraham but all which are carnally descended of Abraham are not his seede but the elect onely Ergo this is affirmed v. 6. 7. then it is prooued first by the example of Izaak that he onely was the true seede of Abraham and not Ismael which is prooued 1. by a direct testimonie of Scripture v. 7. 2. by this argument the children of the promise are the true seede v. 8. but Izaak onely was the promised seede v. 9. Ergo Secondly the same is confirmed by the example of Iacob and Esau Iacob onely was the true seede this is amplyfied 1. by remoouing the supposed causes of this difference betweene Iacob and Esau which was neither their carnall generation because they were conceiued by one and at the same time nor yet their workes for when as yet they were vnborne and had done neither good nor bad sentence was giuen of them which he sheweth by two testimonies of Scripture v. 12.13 2. he setteth downe the true causes the efficient the election and vocation of God the finall that the purpose of God might remaine firme v. 11. 2. Oiection is propounded v. 14. and it riseth out of the former for if God elect some and reiect others before they haue done either good or euill he should seeme to be vniust Answ. 1. He answeareth negatiuely it followeth not that God should be vnrighteous 2. then he giueth a reason of his answear taken from Gods absolute power and right in the creature he sheweth mercie and hardeneth whom he pleaseth this is propounded v. 18. and it is handled before by parts first that he hath mercie on whom he will v. 15. which is amplified by the contrarie it is not in the willer or runner but in God that sheweth mercie v. 16. secondly the other part is prooued by the particular example of Pharaoh which is amplyfied by shewing the ende of his reiection the setting forth of Gods glorie v. 17. 3. Obiect v. 19. If God doth according to his owne will elect some and reiect others and his will cannot be resisted nor hindered it would seeme a cruell and vniust part to condemne those which cannot helpe it Answ. The Apostle answeareth negatiuely not denying that it is Gods will that some should be elected some reiected but that it followeth not hereupon that God should be cruell or vniust which he sheweth 1. by the vnsearcheable wisedome and iustice of God which man is no more to finde fault with then the clay with the potter 2. by Gods absolute power which he hath ouer his workemanship as the potter ouer the clay v. 21. 3. by the effects that howsoeuer Gods decree standeth concerning the reprobate yet they worthily deserue to be cast off because of their sinne wherein God vseth long suffring toward them v. 22. 4. by the ende of the reiection of the one to shewe Gods iustice and power v. 22. and of the election of the other to declare the riches of his mercie v. 23. 3. The third part containeth an application of this generall doctrine of Gods election to the present state of the Gentiles and Iewes wherein 1. he sheweth how the elect and called both among the Gentiles shall be saued which he prooueth by two testimonies out of the Prophet Osee v. 25.26 and among the Iewes which should not be saued but onely a selected remnant which he prooueth by 3. testimonies out of the Prophet Esaias v. 27.28.29 2. he inferreth hereupon the vocation of the Gentiles shewing the cause thereof the embracing of the righteousnesse of faith v. 30. and the reiection of the Iewes v. 31. which he amplyfieth by shewing two causes thereof the following of the workes of the lawe and the stumbling at Christ v. 32. which he confirmeth by a testimonie of the Prophet which concludeth the cause both of the reiection of the Iewes and the taking offence at Christ and of the vocation of the Gentiles namely their faith and beleefe v. 33. 3. The questions and doubts discussed Quest. 1. Why the Apostle beginneth this treatise with an oath I speake the truth in Christ c. 1. Hugo Cardinal referreth it to the former doctrine of the certaintie of predestination because he had said nothing could separate him from the loue of God in Christ. 2. Origen and Chrysostome haue relation to the Apostles extraordinarie wish v. 3. that he wisheth to be seperated from Christ for his brethrens sake which because it might seeme strange and incredible and contrarie to the Apostles confidence vttered before that nothing could seperate him from Christ he therefore vseth this vehement asseueration to shew that he spake from his heart 3. Gryneus thinketh that the Apostle by this vehement speach doth purge himselfe from those cauills and suspitions which were taken vp of him as that he was an innouator of the law a pestilent and seditious fellow 4. Haymo thinketh that the Apostle hereby doth confirme his loue toward his nation sheweth his greefe and sorow for them as it followeth in the next verse 5. But the verie occasion indeed why the Apostle breaketh out into this speach is because he was to entreate of the reiection of the Iewes and vocation of the Gentiles which left it might seeme to proceed from the hatred of his nation he protesteth his loue toward them both by shewing his sorrowe for their hardnesse of heart c. 9. and by his prayer for their conuersion c.
the heathen that they were not called in respect of any such will or endeauour but as well the calling and running of regenerate as vnregenerate men are here excluded from beeing any cause of election 5. Neither are those words to be deuided as though the willer were one and the runner an other but the things onely are discerned by willing is vnderstood the inclination and endeauour of the minde by running the externall workes and labour Gryneus 6. And here the nominative case must be supplied which Beza will haue to be election that it is not in the willer or runner and so Pareus Haymo supplieth the will is not of the willer nor cursus the running of the runner Pet. Martyr better vnderstandeth both that two things are here implied that neither election is in respect of any thing in man neither that he hath power to will or runne of himselfe 7. And Beza well interpreteth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of him that willeth not volentis of the willing to take away all ambiguitie least the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God might be thought to be supplied in the two first as well as in the last as though the sense should be this It is not of God that willeth or runneth but that sheweth mercie 17. Quest. How the Lord is said to haue raised or stirred vp Pharaoh v. 17. 1. Photius in Oecumen vnderstandeth it of the raising vp of Pharaoh to the kingdome so also Rupertus Taitiens I haue raised thee scilicet in regnum that is to the kingdome so also the Rhemists in their annot and Vatablus But the Apostle goeth further then to the time of Pharaohs comming to the kingdome 2. Chrysostome so also the Septuag and Chalde paraphrast doe refer it to the sauing and keeping of Pharaoh aliue from the plagues of Egypt that Gods power might be shewed in him and to the same purpose Ambrose whome the ordinarie glosse followeth thus expoundeth I haue raised thee vp cum apud Deum mortum esses beeing in effect dead before God in suffering thee to liue c. But many beside Pharaoh were so reserued from the plagues of Egypt 3. some vnderstand it permissive that God is saide to haue raised him vp in permitting Pharaoh to rage against his people permittendo non agendo by permitting not acting or doing any thing Rupertus before alleadged and these thinke that good things are done volente Deo God beeing willing mala permittente and euill by his permission onely But Pet. Martyr here well sheweth that euen permission also is not without the will of God and that euen good works belong vnto Gods permission as Heb. 6.3 This will we doe if God permit and this word of raising vp sheweth more then a permission onely 4. Some referre it vnto the meanes as the signes and wonders whereby Pharaoh was further hardened so their meaning is that God did raise him vp occasionaliter by ministring occasion onely as Anselme excitavi te quasi sopitum per mea signa I did raise thee vp or awake thee by my signes as a sleepe to the same purpose Lyranus abusus est signis he abused the signes which were sent to bring him to repentance Haymo much differeth not duritiam cordis manifestavi I manifested or made knowne by this meanes the hardnes of thy heart But the Apostle ariseth yet higher to the counsell and purpose of God he staieth not onely in the externall and secondarie meanes 5. Beza and Gryneus vnderstand it of the creating of Pharaoh that he had made and created him to that ende but the Apostle as before in the example of Esau and Iacob so here speaketh of the purpose and counsell of God which went before their creation and birth 6. Pet. Martyr hath this note by the way that God might raise vp in Pharaohs minde vehementem cogitationem de tuendo regno a vehement cogitation or thought to defend his kingdome but he by his owne corruption turned this cogitation into malice against the people of God But this doth not fully satisfie for the counsell and purpose of God concerning Pharaoh was long before the raising or stirring vp of any such cogitation 7. Neither must this be referred so vnto God as to make him the efficient cause of stirring vp the malice of Pharaoh as Pererius slandereth the Protestants to affirme that God stirred vp Pharaoh that is fecisse eum it a obduratum in malo c. to haue made him so obdurate in euill that by punishing of him diuersly he might take occasion to set forth his power and glorie Perer. disput 9. numer 50. But farre be it from vs to make God the author of euill or the proper cause of any ones hardnes of heart we are further off from this blasphemous assertion then the Romanists themselues 8. Neither doe we restraine this onely to Gods decree of the reiection and reprobation of Pharaoh as though God had ordained Pharaoh to this ende to shew his disobedience that thereby Gods power might appeare as Bellarmine imputeth this opinion to Calvin and Pet. Mart. Deum absolute Pharaonem excitasse c. that God absolutely had raised vp Pharaoh to resist him before any foresight at all of his sinne for God doth not ordaine or appoint any vnto sinne Neither hath Calvin any such saying his words are these God raised vp Pharaoh to this ende vt dum ille contumaciter diuinae patientiae resistere nititur that while he seeketh to resist obstinately the power of God he beeing subdued and brought vnder might shew how invincible the arme of God is Pet. Martyr also thus writeth I haue raised the vp to this end to afflict my people mihi resisteres and to resist me that my power might be seene in thee Neither of these affirme that God raised vp Pharaoh to this end to resist him but the end was the demonstration of Gods power by his obstinacie and disobedience which God procured not but ordered it so that his glorie and power might be set forth by it 9. Wherefore for the right vnderstanding of this place there are foure things to be considered which will deliuer God from all suspition of iniustice 1. his absolute power to dispose of his creatures as it seemeth best vnto himselfe as they may best serue vnto his glorie he may take vnto himselfe and leaue whome he will and none are to say vnto him What doest thou Isa. 45.9 2. God did foresee the malice and obstinacie of Pharaohs heart whereby he fore-iudged him worthie of perdition as Habac. 1.12 the Prophet speaketh of the Chaldeans Thou hast ordained them for iudgement and established them for correction and in the next verse he speaketh of their wickednes wherefore dost thou looke vpon the transgressors 3. God by his secret working but most iust is said to stirre vp the spirit the wicked not by inclining their corrupt wills vnto euill but by his secret power ordering them to that end which he
hath appointed as Ier. 51.11 God is said to haue raised vp the spirit of the King of the Medes against Babel and yet it is certaine that they sinned in this action which God stirred them vp vnto for God stirred them vp to one end to be ministers of his iudgements vpon that wicked nation but they therein satisfied onely their owne cruell and couetous mind as Isai 10.5 the Lord saith concerning Ashur I will giue him a charge against the people of my wrath c. but he thinketh not so they considered not wherefore the Lord 〈◊〉 them as the end of his wrath 4. Lastly the end must be considered wherefore God raised vp Pharaoh to a most holy and iust end for the setting forth of his glorie as the wise man saith Prov. 16.4 The Lord hath made all things for his owne sake yea euen the wicked against the day of euill In these foresaid respects God is said to haue raised vp and ordained Pharaoh without any touch of iniustice at all Quest. 18. How the Lord is said to harden whom he will v. 18. 1. Origen thinketh that this sentence is part of an obiection propounded in the person of some other and so also Chrysostome But it appeareth to be the Apostles owne assertion both by the note of illation therefore he hath mercie c. and because the obiection followeth in the next words v. 19. thou wilt say vnto me then which sheweth this to be no part of the obiection Beza Gryneus 2. Some thinke that God hardneth by permission onely as Oecumen indurat i. durâ—â—â— esse permittit he hardeneth that is suffereth and permitteth to be hardened so also Bellarmine permittit eos male agere he permitteth them to doe euill But this permission doth suppose God either otiosum vel invitum either to be idle and negligent or against his will to suffer things so it will cast vpon God either an imputation of negligence or indulgence as Heli permitted his sonnes to sinne or of impotencie in permitting things which he cannot hinder therefore this deuise of bare permission doth not satisfie 3. Nor yet did God harden him per patientiam by his patience in sparing to punish him Origen dilatione poenae by deferring of his punishment Basil in Oecumen for in this sense Pharaoh rather hardened his owne heart in abusing Gods longsuffering as the Apostle speaketh of those which through their hardnesse of heart despise the bountifulnesse of God Rom. 2.42 God cannot be said this way to harden it 4. Hierome thinketh that God doth harden the vessels of wrath and malâ—â—fieth the vessels of mercie causis praecedentibus vpon causes proceeding or going before because some beleeued in Christ some beleeued not Hierome epist. 150. resp ad qu. 10. But Pererius refuseth this opinion and vpon good ground because he maketh the wills and dispositions of men to be the first cause why God sheweth mercie on some and hardeneth others as the same heate of the Sunne mollifieth the wax and hardneth the clay whereas the Apostle soli voluntati diuinae aperte assignat doth manifestly assigne the cause to the onely will of God Pere disput 10. numer 55. 5. And farre be it from any to thinke that God is the proper efficient cause of the hardening of mans heart which is the worke of Sathan as Pererius slaundereth Calvin to say Deum causam esse efficientem indurationis that God is the efficient cause of the hardening of the heart c. And thus he challenging Calvin because he saith that this word to burden in Scripture signifieth not onely permission sed diuinae irae actionem but an action of the diuine wrath which is most true but yet as the hardning and hardnesse of the heart is sinne the Lord hath nothing to doe with it 6. Pererius thinketh that by hardening here we may vnderstand ipsam reprobationis originem the verie beginning of reprobation that is the will and purpose of God non miserandi not to shew mercie But hardening of the heart is an effect or consequence rather of reprobation then reprobation it selfe and thus he will make God the proper cause of this induration and hardening which he charged Calvin with before 7. To vnderstand therefore how God is said to harden the heart it must be considered that there are two degrees thereof desertio induritae the leauing and forsaking of men in their hardnes of heart which is either non apponendo vel subtrahendo gratiam in not giuing or in subtracting his grace as Augustine saith he hardeneth not impertiendo malitiam sed non impertiendo gratiam not by imparting malice but by not imparting his mercie and grace epistol 105. ad Sixtumi non quia irrogatur aliquod quo fit homo deterior sed quo ferrer melior non irrogatur not because any thing is irrogated to make man worse but nothing is irrogated to make him better â—lib 1. ad Simplici qu. 2. and he likeneth it to the freezing and congealing of the water by the absence of the Sunne which is done non impretiendo frigiditatem sed non apponendo calorem not by imparting coldnesse but in not putting to heat The other degree in hardening is inflictio grautoris duritiae the inflicting of a greater blindnesse and hardnes of heart which is done three wayes either immediately by God himselfe or mediately by Sathan or by themselues that are hardened and so we reade in Exodus that God is said 8. times to haue hardened Pharaohs heart and thrice Pharaoh hardened his owne heart and fiue times his heart is said simply to be hardened Pareus First God inflicteth the hardnesse of heart as a punishment when either inwardly he giueth them vp to their owne desires not onely in denying vnto them necessarie graces but so working by his invisible power that their corrupt wills are more and more hardened as it is said Reuel 22.11 He that is filthie let him be filthie still hardnesse then of heart as it is a punishment of former sinnes is iustly inflicted by God as Augustine saith prioribus meritia c. hoc redditum est Pharaoni vt cor eius induraretur this was giuen as a iust recompence to Pharaohs former euill merits in afflicting the people of God that his heart was hardened c. As hardnesse of heart is a punishment of former sinnes so it is of God And God by his immediate power hardeneth the heart two wayes 1. the generall facultio whereby euerie one mooueth and willeth this or that is of God Luther vseth this similitude as Pet. Martyr alleadgeth him like as the rider that forceth a lame and halting horse is the cause of his going but his halting pase proceedeth from the lamenesse of the horse so God hardeneth as the generall moouer but the euillnes of the action proceedeth from the corruption of man 2. But more then this God doth by a more speciall prouidence so ouerrule euen the hearts of wicked men that they are ordered
father as Rom. 1.23 2. Cor. 1.3 and 11.31 2. Not euery one that is called God in Scripture is consequently that chiefe and great God 3. Christ is said to be ouer all that is men as the most excellent man of all not ouer all whatsoeuer 4. He is said to be ouer all with a limitation for he is not ouer him that hath subdued all things vnto him 1. Cor. 15.27 5. And in that he is ouer all he hath it not by nature but of gift Philip. 2.9 Contra. Erasmus seemeth first to haue giuen occasion to these newfangled Dogmatists who likewise in his annotations vpon this place thinketh this Scripture not so fit to prooue the diuine nature of Christ adding that herein there is no daunger seeing there are more direct places to prooue Christs Godhead by But Pet. Martyr here answeareth well non convenit vt Ecclesiae armamentarium sine causa exhauriatur c. it is not conuenient that the armorie of the Church should without cause be diminished seeing the fathers as Origen Chrysost Theophylact Cyprian cont lud lib. 2. c. 5. Hilarius in Psal. 122. doe all alleadge this place for the proofe of Christs deitie it is not fit that we should suffer it to be wrestled out of our hands their cauills are thus answeared 1. Where the father is said to be blessed for euer the Sonne is not excluded and in some places Christ is said expressely to be blessed for euer as Matth. 21.9 Blessed is be that commeth in the name of the Lord and if the Creator be blessed for euer Christ is included by whom all things were created Ioh. 1. Coloss. 1. 2. He which is said to be God ouer all as Christ here must of necessitie be that chiefe and great God 3. Some indeede reade super omnia ouer all things as Origen the Syrian and Latine interpreter and this is agreeable to that place Coloss. 1.17 He is before all things and in him all things consist and the Apostle nameth both things visible and invisible and so Origen well expoundeth he is aboue all things that is powers principalities and euerie thing that is named 4. He is aboue all things that is all creatures and aboue all as the father is aboue all and yet neither aboue the Sonne or the holy Ghost the father then is here excepted for Christ and his father are one non post patrem ipse sed de patre he is not after the father but of the father Origen 5. S. Paul in that place speaketh of the exaltation of Christ as he is Mediator and according to his humane nature and so he hath it by gift but as he is God he is ouer all by his eternall generation as the onely begotten Sonne of God Controv. 4. That the water in Baptisme doth not sanctifie or giue grace Chrysostome sheweth here a fit analogie and resemblance betweene the birth of Izaak oâ— Sara by the word of promise v. 9. and our spirituall regeneration in baptisme the barren wombe of Sarah he likeneth to the water which of it selfe hath no efficacie erat vterni ille aqua frigidior propter sterilitatem senectutem that wombe was more vnapt for generation then water because of the barrennesse and old age thereof like as then Izaak was borne of that barren wombe by the word of promise ita nos oportet ex verbo nasci so we are borne of the word To this purpose Chrysostome who maketh the element of water of it selfe but a dead thing and like vnto Sarahs barren wombe which could not haue conceiued but by the word of promise So the Apostle saith Ephes. 5.25 Cleansing it by the washing of water thorough the word the water cleanseth but by the operation of the word This then ouerthroweth that opinion of the Romanists which affirme that the sacramentall signe in the sacraments conferre grace See further hereof Synops. Centur. 2. err 76. Controv. 5. Against the vaine observation of Astrologers in casting of nativities v. 10. Rebecca when she had conceiued by one c. Augustine lib. 2. de doctrin Christian. c. 21. by this Scripture confuteth the folly of Mathematicians who in casting of mens natiuities doe obserue the aspect of the planets and so doe calculate and coniecture of the disposition of men for Esau and Iacob were borne at the same time of one and the same parents and yet they were of diuerse dispositions and qualities and conditions of life Controv. 6. That the soules had no beeng in a former life before they came into the bodie It was Origens error who therein did too much Platonize that the soules in the former life according to their workes good or euill were accordingly appointed of God to saluation or damnation But this error is euidently conuinced by the Apostle here for Esau and Iacob had neither done good nor euill before they were borne Lyranus addeth two other reasons to convince this error 1. if there had beene an other life before then the world was not created in the beginning as it is said Gen. 1.1 for that the soules had a beeing and beginning before 2. and temporale non potest esse causa aeterni no temporall thing can be the cause of that which is eternall the actions then and workes of the soule could not be the cause of the act of Gods eternall will Controv. 7. Whether the foresight of faith or workes be the cause of election This was in time past maintained by the followers of the Pelagian sect as it appeareth by the epistles of Prosper and Hilarius Arelatens sent to Augustine and not much differing is the opinion of the Greeke expositors as Theodoret in these words that the purpose of God might remaine according to election vnderstandeth the purpose of men foreseene of God according to the which he electeth But the Apostle euidently calleth it the purpose of God and therefore not of men Chrysost. and Photius cited by Oecumenius doe here vnderstand the purpose of God but where it is added according to election they say this election presupposeth a difference and diuersitie of wills foreseene of God The late Lutherans tread in the same steppesâ— who at the first did hold that the foresight of faith was the cause of election but now they haue somewhat refined that assertion and their opinion now is fidem non esse electionis causam meritoriam sed instrument alem that faith is not the meritorious but the instrumentall cause of election their arguments are these 1. Argum. Photius thus reasoneth electio de illis fit qui aliqua in re differunt election is said to be of those which differ in some thing God then did see some difference in them which he elected from others Contra. 1. Augustine at the first was somewhat mooued with this argument which made him deuise an other sense of the Apostles words to this effect that it was said vnto the children beeing not yet borne and before they had done either good
or euill the elder shall serue the younger least the purpose of God should remaine according to election which he supposeth to rise of some difference in the parties elected to this purpose Augustine lib. ad Simplician quest 2. But this parenthesis or interlaced sentence is â—â—tered by the Apostle affirmatively That the purpose of God might remaine c. it cannot therefore be drawne to a negatiue sense And indeede Augustine whether vpon this or some other reason otherwise expoundeth these words epist. 115. 2. But the best answear is that the proposition is not true for election in God presupposeth not a difference God may make election euen in things in themselues equall by the right of his Creatorship and make a difference as euidently appeareth in the creation of the world when all things were equall at the first in that indigested himpe and masse whereout the creatures were made and yet our of it were different creatures made some lightsome as the Sunne and starres some darke and obscure as the earth and earthly things And so the Lord in his decree of predestination made a difference in his election according to his good pleasure of things which differed not before And so there is a difference indeede in those which are elected from others sed non invenit Deus sed ponit ipse in hominibus differentiam but God findeth not any such difference in men but he maketh it Pet. Martyr the difference then dependeth not of the nature of the things but of the purpose and counsell of God 2. Arg. 1. S. Paul saith Ephes. 1.4 He hath elected vs in him that is in Christ but none are in Christ without faith that then which ioyneth vs to Christ is the cause of election 2. againe 2. Thess. 2.13 we are said to be chosen to saluation in faith 3. and Heb. 11.6 It is impossible to please God without faith the elect are pleasing to God therefore by faith they were accepted 4. and seeing faith is the instrumentall cause of saluation why not also of election Thus the Lutherans reason for the foresight of faith Contra. 1. Not euerie thing whereby we are ioyned vnto Christ is the cause of election but that whereby we were first giuen vnto Christ which is the absolute and free mercie of God who elected vs of his free grace and mercie and in Christ appointed to bring those whom he elected vnto eternall life And the Apostle doth expound himselfe what he meaneth by beeing elected in Christ that is he hath predestinate vs to be adopted thorough Christ faith then in Christ is not the cause of election but a meane subordinate to bring the elect vnto saluation 2. We are said to be chosen in faith not faith foreseene as the cause of election but in faith present as a meane vnto saluation 3. The same answear may serue to the third place obiected which must be vnderstood likewise de fide praesenti non praevisa of faith present not of faith foreseene for God thorough his mercie elected vs beeing yet his enemies his loue therefore was before any foresight of faith by his mercie he made vs acceptable vnto himselfe by the election of grace before he sawe any thing in vs. 4. It followeth not that euerie thing which is the cause of saluation should be the cause of election it is true in the generall cause which is the mercie of God which causeth as well the one as the other but not in the next and immediate causes as for example the father is the cause of his son and the son of the nephew and yet the son is not the cause of the father so election is the cause of faith and faith of saluation but it therefore followeth not that faith should be the cause of election And Hunnius that was at the first a great patrone of this cause in the ende argueth that faith in the mysterie of election was to be considered neither vt causam meritoriam as a meritorious or instrumentall cause sed vt partem illius ordinis c. but as a part of that order which God had appointed that is a meane vnto saluation Pareus dub 6. 3. Arg. If God simply should elect some and refuse others without foresight of their faith how is he not an accepter of persons Ans. The accepting of person is when against the rule of iustice a man of no good parts or qualites is preferred before him that is well qualified But there is no feare of this in Gods election for he findeth all alike in themselues none endued with any good gifts or qualities but as he giueth them therefore herein he is no accepter of persons in preferring one before an other all beeing alike Now on the contrarie side that the foresight of faith or any thing in man is not the cause of election but onely the good pleasure and will of God it may be thus further confirmed 1. The Apostle in saying not by workes but by him that calleth excludeth whatsoeuer in man for if either the foresight of faith or of any other thing and not onely of works should be the cause of election then it should not be onely in the caller as the Apostle here saith Mart. Pareus Tolet annot 19. 2. The effect of election is not the cause faith with the fruits thereof are the effects of election Ephes. 1.4 he hath chosen vs that we should be holy Pareus 3. The eternall decree of God is not founded in that which is temporarie the faith or good workes of men are but temporarie things and therefore they cannot be the ground and foundation of Gods eternall decree Faius 4. Faith is the worke of God Ioh. 6.29 therefore not the cause of his election so the same thing should be the cause of it selfe and so also be before it selfe Pareus 5. If election depended vpon the foresight of good workes then it would followe that we are iustified by workes for from election and predestination proceedeth our vocation and from vocation iustification and if election be out of the foresight of works then iustification also which followeth election by degrees Mart. 6. Lyranus addeth this reason further Deus non vult finem propter ea quae sunt ad finem God will not appoint the ende for those things which tend vnto the ende but rather these are for the ende now faith and works are but the way to the ende and therefore they cannot be the cause of the appointment of the end that is that men should attaine vnto euerlasting glorie Lyran. vpon this place 7. Tolet also annot 16. vrgeth this reason whereas the Apostle saith v. 14. is there iniquitie with God if he had meant that the difference in the decree of election ariseth out of the foresight of faith then the reason had beene apparent and there had beene no shew at all of any iniustice in God and so no place for this obiection at all See further of this question before c.
endebted to the diuine iustice quod siue exigatur siue donetur nulla est iniquitas which though it be exacted or pardoned there is no iniquitie ad Simplic lib. 1. qu. 2. In this assertion there is no inconueniencie to say that God beholding and foreseeing all men by the voluntarie transgression of Adam in the state of corruption did of his free mercy elect some to be saued in Christ the others he left in their corruption and so for their sinnes decreed thē to damnation for here can be no imputation of iniustice at all for it is free where one hath diuerse debters to remit the debt vnto one and to exact it of another So then if the reason be demanded why some are reiected of God it may be answeared that mans voluntarie transgression bringing all his posteririe into bondage beeing foreseene of God is a sufficent cause of their reiection but if it be further demaunded why God out of this masse of corruption hath elected some and not others there no other reason can be giuen but the good pleasure of God Ephes. 1.5 so that the absolute decree of reprobation is grounded vpon the foresight of mans corruption but of the comparatiue as why one is reiected and left and not an other no reason can be rendred but Gods gracious and free purpose Against this opinion of Augustine there are two principall obiections 1. Pererius disput 12. thus obiecteth the Angels had no originall sinne they were all created in the state of grace and yet some of them were elected some reprobate therefore sinne is not the cause of reprobation Ans. 1. As the Angels were created in the state of grace so also was Adam in Paradise and as Adam fell by voluntarie transgression and so enthralled his posteritie so did the Angels that fell abuse the gift of freewill and so for their pride were iustly condemned for euer so then the foresight of the apostasie of the reprobate Angels was the cause of their reiection and condemnation as the Apostle saith Iud. 6. The Angels which kept not their first estate he hath reserued in euerlasting chaines as man then hath originall sinne out of the which proceed actuall sinnes which are the ground and cause of reprobation and condemnation so the Apostate Angels for their sinne of pride were reiected onely here is the difference that the Angels fell irrecouerable falling by their owne pride beeing not seduced but man falling by the sedition and tentation of the deuill hath a redeemer in Gods mercie prouided for him 2. Pareus thus obiecteth the foresight of originall corruption is generall and common to all mankind therefore it cannot be the cause of the reprobation of some onely dub 8. argum 4. so also Vrsinus catech 3. p. 357. Ans. Not simply the foresight of originall corruption which all are subiect vnto but it beeing considered together with Gods decree because he purposed to deliuer some and not others is the cause of reprobation 3. Some doe wholly referre the decree of reprobation and election onely to the will and purpose of God and thinke that no other cause can be rendred why God hath elected some and condemned others but the absolute will pleasure and purpose of God their reasons are these 1. As God loued Iacob before he had done any good so he hated Esau without any respect vnto the euill which he did Rom. 9.11 2. The Apostle also saith v. 18. That God hath mercie on whom he will and whom he will be hardeneth Gods will is the cause of both 3. And God is compared to the potter that as he hath power ouer the clay to make thereout vessels of honour or dishonour as he thinketh good so much more the Lord may out of the same masse make some vessels of mercie some of euerlasting shame 4. Our Blessed Sauiour maketh this the reason why God had hid the misterie of saluation from the wise men and reuealed it to babes because O Father thy good pleasure was such Matth. 11.25 Ans. 1. Why God loued not Esau as well as Iacob the cause was onely the gracious purpose of God and hereof neither the good workes of the one nor the euill workes of the other were the cause yet both of them beeing considered in their originall corruption as it was Gods mercie to deliuer the one so it was no iniustice to leaue the other 2. here the hatred of God is taken onely for the not conferring of his grace and loue which God freely bestowed without respect vnto workes but that hatred which is an ordaining of men vnto euerlasting punishment is not without respect vnto their sinnes 2. Mercie presupposeth miserie and hardening a corrupt inclination in the heart before for the which it is hardened here then mans miserable estate is insinuated out of the which some by Gods mercie are deliuered 3. By that similitude the Apostle sheweth what God may doe by his absolute power not what he doth he dealeth not with men as the potter with the clay though he might that is stricto absoluto iure by his strict and absolute right but aequissimis rationibus vpon most equall and iust conditions he might doe as the potter doth but yet he taketh not that rigorous and strict course 4. It is indeed Gods good pleasure to reueale the secrets of his will to whom he pleaseth and to hide them from whom he will because he is not bound vnto any he may doe with his owne as he please and bestow his graces freely but if he should keepe them from all none had cause to complaine seeing their naturall blindnes and corruption was brought vpon them by the voluntarie corruption of Adam and though it was Gods gracious favour to reueale vnto some his will yet the rest were hardened and blinded iustly through their owne wilfulnesse and obstinacie against the truth And further against this opinion of the absolute decree of reprobation without any respect vnto the sinnes of men originall and actuall these two strong obiections are made first there would be an imputation of iniustice vpon God if he should decree any to be condemned but for sinne for like as none are indeed in time condemned but for sin as the Apostle saith Ephes. 5.6 For such things commeth the wrath of God vpon the children of disobedience c. so the decree of damnation before all time must be vpon the foresight of sinne Secondly whereas God in Scripture is set forth to be exceeding aboundant in mercie as Psal. 25.10 All the waies of the Lord are mercie and truth and Psal. 144.9 His mercies are ouer or aboue all his workes and Iames 2.13 mercie reioyceth against iudgement Now the Lord should be accused of seueritie and inclemencie and farre more readie and prompt vnto iustice then mercie if he out of his owne will should decree more to be condemned then to be saued these obiections the former position of the absolute decree of damnation beeing maintained cannot possibly
Gods mercie herein exceedeth his iustice that whereas all men by nature are the children of wrath and God might iustly â—aue them in their sinne as he did the reprobate Angels yet out of that masse of corruption he saueth some to bring them vnto glorie so then vnlesse the fall and transgression of man he presupposed there is no way to magnifie Gods mercie aboue his iustice Thus Thomas Aquin though he mislike Augustines opinion who maketh the foresight of originall â—â—â—ne the ground of the decree of reprobation and thinketh that God absolutely reiecteth the reprobate without any foresight of sinne yet is constrained to seeke shelter here for the â—â—â—iding of this obiection 5. Wherefore fully to decide this great question and controversie touching the decree â—â— reprobation we will determine of it in this manner 1. There is reprobatio indefinita definita a reprobation indefinite that is that some â—â—e elected some reiected and a definite reprobation whereby some are certainely reiected and not others of the first the cause is onely in God for the demonstration of his mercie â—â—â—ard the elect and of his iustice and power toward the reprobate as the Apostle sheweth v. 22.23 and so the wise man saith Prov. 16.4 that God made all things euen the wicked for himselfe and to this purpose Thomas well saith that the reason of election and reprobation is taken from the goodnesse of God quae multiformiter in rebus representatur which by his meanes is diuersely represented and set forth in the creatures when aâ— some things are in an high some in a low degree If all should be elected Gods iustice should not appeare if all were condemned where were his mercie But of the definite and certaine reprobation why some are in particular reiected the cause is the foresight of their sinne 2. Againe reprobation is considered two waies absolute comparate absolutely as in reiecting these and these and comparatiuely in reiecting these rather then those of the first the reason is the generall corruption of mankind which transgressed in Adam who abused his freewill in choosing euill it beeing in his power to haue made choice of the good and so he brought all his posteritie into bondage vnto sinne in which state of corruption God iustly might haue left all if it had pleased him but of the comparatiue reprobation why God left others in their naturall corruption and freed others no reason can be giuen but the good pleasure of God as Saint Paul saith Ephes. 2.3 We were by nature the children of wrath as well as others but God who is rich in mercie through his great loue c. hath quickned vs so Augustine well saith quare hunc Deus trahat illum non trahat no◠〈◊〉 dijudicare si non vis errare why God draweth one out of that masse of corruption and not an other take not vpon thee to iudge if thou wilt not erre epistol 105. 3. We must distinguish betweene absolutum ius Dei and ordinatum the absolute right which God hath ouer his creatures and his moderate or subordinate right By his absolute right the Creator hath power to dispose of his creature as it pleaseth him to life or to death as the potter hath power of the same clay to make some vessels of honour some of dishonour and if the Lord should thus deale with his creature euen without any respect vnto sinne no man could accuse or challenge God But he dealeth not thus with vs secundum spiritum absolutum ius according to his strict and absolute right but according to his subordinate right whereby he proceedeth not against the creature either in condemning it or decreeing the same to be condemned without iust cause giuen by the creature And thus the Apostle dealeth in this place by the similitude of the potter v. 20.22 he sheweth what absolute power and right God hath if he would please to vse it and v. 22.23 he speaketh of the other ordinarie right and power which God indeed vseth in proceeding against the vessels of wrath prepared by their owne sinnes vnto destruction Pareus And Tolet here well obserueth that the Apostle maketh two answers vnto the obiection propounded one to stop the mouthes of gainesayers in vrging the absolute power of God the other to satisfie the faithfull in shewing that God doth not execute his wrath vpon any but for their sinne annot 28. Concerning this distinction of the strict or absolute right and power of God and his ordinarie or rather subordinate right though it be admitted on both sides both by Protestant and Popish writers yet there is this difference 1. Some doe thinke and so professe and teach that God vseth as well his absolute as subordinate power in the decree of reprobation and thus Bucer Calvin Zanchius affirme that God by his absolute will hath reprobate and reiected some without respect vnto their sinnes 2. Pareus who also acknowledgeth Gods power herein yet he would not haue this doctrine handled either in schooles or before the people but according to Gods subordinate power in reiecting no otherwise then for sinne p. 912. 3. Both these thinke that God bringeth this his absolute power into act but I thinke it more safe to hold that God might if it please him vse that absolute power which if he did none could accuse him of iniustice but he dealeth otherwise in this mysterie of reprobation refusing none but iustly for their sinne and this is that which Augustine affirmeth by way of supposition in this manner Si hominum genus quod creatum constâ—â— primitus nihilo c. if mankind which at the beginning God created of nothing were not brought forth endebted both to sinne and death and yet the almightie Creator should condemne some of them to euerlasting destruction who could say vnto him Lord why hast thou done so God in his infinite power might haue done thus but not according to the ordinarie course of iustice Then seeing I absolutely subscribe vnto the iudgement of Augustine seene before in the 2. opinion produced that mans originall corruption is the first ground of the decree of reprobation out of the which God in mercie saued some by the election of grace leauing others which adding to their originall corruption other actuall sinnes are made worthie of condemnation and so Augustine well concludeth investigabilis Dei miserecordia c. the mercie of God is vnsearcheable whereby he hath mercie on whom he will no merits of his going before and vnsearcheable is his truth whereby he hardeneth whom he will eius praecedentibus meritis his merites going before but the same with his vpon whom God sheweth mercie Learned Pareus hereunto agreeth dub 17. massa damnata propriè est obiectum c. the damned masse is properly the obiect of election reprobation Vrsinus also as Pareus hath set forth his workes defineth reprobation to be the immutable and eternall decree of God whereby he hath decreed in
Pet. 1.10 2. for one to be a reprobate and yet to repent are contraries for he that is a reprobate can neuer haue grace to repent and he that hath grace truely to repent may be assured he is no reprobate Obiect 9. But if God haue foreseene the sinnes of the reprobate and that which God foreseeth must needs come to passe then the reprobate sinne of necessitie they cannot doe otherwise how then can they be iustly punished for that which they cannot auoid Ans. There is a double kind of necessitie the one is called antecedens necâ—â—â—â—â—tas an antecedent necessitie or going before which proceedeth from necessarie and working causes as when a thing is forced by violence and strength as a stone out of the hand it is necessarie it should goe there is consequens necessitas a following necessitie or by way of consequent which is vpon supposition of the effect as when we see one fit this beeing supposed that we see him fit it is now necessarie beeing done and yet he was not forced to fit so it is in this case the reprobate doe sinne necessarily not by a necessitie forcing their will but an infallible necessitie following the effect for they therefore sinne not because God did foresee they would sinne but therefore God foresaw it because they would sinne The reprobate then do sinne freely without any compulsion and therein are guiltie though they were foreseene to sinne and because of the corruption of their nature could doe no other And thus is this doctrine deliuered from all those cauils and obiections and man iâ— found onely to be the cause of his owne ruine and destruction but the beginning of our saluation is from God according to that saying of the Prophet Hoshea c. 13.9 perditio tâ—â— ex te Israel salus ex me thy perdition O Israel is of thy selfe thy salvation of me and so I ende and conclude this point with that saying of Tertullian Deus de suo optimus de nostro iustus c. God is good and mercifull of his owne and iust in that which is ours c. lib. de resurrect that is the originall of mercie is from God but the occasion of his iustice is from sinne which is of our selues Controv. 11. Of the difference betweene the decree of election and reprobation and of the agreement betweene them Whereas in both these there are two things to be considered the decree and the execution thereof here are diuerse opinions Some will haue a correspondencie in election and reprobation in both and these also are deuided Some only in the former that is the decree Some will haue a difference in both as well in the manner of the decree as in the execution 1. Of the first opinion were the Pelagians and some of the Romanists which hold that both the decree of election is grounded vpon the foresight of faith and the good vse of freewill as also the execution of that decree in the giuing of eternall life they will haue procured by good works as reprobation both in the decree and execution proceedeth from sinne and the foresight thereof So the whole worke of election they will haue to take beginning from man as reprobation doth Thus the Rhemists hold that election is not without the condition and respect to workes annot Heb. c. 5. sect 7. Becanus the new diuinitie Reader in Mentz hath this assertion that predestination is ex praescientia conditionata c. of a conditionall prescience whereby God foresaw that one would well vse the grace offered and not an other c. 1. de praedestinat loc 5. But herein other Romanists do dissent from them as Bellarmine Tolet Pererius as hath beene shewed before controv 7. 2. Other Romanists will haue an agreement both in the decree and execution but after an other manner as Pererius following Thom. Aquin. disput 5. numer 34. disput 12. numer 66. saith that God is the cause of reprobation as well as election quantum ad duo principium terminum in respect of these two the beginning and the ende concerning the beginning which is the decree he saith there is nulla causa meritoria ex parte hominis no meritorious cause of either on mans behalfe but in respect of the last effect there is a meritorious cause in man both of his good works vnto eternall life and of euill workes to condemnation But Pererius in two points is farre wide both in making good workes meritorious of eternall life which is the free gift of God Rom. 6.23 and in assigning the beginning or first cause of reprobation and so of condemnation in the will of God and not in the sinne of man contrarie to that saying of the Prophet alleadged before Hos. 13.9 Thy perdition is of thy selfe O Israel as their Latine text readeth 3. Some doe make great difference in the execution of these decrees for good workes are not meritorious of saluation as euill workes are of damnation the reason of which difference is because euill workes are perfitly euill but our good workes are imperfect and so not proportionable to the most excellent and perfect reward and good workes are not our owne nor of our selues as euill workes are and therefore they merit not but the decree as well of election as reprobation they hold to be alike without any relation vnto workes good or euill thus worthie Calvin Beza Martyr with other of our learned new writers 4. But it is the safer way thoroughout from the beginning of the decree to the execution to hold a perpetuall difference betweene election and reprobation that we are elected freely without respect vnto faith or workes for otherwise we should haue chosen God first and not he vs and so we are also saued freely not for our workes and yet neither without them But in the way of damnation neither were the wicked decreed to be condemned neither yet shall they actually be condemned but for their sinne and the foresight thereof 1. because the beginning of damnation is from man but the decree of reprobation is the beginning of damnation therefore that decree must proceed from the foresight of something worthie of damnation in man 2. that for the which God condemneth man he decreed him to be condemned but for sinne is man condemned 3. otherwise if it it were Godâ— absolute will to reiect more then he electeth his iustice should exceede his mercie see before contr 10. Controv. 12. Whether mercie be a naturall propertie in God or an effect onely of his will against Socinus v. 18. He hath mercie on whom he will Socinus that blasphemous heretike lib. 1. c. 1. by occasion of these words goeth about to prooue that Mercie is not a naturall propertie in God but a voluntarie act 1. Because the Apostle saith He hath mercie on whom he will 2. God alwaies vseth his naturall properties but mercie he alwaies sheweth not as toward impenitent sinners 3. Contrarie properties are not naturally in God but his mercie
they will themselues as Because telleth vs that God simplici affectu desideravit omnes ad aeternam beatitudinem pervenire that God simply desired that all might come to eternall life de praedestinat Calvinist c. 8.4 And this assertion may seeme to be fauoured by these places of Scripture Rom. 11.32 God hath shut vp all in vnbeleefe that he might haue mercie vpon all and 1. Timoth. 2.4 God would haue all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth Contra. Diuerse answeares are here found out 1. Some say that secundum quid after a sort God would haue all to be saued in that he offereth meanes of saluation to al but simply he willeth onely the saluation of the elect which he effecteth and worketh accordingly 2. the schoolemen haue here a distinction that there is voluntas signi beneplaciti Gods secret will and his reuealed and signified will by his reuealed will he would haue all to be saued by his secret will onely the elect 3. Augustine hath two answeares sometime he vnderstandeth these places distributive by way of distribution by all men he interpreteth all sorts of men according to that saying Reuel 5.9 Thou hast redeemed vs vnto God thorough thy blood out of euerie tribe and language c. sometime he taketh it restrictive by way of restraint and limitation vnderstanding all the elect he will haue all to be saued because none can be saued but by his wil as that saying is to be taken Ioh. 1.9 Which lighteneth euerie man that commeth into the world not that euerie one is lightened but euerie one which is lightened is lightened by him And this interpretation in restraining such vniuersall promises to the faithfull onely is agreeable to the Scripture for whereas the Apostle saith in generall Rom. 11.32 God hath shut vp all in vnbeleefe that he might haue mercie vpon all he restraineth it onely vnto those which beleeue Galat. 3.22 The Scripture hath concluded all vnder sinne that the promise by the faith of Iesus Christ should be giuen to all that beleeue Pareus 4. But yet none of these answears doe fully satisfie this therefore may further be added that in the beginning God made man righteous and gaue him free will and sufficient strength to haue beene kept from tentation if he would himselfe but man abused his free-will and transgressed and fell yet God offreth outward meanes vnto all of their calling which if they refuse there is no want on Gods behalfe but on their owne this then is our answear that God would all men to be saued that is not that God purposeth all to be saued or giueth grace to all to be saued but that there appeareth no let on Gods behalfe why all are not saued either the creation considered or Gods generall vocation but man is the cause of his owne perdition or ruine Controv. 15. Of the sufficiencie of Scripture v. 17. The Scripture saith c. Hence may be answeared that cauill of the Iesuites against the Scripture that it cannot be the iudge of Controversies because the iudge must speake but the Scripture is a dumbe letter and speaketh not But this the Apostle denieth here for he saith the Scripture saith to Pharaoh the Scripture speaketh it is not then a dumbe and mute Iudge therefore the voice of the Scripture must be heard as the onely sufficient Iudge to decide and determine all controversies of doctrine and this the Apostle euidently sheweth by the frequent alleadging and citing of the Scripture in this chapter shewing that he appealeth thereunto as the supreame and highest Iudge of all truth Controv. 16. Of the certaintie of saluation v. 24. Euen vs whom he hath called c. The Apostle doubteth not to affirme not onely of himselfe but of others also that are called that they are prepared vnto glorie so then we neede not expect some speciall revelation to make vs assured of our saluation as the Romanists affirme we are made certaine of our election by our vocation Par. and afterward the Apostle saith v. 33. he that beleeueth shall not be ashamed he then that is sure he shall not be confounded or ashamed what cause hath he to doubt of his saluation Mart. Controv. 17. Against the workes of preparation v. 30. The Gentiles which followed not righteousnesse haue attained vnto righteousnesse silence it is manifest that a man cannot make a way or doe any thing by way of preparation to further his calling seeing the Gentiles were cōuerted vnto God when they sought it not so it is true which the Apostle saith els-where Philip. 2.13 it is God which worketh in you both the will and deed of his good pleasure See further Synops. Centur. 4. err 81. 6. Morall obseruations Observ. 1. It is not sufficient for children to come of good parents The examples of Ismael and Esau borne of faithfull and righteous parents yet themselues prophane and vnrighteous do teach vs that it is not sufficient for children to boast of the nobilitie and vertue of their ancestours vnlesse they doe also imitate and followe their steppes so the Iewes did vaunt themselues of their father Abraham but our Blessed Sauiour denieth them to be Abrahams children vnlesse they did the workes of Abraham Observ. 2. How parents may be comforted in their vngodly children These examples also may giue contentment and comfort vnto parents when as their childrē prooue prophane and licentious to looke vnto the counsell of God who gaue grace vnto Iacob but forsooke Esau let their be no diligence and care wanting in the Parents to giue vnto their children good education and if other things fall not out answearable to their godly desire they must rest contented in Gods will and counsell which may be hidde and secret but is neuer vniust as Abraham is commended for his care in the instruction of his children Gen. 18.18 yet Ismael became a licentious and irreligious man Observ. 3. Against curiositie v. 20. Who art thou O man that pleadest c. Though the Apostle stay all curious inquiring after Gods secrets yet men are not hereby forbidden and discouraged from a modest desire to search and knowe the truth for our Sauiour doth himselfe bid vs search the Scriptures Ioh. 6.39 and Origen here well noteth non puto quod si prudens fidelis servus interroget c. I doe not thinke if a wise and faithfull seruant should aske and enquire after Gods will that he should receiue such an answear who art thou c. which he sheweth by the example of Daniel who had his desire granted Dan. 9. Observ. 4. Of contentment of mind v. 20. Shall the thing framed say why hast thou made me thus c. Like as in the doctrine of election euerie one must rest contented with Gods good pleasure so for the state and condition of this life we must accept thankfully of that whereto the Lord hath disposed vs if a man be rich of poore high or lowe let him be content
kind was the zeale of the false Apostles Gal. 4.17 They are ielous ouer you amisse they would exclude you that ye should altogether loue them they seemed to beare a great zeale and loue vnto the Galathians but it was onely for their owne aduantage and such was the zeale of Demetrius to Diana Act. 19. because his profit was hindered by the decay of Dianaes worship but a true and vnfained zeale is that when one seeketh onely the good of that which he loueth without respect to himselfe as Saint Paul was thus iealous ouer the Corinthians to seeke to ioyne them for their owne good vnto Christ. 2. Cor. 11.2 Now of this vnfained zeale there are two kinds one which hath knowledge the other is without and this is of two sorts for there is here a twofold knowledge required both of the thing which is desired and affected and of the wrong which is offered the Iewes wanted one of these for they had a knowledge of God though not perfect but they were ignorant of the other they thought the worship of God to â—â—nsist in the rites and ceremonies of the law and so Gods glorie to be hindered by the Preaching of the Gospel the Gentiles were ignorant of both for neither had they the knowledge of God at all neither did they know the way how to worship him and so were ignorant what hindered or furthered Gods glorie 3. Now in that the Apostle maketh this as a reason why he wished well vnto them and prayed for them because they had zeale though not according to knowledge this doth not iustifie their zeale or prooue that we may reioyce or take delight in any thing that is euill but because their zeale was a good thing in it selfe and they failed in the manner onely the Apostle so farre commendeth them as it is said that Christ loued the young man that professed his obedience and obseruance of the law though he were farre from perfection Mark 10.21 because he saw some good things in him So the Apostle commendeth the zeale of the Iewes here 4. Origen here obserueth that as the Apostle saith of zeale that they had a kind of zeale but not according to knowledge the like may be said of faith charitie and other graces that men may haue them after a sort but not according to knowledge as he hath faith without knowledge that is ignorant that faith without workes it dead and so he hath charitie without knowledge that beasteth of it before men Quest. 5. Why the Iewes are said to stablish their owne righteousnesse v. 3. 1. Theodoret thinketh it is called their owne righteousnesse because now the law was ceased and the obseruation of the rites and ceremonies thereof so also Gorrhan vnderstandeth it of the ceremonies of the law which now were abolished and of the traditions which themselues had invented but the Apostle meaneth principally the moral law and that workes thereof 2. Augustine thinketh it to be so called their owne righteousnesse that is an humanes and imperfect righteousnesse because they were not able to fulfill the law tract 26. in Iob. so also Anselme 3. Lyranus because the law was giuen them and so the righteousnesse thereof they tooke peculiarly to be theirs excluding the Gentiles 4. Chrysostome saith â—â— is tearmed theirs because it consisted in their owne labour whereas faith was the gift of God without their labour 5. Origen saith their owne righteousnes was that which so seemed vnto men but did not make them iust before God so also Tolet as the Apostle saith Rom. 4.2 If Abraham were iustified by workes he hath wherein to reioyce but not with God 6. But properly that is called man 's owne righteousnesse which is supposed to be inherent in him is wrought by his owne workes and labour that is Gods righteousnes which is without man and extrinsecally is applied vnto him by faith 3. This proper iustice of man signifieth not such righteousnesse as man seeketh to worke of himselfe but euen such as man worketh by grace for Gods righteousnesse and mans are opposed not onely in respect of the cause and beginning but in the forme and manner how it is applied the one by faith the other by workes and in the subiect the righteousnes of faith is inherent in Christ and applied to vs by faith the other hath man for the subiect thereof 4. The Iewes in refusing this righteousnesse of God commit three great faults 1. they are ignorant of true righteousnesse by faith 2. they ambitiously seeke to be iustified by their owne righteousnesse 3. they are contemners of Gods righteousnesse which is by faith and will by no meanes be subiect vnto it Quest. 6. How Christ is said to be the ende of the law The end of a thing is taken fowre waies 1. for the determination and extremitie and finall ending of it as Psal. 3.19 Whose end is damnation 2. it is also taken for that which first mooueth the agent and for the which all other things are intended 3. the end is the scope and marke which is aymed at as the end of faith is the saluation of our soules 1. Pet. 1. 4. the end also of a thing is the perfection thereof as loue is said to be the end of the commandements 1. Tim. 1.5 according to these diuerse acceptions is this place diuersely interpreted 1. Some take it in the first sense that Christ ended the ceremonies and legall rites in which it is said the law and the Prophets were vnto Iohn Matth. 11. but this is not the meaning here for thus Christ was an ende onely to the ceremoniall not to the morall law 2. The second way Christ is the end of the law but not directly for in generall the law was ordained to make man righteous and to iustifie him by the keeping thereof but seeing this righteousnesse could not be obtained by the law nor in the law the law bringeth vs vnto Christ and in him we obtaine righteousnesse which the law required but performed not so then the end of the law which was to iustifie a man is fulfilled in Christ thus Chrystsost quid vult lex hominem iustum facere c. what would the law make a man iust c. this the law could not effect but Christ hath effected it so Melancthon Christ is the perfection of the law donat id quod lex requirit he giueth that which the law requireth that is iustification by saith in Christ who hath fulfilled the law for vs so also Beza 3. Christ also is the end and scope aymed at in the old Testament all the Prophets gaue witnesse and testimonie vnto Christ as Lyranus citeth R. Selam and other learned Hebrewes that confessed that vniuersi Prophetae non sunt locuti nisi ad dies Messiae that all the Prophets did not otherwise speake but hauing relation to the Messiah as our Sauiour saith Ioh. 6.26 Moses wrote of mee 4. Christ also is the perfection and consummation of the law
mouthes and nothing els doth God require vnto saluation so Chrysost. in ore corde tuo salutis causa in thy heart and mouth is the casue of saluation so Oecumen brevis salus nihil indigens externis laboribus saluation hath but a short cut it needeth not externall labour facile credere animo ore confiteri potes c. thou mayest easily beleeue with thy minde and confesse with thy mouth by the operation of the spirit Calvin and it seemeth to be a proverbiall speach to shewe the readines and facilitie of that which is in the heart and mouth as it is said Psal. 81.10 Open thy mouth wide and I will fill it Faius so Lyranus ostenditur iustitiae per fidem Christi facilitas the facilitie of righteousnesse by the faith of Christ is shewed And here Origens distinction may be receiued who saith that two waies is Christ neere vs possibilitate in possibilitie and so he may be neere vnto vnbeleeuers for they may haue grace to beleeue and efficacia in efficacie and power and so he is neere vnto those which actually by the spirit doe beleeue with the heart and confesse to saluation 4. But where the iustice of faith is said to be easier then the iustice required by the law that is not vnderstood in regard of the beginning and efficient cause of faith for man hath no more power to beleeue of himselfe then to doe good workes for it is God that worketh iâ— vs both the will and deede Philip. 2.13 but the righteousnesse of faith is easier in regard of the manner of the work because the law requireth the obedience thereof to be performed by our selues but faith referreth vs for the performing of the lawe vnto Christ Neither doth our saluation depend vpon the force and efficacie of faith but vpon the worthines and vertue of Christ apprehended by faith as when a sicke man walketh leaning vpon his staffe it is his staffe that stayeth him not his hand which onely layeth hold vpon the staffe The iustice of the law is as if a weake and sicke man should be enioyned to stand by himselfe without a staffe but faith sheweth how our weakenes is propped and held vp by other helps â—s when a sicke man layeth his hand vpon a staffe Quest. 14. How Moses that preached the law is alleadged for iustification by faith Ob. The obiection is made out of that place Ioh. 1.17 The lawe was giuen by Moses but grace and truth came by Iesus Christ c. but if Moses also taught iustification by faith then grace also came by him Answ. 1. Pet. Martyr answeareth that Moses is said to giue the law because his principall intendment was to propound the law yet he giueth testimonie also to the Gospell because Christ was the ende of the lawe as the Apostles in the new Testament preach repentance which belongeth to the law but their principall scope and intent is to set forth the faith of the Gospell 2. Hereunto for more full answear may be added that the lawe giuen by Moses is taken two wayes either strictly for the precepts of the morall law and so Moses was the minister of the lawe onely and not of grace or for the whole doctrine deliuered by Moses wherein also Euangelicall promises are contained Quest. 15. How Christ is to be confessed v. 9. If thou shalt confesse with thy mouth c. 1. S. Paul here placeth the confession of the mouth first both because he followeth that order which Moses did who nameth it first and for that we doe not knowe the faith of others that beleeue in Christ but by their confession Mart. Pareus 2. By confession is vnderstood not a bare and naked acknowledgment of Christ but the invocation of his name beleeuing in him giuing praise vnto him and whatsoeuer belongeth vnto his worship and this must be such a confession as is ioyned with the beleefe of the heart and not with a generall and historicall beleefe onely such as the deuills haue but a confident trust in Christ in beleeuing him to be our redeemer and Sauiour 3. Here we are to consider of fowre sorts of men 1. some neither confesse Christ nor beleeue and they are atheists 2. some beleeue and confesse not they are timorous and fearefull as Peter when he denied his Master 3. some confesse and beleeue not such are hypocrites 4. some both confesse and beleeue and they are right Christians 4. The Apostle maketh speciall mention of the raising of Christ from the dead 1. because this was the most doubted of his death the Iewes and Gentiles confessed but his resurrection they would not acknowledge Mart. 2. and vnlesse Christ had risen againe all the rest had profited vs little because in his resurrection he obtained a perfect victorie ouer death hell and damnation Calvin 3. and this article of Christs resurrection praesupponis alios articulos presupposeth other articles of the faith and taketh them as graunted as if he rose he died and his death presupposeth his birth Gorrhan Quest. 16. How Christ is said to be raised by God 1. By God in this place is not necessarie to vnderstand the person of the father but the power of the Godhead in the whole Trinitie whereby Christ as man was raised vp So Christ as man was raised vp by the power of his father but as he is one God with his father so he is said to raise vp himselfe Iohn 2.18 Christ is also said to be raised by the spirit of sanctification Rom. 1.4 so then Christ is here considered three wayes as beeing one God with his father as the second person in the Trinitie and as he was man as he is God he onely raiseth is not raised as he is man he is onely raised and raiseth not as he is the Son of God he both raiseth himselfe and the father raiseth him the father raiseth the Sonne by the Sonne and the Sonne raiseth himselfe by the spirit of sanctification whereby he was declared to be the Sonne of God Rom. 1.4 Pareus annot in v. 9. 2. And generally concerning the workes of the Trinitie there is a threefold difference to be obserued for there are some workes wherein the Blessed Trinitie doe concurre together both in their diuine essence and persons and they are ioynt workers as all those which are called extra workes without them as all things now ruled and gouerned by Gods prouidence are so gouerned by the whole Trinitie as Ioh. 5.17 My Father worketh hitherto and I worke and the spirit of God also worketh Psal. 104.30 If thou send forth thy spirit they are created some workes are proper and peculiar vnto the glorious persons of the Trinitie as those which are called ad intra the inward workes as the father begetteth the Sonne is begotten the holy Ghost proceedeth these are so peculiar vnto each of them that what is proper to one agreeth not vnto an other and thirdly some works there are wherein the Blessed
leadeth vs vnto the righteousnesse of the law one way by the proper scope and intent thereof and to Christ an other way indirectly and by an accident because when we see our weaknes in performing of the law we are driuen to seeke vnto Christ that hath kept the law for vs. 2. the same answer serueth for the next obiection Christ is the end of the law one way as is said and the righteousnesse of the law an other 3. they differ rather as a thing perfect and imperfect of two diuerse kindes not as an infant and a man of yeares but as reasonable and vnreasonable creatures they agree onely in generall they are both a kind of iustice and haue one efficient cause God is the giuer and worker of the one iustice and of the other but they differ in the seuerall properties the one is imputed the other inherent and is by faith the other by workes 2. Neither yet doe these two kinds of righteousnesse differ as contrarie the one to the other as some thinke 1. one good thing is not contrarie to another but both the righteousnesse of the law and of faith are good 2. neither doth God command contrarie things but both the iustice of the law and of faith are commanded 3. and one contrarie doth expel an other but the righteousnesse of the law doth necessarily follow and accompanie faith though not to be iustified by it as sanctification doth accompanie iustification 3. Neither doe they differ onely ratione non re not in the thing or indeed but in a certaine respect as Gryneus saith they are vna specie of one and the same kind and that the distinction and difference betweene them is not realis sed rationis is not reall but rationall as the Peripaterike Philosophers doe make morall vertue and vniuersall iustice one and the same re subiecto in the matter it selfe and subiect and to differ onely ratione in a certaine respect for as it is considered as an habite of the word it is called vertue but as it giueth vnto euery one his own it is iustice so he thinketh these two kinds of iustice do differ not in nature and substance but onely in a certaine respect and rationall difference But vnder correction of so worthie a man there is a greater difference then thus betweene the the iustice of the law and the iustice of faith 1. Gryneus himselfe confesseth in the same place that they differ subiecto in the subiect for the iustice of faith is subiective in Christ by way of a subiect the iustice of the law hath man for his subiect therefore they differ otherwise then in a diuerse respect 2. that which differeth in forme matter qualitie subiect differeth more then onely in a certaine respect But the iustice of the law and of faith differ in all these 1. in forme the iustice of the law saith doe this and thou shalt be saued faith saith beleeue onely c. 2. in matter they differ the one consisteth of workes the other of faith 3. in qualitie the one is imperfect the iustice apprehended by faith is absolute and perfect 4. in subiect the iustice of faith is imputed vnto vs beeing inherent in Christ the iustice of the law is inherent in man and not imputed 4. Wherefore these two iustices 1. are neither one and the same as Stapleton 2. nor contrarie 3. not differing onely in a certaine respect as Gryneus 4. but they differ as diuers species or kinds of the same gender they are both iustice but the one inherent the other imputed the one consisteth in doing the other in beleeuing Par. dub 5. and Pet. Mar. will haue them differ as in Logike the difference and propertie of a thing the difference is that which giueth essence vnto a thing as Christs iustice applied by faith maketh our iustification the propertie is that which followeth the nature of a thing and so the iustice of the law in our holines and sanctification doth follow necessarily our iustification by faith Controv. 9. Whether the righteousnesse of the law and that which is by the law doe differ Pererius disput 2. maketh three kinds of iustice 1. one is iustitia legis the iustice of the law or the law of iustice which is that iustice when God by his grace doth helpe vs to fulfill the law 2. the iustice of faith is that which is giuen vnto those that beleeue in Christ. 3. iustitia ex lege iustice by the law is that which a man doth of himselfe without faith and grace onely by the strength of freewill and this is that iustice which the Apostle here setteth against the iustice of faith This distinction also hath Stapleton making the like difference betweene iustitia legis and iustitia ex lege righteousnesse of the law and righteousnesse by the law and Bellarmine as is before alleadged qu. 29. Contra. 1. As the righteousnesse of faith and by faith with Saint Paul are one and the same as Rom. 4.11 it is said to be of faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and here v. 6. righteousnesse which is by faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so neither doe the righteousnesse of the law and by the law differ for both of them haue the same definition he that doth the law shall liue thereby so that these termes of the law by the law through the law in the law in the matter of iustification are all one and in effect the same as that which he calleth the righteousnesse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the law Rom. 8.4 the same is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the law c. 10.5 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through the law Gal. 2.21 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the law Gal. 10.11 1. Concerning that distinction it faileth in one of the parts thereof for that which they call iustitiam ex lege righteousnesse by the law which a man doth without grace and faith onely schooled by the law and mooued by the terrour thereof that is no iustice at all for the law is holy and good Rom. 7.12 and the workes thereof holy and good but without faith and grace no man can doe any good thing neither doth Saint Paul dispute of any such imagined iustice but euen of those workes of the law which are done by men sanctified by grace as the Apostle giueth instance in Abraham and Dauid sanctified men Rom. 4. who yet by the workes of grace were not iustified 3. Indeed Augustine hath such a distinction betweene the righteousnes legis of the law which is fulfilled in vs by grace and ex lege by the law which is that righteousnesse which a man worketh by his owne freewill as is before alleadged qu. 29. But Augustines meaning is not that a man is iustified by either of these kinds of righteousnesse therefore that distinction as he vseth it is impertinent to this purpose for we affirme that the righteousnesse of the law whereby they pretended to be iustified is indifferently called of the law
it would haue giuen offence to the Gentiles if it had beene refused and though neither S. Matthew nor S. Luke doe directly make God the author yet it is sufficient that S. Iohn in his Gospell so alleadgeth that place which small difference betweene them teacheth vs that we should compare one Scripture with an other and interpret one by an other and thus much if not too much of their opinion that would vtterly exclude God from beeing any cause at all of the hardening of the heart 2. A second opinion is of them which ascribe somewhat vnto God herein but not much as Chrysostome saith that this word he gaue non operationem Dei sed concessionem significat doth not signifie an operation of God but a concession onely so Theophylact he gaue that is permisit he suffered them to be hardened likewise the enterlin gloss he gaue them the spirit of compunction that is permisit habere he permitted them to haue c. But to doe a thing is more then to suffer and it is a violent interpretation to giue that is to suffer to be giuen beside he that suffreth a thing to be done which is in his power to hinder is accessarie to the doing of it so that in allowing vnto God permission onely they either will make God an idle beholder and no doer or they will make him accessarie and consenting an euill Origen much better answeareth this question how it may be said de bono Deo of the good God that he should giue Israel eyes not to see and eares not to heare vide ne haec â—igis sit retributio merces incredulitatis see saith he if this be not rather a reward of their incredulitie so hardnes of heart as it is a punishment may well proceed from God not as a sufferer and permitter onely but as an agent and doer 3. Some as these doe extenuate the power of to God too much and so doe ascribe too much vnto God in making him the principall cause of hardening of mens hearts which must needes followe as the fruits and effects of their reprobation which God absolutely decreed without any respect vnto their works True it is that they which hold the absolute decree of reprobation must needs make God a proper and principall cause of the hardening of the heart seeing their reprobation is the beginning and originall of their rebellion obstinacie and forsaking of God but that God reiecteth none but for sinne nor decreeth none to be damned without relation to their sinne is before at large handled c. 9. contr 10. whether I referre the reader at this time that place of the Prophet perditio tua ex te Israel â—â—y perdition is of thy selfe O Israel onely may suffice to cleare God from beeing either the proper or principall cause of hardnesse of heart 4. Others doe discharge God altogether and make the deuill only the author and cause of the blindnesse of the heart according to that saying 2. Cor. 4.4 in whom the God of this world hath blinded the minds this place was much vrged both by the Arrians who would prooue by this place that Christ is no other wise God then as this name is giuen vnto creatures in Scripture as here vnto the devill as also by the Manichees who held that there were two beginnings and two Princes or Gods one of good the other of evill Hereupon some of the fathers to take away all aduantage from these heretikes as Hilarie Augustine Chrysost. Ambrose did expound this place of the true God making this the sense in whome God hath blinded the minds that is of the infidels of this world But 1. here the words are euidently transposed for in the originall thus the words stand the God of this world 2. And the Arrians with the Manichees may be otherwise answeared then by declining the right sense of this place for though Sathan be here vnderstood he is not said simply to be God but with an addition God of the world whereas Christ is simply called God Rom. 9.5 Who is God ouer all blessed for euer and so are the Arrians answeared And to the Manichees we say that the deuill is called the God and Prince of the world not as though the kingdome were deuided with him but we graunt that a principalitie is committed vnto him yet as Gods Minister that he can goe no further then the Lord permitteth and therefore he is called the euill spirit of the Lord which came vpon Saul 1. Sam. 16.14 because the Lord vseth him as his messenger and minister of his iudgements Yet this place beeing vnderstood of Sathan maketh not him the onely cause of the blindnes and hardnes of heart though he be a principall doer in it for here the Apostle saith that God gaue them the spirit of slumber 5. Nor yet is man onely the cause of his owne hardening and blindnesse as the ordinar gloss saith excâ—â—ati sunt quia nolucrunt credere they were blinded because they would not beleeue for their blindnesse was the cause of their vnbeleefe as the Apostle here sheweth that the Iewes beleeued not because they were blinded Mart. and Gorrhan here distinguisheth well that there are two kinds of cecitie or blindnes there is caecitas culpa poenae a blindnes which is a fault and a blindnes which is a punishment the first is the cause of infidelitie and infidelitie causeth the second that is a man is first blind which is the cause he beleeueth not and then as a reward of their infidelitie they are more blinded still wherefore though the corruption of mans heart be a cause of his owne blindnes and hardnesse of heart yet there is some other cause beside 6. Wherefore to the hardening and blinding of the heart these three concurre mans owne corruption as the first and nearest cause Sathan as the instigator and temper God as a iust Iudge the Scripture maketh all these the causes God is said to harden Pharaohs heart and Sathan also blindeth the minds of the infidels 2. Cor. 4.4 and Pharaoh hardened his owne heart Exod. 9.34 the corruption of mans heart is as the coale that sendeth forth sparkes Iob. 5.7 the deuill bloweth and stirreth the coales and kindleth the fire God he smiteth as it were on the anvile and frameth and disposeth euerie thing to his owne will so God hath a stroke in the hardening of the heart not by permission onely neither in making a soft heart hard but both in leauing man beeing blind by nature to his owne will and in withdrawing his grace and giuing him ouer as a iust Iudge to the malice of Sathan to be further hardened and so God is the author of the hardening of mans heart not as it is a sinne but as it is a punishment of sinne and thus and no otherwise doe Protestants maintaine God to be an agent and worker in these actions and therefore that is a meere slaunder of Stapleton that Calvin should hold Deum
Synops. Centur. 1. err 69. Controv. 10. The Pope not the head of the Church v. 5. We are one bodie in Christ Beside that in this place the Church is said to be the bodie of Christ and so he consequently the head thereof as S. Paul calleth directly Ephes. 1.22 Coloss. 1.18 and so this beeing a title peculiar to Christ to be head of the Church no mortall man can arrogate it to himselfe it may be thus further shewed 1. the Apostles did not take vpon them to be heads of the Church for S. Paul both here and 1. Cor. 12. doth reckon himselfe in the number of the members 2. the Church hath not two heads Christ is one the Pope cannot be another 3. the head giueth direction and influence to the bodie none of these offices can the Pope doe vnto the Church 4. the Church is not the spouse or bodie of the Pope therefore he is not the head thereof 5. from Peter to Clemens 8. 200. Popes haue died but the head of the Church dieth not for then the Church should die with it 6. from Euaristus to Pius 5. the Papall sea was vacant at times 38. yeares 8. moneths and 29. dayes as Mercator casteth it in his cronologie then so long was the Church without an head if the Pope were the head 7. there haue beene at one time 2. and sometime three Popes then should the Church haue had so many heads ex Pareo Controv. 11. That to loue our enemies is a precept and commanded not counselled as indifferent v. 14. Blesse them which persecute you c. The Romanists doe hold that a man is not bound extra casum necessitatis but in case of necessitie to succour his enemie and to apply any particular prayer vnto him but onely in generall in case of necessitie to doe it it is a precept but otherwise and in other cases it is a counsell onely to this purpose Thomas 22. qu. 25. whom Pererius followeth 2. disput numer 8. Tolet addeth further for a man to be readie in minde not onely not to reuenge himselfe but to suffer more wrong as to hold his other cheeke when he is smitten vpon the one is a precept but in fact to doe it is but a counsell onely annot 30. in fine and a precept and counsell they say doe thus differ the first belongeth to all Christians and to leaue it vndone is sinne the other is onely for such as are perfect which though to leaue vndone be no sinne yet to do it is of great merit Cont. 1. S. Pauls precept is here generall to blesse our persecutors there is no case or time excepted Christian charitie must not be restrained nor limited who then seeth not but that this minsing and cutting of the Apostolicall precept is against the rule of charitie 2. to be alwaies readie in mind and in fact when occasion requireth to keepe patience toward our enemie is a precept and commanded but according to the strict letter to turne the cheeke to the enemie when one is striken is neither precept nor counsell for our Blessed Sauiour beeing smitten on the one cheeke did not turne the other who was most perfect in all his actions 3. a difference betweene precepts and counsels we graunt in respect of the matter and subiect the one is of things necessarie the other of matters in their owne nature indifferent such as that is 1. Cor. 7.15 of bestowing ones virgine but otherwise they are both generall and not to be omitted and neither are meritorious See further Synops. Centur. 2. err 84. 6. Morall obseruations Observ. 1. Of the necessitie of good works and a godly life v. 1. I beseech you brethren c. S. Paul hauing hitherto in this epistle laid downe thâ— doctrine of iustification and of other principall points of Christian religion now beginneth to exhort vnto holines and to the shewing forth of the fruits of our regeneration as here in this place he entreateth them to giue vp themselues and their bodies to the seruice of God for this is the end of our redemption and deliuerance to serue the Lord Luk. 1.74 A. Fulvius when he had taken away his sonne from following Cataline he killed him saying non Catalina te genui sed patriae I did not beget thee for Cataline but for the countrie but it may be better said of vs that God hath not created vs to serue the Deuill the world or the flesh but to serue him When Phillip King of Macedon beeing somewhat pleasant did daunce and leape among the poore captiues insulting ouer them and vpbrayding their miserie Demades said vnto him in this manner cum fortuna tibi Agamemnonis personam imposuerit uonne te pudet Thersitem agere seing fortune hath put vpon thee the person of Agamemnon that is of a King art not thou ashamed to play Thersites who was a base contemptible and odious rayling companion so when God hath called vs to this high dignitie to be called his sonnes and hath made vs heires of his kingdome yea Kings in Christ it is a shame for vs to abase our selues to the vile condition of beeing seruants vnto sinne Observ. 2. We must not conforme our selues to the fashion of this world v. 2. And be ye not fashioned c. Chrysostome obserueth well that the figure and fashion of this world is but a transitorie thing it is tanquam persona scenica non consistens rerum substantia as a person counterfetted vpon the stage not a thing of any substance and therefore it were a vaine thing to conforme our selues to it therefore the Apostle saith We should vse this world as if we vsed it not for the fashion of this world goeth away 1. Cor. 7.31 Observ. 3. Against curiositie v. 3. That no man vnderstand aboue that which is meete c. This maketh against those which are curious searchers and priers into Gods secrets neglecting those things which are for their necessarie knowledge and vse Sirach giueth good counsell Ecclesiastic 3.22 Seeke not out the things that are too hard for thee c. but what God hath commanded thinke vpon that with reuerence c. Augustine saith well melius est dubitare de occultis quam litigare de incertis c. it is better to doubt of hid matters then to contend about vncertaine The Philosopher was worthely reprooued of his maid who while he was vewing the starres fell into a pit that was before him such are they which seeke after things to high aboue their reach and let goe things more profitable Observ. 4. Against pride and vaine glorie v. 3. That euery one vnderstand according to sobrietie Chrysostome hath here an excellent morall against arrogancie when men doe attribute more to themselues then there is cause and are puffed vp with pride 1. he compareth the arrogant man to a verie foole for their speaches are alike vaine and foolish the proud man saith I will set my throne aboue the starres Isay. 14. I haue
voluntarie connivence or negligence of the keeper or some other way as it were made by God for so we reade that Peter escaped out of prison the doores beeing opened by the Angel before him Act. 12. but this is not rashly to be done for the aforesaid reasons but vpon good warrant when God shall as it were make a way for a man to set him free Quest. 8. What kind of iudgement they procure to themselues which resist the magistrate 1. Whereas the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth both condemnation as Beza damnation as the vulgar Latine iudgement as the Syrian interpreter punishment as Piscator some take this to be vnderstood not of eternall punishment but of the temporall inflicted by the Magistrate when as the powers beeing offended doe either punish rebells with death or cast them into prison Haymo so also Vatablus 2. Lyranus contrariwise interpreteth it de aeterna morte of euerlasting death not excluding also temporall punishment so also Martyr 3. Some vnderstand poenam punishment generally without limitation Olevian Piscator Iunius annot 4. Some will haue the punishment in this life vnderstood whether inflicted by the Magistrate or by God himselfe who will take reuenge for the transgression of his owne ordinance as is euident in the fearefull punishment of rebellious Cote Dathan and Abiram Numb 16. Pareus Gualter and so before them Chrysostome and Theophylact cum à Deo tum ab hominibus poenas daturum he shall endure punishment both from God and men 5. But all these are better ioyned together that such as resist the Magistrate are punished by the publike lawes and God often taketh reuenge also beside they make themselues guiltie of euerlasting damnation which is due vnto the transgression of Gods commandement and the violating of his ordinance Faius 6. Tolet hath here this conceite by himselfe it is said they shall receiue iudgement because beeing not restrained by the Magistrate whom they stand not in awe of they cast themselues into those sinnes for the which damnationem incurrunt they incurre damnation but here the Apostle speaketh of that punishment which is due for the resisting of Gods ordinance 7. Pareus here obserueth well these two things that the purposes and endeauours of such are frustrate and beside they shew their madnes and foolishnes in beeing accessarie to their owne punishment for it is an vnwise part for one to procure his owne hurt Quest. 9. How the Prince is not to be feared for good workes but for euill 1. Concerning the words in the originall they stand thus Princes are not a feare of good workes and so the vulgar Latine that is for good workes as the Syrian interpreter putteth it in the datiue bonis operibus to good workes so also Tertullian readeth in scorpian and Beza followeth this sense and the meaning is that they are not a terror or to be feared ratione boni operis by reason of the good worke Lyran. or his qui sunt boni operis to them which are of good workes Gorrhan so before him Chrysostome bene agentibus to those which doe well good workes are here to be vnderstood not as Diuines take them for morall workes but for ciuill workes agreeable to the publike lawes which are either against the diuine lawe whereof the Magistrate ought to haue speciall care or against the positiue constitution Pareus 2. Touching the occasion of these words Tolet will haue them to depend of the former sentence and to shewe the cause why they which resist the powers doe receiue iudgement to themselues because they contemne the Magistrate who is ordained to restraine euill workes and so they without restraint fall into euill and so incurre punishment but the better coherence is to make this an other argument to mooue obedience to the higher powers from the vtilitie thereof as Chrysostome or à duplici sine from the twofold ende of magistracie which is for the punishment of the euill and praise of the good 3. They which doe good workes must feare the Magistrate still but timore reverentiae non seruili c. with a reuerent not a seruile feare as the malefactors doe which hauing a guiltie conscience are afraide of punishment to be inflicted by the Magistrate Gorrhan Quest. 10. What it is to haue praise of the power v. 3. 1. Whereas often it falleth out that the Magistrate doth punish the good and encourage the wicked how then is this true which the Apostle saith doe well and thou shalt haue the praise of the same the answear is that first we must distinguish betweene the power it selfe and authoritie which is ordained of God to these ends for the reward of the good and punishment of the euill and the abuse of this power secondly although gouernours abusing their power do offend in some particulars yet in generall more good commeth by their gouernement then hurt as vnder cruell Nero there was some execution of iustice for Paul was preserued by the Romane captaine from the conspiracie of the Iewes and appealed vnto Caesar which was then Nero and his appeale was receiued 2. It will be obiected that euen vnder good Princes where there is punishment for offenders yet the righteous receiue not their reward 1. Origen thus vnderstandeth these words thou shalt haue praise of the same c. that is in the day of iudgement ex istis legibus landem habebis apud Deum by these lawes thou shalt haue praise with God for keeping them c. but the Apostle speaketh not of hauing praise by the lawes but of the power that is the Magistrate 2. Augustine thinketh it is one thing to be praised of the power that is to be commended and rewarded by it an other laudem habere ex illa to haue praise of it that is exhibit se laude dignum he sheweth himselfe worthie of praise whether he be actually praised or not of the power Tolet alloweth this sense though he take the distinction betweene these phrases to be somewhat curious so also Haymo but the Apostle speaketh not simply of hauing praise and commendation but of hauing it from the Prince 3. the ordinar glosse thus thou shalt haue praise of the power si iusta est ipso laudante if it be iust it will praise thee si iniusta occasionem prebente if vniust it will giue thee occasion of praise so also Gorrhan it shall praise thee either causaliter by beeing the cause of thy praise or occasionaliter by beeing the occasion c. causa erit maigris coronae it shall be the cause of thy greater crowne gloss interlin laudaberis apud Deum thou shalt be praised with God Haymo but the Apostle speaketh of receiuing praise from the power as Chrysostome and Theophylact well obserue erit laudum tuarum praeco futurus he shall be a setter forth of thy praise 4. Bucer thinketh that the Apostle alludeth vnto the custome of the Grecians and Romanes among whom they which had done any
c. for if Origens sense onely should be receiued it would be presupposed that first there must be patience and then God is induced by their patience to dwell with them 2. Here the Apostle doth attribute the same effects vnto God patience and consolation which before he gaue vnto the Scriptures but in a diuers manner for God is in deede the author of them sed verbo vt instrumento vtitur but he vseth the word as his instrument to worke them as Theophylact saith Deum cum sacris Scripturis vna largiri c. that God together with and by the Scriptures doth giue patience and consolation c. But God is the author and giuer of patience Philip. 1.29 To you it is giuen for Christ not onely to beleeue c. but also to suffer and of consolation 2. Cor. 4. which comforteth vs in all our tribulations 3. And S. Paul hauing shewed before the vse of the Scripture now thereunto ioyneth praier thereby signifying cum Scripturis nobis opus esse precibus that together with the Scriptures we had neede of praier that God would assist vs Oecumen for if in other things a man can doe nothing without Gods assistante much lesse can he profit by the reading of Scripture without Gods direction Origen whom Haymo followeth observeth that this was more then ordinarie prayer Paul after the maner of the Prophets and Patriarks whose blessings vpon their children are repeated in the Scripture benedictiones tribuit Romanis doth giue this benediction to the Romanes 4. S. Paul wisheth that they be of one minde among themselues where he toucheth all the causes of this concord the author and efficient cause God the materiall to be like minded the formall according to Christ the finall cause in the next verse that they may withone voice praise God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 idem sapere to thinke the same thing 1. which some referre onely to the affection that euerie one idipsum de altero sentiat doe thinke the same thing of an other Theoph. vt sit idem sensus quod est charitatis that there be the same sense and opinion which is the part of charitie Pellican so also Beza that ye be mutually affected with one minde and Tolet giueth this reason because it is added one toward an other which sheweth it must be referred rather to the affection then vnderstanding 2. Chrysostome applyeth it to the care which one should haue of an others good vt quod pro se quisque curat c. that what euerie one is carefull of for himselfe he should therein take care for an other 3. Lyranus giueth this sense mecum desiderantes c. that yee should be like minded vnto me in wishing one an others profit 4. Pareus vnderstandeth consensum in fide a mutuall consent in faith that they be of one iudgement and opinion concerning the vse of indifferent things and other matters in question 5. But I rather with Haymo referre it both to the consenting in iudgement and concord in affection vt vnum sentiatis de fide spe charitate that they be of one sense and iudgement concerning faith hope and charitie 5. But the Apostle seemeth to wish a thing impossible that there should be such a generall consent in iudgement seeing that all men haue not the same gifts and S. Paul saith there must be heresies 1. Cor. 11.19 Ans. 1. Though God suffer heresies to be which are raised by Satans malice against the truth yet among the true members of the Church there may and ought to be one iudgement in the truth 2. and though some difference in matters indifferent may be found in the true Church of Christ yet this letteth not but that in the chiefe articles of faith and in fundamentall points there should be an agreement and consent 6. The Apostle adding according to Iesus Christ sheweth a difference of concord alia quaedam dilectio est there is an other kind of loue then in Christ and Origen well saith posset fieri vt in malitia aliqui vnanimiter consentirent vnum saperent in peius it may be that some in malice may consent with one mind and be of one iudgement to the worse c. 12. Quest. Of the end of concord which is to glorifie God the father of our Lord Iesus 1. The ende of our concord is to glorifie God and this concord consisteth both of the consent in heart and minde and in the agreement in outward profession which the Apostle here ioyneth together that with one minde and one mouth ye may glorifie God as S. Paul putteth them together Rom. 10.10 with the heart man beleeueth vnto righteousnes and with the mouth he confesseth to saluation 2. He saith not vt cantu boatu in templis glorificetis Deum that you glorifie God with roaring and singing in Churches as they doe in Poperie for there is a consent onely of voice without any agreement in heart Pellican 3. And seeing God is onely glorified where there is concord it sheweth that by discord Gods glorie is hindred both in themselues because their praiers vnto God want their due effect and in others which by their dissentions take occasion to blaspheme and speake euill of God 4. The Apostle addeth God and the father of our Lord Iesus Christ c. 1. He is the father of Christ both as he is God in his eternall generation and as man in his generation in time as he was borne of the virgin Marie but he is Christs God onely as he is man Haymo 2. this clause is added by way of limitation to distinguish the true God from the false gods of the heathen and by way of explanation that they must worship one God not as in the old Testament when as the doctrine of the Trinitie was not yet manifested but now as the father of Christ so they must glorifie one God not according to the prescript rule of the law but after the rule of the Gospel Tolet. 3. and hereby we are giuen to vnderstand that God can not otherwise be glorified then as the father of Iesus Christ for without him nothing is acceptable vnto God 13. Quest. Of the meaning of the 7. v. Receiue ye one an other as Christ receiued vs c. 1. By receiuing the Apostle vnderstandeth bearing helping one an other iudging charitably one of an other both the strong not to despise the weake nor the weake to iudge or thinke hardly of the strong 2. As Christ c. This note of similitude as sheweth not an equalitie in like degree but the qualitie of the thing that it be done in truth and sinceritie as Ioh. 17. Christ saith that they may be one as we are one c. there may be a likenes in the qualitie and manner though a difference remaine in the proportion and degree and therefore Socinus cavill is soone answered that Christ did not satisfie for vs by his death because we are here willed to receiue one
shewed in the verse following so the Apostle calleth it a communicating concerning the matter of giuing and receiuing Phil. 4.15 6. Chrysostome further noteth that the Apostle saith not almes but communication somewhat to extenuate it in respect of the Saints to whom it was a kind of debt and he saith a certaine or some communication in respect of the Romans ne videatur Romanis avaritiam exprobrare least he should seeme to vpbraide the Romans with couetousnesse Theophylact. Quest. 35. How the Gentiles are said to be debters to the Iewes 1. Their debters are they c. 1. not the poore are debters to the rich quia tenentur pro ijs orare because they are bound to pray for them Hugo 2. nor debters onely in respect of God à quo misecordiam pectant of whom they looke for mercie gloss interl 3. not yet onely in generall because the rich debent vsum necessariorum do owe the vse of necessarie things vnto the poore as the wise man saith Prov. 3.27 withhold not good from the owners thereof 4. but the Gentiles are said to be debters because they had receiued spirituall things from the Iewes as the Apostle expoundeth afterward 2. There are two kind of debts one is ex debito necessitatis by a debt of necessitie and so the people are bound to giue of their temporalls vnto their Pastors and Ministers and there is debitum honestatis a debt of honesty and so the rich are bound to giue vnto the poore Hugo Card. but this distinction rather is to be receiued there is debitum ciuile a ciuill debt and so the people pay carnall things for spirituall and debitum naturale a natural debt or equitie and so for a benefit receiued euerie one is bound to shewe the like againe Gorrhan Par. 3. If the Gentiles be made partakers of their spirituall things c. 1. The spirituall things of the Iewes are these as Chrysostome obserueth ex ipsis est Christus ex ipsis sunt Apostoli Prophetae c. of them was Christ of them came the Apostles and Prophets from them came the Gospel 2. Origen hath here an excursion running out to a mysticall and allegoricall sense by the Saints at Ierusalem he vnderstandeth those which are spirituall by the Gentiles those which are yet imperfect in whom the flesh must spiritualibus ministrare praeceptis minister and be obedient vnto the spirituall precepts and not lascivire in carnalibus waxe wanton still in carnall things but this is farre from the Apostles meaning 4. Chrysostome obserueth an emphasis in euerie word as he saith the Gentiles ought to minister as they quiregibus tributa persolvunt which vse to pay tribute vnto kings the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth properly to execute some publike ministerie and it is sometimes referred to spirituall offices it is here vsed to signifie that this office of the Gentiles in communicating to the necessities of the Saints was both publicum sacrum publike and sacred it was as a sacrifice vnto God Calv. Beza And whereas the Apostle saith their spirituall things but not their carnall Chrysostome sheweth the reason of this difference because carnalia sunt omnium communia things carnall are common to all Quest. 36. In what manner almes ought to be given Diuerse necessarie considerations touching the distribution of almes may be obserued out of the 28. and 27. verses 1. whereas they of Macedonia and Achaia did minister vnto the necessitie of the Saints of Ierusalem which was farre distant and remote from those countreys of Grecia therein we haue an example not onely to stretch forth our hand to the needie that are among our selues but to extend our liberalitie to other churches abroad that are in want and necessitie 2. whereas it seemed good vnto them therein appeareth their chearefulnes and willingnes that they gaue of a willing and readie minde as S. Paul exhorteth the Corinthians 2. epist. c. 9.3 3. they did communicate vnto the Saints for though we must doe good to all yet specially we are bound to doe it to the houshold of faith 4. and in that the Apostle saith yee are debters he sheweth that they were bound hereunto by the common bond of charitie and Christianitie that although in respect of any ciuill bond they were free and their almes was an offering of their freewill and franke mind yet in charitie before God they were bound thereunto Quest. 37. What the Apostle meaneth by sealing of the fruite v. 28. When I haue sealed vnto them 1. the vulgar Latine readeth haue assigned so Lyran. Haymo but the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth rather consignans vel obsignans sealing confirming then assigning and setting ouer 2. Origen vnderstandeth it of that seale quo imago Dei exprimitur whereby the image of God is expressed that he which giueth giue in simplicitie of heart seeking no praise of men for then opus suum signaculo divinae imaginis signat he doth seale his worke with the signe of the diuine image 3. some take it literally cum sub sigillo cuiusque ecclesiae ostendero c. when I haue shewed vnder the seale of euerie Church how much euerie one hath sent gloss interlin Hugo 4. Erasmus referreth it to the Macedonians it should be vnto them tanquam thesaurus in tuto reconditus as a treasure surely laid vp so also before him Chrysostome and Theophylact in aerarium regium condam I will lay it vp as in the kings treasurie 5. the Greeke scholiast thus in coelis repositurus he will lay it vp as it were in heauen 6. But the Apostle vseth onely a metaphoricall speech taken from those which vse to seale the treasure or letters committed vnto them the Apostle saith no more but this after I haue faithfully deliuered vnto them this collection committed vnto me so Calvin Mart. Pareus with others This fruit Almes and other workes of mercie are called a fruit in three respects 1. in regard of the efficient cause which is first the spirit as good workes are called the fruits of the spirit Galat. 5.22 then of faith and charitie they are the fruites 2. in respect of the obiect vpon whom such workes of mercie are shewed and exercised they are fructus pietatis a fruit of their pietie when God stirreth vp the hearts of others to supply their necessities which depend vpon God 3. in respect of the giuer and worker they are fruits as Chrysostome obserueth lucrum acquirere contributeres that the giuers of almes do purchase gaine vnto themselues for God will reward them and recompence their benignitie Quest. 38. What the Apostle meaneth by the aboundance of the blessing of the Gospel of Christ v. 29. 1. Some by this benediction or blessing vnderstand the plentifull almes and contribution which the Apostle should finde among the Romanes for so he calleth their beneficence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 blessing 2. Cor. 9.5 Erasmus 2. Chrysostome and Theophylact mislike not this sense poteris
not tell what to thinke but that the Apostle after his manner orationem imperfectaÌ„ c. brought forth here an imperfect speech But 1. this were no such boldnes or impudencie as Erasmus thinketh for neither hath the Syrian interpreter that relative nor yet the Complutensian copie which Beza followeth 2. Augustine as he is cited by the ordinarie glosse will haue the word praise or glorie to be twice supplied in this sense to him that is of power c. be praise and glorie to whome be all praise but this were a superfluous supplie 3. Chrysostome howsoeuer he readeth that word in his text yet he omitteth it in his comment lectionis haec est consequentia this is the consequence and coherence of the reading and sense to him that is of power c. be glorie so also Ambrose Lyranus interpreteth cui to whome that is to Christ Tolet cui that is ipsi to him but yet the sense and the words should not hang well together 4. Wherefore I thinke with Beza that this particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to whome is a pleonasme a filling or superfluous word according to the manner of the Hebrew tongue as he giueth instance of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 himselfe vsed superfluously Eph. 3.21 1. Pet. 2.24 but Pareus giueth a fitter instance Hosh. 10.7 succisus est Samariae rex eius the king of Samaria of it is cut off and so in this place this word to whome may abound and be superfluous but the sense and coherence is that which Chrysostome followeth 24. Quest. A description of the Gospel preached by the Apostle inserted here in the conclusion of his Epistle v. 25 26. There are foure parts of this description containing the foure causes thereof 1. the materiall cause or obiect which is Iesus Christ. 2. the forme reuealed now by the Scriptures of the Prophets before kept secret 3. the author and efficient at the commandement of God 4. the ende for the obedience of the Gentiles 1. According to my Gospel and preaching of Iesus Christ. 1. he calleth it his Gospel because he was the minister of it as our Sauiour calleth it their word Iob. 17.20 which shall beleeue thorough their word the Gospel he nameth the word of the Apostles 2. the preaching of Iesus some take actiuely as Chrysostome quem ipse praedicavit which he preached so also the interlinear glosse à qua non discordat c. from the which the preaching of Christ disagreeth not but it is rather taken passiuely for the Gospell preached concerning Christ as it is taken c. 1.3 and so the Syrian interpreter translateth and withall it sheweth Christ to be the author of S. Pauls preaching he was minister Christus magister the minister and Christ the Master Lyran. Gorrhan and so Origen praedicatio Pauli est praedicatio Christi the preaching of Paul is also the preaching of Christ as he saith 2. Cor. 13.3 seeing ye seeke experience of Christ that speaketh in me 2. By the revelation of the mysterie 1. This mysterie is not to be restrained to the calling of the Gentiles onely but to be vnderstood of the whole doctrine of the Gospel concerning the Trinitie the incarnation of the Sonne of God and such like which although they were in some sort made knowne in the old Testament yet then but obscurely that in respect of the cleare light of the Gospell they were but as a mysterie 2. Origen here vnderstandeth one thing by the preaching of Christ which belonged vnto the faithfull an other by the revelation of the mysterie which was manifested but to a fewe vnto such as capaces esse possunt scientiae Dei may be capable of the knowledge of God but the Apostle saith this mysterie is made manifest among all nations therefore not to a fewe but vnto all beleeuers 3. Kept secret or in silence not that either the Prophets knewe not what they prophesied for as Origen saith si Prophetae non intellexerunt ea quae dicebant non erant sapientes if the Prophets vnderstood not the things they said they were not wise not yet that the Prophets knewe these things sed non licebat profere alijs hominibus but it was not lawfull to bring them forth to others as Origen but it is spoken comparatiuely that although these things were reuealed in some part to the Prophets yet ratione praesentis lucis in respect of the present light of the Gospel these mysteries were kept secret and hid Par. 4. by the euerlasting times 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we vnderstand not with Haymo tempora aeterna quae praecesserunt mundi exordium the infinite times which went before the beginning of the world for they could not then be said to be kept secret or in silence seeing there were none to whom they should then be vttered and whereas Tolet would iustifie this sense by that place 1. Cor. 2.7 We speake the wisedome of God in a mysterie eâ—en hid which God had determined before the world c. there is great difference between these two places for there the Apostle vseth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 determined and the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth before but here he saith onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was kept in silence therefore this place is better explaned by that other Ephes. 3.5 which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in other ages was not opened the Apostle then by these long and eternall times vnderstandeth the ages past quod fuit occultum ab initio temporis which was hid from the beginning of time Hugo from the beginning of the world for the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which answeareth to the Hebrewe gholam doth not alwaies vnderstand a time simply without beginning or end but according to the matter wherevnto it is applyed 3. But now is opened among all nations c. by the Scriptures c. 1. here the efficient cause is shewed with the instrumentall meanes the propheticall Scriptures Tolet referreth this nunc now to the times of the Prophets and he vnderstandeth totum tempus creatum all the time created but if this mysterie had beene opened then S. Paul should speake contrarie to himselfe Ephes. 3.5 in other ages it was not opened therefore Lyranus better interpreteth the Scriptures of the Prophets Apostolis reseratas opened to the Apostles as Luk. 24. Christ opened the sense of the two disciples to vnderstand the Scriptures in illis propheticis Scripturis praedictum est c. that is foretold in the propheticall Scriptures which we see fulfilled in the Gospel Calv. Christus concionum argumenta sumpsit c. Christ tooke the argument of his sermons out of Moses and the Prophets 2. and the Apostle wisely maketh mention here of the Propheticall Scriptures both to giue contentment to the beleeuing Iewes that were addicted to the lawe be not afraid least thou shouldst goe from the lawe in receiuing the Gospel atqui hoc exigit lex this is that which
prepared for you for when I was hungred ye gaue me meate he sheweth not the cause of their saluation but the condition state qualitie of those which should be saued to this purpose Faius see further before c. 1. quest 26. and controv 7. Quest. 25. How by the lawe came the knowledge of sinne 1. The Apostle here confirmeth that which he said before that none are iustified by the workes of the lawe by the contrarie vse of the lawe because thereby commeth the knowledge of sinne therefore iustice and righteousnesse is not attained thereby 2. The lawe Origen vnderstandeth of the lawe of nature Augustine onely of the morall lawe lib. de spirit liter c. 8. but indeed the lawe is vnderstood here in generall both the naturall for euen before the lawe written by the lawe of nature Abimelech knew that adulterie was sinne Genes 20. but the morall more by the which came a more full knowledge of sinne likewise by the ceremoniall and iudiciall lawe sinne was manifested but after a diuerse manner ex accidente accidentally because the one was appointed in expiationem for the expiation the other in poenam for the punishment of sinne Tolet. annot 14. 3. Now diuerse wayes doth the written lawe whereof the Apostle specially speaketh reueale sinne 1. Ambrose sheweth that before the law written there was some knowledge of sinne as he giueth instance in Ioseph who detested the sinne of adulterie to the which his mistresse enticed him but it is so said quia lex ostendit peccata non impune futura because the lawe sheweth that sinnes shall not goe vnpunished so also Theodulus 2. and by the written lawe peccata clarius fuerunt cognita sinnes were more euidently knowne and some were knowne to be sinnes that were not so taken before leviora quaque non cognoscebantur esse peccata the smaller sinnes were not knowne as concupiscence Hierome as the Apostle saith he had not knowne lust vnlesse the law had said thou shalt not lust quaedam etiam grauiora c. and some things by the lawe were knowne to be greater then before gloss ordinar 3. Oecumenius thus expoundeth because sinne was encreased by the knowledge of the lawe for he that sinneth wittingly is so much the more a grieuous offender 4. And before the lawe written sinne was knowne as beeing against reason but by the law it is discerned as beeing against the will of God and so the nature and qualitie of sinne is more fully and perfectly knowne by the lawe Perer. 5. and euen the knowledge of sinne before the lawe written did issue out of the grounds and principles of the morall lawe which were imprinted by nature in the minde Faius 4. But whereas the lawe sheweth as well what things are honest and vertuous as it discouereth sinne the Apostle onely toucheth that vse of the lawe which is to reueale sinne both because it was more pertinent to his purpose which was to shewe that there is no iustification by the lawe because thereby we haue the knowledge of sinne and for that men are more prone vnto the things forbidden in the lawe then to the duties commanded so that the lawe doth not so much teach our dutie to God and our neighbour as that we doe not performe that which is our dutie Beza 5. Now further whereas the Apostle saith by the lawe commeth the knowledge of sinne we must supply the word onely not that the lawe doth nothing else but reueale sinne for it iudgeth and condemneth sinne likewise but here the opposition is between the knowledge of sinne and the remission thereof the lawe onely giueth the one the agnition or knowledge of sinne not the remission Perer. by the lawe is cognitio peccati non consumptio the knowledge of sinne not the consumption of sinne gloss 6. But it will be obiected that in Leuiticus there are oblations prescribed for sinne and the Priest was to pray for such as had sinned and it should be forgiuen them Gorrhan answeareth that it was onely a legall remission quoad poenam non quoad culpam onely concerning the punishment of the lawe not of the fault But Lyranus answeareth better that such sacrifice for sinne was protestatio Christi passuri a protestation or profession of Christ which was to suffer so that such remission of sinnes though it were vnder the lawe yet was not by vertue and force of the lawe but by faith in Christ for the sinnes of the offerers were forgiuen at the prayers of the Priests which could not be heard if they were not of faith 7. It will here be further obiected that the politike and ciuill lawes of Princes intend more then the shewing of sinne they also doe helpe to reforme sinne and reclaime men from it therefore Gods lawe should doe more then manifest sinne Answ. 1. Humane lawes doe onely require an externall ciuill iustice but the lawe of God discouereth the corruption of the heart so that herein there is great difference betweene them Melancth 2. Humane lawes may by proposing of rewards and punishments helpe to perswade and induce men but they cannot instill or infuse obedience into the heart 3. God also intendeth more then the reuealing of sinne by his lawe for if any could keepe it they should liue thereby which while none is able to doe yet the law beside the discouering of sinne ferueth as a Schoolmaster to bring vs to Christ so that it is thorough mans owne infirmitie that the lawe giueth not life and it sheweth Gods power and wisedome that turneth the lawe vnto our good namely to bring vs vnto Christ which by our infirmitie is become vnto vs the minister of death 8. So then there are two other speciall vses and benefits of the lawe beside the reuealing of sinne the one that concerning faith it is a Schoolmaster to bring vs to Christ and touching manners and life it sheweth vs the way wherein we should walke Mars 9. There is a double knowledge of sinne by the lawe there is one which is weake and vnprofitable which neither thoroughly terrifieth the conscience nor reformeth the life such was the knowledge which the heathen had of sinne as the poets in their satyricall verses did set forth the sinnes of their times but themselues followed them there is an other effectuall knowledge of the lawe whereby the soule is humbled and this is of two sorts when such as is ioyned onely with terror of conscience without any hope such was the knowledge of sinne which Cain and Iudas had that betrayed Christ or it hath beside some liuely hope and comfort such was Dauids agnition and confession of his sinne But this comfort is no worke of the lawe it is wrought in vs by the spirit of grace Martyr Quest. 26. Of the meaning of these words The righteousnesse of God is made manifests without the lawe 1. Ambrose by the iustice of God vnderstandeth that iustice wherewith God is iust â—estans promissa sua in keeping his promises Origen
in the first place with the power of signes it signifieth the efficacie of the signes which they wrought in the heart of those which were converted in the latter by the power of the spirit is signified the efficient cause of this efficacie namely the power of the spirit Beza Quest. 25. Of S. Pauls labours in preaching the gospel from Ierusalem vnto Illyricum 1. v. 19. So that from Ierusalem 1. S. Paul setteth forth the effects of his ministerie and Apostleship first extensive shewing the extent thereof from Ierusalem to Illyricum then intensive intensiuely he preached where none other had preached before ver 20. Lyranus 2. Bucer whom Tolet traceth steppe by step though he conceale his name doth here diligently set forth the places of S. Pauls peregrination and trauell in preaching the Gospel Paul beeing conuerted going from Ierusalem to Damascus from thence went to Arabia and after three yeares returned to Damascus and from thence to Ierusalem Galat. 1.17.18 from Ierusalem he went to Cesarea and so to Tarsus Act. 29.30 from Tarsus Barnabas brought Paul to Antioch Act. 11. and from thence to Ierusalem to carie releefe to the Iewes Act. 11.30 from Ierusalem they returned to Antioch Act. 12.25 c. 13.1 from Antioch he and Barnabas were sent forth by the Church by the direction of the spirit and went to Seleâ—cia then to Cyprus and to some cities of Pamphylia and so to an other Antioch in Pisidia Act. 13. and thorough certaine parts of Lycaonia and then returned to Antioch from whence they had beene commended by the Church Act. 14.26 from Antioch they were sent to Ierusalem about the question of circumcision and returned to Antioch with the Apostles decree Act. 15.30 thence he returned and went thorough Syria and Cilicia visiting the Churches then he went through Phrygia Galatia and Mysia then to Troas wherein he was by a vision leauing Asia called into Macedonia and so came into the parts of Europe first to Philippi in Macedonia Act. 16. then to Thessalonica and from thence to Athens Act. 17. and then to Corinth thence to Ephesus and going to visit the Church in Galatia and Phrygia Act. 18.23 he returned to Ephesus Act. 14. from Ephesus he returned into Macedonia and Grecia Act. 20.1.2 and from Philippi in Macedonia to Troas and Miletum Act. 20. and thence by Tyrus and Cesarea and other cities he came to Ierusalem where he was taken and put in bonds Act. 21. And thus S. Paul preached as he saith from Ierusalem in all the regions round about Attica Beotia Achaia Epirus euen vnto Illyricum 2. And round about 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in a circuite 1. which Chrysostome vnderstandeth backeward and forward not onely the cities on this side Ierusalem sed quae retro sunt colliges but thou shalt gather also the cities behind as the Saracens Persians Armenians and other Barbarians 2. some do vnderstand it that the Apostle went not on preaching recta linea by a right and straight line which beeing extended from Ierusalem to Stridon a towne in Illyricum where Hierome was borne would containe 350. Germane miles which make thrice so many English miles more then a thousand but he visited the coastes of the regions in Asia minor as he went and so fetcht a compasse by Cilicia Cappadocia Pysidia Bithinia Pontus Mysia Macedonia Pareus 3. and this circuite also may signifie that he went in and out going and returning vnto the same cities as he visited Ierusalem Antioch Philippi Ephesus diuerse times as is shewed before in the particular description 3. Vnto Illyricum 1. Which countrey Haymo saith is finis Asiae principium Europae the ende of Asia and beginning of Europe Lyranus saith it is in fine Graeciae in the end and vtmost part of Greece bordering vpon the Sea whereupon it is called Illyricum mare the Illyrian Sea the Greeke scholiast and Theophylact say it was the same countrey that is called Bulgaria Osiander taketh ti for the lower Pannonia where is the riuer Danubius Pareus thinketh it is the countrey now called Sclavonia bordering vpon Hungaria Pellican 2. But we must not suppose that S. Pauls labours here ended for he returned backe againe from those parts neare vnto Illyricum and tooke infinite paines and trauaile beside in preaching the Gospel 3. and whereas he maketh these two Ierusalem and Illyricum the bounds and limits of his trauaile we must not thinke that he preached no further then as it were from the riuer Iordane to Danubius for he preached also beyond Ierusalem in the parts of Syria and Arabia some thinke that he beginneth at Ierusalem because he went from thence first to Damascus Faius but at such time as he went first from Ierusalem he was not then conuerted but he nameth Ierusalem whether he returned from these remote parts and because from thence beganne after his returne and so went forward preaching in the regions of Asia the lesse and Europe 4. I haue replenished the Gospel 1. That is plene praedicauerim I haue perfectly and fully preached the Gospel gloss interlin Gorrhan non perfunctorie praedicavit he preached not slightly Mart. perfecte tradidit omnia he perfectly deliuered all points of doctrine Gualter but he sheweth here onely the largenes and extent of his preaching not the perfection of his doctrine 2. Beza doth vnderstand it of fulfilling his office in preaching the Gospel but to make vp this sense many words must be supplyed 3. There are in this speach three figures vsed the first a Synedoche he taketh Ierusalem and Illyricum the countrey for the people the subiect for the adiunct by a synecdoche Pareus then in that he saith he hath replenished the Gospel there is a figure called hypallage which is the putting of one word in an others case as to say I haue filled the Gospel with them for I haue filled them with the Gospel Iun. annot as when it is said trade rati ventos giue the winds to the shippe for giue the ship to the windes the third figure is a metaphor taken from the nets and fishing that as when the nets are filled with fish so the Apostle had filled the preaching of the Gospel which was as the net with the aboundance of beleeuing Gentiles Tolet annot 11. 5. So thus the Apostle abridgeth his infinite labours and travailes in the Gospell as in the former part of this verse acervus miraculorum percurrit he ranne ouer an heape of miracles saying in the power of signes and wonders so here he comprehendeth infinitas vrbes an infinite companie of cities and people where he had preached and this propter ipsos loquitur he speaketh for their cause to commend his Apostleship vnto the Romanes that he might haue some fruite among them as among other of the Gentiles as he saith c. 1.13 Chrysost. Quest. 26. Why the Apostle would not build vpon an others foundation v. 20. that is preach where Christ had been preached alreadie 1. Origen maketh this the cause ne alieni
operis gloriam surripere conaretur least he should goe about to steale away the glorie of an others worke But this is not all the reason for then he should neuer haue preached in any place where an other had preached before and so neither in Iudea 2. Chrysostome giueth this reason least that he might seeme to haue challenged the reward of other mens labours merces laborum qui ab alijs desudati sunt aliena erat à Paulo the reward of the labours wherein others had sweat did not belong vnPaul But there was no feare that S. Paul entring into other mens labours should take away their reward for God knoweth how to recompence both vnto the first and second labourer vnto each man his due reward 3. Ambrose whom the ordinar glosse followeth thinketh the Apostle did preach where Christ had not beene heard of to prevent the false Apostles and so he would not build vpon their foundation which was not rightly laid but it is euident that S. Paul speaketh of the true preaching where Christ was named 4. some thinke the Apostle did it ne videretur laborem fugere least he should seeme to shun labour and seeke his owne ease if he had preached onely where Christ had beene preached before Osiander but this is not all 5. neither doth the Apostle commend his Apostleship onely by the difficultie of the worke because it was an harder enterprise first to plant the Gospel where nothing raigned but idolatrie as at Athens and Ephesus Thus Pareus Tolet 6. And others doe thinke the Apostle thus speaketh to shewe his zeale and holy ambition in seeking to propagate the Gospel of Christ where he was not yet knowne Bucer 7. But the Apostle herein doth prooue his Apostleship to whom this was peculiar not to succeede in other mens labours that the Romanes might hereby vnderstand illustrem esse propria nota Apostolatus that he was commended by the proper and peculiar note of the Apostleship Martyr and so in effect S. Paul vseth this argument it is peculiar and proper to the Apostles to preach vnto them where Christ is not knowne but that haue I done therefore you are not to make any doubt of mine Apostleshippe Gualter so then the Apostle alleadgeth three reasons in all why he preached vnto those which had not yet heard of Christ. 1. because therein consisted the office of an Apostle properly 2. and least he might seeme to arrogate vnto himselfe that should belong vnto an other to put his sickle as it were into an others haruest 3. and to fulfill the prophesie of Isay which he citeth in the next verse that they should see Christ to whom he had not beene spoken of which place is taken out of the 52. of Isay v. 14. where the Prophet euidently speaketh of the calling of the Gentiles Kings shall shut their mouthes at him that is shall not gainesay the preaching of the Gospell but willingly receiue it then follow these words here rehearsed by the Apostle That which had not beene told them shall they see and that which they had not heard shall they vnderstand Quest. 27. Whether this place of the Prophet be fitly alleadged by the Apostle There can be no doubt made hereof 1. the argument there handled by the Prophet concerning the preaching of Christ vnto the Gentiles how that Christ should sprinkle many nations agreeth with the Apostles purpose here onely that which is generally propounded by the Prophet the Apostle in particular applyeth to himselfe not as the sole but as a principall instrument of this preaching of the Gospel to the Gentiles 2. The Apostle addeth of him to whom it was not spoken of him which words the Prophet hath not both because he sheweth this Prophecie to be accomplished in the preaching of Christ and he abridgeth compendiously that prophesie which foretelleth two things who should be preached namely Christ and to whom to the Gentiles who had not heard of him before both which the Apostle here ioyneth together and this is the cause of this small alteration that whereas the Prophet speaketh of the thing that which had not beene told them shall they see the Apostle turneth to the person to whom it was told concerning him Iunius in his parallels 3. Further it must be obserued that the Apostle for breuitie sake leaueth the contrarie part to be supplyed he preached not where Christ was named but where he was not named which must be vnderstood as may be gathered by the allegation of this prophesie the like see before v. 3. 4. They are said to see him who was not spoken of that is to see Christ in the preaching of the Gospel whom they had not seene in the flesh as the Iewes had for in the liuely preaching of the Gospell Christ is described as though with their eyes they had seene him crucified as S. Paul speaketh Galat. 4.1 and they which heard not shall vnderstand that is which had not the law nor the Prophers they shal now heare the preaching of the Apostles and vnderstand that is beleeue Quest. 28. How Saint Paul is not contrarie to Christ which saith of his Apostles that they entred into others labourers Ioh. 4.38 1. The Apostle denying that he had built vpon an others foundation is not therein contrarie to Christ Ioh. 4.38 I haue sent you to reape that wherein you bestowed no labour other men laboured and yee are entred into their labours for the Apostle denieth not that he builded vpon the foundation of the Prophets but acknowledgeth and confesseth it Eph. 2.20 of whom our Sauiour speaketh in this place that the Prophets laid the first foundation and sowed the first seed of that doctrine which afterward was more fully preached by the Apostles but he compareth himselfe with the rest of the Apostles that they had not preached first in those places where he planted the Gospel 2. And whereas it will be obiected that Saint Paul did write vnto the Hebrewes that were conuerted before and here to the Romans that were alreadie instructed in the waies of Christ the answer is 1. that there is difference betweene the writing of Epistles and preaching S. Paul might by his holy Epistles water that which an other had planted and yet preach onely and thereby lay the first foundations where Christ had not beene heard of 2. neither must the Apostle be vnderstood to speake so generally as though he had preached in no other places but where Christ had not beene preached before but cheefely and for the most part Quest. 29. Of the Apostles let and of his purpose to visite the Romans As hetherto Saint Paul in his peroration beginning in the 14. v. excuseth his boldnes in writing so here he excuseth his not comming shewing his great desire thereunto v. 22. I haue beene oft letted 1. The Apostle had diuerse lettes and impediments to hinder him from preaching where he intended sometimes he was forbidden by the Spirit as Act. 16.17 sometime he was letted