words pleasantnes of countenance for all those are signified by hilaritie or chearefulnes Tolet so Chrysost. verbis rebus corpore c. in words deedes yea with seruice of the bodie the poore must be helped with chearefulnes Chearefulnes is required in heart in words in countenance euery way 1. in respect of God he loueth a chearefull giuer 1. Cor. 9. Pareus 2. in respect of the kingdome of heauen which such hope for quis regnum accipiens maestus est who receiuing a kingdome is sorowfull Chrysost. lucrum est alijs benefacere c. it is a gaine to doe well to others and euery man reioyceth in his owne gaine Theodoret. 3. againe such as were emploied in these seruices as old men and widows are naturally giuen to morositie and therefore they haue neede of this precept to dispose themselues to chearefulnes Pareus 4. the worke it selfe which was to deale with the diseased sicke and feeble was such as might breed loathsomnes and therefore the Apostle doth hearten them that they should not giue ouer this worke of mercie thorough nicenes that they should not disdaine with their owne hands if neede were to handle their sores and diseases Tolet. 5. the consideration of the common condition of mankind that there is eadem omnium sors the same lot of all that they are subiect to the same diseases and infirmities this should mooue them in such workes of mercie to be chearefull and willing Gualter 6. ne moerorem addant moerori that they should not adde griefe vnto griefe for the poore seeing them which attend them to doe it vnwillingly would thereby be grieued the more Mart. Beza 17. Quest. Of the Christian affection of loue and the properties thereof The Apostle hauing hitherto touched certaine speciall and particular duties belonging vnto Ecclesiasticall offices proceedeth vnto generall and first concerning Christian brotherly loue which he sheweth how it should first consist in the inward affection and then in the outward act v. 10. in giuing of honour c. Concerning the first this loue must be verus true without simulation then discretus discreete we must not loue but hate that which is euill thirdly it must be firmus firme cleauing vnto that which is good and it must be vniversalis vniuersall common without acception of persons we must be affectioned one toward an other c. Lyranus 1. Let loue be without dissimulation 1. The Apostle beginneth with loue which giueth a rellish and tast as it were to all other vertues euen faith without charitie is not right 1. Cor. 13.2 it is the badge and cognizance whereby we are knowne to be the disciples of Christ Ioh. 13.35 therefore the Apostle first beginneth to shew what this loue is 2. Origen vnderstandeth this loue generally of the loue of God and our neighbour but Chrysostome applieth it onely to brotherly loue and so the precepts following shew 3. this loue must be without dissimulation which Origen defineth thus when one loueth onely God and that which is pleasing to God Chrysostome giueth this rule when one loueth an other and doth vnto him as vnto himselfe but S. Iohn giueth a perfect description of this kind of loue 1. epist. 3.18 My little children let vs not loue in word or tongue but in deede and in truth he then loueth without dissembling that sheweth his loue in act and in deede so S. Paul describeth true charitie 1. Tim. 1.5 out of a pure heart good conscience faith vnfained where are expressed the subiect or place of this loue a pure heart the cause thereof is faith vnfained the perpetuall companion or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the ioynt-worke is a good conscience as the Apostle to the Hebr. 10.22 let vs draw neere with a true heart in the assurance of faith sprinkled in our hearts from an euill conscience Gryn From this true and syncere loue these are farre of 1. they which doe nourish hatred in their heart but colour it with pretensed friendship onely watching an opportunitie of reuenge such was Cain toward Abel and Ioab toward Abner 2. they which pretend friendship toward other but onely for hope of some gaine and profit to themselues these are selfe-louers and not louers of others as Felix propounded fauour vnto S. Paul but he hoped for some bribe Act. 24. 3. they also which professe loue and obedience but onely for feare as they which obserue those which are mightie and of authoritie because they are afraid of their greatnes and power doe not loue without dissimulation 2. Hating that which is euill or rather abhorring c. 1. Chrysostome obserueth an emphasis in the Apostles phrase he saith not abstaining but prosequnting with hatred and that vehemently the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Apostle addeth alwaies somewhat to the sense as he sheweth in diuers instances 2. Haymo taketh this for a generall precept that we should hate the deuill and his members but it seemeth rather to belong to the precept of loue 3. and in this sense some giue this interpretation that they should in their loue abstaine from all euill hurt deceit malice and follow goodnes Calvin Pellican some thinke that good and euill signifie here that which is profitable or vnprofitable and so he that loueth should procure the good not the hurt of him whome he loueth Pareus but the meaning rather is that we should so loue as that we be not partakers with men in their sinnes neither should be withdrawne from God but cleaue to him as the onely good so Chrysostome saith this is added because there is dilectio in malis a loue friendship in euill things as in them that are fellows in robbers c. so Origen qui proprium errantem videt non corrigit c. he that seeth his brother erring and correcteth him not he loueth not in truth so Lyranus also sic ametur natura vt vitium odio habeatur let nature be so loued as yet vice be hated this sense followeth Pet. Mart. some are so foolish to thinke that they loue their brethren cum illis consentiant ad libidines when they consent vnto them to lust and other vices to the same purpose Gualter dilectionis praetexiu non facienda m 〈…〉 la euill things must not be done vnder pretense of loue 3. Cleauing to that is good 1. that is saith Haymo to God who is the chiefe good but this is too generall 2. here we vnderstand that which is morally good Gryn which is agreeable vnto the will of God who is onely good 3. and the meaning is that we should so adhere vnto that which is good that no respect of any friendship or any thing whatsoeuer should draw vs away from it 3. Chrysostome noteth a singular force in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cleaving adhering the same word is vsed of the coniunction betweene man and wife Matth. 19.5 shewing the neare coniunction that should be betweene
to himselfe thereby to set forth God iustice but this euent followed this word that doth not then shewe the cause but the order rather and euent of the thing Perer. where is not relation to Dauid that he did it to this end but vnto God who turned this euill vnto good 2. or these words that thou maist be iustified are not to be referred to the words immediately going before but to the 3. verse I knowe mine iniquities Dauid therefore sheweth not quo sine prius fecerit mal◠with what intent he did euil before sed quo fine nunc faciat bonis but with what end he now did well in confessing his sinne namely that God might receiue glorie thereby 3. Vatablus also referreth these words vnto the 2. verse where he saith wash me thoroughly from my sinnes and then these words in sense are to be annexed that thou maist be iustified c. this was not then sinis peccati sed precationis not the ende of Dauids sinne but of his prayer that God in forgiuing his sinne might appeare to be iust and true of his promises in forgiuing the sinnes of the elect Quest. 11. Of the meaning of the 5 6 7 8. verses 1. Now followeth the third obiection issuing out of the former for if Gods iustice and truth in keeping his promises doe appeare in remmitting the sinnes of the faithfull that notwithstanding their sinnes yet he is faithfull in performing his promises then it would followe that our vnrighteousnesse commendeth the iustice of God and hereupon ensue three other inconueniences 1. That God should be vnrighteous in punishing that which maketh for his glorie 2. nay he should not be said to be so much as a sinner by whom the the glorie of God is promoted v. 7. Why am I yet comdemned as a sinner 3. and it would followe that if by our sinnes the iustice of God were set forth we should still commit sinne and doe euill that good might come thereof the setting forth of Gods glorie Gorrhan 2. Whereas the Apostle saith according to the Greeke text I speake 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to man Origen seemeth to approoue and followe another reading as though it should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against man for the Greeke preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with an accusatiue case signifieth according but with a genitiue against and so he would ioyne it to the former words is God vnrighteous which inferreth or inflicteth punishment against man But there is an other word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I speake which should be quite cut off in this sense beside this phrase I speake according to man is vsuall with the Apostle which he vseth vpon diuerse occasions 1. to decline envie when he is forced to speake of himselfe and his owne doings he thus speaketh according to the wisedome of men 1. Cor. 15.31 2. Cor. 11.16 2. sometime he vseth this forme of speach when he taketh somewhat from the common vse of men for a more liuely demonstration of that which he hath in hand Rom. 6.19 1. Cor. 9.8 3. sometime according to man is as much as according to the flesh and after the guise of carnall men and so the Apostle here speaketh in the person of a carnall man Beza annot 3. But whereas v. 7. the Apostle saith why am I yet condemned as a sinner the most interpreters agree to make it a part of the same obiection that God should seeme vniust in punishing sinners by whom his glorie is set forth Tolet maketh it rather an answear to the obiection that S. Paul prooueth by two arguments that God is not vnrighteous one by his office that he is iudge of the world the other by the execution of his iustice that if God were not iust I should not be punished as a sinner but the former words going immediately before if the veritie of God hath more abounded thorough my lie vnto his glorie sheweth that it is part of the obiection which also is continued still in the verse following And c. why doe we not euill c. 4. By veritie here v. 7. is not vnderstood the veritie of doctrine and by a lie erroneous and false doctrine as Origen here sheweth by diuerse particular instances of the false positions of the Philosophers how the veritie and truth of God hath thereby more manifestly appeared But by vertue rather the iustice of God and constancie in keeping his promises is vnderstood and by a lie the perfidiousnesse of men whereof the Apostle spake before v. 3. 5. Now to this obiection the Apostle maketh 4. answers 1. he reiecteth this impious calumniation as blasphemous and absurd thinking it worthie of no better answer saying God forbid 2. he addeth a reason taken from Gods office he is the iudge of the world both present and to come who doth both gouerne the world in equitie and shall as the supreame iudge giue vnto euerie man according to his workes he therefore cannot be vniust 3. to the last part of the obiection he saith first that they doe blaspheme the Apostle v. 8. in raising such a slaunder of him as though he should teach any such doctrine that men should doe euill that good may come thereof 4. then he saith their damnation is iust which words some doe vnderstand actiuely that the Apostle condemned such positions referring whose to the obiections but it is better vnderstood passiuely of their persons that for this their blasphemie they deserue to be condemned of God Pareus 6. Thus the Apostle answeareth pithily to these cauills and obiections repelling them that howsoeuer men may imagine yet God is most iust in punishing of sinners though thereby his glorie is set forth So that thus much is insinuated in the Apostles answer that it followeth not that God should therefore forbeare the punishment of the wicked because by their iniquitie his iustice and goodnesse is more set forth because it is not of their sinne that any good commeth thereof but of Gods goodnesse they per se by themselues are no causes of the setting forth of Gods glorie but per accidens by an accident God thereby taketh occasion to manifest his iustice in their condigne punishment as he did in the destruction of Pharaoh his wisedome as he did vse the malice and envie of Iosephs brethren to effect his purpose in bringing him to honour his clemencie in doing good to his Church as by Iudas treacherie Christ was deliuered vp to death for the redemption of the world But therefore none of their sinnes were excused because they had no such intent to set forth Gods glorie but God who brought light of darknesse was able by their works of darkenesse to manifest the light of his truth Pareus Like as when the Iudge condemneth a malefactor his vprightnesse appeareth in his iust condemnation and the greater the disease is the more commendable is the skill of the Physitian in healing it yet no thankes is due either to the malefactor for
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
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
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
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
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
tast of his mercie v. 32. and ascribe nothing to themselues 3. The conclusion consisteth 1. of an exclamation with an admiration of Gods wisdome and knowledge as vnsearchable which is shewed 1. by the secrecie thereof not to be found out by a creature v. 34. 2. by the bountie of God not prouoked by any mans giuing first vnto him 3. because God is the beginning and end of all things 2. then followeth the Apostles vow and wish that all glorie may be ascribed vnto God v. 36. 3. The questions and doubts discussed Quest. 1. Of the scope and intent of the Apostle in this chapter 1. Whereas the Apostle had in the ende of the former chapter shewed out of Isay how the Iewes for their obstinacie were reiected and the Gentiles called now he sheweth in this chapter for the comfort of the Iewes that all generally were not cast off but onely the vnbeleuers Origen and so least that the Iewes might haue despaired and some might also haue obiected as though hereby Gods promises to his people should haue beene made of no effect he sheweth this reiection of the Iewes not to be generall Par. and this he doth ne insultarent Gentiles least the Gentiles might haue insulted ouer the Iewes gloss ordin 2. So then partly to minister consolation to the Iewes Bucer partly to represse the insolencie of the Gentiles the Apostle sheweth three things concerning the reiection of the Iewes that it is not vniversalis vniuersall to v. 11. nor inutilitis vnprofitable to v. 25. nor irrecuperabilis irrecouerable from v. 25. to the ende Lyran. 3. And touching the first that their fall is not generall he sheweth first that all are not reiected as by his owne example then that some are assumed as seuen thousand were in Elias dayes and yet some reiected v. 8.9 Gorrhan Quest. 2. Why the Apostle maketh mention of the tribe of Beniamin whereof he was v. 1. I also am an Israelite of the seede of Abraham of the tribe of Beniamin c. 1. Pet. Martyr thinketh that Saint Paul would signifie here that he was not obscurely borne but of a noble tribe euen of Beniamin which came not of any of Iacobs handmaides but of Rachel his principall wife and out of the which Saul the first King of Israel was chosen 2. Tolet giueth a contrarie reason that least Saint Pauls calling might be ascribed to the dignitie of his tribe he sheweth he was of Beniamin which was vltima minima the last and least of all the tribes 3. the interlin glosse thinketh it is added because mention is made next before of the seed of Abraham lest he might be thought to be of Abraham by Ismael But this doubt was remooued before in that he saith he was an Israelite 4. Gorrhan giueth this coniecture alludit genus operi sequeti S. Pauls kindred and tribe is mentioned as agreeable to the worke that followed for as Rachel died in the birth of Beniamin so the Synagogue in the birth of Paul and as Iosephs cup was found in Beniamins sackes mouth so the word of Christ in the mouth of Paul and as Iacob saith of Beniamin Gen. 49. that he is a wolfe devouring the pray so Saint Paul spoiled the Iewish Synagogue and brought many as a pray vnto Christ. 5. But these collections are to curious S. Paul onely hereby sheweth that he was a Iew by nation not a Proselyte conuerted to the faith by rehearsing three of their principall Fathers Israel Abraham Beniamin Pareus that his kindred was so farre off from beeing an hinderance to him that he was chosen to be praeco gratia a preacher of grace Bucer and therefore all the Iewes were not reiected Quest. 3. How God is said not to cast off that people whom he knewe before v. 2. 1. Chrysostome taketh here Gods foreknowledge for his prescience by the which he did foresee the people whom he had chosen aptum fore fidem recepturum to be apt and readie to receiue the faith But herein the Greekes erred in attributing too much to mans freewill and the contrarie is euident out of the Scripture and reasons diduced from them that Gods prescience was no cause why he elected the people of Israel As 1. Deut. 7.7 the Lord saith he did not set his loue vpon them or choose them because they were moe in number c. he did of his meere loue choose them not for any respect vnto any thing in them 2. how could he foresee any goodnesse in them in whom naturally there is nothing but evill 3. and the Lord here saith v. 4. I haue reserued seuen thousand he ascribeth it to their own will but to his owne grace that they were so reserued 2. Some will haue this vnderstood comparatiuely ipsum praesciuit ante Gentes God did foresee them to be his people before the Gentiles so Oecumenius vnderstandeth it of the prioritie of the calling of the Iewes before the Gentiles But as Beza well obserueth the Apostle here speaketh not of vocation but of the decree of eternall predestination 3. Some interpret it thus which he knew before that is had before enlarged with many excellent benefits but it is euident by the circumstance of the place that the Apostle speaketh here of election before all time not of the collation of benefites in time ex Tolet annot 1. 4. Wherefore we must vnderstand that Gods prescience is taken foure waies 1. either largely for his foresight whereby he seeth and knoweth all things which are done in the world as Peter saith to our Sauiour Ioh. 21.17 Lord thou knowest all things and this generall prescience in God belongeth to his vnderstanding rather then will and is no cause of things for all that God in this sense knoweth he decreeth not 2. Gods prescience is taketh more strictly for his foreknowledge of those things which he decreeth to be both of good which he purposeth to worke and of euill which he purposeth to permit and this prescience is practicall the former is onely speculatiue 3. it is vsed yet in a more strict sense as when it signifieth the approbation and acceptance of God in his eternall loue as Rom. 8.29 Whome he knew before he predestinate and so praenoscere is probare to foreknow is to approoue as Origen saith and so Gods prescience differeth from election as the cause from the effect as it signifieth election and predestination it selfe and so Augustine taketh it here praescivit id est praedestinavit he foreknew that is predestinate so also Haymo Lyranus and so the meaning is whome he knew before ab aeterno electum amplexus whom he loued and embraced beeing elected from the beginning Beza and here the word praecognoscendi of foreknowing signifieth beneplacitum the good pleasure of God whereby he chose them to be his children Calvin for there is difference betweene these two words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to foresee and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to foreknow this signifieth a foreknowledge with
doe by their imprecation inflict that punishment which is appointed of God 3. The things must be considered which are wished vnto any by these imprecations they are either temporall which may tend vnto their amendment as Ps. 89.16 fil their faces with shame that they may seek thy name these imprecations are more tollerable which a man sometime wisheth against himselfe that he may be afflicted with some crosse or other rather then to fall into sinne or they are eternall but euerlasting destruction cannot be denounced against any without Gods speciall warrant 4. The persons are to be distinguished which are cursed they are such of whom there is hope of amendment or such as are in a desperate state and professed enemies to God and godlines against whom such imprecations doe lie as S. Iohn will not haue vs to pray for those whom we see to sinne vnto death 1. epist. c. 5. 5. The manner and kind of imprecations must also be looked into some are extraordinarie whereunto men were directed by a propheticall and extraordinarie spirit of the lawfulnesse of such imprecations there is no question or ordinarie wherein these circumstances must be considered 1. the persons that curse they must thereunto be called as the publike Magistrate or minister and parents in their families 2. the persons that are cursed must be intractable and incorrigible and refuse all wholesome admonition 3. the manner must be this they must not curse absolutely but with a condition that such may be converted or confounded 4. with what affection not hating their persons but detesting their vices against the which they open their mouthes to curse Now in Dauids imprecation all the things before requited concurred it was Gods cause he had a propheticall spirit they were professed enemies to God the reasons before alleadged doe conclude only against priuate curses in our owne cause against persons not desperately euill and without any speciall direction Quest. 13. Of the ende of the stumbling of the Iewes v. 11. v. 11. Haue they stumbled that they should fall c. 1. Chrysostome here obserueth well the Apostles wisedome that when he speaketh of the execation and reiection of the Iewes he alleadgeth Scripture least he might be thought to speake of euil will consolationem à seipso ponit but the consolation he bringeth in his owne name that his loue toward them might appeare as here ye sheweth a double ende of their stumbling one that thereby saluation might come vnto the Gentiles the other that by the calling of the Gentiles the Iewes againe might be provoked and stirred vp to beleeue in Christ the first end serueth to beat downe the pride and insolencie of the Gentiles the other to comfort the Iewes that they should not thinke their fall to be irrecouerable 2. Haue they stumbled c. 1. The Latine translator addeth haue they so stumbled that they should fall which Tolet iustifieth and would haue the meaning to be this nor that the ende of the falling of the Iewes should be the calling of the Gentiles but that their fall was not without recouerie and Origen hath the like obseruation shewing here the diuerse kinds of falling some fall and neuer rise againe as Lucifer who shall neuer no not in the end of the world be restoared the fall of others is recouerable as here the Iewes did not so stumble vt ab omni legis observantia declinarent to decline from the whole obseruation of the law 2. But Erasmus well obserueth that here the Apostle speaketh not de magnitudine lapsus sed de eventu of the greatnes of their fal but of the euent for the Apostle throughout this whole epistle doth exaggerate the sinne of their incredulitie neither is this particle so in the originall neither doe the Greek expositors Chrysost. Theoph. Oecumen insert it 3. yet this must be added further to Erasmus observation that the calling of the Gentiles was not onely the euent which followed the incredulitie of the Iewes but it was the ende and scope for the which God suffered the Iewes to fall for this event must not be seuered from the providence of God Beza annot 4. nor yet is this question so propounded as though the Iewes did stumble and fall with any such intention to profit the Gentiles as Gryneus seemeth to note no man that is in his right minde will hurt himselfe which the Iewes should haue done if they of purpose had stumbled to fall But Photius obserueth that the Iewes as much as in them lay did so stumble vt corruerent to fall altogether nec sic affecti sunt c. neither were they so affected that any good should come thereby to themselues or others sed Deus illorum casu c. but God vsed their fall both for the saluation of the Gentiles and their owne emendation 5. Theophylact must here also be warily and aduisedly read the Iewes are not so fallen vt se nequeant quando velint attollere that they can not raise vp themselues againe when they will c. for this were as though the Iewes of purpose had fallen that the Gentiles might come in and then they would returne againe neither is it in any mans power to returne when he will for ones conuersion is as life from the dead v. 13. as one can not raise himselfe from the dead so neither can he conuert and turne vnto God 6. Haymo and Augustine before him put in the word solum onely that is they haue not stumble onely to fall as though no good should come thereby but God did not suffer them to stumble at all to fall God propounded not to himselfe their fall as an end of their stumble for God delighteth not in the destruction of any but God respected two singular good ends in the fall of the Iewes the vocation of the Gentiles and their owne conuersion Pareus Quest. 14. How the stumbling and falling of the Iewes brought salvation to the Gentiles v. 11. Through their fall salvation commeth to the Gentiles 1. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not well here translated delictum as the Latin interpreter which Anselme interpreteth peccatum sinne and vnderstandeth it of that speciall sinne of the Iewes in putting Christ to death so also Gorrhan but it here signifieth rather lapsum their fall as Erasmus well noteth to answear vnto the former question haue they stumbled that they should fall so also Tolet annot 9. 2. But we must not thinke that the fall of the Iewes was properly the cause of the calling of the Gentiles but it was the occasion rather for euill is not of it selfe the cause of that which is good but God by his power draweth good out of euill for otherwise as Lyranus alledgeth out of Augustine in his Euchiridion Deus non permitteret mala sieri nisi inde eliceret maior a bona God would neuer suffer euill to be vnlesse he did thereout draw greater good This is like as Pet. Martyr resembleth it
as there is a saying in Philosophie that the corruption of one thing is the generation of an other not that it is the cause thereof but the efficient hauing expelled one forme doth bring in an other and as in a syllogisme out of false and vntrue propositions a true conclusion may be inferred not by the force of the premises but of the syllogisme and forme of reasoning so Gods prouidence as the chiefe efficient cause doth by occasion of that which is euill bring forth that which is good 3. Anselme thinketh that the reiection of the Iewes was the occasion of the calling of the Gentiles because thereupon followed their dispersion through the world and by that meanes they brought the Scriptures to the Gentiles But this was an occasion rather that after that the Iewes had reiected the preaching of the Apostles they turned to the Gentiles neither was there any such necessitie that the one should be reiected before the other could be called if it had so pleased God they might haue beene called together But this consequence that vpon the reiecting of the Iewes the Gentiles were called depended both vpon the will and pleasure of God who had appointed it should so be Martyr and vpon the conuenience of the thing the Iewes were high minded and could not endure that the Gentiles together with them should be the people of God but they were like the dogge in the maunger that would neither eate himselfe nor suffer the oxe to eat therefore it was requisite that their pride should be first abated and they humbled by seeing them to be called to be a people that were no people so the question here is not what God could doe but what the Iewes had done and would doe by their good will neither they themselues would come nor suffer the Gentiles to enter Pareus 4. And though the Iewes had not beene reiected at all yet the Gentiles also should haue beene called but in the second place as Chrysostome sheweth out of that place Act. 13.46 vobis oportuit primum annuntiari verbum the word of God ought first to haue bin preached vnto you but now through their incredulitie it came to passe vt inverteretur hic ordo that this order was inuerted so in the parable Luk. 14. after that they which were inuited to the feast refused then the good man of the house saith vnto his seruant exi cito goe forth quickly into the streets c. the Gentiles then should haue beene called though the Iewes had not beene incredulous but not so quickly Quest. 15. How the Iewes were prouoked to follow the Gentiles 1. Whereas the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth properly to prouoke to emulation the vulgar latine doth not well translate vt emulentur illos to imitate or emulate them referring it to the Iewes that they should emulate the Gentiles either imitande in imitating them as Lyranus expoundeth and before him Photius that saith the Gentiles were examplaria examples herein to the Iewes or invidendo in envying the faith and knowledge of the Gentiles Gorrhan 2. Some referre it to the Gentiles as Origen vnderstandeth it of the faith of the Gentiles which should prouoke the Iewes to emulation Anselme vnderstandeth it thus that the Gentiles should imitate the Iewes that is such as beleeued among them but this is impertinent to the Apostles purpose some as Chrysostome Theodoret Ambrose do applie it to the Gentiles that they should prouoke the Iewes by their example to beleeue 3. But it is better referred vnto God that he should prouoke the Iewes to emulation by the example of the Gentiles when they saw themselues the auncient people of God to be neglected and the Gentiles which were forelorne to be receaued in Martyr But Tolet refuseth this and would haue it referred either to the Gentiles or their faith because no mention is made of God before but of the Gentiles annot 9. yet I preferre Pet. Martyrs reason totum ad Deum refortur all is referred to God and Pareus prooueth it by that place Deut. 32.21 I will prouoke you to emulation by a nation that is no nation But Tolet obserueth well that the word their vsed by Moses is in hiphil of the word kanah which signifieth to emulate or enuie and in hiphil to cause to emulate and so the Apostle is to be translated here as likewise v. 14. If I might by any meanes prouoke them of my selfe where the Latine interpreter so readeth also and therefore he fayleth here in translating that they might emulate them whereas he should haue said to prouoke them to emulation 4. But it will be obiected that this is no commendable thing by enuie or emulation to be brought to be beleeue the answer is that God simply approoueth not such emulation or enuie but as he can vse that which is euill to good purposes so by this emulation it pleaseth him to incite and stirre vp the Iewes to returne vnto him like as the husband putteth away his adulterous wife that she thereby may be prouoked by a kind of emulation left an other should be receiued in her place to seeke to be reconciled Pareus 5. But here we must vnderstand that the better sort of the Iewes shall be prouoked not all for the obstinate thereby are made worse Martyr and further the Apostle must not be taken to speake of the Iewes in particular for they which stumble and fell away were not restored but of the nature in generall that though some were vnbeleeuers yet the whole nation was not cast off Calvin Beza Quest. 16. What is meant by the diminishing of the Iewes and their abundance v. 12. 1. Whereas the Apostle had shewed that the falling away of the Iewes was an occasion of the calling of the Gentiles it might be obiected that the conuersion of the Iewes might likewise be an occasion of the falling away of the Gentiles hereunto the Apostle answeareth negatiuely and he confirmeth his answear by an argument from the lesse to the greater that if their empayring and diminishing and pouertie as it were were the riches of the Gentiles much more their plentifull calling for God can turne that which is euill to the good of the Gentiles much more that which is good 2. By the riches of the world we vnderstand both the multitude of the Gentiles called to the knowledge of Christ Pareus and that wherewith they were enriched namely the knowledge of the Gospel Genevens 3. By the diminution 1. Haymo whom Lyranus and Gorrhan follow vnderstand the Apostles which were but few and as the abiects of the people yet they enriched the Gentiles by their preaching if the conuersion of a few was so profitable to the Iewes much more the conuersion of the whole nation in the end of the world but the Apostle expoundeth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the ruine of the Iews which he vsed before by this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 diminution he meaneth not then
the conuersion of a few but the falling away of the Iewes to a few 2. Wherefore these three words the Apostle vseth as of equipollent and of one signification 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their fall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their diminution v. 12. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their reiection and casting off Par. 3. and in that he saith they are diminished he sheweth that they are not vtterly perished the imminution of a thing is not rei excisio sed decisio is not the cleane cutting off but an impayring onely Par. 4. How much more their abundance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fulnes 1. by this fulnes is not onely vnderstood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the multitude of the Iewes which shall be called but also excellencie of the spirituall graces wherewith the Iewes in their generall conuersion toward the end of the world shall be encreased Gryneus 2. neither are we so to vnderstand the fulnes of the Iewes as though euery one in particular should be called but as then most of them were averse from Christ so in the end most shall be conuerted Martyr as by the fulnes of the Gentiles v. 22. is vnderstood the generall and vniuersall calling of them not of euery one in particular 3. and this fulnes is not to be vnderstood so much with a relation on to the Gentiles as though their number should be more full by the conuersion of the Iewes for their fulnes must be first come in before the Iewes be conuerted v. 25. as with reference to the whole number of Christs Church that although there is a fulnes of the Gentiles without them yet as Origen saith plenitudo portionis Domini nondum dicitur completa the fulnes of the Lords portion cannot be said to be compleat vntill the Iewes also be conuerted 4. But it will be obiected how much more the fulnes of the Iewes shall be profitable to the Gentiles if more Gentiles shall not be called by the conuersion of the Iewes which the Apostle seemeth to denie v. 25. for the fulnesse of the Gentiles must first enter Pet. Martyr doth vnderstand it of the confirmation of the faith of the Gentiles who seeing the zeale of the Iewes shall thereby be confirmed so the ordinarie glosse their fulnes being conuerted ditabit gentes doctrina exemplo shal inrich the Gentiles by their doctrine and example Osiander addeth the Church of God shall be encreased gloriosa populi Iudaici accessione by the glorious accession of the Iewish people Pareus goeth further the Gentiles also by the fulnes of the Iewes shall be prouoked to emulation some further accession shall be made euen to the number of the beleeuing Gentiles though in respect of their vniuersall calling the fulnes of the Gentiles shall be entred before 5. So these benefits shall accrue vnto the Church of God by the conuersion of the Iewes 1. the consociation and ioyning together both of the Iewes and Gentiles the wall of partition beeing taken away Ephes. 2.14 2. the Church of God shall be encreased when the children of Iudah and the children of Israel shall be gathered together to the Church Hosh. 1.11 3. The faith of the Gentiles shall be greatly confirmed 4. God shall receiue greater glorie when his goodnes and the veritie of his promises shall be made manifest in the saluation both of Iews and Gentiles Gryneus Quest. 17. How it standeth with Gods iustice to cast off the Iewes that the Gentiles might enter in Obiect Seeing the Apostle saith that through the fall of the Iewes saluation came to the Gentiles their ruine is the riches of the world God may seeme to deale hardly in casting off his owne people to receiue strangers and beside it seemeth contrarie to that rule euill must not be done that good may come thereof Ans. 1. It were indeede an hard thing to cast off some to receiue others if they were cast off without their owne fault or if the Lord were tied by any bond not to cast them off or if their casting off did not tend to their further good but it is otherwise here for the Lord did not cast off the Iewes but for their vnbeleefe and he is not bound to bestow or continue his grace he may conferre it and withdraw it vpon whome and from whome he please and beside the reiection of the Iewes was for their more plentifull calling afterward 2. Neither was their reiecting simply the cause of the calling of the Gentiles but ex accidente accidentally as we say it was properly the punishment of their infidelitie and a demonstration of the iustice of God but God that can turne euill vnto good did vse this as an occasion to induce the Gentiles to beleeue 18. Quest. Why the Apostle maketh mention of his Apostleship and how he is said to magnifie his office v. 13. 1. For the occasion of these words 1. Tolet thinketh that the Apostle giueth here occasion of his former speach that the diminishing of the Iewes was the riches of the Gentiles which was by reason of his ministerie who was appointed the Apostle of the Gentiles 2. Chrysostome saith the Apostle sheweth two reasons of his commendation of the Gentiles both because he was their Apostle and to the ende that by their praise the Iewes might be prouoked 3. Hyperius maketh this a third reason of the calling of the Iewes from the ende of his office and ministrie 4. Lyranus will haue the third part of the chapter here to beginne that as he had shewed before that the falling of the Iewes was neither generall vnto v. 11. nor vnprofitable v. 11.12 so now he sheweth that it is not irrecouerable 5. but the best coherence and connexion is this that whereas he touched two ends of the reiection of the Iewes before the saluation of the Gentiles and the conversion in the end of the Iewes this latter he confirmeth by the vse and ende of his ministrie and he sheweth that he in the execution of his office id meditari to meditate or propound to himselfe the same thing that God doth that is in preaching to the Gentiles he intendeth the salvation of the Iewes 2. But whereas in the originall the words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifie in as much as the vulgar latine readeth quamdiu as long as and so Origen who giueth a double sense that it may either signifie the time of this life as long as he is an Apostle here insinuating that he should afterward in the next life haue the same dignitie to be an Apostle where in Origen falleth into his fantasticall speculations of the next world as though their should need any ministerie of the word or Apostleship there or this quamdiu so long is all one as if he had said sine fine without end as long as I liue but the word is not taken here for quamdiu how long but for quatenus in as much as as Matth. 25.45 In as much as ye did it to one of the
reuenge citra vllam perturbationē without any passion or perturbation which man can not doe Gryneus 3. and it is God onely cui propria est generalis omnium delictorū vindictà to whom is proper the generall reuenge of all wrongs which man can not doe Tolet 4. acerbius vindicabit Deus God will more sharply and seuerely take reuenge then any man can doe whereas if a man reuenge his owne cause he must not expect the diuine reuenge also Theophyl 29. Quest. Of doing good vnto our enemies v. 20. If thine enemie hunger c. 1. This precept is fitly ioyned vnto the former of not auenging our selues for not onely he which rendreth euill for euill reuengeth himselfe but he also which withdraweth his helping hand and by feeding and giuing drinke we vnderstand omnia humanitatis officia all the offices of humanity as where the Scripture saith God suffereth the raine to fall and the Sunne to shine vpon the wicked all other temporall gifts are vnderstood and P. Martyr here obserueth out of the ciuill law that if victus testamento legatus sit if maintenance of food be giuen vnto any by will it includeth apparell habitation lodging medicine for sicknes 2. Further whereas we are commanded to feede him this must be vnderstood of the time of necessitie we are not required to bid him home to our houses Tolet we must succurrere necessitati non indulgere voluptati succour his necessitate not pamper his pleasure Caietan and we must then releeue him when fittest occasion is offered to vs to take reuenge this precept hath not place when our enemie is in prosperitie and of power for then men vse to faune vpon their enemies that they may doe them no harme but then there is vse of this precept when our enemie is in necessitie and hath neede of our helpe and then must we afford our helpe willingly and liberally for so the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth not simply to feede but to doe it liberally and plentifully Tolet. 3. This is the most perfect worke of charitie which is here prescribed and so most hard to flesh and blood which made Iulian to deride and scoffe the Christians as fooles and idiots because he fauoured not those things which were of the spirit of God August lib. de serm Dom. c. 33. setteth downe diuers degrees of duties to be practised toward our enemies 1. one is not to butt vnlesse one be first prouoked but then he careth not if he doe greater hurt then he receiued 2. an other degree is velle tantum laedere to doe no more hurt then was done 3. a higher degree is velle minus laedere to doe lesse hurt then was receiued 4. but yet he goeth further qui nihil vult laedere which will doe no hurt at all though he haue receiued much 5. he is yet more perfect who beeing wronged yet is readie vt amplius laedatur to beare it if he be more wronged and hurt 6. but the perfectest point of all is quando laesus laedenti benefacit when he who is hurt doth good vnto him that hurt him These three last duties are touched by the Apostle here not to reuenge to giue place vnto wrath to be prepared with patience to beare still to feed our enemie being hungrie 30. Quest. What it is to heape coales of fire vpon the head of the enemie 1. Chrysostome vnderstandeth it of the punishment of our enemie nihil adeo incundum est atque de inimico sumptum videre supplicium nothing is so pleasant as to see punishment taken of our enemie But this is against the rule of charitie which S. Paul so much vrgeth here for any to take delight in the punishment of his enemie 2. Origen interpreteth it commissi poenitudinem qua eum conscientia torquet the repentance of the fact committed whereby as with a fire the conscience tormenteth the enemie so Augustine by coales of fire vnderstandeth vrentes poenitentiae gemitus the burning gripes of repentance whereby the enemie abateth his pride and malice seeing how the euill which he offered is recompenced with good lib. 3. de doctr Christ. c. 16. so Hierome epist. ad Hedib qu. 1. and Eucherius vnderstand this place that beneficijs cor inimici emollitur the heart of the enemie is mollified by these benefits this sense followeth Gualter and Osiander that the enemie shall be pricked in conscience and descend into himselfe and neuer be at rest till he be reconciled so also Piscator vnderstandeth confusionem conscientiae the confusion of conscience which causeth the enemie to leaue off from his malice 3. Haymo giueth this sense ardorem charitatis paries super caput thou shall kindle vpon him seruent and burning charitie so also Lyranus occasiones accendendi ignis dilectionis c. thou shalt giue him occasion to kindle the fire of loue This sense followeth Martyr adijciet stimulum c. thou shalt so pricke his conscience that he shall be stirred vp to loue thee so Gorrhan Hugo Emmanuel Sa Vatablus Pererius 4. Some put both these last senses together as M. Calvin animus frangetur in vtramque partem c. aut beneficiis emollietur c. the mind of the enemie shall both waies be qualified either it shall be mollified with the benefits or if he continue still in his malice vretur testimonio conscientiae he shall be set on fire with the testimonie of his conscience so also Olevian Pareus and Tolet saith these benefits bestowed vpon the enemie are called burning coales propter vehementiam doloris c. propter ardorem charitatis c. for the vehemencie of griefe which he conceiueth and the feruencie of charitie whereby he is inflamed to the like purpose also Erasmus in his annotations 5. But that other interpretation seemeth more agreeable to vnderstand the heaping of these coales of fire of the heaping vp of Gods iudgements and the kindling of the diuine wrath against such as Theophylact arbiter ero inimici tui vindex c. wilt thou be reuenged of thine enemie conferre some benefit vpon him and so I will take more seuere reuenge for thy wrong c. and Origen also toucheth this sense poenas eorum in diē iudicit cumulamus we doe heape vp their punishment against the day of iudgement of this sense these reasons are giuen Theophylact confirmeth it by the words before-going giue place vnto wrath that is divinae irae concedendum we must giue way vnto the diuine wrath and so here the Apostle sheweth how the diuine wrath shall take reuenge of such malitious and peruerse aduersaries M. Beza referreth vs to that place in the Prov. 25.22 from whence this testimonie is cited where Salomon by burning coales vnderstandeth iram Dei alicuius capiti impendentē the wrath of God hanging ouer ones head so also Iunius in his annotations here in the Syrian translation and Rollocus following him for thus the words stand there Thou shalt lay coales vpon
vnsound opinion 1. Bellarmine thus reasoneth that the Apostles did reach the Church at the first without Scriptures therefore they are not simply necessarie but onely for the greater profit of the Church like as an horse is necessarie for ones iourney for his more speedie trauaile but not simply necessarie because he may go a foot Bellar. l. 4. de verb. c. 4. Contra. 1. True it is that the writing of the Scriptures are not simply necessarie in respect of God for he by his absolute power could find a way to teach his Church otherwise but in respect of Gods ordinance which hath appointed the Scriptures for edifying of his Church they are necessarie as bread is necessarie for mans sustentation though God can nourish and maintaine life without bread 2. It is not true that the Apostles did teach without Scriptures for they had the prophetical writings first and afterward their owne and while the Apostles themselues were liuing and present the writing of the Gospel was not so necessarie as afterward 3. The writing then of the Gospel was necessarie 1. both in respect of that age present for the preuenting and stay of heresies which might be more strongely resisted and gainesayed by an euident and extant rule of faith 2. in regard of those Churches to whom the Apostles preached not by liuely voice it was necessarie that they should haue some perfect direction by writing 3. and that the ages also to come might haue a rule of their faith Arg. 2. The Church may as well now be instructed without the Scriptures as it was for the space of 2000. yeares before the lawe was written Bellar. ibid. Contra. 1. In the first age of the world the light of nature was not so much obscured as afterward when the law was written and therefore the argument followeth not the Scriptures were not necessarie then therefore not now 2. because the old world wanted the Scriptures to direct them that was the cause why they were giuen ouer generally to all kind of prophanenesse and therefore to preuent the like mischiefe afterward the Lord thought good to giue his written word to his Church Argum. 3. The Apostles did preach much more then they did write and many things they deliuered to the Church by tradition so that not the Scriptures by themselues are a totall rule and direction of the faith but partiall together with the traditions and ordinances of the Church Contra. 1. The Apostles did indeed speake more then they did or could write but yet they preached the same things and deliuered no other precepts concerning faith and manners but the same which they committed to writing 2. many things concerning orders and especially in particular Churches the Apostles left by tradition but no other precepts and rules of faith then they had written 3. The Scriptures are no partiall but a totall and perfect rule of faith for mensura adaequata esse debet mensurate the measure must be equall vnto that which is measured it must neither be longer nor shorter if then the Scripture should come short of faith it were no perfect rule nay it were no rule at all Pareus Now on the contrarie that the Scriptures are necessarie thus it is made plaine 1. From the author the Prophets and Apostles did write by the instinct of the spirit but the spirit mooueth not to any vnnecessarie or superfluous worke 2. from the office of the Apostles which was to teach all nations Matth 28.19 which seeing they could not doe in their owne persons it was necessarie that they should preach vnto them by their writings 3. from the ende and vse of the Scriptures 1. whether for instruction in doctrine for all Scriptures are written for our learning Rom. 15.4 or direction vnto vertuous liuing or decision of Questions and confuting of errors it was necessarie that the Scriptures should be writen to these vses as the Apostle sheweth 1. Timoth. 3.16 that the man of God may be perfect The Scriptures then were necessarie to be extant for the aforesaid purposes in so much that the Apostle saith if any Angel from heauen doe preach any other Gospel c. let him be accursed whereupon Chrysostome saith Paulus etiam Angelis de coelo descendentibus proponit Scripturas Paul euen propoundeth the Scriptures to the Angels descending from heauen in Galat. c. 1. 6. Morall observations 1. Observ. Of the happinesse of these times vnder the Gospel in comparison of the former times vnder the Lawe In that the Lord hath clearely manifested and opened vnto his Church by Iesus Christ the high mysteries which lay hid before therein appeareth the singular loue of God to his Church and the great preheminence which the faithfull now haue in comparison of the people of God vnder the Law as our Sauiour saith vnto his Apostles Blessed are your eyes for they see and your eares for they heare for verily I say vnto you that many Prophets and righteous men haue desired to see those things which you see and could not see them c. Matth. 13.16 17. the vse hereof is to stirre vs vp vnto thankefulnesse vnto God for this so great mercie shewed vnto his Church 2. Observ. The dangerous estate of those which are found to be contemners of the Gospel and Newe Lawe The greater light is reuealed and the more knowledge that men haue the greater obedience doth God looke for at their hand disobedience then now vnto the Gospel of truth is so much more greiuous then was transgression vnder the law as the times of light and knowledge in brightnesse exceede the dayes of ignorance and blindnesse thus the Apostle reasoneth the night is past and the day is at hand let vs therefore cast away the workes of darkenesse and put on the armour of light Rom. 13.12 So also Hebr. 2.2 the Apostle saith if the word spoken by Angels was stedfast and euerie transgression c. receiued a iust recompence of reward how much more if we neglect so great saluation c. More special obseruations vpon the whole Epistle 1. The Argument and Methode of S. Pauls epistles in generall and specially of this Epistle 1. Nicephorus lib. 2. c. 34. maketh the end and scope of Saint Paules Epistles to consist in these two things 1. that the Apostle what he preached beeing present he committed to writing to put them in memorie when he was absent 2. And that which he did more obscurely deliuer by word of mouth or passed ouer in silence he did in his writings handle and set forth more fully and plainely But the Apostle had diuerse other occasions offred him in his epistles then fell out in his sermons and therefore it is to be thought that although his sermons and writings agreed in the substance of doctrine yet he as occasion did mooue him in his epistles otherwise handleth matters then he did in his preaching 2. His Epistles then may be reduced to these fiue kinds 1. Some belong vnto doctrine wherein he layeth
that the Gentiles did not conceiue so reuerent an opinion of God in faining him to be like vnto the images of creatures so also P. Martyr Gregor hom 11. in Ezech. thus vnderstandeth it they did not glorifie God non impenderunt ei cultum debitum they did not giue vnto him his due worship Ambrose Anselm Sedulius doe expound the former of the latter they glorified not God in not giuing him thankes but the Apostle set these two downe as two distinct things not to glorifie God and not to giue him thankes Therefore by this word to glorifie is better comprehended both the inward reuerent opinion of God of his iustice mercie eternitie power goodnesse as also the outward worship due vnto him Calvin Pareus So the Gentiles did offend in both these they neither honoured God as they ought worshipping him and reposing their trust and confidence in him neither did they returne him thanks for the benefits receiued but referred all vnto fortune some to the starres some to their owne prouidence 2. They became vaine in their imaginations 1. Erasmus giueth this sense they were deceiued in their expectation because they tooke themselues to be wise yet prooued verie fooles but this the Apostle expresseth afterward in particular 2. some take it in Aristotles sense that is called vaine which is not brought to the due effect as the end of this their knowledge was that God should be honoured which end they attained not vnto Martyr but indeed they neither had the true knowledge of God nor yet propounded vnto theÌ„selues any such end 3. Some referre it to the errors of the Philosophers because they did resemble the Godhead by vaine images Theodoret Chrysost. Tolet but this seemeth to be to particular they had many vanities beside and this the Apostle alleadgeth afterward as a proofe of their foolishnesse v. 23. 4. Augustine whom Anselm followeth vnderstandeth it of their pride the knowledge which they had suis cogitationibus tribuebant they attributed to their owne thoughts and reason but their vanitie was more generall it comprehended other things beside 5. Therefore hereby are vnderstood all the vaine opinions and inventions which the heathen trusting to their owne wit and invention coyâ—ed concerning the diuine nature as 1. some denied there was any God as the Epicures 2. some doubted thereof as Protagoras Diagoras 3. some affirmed that there was a diuine power but they made many gods and them either incorporeall as the spirits so the Platonists 4. or some also made materiall and corporall gods as the Greekes and Romanes made men departed gods the Egyptians other creatures as oxen geese crocodiles yea herbes as onyons leckes 5. Some acknowledged one God as Plato Aristotle but either denied his prouidence in all things done vnder the moone as the Peripatetikes or tied him vnto second and inferior causes as the Stoikes this is the vanitie which the Apostle speaketh of And as this was their vanitie in their iudgement and opinion so were they deceiued in their hope and expectation they thought by such meanes to appease their gods to procure fauour to obtaine good things but the contrarie fell out 3. Their foolish heart was full of darkenesse 1. by the heart is vnderstood the mind their very vndestanding was darkened Faius the naturall reason in them was obscured Gorrham 2. this was a iust punishment vpon them because they abused that knowledge which was giuen vnto them their owne pride and ouerweening of themselues besotted them that whereas they thought themselues wise they became fooles iusto Dei iudicio propter superâ—iam their foolish heart was obscured thorough their pride Lyran. 3. that whereas they boasted of the name and title of wisemen as the Grecians much gloried in their seuen wise men as the Romanes had their wise men also Numa Cato Cicero yet they were all fooles for as fooles delight in toyes and let passe things of greater substance and importance so they worshipped images instead of the true God which the Apostle in the next verse giueth as a reason of their foolishnesse yea Socrates who was counted one of their wisest Philosophers desired his friends beeing now readie to die to offer for him a cocke vnto Aesculapius which he had vowed Pareus 4. Some interpret thus that while they held themselues wise in temporall things stultifacti sunt in spiritualibus they became fooles in spirituall things Lyran. But their vnderstanding was darkened euen in moral duties as Cato gaue his wife vnto Hortensius desiring her and tooke her againe when he was dead Lycurgus exposed virgines naked in their playes and publike spectacles he commended theft if it were secret and many such absurd things euen in ciuill duties were committed by their wisest men Gryneus 5. Augustine whom Hugo Cardinal followeth doth somewhat curiously distinguish these three 1. they became vaine in their imaginations this he applyeth to thâ—â—â— which do measure the diuine nature according to their corporall sense imagining him to haue parts and members like vnto man which was the errour of the Anthropomorphites 2. their foolish heart was full of darkenesse this he vnderstandeth of them which ascribe vnto God the qualities and affections of the soule of man as anger griefe forgetfulnesse remembrance 3. when they thought themselues wise they became fooles this he doth interpret of those which doe imagine such things of God which neither can be found in him nor in any other creature neither in the bodie nor in the soule of man 6. But this description of the error and blindnesse of the Gentiles is better referred generally to their foolish and carnall deuises and pretexes whereby they obscured the truth both in diuine humane duties as they alleadged for their images that they did not worship the image or idol but the thing represented thereby and that as a man cannot haue accesse vnto the Prince but by his courriers so there must be mediators to bring vs vnto God Thus they became foolish in their imaginations for God is not like vnto man that he neede to be informed by others Thus they became fooles leauing the true substance of Gods worship and following after shadowes and shewes as the Apostle saith Col. 2.23 which things haue indeede a shew of wisedome c. but substance they had none Martyr Quest. 61. How the Gentiles changed the glorie of God into the image of men and beasts v. 23. 1. They changed the glorie of the incorruptible God 1. The glorie of God is either absolute in himselfe which can no wayes be changed or it is considered with relation to vs as the worship and honour which is yeelded by the Creatures vnto the Creator this is changed by men when they giue the honour due vnto God vnto creatures Pareus So that indeede they could not depriue God of his glorie sed audaciae accusantur but they are accused of great presumption that as much as in them lay they attempted to rob God of his honour Martyr 2. God is
to euerie one that beleeueth then it followeth that euerie one that beleeueth is saued where els were the power of God to saluation if it were not effectuall to saue if then this power be in faith to saluation if it could not saue without the supply of other helpes this power should be turned into weakenesse that which is powerfull to saluation is sufficient to saluation Gods power worketh perfectly it hath no want nor requireth any helpe but in faith is the power of God to saluation Ergo c. Controv. 18. Of the difference between the Lawe and the Gospel v. 18. The wrath of God is reuealed from heauen against all vngodlines Bellarmine hence inferreth that comminations and terrors are as proper and peculiar to the Gospell as to the lawe lib. 4. de iustificat c. 2. Contra. True it is that the Gospel also hath many comminations against sinners and as by the Gospel the righteousnesse of God is reuealed from faith to faith v. 17. so the wrath of God is also reuealed thereby against all vnrighteousnesse but this is not the proper effect of the Gospel but accidentally for the Gospell by the vnthankfulnesse of them which beleeue it not beeing ordained for their saluation is turned vnto their condemnation And whereas the Lawe in generall condemneth all infidelitie and vnbeleefe the Gospell peculiarly condemneth vnbeleefe in Christ Pareus See further hereof Synops. Centur. 4. er 60. Controv. 19. Whether by naturall meanes the Gentiles might haue attained to the knowledge of the onely true God without the speciall assistance of Gods grace 1. Bellarmine affirmeth the contrarie Deum esse vnum esse cognosci posse lumine rationis absque speciali gratiae auxilio that it may be knowne that God is and that he is but one by the light of nature without the speciall helpe of grace and he insisteth vpon this place of the Apostle v. 20. thereout vrging these two arguments 1. because the Apostle saith the invisible things of the world are seene not by reuelation but by creation 2. and seeing the Gentiles are hereby made inexcusable because they notwithstanding this naturall knowledge of God committed idolatrie it sheweth that they knew God by the creatures or els they might haue excused themselues by pretense of their ignorance Bel. lib. 4. de grat c. 2. Contra. 1. Though we consent not to their opinion who hold that nothing at all can be knowen of God without his speciall assistance as Petrus ab Aliaco affirmeth in 1. sent qu. 3. which opinion see before confuted qu. 54. for many things touching the Godhead as his goodnesse wisedome power are seene in the creation 2. yet it cannot be prooued that the Gentiles did or could attaine vnto such a manifest knowledge of the onely true God onely by the light of nature without Gods further assistance And this is an euident argument hereof because neuer any of the Gentiles de facto in fact did attaine vnto such knowledge of God by the light of nature 3. And concerning the reasons vrged S. Paul sheweth that the invisible things of God were to be seene in the Creatures not that the Gentiles did therein see them but they might haue seene them if they had not bin wilfully blind and they were made inexcusable because they could not pleade simple ignorance but their owne wilfulnesse was the cause of their ignorance which tooke from them all excuse see hereof before qu. 52.54.57 So that Augustines resolution is good that the creatures doe indeede crie with a loud voice ipse fecit nos God made vs sed surdis canere c. but they thus speake vnto deafe men vnlesse God shew further mercie see further Synops Centur. 4. err 38. Controv. 20. Against some Philosophers that the world is not eternall v. 20. The invisible things of God to wit his eternall power and Godhead are seene c. If Gods eternitie is seene by the workes which he made then that which is made is not eternall 1. that which is made must haue one by whom it was made he then that made the world was before the world then as by the things made the maker is found to be eternall so the things made which had a beginning are concluded not to be eternall 2. beside where things are contrarie one vnto another there is no eternitie now in the world there are things contrarie as actions passions generation corruption seeing then the world consisteth of corruptible partes the whole must be also subiect to corruption Then is the opinion of Aristotle vaine and false that held the world to be eternall and of Plinie which calleth the world God and of Hermeas the Stoike that imagined a coeternitie of matter with God whereof he made the world ex Faio Controv. 21. Against the adoration and setting vp of images in Churches and places of prayer ver 23. they turned the glorie of the incorruptible God to the sâ—imilitude of an image Though the vse generally of all images be not condemned among Christians as the Turkes hold it vnlawfull to make the similitude of any thing for there may be a ciuill and historicall vse of pictures and images yet it is dangerous to set them vp in the publike places of Gods seruice either to fall downe and worship before them as the Romanists doe or to retaine them for a supposed ornament as the Lutherans The reasons against all such publike vse of imagerie are these 1. It is the direct commandement of God that he would haue no image made to represent him by Deut. 4.15 Take heede that ye corrupt not your selues or make you a grauen image or representation of any figure whether it be male or female the likenesse of any beast or the likenesse of any feathered foule c. the same prohibition is expressed in the second commandement of the Morall Law which is perpetuall and bindeth for euer Pare 2. Herein pseudo-Christians doe conforme themselues to the Gentiles by whom imagerie was brought in and herein they doe oppose themselues to the decision of the Turkes and Iewes for as the Gentiles did vse the pictures and images of beasts which they ioyned to their idols so is it among the Romanists as they make Iohn Baptist with a lambe in his lappe Vendeline with oxen Antonie with hogges Eustachius with buckes and dogs Gallus with a beare Gertrude with mise Martine and George vpon horsebacke These were the verie superstitious fashions of the heathen Gualter 3. Nay the verie Gentiles at the first did a long time forbeare the superstitious vse of images Plutarke writeth in the life of Numa Pompilius that he would suffer no images to be in Churches because he thought it not fit to make God like vnto man or any other thing who is an invisible spirit and so the Romanes continued without images for the space 170. yeares Varro also thus writeth hereof that they which first brought in images metum ciuitatibus ademerunt errorem addiderunt did take
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
two the Apostle manifestly distinguisheth Rom. 6.22 Beeing freed from sinne c. you haue your fruit in holines holines then and sanctitie is the fruit of our iustification whereby we are freed from sinne Againe Apoc. 23.11 He that is righteous let him be righteous still be that is holy let him be holy still here these two to be iust and holy are manifestly distinguished 16. Controv. Against the works of preparation going before iustification Pererius concerning the works and motiues of preparation tending to iustification hath these positions 1. There are sixe of these preparatiue motions faith the feare of God hope to obtaine pardon the loue of God the purpose of a new life repentance and sorrow for sinnes past thus he alleadgeth out of the Councell of Trent sess 6. can 6. so also Stapleton in Antidot 2. These works of preparation proceede partly from mans free will partly from the assistance of the spirit concurring and hereof it is that sometime the worke of our conuersion is ascribed vnto man as Ioel 2. Turne vnto me with your whole heart Iam. 4. Draw neere vnto God and he will draw neere vnto you sometime it is giuen vnto God as Ier. 31. Conuert vs and we shall be conuerted 3. These works of preparation though they doe not merit the grace of iustification â—â— condigno of condignitie yet de congruo by way of congruitie they may that is God seeth it to be meere and conuenient that such works of preparation should be rewarded with the grace of iustification following Perer. disput 7. Contra. 1. Concerning faith it is no where said in Scripture to prepare or dispose vnto iustification but in deede to iustifie by the imputation of the righteousnes of Christ and as for the other preparations they follow iustification they doe not prepare a way vnto it â— for good works follow iustification as the fruit and effect thereof Rom. 6.22 Beeing freed from sinne you haue your fruit in holines And againe there is no good worke or motion but it is commanded in the law seeing then that we are iustified by faith without such works they can not goe before iustification as preparatiues thereunto 2. The Scripture ascribeth euery good worke motion and thought of the minde vnto God for of our selues we are not able to thinke a good thought 2. Cor. 3.5 and our Sauiour saith Ioh. 15.5 Without me you can doe nothing wherein the Scripture exhorteth men to be conuerted and to draw neere vnto God that sheweth not this power to be in themselues but by these exhortations the spirit of God worketh in them and stirreth them vp that by grace they should seeke to doe that which they finde no strength in themselues to performe 3. But that distinction of merit of congruitie and condignitie is vaine and friuolous for in the matter of iustification there is no merit at all the whole worke is ascribed onely to grace Eph. 2.8 By grace are ye saued thorough faith not of your selues it is the gift of God not of works c. least any should boast if all boasting be taken away then there is no merit for of merits men may boast Augustine hath an excellent testimonie to this purpose Vocantis est gratia percipientis vero gratiam postea sunt opera bona c. Grace is of the caller and then good works belong vnto those which haue receiued grace quae non pariant gratiam sed quae à gratia pariantur c. which works doe not beget grace but are begotten of grace for the fire doth not burne thereby to waxe hoate but it is first hoat and then it burneth and the wheele therefore runneth not well that it may be round but it is first round and then it runneth well so nemo propterea bene operatur vt accipiat gratiam c. no man therefore worketh well to receiue grace but because he hath receiued grace by the saâ—â—e he worketh well lib. 1. ad Simplician qu. 2. no works then going before the grace of iustification haue any worthines in them at all to procure grace 17. Controv. What iustifying faith is Pererius that he may euery where shew some tricke of his Popish profession misliketh three things in that description of faith which is vsually receiued by Protestants for whereas we thus define faith that it is a confident assurance of the heart whereby we are perswaded of the remission and forgiuenes of our sinnes in Christ he taketh exception to these three points 1. He denieth that faith is any such confidence and assurance which he graunteth must be ioyned with faith but that faith is not such assurance and confidence he would thus prooue Eph. 3.12 the Apostle saith by whome we haue boldnes and entrance with confidence by faith in him here it appeareth that confidence is a distinct thing from faith Againe 1. Tim. 3.13 They that haue ministred well get themselues a good degree and great libertie as the faith here the Apostle sheweth that confidence is a diuers thing from faith and that it springeth from charitie and a good conscience Contra. 1. Pererius first argument is faith worketh confidence therefore it is not the same with confidence Answ. 1. This argument may rather be retorted faith worketh confidence therefore it is much more a kind of confidence for as the cause is so is the effect 2. faith is not the same with that confidence which it worketh but they are thus distinguished faith hath a generall assurance confidence in all Gods promises out of this fountaine doe proceede those speciall acts of confidence as to pray confidently to be confident in tribulation which are as little riuers running forth out of the same head and fountaine 2. His second argument is this confidence is wrought by charitie and a good conscience therefore not by faith Ans. The argument followeth not for there may be diuers causes of the one and the same thing faith worketh confidence and yet the same is more encreased and confirmed by a good conscience because the Sunne giueth heat doth it follow that the fire doth not heat also like as the warmth of the Sunne may be augmented by the heat of the fire so may the assurance of faith by charitie and a good conscience be encreased See further Synops. Centur. 4. err 48. 2. Pererius second exception is that the obiect of faith is not the assurance of remission of sinnes The Eunuch when he was baptised beleeued onely that Iesus Christ was the Sonne of God Act. 8. And Paul required none other faith of the keeper of the prison but that he should beleeue in the Lord Iesus and so he should be saued Act. 16. Abrahams faith was counted vnto him for righteousnes which was no other faith then to beleeue that in his seede that is in Christ all the nations of the world should be blessed of none of these was required such faith to beleeue their sinnes were forgiuen them to this purpose Pererius
And although by our redemption we are not deliuered or taken from God but reconciled vnto him yet are we deliuered from his wrath Rom. 5.9 and so from his punishing iustice 5. Argum. We are improperly said to be redeemed from that to the which the price was not paied but to the curse of the lawe and wrath that is the punishment of sinne the price was not paied for the bearing of the curse and the sustaining of the wrath of God for vs was the price it selfe therefore we are improperly said to be redeemed from the curse and wrath Answ. 1. The proposition is false for the captiue may be said to be redeemed from that to the which the price is not payed as from the gives fetters prison sword death though principally the redemption is from the hands of him which holdeth any in captiuitie so we may be redeemed from the curse of the lawe though the price were not payed vnto it 2. the curse of the lawe and wrath may be taken two wayes passiuely for the effect of the curse and wrath which is the punishment of sinne and in this sense the price is not paid to the curse or actiuely for the wrath of God and his irefull iudgement pronouncing the sentence of the curse and in this sense the price may be said to be paied vnto the curse that is the iustice and wrath of God inflicting the curse 6. Argum. The operation or curse of the lawe is euerlasting death but Christ did not vndergoe euerlasting death for vs therefore he was not made a curse for vs but onely for our cause he fell into some kind of curse for vs. Answ. 1. The proposition is generally true for the curse or operation doth not onely signifie the punishment due vnto the breach of the lawe but the sentence also pronounced against the transgressors of the lawe as it is said Deut. 21.23 cursed is euerie one that hangeth vpon a tree but euerie one that so hanged was not euerlastingly condemned as the theife that was converted vpon the crosse 2. yet it is most true that Christ in some sense suffred eternall death for vs for in euerlasting death two things are to be considered the greatnesse and infinitnes of the infernall agonies and dolors with the abiection and forsaking of God the other is the perpetuall continuance of such euerlasting horror and abiection the second Christ must needs be freed from both because of his omnipotencie it was impossible for him to be for euer kept vnder the thraldome of death and his innocencie that hauing satisfied for sinne beeing himselfe without sinne he could not be held in death and in respect of his office which was to be our deliuerer yet the verie infernall paines and sorrowe Christ did suffer for vs because our Redeemer was to suffer that which was due vnto vs and why els was our Sauiour so much perplexed before his passion which in respect of the outward tormēt of the body was exceeded by many Martyrs in their sufferings if he feared not some greater thing then the death of the bodie 3. And although sometime in Scripture the preposition for signifieth onely the ende or cause as Christ is said to haue died for our sinnes 1. Ioh. 3.16 yet it signifieth also for and in ones stead to doe any thing as Rom. 5.7 for a good man one dare die that is in his stead that he should not die and so Christ died for vs that is in our place and stead that we should not die eternally ex Pareo 7. Argum. As we are said to be sold vnder sinne so we are bought and redeemed by Christ but we were sold vnder sinne without any price payed therefore so also are we redeemed without the paying of any price Answ. The proposition is not true for it is a metaphoricall speach that we are sold vnder sinne thereby is signified the alienation and abiection from God by our sinnes but we are said to be redeemed properly wherein it was necessarie that a price should be paied for vs both to satisfie the iust wrath and indignation of God against sinne as also because of Gods immutable sentence thou shalt die the death which sentence must take place let the Lord should be found a lier and his word not to be true Christ therefore in redeeming vs by his death payed that price and ransome for vs which we otherwise should haue payed 8. Argum. Where there is a true and proper redemption the price is paied to him which holdeth the captiues in bondage but in this redemption purchased by Christ the price was not so paied for then the deuill should haue had it whose captiues we were therefore it is not properly a redemption Answ. 1. It is not true that we are principally and originally the deuills captiues first we are the Lords captiues as of an angrie and offended Iudge by our sinnes but secondarily we were captiued vnto Sathan because the Iudge deliuereth ouer sinners vnto him as the tormentor that power therefore which Sathan hath ouer sinners is a secondarie power receiued from God this is manifested in the parable Matth. 18.34 where the king deliuereth ouer the wicked seruant vnto the tormentor 2. The price then of our redemption was paied vnto God who had deliuered vs ouer as captiues for our sinnes and so the Apostle saith that Christ offred himselfe by his eternall spirit vnto God Heb. 9.14 not that God thirsted for the blood of his sonne but after 〈◊〉 salvation quia salus erat in sanguine because there was health in his blood as Bernard saith for thereby Gods iustice was satisfied and the veritie of his sentence established thou shalt die the death 3. But whereas it is further obiected that the price could not be payed vnto God 1. because God procured his owne sonne to pay the price of our redemption but be that detaineth captiues doth not procure their deliuerance 2. in paying the price of redemption there is some vantage accruing and growing to him to whom the price is paied but in our redemption there was no gaine or advantage vnto God we further answear thus 1. that in such a redemption wherein the Iudge desireth the life and safetie of the prisoner the Iudge himselfe may procure him to be redeemed and that out of his owne treasure 2. neither in such a kind of redemption doth the iudge seeke for any advantage to himselfe but onely the preservation of the lawes and common iustice as Zaleucus the gouernor of the Loerensians hauing made a lawe that he which was taken in adulterie should loose both his eyes did cause one of his sonnes eyes to be put out for the offence and one of his owne eyes by this he gained nothing but the commendation of iustice and so in our redemption the iustice of God is set forth otherwise there can be no lucre or advantage growing properly vnto God 4. Wherefore notwithstanding all these cauills and sophistications Christ properly and
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
16. that is which had receiued the lawe 3. By wrath some would vnderstand the wrath and indignation in the transgressor his contumacie and rage against God who hath by lawe restrained him of his licentious libertie Origen and Haymo referre it to the penaltie of the law as an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth but it rather signifieth the wrath and indignation of God in iudging and punishing of sinne not onely temporally but eternally Calvin 4. Now the lawe worketh wrath not of it selfe for it is holy iust and good but in respect of the weakenes and corruption of man which taketh occasion by the lawe as contrarie vnto it to be the worse as we see that in nature one contrarie by the resistance of an other becommeth so much the more violent as expereince sheweth in the breaking out of lightening and thunder and in the terrible noise of gunshot where two contraries meete together the fierie hoat nature of the brimstone and the cold qualitie of the saltpeter both tempered together in the gunpowder Mart. 5. But although the lawe occasionaliter by way of occasion procureth wrath yet it hath an other ende and effect vnto the godly for vnto them it is a schoolemaster to bring them vnto Christ so that Christ is the ende of the lawe not onely because he hath abolished the ceremonies of the lawe and so is the ende and fulfilling thereof but because the law directeth vs vnto Christ who hath fulfilled the lawe for vs which it was impossible for vs to keepe 6. Now the holy Apostle doth of purpose thus speake of the law as saying that by it commeth the knowledge of sinne that it causeth wrath that it is the ministerie of death that by this meanes he might abate that great opinion and estimation of the law which the Iewes conceiued of it hoping thereby to be iustified but otherwise as the law is considered in it selfe he giueth it the due commendation as afterward is shewed in the 7. chapter like as now the Preachers of the Gospel doe giue vnto good works their due praise and commendation but yet they detract from them as not beeing able to iustifie vs. Mart. 26. Quest. Of the meaning of these words v. 15. Where no law is there is no transgression 1. Origen here obserueth that the Apostle saith not where is law there is transgression for then all those holy men which liued vnder the law should be held to be vnder transgression but he saith in the negatiue where there is no law there is no transgression But this collection is not good for the contrarie must be inferred out of the Apostles words where there is no law there is no transgression therefore where there is a law there is transgression or els there should be no coherence in the Apostles words whereas this is added as a proofe of the former clause that the law causeth wrath 2. Now touching the coherence Gorrhan maketh here two arguments why the inheritance can not be by the law because by it there is neither remissio poenae remission of the punishment the law causing wrath nor yet remissio culpae remission of the fault because by the law commeth transgression Gryneus maketh this the coherence because idem est index c. there is the same foreshowne both of the transgression and punishment namely the law But thus better doth the sentence hang together the Apostle prooueth that the law causeth wrath by the cause thereof for that it causeth transgression so then transgression is set in the middes betweene the law and wrath for the law bringeth forth transgression and transgression wrath Pareus 3. But this should seeme to be no good argument no law no transgression therefore where there is law there is transgression as it followeth not no creature no man Ergo a creature a man Ans. The Apostle here reasoneth not à genere-ad speciem from the genus to the species as in the instance proposed but from the contrarie by the like connexion of the causes and effects as this followeth well in the like where the Sunne is not risen there is â—â— day light therefore the Sunne beeing risen it is day Pareus 4. Now concerning the meaning of these words Haymo thinketh it may be vnderstood either of the lawe of nature and so infants not yet hauing vnderstanding of this lawe cannot be transgressors against it or of the Evangelicall lawe which the Pagans not hauing are not held to be so great offenders as they which haue reciued it or of the morall lawe of Moses where that lawe is not non est tanta praevaricatio neque sic imputatur there is not so great transgression neither is it so much imputed This latter sense is to be preferred for thoroughout this chapter the Apostle vnderstandeth the lawe of Moses 5. And further for the true vnderstanding of these words it must be obserued 1. that the Apostle saith not where is no lawe there is no iniquitie for the old world and the Sodomites committed iniquitie before the lawe was written but he saith there is no transgression which is referred to the lawe written gloss ordin 2. this is simply true of things indifferent as were the ceremonies before they were commanded by lawe for then it was no sinne to omit them but of things euill in their owne nature it must be vnderstood after a sort that there was not so great transgression before the law was giuen as after Lyran. 3. and hereof these two reasons may be giuen both quia homines nituntur in vetitum men are most bent vnto that which is forbidden and so by the prohibition of the lawe the stubbornenesse of mans heart was increased as also because by the lawe came the knowledge of sinne and so the seruant that knoweth his masters will and doth it not is worthie of more stripes Lyran. 4. So then the Apostle denieth not but that sinne which is committed against the conscience euen where there is no lawe is sinne non est reus tantae transgressionis c. he is not guiltie of so great transgression as he which knoweth the lawe and breaketh it Calvin Quest. 27. Who are meant by Abrahams seede which is of the Lawe v. 16. 1. The Apostle in this verse vrgeth two arguments to prooue that the inheritance is not of the law but of faith because it is of grace for to be iustified by faith and by grace with the Apostle are all one and because the promise is firme but if it were by the law it should be vncertaine and not firme because of mans weaknes who is not able to performe the law Calvin Chrysostome further saith that the Apostle here speaketh of two chiefe good things or benefits the one is quod quia data sunt firma sunt the things which are giuen are firme the other quod vniverso semini data sunt they are giuen to the whole seede of Abraham 2. By the seede which is of the law
vnto our soules that we are the sonnes of God Rom. 8.16 Osiand Pareus facit nos intelligere charitatem Dei c. the spirit of God maketh vs to vnderstand and feele the loue of God toward vs. 2. And this worke is ascribed to the spirit not excluding the Father and the Sonne to whome this loue toward mankind is common but the Apostle obserueth the propertie of their persons because as election is giuen vnto God the father and Redemption to the Son so loue is the proper worke of the spirit both to cause vs to feele the loue of God and to make vs to loue God againe 3. And here we are not to vnderstand onely the gifts of the spirit but the spirit it selfe which dwelleth in vs not in his essence which is infinite but by his power illuminating directing conuerting vs Faius so Tolet well saith that the spirit non solum dona sua nobis communicat sed per ea in nobis inhabitat c. doth not onely communicate his gifts vnto vs but also by them dwelleth in vs. 4. In that the holy Ghost is said to be giuen vs thereby is signified quod non proprijs viâ—tutibus c. that we haue obtained the spirit not by our owne vertue but by the free loue of God Oecumen and the person of the holy Ghost is noted in that he is said to be giuen and the giuers are the Father and the Sonne Hug. Card. 10. Quest. How Christ is said to haue died according to the time v. 6. 1. Some doe referre these words to the former clause and read thus when we were yet weake according to the time that is we were weake in the time of the law when grace yet appeared not so Chrysost. Theodor. and Erasmus thinketh this is added as a mitigation of their infirmity but it is against the Apostles vse to qualifie the corruption euilnes of mans nature and he speaketh to the Gentiles that had not the law as well as to the Iewes 2. The most doe applie it vnto the latter clause that Christ died in his time and here there are diuers opinions 1. Some vnderstand it of the short time which Christs death continued namely but three daies Ambrose so also Lyran. but that time beeing assigned see Christs resurrection is not fitly expounded of his death 2. Sedulius thus interpreteth quâ—â— in vltimo mundi tempore mortuus est because he died in the last time or age of the world 3. According to the time that is he died temporally in the flesh which is mortall for eternitie knoweth no time Haymo 4. Hierom. epist. ad Algas referreth it to the opportunitie of time Christ died in a fit time when the world stood most in neede of his redemption 5. But the best exposition is that Christ died in the fulnes of time as the Apostle speaketh Gal. 4.4 the time decreed and appointed of his father thus expoundeth Theodor. and Theophyl tempore decenti destinato in a meete time and appointed of God so also Beza Par. Tol. with others 11. Quest. Of the meaning of the 7. v. One will scarce die for a righteous man c. 1. The Syrian interpreter readeth in the first place scarce will any die for the wicked which reading Beza seemeth not to mislike but that all the Greeke copies are otherwise and Iunius thinketh that here one word by the writers was taken for an other because of the neere similitude in the Syrian tongue and thinketh it should rather be read according to the Greeke copie for the righteous not for the wicked 2. Some doe take here these two the righteous and the good to be one and the same and some confounding these two doe not vnderstand these words of the person of the iust and good man but of the cause Hier. epist. ad Alg. and so this should be the sense that although scarce and sieldome yet sometime one may be found to die for a iust and good cause some likewise taking these two for one applie it vnto the person of the righteous and good man Chrysost. Lyran. Tolet. Par. Faius But the Apostle first saying negatiuely one wilâ— scarce die c. and afterward vsing a kind of correction that one may die for a good man doth euidently distinguish these two clauses 3. The most then doe diuide these two and take the iust and righteous and the good to be diuersly taken by the Apostle 1. Wicked Marcion as Hierome reporteth by the iust did vnderstand the God of the old Testament for whome fewe offered themselues to death by the good the God of the new Testament that is Christ for whom many are found readie to die But this opinion beside the blasphemie thereof in making two diuers Gods and authors of the Old and new Testament containeth apparant absurditie and falshood for both many gaue their liues in the old Testament in defence of the law of God as the three children Dan. 3. and many in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes as the historie of the Macchabees testifieth and beside many thousand Martyrs are found to haue died for Christ whereas the Apostle speaketh of very few that will die for a good man 2. Arrius contrariwise by the iust vnderstandeth Christ and by the good the Father of whome Christ testifieth that none is good but God But if Christ be this iust one for whom so many thousand Martyrs willingly gaue their liues how saith the Apostle that scarse any will die for a iust man 3. Eucherius by the iust interpreteth the Law and old Testament by the good Christ and the new Testament for few Martyrs are found in the old Testament and many in the new But beside that it is against the scope and mind of the Apostle to vnderstand this of dying for Christ who by this comparison setteth forth the loue of Christ who died for euill men euen for his enemies whereas few are found readie to die for the righteous and good the words of the Apostle will not beare this sense who in saying for a good man it may be that one dare die noteth the paucitie and fewnes of them whereas many thousands haue died for Christ in the New Testament 4. Some by the iust vnderstand the vertuous by the good the innocent for whome one may die in commiseration and pitie toward him Haymo Thom. Aquin. Gorrhan or because innocencie is fauoured of men iustitia habet aliquid severitatis iustice hath some rigour and seueritie in it Hug. Cardinal But a man can not be iust but he must also be innocent these two then are not thus distinguished 5. Caietane vnderstandeth by the iust an ordinarie vertuous or righteous man by the good some excelling in the works of supererogation for such one perhaps dare die But such works of supererogation we acknowledge not all that a man hath is too little for himselfe he hath no superfluitie to supererogate to an other 6. Osiander and Emmanuel Sa doe vnderstand in both
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
righteousnesse Controv. 14. Concerning inherent iustice v. 13. Neither giue your members as weapons of vnrighteousnesse c. Bellarmine inferreth out of this place that as sinne was a thing inherent and dwelling in vs before our conuersion so instead thereof must succeede righteousnes per iustitiam intelligit aliquid inherens by righteousnesse he vnderstandeth a thing inherent in vs from whence proceed good workes Contra. 1. We doe not denie but that there is in the regenerate a righteousnesse inherent and dwelling in them which is their state of sactification or regeneration but by this inherent iustice are we not iustified before God but by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed onely for here the Apostle treateth not of iustification but of our sanctification and mortification which are necessarie fruits of iustification and doe followe it but they are not causes of our iustification 2. Wherefore this is no good consequent There is in the righteous an inherent iustice Erg. by this iustice they are iustified before God See further hereof Synops. Centur. 4. err 56. Controv. 15. Against the power of freewill in the fruits of righteousnesse v 20. When ye were the seruants of sinne ye were freed from righteousnesse Beza doth vrge this place strongly against the popish freewill for in that they are said to be free from iustice that is as Anselme interpreteth alieni à iustitia estranged from iustice it sheweth that they haue no inclination at all vnto iustice it beareth no sway at all nullum erat eius imperium it had no command at all ouer you Pererius disput 5. numer 33. maketh an offer to confute this assertion of Beza but with bad successe for those verie authors whom he produceth make against him first he alleadgeth Anselme following Augustine liberum arbitrium saith Augustine vsque adeo iâ— peccatoribus non perijt vt per ipsum maximè peccent c. freewill is so farre from beeing lost in the wicked that thereby they doe sinne most of all c. But who denieth this the wicked haue freewill indeed free from compulsion it is voluntarie but inclined onely vnto euill which Anselme calleth libertatem culpabilem a culpable freedome and he therefore fitly distinguisheth betweene these two phrases of the Apostle he saith they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 free not freed from iustice least that sinne might be imputed vnto any other then to themselues but afterward v. 22. he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 liberati freed from sinne to shewe that this freedome is not of our selues but onely from God and so he concludeth haec voluntas quae libera est in malis c. ideo in bonis libera non est quia non liberatur ab eo qui eam solus c. this will which is free in euill because they delight in euill is not therefore free in good things because it is not freed by him who onely can make it free from sinne c. With like successe he citeth Thomas in his Commentarie here who thus writeth semper itaque homo sive in peccato fuerit sive in gratia liber est à coactione non tamen semper liber est ab omni inclinatione man therefore alwaies whether he be in sinne or in grace is free from coaction and compulsion but he is not alway free from an inclination c. where he affirmeth the same thing which we doe that the will of men is free alwaies from compulsion for it alwaies willeth freely without constraint that which it willeth but it is not free at any time from an euill inclination it is not free à necessitate from a necessitie of inclining vnto that which is euill of it owne naturall disposition Controv. 16. Whether all death be the wages or stipend of sinne v. 13. The stipend of sinne is death Socinus part 3. c. 8. pag. 294. graunteth that eternall death is the reward of sinne and the necessitie of mortalitie and dying but not â—â—â— corporall death it selfe for Adam before sinne entred was created in a mortall state and condition and Christ hath redeemed vs from all sinne and the punishment thereof therefore corporall death is no punishment of sinne because it remaineth still neither hath Christ redeemed vs from it Contra. 1. It is euident in that the Apostle speaketh of death here absolutely without any restraint or limitation that he meaneth death in generall of what kind soeuer and of the corporall death he speaketh directly c. 5.12 by one man sinne entred into the world and death by sinne which is specially vnderstood of the bondage of mortalitie which Adam by his transgression brought vpon his posteritie 2. It is friuolous distinction to make a difference betweene death and the necessitie of dying for what else is mortalitie then a necessitie of dying which if it be brought in by sinne then death also it selfe 3. Adam though he were created with a possibilitie of dying if he sinned yet this possibilitie should neuer haue come into act if he had not actually sinned 4. Christ hath indeed deliuered vs from all punishment of sinne both temporall and eternall as he hath deliuered vs from sinne for as our sinnes are remitted neuer to be laid vnto our iudgement and yet the reliques and remainder of sinne are not vtterly extinguished so the Lord hath effectually and actually deliuered vs from eternall death that it shall neuer come neare vs but from temporall death as it is a punishment onely for he hath made it an entrance to a better life and he hath taken away the power thereof that it shall not seaze vpon vs for euer because he shall raise vs vp at the last day and then perfectly triumph ouer death for euer 5. Origen here vnderstandeth neither eternall nor temporall death but that qua separatur anima per peccatum à Deo whereby the soule is separated from God by sinne But then the Apostle had made an iteration of the same thing for sinne it selfe is the spirituall death of the soule and therefore the death here spoken of is an other death beside that namely that which followeth as the stipend of sinne which is euerlasting death vnto the which is in the next clause opposed eternall death Controv. 17. Against the distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes v. 23. The stipend or wages of sinne is death Faius by this place doth well confute that Popish distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes they say that veniall sinnes are those which in their owne nature are not worthie of death but the Apostle here noteth in generall of all sinne whatsoeuer that the stipend and wages thereof is death because all sinne is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the transgression of the law 1. Ioh. 3.5 and death is the wages of them that transgresse the 〈◊〉 that glosse then of Haymo vpon this place may seeme somewhat straunge hoc non de omnibus peccatis intelligendum est sed de criminalibus c. this is not to be vnderstood of all sinnes
4 Therefore my brethren or euen so B.G. ye are made dead also or mortified Be. L.A. dead B.G. to the law by the bodie in the bodie Be. T. of Christ that ye should be vnto an other euen vnto him that is raised not risen L.T. from the dead that we should fructifie L. bring forth fruit Be. B.G. vnto God 5 For when we were in the flesh the motions infirmities T. affections Be. lusts B. passions L. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. of sinnes which were by the law did worke L.B. had force Be. G. were effectuall in our members to bring forth fruit vnto death 6 But now we are deliuered from the law that beeing dead not of death L. or we beeing dead vnto it B.G.T. see the question following vpon this place wherein we were holden that we should serue in the newnes of the spirit not in the oldnes of the letter 7 What shall we say then is the law sinne God forbid let it not be Gr. yea I knew not sinne but by the law for I had not knowne lust except the law had said Thou shalt not lust 8 But sinne taking occasion by the commandement wrought in me all manner of concupiscence B.G.T. some read thus sinne taking occasion by the commandement c. Be. L. see v. 11. following for without the law sinne was dead 9 For I once was aliue without the law but when the commandement came sinne revived but I died 10 And the commandement which was ordained vnto life the same was found to be to me vnto death 11 For sinne tooke occasion by the commandement and deceiued me and thereby flew me 12 Wherefore the law is holy and the commandement is holy and iust and good 13 Was that then which was good made death vnto me God forbid but sinne that sinne might appeare wrought death in me by that which is good L. G. T. A. some thus but sinne was death vnto me that sinne might appeare in working in me death by that which is good Be. B. that sinne might be out of measure sinnefull by the commandement 14 For we know that the law is spirituall but I am carnall sold vnder sinne 15 For what I worke I acknowledge not allow not G. vnderstand not L. for not what I would that doe I but what I hate that I doe 16 If I doe then that which I would not I consent to the law that it is good 17 Now it is no more I that worke it but sinne that dwelleth in me 18 For I know that good dwelleth not in me that is in my flesh for to will is present with me but how to performe that which is good I find not 19 For I doe not the good which I would but the euill which I would not that doe I. 20 Now if I doe that I would not it is no more I that worke it but sinne that dwelleth in me 21 I find then a law L. Gr. this law to be imposed Be. by the law B. Ge. that when I would doe good euill is present with me see the question following vpon this verse 22 For I delight in the law of God concerning the inner man 23 But I see an other law in my members rebelling against the law of my minde and leading me captiue to the law in the law L. of sinne which is in my members 24 O wretched man that I am who shall deliuer me out of this bodie of death Be. T. the bodie of this death L. B.G. 25 I thanke God through Iesus Christ our Lord Then I my selfe in my minde serue the law of God but in my flesh the law of sinne 2. The Argument Method and Parts IN this Chapter the Apostle sheweth how we are freed and exempted from the seruice of the law yet so as that he commendeth the law in it selfe and deliuereth it from all blame laying the imputation vpon his owne weaknes and infirmitie where he taketh occasion to shew the combate betweene the flesh and the spirit This Chapter then hath three parts 1. he sheweth how we are deliuered from the law to v. 7. 2. he excuseth and commendeth the law to v. 14. 3. he sheweth the infirmitie that remaineth in the regenerate and the combate betweene the flesh and the spirit 1. In the first part the Apostle sheweth that we are not freed and discharged from the morall obedience of the law but from the seruitude and bondage thereof in respect of the curse and irritation and prouocation to sinne this is set forth by an allegorie taken from the lawe of matrimonie the proposition is contained v. 1.2 3. consisting of three parts like as the woman is 1. free from her husband when he is dead v. 2. 2. after his death she may take an other husband and therein is no adultresse v. 2. 3. the third is implyed that she may also bring forth by an other the reddition followeth which hath three correspondent parts so we are 1. dead to the law 2. we are married to Christ. 3. to bring forth fruit vnto him v. 4. this last part is amplified by the contrarie that as sinne by the lawe did fructifie vnto death v. 5. so we now beeing freed should fructifie vnto the spirit v. 6. 2. Then he taketh vpon him the defense of the law that whereas he had said v. 5. that the matrons of sinne which were by the Law c. did bring forth fruit vnto death hereupon two obiections might arise that the lawe is the cause of sinne and of death to both which he answeareth The first obiection is propounded v. 7. is the law sinne then he answereth 1. in bringing a reason from the effect that the law connot be sinne nor the cause thereof because it reuealeth and discouereth sinne v. 7. 2. he sheweth how not the law but sinne taking occasion by the law wrought concupiscence reuiued in him deceiued him and in the end slew him all which he giueth instance of in his owne person v. 8. to v. 12. 3. he sheweth what the law is in it selfe iust and holy v. 12. the second obiection followeth v. 13. that it might seeme that the law beeing good wrought death in him then the answer is that not the lawe but sinne by the lawe wrought death 3. The Apostle in this third part sheweth first the combate betweene the flesh and the spirit to v. 24. then the issue thereof v. 24.25 the combate is set forth in three degrees 1. in that he by sinne is brought to doe that euill which he would not where he sheweth the opposition betweene the lawe commanding and his will consenting and sinne ouer-ruling him and his flesh obeying v. 14. to v. 18. 2. the next degree is that he is hindered by sinne from doing the good which he would this is prounded v. 18. then prooued by the contrarie effects v. 19. and by the contrarie causes the lawe moouing to good whereunto he consenteth and sinne hindring him v. 20.21 3. the third degree consisteth in
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
in chaunging it for some better thing 4. Wherefore the Apostle specially meaneth that all things that is all afflictions and tribulations shall be turned to the good of the Saints as Chrysostome interpreteth omnia etiam tristia includit in saying all he includeth also heauie things c. so Calvin Martyr Pareus with others though it be verie true that not onely afflictions but all things whatsoeuer shall fall out for the best And here Bernard well obserueth that all things so worke together vt inter haec omnia etiam quae nihil sunt numerentur c. that among all these things euen those are numbred which are indeed nothing as sickenes death and such like which haue no nature of their owne but are naturae corruptiones corruptions of nature 4. To those which loue God 1. the Apostle rather saith which loue God then which beleeue in God for these causes 1. for that the loue of God doth most shew it selfe in affliction when a faithfull man is willing to endure all things for the exceeding loue of God 2. and hereby Saint Paul doth distinguish a true faith working by loue from a sained faith which hath no such loue Mar. 3. and least any should thinke that by the merite of their loue toward God this benefit is obtained for all things to worke for the best the Apostle addeth which are called to shew that God first loueth them in calling of them before they could loue God Calvin and so the ordinarie gloss well noteth because the Apostle addeth which are called non aliunde est quà m à praedestinatione c. it is not from any other cause that all things worke together to their good then of predestination it is not of their merit 3. Origen whereas all things are said to worke together c. to them that loue God inferreth that to them which are not yet so perfit to loue God but reteine still the spirit of feare some things may fall out for the best but not all But though there may be diuerse degrees in the loue of God and so some more or lesse are made partakers of this benefit yet not onely some things but all to such as loue God shall fall out for the best so long as they remaine in the loue of God But if they haue not the loue of God at all then nothing shall be for the best but euen the good things shall fall out vnto their hurt as Chrysostome well collecteth that as to those which loue God etiam quae nocitura videntur euen those things which seemed hurtfull are for their profite so to them which loue not God quae profutura videntur damna sunt things which seemed to profite are hurtfull 5. Called of this purpose 1. Chrysostome Origen Theodoret Oecumenius doe vnderstand this not of the purpose of God but of man that God called those whom he foresaw to haue a purpose to consent vnto their calling But this is a very erroneous interpretation God in Scripture is said to call men not according to the purpose of men but according to his owne purpose as c. 9.11 that the purpose of God might remaine according to election 1. Tim. 1.9 Who hath saued vs according to his owne purpose and grace Ephes. 1.5 Who hath predestinate vs according to the good pleasure of his will in these and such other places this purpose is interpreted to be the purpose of God not of men and herein Tolet annot 31. and Pererius numer 107. doe well concurre together in giuing testimonie to the truth in reiecting the erroneous interpretation of the Greeke expositors 2. so then here the Apostle insinuateth a distinction of callings some are onely externall and not effectuall some are internall by the efficacie of grace according to the purpose of God so our Sauiour in the Gospell many are called but few chosen he speaketh of the externall calling onely but the Apostle here mentioneth the other effectuall calling which alwayes and onely followeth election Quest. 45. Of the meaning of these words v. 29. Those whom he knew before he also predestinate c. 1. They are deceiued which here doe vnderstand this foreknowledge of God of the foresight of their faith which should beleeue as Haymo quos praesciuit credituros c. whom he foresaw should beleeue them he predestinate so also Osiander with other Lutherans who doe hold election to depend ex prouisa fide of the foresight of faith whereas faith is the fruit and effect of predestination not the cause thereof whereof more followeth to be handled among the controversies 2. And as we make not Gods prescience here the cause of predestination so neither with Caietane doe we make predestination the cause of Gods prescience ratio quod sciat ill◠fore est quod volendo decrevit illa fore the cause that God knoweth things to come is because he willed and decreed them to be and Origen before had the like conceit in eo quod futurum sit id quod nondum est in hoc voluntas magis est quà m praescientia conditoris in this that what yet is not shall be therein the will rather of the Creator then his prescience is seene c. for in the order of nature first the knowledge of a thing which is in the vnderstanding goeth before the determination and decree which is in the will 3. Neither here doe we admit their distinction who would haue the foreknowledge of God onely to concerne the reprobate and predestination the elect and so they set praescites they which are foreseene or foreknowne against the predestinate for the Apostle here saith that God predestinate whom he knewe before then are not the wicked onely said to be foreseene of God but the elect also Beza nay Origen well obserueth that in the Scripture the wicked are not said to be foreseene of God at all not that any thing can escape Gods knowledge sed quia omne quod malum est scientia eius praescientia habetur indignum but because whatsoeuer is euill is counted vnworthie of the knowledge or foreknowledge of God 4. Some doe take this foreknowledge of God pro verbo elegendi for the word of electing as 1. Pet. 1.2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God Calvin but here election and foreknowledge are distinguished foreknowledge goeth before election 5. Wherefore by prescience here we vnderstand not simply the foreknowledge of God but his foreacknowledging which is a knowledge with approbation the word is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he knewe before but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 praecognovit he acknowledged before in this sense it is said The Lord knoweth who are his 2. Timoth. 2.19 and Rom. 11.2 Hath God cast away his people whom he knewe before that is loued approoued for they had no good workes which the Lord did foresee thus Martyr Bullinger Pareus with others and Pererius significat scientiam approbationis it signifieth the knowledge of approbation disput 21. num
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.
Christ and his constancie and immutabilitie that whom he loueth he loueth to the end all which tend to make vs sure of our election and saluation in Christ. 3. Saint Paul did not thinke himselfe to be iustified by the peace of his conscience for that is a fruite of iustification not the cause thereof But Saint Paul knew himselfe to be iustified by faith and thereof was assured the testimonie of the conscience which ariseth of our good fruits is an argument of our liuely faith whereby we are iustified 4. we confesse that none in this life can attaine to a perfect assurance without some doubting but there is difference betweene an infallible and certaine assurance and a perfect assurance this sheweth the degree the other the kind and manner 2. To Pererius we answer that we are assured by the light of faith infused that we are saued and his exceptions we except against 1. it is not naturall sense and experience that assumeth I am saued but this is the particular act or sense of faith relying vpon Gods promises there is a generall assent vnto and apprehension of Gods promises which maketh the proposition he that beleeueth in Christ shall be saued then is there a particular application which is the speciall act of faith but I beleeue which a man is assured of by his workes then the conclusion followeth I shall be saued the propositions beeing grounded vpon the promise of God is the obiect of faith the assumption inferred out of the proposition is the act of faith Therefore that is a friuolous obiection that the assumption I doe beleeue is not de fide of faith and it hath not the expresse word of God for fides non creditur sed sentitur faith is not beleeued but it is felt and perceiued it apprehendeth the generall promises of God and particularly applieth them 2. It is vntrue that the actions proceeding of the spirit and such as come from man himselfe are aliue for there is no good thing in vs which the spirit worketh not naturall ciuill workes haue a semblance indeede and shew of goodnes but there is not any true goodnes in them 3. but this is not to the purpose for though a man haue many sinnes which he knoweth not and his workes be imperfect this in a faithfull man hindreth not the assurance of his saluation which is not grounded vpon his workes but vpon his faith indeed if a man were iustified by workes he could neuer attaine vnto any securitie or certaintie of saluation but it is faith that layeth hold on the perfect obedience and righteousnesse of Christ that bringeth vs to this assurance 4. And as for their speciall reuelation whereby they pretend that Saint Paul and other holy men were made sure of their saluation the Apostle taketh away this pretext in making his case common herein with other faithful men saying that there was not a crowne of righteousnesse laid vp onely for him but for all them that loue his appearing 2. Tim. 4.8 a more excellent degree of assurance the Apostle had but the diuersitie of degree taketh not away the truenes of the thing a true assurance of saluation all the faithfull haue though not in the like degree measure Now on the contrarie side that it is possible for a Christian by faith to assure himselfe of his euerlasting saluation and that de facto in very deed euery faithfull man is so assured we prooue it by these testimonies of Scripture As Rom. 8.16 The spirit beareth witnesse with our spirit that we are the children of God 1. Cor. 2.12 We haue receiued the spirit of God that we may know the things that are giuen vs of God 2. Cor. 13.5 Know ye not your owne selues that Iesus Christ is in you vnlesse ye be reprobates and such other places many might be produced which shew that we haue a certaine knowledge and assurance by faith of heauenly things Pererius answereth 1. that either these places must be vnderstood of a morall coniecturall and humane kind of certitude assurance not diuine and infallible as in the first place though the testimonie of the spirit be most certaine in it selfe yet we onely by coniectures gather that it is the testimonie of the spirit 3. or the Apostle speaketh of that speciall assurance by reuelation which the Apostles had in those daies as in the second place 3. or he meaneth the knowledge onely of the doctrine and principles of faith not of beeing in the state of grace as in the third Pere disput 8. Contra. 1. The Apostle speaketh not simply of the testimonie of the spirit as it is in it selfe but as it is to vs it beareth witnesse with our spirit that we are the children of God and thereby we crie Abba father like as then children doe call vnto their fathers with a confident assurance not a coniecturrall opinion the like certaintie haue the faithfull that they are the sonnes of God and that he is their father 2. the Apostle speaketh not of the Apostles and teachers onely of those times but generally of all the faithfull which haue not receiued the spirit of the world but the spirit of God 3. And the Apostle in the third place expressely mentioneth such a knowledge which the reprobates haue not and they which haue it are not reprobates but the knowledge of the doctrine of faith euen the reprobates haue but it is not sanctified vnto them 4. Now then to conclude this point there is a threefold kind of certitude there is one in opinion onely when a man deceiueth himselfe in his perswasion and thinketh that to be which is not there is an other certaintie in the truth of the thing as the Deuils know the truth of the articles of faith though they haue no comfort in them and there is an assurance as well of the truth of the thing as in perswasion and assent of him which beleeueth such is the assurance of faith the first is onely in the will and affection without any ground the second in the intellectuall part onely the third is in both So then in a faithfull man both his vnderstanding is illuminate to perceiue celestiall things and his heart and affection is inclined firmely to beleeue and applie them to himselfe 5. Some of the Romanists doe not much differ from vs in this point of the certaintie of saluation as Pererius disput â— alleadgeth Vega and Ricuram Tapperus who affirme that a man may be so certaine of grace vt omnicareat formidine haesitatione that he may be without all feare and doubting See further of this Controversie Synops. Centur. 4. er 20. Controv. 10. Against the invocation of Saints v. 15. Whereby we crie Abba father Hence Bucer well obserueth that the spirit of God teacheth vs to call vnto God and crie in our hearts Abba father the spirit sendeth vs not vnto Saints the prodigall child comming home to his father wâ—nâ— not to any of his fathers seruants to
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
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.
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.
be answeared 4. Whereas to shunne these rockes of offence and to preuent these obiections some here haue found out a middle or meane way to referre the decree of reprobation partly to the will of God as the efficient partly to the foresight of sinne as the materiall cause thereof And here these distinctions are brought in 1. Lyranus thus distinguisheth that reprobation is either taken large largely and so it signifieth onely simplicem negationem ad gloriam a simple deniall of glorie and this hath no cause in Gods prescience but onely in the will of God or it is taken proprie properly for ordinario ad poenam an ordaining vnto punishment and so it is not willed or decreed of God nisi propter culpam but for sinne Bellarmine also fleeth to the same distinction of negatiue reprobation which is not to haue mercie positive to decree vnto condemnation of this the foresight of sinne he saith is the cause of the other the free will of God But seeing this negatiue reprobation containeth a priuation and deniall of euerlasting glorie this also must arise from the foresight of sinne for God excludeth none out of his kingdome but for sinne as the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 6.9 Know ye not that the vnrighteous shall not inherite the kingdome of God 2. Gorrhan hath this distinction there is a double kind of reprobation temporalis the temporall which is non appositio gratiae the not affording or giuing of grace and eterna voluntas non apponendi the eternall which is the will or purpose of not giuing of grace this is without the foresight of any merite but not the other like vnto this is that difference which some make betweene the decree and the execution of the decree the first is without respect vnto sinne but sinne commeth betweene before the other But this doth not satisfie as Pareus well obserueth for the same cause mooued God to decree punishment which mooueth him in time to execute punishment 3. Some doe thus consider of predestination that it is of two sorts there is decretum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a decree simply called of those things whereof God is the author and efficient cause himselfe such is the decree of election vnto life there is decretum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 secundum quod a decree after a sort which may also be called permissivum the decree of permission as the other is effectivum an effecting and working decree of this latter sort is the decree of reprobation the meanes which lead thereunto God onely permitteth and effecteth not as the sinne and iniquitie of men for the which they are worthily condemned to this purpose Rollocus in 8. ad Roman p. 181.182 But this doth not satisfie for the decree of damnation is as well an effecting decree as is the decree of election God willeth and decreeth the damnation of the wicked as effectually in his iustice as he effectually willeth the saluation of the elect as the wise man saith in the Proverbs 16.4 That the Lord hath made all things for his owne sake yea euen the wicked for the day of euill 4. Iunius against Pukâ—us resp ad ration 72. maketh two degrees of reprobation decretum praeteritionis the decree of preterition which is the purpose of God not to shew mercie and this is absolute without any respect vnto sinne then there is decretum ex praescientia the decree of reprobation issuing forth of God prescience and so none are decreed to be condemned but for sinne some call the first decretum non miserandi the decree not to shew mercie the other decretum puniendi the decree of punishment Pareus dub 8. p. 913. citeth Mr. Perkins who calleth them decretum deserendi the decree of desertion and ordinatio ad poenam an ordaining to punishment Pareus out of his owne iudgement saith that there are two acts of reprobation negativus the negatiue that is not to haue mercie and affirmativus the affirmatiue which is to condemne the negatiue act is either reprobation from grace or from glorie the first of these which is a reiection from grace be thinketh onely to proceed from the good pleasure of God but not the other all these distinctions are the same in effect which else where I haue followed allowing that distinction especially of Iunius as giuing full satisfaction in this matter But now I find some doubts and obiections which are not yet remooued by these distinctions 1. Seeing damnation necessarily followeth reiection and where grace is denied glorie cannot follow if the deniall of the one should be the absolute act of Gods will so by consequence should the other also 2. And the Scripture sheweth that the cause why God reiecteth man is for that they reiect God first as Samuel saith concerning Saul 1. Sam. 15.23 Because thou hast cast away the word of the Lord the Lord hath cast away thee and Rom. 1.24.27 the Apostle sheweth that the giuing vp of the Gentils vnto their hearts lusts was a iust recompence of their error therefore because the substraction and deniall of grace the hardening of the heart the blinding of the mind are punishments of sinne and sinne goeth before the punishment thereof it followeth that these things as they are not temporally inflicted but for sinne so neither are they eternally decreed but vpon the foresight of sinne 3. If God should absolutely reiect any otherwise thou for sinne and more are reiected then elected then should Gods iustice farre exceed his mercie and his seueritie farre surpasse his clemencie To this last obiection Thomas Aquin. maketh this answer by a distinction that bonum proportionatum communi status naturae c. the good things which are proportioned to the common state and condition of nature are found in the most but bonum quod excedit comâ—â—â—â— statum c. the good things which exceed the commoÌ„ state are found in few as they are found more which haue sufficient knowledge and direction for the gouernment of their life then they which want it such as are idiots and fooles but there are few which are found that haue the profunditie and depth of knowledge and of this kind of euerlasting life it exceedeth the common state and condition of humane nature and therefore it is no maruel if it be found in the fewest and smallest number to this purpose Thomas 1. part qu. 25. artic 7. But this answer is not sufficient he hath giuen a good reason why eternall life is not merited or procured by mans deserts because it is a gift which exceedeth the proportion and condition of mans nature but yet the reason appeareth not neither is the doubt satisfied why seeing God aboundeth in mercy euerlasting life is not giuen vnto the most therefore Thomus addeth further that Gods mercie appeareth in that he directeth some vnto life from the which the most decline by the common cause and inclination of nature And indeed this is the best and most sufficient answear that
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
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
Apostle expresseth the Hebrew word sorer by these two rebellious and gainesaying so also Beza But Iunius parall 19. thinketh rather that the Apostle doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 compendiously in one word expresse the Prophets meaning which is set forth in many words in that place Isa. 65.3 a rebellious people which walketh a way that is not good after their owne imaginations a people that prouoke me euer to my face c. all this the Apostle comprehendeth in these two words rebellious and gainsaying 2. By all the day 1. Origen vnderstandeth litterally the day wherein Christ did hang vpon the crosse c. and so a part is taken for the whole gloss ordinar but then it should not haue beene said all the day 2. Haymo interpreteth it to be the whole time Dominicae predicationis of the Lords preaching vnto his passion 3. But Oecumenius better taketh it for all that time which went before since they came out of Egypt so also Gryneus with M. Calvin and others vnderstand all that time since the Lord begunne to take speciall care of this people and thus the Prophets vse to speake as Ierem. 7.13 I rose vp earely to speake vnto you c. but ye would not heare toto tempore legis Mosaicae all the time of the law of Moses Lyran. 3. I stretched out my hands 1. not vpon the crosse as Origen and Ambrose for Christ said before he suffered that he would haue gathered them together as the henne her chicâ—â—us but they would not Martyr 2. neither is thereby onely signified the miracles which Christ shewed and the benefits bestowed vpon them as Haymo and as Gorrhan by the extending the left hand signifieth their protecting from euill and by the right hand the collaâ—â—â— of benefits 3. But hereby we vnderstand generally all those meanes which the Lord vsed not onely by his benefits but by his threatnings promises preaching of his word whereby he would haue called them to repentance Pareus 4. Yet they were still a rebellious and gainsaying people rebellious in heart and gainsaying in their mouth contrarie to those two speciall works of grace before spoken of the 〈◊〉 of the heart and the confession of the mouth Pellican so here three sinnes are set 〈◊〉 in the people their ingratitude that regarded not Gods mercie in calling them 〈◊〉 incredulitie in their rebellion obstinacie in gainsaying three vertues also are described 〈◊〉 seruants of God the Prophets their patience in suffering signified by the stretching out of their hands their perseverance all the day the cause for the which they suffered against a rebellious and gainsaying people 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doct. A good intention maketh not a good action v. 1. They haue the zeale of God but not according to knowledge Hence it is euident that make a good action it is not sufficient to haue a kind of zeale and good intention for them beleeue had beene excused for putting Christ to death which they did of a blind zeale 〈◊〉 here the Apostle confesseth that they had zeale but it was not according to knowledge â—â— therefore it was a false and erroneous zeale such as they were ruled with that should â—â—â—ke they did God seruice in killing his seruants Ioh. 16.2 Doct. 2. Of the kinds of prayer v. 1. My hearts desire There is oratio mentalis vocalis a mentall and vocali prayer the one onely in the mind the other vttered by the voice of the first our Sauiour speaketh Matth. 6.6 When thou prayest enter into thy chamber of the other v. 9. after this manner pray yee And Saint Paul sheweth them both in this place that his hearts desire was c. he prayeth both with his heart and voice and the praier of the heart is the more principall Doct. 3. How to discerne true loue and freindship v. 2. That they may be saued c. Herein Saint Pauls true affection appeared toward his countrie men the Iewes in wishing their saluation whatsoeuer one freind wisheth vnto an other beside this it is nothing hence it is that Saint Paul in all his Epistles beginneth his salutation with grace and peace this was Abrahams commendation that he had a case to instruct his familie children and seruants in the waies of God Gen. 18.18 Doct. 4. Of the consent betweene the law and the Gospel v. 4. Christ is the end of the law So then herein both the law and the Gospel agree that both of them doe ayme at Christ the law looketh vnto him as the end and the Gospel also requireth obedience to the law but Christ is couertly insinuated in the law but openly shewed in the Gospel the law leadeth indirectly vnto faith and the Gospel as it were indirectly pointeth at the law requyring the obedience thereof not as a cause but as a â—â—â—ie testimonie and consequent of iustification and so that is fulfilled which S. Paul saith Rom. 3.31 doe we then make the law of none effect through faith God forbid yea we est 〈◊〉 the law Doct. 5. Of the difference betweene the law and the Gospel v. 5. He that doth these things shall liue thereby c. Hence may be gathered there differences betweene the law and the Gospel 1. the law commandeth things impossible and not in mans power as in euery point to keepe and fulfill the law the Gospel onely requireth faith and beleefe 2. the law worketh terrour and perplexitie of conscience breeding doubts and questions in the mind who shall ascend to heauen to bring vs thâ—â—â—er who shall descend to hell to keepe vs from thence But the Gospel bringeth comfort and peace of conscience and assurance of saluation 3. the righteousnesse of the law is grounded vpon the law of Moses but the iustice of faith vpon the Gospel this is the word of faith v. 8. Doct. 6. Of the diuerse kinds of calling and sending to preach v. 18. How shall they preach vnlesse they be sent c. Though the Apostle doe here especially speake of the extraordinarie calling such as was this of the Apostles yet it is true of the ordinarie calling of preachers that none must take vpon them to preach vnlesse they be sent of God which is either immediately as the Prophets were so called of God in the old Testament or mediately by the authoritie of the Church or by them to whom it is committed which kind of mediate calling is not in euery Church the same in respect of some circumstances which are left to the libertie of the Church Pareus but yet the same end must be propounded which is the edifying of the Church and none ought to be sent which are not meete for such are not sent of God but runne vncalled and vnsent and as intruders But no man as the Apostle saith ought to take this honour vpon him but he that is called of God Hebr. 5.4 Here I cannot omit that obseruation of Faius who thinketh the sending of Ionas to haue beene ordinarie from the companie of the Prophets
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
the elect perish Answ. It followeth not the branches may perish therefore the elect 1. That the elect cannot possibly fall away is shewed before contr 1. the Scripture saith they that trust in Iehovah shall be as mount Sinai which is not mooued but standeth fast for euer Psal. 125.1 not that the elect are so stable of themselues that they cannot be mooued for there is no creature but of it selfe is mutable and subiect to change but the Lord vpholdeth such by his grace as it is said Psal. 37.24 Though the righteous fall be shall not be cast off for the Lord putteth vnder his hand 2. We must distinguish of the branches some are true and right branches and they are the faithfull and elect which cannot be broken off some are counterfeit branches which were neuer elected and they may fall off so Christ sheweth Ioh. 15. that the vine may haue some vnfruitfull branches which are cast off but the fruitfull branches he neuer casteth away so the Apostle c. 9.7 doth make a difference among the children of Abraham all were not his right children that were of his seede Controv. 9. Against the heresie of Valentinus and Basilides that held some things to be euill some good by nature Whereas S. Paul maketh mention of the wild oliue and of the true oliue v. 17. Origen taketh occasion to confute the heresie of the foresaid heretikes and their followers whose assertion was this that there were two natures of soules some were made good and they should be saued and neuer fall away some were euill and they could not but perish 1. Origen refelleth this hereticall paradox out of this place for here some branches of the oliue tree were broken off because of their vnbeleefe and so of good became bad and the branches of the wild oliue were planted in and so of bad became good this difference was not in the diuersitie of their nature and further he vrgeth these words of our Blessed Sauiour Math. 12.33 Either make the tree euill and the fruit euill or make the tree good and the fruit good whereupon he inferreth vt ostenderet arborem bonam vel malam non nasci sed fieri to shewe that a tree is not borne good or euill but is so made 2. Thus farre Origen proceedeth well but after going about to shew the cause whence it commeth that some trees are good some bad he falleth into other errors himselfe 1. ascribing this difference onely to the power of free will for these are his words vnusquisque ex arbitrij potestate aut bona oliva aut oleafter efficitur euery one by the power of free will is made either a true oliue or a wild oliue which he prooueth by the example of the creatures which are all of one nature but by certaine accidentall qualities bring forth diuerse kinds as of trees hearbs and such like so there is one and the same nature of reasonable creatures the difference is out of the diuers motions of their free will and to this ende he presseth that saying of our blessed Sauiour wake the tree good and his fruit good as though it were in mans power to make himselfe a good tree 2. he addeth that whereas God so in his prouidence disposeth that there are outward exhortations ministred sometime to good sometime to euill it is in mans power obedire si velit to obey if he will him that provoketh him vnto goodnes and if he will to despise him 3. and to mend the matter withall he saith further that by this libertie of will he that is ramus oliuae a branch of the right oliue may fall away to misbeleefe and an other that is but a wild oliue may conuert vnto the faith and become a branch of the true oliue Thus Origen playeth the Philosopher rather then the diuine Contra. 1. The Apostle is contrarie to Origen for he saith v. 20. Thou standest by faith therefore not by free will for faith is not of our selues it is the gift of God Eph. 2.8 neither is the example of the creatures like for the diuersitie of their kinds proceedeth of the seuerall properties of their different natures whereas the difference betweene men is not from their nature but by the grace of God which separateth them 1. Cor. 4.7 Who separateth thee and what hast thou that thou hast not receiued and whereas Christ saith facite make ye this word as Pet. Martyr well sheweth non efficientiam sed hypothesin significat doth signifie not an efficiencie but a supposition as if he should haue said you must thus thinke and imagine with your selues that the tree must first be good before it can bring forth good fruit and this to be the meaning appeareth by the words following how can ye speake good things when ye are euill 2. Neither is it mans power to giue care vnto wholesome doctrine and obey it if he will for then why is it said of Lydia Act. 16.14 whose heart God opened that she attended to the things that Paul spake 3. Neither is it possible for them that were true branches of the right oliue to be broken off they were neuer truly graffed in that are broken off though they so seemed as they which are said to be blotted out of the booke of life were neuer indeede there written at all Rev. 17.8 and thus witnesseth S. Iohn 1. epist. 2.19 They went out from vs but they were not of vs for if they had beene of vs they would haue continued with vs. 10. Controv. That there was the same spirit of faith and the same spirituall substance of the Sacraments vnder the old Testament and in the new v. 17. And made partaker of the roote P. Martyr doth well obserue out of these words so also Pareus with others that there was eadem substantia res spiritus c. the same substance matter spirit in both Testaments though their Sacraments in respect of the outward signes and ceremonies were diuers for there was but one roote of faith both of the Iewes and Gentiles we are not planted into an other oliue but are made partakers of the fatnes of the same oliue tree this is contrarie to the doctrine of the Romanists which denie that the Sacraments of the old Testament had the same spirituall substance with the Sacraments of the new See further Synops. Centur. 2. err 97. 11. Controv. That the Scriptures are the iudge of euery one in particular Whereas Gretserus in the colloquie at Ratisbone sess 9. p. 111. denied impudently that the Scripture iudged him because it no where said Thou Gretser errest and cried out with â— blasphemous mouth let the Scripture iudge me indicet me spiritus si potest let the holy spirit iudge me if he can Pareus out of this place taxeth his ignorance and impudencie for the Apostle speaketh in particular v. 20. Thou standest by faith 21. take heede he spare not thee and in like manner the commandements were propounded in particular as speaking
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.
reason and good counsell doth those things continually which are agreeable to the will of God he performeth this reasonable service c. Beza misliketh here this exposition of Baesil but it may verie well be receiued and is agreeable to the Apostles minde as in the next verse he saith that you may prooue what is the goodwill of God c. he then doth follow this reasonable service of God that prooueth what Gods will is and conformeth himselfe thereunto Quest. 6. How we must not fashion our selues to this world v. 2. 1. Concerning the occasion of these words some thinke that as the Apostle spake before of the sacrifice of the bodie so now he sheweth how the minde should be reformed Lyran. Gorrhan Tolet but the Apostle speaking of the reasonable seruice of God v. 1. comprehendeth both the seruice of the soule and bodie therefore here rather the Apostle now more plainely expresseth that which before he figuratiuely set downe Nyper Martyr maketh this the connexion as the Apostle shewed before quid curandum what was to be cared for in this spirituall sacrifice so here quid cauendum what is to be taken heed of Beza maketh it a second precept that in the seruice of God we should not conforme our selues to the opinion or fashions of the world Gryneus maketh it a consectation a consequent necessarily inferred vpon the former exhortation But I insist vpon the former sense pianiùs explicat rationalem cultum the Apostle more plainely expresseth this reasonable seruice Par. 2. Fashion not your selues or be not fashioned 1. Chrysostome here obserueth a diffeerence betweene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the figure of the world to the which we must not fashion our selues which is tanquam scenica persona as a person counterfeited vpon the stage which is in shewe not in truth but afterward he biddeth vs be transformed in the minde the formes hath substance whereas a figure is no permanent or existent thing but this distinction seemeth to be too curious neither is it perpetually obserued for Phil. 2.7 S. Paul atributeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 figure vnto Christ he was found in figure or shape as a man 2. But this is better obserued that the Apostle forbiddeth vs not either not to be in the world nor to vse the world for neither of these are possible so long as we are in the world but we must not fashion our selues to be like vnto the word 3. for it is the propertie of the soule to beare the image of that thing to the which it turneth it selfe as we see in a glasse he then fashioneth himselfe to this world that doth seeke onely or chiefely for the things of the world who followeth the corruptions thereof with greedines and what the fashion of this world is S. Peter sheweth It is sufficient for vs that we haue spent the time past of the life after the lust of the Gentiles walking in wantones lusts drunkennes gluttonie 3. To this world 1. Origen hereupon obserueth this difference aliam esse formam seculi praesentis aliam futuri that there is one forme or fashion of this present world an other of the world to come they which loue things present fashion themselues to this world but they which set their minds on spiritual and invisible things do conforme themselues to the world to come 2. by the world we vnderstand not as Haymo noteth the outward state and condition of the world as it consisteth of dayes moneths yeares but men carnall conversatione seculo deditos which by their carnall conuersation ate giuen to the world Quest. 7. Of our transforming by the newenes of mind 1. Be ye transformed 1. there is a transformation of the bodie as Christ was transformed in the mount and our bodies shall be in the resurrection Philip. 3.20 but here the Apostle speaketh of the transformation of the minde 2. and it must be transformed not in the substance thereof but onely in the condition and qualitie Faius 3. man was formed by his creation deformed by sinne reformed by grace informed by the word conformed and made like to Christ by the spirit transformed in the newenesse of the minde Gorrhan 2. By the newnes 1. the oldnes of man is his sinne and corruption of nature deriued frō Adam that is called newnes which is wrought by grace as faith hope charitie hereof the one is called the old man which is after Adam the other the newe man which is created a newe by grace this renouation is sometime called the newenesse of life Rom. 6.4 from the effects which shewe themselues in the life sometime the newnesse of the spirit Rom. 7.6 from the author and efficient cause which is the spirit sometime the newenes of the mind of the subiect and place where this renouation beginneth 2. Chrysostome vseth this fit resemblance quod in adibus facimus subinde reformantes inveteratum ita in te ipso facias that which we vse to doe in our houses repayring that which is decayed the same doe in thy selfe thou art decayed and waxed old by sinne be renewed by repentance c. 3. Of the mind 1. not of the sense as the vulgar Latine whom Gorrhan followeth vnderstanding here the reforming of the affections and hereupon that common error was grounded that sinne had the seat place in the affections whereas the very mind hath need to be reuiued as S. Paul saith be renewed in the spirit of your mind 2. Faius here noteth that a naturall man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath but a soule and a bodie but a spirituall man hath a spirit soule and bodie as S. Paul saith I pray God that your whole spirit soule and bodie may be kept blameles c. 1. Thess. 5.23 not that any newe part is added to the soule in the regenerate but a newe spirituall qualitie is wrought in it 3. Haymo following Origen by the minde thinketh the vnderstanding to be signified which must be exercised in the Scriptures but this is too particular by the minde rather is vnderstood all the faculties of the soule the intellectual part and the will where this renouation must take beginning Quest. 8. Of these words That ye may prooue what the good will of God is acceptable and perfect c. v. 2. 1. That yee 1. which some thinke is put 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to shewe the ende of this their renovation Mart. Pareus 2. Theodoret will haue it the effect and that the Apostle sheweth cui rei conducat c. to what purpose this renovation of the minde is profitable 3. Chrysostome maketh it to be the cause sic poteritis renouari c. by this meanes ye may be renewed if ye learne what Gods will is so also Tolet annot 6. 4. Gryneus maketh it an adiunct and propertie of renouation for they which are not renewed cannot vnderstand what the good will of God is and Melanchton maketh it a part of our renovation
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
he take greater punishment of the offender then the cause requireth but the magistrate reuengeth not himselfe but others Now here men are forbidden onely to auenge themselues and yet in this case euen the magistrate auengeth himselfe when vnder colour of his office he in respect of some particular wrong proceedeth more rigorously against an offender 3. But the Apostle taketh not away here all libertie to vse defence by the authoritie of the Magistrate for both S. Paul himselfe appealed vnto Cesar and the Magistrate is appointed of God for our wealth yet we must not goe vnto the Magistrate animo vlciscendi with a mind to seeke reuenge For these causes a Christian may safely craue the aid of the Magistrate 1. to discharge his dutie in defending those frō wrong which are vnder his care and charge 2. to seek the amendment of the offender and wrong-doer by moderate correction 3. to take away such euil examples and scandals among Christians Martyr but one must not vse the benefit of the law to seeke his owne reuenge as S. Paul when 40. Iewes conspired against him sought the Magistrates helpe for his defence and deliuerance not for their punishment Gualt so that nihilo plus excusationis habet c. he hath no better excuse that seeketh to the Magistrate with a malevolent minde then if he sought to be reuenged by himselfe Calv. 4. The Apostle doth not onely stay our hands tongue here from reuenge sed ne cor huiusmodi cupiditate teneatur but he forbiddeth least the heart should be tempted with any such desire Calv. 5. But whereas our Sauiour proceedeth yet further and saith Matth. 5.39 Resist not euill but whosoeuer shal smite thee on the right cheeke turne to him the other also this must not be vnderstood according to the strict letter as Augustine well interpreteth that this precept is not alwaies to be obserued quantum ad executionem in respect of the execution in fact sed quantum ad praeparationem animi but in the preparation of the minde that we should alwaies be armed with patience to suffer wrong for neither did our Sauiour when he was smitten on the cheeke turne the other but mildly reprooued him that did the violence to this purpose Aug. epist. ad Marc. This then is to be done when it may either profit our brother or maketh more for the glorie of God and not otherwise Martyr Beloued ◠The Apostle vseth this friendly compellation 1. because these things which now he speaketh of were duriora somewhat harsh and vnpleasing therefore he thus insinuateth himselfe the better to perswade Martyr blanda appellatione manum inijcit vt nos retineat c. he doth stay vs as with his hand by this friendly word for otherwise men are impatient in their affections Calv. 2. And least they might thinke that he in thus reading did not counsell them for their profit he calleth them beloued Mart. 3. And though the world hate such as were patient in suffering wrong yet they were beloued of God and so also beloued of the Apostle Tolet. 4. And in thus saluting them as beloued brethren he putteth them in mind of brotherly loue which is much hindred by seeking of reuenge Giue place vnto wrath 1. some vnderstand this of our owne wrath to giue way vnto it not to suffer it to breake forth sed apud nos ipsos concoquamus but to digest and allay it in our selues Gualt so also Vatablus compescite eam stay your anger but this phrase is vsed in a contrarie sense Eph. 4.27 neither giue place vnto the deuill to giue place vnto wrath were to giue way vnto it not to resist it 2. others referre it to the anger and wrath of the aduersarie that doth wrong and so they giue two expositions giue place that is permittite vobis nocere suffer them willingly to doe you wrong and hurt or fugite a loco ad locum flee from place to place and so giue way vnto them Haymo and Basil also hath both these expositions regul brev resp 244. Origen vnderstanding it also of the wrath of him that doth the wrong giueth an other sense that if he that hath receiued the wrong auenge not himselfe quasi effuso à rgesto furore c. he hauing digested and allaied his furie waxeth milder 3. But the better interpretation is by wrath to vnderstand the diuine reuenge or punishment permitte Deo vt adversarium tuum in ius vocet suffer God to deale with thine aduersarie Chrysost. so also Origen vnderstandeth vindictam divinam the diuine reuenge and that wrath quam sibi the saurizat malis actibus which he doth treasure vnto himselfe by his owne leud acts this sense followeth Calv. Mart. Osiand Par. Perer. it is confirmed by the sentence following cited out of Moses vengeance is mine I will repay the meaning is then that we should commend our cause vnto God and he will in due time take reuenge 4. Vengeance is mine c. 1. Concerning the reading of the words 1. the vulgar Latin putteth the word in the accusative vindictam reuenge which reading Pererius defendeth to be auncient and to haue beene vsed both by Tertull. l. 2. cont Marc. and Hil. in Psal. 118. yet he confesseth quod lectio sit rectior c. that it is the better reading in the nominatiue And so it is in the Greeke and so readeth Hier. epist. ad Ruffia mihi vindicta to me reuenge that is belongeth 2. now whereas in the originall Deut. 32.35 whence this testimonie is cited there is the coniunction and which is here omitted by the Apostle and there a verbal word is put recompence is mine which here the Apostle expresseth by the verb I will repay herein he partly followeth the Septuagint who doe interpret it so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I wil repay and partly he expresseth the sense not tying himselfe to the words neither doth the omitting of the coniunction any thing alter the sense 2. The Apostle here secretly meeteth with an obiection for whereas he forbiddeth all reuenge it might be said what then shall iniuries neuer be requited yes saith the Apostle God in his good time shall take reuenge Tol. neither must the Apostle be so vnderstood as though we should votis expetere by our vowes and desire entreat God to be reuenged of our enemies but the Apostle here sheweth that we must not reuenge our selues for this were to take Gods office vpon vs we must therfore pray first that God would conuert our enemies but if they continue in their wickednes then we leaue them to Gods iustice Calv. and when the righteous seeth his desire vpon his enemies non tam delectatur poena quam dei iustitia he is not so much delighted in his punishment as in the iustice of God gloss ordinar 3. Now then we must leaue all reuenge vnto God 1. because he is the iudge of all the earth and it belongeth vnto him to punish Gualt 2. he taketh
the subiect is assaulted if it be a ciuill matter resistance may more safely be vsed but if it be the cause of religion therein they should rather shew their patience in suffering as we read in the persecutions of the primitiue Church of 20. thousand Martyrs that were burnt together in a Temple without any resistance at all who for their number might haue sustained the brunt of the aduersaries but they willingly yeelded themselues to the fire 5. Likewise this discreete consideration must be vsed whether there be not hope to escape the daunger without resistance or whether by resisting a way may be opened of deliuerance or whether by their escaping many of their brethren shall not be brought into greater daunger for where any of these things doe happen it is not safe to resist 6. They must in such extremities so defend themselues as that they vse no assault vpon the person of their Prince to put his life in daunger for therein they manifestly transgresse the publike lawes it is one thing to vse a necessarie defense an other to make an assault Dauid though he stood vpon his owne guard and had a great band of men attending vpon him yet when Saul twice fell into his hands he spared to lay any violent hands vpon him with these restraintes and limitations some defense may be graunted euen vnto priuate subiects against Tyrants otherwise it is daungerous both in respect of their conscience in resisting the power and for the euil example whereby other seditious persons may be encourraged Thus much of this question how farre resistance may be made against the ciuill power how farre also and in what manner the Tyrannie of the Pope the Antichrist may be resisted see among the Controversies contr 3. Quest. 18. How we should not owe any thing to any man but to loue one an other 1. Touching the occasion of these words Augustine thinketh that the duties before membratim fusa nunc ipso circuitu clauduntur deliuered by partes now are shut vp together de doctrin Christian. 4. c. 20. Lyranus also thinketh that here inferiors are taught that they owe charitie to their superiors so also Mr. Calvin thinketh this precept of the Apostle to be a confirmation of his former doctrine of obedience to Magistrates because violat charitatem c. he doth violate charitie who denieth obedience 2. Beza thinketh that the Apostle remooueth the impediment of obedience because the want of charitie is cause of quarrels and suits whereupon the Magistrate is constrained by his authoritie to force men to render vnto euerie one their owne and so by this meanes magistratus nomen invidio sum sit it commeth to passe that the name of the Magistrate is odious and envied 3. Erasmus collecteth out of Ambrose but not rightly as Beza here noteth that hitherto the Apostle shewed what dutie was to be yeelded to the heathen Magistrates but now he teacheth the dutie which must be rendered to Christian Magistrates 4. But the truth is the Apostle from speciall duties belonging to superiors ascendeth higher to treat of the generall dutie of loue which is common to all 2. Owe nothing there are two kinds of debts there is a Ciuill debt and a Naturall debt the ciuill is either common to all as the paying of tribute yeelding of obedience must be performed by euery one to the superiors or concerneth onely some particular persons which are endebted by promise and contract or some other bond vnto others there is also a naturall debt either peculiar and proper to some as of the children to the parents of scholers to their Masters wiues to their husbands or common to all as is mutuall loue here by the Apostle commended 3. There are three kind of wayes whereby one may be a debter to another either when he payeth nothing of his debt as if he owe an hundred shillings and pay none at all or if he pay but part and not all as but tenne and if he pay the whole debt due at one time but not at another as if he should pay euery day a shilling till the whole debt be paid and he hold the payment one day or two but fayle in the rest the debt of charitie is not of either of the first kinds but of the third a man sheweth charitie once or twice he is bound to shew it still Tolet. 4. The debt of charitie different from other debts in these three points 1. as Chrysostome saith it is such a debt vt semper reddatur semper debeatur that it both is alwaies paied and yet is alwaies owing not like vnto other debtes which beeing paied cease to be due and so both redditur cum impenditur it is restored when it is paied debetur cum reddita fuerit and it is owing when it is rendered because it must be shewed at all times 2. nec cum redditur omittitur charitie is not lost from him that sheweth it as money which is paid goeth from him that payeth it 3. may charitie reddendo multiplicatur is multiplyed by the paying of it cum redditur ab homine crescit in homine when it is rendered by a man it encreaseth in man gloss ordinar ex Augustine so some things when they are communicated to many minuuntur non augentur are diminished not encreased as mony and all terren things some things are neither encreased nor diminished when they are communicated as the light and the sound of a voiceâ— some things non minuuntur sed augentur are not diminished but encreased as charitie and all spirituall things Gorrhan 5. Origens conceit is here verie straunge who by debt vnderstandeth sinne vult ergo omne debitum peccati solvi he would therefore euery debt of sinne to be paid and not to remaine with vs. But the Apostle speaketh not of any such spirituall debt whereby we stand indebted to God neither is it in our power to pay that debt but of outward debts and duties vnto men 19. Quest. How he that loueth his brother fulfilleth the law 1. He which loueth his brother doth not in euery particular and in act keepe euery part in the law for one may loue his brother though in that instant he doe not performe all the acts of charitie as in feeding him if he be hungrie and such like but yet he fulfilleth all these duties virtute potestate in possibilitie and hauing an aptnes and power thereunto both because charitie is the cause and beginning of all the duties which as it mooueth him to one dutie so it will stirre him vp to the rest as also it is the ende and scope of the law which is to maintaine charitie and it is modus the manner how the law should be obserued for whatsoeuer externall dutie one doth if it be not in loue it is nothing as S. Paul sheweth 2. Cor. 13.2 3. 2. But here a question is mooued by Chrysostome how the Apostle reduceth all the law vnto this one precept of louing
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
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