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.
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
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.
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
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
is soule of my soule as he saith bone of my bones flesh of my flesh 2. Gen. 46.26 it is said that 66. soules came out of the loines of Iacob Answ. here the soule is taken for person and by a synecdoche the whole man is vnderstood by a part and that is said of the whole because of the vnitie of the person and the neare coniunction of the soule and bodie which is true onely in the one part namely the bodie which onely came out of the parentes loines in the same sense Marie is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the mother of God because Christ both God and man was borne of her and yet he was borne onely as man 3. If the soule be not propagated by generation but created in the bodie then it would follow that God on the seauenth day had not made an end of the creation Answ it followeth not God ceased from creating any new kind but now the inspiring of the soule is but a continnuing of that way of the soule which God in the first creation made for it The better opinion then is animas creando infundi infundendo creari that the soules are infused by creation and created by infusion the reasons of which opinion are these 1. the direct words of Scripture Zacha. 12.1 God is said to haue formed the spirit of man within him And Hebr. 12.9 he is called the father of spirits 2. an other ground of this opinion is taken from the nature and condition of the soule it is a spirituall and immateriall essence immortall and incorruptible and therefore cannot come of corruptible and corporall seed 3. Christs soule came the same way which other mens soules doe for otherwise he should not be like vs in all things sinne excepted but his soule was not propagated from Marie for if he had both his bodie and soule from her he might as well be said to haue beene in the loines of Abraham when he paied tithes to Melchisedech as Levi Hebr. 7.10 and yet though Leui had his bodie onely not his soule from the loines of Abraham he is said to be in his loines because he came from thence by the ordinarie and common generation but so did not Christ seeing then this opinion is refused of the generation and derivation of the soule we also reiect this answer concerning the propagating of originall sinne 4. This then is our more full answer vnto this obiection of the Pelagians 1. although we can not giue a sufficient reason of this how originall sinne should be propagated yet it is enough for vs that it is so that we are all by nature the children of wrath 2. it is not true that onely the flesh and bodie of man is propagated from the parents for then man should conferre lesse in his generation then brute beasts from whom not the bodies onely but the spirits doe issue in the generation of their kind so then totus homo ex toto homine nascitur whole man is generated of whole man and anima licet non materialiter tamen originaliter the soule though not materially yet originally is taken from Adam Pareus we doe not say that the soule of man is deriued from the soule of the father yet man consisting of bodie and soule is begotten of his father the Lord beeing the father of spirits concurring in that naturall act of carnall generation 3. it is denied that the soule onely is the feate of sinne it is the corruption of the whole man consisting both of bodie and soule the whole man then is corrupted and so the feate and place of sinne Pareus and how the soule beeing created pure commeth to be infected with sinne Lyranus wel sheweth sicut liquor bonus inficitur ex corruptione vasis c. as a good liquor is infected by the corruption of the vessell so originall sinne provenit ex carne causaliter sed tamen in anima est subiective formaliter commeth of the flesh as the cause but it is in the soule as the subiect and formally like as sickenes and infirmitie commeth of corrupt and vnholesome meats as the cause but the meate is not capable of sickenes as the subiect the bodie is the subiect of sickenes to this purpose Lyranus Faius expresseth it by this similitude the pure soule is infected with the contagion of impute seed sicut manu immunda flos insignis polâ—â—â—tur c. like as a faire flower is polluted with vncleane hands Pet. Martyr yet more distinctly sheweth the manner how this pollution entreth into the soule corporis impuritate imbecillitate sua by two waies the impuritie of the bodie and it owne weaknesseâ— for both the soule is weake and not able to resist the corrupt inclination of the flesh it is not created in such strength and perfection as Adams soule was and the bodie is vnapt and vnfit for any spirituall worke and this may suffice for an answer vnto this obiection of the Pelagians concerning the originall of the soule Controv. 13. Against the Pelagians and Papists that originall sinne is not quite taken away in baptisme 1. The Pelagians obiect further that there is no originall sinne propagated vnto Adams posteritie or at the least remaining in them for that which is taken away and blotted out remaineth not now originall sinne is taken away in baptisme and therefore it is no more extant Answer There must be two things considered in sinne the act thereof as the matter and the guilt now there is herein a great difference betweene originall and other actuall sinnes for in those the act is transitorie and remaineth not and the guilt is remitted by faith in Christ in originall sinne though the guilt thereof be remitted in baptisme yet the matter thereof which is the corruption and deprauation of mans nature remaineth it passeth not away as the transitorie act of other actuall sinnes and for the more full demonstration hereof Augustine vseth two similitudes like as the corne is sowen without chaffe or straw and yet the corne that springeth of the seed hath both and as they which were circumcised beget children that are vncircumcised and had neede of a new circumcision so the fathers beeing regenerate by a new birth yet doe beget vnregenerate children the sanctitie of the parents no more passeth to their children then their knowledge and other vertues Mart. 2. The Romanists denie not but there remaineth a corruption of nature still in the children of God after Baptisme but they say it remaineth vt poena exercenda vertâ—tis materia not as a fault but as a punishment and matter or occasion for the exercising of vertue Lyran. And it was concluded in the Councell of Trent in baptisme tolli omne illud quod veram habet propriam rationem peccati all that to be taken away which hath the proper and true nature of sinne Concil Trident. sess 5. the Rhemists also affirme that children baptized haue neither mortall nor
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
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
to make request by the merit and efficacie of his death and the continuall demostration of his loue to this purpose Chrysostome though it must be confessed that Christ beeing God and man otherwise maketh intercession for vs then either God the father or the holy spirit which tooke not our â—â—ure vpon them 4. that Christ vseth no formall or interstinct prayers it is euident by that place Ioh. 11.41 Howbeit thou hearest me alwayes but because of the people that stood by I said it that they may beleeue that thou hast sent me hence two reasons may be gathered that if Christ pray he alwayes prayeth he alwaies is heard his intercession then is his continuall will and desire which is heard Christ spake in his prayer that others hearing might beleeue but now there is no such cause in heauen therefore nowe no such occasion is of formall and distinct prayers 5. Tolets argument is nothing for the Saints now make no formall prayers in heauen but by their voices and desires Reuel 6.9 the soules vnder the altar crie vnto God and Christ is a Priest for euer after the order of Milchisedech in that the fruits of his passion and mediation continue for euer though such distinct and and formall prayers be 〈◊〉 powred out Quest. 54. Whether Christs intercession and interpellation for vs do extenuate the merit of his death 1. Obiect This doubt may be mooued because that seemeth not to be of sufficient merit which needeth a further supply now if Christs mediation for vs be a supply vnto his death and passion then was not that alone sufficient Answ. 1. The intercession of Christ is not to merit our redemption which is purchased by his death but to apply vnto vs ratifie and confirme our saluation merited by Christs death so that the worke of our redemption is perfited by Christs death and in respect of the worke it selfe nothing can be added but on our part because we are weake and doe often fall into sinne our saluation had neede continually to be confirmed and applyed vnto vs to which ende Christs mediation helpeth 2. like as other meanes as the hearing of the word prayer the receiuing of the Sacraments doe not argue any imperfection and insufficiencie in the worke of our redemption but in vs that haue neede of such helpes and supplyes whereby Christs death is applyed 3. And whereas Christs mediation is grounded vpon the merit of his death and passion it is so farre from detracting to the merit thereof that it rather amplyfieth and setteth forth the dignitie of it Quest. 55. What charitie the Apostle speaketh of from which nothing can separate vs. 1. Chrysostome Oecumen Theophyl Origen and most of the Greeke and Latine exposition as Augustine Aâ—b do vnderstand this of the actiue loue which we beare toward God but it is better referred vnto the passiue loue wherewith we are beloued of God for 1. this is more agreeable to the Apostles scope who hitherto hath vrged the loue and mercie of God toward vs in our predestination vocation iustification in giuing his owne Sonne for vs Mat. 2. the Apostle so expoundeth himselfe v. 39. the loue of God which is in Christ Iesus Gryn so also is it taken c. 5.5 the loue of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 3. and our loue toward God sepenumero fluctuas doth oftentimes waver and sadeth in it as in Dauid 2. Sam. 11.4 and so it were a verie vnstable foundation for vs to stay vpon 〈◊〉 The Apostles meaning then is that no kind of trouble or affliction which the world taketh to be signes of Gods anger can yet separate vs from the loue of God and make vs lesse beloued of him 2. Then the Apostle rehearseth sixe seuerall kinds of affliction which are incident to the children of God the vulgar Latine numbreth seuen adding one more namely persecution which is not in the originall Lyranus sorteth them into this order these passions and sufferings of the Saints are either death it selfe signified by the sword or dispositions to death either nearer or more remote and further off the nearer are either in respect of the thing â—â— danger or in the apprehension thereof anguish the more remote are either in substractione necessarij in the subtracting of necessarie things as of food in famine of rayment in nakednesse or in illatione nocumenti in the offring and bringing in of some hurt as in tribulation But the sorting out of these into their seuerall places doth invert the order wherein the Apostle hath placed them which it is safest to followe 3. The Syrian translator readeth for vs who shall separate me which reading Beza seemeth to approoue because thereby the Apostle sheweth how euerie one should make particular application of his faith to himselfe and the Apostle was not so secure of other mens faith as so to pronounce of them But the Greeke text is more authenticall which readeth vs and Osiander verie well obserueth thereupon that the Apostle speaketh not of his owne person alone but of all the faithfull in generall to shewe this certaintie of saluation to belong vnto all that beleeue Quest. 56. Of these words v. 36. For thy sake are we killed all the day long 1. Calvin observeth and P. Martyr noteth the same that the 44. Psalme from whence this testimonie is alleadged describeth rather the persecution of the Church of God vnder Antiochus then vnder the Chaldeans for they were carried into captiuitie and afflicted by the Chaldeans for their idolatrie but vnder Antiochus they suffred for giuing testimonie to the lawe and therefore it is said for thy sake are we killed c. 2. For thy sake Simply to be killed or put to death is not commendable but it is the cause which maketh the suffrings of the Martyrs glorious and honourable and there are three things requisite in true Martyrdome first the cause they must suffer for Christs sake Matth. 5.11 then their person that they be righteous and innocent men of integritie not offenders and euill liuers for then they cannot suffer for righteousnesse sake Matth. 5.10 lastly the ende must be considered that they doe it not for vaine glorie but in loue to God and his Church as the Apostle saith If I giue my bodie to be burned and haue no loue it profiteth me nothing Martyr 3. All the day 1. Chrysostome referreth it to the minde which is alwayes readie and prepared to suffer for Christ. 2. Origen omni vitae tempore all the time of the life so also Haymo iugiter continually Pellican sine intermissione without intermission Pareus 3. Pet. Martyr vnderstandeth it of the continuall expectation of death in the time of persecution so also M. Calvin 4. Osiander applyeth it to the number of those which are persecuted to death the tyrants are not content with the death of some few sed grassantur in quam plurimos they rage against many 5. Gryneus vnderstandeth by all the day
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
amorem tautopere hoc ardet desiderio for the loue of Christ he is so much inflamed with this desire it followeth not therefore he desireth to be separated from Christ therefore from his loue he wisheth not to be depriued amicita Christi sed fructu amicitiae of the friendship of Christ but onely of the fruit of his friendship which was euerlasting felicitie Pareus 2. Obiect If S. Paul herein respected the glorie of God in the saluation of the Iewes why did he not likewise wish to be separated for the saluation of the Gentiles Answ. S. Paul no doubt was readie to doe the like for them but there was not the like occasion for the Gentiles flocked to Christ and receiued the Gospell but the Iewes were stubborne and euerie where resisted their calling and therefore for them he maketh this vowe Mart. 3. Obiect But S. Paul knewe that he could not indeede be separated from Christ as he professed before c. 8.38 that nothing could separate him from the loue of God in Christ. Ans. 1. Lyranus thinketh that this vowe of Paul as likewise that of Moses was secundum dispositionem inferioris partis animae according to the disposition of the inferiour part of the mind where the affections are for loue nec mensuram scit nec modum knoweth neither measure nor manner not in the deliberate and reasonable part of the minde 2. But the better answear is that it was votum conditionale a conditionall not an absolute vowe if it were the will of God as Christs petition was for the passing away of the cuppe of his death if it were his fathers will Pareus so the Apostle speaketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after a sort and with condition if it might be Gryneus And to the same purpose before them Oecumenius 〈◊〉 absolute haec dixit tanquam possibilia sed sub conditione he spake not these things absolutely as if they were possible but with a condition for if Paul for the loue of Christ could haue beene separated from Christ he should againe haue beene so much the more firmely ioyned vnto Christ for if loue be the cause of vnion then so great loue of the Apostle would haue caused so much nearer coniunction 4. Obiect Though a man be bound by the rule of charitie to giue his temporall life for an others spirituall life yet he is not bound to giue his soule euerlastingly to perish if it were in his choice that others should not so perish like as one is not bound to redeeme an others bodily life by the losse of his so neither the spirituall life of the soule by the losse of his owne Tolet thus obiecteth annot 4. and therefore he inferreth that in this sense it had beene an inordinate and vaine desire in the Apostle Answ. 1. Some thinke that euery man is bound to redeeme the saluation of others by the losse of his owne sauing that fewe can attaine vnto such perfection of charitie for the rule of charitie is this that we should doe that for others which we would haue done for our selues now a man had rather that an other should giue himselfe to ransome him then he should perish and Christ was enflamed with such charitie that he became a curse for vs and the like minde should be in Christs members to wish to be accursed for their brethren as Origen inferreth Quid mirum si cum Dominus pro servis sit factus maledictum servus pro â—â—â—â—ribus anathema fiat what maruell is it when the Lord was made a curse for the seruants if a seruant become an anathema for his brethren Pareus also giueth instance in Christ who was made a curse for vs dub 1. Contra. 1. That saying of our Sauiour whatsoeuer you would that one should doe vnto you doe vnto them Augustine well vnderstandeth â—â—â—â—cta iusta voluntate of a right and iust minde not otherwise for if a man could be content vpon a lewde mind that his wife should commit adulterie with an other it followeth not that the other should yeeld his wife to his wicked desire so for a man to wish that an other would giue his soule for his were no iust or equall desire 2. Christ though he did beare the punishment due to vs and did beare the curse of the lawe yet he was neuer avulsâ—â— Ã Deo separated or pulled away from God Mart. and there is great difference between the person of the Redeemer and his exceeding loue and those which are redeemed who herein cannot be imitators of Christ. 2. As these doe iustifie Pauls desire hauing relation onely to the loue of his brethren so Chrysostome aymeth onely at the glorie of God that in respect thereof Paul made no account of his saluation but he expressely maketh not mention thereof for modestie sake lest he should seeme to boast too much of his loue toward Christ But Tolet sheweth the insufficiencie of this reason because Paul had professed before that nothing could separate him from the loue of Christ he might also as modestly haue wished here to be an anathema for Christ. 3. I preferre therefore Calvins solution that neither Saint Paul had here respect vnto the glorie of God alone or vnto the saluation of his brethren alone sed charitatem hominum in studio gloriae Dei contungimus but we ioyne the loue of men with a desire of the glorie of God c. he wisheth the saluation of his brethren with respect vnto the glorie of God as Moses in the like case in making request for his people therein desired the promoting of Gods glorie Now the Apostle saith for his brethren vt inserviret causae to apply himselfe to the cause in hand which was to testifie the great desire that he had to their saluation yet as ioyned with the glorie of Christ as is euident v. 5. where he addeth who is God ouer all Blessed for euer Mart. So then not withstanding these or any other such like obiections I preferre Chrysostomes interpretation of these words of the Apostle who in the zeale to Gods glorie loue to his brethren wisheth that he were cut off from Christ so they might be saued according to that saying in the Gospell that it were better that one of the members should perish then that the whole body should be cast into hell for the Apostle had herein respect vnto the glorie of God should haue more appeared in the sauing of the multitude of that nation as the whole bodie he beeing cut off but as one member then that he should be saued and the whole bodie perish to this purpose Chrysost. vpon that place in the Gospel Anselme likewise vpon this place saith that Paul optabat perire desired to perish so the rest might be saued and this sense he confirmeth by the like desire of two great Prophets Moses and Micah this latter c. 2.11 wisheth thus I would I were a man not hauing the spirit and that I did speake lies voluit se
father as Rom. 1.23 2. Cor. 1.3 and 11.31 2. Not euery one that is called God in Scripture is consequently that chiefe and great God 3. Christ is said to be ouer all that is men as the most excellent man of all not ouer all whatsoeuer 4. He is said to be ouer all with a limitation for he is not ouer him that hath subdued all things vnto him 1. Cor. 15.27 5. And in that he is ouer all he hath it not by nature but of gift Philip. 2.9 Contra. Erasmus seemeth first to haue giuen occasion to these newfangled Dogmatists who likewise in his annotations vpon this place thinketh this Scripture not so fit to prooue the diuine nature of Christ adding that herein there is no daunger seeing there are more direct places to prooue Christs Godhead by But Pet. Martyr here answeareth well non convenit vt Ecclesiae armamentarium sine causa exhauriatur c. it is not conuenient that the armorie of the Church should without cause be diminished seeing the fathers as Origen Chrysost Theophylact Cyprian cont lud lib. 2. c. 5. Hilarius in Psal. 122. doe all alleadge this place for the proofe of Christs deitie it is not fit that we should suffer it to be wrestled out of our hands their cauills are thus answeared 1. Where the father is said to be blessed for euer the Sonne is not excluded and in some places Christ is said expressely to be blessed for euer as Matth. 21.9 Blessed is be that commeth in the name of the Lord and if the Creator be blessed for euer Christ is included by whom all things were created Ioh. 1. Coloss. 1. 2. He which is said to be God ouer all as Christ here must of necessitie be that chiefe and great God 3. Some indeede reade super omnia ouer all things as Origen the Syrian and Latine interpreter and this is agreeable to that place Coloss. 1.17 He is before all things and in him all things consist and the Apostle nameth both things visible and invisible and so Origen well expoundeth he is aboue all things that is powers principalities and euerie thing that is named 4. He is aboue all things that is all creatures and aboue all as the father is aboue all and yet neither aboue the Sonne or the holy Ghost the father then is here excepted for Christ and his father are one non post patrem ipse sed de patre he is not after the father but of the father Origen 5. S. Paul in that place speaketh of the exaltation of Christ as he is Mediator and according to his humane nature and so he hath it by gift but as he is God he is ouer all by his eternall generation as the onely begotten Sonne of God Controv. 4. That the water in Baptisme doth not sanctifie or giue grace Chrysostome sheweth here a fit analogie and resemblance betweene the birth of Izaak oâ— Sara by the word of promise v. 9. and our spirituall regeneration in baptisme the barren wombe of Sarah he likeneth to the water which of it selfe hath no efficacie erat vterni ille aqua frigidior propter sterilitatem senectutem that wombe was more vnapt for generation then water because of the barrennesse and old age thereof like as then Izaak was borne of that barren wombe by the word of promise ita nos oportet ex verbo nasci so we are borne of the word To this purpose Chrysostome who maketh the element of water of it selfe but a dead thing and like vnto Sarahs barren wombe which could not haue conceiued but by the word of promise So the Apostle saith Ephes. 5.25 Cleansing it by the washing of water thorough the word the water cleanseth but by the operation of the word This then ouerthroweth that opinion of the Romanists which affirme that the sacramentall signe in the sacraments conferre grace See further hereof Synops. Centur. 2. err 76. Controv. 5. Against the vaine observation of Astrologers in casting of nativities v. 10. Rebecca when she had conceiued by one c. Augustine lib. 2. de doctrin Christian. c. 21. by this Scripture confuteth the folly of Mathematicians who in casting of mens natiuities doe obserue the aspect of the planets and so doe calculate and coniecture of the disposition of men for Esau and Iacob were borne at the same time of one and the same parents and yet they were of diuerse dispositions and qualities and conditions of life Controv. 6. That the soules had no beeng in a former life before they came into the bodie It was Origens error who therein did too much Platonize that the soules in the former life according to their workes good or euill were accordingly appointed of God to saluation or damnation But this error is euidently conuinced by the Apostle here for Esau and Iacob had neither done good nor euill before they were borne Lyranus addeth two other reasons to convince this error 1. if there had beene an other life before then the world was not created in the beginning as it is said Gen. 1.1 for that the soules had a beeing and beginning before 2. and temporale non potest esse causa aeterni no temporall thing can be the cause of that which is eternall the actions then and workes of the soule could not be the cause of the act of Gods eternall will Controv. 7. Whether the foresight of faith or workes be the cause of election This was in time past maintained by the followers of the Pelagian sect as it appeareth by the epistles of Prosper and Hilarius Arelatens sent to Augustine and not much differing is the opinion of the Greeke expositors as Theodoret in these words that the purpose of God might remaine according to election vnderstandeth the purpose of men foreseene of God according to the which he electeth But the Apostle euidently calleth it the purpose of God and therefore not of men Chrysost. and Photius cited by Oecumenius doe here vnderstand the purpose of God but where it is added according to election they say this election presupposeth a difference and diuersitie of wills foreseene of God The late Lutherans tread in the same steppesâ— who at the first did hold that the foresight of faith was the cause of election but now they haue somewhat refined that assertion and their opinion now is fidem non esse electionis causam meritoriam sed instrument alem that faith is not the meritorious but the instrumentall cause of election their arguments are these 1. Argum. Photius thus reasoneth electio de illis fit qui aliqua in re differunt election is said to be of those which differ in some thing God then did see some difference in them which he elected from others Contra. 1. Augustine at the first was somewhat mooued with this argument which made him deuise an other sense of the Apostles words to this effect that it was said vnto the children beeing not yet borne and before they had done either good
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
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
purpose alleadge Augustine who vnderstandeth here the loue non qua ipse nos diligit sed qua facit nos dilectores sui not wherewith God loueth vs but whereby he maketh vs louers of of him c. and he would prooue the same by the Apostles phrase absurdissime dicitur c. that is most absurdly said to be shed in our hearts quod extra nos est c. which is without vs onely in God Contra. 1. Against Oecumenius we set Chrysostome an other Greeke father who vnderstandeth the Apostle to speake of the loue of God toward vs dilectioni Dei rem omnem acceptam fert he ascribeth the whole matter vnto the loue of God 2. Augustine shall answear Augustine who elsewhere interpreteth this place of the loue of God toward vs as where he thus saith ipse spiritus sanctus dilectio est non enim habet homo vnde Deum diligâ—â— nisi ex Deo vnde Apostolus the holy spirit himselfe is this loue for man cannot tell how to loue God but from God whereupon the Apostle saith the loue of God is shed abroad c. 3. And in this verie place of Augustine he speaketh of such loue of God in vs whereby the Lord maketh vs loue him so that he includeth also the loue of God first toward vs whence issueth our loue toward him 4. And the loue of God in God toward vs may without absurditie at all be said to be shed abroad in our hearts as in true friendship the loue of a friend may be said to be shedde on him whom he loueth so Gods loue is shed forth in vs by the fruits and effects which it worketh in vs Pareus dub 4. 2. Some thinke that both the loue of God toward vs and our loue toward God are comprehensive in the Apostles speach as Origen vpon this place alloweth both so also Gorrhan and Pererius disputat 2. numer 9. who hereupon inferreth that there may be more literall senses then one of one place of Scripture Contra. One Scripture may haue one generall sense which may comprehend diuers particulars or it may haue one literall sense with diuers applications as typicall or tropologicall figuratiue or morall but it can not haue more then one literall sense or exposition specially one beeing different from the other not any scales included in it or inferred or diducted out of it for then the spirit in the Scripture should speake doubtfully and ambiguously like vnto the oracles of Apollo which were so deliuered as that they might be taken in a diuers yea a contrarie sense See further of this point Synops. Centur. 1. err 7. But that the loue wherewith man loueth God is not here at all vnderstood it shall appeare by diuers reasons here following 3. The best interpretation then is that the Apostle speaketh here of the loue of God wherewith we are beloued of him in Christ. 1. Beza vrgeth this reason because afterward v. 8. the Apostle speaketh of that loue God setteth forth his loue toward vs c. and in both places mention is made of the same loue of God the ground and foundation whereof is Christ that was giuen to die for vs. 2. Pareus insisteth vpon this reason the loue of God here spoken of is alleadged as the cause of our reioycing and of the steadfastnes of our hope but our loue of God beeing weake and imperfect can not be that cause 3. Peter Martyr and Pareus doe further presse the scope of the place the Apostle assumeth this as an argument of our hope because Christ was giuen to die for vs which proceeded not from the loue of vs toward God but from his loue toward vs. 4. Faius vrgeth the force of the Apostles phrase this loue is said to be shed abundantly in our hearts but our loue toward God is not such an abundant and surpassing loue it is a slender scant and weake loue he meaneth then the superabundant loue of God toward vs which as the Apostle saith Phil. 4.7 passeth all vnderstanding 5. I will adioyne also Tolets reason annot 5. in c. 5. the charitie and loue whereby we loue God is but one grace and vertue but the Apostle speaking of the shedding forth of this loue by the holy Ghost meaneth the effusion and powring out of all the graces which are wrought in vs by the spirit he meaneth then the loue of God toward vs from which fountaine issue faith all the graces and gifts of the spirit 6. Adde hereunto the consonant exposition of many of the Fathers as of Chrysostome cited before of Hierome who thus writeth quomodo Deus nos diligat ex hoc cognoscimus c. how God loueth vs we know by this that he hath not onely by the death of his Sonne forgiuen our sinnes but hath also giuen vs the holy Ghost c. Likewise Ambrose pignus charitatis Dei bohemus in nobis c. we haue the pledge of the loue of God by the holy spirit giuen vnto vs c. Theophylact also interpreteth de charitate Dei quam erga nos ostendit c. of the loue of God which he sheweth toward vs c. Likewise expound Theodoret Sedulius with others 8. Quest. Why the loue of God is said to be shed abroad in our hearts 1. Some doe giue this sense effusa est sicut oleum c. this loue is shed abroad like oyle 〈◊〉 cor occupando in possessing and occupying the whole heart according to that saying Matth. 22. Thou shalt loue the Lord thy God with all thy heart Gorrh. but the loue of 〈◊〉 is not here taken actively for that loue whereby we loue God as is shewed in the former question 2. Tolet thus expoundeth it abundantissime facti sunt amici Dei they are not sparingly but abundantly made the sonnes of God likewise the ordinarie glosse referreth it to the greatnes of Gods loue late nos diligit he doth loue vs largely that is greatly 3. Some referre it to the cleare manifestation of the loue of God in our hearts clare nobis manifeâ—â—ta sicut cum lux diffunditur c. the loue of God is clearely manifested to vs as when the â—ight is spread and dispersed abroad Gorrhan 4. But hereby rather is expressed the abundance of those graces which are powred vpon vs by the spirit so Chrysostome non moâ—ce nos honoravit c. he hath not sparingly honoured vs but he hath shed forth vpon vs his loue as the fountaine of all good things so also Oecumenius quia vbere datus est c. because the spirit is plentifully giuen vs and in the same sense the Prophet saith Ioel 2. I will powre out my spirit vpon all flesh Faius 9. Quest. Why it is added by the holy Ghost which is giuen vs. 1. The spirit of God is mentioned as the efficient cause of this worke the loue of God is said to be shed in our hearts by the holy Ghost because the spirit of God beareth witnes
vnto our soules that we are the sonnes of God Rom. 8.16 Osiand Pareus facit nos intelligere charitatem Dei c. the spirit of God maketh vs to vnderstand and feele the loue of God toward vs. 2. And this worke is ascribed to the spirit not excluding the Father and the Sonne to whome this loue toward mankind is common but the Apostle obserueth the propertie of their persons because as election is giuen vnto God the father and Redemption to the Son so loue is the proper worke of the spirit both to cause vs to feele the loue of God and to make vs to loue God againe 3. And here we are not to vnderstand onely the gifts of the spirit but the spirit it selfe which dwelleth in vs not in his essence which is infinite but by his power illuminating directing conuerting vs Faius so Tolet well saith that the spirit non solum dona sua nobis communicat sed per ea in nobis inhabitat c. doth not onely communicate his gifts vnto vs but also by them dwelleth in vs. 4. In that the holy Ghost is said to be giuen vs thereby is signified quod non proprijs viâ—tutibus c. that we haue obtained the spirit not by our owne vertue but by the free loue of God Oecumen and the person of the holy Ghost is noted in that he is said to be giuen and the giuers are the Father and the Sonne Hug. Card. 10. Quest. How Christ is said to haue died according to the time v. 6. 1. Some doe referre these words to the former clause and read thus when we were yet weake according to the time that is we were weake in the time of the law when grace yet appeared not so Chrysost. Theodor. and Erasmus thinketh this is added as a mitigation of their infirmity but it is against the Apostles vse to qualifie the corruption euilnes of mans nature and he speaketh to the Gentiles that had not the law as well as to the Iewes 2. The most doe applie it vnto the latter clause that Christ died in his time and here there are diuers opinions 1. Some vnderstand it of the short time which Christs death continued namely but three daies Ambrose so also Lyran. but that time beeing assigned see Christs resurrection is not fitly expounded of his death 2. Sedulius thus interpreteth quâ—â— in vltimo mundi tempore mortuus est because he died in the last time or age of the world 3. According to the time that is he died temporally in the flesh which is mortall for eternitie knoweth no time Haymo 4. Hierom. epist. ad Algas referreth it to the opportunitie of time Christ died in a fit time when the world stood most in neede of his redemption 5. But the best exposition is that Christ died in the fulnes of time as the Apostle speaketh Gal. 4.4 the time decreed and appointed of his father thus expoundeth Theodor. and Theophyl tempore decenti destinato in a meete time and appointed of God so also Beza Par. Tol. with others 11. Quest. Of the meaning of the 7. v. One will scarce die for a righteous man c. 1. The Syrian interpreter readeth in the first place scarce will any die for the wicked which reading Beza seemeth not to mislike but that all the Greeke copies are otherwise and Iunius thinketh that here one word by the writers was taken for an other because of the neere similitude in the Syrian tongue and thinketh it should rather be read according to the Greeke copie for the righteous not for the wicked 2. Some doe take here these two the righteous and the good to be one and the same and some confounding these two doe not vnderstand these words of the person of the iust and good man but of the cause Hier. epist. ad Alg. and so this should be the sense that although scarce and sieldome yet sometime one may be found to die for a iust and good cause some likewise taking these two for one applie it vnto the person of the righteous and good man Chrysost. Lyran. Tolet. Par. Faius But the Apostle first saying negatiuely one wilâ— scarce die c. and afterward vsing a kind of correction that one may die for a good man doth euidently distinguish these two clauses 3. The most then doe diuide these two and take the iust and righteous and the good to be diuersly taken by the Apostle 1. Wicked Marcion as Hierome reporteth by the iust did vnderstand the God of the old Testament for whome fewe offered themselues to death by the good the God of the new Testament that is Christ for whom many are found readie to die But this opinion beside the blasphemie thereof in making two diuers Gods and authors of the Old and new Testament containeth apparant absurditie and falshood for both many gaue their liues in the old Testament in defence of the law of God as the three children Dan. 3. and many in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes as the historie of the Macchabees testifieth and beside many thousand Martyrs are found to haue died for Christ whereas the Apostle speaketh of very few that will die for a good man 2. Arrius contrariwise by the iust vnderstandeth Christ and by the good the Father of whome Christ testifieth that none is good but God But if Christ be this iust one for whom so many thousand Martyrs willingly gaue their liues how saith the Apostle that scarse any will die for a iust man 3. Eucherius by the iust interpreteth the Law and old Testament by the good Christ and the new Testament for few Martyrs are found in the old Testament and many in the new But beside that it is against the scope and mind of the Apostle to vnderstand this of dying for Christ who by this comparison setteth forth the loue of Christ who died for euill men euen for his enemies whereas few are found readie to die for the righteous and good the words of the Apostle will not beare this sense who in saying for a good man it may be that one dare die noteth the paucitie and fewnes of them whereas many thousands haue died for Christ in the New Testament 4. Some by the iust vnderstand the vertuous by the good the innocent for whome one may die in commiseration and pitie toward him Haymo Thom. Aquin. Gorrhan or because innocencie is fauoured of men iustitia habet aliquid severitatis iustice hath some rigour and seueritie in it Hug. Cardinal But a man can not be iust but he must also be innocent these two then are not thus distinguished 5. Caietane vnderstandeth by the iust an ordinarie vertuous or righteous man by the good some excelling in the works of supererogation for such one perhaps dare die But such works of supererogation we acknowledge not all that a man hath is too little for himselfe he hath no superfluitie to supererogate to an other 6. Osiander and Emmanuel Sa doe vnderstand in both