the last place according to the originall with reference as is said before 5 By whome we haue receiued grace and Apostleship for obedience to the faith that obedience might be giuen to the faith B. G. among all the Gentiles for his name that they may obey the faith of his name T. in his name among all heathen B.G. 6 Among whome ye are also the called of Iesus Christ the called in Iesus Christ. T. 7 To all that be at Rome B. you that be B. G. Be. V. they that be L. T. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beeing called to be Saints Grace be to you and peace grace with you T. from God our Father and from the Lord Iesus Christ. 8 First verily I giue thanks to my God I thanke my God B.G. but in the originall it is put in the dative to God thorough Iesus Christ for you all because your faith is published in the whole world not heard T. or renowned R. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 annuÌ„ciator published 9 For God is my witnesse whome I serue in my spirit with my spirit B. in the Gospel of his Sonne that without ceasing I make mention of you V.B.G.Be. make memorie of you R.L. which phrase is neither good in Latin or English 10 Alwaies in my prayer beseeching if by any meanes sometime at the length T.B.L. V. at one time or other B.G. I might haue a prosperous iourney by the will of God to come vnto you 11 For I long to see you that I might impart vnto you Be. L. bestow among you B.G. some spirituall gift that ye may be stablished Be. B. or confirmed T.V. to confirme you L. R. but the word is in the passiue 12 That is to be comforted together among you Be. in you L. R. with you B.G. to be exhorted together B. Par. but the Apostle was comforted rather then exhorted by their faith by our mutuall faith yours and mine 13 Now I would not haue you ignorant brethren Be. Par. l. Or. I would haue you know T.B. how that I haue oftentimes purposed to come vnto you but haue beene letted hetherto that I might haue some fruit also among you Be. Par. in you L. T.R. the Greeke preposition signifieth in properly but here it is taken for among as also among other Gentiles 14 Both to the Grecians and to the Barbarians both to the wise and vnwise am I a debter to euery man am I a debter to preach T. this is not in the originall 15 So that as much as in me is I am readie to preach the Gospel to you also that aâ—â— in Rome verbat that which is in me is readie to preach 16 For I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ for it is the power of God vnto saluation to euery one that beleeueth to the Iew first and also to the Grecian 17 For by it the righteousnes of God is reuealed from faith to faith as it is written But the iust shall liue by faith 18 For the wrath of God is reuealed from heauen against vpon L. all vngodlines and vnrighteousnes of men which withheld the truth in vnrighteousnes 19 Forasmuch as that which may be knowne of God Be. G.V.B. which is knowne of God L.R. the knowledge of God T. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here signifieth that rather which may be known is manifest in them for God hath shewed it vnto them 20 For the inuisible things of him from the creation of the world or since the foundation T.L. Par. not thorough the creation of the world V.G.B. see qu. 51.2 beeing vnderstood by his works are seene both his eternall power and Godhead which words the Genevens transpose to the beginning of the verse that they should be without excuse T. not so that they are inexcusable L. R. B. or to the intent that they should be without excuse B.G. Par. see qu. 54. 21 Because that when they knew God they glorified him not as God neither were thankfull but became vaine in their imaginations and their foolish heart was darkned 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Be. L. blinded B. full of darknes G. 22 When they professed themselues to be wise B.G. saying themselues to be wise L.R. counting B. thinking T. but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is better translated professing they became fooles 23 And they turned for they turned Be. G. but the word in the original is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the glorie of the corruptible God into the similitude of the image by the similitude c. V. into the formed image Be. made after the similitude c. B. but in the original it is in the similitude of a corriptible man and of birds and of foure footed beasts and of creeping things 24 Wherefore God gaue them vp to their hearts lust vnto vncleannes not to vncleane lusts of their hearts T. or to vncleannes thorough the lusts of their hearts V.B. to dishonour or disgrace ignominia afficiant T.V.L. defile Be. B.G. but the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly signifieth to disgrace their owne bodies betweene themselues 25 Which turned the truth of God into a lie not his truth for a lie V.B. and worshipped and serued the creature beside the Creator or forsaking the Creator not aboue the Creator V. or more then the Creator B. or rather then the Creator the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beside who is blessed for euer Amen For this cause God gaue them vp to vile affections for euen the women did change the naturall vse into that which is beside nature contrarie to nature L.B.G. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 prater and vsed that which is not of nature T. but here he interpreteth rather then translateth 27 Likewise the males the men B.G. but the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 males left the naturall vse of the women and burned in their lust one toward an other and the males with males men with men B.G. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 males wrought filthines and receiued in themselues such recompence of their error as was meete as they should L. as was according B. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which it beheoued or was meete 28 For as they regarded not to know God euen so God deliuered them to a reprobate minde G.V. rather then a leud minde B. reprobate sense L. vaine minde T. minde voide of iudgement B.P. the words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reprobate minde to doe those things which are not conuenient 29 Beeing full of all vnrighteousnes fornication wickednes couetousnes maliciousnes rather then iniquitie malice fornication wickednes L. B. for the order is inuerted for the most Greeke copies and the Syriak put fornication in the second place see qu. 73. following full of enure murder debate deceit euill conditioned V.B. taking things in the worse part G. full of euill thoughts T. malignitie L.Be. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 churlishnes morositie 30 Whisperers backbiters haters of God not hatefull to God L. for the
iudged in this that he beleeued not though for other things which he doth he shall not be iudged as it is said he that beleeueth shall not be iudged or condemned that is he shall not be iudged secundum hoc quod credit in that that he beleeueth yet in other things he shall be iudged 2. Such an one not beleeuing in Christ yet doing well though he haue not eternall life yet gloria operum poterit non perire by the glorie of his workes he may be kept from perishing to this purpose Origen lib. 2. in c. 2. ad Roman 2. Contra. 1. The first position of Origen that any thing done without faith can be acceptable to God is contrarie to the Scripture Heb. 11.6 Without faith it is impossible to please God neither doth that argument followe from the contrarie for one euill worke is sufficient to condemne a man but one good worke is not sufficient to obtaine reward for he that doth one good worke may haue many euill workes beside for the which he deserueth to be punished that other glosse of his of the iudging of beleeuers and the not iudging of vnbeleeuers is coÌ„futed by the words of our Sauiour Ioh. 5.24 he that beleeueth hath euerlasting life and shall not come into condemnation he is not freed then from iudgement onely in part because he beleeueth but simplie he shall neuer enter into condemnation for he which hath a liuely faith which is effectuall working by loue hath not onely a naked faith but is full of good workes and where he is wanting his imperfect obedience is supplied by the perfect obedience of Christ apprehended by faith 2. Neither doth the Scripture allowe any third place beside heauen and hell after this life that any not hauing eternall life should be preserued from perishing for they which are not counted among the sheepe at the right hand of Christ for whom the kingdome is prepared they belong vnto the goates at the left hand and shall goe into euerlasting fire prepared for the deuill and his Angels 3. This straight and inconuenience Origen is driuen vnto because he taketh these Iewes and Grecians to be vnbeleeuers whereas the Apostle vnderstandeth such among the Gentiles as beleeued in God and liued thereafter such were they which liued with Melchisedek Iob the Niniuites Cornelius as Chrysostome vpon this place sheweth whom Faius followeth 22. Quest. Of the diuerse acceptions of the word person v. 11. This word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is either giuen vnto God or to creatures and the same either without life or to such as haue life as to man 1. It is attributed to God three wayes 1. the face of God signifieth his iudgement against sinners 1. Pet. 3.12 the face of God is against those which doe euill 2. it is taken for the spirituall presence of Christ 2. Cor. 2.10 I forgaue it for your sakes in the sight or face 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Christ. 3. it is taken for the diuine hypostasis in the Trinitie as Christ is said to be the engraued forme of the person of his father Heb. 1.3 2. Things without life are said to haue a certaine face as Luke 12.56 the face of heauen 3. Properly this word face is giuen vnto man and it 1. either signifieth his countenance as Iesus is said to haue fallen vpon his face Matth. 26.39 2. or the bodilie presence as the Apostle saith he was kept from the Thessalonians concerning his face but not in heart 1. Thessal 2.17.3 or it is taken for some respect of the gifts of bodie minde or some externall condition as of honour riches or such like in this sense it is said of Christ Mark 12.14 thou carest not for the person of any and S. Iude saith of certaine false teachers that they haue mens persons in admiration for aduantage sake Iud. v. 16 and in this sense it is taken here Gryneus 4. The person then of man betokeneth some qualitie or condition in him for the which he is respected either naturall as the gifts of the minde sharpnes of wit memorie vnderstanding or of the bodie as strength come lines beutie or such as are attained vnto by labour and industrie as learning knowledge of arts wisdome or externall in worldly respects as if he be rich honourable of authoritie or such like 5. Further some respect of persons is necessarily ioyned with the cause as a fault in an aged man or minister or one that hath knowledge is greater then a slippe of a young man or one that is ignorant some respect of persons is diuided from the cause as whether he be rich or poore honourable or base and in this sense persons are not to be respected Martyr 23. Qu. How God is said not to accept the persons of men The Apostle hauing made mention of the equall condition of the Iewes and Gentiles both in punishment and reward addeth this as a reason because God is no accepter of persons in respect of their nation and kinred So S. Peter saith God is no accepter of persons 〈◊〉 in euery nation he that feareth God c. is accepted with him Act. 10.34 35 here the respecting of persons is vnderstood of the nation or countrey likewise S. Paul saith Gal. 3.28 that in Christ There is neither Iew nor Grecian bond nor free male nor female that is in Christ there is no respect of persons Deut. 16.19 Thou shalt not accept any person neither take any reward to preferre any for gifts or rewards beside the merit of his cause is to haue respect of persons God then accepteth no mans person he preferreth not any for his riches countrey honour strength or any other such qualitie but iudgeth euery man as his cause is and aâ— his works are But thus it will be obiected on the contrarie 1. Obiect Moses entreateth the Lord to spare his people for Abraham Isaak and â—â—kobs sake Exod. 32. herein then the Lord had respect of persons Ans. Some giue this answer that in temporall things such as was the forbearing to punish the people God may haue respect to persons but not in eternall Mart. But it may be better answered that God had not respect to the persons of these Patriarks but to his gracious promise which he had made vnto them as there Moses saith Remember Abraham c. to whome thou swarest by thy selfe c. 2. Obiect S. Paul would haue vs doe good to all but specially to the houshold 〈◊〉 faith Gal. 6.10 here the person is respected Ans. The person is not respected here but the cause for the faithfull are preferred in respect of their faith which is the cause why they haue the preheminence 3. Obiect But God doth elect some vnto saluation some are reiected whereas all by nature are the children of wrath and in the same common condition to giue then vnequall things as life or death to those which are in the same equall condition seemeth to be done with respect of persons Ans. 1.
the which naturall reason iuduceth was some way sufficient to the Gentiles vnto saluation c. But nothing can be acceptable to God without faith not that generall faith and knowledge of one God but the knowledge of God in Christ for he is the way and doore and without him is no entrace into life 6. Wherefore the Apostle here describeth the Gentiles in generall euen before the times of the Gospel and such as had no other direction then by the lawe of nature which they had as the Apostle sheweth by these two arguments both by the externall workes of the lawe and by the inward testimonie of their conscience But the Apostle faith not they fulfilled the lawe they onely did certaine things prescribed in the lawe Martyr And he speaketh rather de notitia naturali quam de implenda legis facultate of the naturall knowledge which they had not of any power or facultie to fulfill the lawe Calvin Beza And he meaneth not all the Gentiles in generall but the wiser sort among them as Solon Socrates Aristides the Sciptoes Catoes with other who outwardly did some externall workes which the lawe commanded though they wanted the inward obedience Pareus Quest. 27. How any thing can be said to be written in the heart by nature seeing the minde is commonly held to be as a bare and naked table v. 15. Which shewe the effect of the lawe written in their heart It is the opinion of the best Philosophers as of Plato in Philebo that the soule of man by nature is like vnto a booke wherein nothing is written or like vnto a bare naked table Aristot. lib. 3. de anima c. 4. how then doth the Apostle here say that the lawe is written in their heart Answ. 1. Plato was of opinion that all things were at the first written in the soule but when it commeth into the bodie is blotted out againe and forgotten and vpon this ground that opinion is mentioned by the Platonists that scire est reminisci to know is nothing els but to remember But this assertion presupposeth that the soule of man had a beeing without the bodie and that there is a certaine promptuarie or seminare of soules from whence the soules are deriued into the bodies But this opinion is contrarie to the Scripture which affirmeth that God formeth the spirit of man within him Zach. 12.1 the soule of man is created within him in his bodie infundendo creatur creando infunditur it is created by infusion into the bodie and iufused by creation 2. therefore a better answer is that whereas Aristole saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that nothing is written in the vnderstanding it must be vnderstood actually yet potentia in possibilitie euerie thing is written there because the vnderstanding is apt and hath a capacitie to receiue and apprehend euerie thing 3. neither is that axiome of Philosophie generally to be vnderstood but to be restrained to such principles as are not engendred in the mind without instruction experience and obseruation as is the knowledge of arts otherwise there are some principles which are by nature imprinted in the soule as first the naturall conclusions which the soule apprehendeth of it selfe without any other demonstration as that God is to be worshipped parents are to be honoured that good and honest things are to be desired secondly there are certaine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 generall notions which are at the first apprehended onely by the sense as that the fire burneth that the whole is greater then the part and such like ex Perer. Quest. 28. Of the Lawe of nature what it is It shall not be amisse by occasion of these words of the Apostle who speaketh here of the lawe of nature written in the heart a little to digresse and briefly touch certaine questions of this matter and first we will see what this lawe of nature is and of what precepts it consisteth 1. It is euident by the Apostle here that there is a lawe of nature which he prooueth by â—o effects the one externall in the performance of some things agreeable to the lawe the other internall in the testimonie of the conscience But in this inward testimonie there are two things to be considered there is first that which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the comprehension of certaine practicall principles and a naturall discerning betweene good and euill iust and vniust then there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the conscience which either accuseth one for doing euill or excuseth him in choosing of that which is good the synteresis doth frame the proposition the syneidesis or cosncience the assumption as thus the naturall lawe reacheth that parents must be honoured and that they which disobey parents are worthie of punishment thus the proposition is framed out of the principles of nature then the conscience of the guiltie person supplyeth the assumption But we Cham Esau Absolom haue disobeyed our parents therefore we deserue punishment and the like practicall syllogismes may be made in other commandements Gryneus 1. Melancthon thus defineth the lawe of nature it is a knowledge of certaine principles belonging to the practise of life and of the conclusions thence necessarily inferred agreeable with the eternall rule of truth which God hath planted in the mind of man to be a testimonie vnto man that there is a God which ruleth and iudgeth the actions of men c. In this description there are the former causes expressed of the law of nature 1. the materiall cause or the obiect thereof wherein it is occupied and whereof it consisteth namely of certaine practicall principles with the conclusions gathered thereupon for the speciall scope of this naturall direction is for the the practise of life and not for speculation and in this naturall knowledge are not onely contained the first principles as parents are to be honoured but the conclusions thence diducted as out of this principle in generall euery one is taught by the light of nature in particular to conclude that therefore he must honour his parents 2. the formall cause is the agreement with the rule of truth and the equitie of Gods written lawe for the lawe of nature is a summarie abridgement of the morall lawe 3. then the efficient cause and author is God who hath written and imprinted this law in the heart of man as Ambrose thus defineth this naturall law quam Deus omnium creator singulorum hominum pectoribus iufudit which God the Creator of all hath infused into euerie mans breast epist. 71.4 then the end is that it should be a testimonie of the diuine prouidence and iudgement whereby he ruleth all things and in the ende will iudge the actions of men This description of the lawe of nature agreeth with the Apostles definition here it is the effect of the lawe written in our hearts the effect or worke sheweth the matter of the lawe the forme written the efficient for it is Gods writing the ende
of death originall sinne then hath a kind of existence for how else could it be called a bodie of sinne or death see more hereof elsewhere Synops. Cen. 4. err 14. 2. Concerning the reasons obiected 1. God is the author of euerie substance and of euery naturall qualitie but not of vnnaturall dispositions or qualities as neither of diseases in the bodie nor of vices in the minde this euill qualitie was procured by mans voluntarie transgression 2. and though habites which are personall and obtained by vse and industrie are not transmitted to posteritie yet this euill habite was not personall in Adam as he is considered vt singularis persona as a singular person but by him it entred into the nature of man as he was totius humanae naturae principiū the beginning of the whole nature of man 3. Burgensis taketh another exception vnto Lyranus addition and he thinketh that Adams posteritie is not bound to haue the originall iustice which was giuen to Adam for they haue no such bond either by the law of nature for that originall iustice was supernaturally added or by any diuine precept for God gaue vnto Adam no other precept but that one not to eate of the forbidden fruite and therefore they were not bound at all to haue or reteine Adams originall iustice Thus Burgens Contra. 1. Herein I rather consent vnto Thoring the Replic vpon Burgens who thus argueth that this debt or bond to haue originall iustice was grounded vpon the law of nature which is the rule of right reason for by nature euery one is tied to seeke the perfection and conseruation of it kind and this originall iustice tended vnto the perfection of man which though it were supernaturally added vnto man yet it was not giuen him alone sed pro tota natura for the whole nature of man and so he concludeth well that man is culpable in not hauing this originall iustice though not culpâ actuali quae est suppositi by any actuall fault which belongeth to the person or subiect yet culpâ originali quae est natura by an originall fault which is in nature To this purpose the Replic And this may be added further that if Adams posteritie were not debters in respect of this originall iustice then were they not bound to keepe the law which requireth perfect righteousnesse and so it would follow that they are not transgressors against the law if they were not bound to keepe it the first exception then of Burgensis may be recieued but not the second 2. Pighius also who denieth originall sinne to be a privation or want of originall iustice holdeth it to be no sinne to want that iustice which is not enioyned by any law vnto mankind for no law can be produced which bindeth infantes to haue that originall iustice and therein he concurreth with Burgensis Contra. But this obiection is easily refuted for first man was created according to Gods image in righteousnesse and holines which image Adams posteritie is bound to retaine but he by his sinne defaced that image and in stead thereof begate children after his owne image Gen. 5.3 in the state of corruption And whereas Pighius replieth out of Augustine that the image of God in man consisteth in the three faculties of the soule the vnderstanding memorie and will Augustine must not be so vnderstood as though herein consisted onely the image of God but as therein is shadowed forth the misterie of the Trinitie for the Apostle expressely sheweth that this image of God is seene in righteousnes and holines Ephes. 4.24 An other lawe is the lawe of nature which is the rule which euery one is to followe Cicero could say that convenientur viuere c. to liue agreeably to this law is the chiefe ende of man to this lawe euen infants are also bound there is a third lawe which is the morall which saith thou shalt not lust which prohibiteth not onely actuall but originall concupiscence And whereas Pighius here obiecteth that a lawe is giuen in vaine of such things as cannot be avoided therein he sheweth his ignorance for it is not in mans power to keep the lawe for then it had not beene necessarie for Christ to haue died for vs who came to performe that which was impossible by the lawe Rom. 8.3 yet was not the lawe giuen so in vaine for there are two speciall vses thereof both to giue vs direction how to liue well and to bring vs to the knowledge of sinne xe Mart. 4. This then is originall sinne 1. it consisteth partly of a defect and want of originall iustice in that the image of God after the which man was created in righteousnesse and holines was blotted out by the fall of man partly in an euill habite disposition and qualitie and disorder of all the faculties and powers both of bodie and soule This was the start of man after his fall and the same is the condition of all his posteritie by nature Augustine also maketh originall sinne a positiue qualitie placing it in the concupiscence of the flesh not the actuall concupiscence but that naturall corruption which although it be more generall then to containe it selfe within the compasse of concupiscence onely yet he so describeth it by the most manifest effect because our naturall corruption doth most of all shew and manifest it selfe in the concupisence and lust of our members 2. The subiect then and matter of originall sinne are all the faculties and powers of soule and bodie the former is the pravitie and deformitie of them the efficient cause was the peruersnes of Adams will the instrument is the carnall propagation the end or effect is euerlasting damnation both of bodie and soule without the mercie of God Martyr 3. Originall sinne is taken either actiuely for the sinne of Adam which was the cause of sinne in his posteritie which is called originale origmans originall sinne giuing beginning or passiuely for the naturall corruption raised in Adams ofspring by his transgression which is tearmed originale originatum originall sinne taking beginning 4. Of this originall sinne taken both waies there are three misserable effects 1. participatio culpa the participating in the fault or offence for we were all in Adams loines when he transgressed and so we all sinned in him as here the Apostle saith 2. imputatio reatus the imputation of the guilt and punishment of sinne we are the children of wrath by nature subiect both to temporall and eternall death 3. there is naturae depratatio vel deformitas the depravation and deformitie of nature wherein there dwelleth no good thing Rom. 17.18 Controv. 16. Of the wicked heresie of Marcion and Valentinus with the blasphemous Manichees 1. Origen out of the words of the former verse where the Apostle speaketh of our attonement and reconciliation by Christ confureth the heresie of Marcion and Valentinus whose opinion was that there was some substance quae naturaliter Deo sit inimica which naturally is
discriâ—iâ—â— all perills which put the life in danger Mort. omnia extrema secunda adversa and â—ll exceeding great prosperitie or adversitie 2. Angels principalities powers 1. Origen vnderstandeth onely the euill Angels and adversarie powers so Osiander also 2. Chrysostome onely the good Angels and Hierome so also Lyranus and they vnderstand it by way of supposition that if the good Angels should seeke to withdraw vs from Christ which is impossible yet we should not giue 〈◊〉 vnto them so the Apostle hath the like supposition of the good Angels Galat. 1.8 Calv. 3. But we may better vnderstand the Angels good and bad Mart. Gryn Pareus who by principalities and powers vnderstandeth the kingdomes and commanders of the world but they are titles rather giuen to the Angels as Ephes. 1.21 Gryneus following Chrysostome 3. Things present nor things to come 1. Not in this world and the next as Origen 〈◊〉 hath a speculation of the passage of the soule out of the bodie which in that instant is many times seduced and deceiued by the euill spirits 2. But he meaneth the dangers of this life present or to come Mart. Par. 3. he maketh no mention of the things past for they are ouercome alreadie Lyran. and as for our sinnes past they are forgiuen vs in Christ Gryn 4. Neither height nor depth 1. Origen vnderstandeth it of the spirits in the ayre and in the deepe 2. Lyranus of the depth and profunditie of Sathan 3. Gorrhan of the height and depth of humane wisedome so also Mart. 4. Osiander of the diuerse kinds of death as by hanging aloft and beeing drowned in the deepe 5. Chrysostome and Theophylact better vnderstand things in heauen and earth the elements aboue and belowe Pareus ret sâ—premas infernas things aboue and beneath Bulling 6. Theodoret vnderstandeth heauen and hell 7. Oecumenius prosperitie and adversitie 5. Or any other creature 1. not beside those which are visible Origen for he had spoken of invisible things before 2. nor a newe creature beside those which God made as Ambrose as equus hipes an horse with two legges and such like gloss ordinar Hugo Gorrhan 3. But the Apostle absolvit inductionem doth make an ende of his induction because it had beene infinite to reckon vp all the creatures Martyr so Chrysostome if there be any other creature of what manner soeuer how great soeuer 4. Places of Doctrine Doct. 1. How the same worke may be both good and sinnefull as it proceedeth from God the deuill and man v. 3. Sending his Sonne c. God in sending his Sonne and giuing him vp vnto death onely intented his owne glorie and the salvation of man but Sathan stirred vp the Iewes of envie and malice to put that holy and Iust one to death so the same action as it proceeded from God was good as it came from Sathan man was euill So that God is no way the author of euill though he be author of that thing which is abused vnto euill Mart. This further is euident in the affliction of Iob which as God was the author worker of it tended to Gods glorie and the triall of Iobs faith but as Sathan had his finger in it he would thereby haue supplanted the faith of Iob. Doct. 2. Of the causes of saluation v. 3. Here all the causes of our saluation are expressed 1. The author and efficient cause is God who sent his Sonne to redeeme vs. 2. the materiall cause is Christ who came in the similitude of sinful flesh not that he had not true flesh as Marcion the heretike said but it was true flesh yet without sinne so in that behalfe like vnto sinfull flesh as hauing the true nature of our flesh but not the sinfull qualitie thereof 3. the forme is also set forth he condemned sin in the flesh that is suffred the punishment due vnto our sinne in his flesh 4. the impulsiue or motiue cause was the imbecilsitie weaknes of the law for if the law could haue saued vs Christ needed not haue died 5. the finall causes were these two 1. for sin that is he came to expiate purge and take away sinne 2. and that the lawe might be fulfilled and the righteousnesse of the lawe fulfilled by Christ imputed to vs by faith v. 4. Doct. 3. That the holy Ghost is God v. 9. The spirit of God dwelleth in you Hence Didymus inferred well that the holy spirit is God because he dwelleth in all the faithfull this infinitenes and immensitie of the spirit sheweth that he is God for who but God can dwell in so many temples at once and beside in that he is called the spirit of God that also prooueth him to be God for the spirit of God is of the same nature and substance with God Doct. 4. That the three glorious persons of the Blessed Trinitie are of one efficacie and power v. 11. The raising vp of the dead is a worke of Gods omnipotencie but God the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost doe all raise vp the dead as God is said to raise vp our dead bodies because his spirit dwelleth in vs God the father then raiseth and his spirit also raiseth and quickeneth the dead and Christ also raiseth the dead because the same spirit is here called the spirit of God and of Christ so Ioh. 6.54 He that eateth my flesh c. I will raise him vp at the last day Doct. 5. Of euerlasting glorie v. 18. Not worthie of the glorie which shall be reuealed in vs Thomas Aquin. obserueth 4. necessarie points out of these words concerning euerlasting life 1. it is called glorie to shew the excllencie of it for in this life noble wittes are desirous of nothing more then glorie it is set forth by the name of that thing which is most desired 2. it shall be which sheweth the eternitie of it for that which is now present is but short and momentarie 3. reuealed the glorie to come then is of it selfe invisible but God shall so illuminate our minds as that he himselfe will be seene of vs. 4. this glorie shall be shewed in vs which signifieth the stabilitie of this glorie it shall not depend of externall things as riches honour but within vs it shall be and possesse and replenish both our bodies and soules Doct. 6. Of the nature and properties of hope v. 24. Hope that is seene is no hope 1. the author and efficient cause of hope is God Rom. 15.13 The God of hope c. 2. the subiect is the faithfull heart 3. the obiect things which are not seene 4. the forme thereof is with patience to abide 5. the effect thereof is ioy in the spirit Rom. 1â— 1â— reioycing in hope 6. the ende is our saluation we are saued by hope 7. the contrarie to all is despaire and diffidence ex Gryneo Doct. 7. Of true prayer that consisteth not in the sound of the voice but in the sighes of the heart v. 26.
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
oppressors of the people of God and therefore the vision which the Prophet receiued c. 2. was to Minister comfort againe the present afflictions of Gods Church Ans. It is the manner which the Lord obserueth in the visions and prophesies by occasion of temporall deliuerances to raise vp the mindes of his people to looke for their euerlasting deliuerer as Psal. 72. vnder the type of Salomon the kingdome of the Messiah is properly described and Dan. 9. the Prophet prayeth for the deliuerance of his people out of the captiuitie of Babel and he receiueth that prophesie of the 70. weekes concerning the Messiah who should deliuer them from their sinnes And so in this place the Prophet praying for the deliuerance of the people from their oppressors receiueth a vision concerning the Messiah in whom whosoeuer beleeueth shall liue for euer Pererius 5. Theodoret thinketh that this saying of the Prophet concerned not those times then present but was a prophesie of the times of Christ that then the iust by faith should liue so also Ireneus lib. 4. c. 67. But the Apostle otherwise applyeth it Galat. 3.11 that neither vnder the lawe nor vnder the Gospel any were iustified by the lawe but by saith for his words there are generall And that no man is iustified by the lawe in the sight of God it is euident for the iust shall liue by faith 6. Ambrose and so likewise Chrysostome because the word is put in the future tense shall liue doe vnderstand this not of this present life but of eternall life to come But it is euident that S. Paul Galat. 3.11 vnderstandeth this life of iustification and so the Apostle calleth iustification by faith the life of the soule Galat. 2.20 I liue by faith of the Sonne of God and the future tense with the Hebrewes indifferently is oftentimes put for the present yet the Apostle so vnderstandeth the present life of the soule by faith and grace as that he excludeth not the other sense concerning eternall life as he applyeth this sentence of the Prophet to the second comming of Christ Heb. 10.37 Tolet. 7. Now whereas Moses saith as S. Paul citeth him Rom. 10.5 The man that doth these things shall liue the Prophet may seeme to be contrarie vnto him saying the iust by faith shall liue but they are easily reconciled Moses speaketh of the iustice of the lawe which none could attaine vnto the Prophet of the iustice of the Gospel which the faithfull obtaine by faith in Christ Mart. 8. Thus the Apostle setteth downe the chiefe benefits which we haue by faith saluation v. 16. it is the power of God to saluation iustice or righteousnesse the iust by faith life shall liue Matyr Quest. 47. How the wrath of God is said to be reuealed from heauen against all vnrighteousnesse ver 18. 1. This clause is a probation of the former that there is no way whereby one is iustified before God but by faith which the Apostle prooueth by the contrarie because either by workes or faith must men he iustified but not by workes as he prooueth first in this chapter by particular induction in the Gentiles that their workes deserued nothing but Gods wrath and in the Iewes c. 2. This is the reason of the connexion of this verse with the former Beza Aretius Mart. And the causes why the Apostle thus beginneth to reprooue the Gentiles are these 1. S. Paul was the Apostle of the Gentiles and therefore he first dealeth with them 2. because the qualitie and nature of faith and of the grace of God can not be well vnderstood vnlesse we first looke into our selues and consider the vilenesse of our owne workes 2. And because such is mans pride by nature vt opera sua maximifaciat that he setteth much by his owne workes therefore the Apostle doth first beginne to beat downe the pride of man 3. It is the manner of the Prophets and of our Blessed Sauiour in their prophesies and sermons to beginne with the Lawe and then to proceede to the promises of the Gospel Hyper. 2. By the wrath of God is signified declaratio irae Dei the declaration of the wrath of God Aretius there is in God no motion or perturbation as in man wrath according to the Hebrewe phrase is taken for reuenge or punishment Erasmus 3. Reuealed 1. three waies is the wrath of God reuealed against sinne 1. by the light of nature for euery mans conscience accuseth or excuseth him 2. by the Gospel which threateneth euerlasting punishment to the wicked and vnbeleeuers 3. and by daily experience which sheweth that God is angrie with the sinnes of the world Pareus 2. God doth by daily experience testifie his wrath against the vngodly of the world and euen at this time when the Apostle thus wrote the world was plagued with warre famine and other grieuous calamities for the contempt of the Gospel Gualter 3. but this revelation also may be applyed to the Gospel wherein is reuealed the wrath of God against sinners as Mat. 3. Iohn Baptist preached Now is the axe laid to the root of the tree and our Blessed Sauiour saith Luk. 13.3 vnlesse ye repent yee shall likewise perish 4. vnder the lawe also the wrath of God was declared against the vngodly as in the destruction of Sodome and of the Egyptians in the red Sea but the wrath of God did then onely shew it selfe in such externall and temporarie punishments But the gospel doth threaten euerlasting condemnation as Matth. 10.28 feare not them which kill the bodie but rather feare him who is able to destroy both bodie and soule in hell Perer. And the Law did onely in theft generally condemne all infidelitie but the Gospel in hypothesi in particular condemneth incredulitie and vnbeleefe in Christ Pareus And then it beeing a time of ignorance the iudgements of God though they were in the world yet were not marked and obserued but now they are euident to all men Aretius 4. From heauen 1. Ambrose expoundeth ipsos coelos demonstrare c. that the heauens doe declare the wrath of God against sinners and shall be their accusers who refused to worship God which made the heauens so sometime the Lord calleth the heauens and earth to be witnesses against men Isa. 2.1 Gryneus 2. Origen giueth this sense quia spirituales nequitiae in coelestibus sunt because the spirituall wickednesses that is the euill spirits are aboue in the celestiall places who are ministers of Gods iudgements vpon the wicked 3. Chrysostome Theophylact Oecumenius referre it to the reuelation of the last and finall iudgement from heauen at the second comming of Christ. 4. Caietan and gloss ordinar thus vnderstand it quia Euangelium de toelo est because the Gospel is from heauen wherein this wrath of God is reuealed 5. Some hereby vnderstand the vniuersalitie of Gods iudgements that they shall be vpon all men vnder heauen wheresoeuer they are Per. 6. Some referre it to the manifest appearance of Gods
he calleth God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the habitation of God Pareus Perer. disputat 14. 5. Galen by the contemplation of the creatures and of the excellent workmanship of the world did finde out the wisdome power and goodnes of God for thus he writeth lib. 3. de vsu partium as Beza annot and Gryneus out of him translateth Sacrum istum sermonum vti verum hymnum conditori nostro componā c. This sacred speach as a right hymne I will compose to our Creator and this I hold to be the true worship of him not to offer vnto him many sacrifices of bulls or burne ointment and incense but if I both know him my selfe and declare him vnto others how great his wisdome power and goodnes is for in that he would haue all these things made and enuied vs not any of those good things this is a cleare demonstration of his goodnes in that he would finde out a way how to adorne all those things it was his great wisdome and in that he would bring to passe and effect whatsoeuer he had decreed therein he shewed his power And by these meanes the Philosophers attained by their naturall light to some knowledge of God 53. Quest. How other Scriptures that denie all knowledge of God vnto the wicked agree with this place of Saint Paul 1. Obiect The Apostle saith here that the things which might be knowne of God were manifest vnto them how then is it saide in the Psal. 53.1 The foole hath said in his heart there is no God and Isa. 1.3 The oxe knoweth his owner c. but Israel hath not knowne me and it is said of all in generall Ioh. 1.18 No man hath seene God and yet more euidently the Apostle thus writeth 1. Cor. 1.21 Seeing the world by wisdome knew not God in the wisedome of God it pleased God by the foolishnesse of preaching to saue them that beleeue Answ. 1. Caietane giueth this solution that the Apostle saith not none of the world knew not God sed mundus communiter non cognovit the world generally knew him not though the wiser sort among them as the Philosophers knew him yet they in respect of the rest of the world were as none But the Apostle doth exclude euen the wise from the true knowledge of God as he saith in the same place 1. Cor. 1.20 Where is the wise c. hath not God made the wisdome of this world foolishnes 2. Pareus thus answereth Impijs negatur cognitio Dei efficax salutaris quae ex verbo discitur the effectuall and sauing knowledge of God is denied vnto the wicked which is learned out of the word but an vnfruitfull and idle knowledge they may haue Tit. 1.16 They professe that they know God but by workes they denie him But the Apostle speaketh not here of the knowledge of God by his word the world by wisdome knew not God in the wisdome of God but of the naturall knowledge which the heathen might haue had of God for as Theodoret wel noteth the Apostle sheweth three kinds of wisdome two are naturall the wisdome of man by the light of reason the other the wisdome of God shining in the creatures these two the Apostle speaketh of here the third kind is the wisdome of God in his Sonne Christ which afterward the Apostle also expresseth v. 24. We preach Christ the power of God and the wisdome of God 3. P. Martyr maketh this answer that there were some among the heathen which by nature were perswaded there was a God but afterward they did not yeeld vnto him that which was proper vnto God as the Epicures denied vnto God the gouernment of the world but made him as an idle beholder of the actions of men beeing no agent himselfe And some likewise grew to that impudencie that they sought by subtill reasons to prooue that there was no God But though this be true which P. Martyr affirmeth yet it is too particular to include the whole meaning of the Apostle for he saith generally of the heathen that the world knew not God not onely certaine sects of Philosophers among them but all the Gentiles generally 4. Pareus hath an other answer that this naturall light could not bring them to the knowledge of God because it was obscured and darkned by sinne and so imperfect thorough the naturall corruption of man But this doth not fully satisfie neither for though by mans fall this naturall knowledge is decaied yet there was sufficient remaining if the Gentiles had not abused it at the least as the Apostle saith that they might haue groped after God in some sort to haue knowne him 5. This solution then remaineth that there is a twofold naturall knowledge one is onely speculatiue consisting in a bare and naked contemplation of God bringing forth no fruit the other is practicall when men according to that light which they haue of God doe feare him and worship him the first kind of knowledge of God the heathen onely had as the Apostle sheweth Rom. 1.21 When they knew God they did not glorifie him as God neither were thankefull but became vaine in their imaginations for the heathen notwithstanding this naturall direction which they had generally did fall vnto idolatrie and so dishonoured that God whome they knew by his creatures Mart. Perer. 54. Quest. Of the meaning of these words That they should be inexcusable v. 20. 1. Some thus translate the Greeke words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad hac vt sint to this ende that they may be unexcusable Beza Pareus to the intent that they be inexcusable Genevens And Beza thinketh that God for this cause would haue the light to shine in darknes vt homines nihil possent praetexere that man should vse no pretext or excuse But it is hard to say that God for this ende gaue the light of nature vnto men to take away all defense and excuse from them whereas Gods intent was that man should thereby come vnto the knowledge of the Creator 2. Origen Chrysostome doe vnderstand this consecutivo by way of consequent that this followed as a consequent vpon their abusing of that naturall knowledge which was giuen them And Theophylact maketh it like vnto that saying in the Psalme 51.4 Against thee haue I sinned c. that thou maist be iust when thou speakest it was not the ende but a consequent so also Erasmus and Faius est consequens cognitionis illius it was a consequent of that knowledge But the Apostle seemeth to signifie more then so Tolet. 3. Aretius because he can not thinke that to this ende were these helps giuen them to make them inexcusable taketh this to be a new argument against iustification by works that whereby the Gentiles were made inexcusable can not iustifie them but by their workes they were made inexcusable Ergo. But the Apostle speaketh here of the light of nature which the Gentiles vsed not of their works which follow in the next verse 4. Wherefore
weakenesse came vpon them by their owne apostasie and falling away from God and that light which they had they depraued neither did they acknowledge their infirmitie but became vaine and foolish in the opinion of their owne strength neither is God debter or bound vnto any but bestoweth his graces freely 2. Pererius disput 16. insisteth onely vpon the first part of this answeare shewing that there is a double kind of ignorance vna est causa culpae one kind of ignorance is that which is the cause of fault or sinne and this excuseth there is an other cuius causa culpa est the cause whereof is our fault and this excuseth not and such was the ignorance of the heathen which was caused by their owne wilfull neglecting and abusing of the light of nature giuen vnto them 3. Peter Martyr hath yet a further answer he distinguisheth between the ignorance of the heathen and their imbecillitie or weakenesse this the heathen would not haue pretended because they ascribed all vnto freewill and therefore they would not haue complained of want of strength the Apostle then toucheth that which was most likely to haue beene obiected by thē namely their ignorance sheweth how euen in that behalf they were also inexcusable c. But seeing as is shewed before euē their natural knowledge was insufficient to saluation the same doubt remaineth stil therfore those two other exceptions concerning their imbecillitie which P. Martyr mentioneth as that it happened by their owne default and that they did not practise that little knowledge which they had but abused it may also be admitted touching their ignorance as before Pareus answeared sufficiently 4. Hereunto further may be added that distinction of ignorance which Gryneus borroweth from Augustine not eueris one which is ignorant is excused sed is solùm qui non habuit vnde disceret but he onely that had not whence to learne And therefore S. Paul excuseth himselfe by his ignorance that he persecuted Christ I did it ignorantly thorough vnbeleefe 1. Tim. 1.13 But such was not the ignorance of God which the Gentiles had hauing naturall meanes offred vnto them which they depraued and abused Quest. 59. v. 21. How the Gentiles are said to haue knowne God and yet glorified him not as God 1. Some thinke that in Scripture that ignorance which is caused by a mans owne fault when he may haue knowledge if he will himselfe it is called by the name of science and knowledge in Scripture as Ioh. 7.28 Christ saith to the Iewes ye both know me and whence I am because they might haue knowne if they would Iustin. resp 140. ad 44. Gentium so also Photius and Sedulius But this is not the Apostles meaning here for he saith not when they might haue knowne God but when they knewe God they therefore had some knowledge of him 2. Some thinke that they had the true knowledge of God but they against this knowledge malitiously and against their owne conscience worshipped other gods so Ambrose Anselm But 1. it cannot be shewed that any of the Philosophers no not they which come nearest vnto the truth had the true knowledge of God for euen Socrates Plato Seneca allowed the worship of the heathen gods and practised it as is before shewed qu. 57. and if any of them thought that the images were no gods yet those which they worshipped were either deuils or Angels as Athanas. sheweth orat cont idol 2. the Apostle here saith that they became vaine in their imaginations which sheweth that they were without the true knowledge of God Anselm answereth that they had once the true knowledge of God and afterward lost it But the Apostle saith otherwise that they did withhold the truth in vnrighteousnesse v. 18. they lost not that knowledge of the truth which they had but suppressed it and kept it vnder with their vaine imaginations 3. Origen seemeth to thinke that they were vtterly voide of all true knowledge of God dum formas imagines requirunt in Des in semetipsis imaginem Dei perdiderunt while they imagined formes and images to be in God they lost in themselues the image of God for there were some Philosophers which held God to be a spirit without any forme or image 4. Some whereas it is said Ioh. 1. the world knewe him not and yet here the Apostle saith when they knewe God c. giue this solution that the world knewe the onely God but not the Sonne Gorrham But the Apostle speaketh here onely of such knowledge of God as naturally may be attained vnto but the knowledge of the Trinitie exceedeth the strength of nature 5. Wherefore the Apostle is thus to be vnderstood that they knewe the true God in part but not perfectly they held some truths concerning the diuine nature but they mingled many vntruthes and falsities therewith they acknowledged a God but they either denied his prouidence and power or they communicated the duine honour vnto others which were not gods and thus they knewe him and yet knew him not In this sense Christ said to his Apostles Ioh. 14.4 Whether I goe ye knowe and the way ye knowe and yet Thomas saith immediately Lord we knowe not whether thou goest how then can we knowe the way So they knewe Christ because they sawe him and he was among them but yet they knewe him not perfectly his power they as yet did not fully vnderstand So the Gentiles knew God in some sort but such an one as he was they did not knowe Augustine to this purpose giueth instance in one of their chiefe Philosophers Hermes Trismigestus how he confesseth many things of the true God the maker of the world tamen obscuritate cordis ad ista delabitur c yet by the darkenesse of his heart he falleth to say that he would haue men subiect vnto those gods which are made by men Beda ex Augustin so they kept the truth as the same Augustin saith in doctrina multis falsitatibus permixta in doctrine mingled with many falshoods And though some among the heathen did hold certaine true principles of God yet there were others more grosse and foolish and were vtterly ignorant of the diuine nature taking the fire wind starres and such like to be gouernours of the world as it is in the booke of wisdome c. 13.1 2. see before of this matter quest 52. Quest. 60. v. 21. How the Gentiles did not glorifie God neither were thankefull but became vaine 1. Did not glorifie him as God this word to glorifie is taken two wayes either to conceiue an honourable opinion of God and to magnifie him and set forth his praise as Ioh. 11.4 this sickenesse is not vnto death but for the glorie of God that the Sonne of God may be glorified thereby or it signifieth the worship due vnto God as Isay. 43.23 Neither hast thou honoured or glorified me with thy sacrifices Theodoret so likewise Chrysostome and Origen seeme to take it in the first sense
nature but doe so diuide and distinguish the natures as if they made two persons so the Vbiquitaries make a confused commixtion and communitie really attributing to one nature that which is proper to the other as though to ascribe any thing to the whole person were secundum vtramque neturam tribuere according vnto both natures to attribute it because Christs deitie is euery where and it is true of Christs whole person that homo Christus the man Christ is euery where yet it followeth not that his humanitie should be euery where so then we conclude against the Nestorians that Christus totus non dimià tus that Christ whole not halfe was made of the seede of Dauid and against the other that yet non secundum totum sus not according vnto his whole nature but his humanitie onely 4. Controv. Against the heresie of one Georgius Eniedinus a Samosatenian heretike in Transilvania v. 3. According to the flesh whereas we vnderstand this place of the Apostle of the two generations of Christ his humane in that he is said to be made of the seede of Dauid after the flesh his diuine in that he was declared to be the Sonne of God touching the spirit of sanctification this forenamed heretike affirmeth that Christ is said to be made of the seede of Dauid in respect of his carnall generation which is vulgar and common to all and that he is by his spirituall natiuitie the Son of God as other faithfull are Eniedin expl loc p. 226. 1. Concerning the first part of his wicked assertion that this clause according to the flesh doth here signifie the vulgar and common kind of natiuitie he would prooue it by the like places as Rom. 9.3 he calleth the Iewes his kinsmen according to the flesh and 1. Cor. 10.18 Israel after the flesh c. Contra. 1. It is not true that this clause according to the flesh no not in these places giuen in instance doth shew the common and vulgar generation but there is implied a difference and distinction betweene kinred according to the flesh and in the spirit and of Israel after the flesh and Israel after the spirit for otherwise in respect of their common natiuitie all Israel was after the flesh whereas some were the children of Abraham after the flesh some were the children of promise Rom. 9.8 2. The miraculous and singular birth of Christ is not insinuated onely by these words according to the flesh but in that he is saide to be made not borne for the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it sheweth the extraordinarie making of his flesh as the Apostle saith in the same phrase Galat. 4.4 that he was made of a woman And this is of purpose obserued by diuers of the fathers to set forth the miraculous conception of Christ as by Tertullian lib. in praxeam Iren. lib. 3. c. 32. advers haeres Vigilius in Eutychet l. 5. August l. 2. de Trin. c. 5. whereby is conuinced the heresie of Hebian revived by this Transilvanian that Christs flesh was conceiued by humane seede 2. He thus obiecteth concerning the other generation of Christ. 1. that euery faithfull man likewise hath two natiuities one according to the flesh an other according to the spirit as Ioh. 1.13 which are not borne of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man but of God Isaack is said to be borne according to the spirit Rom. 9.8 yet hereupon it followeth not that they had two natures diuine and humane Contra. There is great difference betweene the two generations of the faithfull and of Christ 1. for when they are said to be borne of the flesh and of the spirit not two natures are thereby signified but two beginnings of their diuers births but Christ is man according to his owne flesh and declared to be the Sonne of God according to his owne sanctifying spirit he is not saide to be borne of the spirit but to be declared to be the Sonne of God according to the spirit which sheweth not a diuers generation onely but a diuers nature 3. other faithfull are the Sonnes of God by adoption and grace Rom. 8.15 Ye haue receiued the spirit of adoption whereby we crie Abba Father But Christ is the true naturall Sonne of God Ioh. 1.18 The onely begotten Sonne which is in the bosome of his father Heb. 1.3 The brightnes of his glorie and the ingraued forme of his person 2. Obiect Christ is no otherwise the Sonne of God then because the Father sanctified him and sent him into the world Ioh. 10.36 Say ye of him whome the Father hath sanctified into the world thou blasphemest because I said I am the Sonne of God And thus others also are the Sonnes of God because they are sanctified by his spirit Contra. Christ maketh not his sanctification a cause of his Sonneship but he reasoneth from the effects which are set forth by an argument from the lesse to the greater that if the Scripture calleth civill Magistrates the Sonnes of God in respect of their office much more may Christ call himselfe the Sonne of God whome the Father had sanctified to be the Redeemer of the world and to be the chiefe gouernour thereof 3. Obiect By the spirit of sanctification the diuine nature of Christ can not be signified for Christ is thereby sanctified but that which sanctifieth is diuers frō that which is sanctified and the Apostle giueth this to be the cause of Christs beeing the Sonne of God namely his resurrection But his diuine nature rather should be the cause if it were here signified Contra. 1. It is true that which sanctifieth is diuers from that which is sanctified ◠and Christs humane nature which is sanctified is diuers from his diuine which sanctifieth 2. neither is the resurrection giuen as a cause of his beeing the Sonne of God but of his manifesting to be the Sonne there is one cause of the beeing of a thing an other of the manifestation ex Paraeo 5. Controv. Against the Marcionites that Christ had a true bodie v. 3. Made of the seede of Dauid Then the Marcionites heresie is hereby conuinced which imagine Christ to haue an inuisible bodie that could not be seene or touched though it were present from whose heresie they much differ not which include the bodie of Christ in the sacrament vnder the formes of bread and wine neither giuing vnto it place nor disposition of parts nor making it visible or palpable their heresie also is noted that affirme Christ to haue brought his bodie downe from heauen with him or to haue passed through his mothers wombe as water through a conduit for he was made of the seede of Dauid Gryneus 6. Controv. Against the Apollinarists that Christ had no humane soule v. 3. Made of the seede of Dauid If Christ had a true humane bodie made with parts organes and instruments of life and sense as other men haue then it followeth
the father Sonne and holy Ghost c. Therefore if no creature is to be worshipped much lesse an image which is the work of mans hands if not the liuing are to be adored much lesse the dead But here this obiection will be mooued if no creature is to be worshipped how then doe we adore Christ Chrysostome answeareth Nemo veneraturus regem dicit illi exuas purpuram c. no man comming to doe reuerence to the king saith put off thy robes So Christ beeing cloathed with our flesh is worshipped in and with our humanitie which is vnited vnto his Godhead in one person yet the originall and first cause of this adoration giuen vnto Christs humanitie proceedeth from his diuine nature adoration then beeing due vnto the person of Christ is yeelded vnto him both God and man Martyr Controv. 11. Of the vaine vse of popish pilgrimages v. 13. That I might haue some fruit Paul desireth to see Rome to the intent that he might receiue some fruit by them and they by him this was the ende of this his iourney and peregrination Much vnlike herein were the pilgrimages which in times past and now in many countreys are made to Rome Ierusalem and other places which are onely of a superstitious meaning to offer before some idol and to performe their vowes But the end of the travaile comming together of Christians should be for their mutuall edifying Mar. Controv. 12. None to be barred from the knowledge of Gods word v. 14. I am detter both to the Grecians and Barbarians seeing there was no nation so barbarous to whom the Apostle was not willing to impart the knowledge of the Gospell the Romanists are euidently conuinced of error that will not admit their lay people generally to the reading of the Scripture If the gospel of saluation must be communicated to all then the Scriptures also which containe the knowledge of saluation should be common to all Hyperius the booke â—â— the lawe was appointed to be read in the hearing of the people that they might learne and feare God Deuter. 31.12 see more Synops. Centur. 1. error 3. Controv. 13. Against diuerse hereticall assertions of Socinus touching the iustice of God v. 17. For by it the iustice of God is reuealed because in this place the iustice of God is taken for his benignitie and mercie shewed by Christ in the Gospell Socinus that blasphemous heretike taketh occasion thus to broach his errors 1. he saith that iustice beeing vndestood of God is neuer in Scripture set opposite to Gods mercie but the contrarie is euident Psal 5.6 thou shalt destroy them that speake lies here the Prophet speaketh of Gods reuenging iustice and in the next verse he compareth it with Gods mercie But I will come into thine house in the multitude of thy mercies 2. he affirmeth that that which is opposed to Gods mercie is not called the iustice of God but wrath indignation seueritie which is euidently refelled v. 31. they knowing the iustice of God that they which commit such things are worthie of death here the vengeance of God vpon sinners is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iustice And yet more euidently Psal. 145.17 the Lord is iust in all his wayes and mercifull in all his workes here the iustice and mercie of God are compared together 3. further he saith that this iustice of God as it is set against his mercie is of two sorts there is one whereby he punisheth the wicked and obstinate sinners an other whereby he chasteneth euen those that are not altogether impenitent But herein is his error he maketh them two kinds of iustice which are but diuerse degrees of one and the same iustice for when God sheweth seueritie in punishing the wicked therein he exerciseth his strict and rigorous iustice and when he chastiseth sometime his owne children for their amendment he vseth the same iustice but in an other degree tempering his iustice with mercie and fauour Pareus Controv. 14 Against inherent iustice v. 17. The iustice of God is reuealed the Rhemistes apply this place against imputatiue iustice alleadging out of Augustine how it must be vnderstood of that iustice not which God hath in himselfe sed qua induit hominem but wherewith he endueth man when he iustifieth him Contra. 1. They doe not well translate the word induit which signifieth here not to endue but to cloath with and so man beeing iustified by faith is cloathed with Christs righteousnesse he is not iustified by any inherent righteousnesse in himselfe but by an imputed righteousnesse Rom. 4.6 2. And the Apostle doth expound himselfe Rom. 3.22 shewing that the iustice of God is by the faith of Iesus and Philip. 3.9 the Apostle renounceth his owne righteousnesse that he might haue the righteousnesse of God through faith Controv. 15. That the Sacraments doe not conferre grace Kemnitius out of this place v. 16. the Gospel is the power of God to saluation inferreth that the Sacraments doe no otherwise iustifie then the word preached that is excitando fidem by exciting and stirring vp our faith as in this sense the Gospell is said to be Gods power to saluation Bellarmine answeareth 1. that the Gospel is not here taken for the preaching of the Gospel but for the historie of the Gospel as of Christs incarnation and passion 2. if it be taken in the other sense it followeth not because the preaching of the word iustifieth onely by stirring vp faith that therefore the Sacraments iustifie the same way Bellar. lib. 2. de effect sacram c. 11. ration 4. Contra. 1. The Apostle speaketh not onely of the historicall narration of the Gospel but of preaching and publishing the same as it appeareth both by the words before going v. 15. I am readie to preach the Gospel to you that are at Rome and by the words following it is the power of God to saluation to euerie on that beleeueth but they cannot beleeue vnlesse they heare neither can they heare without preaching 2. the argument thus followeth from the greater to the lesse if that which is more principall in the worke of our saluation doe iustifie no otherwise then instrumentally in stirring vp faith namely the preaching of the word then that which is lesse principall cannot iustifie more but the word and preaching of the Gospell is the more principall for they beget faith which the Sacraments onely confirme and seale therefore the Sacraments doe not iustifie men us by conferferring of grace by the worke wrought Controv. 16. That faith onely iustifieth v. 17. The iust by faith shall liue out of this place where the verie iustice life and actiuitie of the soule is ascribed to faith we doe conclude that a man is iustified onely by faith for all is ascribed vnto faith Now the Romanists seeing this place of the Apostle to be so pregnant for iustification by faith onely seeke diuerse shifts to obscure the truth of this testimonie 1. Costerus Euchirid 170. saith that these words
taketh this iustice to be Christ rather it signifieth the iustice or righteousnesse which is by faith to Christ so called both because of the efficient cause thereof namely God who worketh it in vs and in regard of the effect because it onely is able to stand before God Calvin 2. Without the Lawe 1. Origen here vnderstandeth the lawe of nature and giueth thiâ— exposition ad iustitiam Dei cognoscendam nihil opitulabatur lex naturae the law of nature did helpe nothing at all to the knowledge of the iustice of God but it was manifested by the written lawe of Moses but the Apostle excludeth not here the written lawe for them it were no consequent speach vnto the former where the Apostle denied iustification vnto all workes of the lawe in generall the same lawe then must be here vnderstood which he treated before that is generally both the naturall and written law 2. Augustine ioyneth this word without the lawe not vnto manifested but vnto righteousnesse so the righteousnesse without the lawe he expoundeth sine adminiculo legis without the helpe of the law lib. de spirit liter c. 9. but this sense first Beza confuteth by the order and placing of the words which stand thus without the lawe is righteousnesse made manifest not righteousnes without the lawe as S. Iames saith faith without works is dead not without works faith is dead for in this transposing of the words the sense is much altered Tolet addeth this reason that righteousnesse without the lawe that is the workes of the lawe was knowne euen vnto the faithfull vnder the lawe therefore the words without the lawe must be ioyned rather vnto manifested then to righteousnesse 3. But yet Tolet is here deceiued for he thus interpreteth absque lege without the lawe that is cossante lege the lawe ceasing and beeing abrogate the Euangelicall faith was manifested for although the workes of the morall law are commanded in the Gospel yet they bind not by reason of the legall bond or obligation but by vertue and force of newe institution thereof by Christ But our Sauiour faith directly that he came not to destroy the lawe and the Prophets Matth. 5.17 but if the morall lawe were first abrogated though it were againe reuiued by Christ it must first be dissolued 4. Ambrose well referreth without the lawe to manifested but he seemeth to restraine it to the lawe of ceremonies sine lege apparuit sed sine lege sabbati circumcisionis it appeared without the lawe but without the lawe of the Sabboth and circumcision and newe Moone c. But in all this disputation the Apostle chiefely entreateth of the morall lawe by the which specially came the knowledge of sinne 5. some referre this to the manifestation of the Gospel by the preaching of the Apostles when the Gentiles were called which had no knowledge of the lawe Mart. and many also among the Iewes which though they had not the lawe yet cared not for it as they say Ioh. 7.48 Doth any of the rulers or Pharisies beleeue in him but this people which knoweth not the lawe Gorrhan â—â— they vnderstand without the lawe that is without the knowledge of the lawe But the Apostle speaketh of that iustice which was manifested both to the Gentiles and the Iewes which had yet the knowledge of the lawe 6. Gryneus whereas the Apostle saith first that righteousnesse is reuealed without the lawe and yet immediately after he saith hauing witnesse of the law and the Prophets would reconcile them thus vnderstanding lawe in the first place of the letter of the lawe which doth not set forth the iustice of God by faith and in the other place the spirituall sense of the lawe 7. But the meaning rather of the Apostle is this that it is not the office of the lawe to teach faith and that beside the lawe there is an other doctrine in the Church concerning faith which doctrine of saluation and iustice by faith neither the naturall nor morall lawe can teach and though in the time of the lawe this doctrine of faith was taught the faithfull yet the knowledge thereof came not by the lawe And for the full reconciling here of the Apostle to himselfe three things are to be considered 1. that in the first place the lawe is vnderstood strictly for the doctrine of the morall lawe whether written or naturall which doth not properly teach faith in Christ afterward the lawe is taken for the bookâ— of Moses wherein many Euangelicall promises are contained beside the legall precepâ—â— Beza annot â—2 The lawe doth properly vrge workes it doth not professedly teach faith and yet it excludeth it not Pareus but accidentally it bringeth vs to Christ as forcing vs when we see our disease to seeke for a remedie 3. this doctrine of faith was manifested without the lawe that is more clearely taught and preached at the comming of Christ yet it was knowne vnto Moses and the Prophets though more obscurely for in that it is said to be manifested nor made or created it sheweth that it was before though not so manifest Perer. disput â—0 Faius So then those words but now doe both note the diuersitie of time and they are aduersatiue particulars shewing that our iustice is not reuealed in the lawe but otherwise and els where Quest. 27. How the righteousnesse of faith had witnesse of the lawe and the Prophets Fowre wayes are the law and Prophets found to beare witnesse and testimonie vnto the Gospell of faith 1. by the euident prophesies of Christ as our blessed Sauiour saith Ioh. 5.46 Moses wrote of me and S. Paul said before c. 2. Which he had promised before by his Prophets in the holy Scriptures and S. Peter saith Act. 10.43 To him also giue all the Prophets witnesse such euident testimonies out of the lawe and Prophets are these which are cited by the Apostles as that Rom. 10.6 The righteousnesse of faith speaketh on this wise say not in thy heart who shall ascend into heauen that is to bring Christ from aboue c. so the Apostle citeth an euident testimonie out of the 31. of Ieremie Hebr. 8.8 how the Lord would make a newe testament with the house of Iuda and many such testimonies in the newe Testament are taken out of the old 2. A second kind of testimonie were the types and figures which went before in the old Testament as the Paschal lambe the Manna the rocke the cloud did shadow forth Christ likewise some acts of the Patriarkes and Prophets did prefigure out Christ as Abrahams sacrificing of Isaac Salomons building of the Temple Ionas beeing in the bellie of the whale with such like 3. The sacrifices and oblations and the blood of rammes and goates did signifie the vnspotted lambe of God that should be slaine for the sinnes of the world Mart. 4. The lawe also by the effect thereof did beare witnesse vnto Christ as Augustine saith lex hoc ipso quod iubendo minando
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
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
risen but his bodie might haue beene kept incorruptible in his graue vnto the ende of the world and then he might haue risen and we with him but then should we haue beene iustified he rose therefore for our iustification not for our resurrection 4. Some will haue these two benefits of remission and iustification to be indifferently referred as well to the death as to the resurrection of Christ as Theophylact mortuus est exe tatus à morte c. he died and was raised from death to free and exempt vs from our euill works and to make vs iust to the same purpose Haymo vt credentes eum passum c. that beleeuing him to haue suffered for our saluation and to haue risen from the dead per hanc fidem mereamur iustificari we may be counted worthie to be iustified by this faith So Emmanuel Sa. vtrunque factum propter vtrunque both of these were wrought by both these But if both these benefits were in like sort and manner wrought by both those actions of Christ there should appeare no reason of this distinction which the Apostle vseth 5. An other exposition is Christ rose for our iustification that is ad eam demonstradam for the manifestation and demonstration of it Piscator he had purchased indeede both our redemption from our sinnes and our iustification by his death and passion but resurrectione gloriosa testatus est he witnessed by his resurrection that he had ouercome hell and death for vs Osiand But the Apostle sheweth the very reall cause of our iustification not the testification onely thereof by Christs resurrection as his deliuering to death was the very cause of the remission of our sinnes 6. Some giue this sense he is said to haue risen for our iustification quia salutis predicatio redemptionis applicatio generalis c. because the preaching of saluation and the generall application of redemption was to followe after the resurrection Tolet. annot 25. to the same purpose Pet. Martyr our redemption was purchased by the death of Christ but that the same might be applyed vnto vs spiritu sancto opus fuit it was needefull the spirit of God should be sent These by iustification vnderstand the application publication and preaching of iustification But this seemeth not be so fit neither for as in the one part of the sentence the Apostle toucheth the true working and efficient cause of the remission of sinnes Christs deliuering vnto death and not the application or publication so must the other part of our iustification be vnderstood And Christ might if it had pleased him haue giuen his Apostle a commission to preach his death and passion before his resurrection yet had we not beene fully iustified vntill he had risen againe 7. But among the rest that exposition which goeth vnder the name of Ambrose in the commentarie vpon this place seemeth to be most vnreasonable that the Apostle thus deuideth these benefits to shewe that as many as were baptized before the passion of Christ solam remissionem peccatorum accepisse receiued onely remission of sinnes but after Christs resurrection as well they which were baptized before as after esse omnes vere iustification were all truely iustified This one place doth giue iust occasion of suspition that those commentaries were not composed by Ambrose for remission of sinnes cannot be separated from iustification whosouer hath the one hath likewise the other because they are pronounced blessed whose sinnes are remitted before ver 7. but there can be no blessednesse without iustification 8. Hugo is somewhat curious to shewe the reason why remission of sinnes is ascribed vnto Christs passion and iustification vnto his resurrection first he saith that Christs passion is both causa meritum figura the cause merit and figure or forme of remission but it is the cause and merit onely of iustification and newenesse of life not the forme it is the cause moouing that we should liue in sinne for which Christ hath died and Christ by his death merited forgiuenesse of our sinne and he hath giuen in his death a forme that as he died in respect of his bodily life so we should die vnto sinne now of newenesse of life Christs death is both the cause mouing and meriting of newenesse of life but not a figure so it agreeth in three points with the remission of sinnes and in two onely with iustification Likewise Christs resurrection was both the cause mouing vnto newenesse of life are the forme and figure that as Christ rose againe so we should rise vnto newenesse of life but of remission of sinnes it was onely the cause moouing not the forme but of neither was it any meritorious cause for Christ hauing put off his mortall bodie in the resurrection was not in statu merendi in the state of meriting so the resurrection of Christ agreeth with iustification in two points in beeing the cause and figure or forme but with remission of sinnes onely in one in beeing the cause therefore iustification is rather ascribed to Christs resurrection then vnto his passion to this purpose Hugo But he faileth in this his subtile and curious distinction 1. for seeing that the passion of Christ in two points as be himselfe obserueth agreeth with iustification namely in beeing the cause and merit thereof and the resurrection in two likewise in beeing the cause and figure or forme iustification should rather in this regard be ascribed vnto Christs passion because it was merited by it and not by the other and the rather because the Apostle hath nothing to doe with the exemplarie forme of the one or the other but to shewe the true causes and so the passion of Christ shall agree in two respects with iustification and the resurrection of Christ but in one 9. To drawe then this question to an ende there are two answers which I insist vpon as the best and so I will ioyne them both together 1. The Apostle doth put iustification vnto the resurrection of Christ because although it were merited by his death yet it had the complement and perfection by the resurrection of Christ for if Christ had not risen againe he had not shewed himselfe conquerour of death and so the worke of our redemption had beene vnperfect thus Calvin Beza Gualter and to this purpose Rollecus distinguisheth well betweene meritum efficacia the merit of iustification in respect of Christ and the efficacie thereof in respect of vs Christ did meritoriously worke our iustification and saluation by his death and passion but the efficacie thereof and perfection of the worke to vs-ward dependeth vpon his resurrection the like distinction the Apostle vseth saying Rom. 10.10 With the heart man beleeueth vnto righteousnes and with the mouth man confesseth to saluation not really distinguishing them in the causes one from the other but shewing that the complement and perfection of the worke consisteth in both 2. Hereunto adde that although these two benefits of our
beene immortall 2. the Apostle saith Rom. 6.23 the wages of sinne is death he speaketh of death in generall euerie kind of death both spirituall and corporall is the reward of sinne 3. the propagation of sinne doth indeede bring with it also propagation of death as the Apostle here saith sinne entred by Adam and death by sinne if sinne then had not entred neither should death haue entred 3. But thus it is obiected on the contrarie that death to mankind is naturall and not brought in by sinne 1. Obiect The bodie of man is compounded of dissonant and contrarie qualities and therefore naturally is apt to be dissolued and if there be a naturall aptnesse and power to die there should also haue followed a naturall act of dying Answ. 1. Pererius answeareth that indeede if man be considered secundum nudam natura conditionem according to the bare and naked condition of his nature he was by nature mortall as other creatures but beeing considered as he receiued a supernaturall grace from God death was not naturall but a punishment of sinne Perer. numer 34. But this answear is insufficient and vntrue for there should not haue beene so much as any possibilitie of death in the world if sinne had not entred he then answeareth onely concerning the act of dying which should be suspended by a supernaturall gift he taketh not away the possibilitie of dying and this supernaturall gift was no other then the dignitie and excellencie of mans nature made by creation immortall if he had not sinned 2. wherefore our more full answear is that mans bodie though consisting of diuerse elements yet was made of such an harmonaicall constitution and temper as no dissolution should haue followed if he had not sinned such as shall be the state and condition of our bodies in the resurrection 2. Obiect If death be the punishment of sinne God should be the author of death because he is the author of punishment Answ. 1. Pererius saith that God is not directly the cause of death but either consequenter by way of consequent because he made man of a dissoluble matter whereupon death ensueth or occasionaliter by way of occasion because he tooke away from man that supernaturall gift whereby he should haue beene preserued from mortallitie but God efficiciter is not the efficient cause of death which is a meere priuation But this answear also is insufficient for neither should death haue followed by reason of any such dissoluble matter if Adam had not sinned neither needed there any such supernaturall gift beside the priuiledge and dignitie of mans creation 2. wherefore we answer further that as God created light darkenes he created not but disposed of it so he made not death but as it is a punishment God as a disposer rather and a iust iudge then an author inflicteth it 3. Obiect Christ died and yet had no sinne therefore death is a naturall thing not imposed as a punishment for sinne Answ. 1. Origen here answeareth that as Christ knewe no sinne yet per assumptionem â—â— uis dicitur factus esse peccatum c. yet by the taking of our flesh he is said to be made sinne for vs so also he died for vs c. the death then which he vndertooke was not a punishment vpon him in respect of his owne sinne which he had not but of ours which was imputed vnto him 2. Origen saith further mortem quam nulli debuit sponte non necessitate suscepit the death which he ought to none he did willingly vndertake not of necessitie as Christ himselfe saith I haue power to lay down my life and power to take it againe 3. adde herevnto that mors in eo imperium non habuit c. death had no power or command ouer lum Mart. for he rose againe from death triumphantly which sheweth that he yeelded not vnto death of necessitie for then he could not haue shaken off so soone the bands of death againe Quest. 23. Of the meaning of the Apostle in these words in whom all haue sinned and of the best reading thereof ver 12. 1. Erasmus will haue the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be interpreted eo quod or quandoquidem in so much or because so also Calvin Martyr Osiander and our English translations and Erasmus reason is because the Scripture vseth an other phrase in that sense as 1. Cor. 15.22 as in Adam all die the words are not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But this reason may be easily taken away for sometime in Scripture the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Heb. 9.17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the testament is confirmed in the dead Beza and Heb. 9.10 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in meates And this interpretation of Erasmus is the rather to be misliked because he would not haue this vnderstood of originall sinne but of euery ones proper and particular sinnes as Theodoret before him and so we should want a speciall place for the proofe of originall sinne 2. Wherefore the better reading is in whom that is in Adam all haue sinned so reade Origen Chrysostome Phatius in Oecumenius Theophylact whom Beza Pareus followe and there are three things which may serue for the antecedent to this relatiue in whom either sinne or death or that one man namely Adam before spoken of but not the first because sinne in the Greeke tongue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is of the feminine gender and so cannot answer vnto the Greeke relatiue which is of the masculine gender nor the second for it were an improper speech to say in the which death all haue sinned for as Augustine saith in peccato moriuntur homines non in morte peccant men die in sinne they are not said to sinne in death and so Augustine resolueth that in primo homine omnes peccasse intelliguntur all are vnderstood to haue sinned in the first man Adam c. and to this purpose Augustine in the same place alleadgeth Hilarius Quest. 24. Whether the Apostle meane originall or actuall sinnes saying in whom all haue sinned 1. Erasmus in his annotations vpon this place contending that it should be rather read for as much as all men haue sinned then in whom all men haue sinned thinketh that this place is not vnderstood of originall but of actuall sinnes who although he professe that he is an enemie to the heresie of the Pelagians which denie originall sinne yet contendeth both by the authoritie of the Fathers as Hierome and Origen and by the scope of the place that the Apostle must be vnderstood to speake of actuall sinnes But all this may easily be answered 1. those commentaries which passe vnder the name of Hierome are verily thought not to be his but Augustine coniectureth that they might be written by Pelagius that supposed author excepteth Abraham Isaac Iacob that they were free from this death namely the spiriturall death of the soule whereas euen
it entred in by the way as though it had entred in secretly so also Erasmus and Gorrhan giueth the reason because it was giuen but vnto one people and secretly in the desert but the lawe beeing so publikely deliuered in such great power and signes could not be said secretly to enter 2. Origen giueth this sense that the lawe of the members entred sub obtentu legis naturalis vnder the pretext and colour of the lawe of nature it entred as it were by stealth but the Apostle speaketh not here of the lawe of nature as is shewed before 3. Chrysostome whom Tolet followeth thus interpreteth the lawe is said to haue entred by the way vt ostenderet vsum illius temporarium to shewe that the vse thereof was but for a time but this is a perpetuall vse of the lawe to manifest and reueale sinne though indeed the vse of the ceremoniall lawe were but to continue for a time 4. Some thinke the lawe is said to haue entred as vnder hand post effuscationem 〈◊〉 naturalis after the lawe of nature was obscured so Ambrose Lyran. but though the lawe of nature had not beene obscured yet the written lawe should haue beene giuen by 〈◊〉 which men should haue beene prepared to receiue the Gospell Tolet. annot 26. therefore it is said to haue entred thereto or thereupon that is beside that naturall corruption and depriuation of nature in Adam the lawe also was giuen accessit ad morbum illium it came vpon or was added vnto that naturall disease that sinne thereby beeing more encreased might more commend the riches of Gods mercie in Christ Beza Pareus Quest. 42. How the offence is said to haue abounded by the entring of the lawe ver 20. The lawe is to be considered three wayes in respect of the nature thereof in respect of man to whom it is giuen and of God the author and giuer of the lawe 1. The lawe beeing considered in it selfe it holy spirituall and good and so properly is not the cause of the encrease of sinne but onely in respect of the euent as Chrysostome Gennadius and most of the Greeke interpreters expound it the lawe then causeth sinne to encrease non causaliter sed consecutiue not as the cause but in regard of the euent or consequent and that not ex parte legis on the behalfe of the lawe but by the malice of mans heart Lyran non ex â—â—tura legis not by the nature of the lawe but by the slougth and carelesnesse of them which receiue the lawe Chrysost. and sinne is thus occasionally encreased sower wayes 1. because ruimur in vetitum c. we alwaies rush vpon that which is forbidden like as a riuer meeting with some stone or let in the way maketh the greater noise whereof these reasons may be giuen first because things forbidden are not in our power and therefore our desire is more toward them whereas we neglect things easie and such as we can do when we list secondly the nature of humane affections is the more they are suppressed and kept in the more to be inflamed as fide when it is kept in breaketh out more violently this is vsually seene in the passions of anger and griefe Perer. numer 78. Adde hereunto the peruersenesse of mans will which is opposite to the will of God and most of all is bent to follow those things which the Lord forbiddeth 2. Sinne is increased by the lawe because he sinneth more that knoweth the will of God and doth it not then he that is ignorant of it 3. by the lawe which containeth varietie of precepts the number of sinnes is multiplyed innumera praecepta lex dedit the law gaue a number of precepts Chrysostom 4. the lawe terrifieth the conscience and so accuseth and condemneth and sheweth punishment due vnto sinne and so exaggerateth it Mart. 2. If the lawe be considered in regard of the effect which it worketh in the hearts of men then this particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that may be taken causally because by the lawe properly sinne is manifested and reuealed as the Apostle sheweth Rom. 3.20 that by the lawe commeth the knowledge of sinne Perer. 3. If we turne our selues to God the author of the lawe then in respect of his counsell the lawe may be vnderstood causally to encrease sinne in regard of a further ende which God propoundeth to himselfe namely that by the abounding of sinne grace may yet more abound Martyr so the ordinarie glosse hath here this profitable note Magnum Deiconsilium fuit c. it was the great and deepe counsell of God that by the lawe sinne should abound that men in seueritie and austeritie of the lawe seeing their owne infirmitie infirmi ad â—â—dicum confugerent c. beeing weake should runne vnto the Physitian and seeke for the helpe of grace c. Quest. 43. How grace is said to haue abounded more 1. Athanasius referreth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vbi where to the nature of man that in the same nature grace abounded by the comming of Christ in the flesh where sinne abounded before tractas de salutar advent but this seemeth to be too curious 2. Lyranus hath reference to the lawe that whereas sinne abounded vnder the lawe grace also abounded vnder the lawe because Christ was made vnder the lawe as the Apostle sheweth Galat. 4.4 But here grace is opposed and set against the lawe therefore in both the opposite partes there cannot be reference to the same lawe 3. The ordinarie glosse hath two expositions grace is said to abound because it profiteth them whom the deuill could not ouercome grace worketh on them vpon whom the kingdome of sinne had no power but then the same thing should be compared with it selfe for in that the kingdome of sinne and Sathan preuailed not against them it was the worke of grace 4. Otherwise thus quia peccatum ad tempus regnavit because sinne raigned but for a time but grace for euer but vnlesse grace had destroyed the kingdome of sinne it should haue raigned for euer 5. Origen saith grace abounded more in that it doth not onely hominem absoluere à peccatis prateritis free a man from sinnes past but also strengthen him against sinnes to come 6. Chrysostome thus grace hath superabounded not onely in taking away the punishment and remitting our sinnes but in giuing vs life and making vs iust 7. Some giue this sense that grace hath abounded not onely in taking away originall sinne but all other actuall sinnes added beside Piscator Gorrhan 8. But it is better to vnderstand this superabounding of grace of all those priuiledges and excellencies which the benefit by Christ hath beyond our losse and fall in Adam as the Apostle shewed before Bez. Fai. So euery way grace exceedeth both in respect of the poteÌ„tis of God whose grace appeareth to be the greater by the greatnes of our sinne which non 〈◊〉 superat sed absorbet it doth not onely ouercome
members as weapons of vnrighteousnesse vnto sinne but yeeld giue G. B. exhibite L. apply V. S. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your selues vnto God as aliue vnto God from the dead and yeelde your members as weapons of righteousnesse vnto God 14 For sinne shall not haue dominion let it not raigne S. but the word is in the future tense for ye are not vnder the lawe but vnder grace 15 What then shall we sinne because we are not vnder the lawe but vnder grace God forbid let it not be Gr. as v. 1. 16 Knowe ye not that to whom ye yeeld your selues as seruants to obey his seruants ye are to whom ye obey whether it be of sinne vnto death or of obedience of the hearing of the eare S. vnto righteousnes 17 But God be thanked that ye haue beene the seruants of sinne but ye haue obeyed from the heart that forme of doctrine whereunto ye were deliuered 18 Beeing then made free from sinne ye are become the seruants of righteousnes 19 I speake after the manner of men I speake 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some humane thing Gr. L.V. because of the infirmitie of your flesh for as ye haue yeelded your members seruants to serue L. to the seruice S. but the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seruants to vncleanes and iniquitie to commit iniquitie so now yeeld your members seruants to righteousnes and holines vnto sanctification L. V. S. 20 For when ye were the seruants of sinne ye were free vnto righteousnes from righteousnesse G. B. that is the meaning but the word in the originall is put in the datiue 21 What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed for the end of those things is death 22 But now beeing freed from sinne and made the seruants of God ye haue your fruit vnto holines in holines G. holy fruits S. and the ende euerlasting life 23 For the stipend stipends Gr. wages G. reward B. of sinne is death but the gift of God the grace of God L. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a grace a gift is eternall life through Iesus Christ our Lord. 2. The Argument Method and Parts In this Chapter the Apostle sheweth the necessarie coniunction betweene iustification and holines and newenes of life and there are two parts thereof in the first to ver 12. he layeth downe the doctrine then he exhorteth v. 12. to the end In the doctrine he prooueth the necessitie 1. of mortification and dying to sinne propounded v. 1.2 from the efficacie of baptisme which signifieth that we are dead and buried with Christ v. 3.4 and from the ende of Christs crucifying v. 6.2 of sanctification propounded v. 8. prooued from the mysterie of baptisme v. 4.5 from the vertue of Christs resurrection who is risen and dieth no more ver 9.10 and then he concludeth ver 11. 1. The exhortation followeth which hath two parts 1. one dehorting from sinne which is propounded and explaned v. 12.13 then amplified by three arguments 1. from their present state and condition beeing vnder grace v. 14. with the preuenting of an obiection v. 15.2 from the inconveniencie of the seruice of sinne which is vnto death set forth by the contrarie v. 16.3 from the efficacie of the doctrine which they obeyed v. 17.2 the other part stirreth vp to newenesse of life propounded v. 18. amplified 1. à pari v. 19.20 as when they serued sinne they were free from righteousnesse so beeing freed from sinne they must be the seruants of righteousnesse ab effectis from the effects of sinne shame and death v. 21. which are amplified by the contrarie effects of sanctification holinesse v. 22. and eternall life set forth by the contrarie on the diuerse manner sinne deserueth death as the iust stipend but life eternall is not deserued it is Gods free gift v. 23. 3. The questions and doubts discussed Quest. 1. Of the meaning of these words shall we continue in sinne v. 1. 1. The Apostle preuenteth here an obiection which might be occasioned by the former words in the end of the fift chapter where the Apostle said where sinne abounded grace abounded much more by occasion of which words the Apostle might feare least two sorts of men might take advantage the false teachers which did continually picke quarrells with the Apostles doctrine as some affirmed that he said we might doe euill that good might come thereof c. 3.8 He might feare also least the weake might receiue encouragement hereby to nourish theâ— infirmities still 2. But either of these so inferring did misconster the Apostles words and in this kind of reasoning there are three Paralogismes or fallacies committed 1. they take non causam pro causa that which is not the cause for the cause for the abounding of sinne is not the cause of the abounding of grace Augustine saith non peccantis merito sed gratiae supervenient â—â—â—uxilio c. where sinne abounded grace abounded more not by the merit of the sinne 〈◊〉 by the meanes of helpe by grace c. the Apostles speach is to be vnderstood occasionaliter by way of occasion and they take it causaliter by way of a cause Hugo sinne in it owne nature is no more the cause of grace then the disease is of medicine Maâ—â— qui laudat beneficium medecinae non prodesse dicit morbos c. he that praiseth the benefit 〈◊〉 Phisicke doth not commend the disease Augustin so then mans vnrighteousnesse doth not in it selfe set forth the iustice of God but ex accidente by an accident Pareus proveniter bonitate Dei qui bona elicit ex malis it commeth of the goodnesse of God who decreeâ—â— good out of euill Lyran. 2. the second fallacie is in that they thus obiecting make the Apostles words more generall then he meant or intended them for the abounding of sinne is not the occasion of the abounding of grace in all but onely in those which acknowledge and confesse their sinnes Martyr as it is euident in damnatione malorum in the condemnation of the wicked Lyran. there Gods iustice rather then his grace and mercie sheweth it selfe 3. a third fallacie is they apply that to the time to come which the Apostle onely vttered of time past the abounding of sinne in men before their conuersion and repentance setteth forth the aboundance of the grace and mercie of God in the forgiuenesse of their sinnes past but not so if sinne abounded after their conuersion and calling Mart. 3. The Apostle propoundeth this obiection in the person of the aduersarie by way of interrogation thereby expressing both affectum indignantis the affection of one angrie and displeased that his doctrine should be thus perverted and he sheweth also securitatem conscientiae the securitie of his conscience that he was free from any such thought 4. By sinne neither doth the Apostle vnderstand the author of sinne namely the deuill as Origen for then one should be said improperly to remaine in sinne that is in the
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
homines à coelestium meditatione retrahit which draweth spirituall men from the meditation of heauenly things but the Apostle spake before of the combate betweene the flesh and the spirit and they are not all carnall which are occupied in the necessarie affaires of this life 6. Tolet ioyning the pronoune this vnto death not vnto the bodie reading thus from the bodie of this death will haue reference to be made vnto the tyrannie of the lawe of concupiscence whereof he spake before but the pronoune is better ioyned to bodie as the Syrian interpreter Erasmus and Beza well obserue for of his flesh and members he spake before but of death he made no mention This demonstrative then this is better referred to bodie 7. Wherefore the Apostle calling his present state out of the which he desireth to be deliuered this bodie of death ioyneth both mortalitie and sinne together he meaneth his mortall bodie subiect to sinne as Hierome expoundeth quod morti perturbationibus est oppositum which is opposed to death and perturbations apolog advers Ruffin and so Beza the Apostle by the bodie designeth carneam corporis molem the fleshie masse of the bodie which is nothing else but mussa mortis peccati a lumpe of death and sinne so Origen it is called the bodie of death in quo habitat peccatum quod est mortis causa wherein sinne dwelleth which is the cause of death 8. And this deliuerance which the Apostle longeth for is not the spirituall deliuerance in this life from the captiuitie of sinne as Tolet but the finall deliuerance from the bondage of mortalitie and corruption which we looke for in the resurrection as Augustine expoundeth lib. 1. cont epist. Pelag. c. 11. and so the Apostles meaning is non finiri hoc confluctus c. that these conflicts cannot be ended as long as we carrie this mortall bodie about with vs Pareus And here we may consider a threefold state of mans bodie the one in Paradise cum non potuit mori when it was in mans power if he had not sinned not to die at all vnder the state and condition of sinne where non potest non mori he cannot but die a necessitie of death is laid vpon all Adams posteritie vnder the state of glorie non possumus mori we cannot die we shall be exempted from the condition of all mortalitie Pererius Quest. 25. Why the Apostle giueth thanks to God ver 25. 1. There is some difference in the reading of these words the Latine interpreter thus readeth the grace of God thorough Iesus Christ so also Origen before who maketh it an answear to the former words of the Apostle who shall deliuer 〈◊〉 likewise Augustine followeth this reading serm 45. de tempor but all the Greek copies haue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I giue thankes and the Apostle did not aske the question before who should deliuer him but suspirat potâ—â—s be sigheth and sheweth his desire to be deliuered Beza 2. For the meaning of the words 1. some thinke that the Apostle giueth thanks for his redemption in Christ Mart. that he is deliuered à reatu peccati from the guilt of sinne originall and actuall Roloch and that his sinnes are not imputed Osiander and before them Oecumenius quod me liberavit per mortem filij that he hath deliuered me by the death of his Sonne But this deliverance the Apostle had alreadie obtained he speaketh in the future sense who shall deliuer me 2. Theophylact referreth it to the former benefit quod viriliter adversatur peccato that he did manfully resist sinne which strength he had not either by the law of nature or by the law of Moses but by grace in Christ So also Pareus thinketh the Apostle doth giue thankes that he doth not succumbere in certamine sed vincere giue ouer in this combate but at the length ouercommeth But the Apostle wisheth yet a further deliuerance which as yet he had not because he speaketh of the time not to come who shall deliuer me and yet he giueth thankes for it as enioying the fame in hope 3. Tolet and Pererius thinke that the Apostle giueth thankes that he was deliuered from concupiscence quod non mentem trahit in consensum that it did not draw his mind to consent and so he was deliuered from it as it was malum culpae as there was sinne or fault in it that is to consent vnto it but not as it was malum poenae a punishment that is concupiscere to couet or desire simply without assent so also Lyranus But if the Apostle did not sometime thorough his infirmitie giue consent vnto his concupiscence how could he say it did lead him captiue vnto the law of sinne more it is prooued at large afterward that the commandement thou shalt not lust whereof the Apostle confesseth himselfe a transgressor v. 7.18 doth not onely restraine the first motions of concupiscence which haue not the consent of the will but the second also which haue controv 8.4 Vatablus will haue this thanksgiuing to be referred to the deliuerance which the Apostle expected in the life to come 5. But it is better to ioyne them together as Augustine doth serm 45. de tempor the grace of God nunc perfecte innovat hominem c. doth now perfectly renew a man by deliuering him from all his sinnes ad corporis immortalitatem perducit and bringeth him also to the immortalitie of the bodie Lyranus likewise comprehendeth both these deliuerances that both the regenerate are here deliuered from their sinnes and in the next life shall be freed from all corruption as the Apostle saith Philip. 3.21 Who shall change our vile bodie that it may be fashioned like vnto his glorious bodie so Chrysostome saith the Apostle giueth thanks quod non solum principibus malis liberamur sed eoruÌ„ quae futura sunt capaces facti sumus that we are not onely deliuered from the former euills namely our sinnes but are made capable of the good things to come thus also Pellican the Saints reioyce se primitijs spiritus donatos c. that they are endued with the first fruits of the spirit which giue them certaine hope of the inheritance to come and Beza the Apostle sheweth that he resteth in that hope quam habet in Christo fundatam which he hath grounded on Christ. 35. Quest. Of these words I in my minde serue the law of God c. 1. By the mind the Apostle vnderstandeth the inner man reformed by grace by the flesh the part vnregenerate so that in this speach of the Apostle a double figure is to be admitted first a metonymie in that the subiect is taken for the adiunct the minde for the sanctitie and holines wrought in the minde by grace as Vatablus well interpreteth secundum spiritum meum doctum à spiritu sancto in my spirit taught by the holy spirit and the flesh for the carnall sensualitie whereby it is lead there is also a
dutie vnto God in louing him with all our heart and strength and in obeying of his will is sinne but this doth concupiscence for it hindered the Apostle v. 19. I doe not that good thing which I would Ans. Pererius answereth that concupiscence doth not hinder vs from louing of God doing of his will so far as we are bound to this life for God may be loued with all the heart two wayes one is modus perfectionis the way of perfection which is when the heart actually loueth nothing but God and thus God shall be loued onely in heauen the other way is so farre as it bindeth a man in this life when the heart is habitually inclined vnto God so that it admit nothing against it as this kind of loue is not hindered as he saith by the first motions of concupiscence to the same purpose he alleadgeth Thomas that a precept is two wayes fulfilled the one is perfectly quando pervenitur ad finem when we attaine vnto the ende intended by him which giueth the precept the other imperfectly cum non receditur ab ordine ad finem when we depart not from the way which leadeth to the ende as when the captaine biddeth his souldiours fight to obtaine the victorie he which fighteth and hath the victorie perfitly fulfilleth his will he also which fighteth and doth his best doth his will also though he get not the victorie the first kind of fulfilling the precept shall be in patria in our countrey the other is in via in the way Contra. 1. We grant that there shall be a greater perfection of obedience in the next life then can be attained vnto here but euen that perfect obedience is propounded vnto vs here and required of vs Matth. 5.28 Ye shall be perfect as your heauenly father is perfect whereupon Augustine cur non praeciperetur in hac vita ista perfectio c. why should not this perfection be commanded euen in this life though no man can attaine vnto it here non 〈◊〉 recte curritur c. for we cannot runne right if it be vnknowne whether we should runne c. lib. de spirit liter c. vltim And seeing Christs righteousnesse and obedience of the lawe was most perfect and he came to performe that which was required of vs it followeth that God in the strict rule of his iustice required of vs perfect obedience which not to performe is sinne 2. If God doe command the ende as our perfection then he which commeth short and faileth of the ende fulfilleth not the commandement as if the souldier be commanded not to giue ouer till he haue the victorie breaketh his generalls charge if he get not the superioritie of the enemie And he which misseth of the ende must needes also recedere ab ordine ad finem faile in the meanes to the ende for otherwise he might atchieue the ende 3. And that concupiscence hindreth our obedience euen in this life the Apostle sheweth v. 19. I doe not the good thing which I would 3. Argum. The Apostle directly calleth euen concupiscence wherewith he is vnwilling sinne v. 20. If I doe that I would not it is no more I that doe it but the sinne that dwelleth in me Ergo it is sinne Answ. Pererius answeareth that it is called sinne either because it is effectus peccati the effect of sinne as the writing is called the hand because it was written with the hand or because it bringeth forth sinne as frigus cold is called pigrum slouthfull because it maketh one so Contra. 1. But that is properly and truely sinne which causeth death for death came in by sinne as the Apostle saith of concupiscence that it slue him and was vnto him the cause of death v. 10.11 2. S. Augustine also confesseth that concupiscence is not onely poena peccati the punishment of sinne and causa peccati the cause of sinne sed ipsum peccatum but sinne it selfe Pererius answeareth that Augustine vnderstandeth not peccatum morale a morall sinne but vitium naturae corruptae a fault or vice of our corrupt nature as the vices in the bodie as blindnes or deafenes are called peccata seu errata naturae the faults or errors of nature because they are against the integritie and perfection of the nature of the bodie so the rebelling of the carnall concupiscence against the lawe of reason is against the integritie and perfection of the soule and so an error of nature Contra. 1. We grant that there are naturall faults both in the soule as forgetfulnesse ignorance dulnesse of vnderstanding in the bodie weakenesse infirmitie blindnesse and such like which are the fruits and effects of sinne but not sinne themselues but concupiscence is none of that kind for all these infirmities are effects and passions but the concupiscence rebelling against the minde is actiue and working and Augustine himselfe giueth a reason why he calleth it sinne quia inest illi inobedientia contra dominatum mentis because there is in it disobedience against the lawe of the minde gouerned by grace so that it disobeyeth not only the law of the mind but resisteth the motions of the spirit now all disobedience to the will of God is sinne 2. and that it is not naturall but a morall and spirituall sinne appeareth by the effects because it causeth the spirituall death of the soule Argument 4. Vnlesse the precept Thou shall not lust did prohibite the verie first motions that haue not the consent of the will then should there be no difference betweene this and the other precepts which doe condemne also ipsos prauos affectos the euill affections as of wrath enuie in the sixt of lust and carnall desire to the which the will is inclined in the seauenth so then this commandement ipsos appetitus quibus titillamur doth condemne the verie appetite which tickleth vs though it haue not our consent Calvin Pererius answereth that the other commandements onely prohibite ipsos externos actus the eternall acts of stealing committing adulterie and such like numer 58. Contra. 1. Our Blessed Sauiour confuteth him who Matth. 5. sheweth how in the former commandements the verie affections and inward purposes are restrained as of anger in the sixt thou shalt not kill of lusting after a woman in the heart in the seauenth thou shalt not commit adulterie 2. yea Pererius confuteth himselfe confessing afterward numer 60. praeceptis illis legalibus â—on solum externa peccata c. in those legall precepts not the externall workes of sinne onely to be prohibited but the verie inward concupiscence But we haue staied somewhat to long in this controuersie Controv. 9. That the commandement Thou shalt not lust is but one 1. The Romane catechisme which the Romanists generally follow deuide the last commandement into two the first forbidding the coueting of things of pleasure as the neighbours wife the other things of profit as our neighbours house and goods and they make the two first commandements thou shalt
it so the spirit dwelleth in the faithfull as the ruler and commander in the house the spirit and the flesh may be in the same house together if the flesh be as the seruant and the spirit as the master but if the flesh haue the masterie the spirit departeth like as where extreame cold hath taken possession there can be no heate at all but if the extremitie of cold be abated then there may be place for heate Martyr 4. And here we must distinguish as Origen well doth between the extraordinarie gifts of the spirits such as the Prophets and Apostles had when the spirit came vpon them in the likenes of fierie tongues and the ordinarie gifts for where the spirit is those extraordinarie graces alwaies follow not but those which the Lord seem to be conuenient for God giueth vnto euery one as he will 2. Cor. 12.11 3. And whereas the Apostle saith he that hath not the spirit of Christ is not his Origen well thus expoundeth creatura eius est sed non discipulus he is his creature still as all other things are but he is not his Disciple nor a member of his mysticall bodie 12. Quest. Of the meaning of these words v. 10. The bodie is dead because of sinne the spirit is life c. 1. Origen vnderstandeth the two parts of man the bodie and the soule and he giue in this sense the bodie is dead because of sinne mors imponitur ne peccet death is imposed vpon the bodie that it should not sinne alwaies remembring the ende and so the spirit vivit ad faciendam institiam liueth to worke righteousnes but the Apostle sheweth the cause of death in the one namely sinne and of life in the other namely righteousnes rather then the ende of both 2. Ambrose seemeth by the bodie to vnderstand the whole man that is dead because of sinne and by the spirit the holy Ghost â—â— author of life because he is giuen to iustifie vs so also Chrysostome will haue the holy Ghâ—â—t to be vnderstood which onely is not life in himselfe but giueth life vnto others so also Martyr but the other opposite part of the bodâ—â— sheweth that the spirit hath relation also vnto man 3. Some vnderstand the first clause of mortification as if the Apostle should say the â—â— die is dead quantum attinet ad peccati operationem in respect of the operation of sinne Oecumen Piscat but in this sense the same thing should be expressed in both clauses the mortifying of sinne and liuing vnto righteousnes which the opposition betweene the contraâ—â— parts of the bodie and spirit wil not heare 4. Calvin and so Osiander will haue the bodie to signifie the vnregenerate part the spirit the spirituall and regenerate but in this sense the Apostle vseth to oppose the flesh in the spirit not the bodie and the spirit 5. Wherefore by bodie we may better vnderstand that mortall part of man which is subiect to death and by the spirit the inward part of man namely his soule regenerate which liueth by faith Beza thinketh that the life of the soule is here vnderstood when it is separate from the bodie Chrysostome referreth it to the life of the resurrection Lyranus to the life of grace now in present But we may better comprehend both that both now for the present the spirit of man liueth by grace as the iust is said to liue by faith and that also is a pledge of life euerlasting afterward And this sense is most agreeable to the scope of the Apostle for hitherto he hath shewed how the spirit of Christ hath freed vs from the law of sinne in the flesh now he commeth to set forth the other part of our libertie which is from death and first presently in the spirit we liue by faith and then afterward the bodie also shall liue in the resurrection by the spirit of Christ which the Apostle sheweth in the next verse Quest. 13. How the quickening of the dead is ascribed to the spirit of Christ seeing all both good and bad shall rise 1. M. Calvins opinion is here refused who thinketh that the Apostle doth not here speake of the last and finall resurrection sed de continua spiritus operatione but of the continuall working of the spirit in vs in mortifying the reliques of sinne so also Piscator vificabit corpora vestra ad sanctificationem shall quicken your bodies vnto sanctification c. But in that sense our bodies are said to be mortua dead not mortalia mortall and the Apostle speaking of the time to come pointeth at the resurrection which shall be not that which is present in rising vnto newnes of life 2. There are three arguments of the resurrection here expressed by the Apostle the first from the power of God he that raised Christ from the dead shall also raise vs vp secondly from the correspondencie of Christ with his members as Christ was raised from the dead so shall we that are his members thirdly from the office of the spirit who shall raise vs vp that are his temples wherein he dwelleth Pareus 3. As God is said to haue raised Christ vp by his spirit so Christ raised vp himselfe by his eternall spirit omnia quippe divina pâ—â—er per Filium in Spiritu Sancto operatur all diuine things the father worketh by the Sonne in the holy Ghost Oecumen 4. Although our redemption purchased vnto vs by Christ was sufficient at once to haue redeemed both our soules and bodies tamen ordinate nobis datur it is giuen vnto vs in order and by degrees that as Christ had first a passible bodie before he had a glorious bodie so our bodies must first be mortall before they can haue immortalitie Lyran. 5. Now although the members of Christ shall be raised vp by his spirit yet the wicked also which haue not the spirit of Christ shall also rise againe but vnto iudgement they shall be raised vp by the omnipotent power of God but the righteous shall be raised by the spirit of Christ and therefore it is not said he shall raise but vinificabit he shall quicken your mortall bodie quod ipsa resurrectione maius est c. which is a greater worke then the resurrection and onely graunted to the righteous Chrysostome whom Martyr and Pareus followe Quest. 14. What it is to be lead by the spirit of God 1. There are two kind of actions of the spirit generall wherbey all things mooue liue and haue their beeing and speciall whereby the Lord worketh in the hearts of his children such is the worke of sanctification Calv. 2. And in that they are said to be lead we must not thinke that any are compelled by the spirit but this signifieth vehementem inclinationem non coactionem a vehement inclination not coaction Gorrhan God by his spirit ex nolentibus volentes facit of vnwilling maketh vs willing so he draweth vs volentes willing consequenter not antecedenter we are willing
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
might seeme to be partiall and vniust he answereth in effect thus much that whereas all are endebted to God and without Gods mercie like to perish here is no iniustice if God remit his debt to one and not to an other as Augustine saith debitum si non reddis habes quod gratuleris si reddis non habes quod queraris if thou doe not pay the debt which thou owest thou hast cause to be thankfull if thou doest thou hast no cause to complaine So then the Apostle here sheweth that betweene the decree of election and reprobation and the execution thereof there came betweene certaine subordinate causes all are sinners in Adam for mercie presupposeth miserie where the Lord then findeth all in miserie there if he shew mercie to some and not to others no man can accuse him of iniustice because he is not endebted or tied in his iustice vnto any but all are by nature the children of wrath if then he saue some out of that masse of corruption it is a worke of his mercie and no iniustice is to be imputed vnto him where in iustice nothing is due to any to this purpose Beza annot Quest. 16. How it is said It is not in him that willeth nor in him that runneth but in God that sheweth mercie 1. Origen and Heirom ad Hedib qu. 10. thinke that the Apostle speaketh here in the person of one that contradicteth and obiecteth against that which he had said and Chrysostome saith that the Apostle hero aliam obiectionem inducit bringeth in an other obiection But it is euident by this note of illation so then that the Apostle thus inferreth and includeth out of the former places of Scripture alleadged 2. Origen and Photius with other Greeke expositors supplie here the word solum onely as if the Apostle should meane It is not onely in him that runneth or in him that willeth but in God that sheweth mercie and Origen will haue this sentence to be vnderstood comparatiuely as those two other places Psal. 127. Except the Lord build the house they labour but in vaine that build it and 1. Cor. 3. Neither be that planteth is any thing nor he that watereth but God that giueth increase But these places are not like for the first is a ciuill action to build an house wherein the will of man hath some libertie though it cannot prosper without the blessing of God and like as the outward ministerie of man is nothing auailable vnto saluation without the assistance and concurrence of the spirit so neither can the will or endeauour of man doe any thing of it selfe toward the attaining of saluation but all must be ascribed to Gods mercie Martyr and beside the antithesis or opposition but in God that sheweth mercie excludeth that glosse onely for Gods mercie and mans will cannot in this opposition be ioyned as workers together seeing the one is excluded and the other admitted Pareus Calvin here also presseth Augustines reason that if the Apostles words admitted any such sense then they might as well be inuerted to say It is not in God that sheweth mercie but in him that willeth and runneth that is it is not onely in the one no more then in the other 3. Some of the Romanists that will not haue mans free will vtterly excluded in the worke of saluation haue this deuise that although there be somewhat in him that willeth and runneth yet all is ascribed to Gods mercie because miserecordia Dei praeuenit voluntarem hominis c. the mercie of God preuenteth the will of man c. and mans will beeing thus prepared then worketh together with grace Pererius numer 46. taking vpon him herein to confute Calvin Thomas Aquine in his Commentarie here moouing this question why seeing that as free will is not sufficient without grace so neither grace sufficeth without freewill yet all is ascribed to Gods mercie answeareth by a distinction because the grace of God is agens principale the principall agent mans will secundum instrumentale is the second agent and the instrument to the which the worke is not ascribed but to the principall agent as the axe is not said to make a chest but the artificer that worketh with it Contra. Pet. Martyr vseth the same similitude but to a diuers ende mans will indeede God vseth as an instrument but not any goodnes in mans will which it should of it selfe without grace the will of man concurreth as a naturall instrument in respect of the naturall facultie of calling but it hath no inclination to that which is good but as it pleaseth God to mooue it Mans will then is a naturall instrument of the action but not a morall instrument of the goodnes of the action this is wrought wholly by the mercie and grace of God therefore the ordinarie glosse here concludeth well out of Augustine restat vt totum Deo datur it remaineth that the whole be giuen vnto God volentem praevenit vt velit subsequitur â—e frustra velit he preuenteth man to make him will and followeth him with his grace that he doe not will in vaine c. And I preferre here the iudgement of Tolet and Bellarmine before other Romanists the first inferreth out of this place non fuit nisi ex sola voluntate Dei the calling of the Gentiles was onely of the will of God annot 23. the other likewise so expoundeth this place that it is onely the mercie of God nothing at all in the will of man that he perseuereth to the ende lib. 2. de grat c. 12. 4. Ambrose by mercie vnderstandeth the discerning iudgement of God as he giueth instance in Dauid and Saul how both of them asked pardon of God but God discerned vter bono animo peteret which of them asked of a good minde and so he will haue the meaning to be that it was not enough for a man to will and endeauour vnlesse God did confirme and allow of his endeauour But there is great difference betweene the mercie of God and the iudgement and approbation of God for but part of the worke is ascribed to the one whereas the whole is due to the other ex Mart. 5. Now touching the true meaning of the words 1. neither with Anastasius qu. 59. are they to be restrained to Esaus running and coursing in the field to hunt for venison for his father 2. nor yet with Tolet to Iacobs running to the flocke to fetch a kid Gen. 27. the Apostles doctrine is more generall 3. nor yet as the same Tolet annot 23. is this sentence onely to be applied in generall to the calling of the Gentiles and the reiection of the Iewes but with August epist. 101. doe we interpret this place of the particular predestination of euery one that it dependeth not vpon the foresight of the will and works of men but onely on the mercie of God 4. Osiander vnderstandeth it of the willing and running of naturall and vnregenerate men among
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
in Ezek. Hilar. lib. 8. de Trin. so also Haymo gloss interlin Tolet Gorrhan Lyran. but this seemeth to be too curious for this phrase by whom is as well giuen vnto the Father 1. Cor. 1.9 as vnto the Sonne 4. Wherefore this clause of whome through whome and for whome c. is better referred to the whole Trinity as Chrysost. interpreteth ipse fecit ipso conservat he made he preserueth all things so also Augustine as the ordin glosse citeth him sheweth how euery one of these prepositions of through for may be applied vnto euery one of the glorious persons of the Trinitie and so all things are of God as the first cause by him as the preseruer of all things and in him as the end and perfection Thomas so all things are à seipso nullo alio movente from himselfe none other moouing him per seipsum nullo alio adiuvante by himselfe none other helping and propter seipsum onely for himselfe and for none other cause for he made all things for his owne glosse Calvin 5. Whereas the vulgar Latin readeth in the third place in ipso in him in the originall the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in ipsum for him which sheweth that God is the ende and perfection of all that all things were ordained for him that is to set forth his glorie and so readeth Chrysostome 4. Places of Doctrine Doct. 1. Of Gods prescience v. 2. God hath not cast away his people which he knew before Concerning Gods prescience and foreknowledge 1. It is a certaine truth that there is in God from the beginning a prescience of all things in the world before they were Act. 15.18 From the beginning of the world God knoweth all his workes 2. There is in God a double kind of prescience one is cognationis of knowledge onely and speculatiue whereby he foreseeth onely things that shall be or it is also approbationis a prescience ioyned with approbation and liking which is also called practica his practicall prescience 3. This latter kind of prescience in God which is ioyned with his will and approbation is the cause of things the other is not 4. The prescience of God is certaine and infallible for God is not as man that he can lie or be deceaued whatsoeuer he foreseeth shall be shall certainely come to passe 5. Gods prescience doth not impose a necessitie vpon such things as fall out in the world but onely in respect of the first cause which is the infallible knowledge of God and so all things euen those which seeme to happen by chaunce are necessarie necessitate infallibilitatis by an infallible necessitie in respect of Gods prescience which cannot be deceiued but in respect of the second causes euery thing remaineth in it owne nature such things as haue necessarie causes are foreseene of God as necessarie certaine and definite such was the betraying of Christ by Iudas before so decreed and determined of God Act. 13. but such things as are contingent and casuall doe so remaine still in themselues though in respect of Gods foresight are necessarie as 1. Sam. 23.11 the Lord answeareth Dauid that if he stayed still in Keilah Saul would come downe and the Lord of the towne would deliuer him into Sauls hands this was a thing contingent coniectâ— all onely and probable but in respect of Gods foreknowledge it was certaine that Dauid should not stay there and so neither Saul would come downe 6. Gods prescience and foreknowledge is thus distinguished from election and predestination either it signifieth the generall prescience and foreknowledge of God of all things both the good which the Lord himselfe decreed to doe or the euill which he decreed to permit and so prescience differeth from election as the whole from the part for election is but a part of Gods generall prescience and prouidence or Gods prescience and foreknowledge is taken for election it selfe and so it is all one with election as here the Apostle saith God hath not cast away his people whom he knowe before and thirdly Gods foreknowledge signifieth his loue and approbation of those whom he electeth as S. Peter saith 1. epist. 1.2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God and thus Gods foreknowledge differeth from election as the cause from the effect for the loue acceptance and approbation of God is the cause of election Doct. 2. Gods generall promises or threatnings must haue a particular application v. 1. I demaund then hath God cast away his people God forbid c. The Apostle had in the ende of the former chapter alleadged out of the Prophet a generall complaint against Israel All the day long haue I stretched out my hand to a disobedient people which menacing speach though generally propounded yet the Apostle would not haue generally vnderstood of all the people for they were not all cast off but onely the peruerse and obstinate So likewise the promises of God made vnto Abraham and his seede did not concerne all but onely those which were the true Israel and children of the promise as the Apostle shewed before c. 9.7.8 Doct. 3. Against the old Pagane names of dayes and moneths v. 4. Which haue not bowed the knee to Baal c. In the place 1. King 19. whence this is cited it is added further nor kissed him with their mouth whereupon Pet. Martyr obserueth that they did neither honour Baal with the kisses of their mouth nor yet in naming him with their lippes whereupon the Lord saith he would not be called of the people Baali that is my husband or Lord but ishi mi vir my man or husband and the reason is added For I will take the name of Baalam out of their mouth Hosh. 2. â—â— though the Lord were indeede Baal that is the Lord and husband of his people yet because they gaue that name to their idoles the Lord would none of it and so Pet. Martyr inferreth further that he wondreth how those Pagan tearmes of the moneths as March so called of Mars and of the dayes of the weeke as moonday of the moone and twesday of Mars which planets the beathen made their gods were at the first taken vp of the Christians which might better saue beene layed downe though nowe there is no such danger as in the beginning when Christians were newly conuerted from Pagan Idolatrie Doct. 4. Of the grace of God with the diuerse kinds properties and effects thereof v. 6. If it be of grace c. 1. The grace of God either signifieth his free loue and mercie which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the gifts of grace which are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. the grace loue and fauour of God in the first sense is either eternall in his election before the world was or temporall in the actuall vocation of the elect and this grace is either praeveâ—â—â—â—â— a preuenting grace whereby he calleth and converteth as Psal. 59.10 My mercifull God will prevent me or it
adoration and humble prostrating of himselfe 3. All idololatricall worship is forbidden but all religious adoration giuen vnto the creatures is such as tendeth to idolatrie because it ascribeth vnto the creature that which is peculiar to the Creator as to knowe the heart to be present euerie where to haue power to helpe and such like for they which pray vnto Angels and Saints and prostrate them before their images haue this opinion of them that they are present to heare and helpe them which onely God can doe Ergo such religious adoration is idolatrous See further of this question Synops. Controv. 4. Of the comparison betweene virginitie and mariage The Rhemists in their annotation 1. Cor. 7.31 doe extoll virginitie in such sort that they doe much disgrace marriage for these are their words virginitie hath a gratefull puritie and sanctitie of bodie and soule which mariage hath not c. and for this cause they say that Priests are forbidden marriage That they may be cleane and pure from all fleshly acts of copulation c. But this were to make mariage vncleane whereas it is not the matrimoniall act but the lasciuious and wanton minde which abuseth mariage that bringeth vncleanenesse with it Origen is more equall who vpon these words v. 1. giue vp your bodies a liuing sacrifice â—â—â—â—ly c. thus writeth quoniam videmus nonnullos sanctorum aliquas etiam Apostolâ—◠〈◊〉 buisse coniugium c. because we see that certaine of the Saints and some of the Apostles were married we cannot vnderstand the Apostle here to meane virgintie onely c. but that they which are in coniugijs positi c. placed in mariage and by consent for a time doe giue themselues to prayer corpora sua exhibere posse hostiam viuentem c. may exhibite their bodies a liuing sacrifice if in other things sanctè agant iustè c. they deale holily and iustly c. and concerning virgins he further saith that if they be polluted with pride or couetousnesse or such like they are not to be thought ex sola virginitate corporis c. by the onely virginitie of their bodies to offer vp a liuing sacrifice vnto God c. Thus then there may be both puritie and sanctitie in mariage and as the Apostle saith an vndefiled bed Heb. 13.4 which the Rhemists denie and there may be pollution and vncleanesse in virginitie See further Synops. Papis Centur. 3. er 97. Controv. 5. The minde it selfe and not the sensuall part onely hath neede of renovation v. 2. Be changed by the renewing of your mind this is against the position of the Philosophers as Aristotle affirmeth Ethic. 1.13 that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reason alway perswadeth and mooueth vnto the best things the Romanists doe iumpe with them herein who thinke the sensuall part of the minde onely to be corrupted But 1. the Apostle here sheweth that the verie minde and spirituall part of the soule hath neede of renouation 2. indeede in ciuill things and morall duties the reason may be a guide but in diuine and supernaturall it is blind and erroneous 3. and if it be here obiected that the Philosophers as Socrates Plato did many excellent things by the light of reason I answear that yet in those things they failed of the true ende for they respected not the honour and glorie of God but sought perfection by their owne endeauour and herein they shewed the error and corruption of their mind 4. yea the reason is so farre off from beeing a perfect guide that euen in the regenerate it hath neede still to be renewed as in the Romanes here to whom S. Paul writeth how much more in the vnregenerate Controv. 6. Of the perfection of the Scriptures against traditions v. 2. To prooue what the will of God is acceptable and perfect this perfect will of God is no where els reuealed but in the scriptures if they containe a perfect reuelation of the will of God then there neede no other additaments what vse then of humane traditions such as many the Church of Rome is pestered with which haue no warrant out of the Scripture which beeing able to make the man of God perfect to euerie good worke 2. Tim. 3.17 all other helpes and supplyes are superstitious and superfluous See further hereof Synops. Centur 1. err 11.13 Controv. 7. Against freewill v. 2. And be not fashioned c. Tolet hence collecteth because the vulgar Latine thus readeth nolite configurari c. haue you no will to be conformed c. that it is positum in arbitrio hominis placed in the will of man whether thus to be fashioned or not whereas there is no such word in the originall for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth be not fashioned not be ye not willing to be fashioned and beside the verie next words be ye changed by the renewing of your mind doe confute this opinion and euidently shewe that a man hath no free-will of himselfe vnto that which is good Indeede the Scriptures doe vse exhortations to the regenerate to shewe that it must be the worke of the spirit to stirre them vp to doe those things whereunto they are exhorted See further Synops. Papis Centur. 4. err 46. Controv. 8. Against the arrogancie of the Pope v. 3. According as God hath dealt to euerie man c. Then euerie man hath his certime measure and stint of gifts one hath not receiued all as the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 7.7 Euerie man hath his proper gift of God c. Then that man of pride here sheweth himselfe in his colors who arrogateth to himselfe authoritie ouer the whole Church and boasteth to haue all knowledge locked vp in his breast wherein he sheweth not himselfe to be a seruant of Christs for all his seruants haue receiued a portion and measure of gifts one alone hath not all Pareus Controv. 9. Against the superstitious orders of the Popish Clergie v. 7. Or he that teacheth on teaching c. Pet. Martyr and Gualter vpon this place do shew what was the oeconomie ecclesiasticall policie and discipline of the Primitiue Church how first they had praesides doctrinae the presidents of doctrine then they had assistants the Seniors and Elders qui disciplinam publicam conservabant which did preserue the publike discipline the next were the deacons which dispensed the treasure of the Church vnto whom were ioyned such as attended the sicke as in this place the Apostle setteth downe fiue offices of the Church pastors and teachers that attended the spirituall edifying of the Church then distributors rulers shewers of mercie whose care was for the externall discipline but now ne nominaÌ„ quidem extant c. not so much as the names remaine of these functions Martyr or as Gualter praeter inauia nomina c. beside vaine names and titles nothing is left in the Popish Church but they substituted other orders as Acoluthists exorcistes doorekeepers candlebearers and such like See more hereof