the more inexcusable because they knew their masters will and did it not 5. Thou allowest or triest the things that are excellent they had a discerning iudgement by the knowledge of the law to know good from euill iust things from vniust 6. Then that which was the cause of this their discerning they were instructed in the law and trained vp in the precepts thereof 7. Then follow their titles which they tooke vpon them to be masters and teachers of others a guide to the blind a light of them which were in darknes both of the Gentiles which were blind in respect of other nations and the more simple and ignorant Iewes But these priuiledges did nothing profit them because they followed not that which they taught others Pareus 39. Quest. How the Iewes are said to commit sacriledge v. 22. 1. They were not guiltie of sacriledge in giuing the diuine worship vnto idols as Gorrh. for the Iewes after their returne out of captiuitie excepting some in the time of the Macchabees who for feare were compelled to worship idols were free from idolatrie and if it had beene so S. Paul would haue directly charged them with idolatrie as he did before with adulterie 2. Neither is hereby vnderstood contemptus divinae maiestatis the contempt of the diuine maiestie Calv. Piscat for that is afterward touched by the Apostle v. 23. Thorough breaking of the law dishonourest thou God 3. Nor with Origen is the meaning Christum verum templum Dei violas thou dost violate Christ the true temple of God for in ioyning sacriledge with idolatrie he meaneth some externall sinne and the violence offered to the name of Christ is compreheÌ„ded vnder blasphemie which is obiected v. 24.4 Gryneus vnderstandeth it of arrogating to their owne merits that which was peculiar to the grace of God Pareus of the polluting of Gods seruice with their inuentions but some externall sacriledge is signified as is faide 5. Some referre it to that particular sinne of robbing and spoiling the house of God as the sonnes of Eli appropriated to themselues the things offered to God Martyr but S. Paul seemeth specially to touch the sinnes of that age present thou art called a Iew. 6. Some take this sacriledge to be meant of buying and selling the Priests office Osiand and in taking to their owne vse things ordained for the temple Lyran. Syriack interpret Haymo But the Iewes which were at Rome were not guiltie of those abuses committed against the Temple at Ierusalem 7. Therfore this sacriledge was rather the couetousnes of the Iewes who attrectabant idolathyta did handle things offered to idols and so committed sacriledge in vsing those things to their priuate commoditie which were consecrate to idolatrie which by the law of God should haue beene destroied Chrysost. Theophyl as the manner of the Iewes is at this day to buie chalices and other implements which are stolne out of the idolatrous Churches of the Romanists this is called sacriledge because such things as were dedicate to idolatrie no man was to conuert to his owne vse Gualt and Calvin misliketh not this sense 40. Quest. How the name of God was blasphemed by the Iewes and whether this testimonie be rightly alleadged by the Apostle v. 24. The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you as it is written There are two kinds of blasphemie one is in word wher the name of God is taken in vaine whereof we haue an example Levit. 24. when the blasphemer was stoned to death Grâ—â— and here there is great difference betweene these two blasphemare blasphemiam dieâ—â— to blaspheme and to say a blasphemie he blasphemeth which of set purpose profaneth and abuseth the name of God but one may through infirmitie and perturbation of mind spâ—â—â—â— that which is blasphemie and yet not blaspheme as Iob that complained that God had peruerted or ouerthrowne him Iob 18.6 the other kind of blasphemie is when that is giuen vnto God which appertaineth not vnto him as that he is cruell vniust or that is denied vnto him which is due vnto him as if any denie his prouidence mercie wisdome Faius 2. Here the Iewes are said to blaspheme God diuers waies 1. they did both themselues contumelia Deum afficere offer contumelie vnto the name of God in blaspheming Christ ad id alios inducunt and they teach others to doe so likewise Theoph. Gorrh. 2. they blasphemed God in the contempt of his law for he that willingly transgresseth the law contemneth it and the author of it Basil. reg brev resp 4. 3. and they did not onely blaspheme God themselues male vivendo in euill liuing but occasionem praebendo in giuing occasion to the Gentiles to speake euill of God and of his religion because he had chosen such a wicked and disobedient people Lyran. and of this latter kind of dishonouring and blaspheming God speaketh the Apostle here 3. Now for the allegation it selfe 1. some thinke that the Apostle borroweth this testimonie from the Prophet Isa 52.5 They that rule ouer them make them to houle saith the Lord and my name all the day continually is blasphemed so Origen Theophyl Tolet but the two things will be here alleadged 1. that the Apostle neither followeth the Prophets words for here are neither thorough you nor among the Gentiles 2. nor yet keepeth his sense for he speaketh of the blasphemie of the Chaldeans who insulted against God as though he were not able to deliuer his people Ans. 1. First of all those words are in the translation of the Septuagint which the Apostle followeth as beeing best knowne vnto the Grecians and Romanes and because there is eadem sententia the same sentence and sense Lyran. 2. And in that the Chaldeans blasphemed God as though he either would not or could not deliuer his people the occasion was ministred by themselues who for their sinnes were carried into captiuitie vpon which occasion their enemies blasphemed 2. Some referre vs to that place Ezek. 36.23 And I will sanctifie my great name which was polluted among the heathen among whome ye haue polluted it Hierome Ostand Calvin where it is euident that the Iewes by their euill life caused the name of God to be polluted among the heathen 3. But the Apostle rather hath reference to both those places not so much alledging a testimonie as shewing the agreement of that prophesie to those times then present that the Iewes by their euill life caused the name of God to be blasphemed and euill spoken of among the Gentiles Mart. Pareus 41. Quest. In what sense the Apostle saith Circumcision is profitable v. 25. Seeing the Apostle in other places vtterly reiecteth circumcision as Gal. 5.2 If ye be circumcised Christ shall not profit you any thing and v. 5. for in Iesus Christ neither doth circumcision attaâ—le any thing c. hence two doubts arise 1. how the Apostle saith here Circumcision is profitable if thou doe the law 2. seeing none could keepe
to the second or next vnderworking cause as the Apostle saith of beneficence or liberalitie that it worketh or causeth thanksgiuing vnto God sometime the effect is ascribed by this word vnto the instrumentall cause as Rom. 4.15 the lawe is said to worke or cause wrath and our light and momentanie afflictions are said to cause or worke vnto vs an exceeding weight of glorie 2. Cor. 4.17 because they are meanes to withdrawe our mindes from earthly things and to stirre vp faith in vs So tribulation worketh patience not as the efficient cause but as the organe and instrument whereby the spirit worketh patience in vs it procureth patience not sicut causa effectum c. as the cause the effect as Caietan but eam exercendo augendo ostendendo in exercising encreasing and shewing forth our patience Gorrh to the same purpose Pererius exercendae patientiae materia occasio est tribulation is the matter and occasion of exercising our patience This then is to be vnderstood according to the phrase of Scripture which doth vse to pronounce that of the signe and instrument which is proper vnto the thing as when it speaketh of the Sacraments for of it selfe tribulation worketh not patience as is seene in the wicked who thereby are driuen to impatience and despaire here then is no place to prooue any merit in the afflictions of the faithfull Controv. 5. That we are not iustified by the inherent habite of charitie Whereas the Apostle saith v. 5. The loue of God is shed abroad in our hearts c. Pererius vnderstanding the Apostle to speake here of that loue and charitie which is infused as an habite into the minde whereby we loue God setteth downe here certaine positions concerning this inherent charitie 1. he affirmeth that this charitie is that iustice whereby we are formally made iust and righteous before God disput 2. numer 10. 2. this charitie whereby we are iustified he affirmeth esse donum omnium donerum maximum to be a gift farre exceeding all other gifts 3. this charitie re non distingui à gratia gratum faciente is not indeede distinguished from grace making vs acceptable vnto God 4. Against the opinion of Caietane Scotus Gabriel he holdeth that there is in those which are iustified the habite of charitie permanent and remaining when the act ceaseth whereby they are formally made iust before God otherwise they should not be helde to be iust before God in their sleepe or when they cease to worke disput 3. numer 17.18 Contra. Although all these questions are here impertinent because the Apostle treateth not here of the charitie or loue which is in man toward God but of Gods loue toward vs as hath beene shewed at large before quest 7. yet it shall not be amisse briefly to counterpoise these erroneous assertions with the contrarie true and sound positions 1. An inherent righteousnesse and infused charitie in the faithfull we denie not but not such as whereby we are formally made righteous and iustified before God both because all our righteousnesse is as a stayned cloth Esay 64. it is imperfect and weake and therefore not able to iustifie vs and for that the Scripture testifieth that it is the righteousnesse of Christ which is applyed by faith whereby we are iustified before God as the Apostle calleth it The righteousnesse of God thorough the faith of Christ Rom. 3.22 Philip 3.9 2. Charitie is not simply the greatest of all other gifts and so absolutely preferred before faith but onely wherein they are compared together namely in respect of the continuance because faith and hope shall cease when we enioy those things which are beleeued and hoped for but loue shall remaine still so Chrysostome expoundeth the Apostle 1. Cor. 13.13 Thus Hugo saith well that charitie is said to be the greatest quia non excidit because it falleth not away but otherwise faith is the greater in quantum est cognitio generans omnes alias virtutes as it is a knowledge and engendreth all other vertues 3. The Thomists are herein contrarie to the Iesuite who affirme that gratia gratum faciens grace which maketh vs acceptable to God is in respect of charitie as the soule is to the powers and faculties which proceede from it And so indeede the grace that maketh vs acceptable vnto God is the loue and fauour of God in Christ which is as the efficient cause of that other loue and charitie which is infused into vs and wrought in vs by the holy Ghost And that our loue of God maketh vs not first acceptable vnto him the Apostle euidently testifieth 1. Iob. 4.10 Herein is loue not that we loued him but that he loued vs we were first then accepted and beloued of God before we could loue him againe 4. We graunt that faith hope and charitie are habits of the minde infused by the spirit and permanent in the soule for as the wicked doe attaine vnto euill habites of vice and sinne so the faithfull haue the habite of vertue but this is the difference that an euill habite is acquisitus gotten by euill custome but the good habites of the intellectuall vertues of faith loue hope are iufusi infused and wrought in vs by the spirit But we denie that by any such inherent habite we are made formally iust they are not causes of our iustification but rather the fruits and effects we haue the habite of faith because the spirit of God worketh in vs beleefe and we loue God because he loued vs first and gaue vs his spirit which worketh this loue in vs Faius So then the faithfull euen in their sleepe are iustified not by any inherent habit but because they are accepted of God in Christ as the Apostle saith Christ died for vs that whether we wake or sleepe we should liue together with him Controv. 6. Against the heresie of impious Socinus who denieth that Christ died for our sinnes and payed the ransome for them Whereas the Apostle here saith v. 8. that Christ died for vs we according to the Scriptures so vnderstand it that he offered a sacrifice for our sinnes Heb. 10.12 that he as our high Priest offred himselfe for our redemption Heb. 7.27 that he was our suretie and paied our ransome for vs Heb. 7.22 and saued vs from our sinnes in bearing the punishment due vnto the samâ—â—nd so he died for vs that is in our place and stead and so purchased our redemption 〈◊〉 wicked Socinus thus wresteth and misconstrueth these words that Christ died no 〈◊〉 wise for vs then for our profit and benefit in confirming by his death his doctrine and example of life by the which he saith he brought saluation vnto the world and not by dying for vs as in our stead or to pay by his death our ransome his wicked obiections are these 1. Obiect The Apostle saith 1. Ioh. 3.16 He laid downe his life for vs and we ought to lay downe our liues for the brethren Christ died for
rule and line of all iust lawes secondly the end and scope of lawes must be to suppresse vice and maintaine vertue the lawmaker must intend the publike good and not his private gaine thirdly for the extent of these lawes they must include all some must not be bound vnto the lawes and others free and therefore it is dangerous to giue priuiledges and immunities to some persons by vertue whereof they may without checke and controlment transgresse the lawes Papintanus is worthie of honourable memorie who choose rather to die then to excuse the parricide of Antonius Bassianus the Emperour 2. As good lawes must first be made so iudgement must be exercised according to those lawes that the iust case may be discerned from the false and good men from the euill Antishenes was wont to say that those commonwealths were declining wherein boni à malis nihil differunt good men did nothing differ from euill Now in the processe of iudgement these rules must be obserued 1. that the Iudge be willing to admit all complaints and to take knowledge of all causes and aggrevances this was the fault of Sauls governement that the oppressed could not haue iustice which made many that were aggreved to flocke and haue recourse vnto Dauid Absalom did not more insinuate himselfe into the hearts of the people then in shewing his affabilitie in hearing the griues and complaints of them In forren histories Philip King of Macedon was killed by Pausanias because he reiected his suite to haue iustice against Attalus that had wronged him and after laughed him to scorne and Demetrius of Macedon did much alienate the hearts of his people because he neglected their complaints and would cast their bils of supplication from the bridge of Axium into the riuer secondly after diligent inquisition of the cause there must be iust iudgment giuen without partiallitie feare fauour or any other sinister affection see Levit. 19.15 among the Thebanes a Iudge was pictured blindfold and without hands to signifie that he neither should be lead by partiall affection in iudgement or corrupted with bribes and the Athenians had a lawe that causes should be handled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without proems and prefaces to stirre vp affection 3. After iudgement must followe execution for otherwise the lawes are in vaine and iudgement according to the lawes if they be not put into execution where these two things must be obserued 1. that the execution be not too remisse for it is profitable often for the offender himselfe to be punished thereby to be brought vnto repentance who otherwise might continue in his sinne as the theife conuerted vpon the crosse was prepared by that ignominious punishment vnto repentance and it is good for the example and admonition of others that punishment be inflicted vpon the offenders 2. yet the punishment must not be hastened too much or be too severely adiudged but with such moderation as that the partie which suffereth be not in hazard of loosing both soule and bodie 2. Concerning the vse of the sword in warring and waging of battell 1. it is out of doubt that it is lawfull for the Magistrate to take in hand iust and lawfull warre for Abraham recouered Lot by force from them which had taken him captiue the Centurions faith is commended in the Gospell by our Sauiour and if it be the Magistrates office and part to defend euerie particular person from wrong much more the whole people 2. but warre must be enterprised not rashly or suddenly but with deliberation and not without waightie and vrgent cause 1. as when either the Magistrate is bound by some league to helpe his confederates as Ioshua did the Gibeonites 2. or when the enemies offer to invade the countrey they must by the Magistrates force be kept off as Dauid often encountred the Philistims that assaulted Israel 3. and in the quarrell of religion and defence of the truth the Magistrate may fall to battell as the other tenne tribes had thought to haue warred against Ruben Gad and the halfe tribe of Manasseh for setting vp an altar fearing that they had declined from the true worship of God Iosh. 22. Quest. 13. How it is said it is necessarie to be subiect for conscience sake v. 5. Therefore it is necessarie ye should be subiect 1. first some reade be ye subiect vnto the necessitie diuinae dispositionis of the diuine ordinance and so put necessitie in the datiue Gorrhan 2. the vulgar Latine which many followe put necessitie in the ablatiue necessitate subditi estote be subiect of necessitie but both these readings are diuerse from the originall where the word is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be ye subiect in the imperatiue but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be subiect in the infinitiue as both Beza and Erasmus well observe so then the best reading is it is necessarie to be subiect 3. which neither must be vnderstood of a compelling necessitie as the interlin gloss quasi ex necessitate as of necessitie because he cannot excutere iugum Principis shake off the yoke of the Prince nor yet as Augustine is it referred to the necessitie of this life because we must necessarily vse temporall things as long as we are in this world which it is in the Magistrates power to depriue vs of but we vnderstand rather obligationem praecepti the bond of the precept which is of necessitie to be kept so that it is not a free thing whether men will be subiect or no but it is necessarie both in respect of the wrath and reuenge of the power and for conscience sake toward God so in effect here are three reasons couched together why we should be subiect to the Magistrate in respect of God it is his ordinance of the Magistrate because of wrath and punishment of our selues that we wound not our conscience the first is honestum honest the second vtile profitable the third delectabile pleasant and delightfull But also for conscience 1. Ambrose referreth this conscience to the feare of punishment in the world to come that men should not obey onely for feare of present punishment but because of the iudgement to come 2. Chrysostome applyeth this to the conscience of the great benefits which we receiue by the Magistrate that he which is disobedient offendeth against his conscience in beeing vnthankefull 3. Lyranus vnderstandeth it of the particular conscience which euerie man ought to haue debitum reddere to render that which he oweth to an other 4. Tolet interpreteth it of the conscience of other sinnes which they that are lawlesse and disobedient are apt to fall vnto 5. Hugo of the conscience quae naturaliter dictat c. which naturally suggesteth vnto a man that the superior is to be obeyed 6. Erasmus of an others conscience which is offended by the euill example of the disobedience 7. but here the conscience of the diuine precept must be vnderstood which to obey bringeth peace of
committed against others 2. These words they regarded not to know God 1. some thus interpret that they thought God to haue no knowledge or no great care of such things as they committed gloss ordin Gorrham and so before them Ambrose but the words must be much forced and strained to make this sense as though the Apostle should say they regarded not that God knew 2. Some thinke the Apostles meaning is that they had not Gods feare before their eyes that knowing him they much regarded not what was pleasing or displeasing vnto him Haymo But the Gentiles had not the true knowledge of God for they neglected the meanes which should haue brought them to know him 3. Some giue this sense neglexerunt c. they neglected Tolet. non curarunt they had no care to know God Vatab. they did not seeke to know God according to that naturall light and direction which they had 4. But there is more signified here then a negligence rather spreverunt they despised to know and acknowledge God Faius they scorned and derided the true knowledge of God and preferred their owne vaine inuentions And so Chrysostome noteth that the Apostle saith not as they knew not God but regarded not to know God so that it was corrupts iudicij of a corrupt iudgement not a sinne of ignorance that they refused the knowledge of God The Apostle then sheweth voluntariam caecitatem their wilfull blindnes Pareus it seemed not good vnto them as Beza or they iudged it not good as the Syrian translator to know God it was a voluntarie election in them to preferre their superstitions before the knowledge of God And Erasmus whome P. Martyr therein approoueth noteth here a difference betweene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 knowledge and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acknowledgement the latter word is here vsed though they had some knowledge of God yet they did not acknowledge him to be God as in glorifying him giuing thanks vnto him as the Apostle said before v. 21. Quest. 70. What it is to be deliuered vp to a reprobate minde 1. Some vnderstand this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reprobate passiuely that is quod omnibus displicet which displeaseth and is reprooued of all Eras. mentem improbandam a minde to be reprooued or disalowed Sa. but this expresseth not the whole meaning their reprobate minde was not so called so much in respect of others as of themselues 2. Some take it passiuely in respect of God that they were as reprobates that is reiected and reprobate of God But all the Gentiles which followed these sinnes were not reprobates Beza many of them afterward were washed from their sinnes and sanctified in the name of Christ 1. Cor. 6.11 3. Therefore this word reprobate is rather here taken actiuely for a minde voide of all iudgement Beza which taketh good for euill and euill for good Esa. 5.10 Bucer which prauitie of minde commeth not by one or two euill acts but by a continuall custome to euill per acquisitum habitum when it is growne into an habite like as the rast that is corrupted taketh sweet things for bitter Lyran. So the Gentiles were not deliuered ouer to this reprobate minde all at once but by diuerse degrees first they were giuen vp to their hearts lustes v. 24. then to vile affections v. 26. last of all to a reprobate sense to such an euill habit that they could doe nothing but euill Faius 4. This prauitie of the minde is here described 1. by the subiect in the verie mind not in the sense as the Latine translator the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth the verie iudgement and vnderstanding both theoreticall and practicall they erre both in their iudgement and conscience as the Apostle saith Tit. 1.15 their mindes and consciences are defiled 2. the materiall part wherein this reprobate disposition of the mind consisteth is more distinctly shewed Ephe. 4.18 where the Apostle imputeth to the Gentiles vanitie of mind their iudgement and vnderstanding was corrupt then their cogitations were darkenes their reason and thoughts were obscured and their hearts were hardened that is their wills and affections 3. the causes are expressed the meritorius cause is their reiecting of God they regarded not to knowe God they reiected God and he reiecteth them where there is a fit allusion in the words for it is saide of them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they approoued not to know God so they are deliuered vp 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into a reprobate mind Pareus The efficient cause not of their reprobate mind but of giuing them vp to a reprobate minde is God who as a iust iudge doth deliuer them to this punishment Gryneus 4. Then followe the effects of their reprobate mind to doe things not conuenient that which was forbidden both by diuine and humane lawes Haymo 5. But here it is to be considered that God is not said to be author or worker of their reprobate minde but of the deliuering of them vp to a reprobate minde Faius not that their minde beganne now to be wicked and euill which was not so before but God finding their minde euill and lewde doth deliuer them ouer that is to themselues first in withholding his grace then vnto Sathan to worke his will in them Gryneus and not onely to but God by his iust iudgement doth secretly so worke and dispose euen in the hearts of the wicked that all things doe tend still to their further hardening Aretius 6. This reprobate minde or corrupt and depraued iudgement is of two sorts either in generall when things that are euill and vnlawfull are iudged to be good and commendable and in particular when as the affection is misled in some particular act to doe that which generally the iudgement condemneth as to steale to commit adulterie the Gentiles failed in both these for some of them iudged many things to be lawfull which were euill as to commit fornication to steale But most of them fayled in particular committing those things which in their generall iudgement they allowed not Tolet. Quest. 71. Generall obseruations out of the Catalogue of the sinnes of the heathen reckoned vp by the Apostle ver 29.30 1. As before the Apostle touched those sinnes of vnrighteousnesse which the Gentiles committed against themselues in their mutuall defiling so now he rehearseth such sinnes as were perpetrated against others Rareus 2. And in that he saith full of all vnrighteousnesse this happened vnto them propter aversionem à Deo because they had now forsaken and turned aside from God therefore they fell into all euill Lyran. for as the feare of God is the fountaine of all righteousnesse so incredulitie and want of the faith and feare of God is the beginning of all iniquitie 3. Origen seemeth to make this the cause why they were giuen ouer to a reprobate minde because they were full of all vnrighteousnesse and the Latine interpreter referreth it to the word deliuered vp that they beeing full of
punishment B. Par. immittit iram sendeth his wrath T. inducit iraâ—â— bringeth in his wrath that is punishment I speake according to man V.L. Or. as a man G. as the sonne of man T. after the manner of man B.Be. 6 God forbid farre be it or let it not be Or. els how shall God iudge the world Or. this world L.R. 7 For if the veritie of God hath more B. abounded thorough my lie in my lie L. so is the originall but the preposition in is taken for through why am I yet condemned as a sinner 8 And not rather as we are blasphemed orig as some speake euill of vs. Be. V. but the word in the orig is in the passive as we are slanderously reputed B. and some affirme that we say let vs doe euill that there may come good whose damnation is iust or whose damnation is reserued for iustice T. 9 What then are we more excellent no in no wise for we haue already or before prooued G. or pronounced T. not before accused Be. B. L shewed by rendring the cause V. the word properly so signifieth to giue a reason or shew the cause all both Iewes and Gentiles to be vnder sinne 10 As it is written There is none righteous no not one there is not any iust L.R. but the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one is here omitted 11 There is none that vnderstandeth there is none that seeketh after B. God 12 They haue all gone out of the way they are together become vnprofitable there is none that doth good no not one vnto one Or. 13 Their throat is in an open sepulchre with their tongues they haue deceiued B. Or. vsed their tongues to deceit Be. G. the poison of aspes is vnder their lippes 14 Whos 's mouth is full of cursing and bitternes 15 Their feete are swift to shed blood 16 Destruction not hearts griefe B. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contrition destruction and calamitie V.B.G. miserie B. vnhappines L. griefe T. are in their waies 17 And the way of peace they haue not knowne 18 The feare of God is not before their eyes Or. not there is no feare of God before their eyes for the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not is an adverb 19 Now we know that whatsoeuer the Law saith it saith to them which are vnder the Law in the law Or. that euery mouth may be stopped and all the world may be culpable G. obnoxious V. Be. subiect L. R. endamaged B. subiect to condemnation B. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth to be vnder the sentence that is guiltie vnto God 20 Therefore not because L.B. because that V. for it is a conclusion inferred out of the former words by the works of the Law shall no flesh be iustified in his sight or before him L. for by the Law commeth the knowledge of sinne by the law sinne is knowne T. 21 But now is the righteousnes of God made manifest without the Law hauing witnes of the Law and the Prophets 22 To wit the righteousnes of God by the faith of Iesus Christ toward all vnto all B.G. but the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in omnes toward all and vpon all that beleeue the righteousnes of God by faith c. L.V.T. but it is better to ioyne it by way of exposition to the former verse for this righteousnes by faith is the same which in the former verse he called the righteousnes of God for there is no difference these words some make part of the next verse the 23. Genev but in the original they ende the 22. verse 23 For all haue sinned and are depriued of the glorie of God G. Be. or come short as of the marke not haue neede of the glorie of God L. B. or are destitute V. T. for that doth not sufficiently expresse the meaning of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is to come short 24 But are iustified beeing iustified L. Or. but the participle must be resolued into the verbe freely by his grace thorough the redemption that is in Christ Iesus 25 Whome God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood for the shewing of his righteousnes by the forgiuenes of the sinnes which were past before 26 Through the patience of God by the space which God gaue vs by his long suffering T. but this is interpreted rather then translated for the shewing of his righteousnes in this present time at this time G.B.L.T. but in the originall there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nunc now that is this present that he might be iust and a iustifier of him which is of the faith of Iesus Or. of Iesus Christ. L. of our Lord Iesus Christ. T. 27 Where is then the boasting reioycing G. it is excluded by what law of works nay but by the law of faith 28 Therefore we conclude G. or collect or gather B.V. as by reason and argument so the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth not we thinke L. or hold B. that a man is iustified by faith without the works of the Law 29 Is he God of the Iewes onely and not of the Gentiles also yes euen of the Gentiles also 30 For it is one God which shall iustifie iustifieth L.T. but the word in the originall is in the future tense the circumcision of faith through faith T. but the preposition here is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of and the vncircumcision through faith 31 Doe we then make the Law of none effect through faith not destroy the law through faith L.B. for the same word was vsed before v. 3. shall their vnbeleefe make the faith of God without effect not destroy it God forbid yea we establish the Law 2. The Argument Method and parts IN this Chapter the Apostle proceedeth to prooue that the Iewes notwithstanding certaine priuiledges which they had yet because of their vnbeleefe were not better then the Gentiles and so he concludeth all vnder sinne and vnable to be iustified by their workes whereupon it followeth that they must be iustified by faith This chapter hath three parts The 1. from v. 1. to v. 9. wherein he remooueth certaine obiections which might be â—ooued by the Iewes which are three in number 1. Obiection is propounded v. 1. in making the case of the Iewes and Gentiles alike he should seeme to take away all priuiledge from the Iewes the answer followeth in graunâ—ing their priuiledge v. 2. and confirming the same by the constancie of Gods promises v. 3. which he prooueth by certaine testimonies out of the Psalmes v. 4. 2. Obiection is propounded v. 5. and it ariseth out of the testimonie before alleadged that if God be declared to be iust when he iudgeth and punisheth mens sinnes then he should not do well to punish that whereby his iustice is set forth v. 5. the answer followeth v. 6. taken froÌ„ the office of God he can not be but most iust seeing he shall iudge the
any thing that is good Beza 5. To iustifie is taken three wayes first to make one actually and verily iust so if any man could perfectly keepe the lawe he should thereby get an habituall and inherent iustice secondly it signifieth to be counted and declared iust as wisedome is said to be iustified of her children and thirdly it signifieth to forgiue discharge and acquite sinnes and so is it taken here that no man is iustified by the workes of the lawe that is thereby findeth forgiuenesse of his sinnes and so is taken for iust before God but this iustification is by faith in Christ by whome we are acquited of our sinnes and cloathed with his righteousnesse Martyr 6. The Apostle addeth in his sight to shewe a difference betweene iustification and righteousnesse before men which may be attained vnto by workes and the perfect righteousnesse which God requireth sometime this phrase in Gods sight is vsed to shewe a difference betweene that righteousnesse which is but in shewe and hypocrisie and that which it in truth as in this sense Zacharie and Elizabeth are said to haue beene iust before God Luk. 1.6 sometime it distinguisheth betweene the righteousnesse euen of good men and the righteousnesse before God as the Apostle graunteth that Abraham had wherein to glorie before men in respect of his workes but not before God Rom. 4.1 and so the Apostle taketh it here It is Christ onely that maketh vs holy and vnblameable in the sight of God Coloss. 1.22 Beza And further these reasons may be yeelded hereof why none can be iustified by works in Gods sight though before men they may 1. in respect of the Maiestie of God and most perfect puritie of his nature before whom the verie Angels doe couer their faces and feete Isay 6. and the heauens are not cleane in his eyes how much more is man abhominable Iob. 15.15 2. God looketh not vnto the outward shew but to the inward disposition of the heart which is perfect in none 3. the lawe of God is spirituall and requireth exact obedience of Gods commandements so that he which offendeth in one is guilty of all Iam. 2.10 this perfection none can attaine vnto Pareus Quest. 24. How the Apostle here denieth iustification by workes seeing he said before c. 2. v. 13. that the doers of the Lawe are iustified 1. The ordinar gloss giueth this solution secundum ceremonialia intellige vnderstand this according to the ceremonials he thinketh that the Apostle speaketh here of the ceremoniall workes of the lawe whereby none are iustified but in the other place of the morall workes which doe instifie But the Apostle here euen excludeth morall workes for of the morall lawe the words following are specially vnderstood by the lawe commeth the knowledge of sinne 2. Caietan thinketh that the Apostle speaketh here of iustification before God there of the iustice of workes before men but the verie words of the text doe ouerthrowe this interpretation for euen in that place the Apostle speaketh of those which are righteous before God which are not the hearers but the doers of the lawe 3. Ambrose to this purpose lex temporalem habet iustitiam fides aeternam the law may giue a temporall kind of iustice but faith an euerlasting be thinketh that men are said here not to be iustified by workes that is without faith but yet a temporall kind of iustice they might haue by the lawe without faith But the Apostle in both places as hath beene said speaketh of true iustice and righteousnesse before God 4. The moderne Papists tell vs here of two iustifications the first which is by faith onely without workes the second which is by workes which proceede of faith and grace of the first speaketh the Apostle here as they thinke and of the other in the former place Rom. 2.13 Perer. disput 8. to the same purpose Tolet that the Apostle speaketh here of workes going before faith which doe not iustifie there of workes which followe faith the other doe iustifie in encreasing iustification which was begunne before by faith annot 13. Contra. 1. This is but a Popish fiction of the first and second iustification the Apostle is saying Rom. 8.30 whom he iustified he glorified maketh but one iustification after the which followeth glorification 2. euen the Apostle excludeth here the workes of the regenerate which may appeare by these reasons 1. because there neede no question to be made of the workes of carnall men which are euill because they are without faith there can be no shewe at all that such workes should iustifie 2. the workes of Abraham were the workes of grace which the Apostle excludeth from iustification c. 4.2 3. This is the reason why workes cannot iustifie that all occcasion of reioycing may be taken away from men and euerie mouth may be stopped but now if men might be iustified by their works after they are called and haue faith they might glorie in such works by the which they say they doe merit and which in their opinion proceede in part from mans owne free will 5. Some thinke that the Apostle Rom. 2.13 speaketh ex hypothesi by way of supposition that the doers of the lawe shall be iustified that is if any could keepe and performe the lawe they should thereby be iustified But here he simply denieth iustification to workes because no man is able to keepe the lawe Pareus This is a good distinction and in other places it may well be receiued where the Scriptures seeme to attribute much vnto the law as he that doth these things shall liue thereby But here it is not so fit for in that place Rom. 2.13 the Apostle encreateth not of the causes of iustification but onely sheweth who they are which shall be iustified not hearers and professors but doers and followers 6. Peter Martyr saith that when iustification seemeth to be ascribed vnto workes it must be vnderstood in respect of faith and grace wherewith they are ioyned as a man is said to be a reasonable creature yet in respect of his soule onely though he consist both of soule and bodie yet it is faith properly that iustifieth and not workes which followe faith But the Apostle doth not at all in that place or any other ascribe iustification before God vnto workes 7. Wherefore the best solution is this that here S. Paul disputeth indeede of the proper and true causes of iustification which he simply denieth vnto workes and giueth vnto faith but there he sheweth who and vpon what condition men are iustified and who are not iustified namely such as hauing a liuely faith doe bring sorth the fruits thereof and doe their endeauour to keepe the lawe are iustified as the Apostle in the same sense had said before c. 2.6 that God will reward euerie man according to his workes And in the like sense Christ shall say vnto the righteous in the day of iudgement Matth. 25.34 Come ye blessed of my father inherite the kingdome
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
those clauses the things not the persons and the first they expound of iust punishment which none willingly suffer in the second the good and honest cause for which one may be found readie to die But the phrase to die for the iust will not beare that sense a man is not saide to die for iust punishment but by it or with it and yet in this sense some haue beene found which willingly suffered their iust punishment as the theise conuerted vpon the crosse who said vnto his fellow Luk. 23.41 We are righteously here 7. The best interpretation then is that by the iust we vnderstand such an one as is in himselfe a righteous and vertuous man by the good such as haue deserued well of vs that are liberall and bountifull men from whome we haue receiued good so Beza interpreteth one that is profitable to him of whome he hath receiued good Genevens so also Catharinus a Popish writer and some by the good vnderstand such as are deare vnto them as their children parents friends countrey as some such were found among the Romans that gaue their liues for their friends and countrey P. Mart. And this exposition may be confirmed by the opposite part that Christ died for vs beeing sinners v. 8. yea his enemies v. 10. whereas men will not die for the righteous and hardly for their friends 12. Quest. Of the difference betweene Christs dying for vs and those which died for their countrey We read in the forren histories of the Gentiles that some haue giuen their liues for their countrey as Codrus for the Athenians Menoecius for the Thebanes who killed himselfe and fell among his enemies for the deliuerance of his countrey so Curtius threw himselfe into a gulph to preserue Rome from the pestilence But there was great difference betweene the death of these and of Christ. 1. They were not innocent as Christ was and therefore as their life was not so holy so could not their death be so pretious nor their person to honourable 2. They did not willingly offer themselues vnto any iudge to be condemned as Christ did but in other manner and sort aduentured their liues 3. They did it not of loue but of vain-glorie and desire of praise 4. They by the instigation of Sathan were mooued so to doe hauing no cogitation therein to please God but Christ gaue himselfe to death 〈◊〉 obedience to the will of his heauenly father 5. They at such time gaue their liues when as their case was desperate and so were impatient to abide the extreame haâ—â—d and they died beeing mortall men that could not liue long as Solon when he encouraged the citizens to take armes against Pisistratus the tyrant beeing asked what made him bold so to doe answered his old age he knew he could not liue long But Christ died for vs hauing no necessitie to die in himselfe 6. Their death was glorious and honourable vnto them but Christ offered himselfe to the ignominious and shamefull death of the crosse 7. They died for a temporall deliuerance but we by Christs death are eternally deliuered 8. And that which maketh the greatest honour of all they died for their countrey and friends but our blessed Sauiour for his enemies ex Martyr Pareus 9. Origen addeth further that although there may be found among the heathen that died for their countrey yet there is none of them which died for all the world as Christ onely did which by his death totius mundi peccata absolvit did absolue all the world of their sinnes 13. Quest. Of the greatnes of the loue of God toward man in sending Christ to die for vs v. 8. This exceeding great loue of God is set forth by three circumstances what they were for whome Christ died sinners and enemies to God what Christ was that suffered euen the Sonne of God and what he endured and suffered euen to die for them 1. The condition of them for whome Christ died is set forth by three names they are said to be weake as not able to helpe or deliuer themselues vngodly as they which had left the worship of the onely true God and had defiled themselues with idolatrie sinners which had euery way transgressed the law of God Tolet. annot 10. Origen here comprehendeth all kind of sinnes for either one of ignorance and infirmitie sinneth and he is called weake or he is an obstinate and malitious offender who is called the sinner Sinners in Scripture are said to be those not which commit any sinne but those in whome sinne dwelleth and raigneth as Ioh. 9.31 and such were we by nature Beza yea we were not onely sinners but enemies vnto God which setteth his loue forth so much the more that he sought our good not onely beeing euill but also aduersaries vnto him So that while we were sinners and so God hated vs in respect of our sinnes yet at the same instant amabat secundum quod opus eius he loued vs as his owne worke gloss ordin 2. Gods loue further appeareth in sending his owne Sonne into the world nothing is dearer to a man then his owne sonne and therefore Gods loue doth herein most shew it selfe in that he sent not either Angel or Arkangel or any other of his glorious creatures to die for vs but his owne sonne Martyr 3. And this Sonne of God was not onely made man for vs and liued in the flesh and suffered many things for our sake but he died for vs it had beene a sufficient demonstration of his loue to haue humbled himselfe to take vpon him the nature of man and to walke and conuerse among sinnefull men But in that he died and that for his enemies it sheweth an vnspeakable loue there is no greater loue among men then when one bestoweth his life for his friends Ioh. 15.13 But Christs loue here exceeded that he gaue his life for his enemies Gorrhan 14. Quest. Whether mans redemption could not otherwise haue beene wrought then by the death of Christ. 1. It was not necessarie that Christ should die for our redemption either by the necessitie of coaction as though God had beene by some vrgent occasion compelled thereunto set God is not forced he worketh most freely nor yet by necessitie of nature as it is impossible in the diuine nature that God should lie or be vntrue but no externall worke done by God proceedeth from the necessitie of his nature there was then no absolute necessitie that Christ should die for vs nor yet any hypotheticall or conditionall necessitie the end beeing considered namely the saluation of man for it had beene possible for God by other meanes then by the death of his Sonne to haue wrought the saluation of man 2. Yet was it necessarie that Christ should die for mankind the wisdome and counsell of God considered because there was no other way whereby the greatnes of the loue of God could be shewed vnto man then by giuing his owne Sonne to die for vs P.
it entred in by the way as though it had entred in secretly so also Erasmus and Gorrhan giueth the reason because it was giuen but vnto one people and secretly in the desert but the lawe beeing so publikely deliuered in such great power and signes could not be said secretly to enter 2. Origen giueth this sense that the lawe of the members entred sub obtentu legis naturalis vnder the pretext and colour of the lawe of nature it entred as it were by stealth but the Apostle speaketh not here of the lawe of nature as is shewed before 3. Chrysostome whom Tolet followeth thus interpreteth the lawe is said to haue entred by the way vt ostenderet vsum illius temporarium to shewe that the vse thereof was but for a time but this is a perpetuall vse of the lawe to manifest and reueale sinne though indeed the vse of the ceremoniall lawe were but to continue for a time 4. Some thinke the lawe is said to haue entred as vnder hand post effuscationem 〈◊〉 naturalis after the lawe of nature was obscured so Ambrose Lyran. but though the lawe of nature had not beene obscured yet the written lawe should haue beene giuen by 〈◊〉 which men should haue beene prepared to receiue the Gospell Tolet. annot 26. therefore it is said to haue entred thereto or thereupon that is beside that naturall corruption and depriuation of nature in Adam the lawe also was giuen accessit ad morbum illium it came vpon or was added vnto that naturall disease that sinne thereby beeing more encreased might more commend the riches of Gods mercie in Christ Beza Pareus Quest. 42. How the offence is said to haue abounded by the entring of the lawe ver 20. The lawe is to be considered three wayes in respect of the nature thereof in respect of man to whom it is giuen and of God the author and giuer of the lawe 1. The lawe beeing considered in it selfe it holy spirituall and good and so properly is not the cause of the encrease of sinne but onely in respect of the euent as Chrysostome Gennadius and most of the Greeke interpreters expound it the lawe then causeth sinne to encrease non causaliter sed consecutiue not as the cause but in regard of the euent or consequent and that not ex parte legis on the behalfe of the lawe but by the malice of mans heart Lyran non ex â—â—tura legis not by the nature of the lawe but by the slougth and carelesnesse of them which receiue the lawe Chrysost. and sinne is thus occasionally encreased sower wayes 1. because ruimur in vetitum c. we alwaies rush vpon that which is forbidden like as a riuer meeting with some stone or let in the way maketh the greater noise whereof these reasons may be giuen first because things forbidden are not in our power and therefore our desire is more toward them whereas we neglect things easie and such as we can do when we list secondly the nature of humane affections is the more they are suppressed and kept in the more to be inflamed as fide when it is kept in breaketh out more violently this is vsually seene in the passions of anger and griefe Perer. numer 78. Adde hereunto the peruersenesse of mans will which is opposite to the will of God and most of all is bent to follow those things which the Lord forbiddeth 2. Sinne is increased by the lawe because he sinneth more that knoweth the will of God and doth it not then he that is ignorant of it 3. by the lawe which containeth varietie of precepts the number of sinnes is multiplyed innumera praecepta lex dedit the law gaue a number of precepts Chrysostom 4. the lawe terrifieth the conscience and so accuseth and condemneth and sheweth punishment due vnto sinne and so exaggerateth it Mart. 2. If the lawe be considered in regard of the effect which it worketh in the hearts of men then this particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that may be taken causally because by the lawe properly sinne is manifested and reuealed as the Apostle sheweth Rom. 3.20 that by the lawe commeth the knowledge of sinne Perer. 3. If we turne our selues to God the author of the lawe then in respect of his counsell the lawe may be vnderstood causally to encrease sinne in regard of a further ende which God propoundeth to himselfe namely that by the abounding of sinne grace may yet more abound Martyr so the ordinarie glosse hath here this profitable note Magnum Deiconsilium fuit c. it was the great and deepe counsell of God that by the lawe sinne should abound that men in seueritie and austeritie of the lawe seeing their owne infirmitie infirmi ad â—â—dicum confugerent c. beeing weake should runne vnto the Physitian and seeke for the helpe of grace c. Quest. 43. How grace is said to haue abounded more 1. Athanasius referreth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vbi where to the nature of man that in the same nature grace abounded by the comming of Christ in the flesh where sinne abounded before tractas de salutar advent but this seemeth to be too curious 2. Lyranus hath reference to the lawe that whereas sinne abounded vnder the lawe grace also abounded vnder the lawe because Christ was made vnder the lawe as the Apostle sheweth Galat. 4.4 But here grace is opposed and set against the lawe therefore in both the opposite partes there cannot be reference to the same lawe 3. The ordinarie glosse hath two expositions grace is said to abound because it profiteth them whom the deuill could not ouercome grace worketh on them vpon whom the kingdome of sinne had no power but then the same thing should be compared with it selfe for in that the kingdome of sinne and Sathan preuailed not against them it was the worke of grace 4. Otherwise thus quia peccatum ad tempus regnavit because sinne raigned but for a time but grace for euer but vnlesse grace had destroyed the kingdome of sinne it should haue raigned for euer 5. Origen saith grace abounded more in that it doth not onely hominem absoluere à peccatis prateritis free a man from sinnes past but also strengthen him against sinnes to come 6. Chrysostome thus grace hath superabounded not onely in taking away the punishment and remitting our sinnes but in giuing vs life and making vs iust 7. Some giue this sense that grace hath abounded not onely in taking away originall sinne but all other actuall sinnes added beside Piscator Gorrhan 8. But it is better to vnderstand this superabounding of grace of all those priuiledges and excellencies which the benefit by Christ hath beyond our losse and fall in Adam as the Apostle shewed before Bez. Fai. So euery way grace exceedeth both in respect of the poteÌ„tis of God whose grace appeareth to be the greater by the greatnes of our sinne which non 〈◊〉 superat sed absorbet it doth not onely ouercome
4 Therefore my brethren or euen so B.G. ye are made dead also or mortified Be. L.A. dead B.G. to the law by the bodie in the bodie Be. T. of Christ that ye should be vnto an other euen vnto him that is raised not risen L.T. from the dead that we should fructifie L. bring forth fruit Be. B.G. vnto God 5 For when we were in the flesh the motions infirmities T. affections Be. lusts B. passions L. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. of sinnes which were by the law did worke L.B. had force Be. G. were effectuall in our members to bring forth fruit vnto death 6 But now we are deliuered from the law that beeing dead not of death L. or we beeing dead vnto it B.G.T. see the question following vpon this place wherein we were holden that we should serue in the newnes of the spirit not in the oldnes of the letter 7 What shall we say then is the law sinne God forbid let it not be Gr. yea I knew not sinne but by the law for I had not knowne lust except the law had said Thou shalt not lust 8 But sinne taking occasion by the commandement wrought in me all manner of concupiscence B.G.T. some read thus sinne taking occasion by the commandement c. Be. L. see v. 11. following for without the law sinne was dead 9 For I once was aliue without the law but when the commandement came sinne revived but I died 10 And the commandement which was ordained vnto life the same was found to be to me vnto death 11 For sinne tooke occasion by the commandement and deceiued me and thereby flew me 12 Wherefore the law is holy and the commandement is holy and iust and good 13 Was that then which was good made death vnto me God forbid but sinne that sinne might appeare wrought death in me by that which is good L. G. T. A. some thus but sinne was death vnto me that sinne might appeare in working in me death by that which is good Be. B. that sinne might be out of measure sinnefull by the commandement 14 For we know that the law is spirituall but I am carnall sold vnder sinne 15 For what I worke I acknowledge not allow not G. vnderstand not L. for not what I would that doe I but what I hate that I doe 16 If I doe then that which I would not I consent to the law that it is good 17 Now it is no more I that worke it but sinne that dwelleth in me 18 For I know that good dwelleth not in me that is in my flesh for to will is present with me but how to performe that which is good I find not 19 For I doe not the good which I would but the euill which I would not that doe I. 20 Now if I doe that I would not it is no more I that worke it but sinne that dwelleth in me 21 I find then a law L. Gr. this law to be imposed Be. by the law B. Ge. that when I would doe good euill is present with me see the question following vpon this verse 22 For I delight in the law of God concerning the inner man 23 But I see an other law in my members rebelling against the law of my minde and leading me captiue to the law in the law L. of sinne which is in my members 24 O wretched man that I am who shall deliuer me out of this bodie of death Be. T. the bodie of this death L. B.G. 25 I thanke God through Iesus Christ our Lord Then I my selfe in my minde serue the law of God but in my flesh the law of sinne 2. The Argument Method and Parts IN this Chapter the Apostle sheweth how we are freed and exempted from the seruice of the law yet so as that he commendeth the law in it selfe and deliuereth it from all blame laying the imputation vpon his owne weaknes and infirmitie where he taketh occasion to shew the combate betweene the flesh and the spirit This Chapter then hath three parts 1. he sheweth how we are deliuered from the law to v. 7. 2. he excuseth and commendeth the law to v. 14. 3. he sheweth the infirmitie that remaineth in the regenerate and the combate betweene the flesh and the spirit 1. In the first part the Apostle sheweth that we are not freed and discharged from the morall obedience of the law but from the seruitude and bondage thereof in respect of the curse and irritation and prouocation to sinne this is set forth by an allegorie taken from the lawe of matrimonie the proposition is contained v. 1.2 3. consisting of three parts like as the woman is 1. free from her husband when he is dead v. 2. 2. after his death she may take an other husband and therein is no adultresse v. 2. 3. the third is implyed that she may also bring forth by an other the reddition followeth which hath three correspondent parts so we are 1. dead to the law 2. we are married to Christ. 3. to bring forth fruit vnto him v. 4. this last part is amplified by the contrarie that as sinne by the lawe did fructifie vnto death v. 5. so we now beeing freed should fructifie vnto the spirit v. 6. 2. Then he taketh vpon him the defense of the law that whereas he had said v. 5. that the matrons of sinne which were by the Law c. did bring forth fruit vnto death hereupon two obiections might arise that the lawe is the cause of sinne and of death to both which he answeareth The first obiection is propounded v. 7. is the law sinne then he answereth 1. in bringing a reason from the effect that the law connot be sinne nor the cause thereof because it reuealeth and discouereth sinne v. 7. 2. he sheweth how not the law but sinne taking occasion by the law wrought concupiscence reuiued in him deceiued him and in the end slew him all which he giueth instance of in his owne person v. 8. to v. 12. 3. he sheweth what the law is in it selfe iust and holy v. 12. the second obiection followeth v. 13. that it might seeme that the law beeing good wrought death in him then the answer is that not the lawe but sinne by the lawe wrought death 3. The Apostle in this third part sheweth first the combate betweene the flesh and the spirit to v. 24. then the issue thereof v. 24.25 the combate is set forth in three degrees 1. in that he by sinne is brought to doe that euill which he would not where he sheweth the opposition betweene the lawe commanding and his will consenting and sinne ouer-ruling him and his flesh obeying v. 14. to v. 18. 2. the next degree is that he is hindered by sinne from doing the good which he would this is prounded v. 18. then prooued by the contrarie effects v. 19. and by the contrarie causes the lawe moouing to good whereunto he consenteth and sinne hindring him v. 20.21 3. the third degree consisteth in
The spirit maketh request with sighes The meaning is this that many times when the children of God are ouerwhelmed with griefe and knowe not themselues what they pray but onely sobbe and sigh that the spirit vnderstandeth their meaning and euen those sighs and groanes which come of the spirit doe pray for them Augustine writeth excellently hereof epist. 121. that the brethren in Egypt are said crebras habere orationes sed eas brevissimas raptim iaculatas to make often prayers but the same verie short and as it were of a sudden cast out c. whereupon he thus inferreth hanc intentionem sicut non est obtrâ—denda si per durare non potest ita si perduraverit non esse cito rumpendam the intention of prayer as it must not be forced if it doth not continue so if it hold still it must not suddenly be interrupted and broken off and so he concludeth ab sit ab oratione multa locutio sud non desit multa precatso in our prayer let there be absent much speach but let there not be wanting much praying c. for as long as the intention and devotion holdeth the prayer cannot be too much but to goe on still in words the intention beeing slacked is much babling and talking not praying 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. That concupiscence remaining euen in the regenerate is sinne and in it selfe worthie of condemnation v. 1. There is no condemnation Bellarmine hence inferreth the contrarie that in these words the Apostle doth not so much shewe that there is no condemnaâ—on to those that are iustified as that there is no matter of condemnation in them nihil condemnatione dignum nothing worthie of condemnation l. 5. de amiss grat c. 7. arg 3. and consequently concupiscence in them is not sinne Contra. 1. The contrarie rather is inferred out of the Apostles words that concupiscence is in it selfe worthie of condemnation of the which the Apostle treated before in the former chapter but it is not vnto damnation neither it nor any other sinne vnto those which are iustified by faith in Christ. 2. and the Apostle expresseth the verie cause they are iustified in Christ and therefore though sinne remaine in them yet it is not imputed therefore it is great bouldnes to denie that which the Apostle in so direct words expresseth that vnto those which are iustified in Christ there is no condemnation not for that there is nothing worthie of condemnation in them for then they should be altogether without sinne but because they are iustified 3. the Apostle saith not there is no sinne but no condemnation Melancth not that the same sinnes remaine in those which are iustified which were in them before as Pererius slanndereth Calvin to say disput 1. numer 5. but there be still some imperfections and reliques of sinne remaining but not raigning which notwithstanding are not imputed vnto the faithfull neither are able to condemne them and Calvin saith no more but that the Apostle ioyneth three things together imperfectionem the imperfections which are alwayes in the Saints Dei indulgentiam Gods indulgence whereby their sinnes are forgiuen and regenerationem spiritus the regeneration of the spirit for carni suae indulgens he that is giuen to the flesh doth flatter himselfe in vaine to be freed from his sinne Calvin then cannot the same sinnes remaine seeing in the regenerate the flesh is mortified and sinne subdued Controv. 2. That none are perfect in this life Origens ouersight is here to be noted who thinking that the Apostle spake in the former chapter of those which partly serued the lawe of God in the spirit and partly the Lawe of sinne in the flesh saith that now he speaketh of those which ex integro in Christo sunt which wholly are in Christ not partly of the spirit partly of the flesh but are perfect Contra. 1. First Origen confoundeth iustification and sanctification for the faithfull are indeed wholly graft into Christ by faith and yet they may haue some infirmities of the flesh remaining 2. there neuer liued any of that perfection neuer to be tempted of the flesh but onely Christ but yet they which are in Christ doe not walke after the flesh that is non carnem ducem sequuntur they doe not followe the flesh as their guide though they be sometime tempted of the flesh but they follow the guiding and direction of the spirit Beza in annot 3. and it hath beene sufficiently shewed before quest 36. of the former chapter that the Apostle there speaketh in his owne person as of a man regenerate and so in this place he meaneth the same whom in his owne person he described before Controv. 3. That regeneration is not the cause that there is no condemnation to the faithfull The Romanists doe make this the cause why there is no condemnation to those which are in Christ because they walke not after the flesh but after the spirit Tolet. annot 1. Bellarm 5. de amission grat c. 10. respons ad obiect 7. so likewise Stapleton Antidot p. 435. who thus obiecteth 1. Ob. He vrgeth the Apostles words here there is no condeÌ„nation c. which walke not after the flesh therefore for that they walke not after the flesh there is no condemnation to such Contra. The Apostle saith not there is no condemnation because they walke not but to them that walke not regeneration is required as a necessarie condition annexed to iustification not as the cause so that here is an answear to two questions together how we are iustified namely by faith in Christ and who are iustified they which bring forth good fruits the one is internall their iustification the other externall namely sanctification Beza 2. Ob. The Apostle saith that the lawe of the spirit which Beza interpreteth to be the grace of regeneration doth free vs from the lawe of sinne and death v. 2. Ergo it is the cause of iustification Contra. 1. This interpretation beeing admitted that followeth not which is inferred for the words are not from sinne but from the lawe of sinne that is from the dominion of sinne and so indeede the grace of regeneration freeth vs that sinne hath no more dominion ouer vs. 2. but it is better with Ambrose to vnderstand by the law of the spirit legem fidei the lawe of faith whereby we are freed from sinne and death 3. Ob. If righteousnesse beeing present do not iustifie vs then beeing absent it condemneth not Contra. 1. Is followeth not for a thing may be insufficient to a worke beeing present and yet if it be remooued it is sufficient to hinder the worke as good diet in a sicke man may hinder his recouerie and yet if he vse it it is not alwayes sufficient to helpe him 2. and yet here is a difference in this example for good diet is an helping cause vnto health but good workes are no cause of saluation but onely a condition necessarily required and annexed 4.
Obiect The Apostle saith v. 15. If ye liue after the flesh yee shall die but if ye mortifie the deedes of the bodie ye shall liue therefore mortification is the cause of life and saluation Contra. 1. Hence followeth that mortification is necessarie vnto saluation yet not as a cause but as a necessarie condition without the which there is no faith and consequently no saluation 2. eternall life is the gift of God c. 6.23 therefore not due vnto our merits euill workes are the cause of damnation because they iustly deserue it but it followeth not that good workes are the cause of saluation for they are both imperfect and so vnproportinable to the reward and they are due otherwise to be done and therefore merite not Controv. 4. Against the Arrians and Eunomians concerning the deitie of the holy Ghost v. 2. The law of the spirit of life c. hath freedome Chrysostome homil de adorand spirit from this place prooueth the deitie of the spirit against the Arrian and Eunomiâ—au heretikes who made great difference in the persons of the Trinitie the Sonne they affirmed to be a creature and much inferiour to the Father and the holy Ghost they made servum ministrum silij a seruant and minister of the Sonne Chrysostome confuteth them by this place for if the spirit be the author of libertie and freedome to others then is he most free himselfe and not a minister or seruant as the Apostle saith 2. Cor. 2.17 where the spirit of the Lord is there is libertie Controv. 5. Against the Pelagians that a man by nature cannot keepe and fulfill the law This error is confuted by the expresse words of the Apostle who saith that the law was weake by reason of the flesh and so not able to iustifie vs by the flesh the Apostle vnderstandeth not substantiam caruis the substance of the flesh as the Maniches were readie to catch at these and the like places to confirme their wicked opinion who held the flesh of man to be euill by nature nor yet the carnall rites and obseruations of the law which were not able to cleanse the obseruers of them as Origen here interpreteth and Lyranus following him But by the flesh we vnderstand with Chrysostome carnales sensus the carnall affections carnalitatem quae rebellabat the carnalitie of man which rebelled against the spirit gloss ordinar concupisentias carnis the concupiscence of the flesh Haymo prauitatem naturae the pravitie of nature Martyr which hindereth that none can keepe the law to be iustified by it This then manifestly conuinceth the Pelagians for if the flesh make the law weake and vnable to be kept then none by the strength of their nature and flesh can fulfill the law Controv. 6. The fulfilling of the law is not possible in this life no not to them which are in the state of grace 1. The Romanists out of these words of the Apostle v. 4. That the righteousnesse of the law may be fulfilled in vs which walke not after the flesh doe inferre that they which walke not after the flesh may fulfill the law so that either it must be denied that none in this life walke after the spirit or it must be graunted that by such the law may be fulfilled Pere disput 5. Bellarmine addeth that if the law cannot be fulfilled Christus non obtinuit quod vâ—luit Christ hath not compassed or obtained that which he intended for therefore he died that the iustice of the law might be fulfilled Contra. 1. Indeed Origen whose errors and erroneous interpretations our aduersaries themselues will be ashamed of sauing where they serue their turne first deuised this interpretation who by the law here vnderstandeth the law of the mind which is fulfilled quando lex peccati in membris c. when the law of sinne in the members resisteth it not and Haymo hath this glosse that we beeing redeemed by Christ might spiritually fulfill the workes of the law per cuius impletionem possumus iustificari by the fulfilling whereof we may be iustified But this place is better vnderstood of the obedience of Christ who fulfilled the law which is imputed vnto vs by faith and thus doe not onely expound our new writes Melancthon Bucer Hyperius Calvin Beza with others but some of the auncient expositors as Theophylact quae lex facere nitibatur ea Christus nostri gratia executus est those things which the law endeuoured Christ hath performed for vs so also Oecumenius scotus finis legis per Christum partus est exhibitus the scope and end of the law is obtained exhibited by Christ yet we must endeuour to keepe those things which are deliuered per conuersationem bonam fidem by a good conuersation and faith 2. And that this is the meaning of the Apostle 1. the phrase sheweth that the law might be fulfilled in vs he saith not by vs Beza 2. because there is none so perfect in this life that neither in thought word nor deed transgresseth not the law 3. The law was weake through the infirmitie of the flesh but the infirmitie and weakenes of the flesh remaineth still euen in the regenerate therefore neither in them the righteousnesse of the law can be fulfilled 4. To the contrarie arguments thus we answer 1. the Apostle saith not that they which walke after the spirit fulfill the law but the law is fulfilled in them that is imputed vnto them by faith in Christ. 2. though the faithfull cannot fulfill the law yet Christ performed what he intended that he might keepe the law for them and they be iustified by faith in him 3. this clause then which walke not after the flesh is added to shew who they are for whom Christ hath fulfilled the law and to what end namely to such as walke in newnes of life 5. Some doe thinke that the Apostle speaketh here of two kinds of fulfilling the law one imputatione by imputation of Christs obedience which is our iustification the other inchoatione by a beginning onely which is our sanctification begunne in this life and perfited in the next when it shall be fulfilled Martyr Pareus But the other sense is better for the Apostle speaketh of a present fulfilling of the law in them which walke according to the spirit not of a fulfilling respited and excepted in the next life which is most true but not agreeable to the Apostles meaning here 6. So the Apostle in this place setteth forth three benefits purchased vnto vs by Christ 1. remission of our sinnes in that Christ bare in himselfe the punishment due vnto our sins 2. then the imputation of Christs obedience and performing of the law 3. our sanctification that we by the spirit of Christ doe die vnto sinne and rise vnto newnes of life which our sanctification is necessarily ioyned with our iustification but no part thereof 1. because it is imperfect in this life it is perfect after a sort perfectione partium by
of predestination c. 8.30 whereupon iustification by faith is grounded he in this Chapter doth handle at large this mysterie of Gods free and gracious election and the Chapter consisteth of three parts 1. because he was to treat of the reiection of the Iewes and calling of the Gentiles be doth first vse a pathetical insinuation protesting his desire toward the saluation of the Iewes to v. 6. 2. Then he handleth the mysticall doctrine of election remooving diuerse obiections to v. 24. 3. then he declareth the vse of this doctrine in the vocation of the Gentiles and the reiection of the Iewes 1. In the insinuation 1. the Apostle setteth forth his griefe the truth of it v. 1. the greatnes v. 2. 2. then his desire v. 3. euen to be separated from Christ for the saluation of the Iewes with the reasons thereof 1. because they were his kinsmen after the flesh v. 3. 2. they were the people of God which he prooueth by fiue priuiledges and immunities v. 4. 3. of them were the fathers of whom Christ descended 2. The mysterie of the doctrine of predestinaion is handled by remoouing certaine obiections which are three 1. Obiect Is propounded v. 6. if the Iewes be reiected and become an anathema to whom Gods promises were made it would followe that God should be mutable and inconstant in his promises Answ. 1. He denieth the consequent it followeth not if many of the Israelites be reiected that therefore God should faile in his word v. 6. 2. he sheweth the reason the promise was made onely vnto the true seede of Abraham but all which are carnally descended of Abraham are not his seede but the elect onely Ergo this is affirmed v. 6. 7. then it is prooued first by the example of Izaak that he onely was the true seede of Abraham and not Ismael which is prooued 1. by a direct testimonie of Scripture v. 7. 2. by this argument the children of the promise are the true seede v. 8. but Izaak onely was the promised seede v. 9. Ergo Secondly the same is confirmed by the example of Iacob and Esau Iacob onely was the true seede this is amplyfied 1. by remoouing the supposed causes of this difference betweene Iacob and Esau which was neither their carnall generation because they were conceiued by one and at the same time nor yet their workes for when as yet they were vnborne and had done neither good nor bad sentence was giuen of them which he sheweth by two testimonies of Scripture v. 12.13 2. he setteth downe the true causes the efficient the election and vocation of God the finall that the purpose of God might remaine firme v. 11. 2. Oiection is propounded v. 14. and it riseth out of the former for if God elect some and reiect others before they haue done either good or euill he should seeme to be vniust Answ. 1. He answeareth negatiuely it followeth not that God should be vnrighteous 2. then he giueth a reason of his answear taken from Gods absolute power and right in the creature he sheweth mercie and hardeneth whom he pleaseth this is propounded v. 18. and it is handled before by parts first that he hath mercie on whom he will v. 15. which is amplified by the contrarie it is not in the willer or runner but in God that sheweth mercie v. 16. secondly the other part is prooued by the particular example of Pharaoh which is amplyfied by shewing the ende of his reiection the setting forth of Gods glorie v. 17. 3. Obiect v. 19. If God doth according to his owne will elect some and reiect others and his will cannot be resisted nor hindered it would seeme a cruell and vniust part to condemne those which cannot helpe it Answ. The Apostle answeareth negatiuely not denying that it is Gods will that some should be elected some reiected but that it followeth not hereupon that God should be cruell or vniust which he sheweth 1. by the vnsearcheable wisedome and iustice of God which man is no more to finde fault with then the clay with the potter 2. by Gods absolute power which he hath ouer his workemanship as the potter ouer the clay v. 21. 3. by the effects that howsoeuer Gods decree standeth concerning the reprobate yet they worthily deserue to be cast off because of their sinne wherein God vseth long suffring toward them v. 22. 4. by the ende of the reiection of the one to shewe Gods iustice and power v. 22. and of the election of the other to declare the riches of his mercie v. 23. 3. The third part containeth an application of this generall doctrine of Gods election to the present state of the Gentiles and Iewes wherein 1. he sheweth how the elect and called both among the Gentiles shall be saued which he prooueth by two testimonies out of the Prophet Osee v. 25.26 and among the Iewes which should not be saued but onely a selected remnant which he prooueth by 3. testimonies out of the Prophet Esaias v. 27.28.29 2. he inferreth hereupon the vocation of the Gentiles shewing the cause thereof the embracing of the righteousnesse of faith v. 30. and the reiection of the Iewes v. 31. which he amplyfieth by shewing two causes thereof the following of the workes of the lawe and the stumbling at Christ v. 32. which he confirmeth by a testimonie of the Prophet which concludeth the cause both of the reiection of the Iewes and the taking offence at Christ and of the vocation of the Gentiles namely their faith and beleefe v. 33. 3. The questions and doubts discussed Quest. 1. Why the Apostle beginneth this treatise with an oath I speake the truth in Christ c. 1. Hugo Cardinal referreth it to the former doctrine of the certaintie of predestination because he had said nothing could separate him from the loue of God in Christ. 2. Origen and Chrysostome haue relation to the Apostles extraordinarie wish v. 3. that he wisheth to be seperated from Christ for his brethrens sake which because it might seeme strange and incredible and contrarie to the Apostles confidence vttered before that nothing could seperate him from Christ he therefore vseth this vehement asseueration to shew that he spake from his heart 3. Gryneus thinketh that the Apostle by this vehement speach doth purge himselfe from those cauills and suspitions which were taken vp of him as that he was an innouator of the law a pestilent and seditious fellow 4. Haymo thinketh that the Apostle hereby doth confirme his loue toward his nation sheweth his greefe and sorow for them as it followeth in the next verse 5. But the verie occasion indeed why the Apostle breaketh out into this speach is because he was to entreate of the reiection of the Iewes and vocation of the Gentiles which left it might seeme to proceed from the hatred of his nation he protesteth his loue toward them both by shewing his sorrowe for their hardnesse of heart c. 9. and by his prayer for their conuersion c.
is subsequens gratia subsequent or following grace whereby the Lord assisteth those which are called as Augustine saith gratia praevenit vt velimus subsequiâ—â—â—â— frustrà velimus grace preuenteth vs that we may be willing and it followeth vs that our will be not in vaine 3. the cause of the grace of God is his owne mercie the Apostle saith here v. 35. who hath giuen vnto him first the internall motiue is the free loue of God the externall impulsiue and moouing cause is the merit of Christ. 4. the effects of the grace and fauour of God are either externall as election predestination or such as are brought forth in time as vocation iustification sanctificatioÌ„ 5. the graces in the second sense which are the gifts of the spirit are either salutis the graces belonging to saluation as knowledge faith hope or they are vocationis such as appertaine vnto our vocation and calling which are either extraordinarie as were the miraculous and propheticall gifts which the Prophets and Apostles had or ordinarie as are the knowledge of arts the gift of vtterance and such like which now are attained vnto by diligent labour and industrie Doct. 5. Concerning good workes the qualitie and kinds thereof the causes and effects v. 6. But if of workes c. 1. The works of men are either naturall as to sleepe or ciuill as to buy to sell which are indifferent or they are morall which are either good or evill 2. the efficient cause of good works is first God moouing by his spirit then the will of man converted and prepared by grace the helping causes are instruction exhortation faithfull endeauour prayer 3. the matter of good works is the internall and externall act of the will and mind heart and bodie the forme is the consent and agreement with the lawe of God 4. the effects of good works are toward God our obedience which in Christ is pleasing and acceptable to him in our selues the fruits and testimonie of our faith toward our brethren their edification they are stirred vp by our good conuersation to glorifie God Doct. 6. We must compare the present state of the Church with the times past v. 5. Euen so now at this present time As S. Paul compared the estate of the Church then present with the times of Elias so we are taught to comfort our selues in the afflictions of the Church of God in these dayes with looking backe into the times past for God doth after the same manner gouerne his Church So Origen well obserueth sicut factum est sub Helsa c. as it was vnder Helias so it was in the comming of Christ and in S. Pauls time c. like as the small number of true professors was then no preiudice to the truth no more ought it to be now Doct. 7. Of the priviledge of the seede of the faithfull v. 16. If the first fruits be holy so is the whole lumpe like as the Iewes which were descended of Abraham were within the couenant and so vnto them belonged circumcision the signe of the couenant the paschal lambe the Temple and sacrifices vnto the which the seede of the Gentiles which were not of Abraham had no right so now the seede and ofspring of Christians are counted holy vnto them belongeth baptisme and other Sacraments and rites of Christian profession for they are an holy seede as the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 7.14 Els were your children vncleane but now are they holy Doct. 8. How the Church or a righteous man is resembled to a tree v. 16. If the roote be holy so are the branches c. 1. a iust man is resembled to a tree 1. propter pedis i. fidei immobilitatem for the stedfastnes of his foot that is his faith v. 20. thou standest by faith 2. propter stipitis i. spei erectionem c. for the erecting of the stalke or truncke which signifieth hope and therefore Iob saith 19.10 he hath remooued my hope like a tree 3. the roote is charitie Eph. 4. beeing rooted and grounded in loue 4. The branches are his vertues Hosh. 14.7 His branches shall spread and his beautie shall be as the olive tree 5. the bloomes and blossomes are his sweete manners 6. the leaues his gracious words 7. the fruit good workes 8. the shadowe of the tree is his mercie Hosh. 14.7 They that dwell vnder his shadowe shall returne Gorrhan Doct. 9. The old Testament and the newe one and the same in substance v. 18. Thou bearest not the roote but the roote thee c. There was then the same roote both of the Iewes and beleeuing Gentiles the same faith the same Mediator the same substance efficacie and force of the Sacraments though the externall rites and symboles were diuerse Martyr so S. Paul Ephes. 4. There is one bodie one spirit c. one Lord one faith c. Doct. 10. Of Gods omnipotencie v. 23. God is able to graffe them in againe The Apostle prooueth the returne and graffing in of the Iewes by the power of God though simply and generally this is no good argument God can doe it therefore it shall be yet here is a sufficient reason because there was no doubt of Gods will seeing the Iewes were his people of old otherwise Gods power is not limited to his will for he can doe more then he will it is contrariwise with man who willeth many things that he cannot effect and so his will is larger then his power Martyr Doct. 11. Christ prooued to be God by the remission of sinnes v. 27. This is my couenant when I shall take away their sinnes c. This sheweth Christ to be God who onely is able to forgiue sinnes men may remit the punishment that it be not inflicted but the guilt of sinne is onely purged by God the keyes are indeede committed to the Church in the preaching of the word but they are the instruments onely whereby God forgiueth sinnes the Ministers are onely the proclaymers of Gods will herein they cannot remit sinnes but onely ministerially as the instruments Doct. 12. Of the excellencie of the knowledge of God v. 33. O the depth of the riches of the wisedome and knowledge of God c. Gods knowledge is excellent 1. for the largenes of it in knowing all things 2. the perfection of it he knoweth all things perfitly 3. the manner he needeth no meanes of his knowledge but himselfe 4. the celeritie of it he knoweth all things in a moment 5. the certaintie of it it cannot be deceiued 6. the eternitie it was from the beginning 7. the efficacie it is the cause of all things 8. the secunditie of it all things are lightened by his knowledge 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. That none which are elected can finally fall away v. 2. Whereas the Apostle saith God hath not cast away his people which he knewe before c. Hence it may be obiected thus God knewe his people before that is elected them vnto saluation but
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
be lawfull to sweare and vpon what occasion 1. That it is lawfull to sweare thus it appeareth 1. Christ came not to dissolue the lawe Matth. 5.17 now the lawe not onely permitteth but commandeth to sweare where cause is Deut. 6.13 and 10.20 2. the Lord himselfe sweareth Psal. 110.4 Heb. 6.17 therefore it is not sinne to sweare 3. the holy Fathers and Patriarkes vsed to take an oath where it was lawfully required as Abraham Gen. 21.24 Iacob Genes 31.53 Dauid 1◠Sam. 24.23 2. But it will be thus on the contrarie obiected 1. Christ saith Sweare not at all neither by heauen for it is the throne of God c. Answear Christ forbiddeth not to sweare by God but not by creatures as by the heauen the earth by the Temple by the head 2. where he saith let your communication be yea yea nay nay Christ forbiddeth not the lawfull vse of an oath when there is iust cause but the often and vnnecessarie vsing of it in common talke where then it concerneth the saluation or edification of our brethren it is lawfull to take an oath as it was requisite that the Romanes should be well perswaded of S. Pauls affection toward them who had yet neuer seene them as Chrysostome saith quouiam neminem hominum animi sui testem sistere poterat c. because he could not set forth any man to be a witnesse of his minde he calleth vpon God who searcheth the heart 3. It will be againe obiected that in the Newe Testament an oath is not lawfull as it was in the olde Basil. in Psalm 14. Answear The abuse of an oath was vnlawfull both in the Old Testament and in the Newe But to take an oath lawfully is as well permitted to the Church of Christ nowe as it was to the Church of the Iewes As the Prophet Isaiah prophesieth of the Newe Church that they shall sweare by Iehovah Isay. 19.18 and c. 43.23 Ierem. 4.3 Quest. 30. How Paul is said to serue in the spirit 1. Chrysostome by the spirit vnderstandeth the holy Ghost omnia spiritus sancti imputat virtuti he ascribeth all to the vertue of the holy spirit nothing to his owne diligence But in that he saith in my spirit this interpretation is auoided Paul would not so call the holy Ghost my spirit 2. Theodoret by spirit thinketh to be meant the gift and grace giuen vnto Paul whereby he was furnished for his Apostleship whereof he spake before v. 5. by whom we haue receiued grace and Apostleship so also Oecumenius he is said to serue him in tradito sibi dono in the gift giuen vnto him but so much is expressed in the words following In the Gospell of his sonne that sheweth his ministerie and employment in the Gospell 3. some giue this sense whom I serue in the spirit that is not in the flesh non in carnalibus observantijs not in carnall obseruations such as were the ceremonies of the lawe gloss interlin so also Aretius I serue God non vt hypocritae ceremonijs not as hipocrites with ceremonies but the mentioning of the Gospel following excludeth all legall ceremonies 4. Origen here maketh a distinction betweene the soule and the spirit which he taketh for the superior and higher part of the soule wherein he serued God Ambrose also by the spirit vnderstandeth the minde which is true that inwardly he serued Christ in his spirit and mind but the faine not considered in the naturall condition thereof as Origen seemeth to haue relation thereunto but renewed and regenerate by grace 5. S. Paul then by his spirit vnderstandeth his ardent and earnest affection wherein he serued God most earnestly and zealously in the ministerie of the Gospel Beza The like saying the Apostle hath 2. Tim. 1.3 I thanke God whome I serue from mine Elders with a pure conscience he serued God with an vpright and innocent heart not in shew and oftentation and in this sense our Sauiour saith Ioh. 4.24 They that worship God must worship him in spirit and in truth Martyr 31. Quest. v. 10. What prosperous iourney the Apostle meaneth v. 10. That I might haue a prosperous iourney by the will of God 1. Paul simply praieth not for a prosperous iourney but according to the will of God there is a prosperitie not according to the will of God as the wise man saith Prov. 1.32 The prosperitie of fooles destroyeth them Gorrham But the Apostle esteemeth not of such prosperous things quae sine voluntate dei eveniunt which come to passe without the will of God Haymo 2. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth that I may haue a iourney giuen me according to my minde Erasm. in which desire the Apostle non deprecatur omnia pericula doth not pray against all perills and daungers for he suffered shipwracke and endured other casualties in his iourney to Rome but he counted it a prosperous iourney which howsoeuer might bring him vnto them to bestow some spirituall gift vpon them Aretius Such a prosperous iourney was that which S. Paul tooke into Macedonia where though he suffered imprisonment and were beaten with roddes yet his iourney prospered in respect of the good successe which he had in preaching of the Gospel Martyr 3. And this desire of Paul to see the Romanes might be one cause of his appeale which he made to Rome Act. 25. Lyranus 32. Quest. Whether S. Paul needed to be mutually strengthened by the faith of the Romanes v. 12. That I might be comforted through our mutuall faith both yours and mine 1. Chrysostome thinketh that Paul spake not this quod ipse illorum opus habeat auxilio as though he had neede of their helpe seeing he was a pillar of the Church but that he so saith to qualifie his former speach v. 11. because he had saide that I might bestow vpon you some spirituall gift to strengthen you 2. But although the Apostles modestie appeare herein that ioyneth himselfe with them as hauing neede of their mutuall comfort yet in truth he professeth himselfe not to be so perfect as though he needed no helps non ponit se in supremo gradu he doth not place himselfe in the highest degree for he other where doth acknowledge his imperfection both in knowledge 1. Cor. 13. and in the gifts of regeneration Rom. 7. Pareus like as a minister comming to visit one that is sicke to comfort him may be comforted againe by him Olevian to this purpose P. Martyr 3. This mutuall consolation Theophytact vnderstandeth of the alleviating of their afflictions by their mutuall comforts Tolet with others of the mutuall ioy which they should haue one in an others mutuall faith Lyranus that they should be comforted by faith which was common to him and them for there is but one faith But as Chrysostome saith here this consolation may be taken pro fider incremento for the encrease of faith for the faithfull mutuis exhortationibus in fide proficiunt by mutuall exhortations doe profit
Gospel himselfe so he insinuateth vnto them that they should not be ashamed to heare it Mart. 3. Chrysostome mooueth a question why S. Paul saith not here that he is not onely not ashamed but reioyceth also in the Gospel of Christ as he saith Gal. 6.14 God forbid that I should reioyce but in the crosse of our Lord Iesus Christ And thus he answereth that because the Romanes were lifted vp in their mind because of their honour riches and estimation in the world and Paul preached Christ Iesus who was crucified and counted as nothing in the world he therefore first of all would winne them not to be ashamed of the Gospel and then they would come also to glorie in it c. But S. Paul in effect faith as much as I glorie in the Gospel minus dicitur plus intelligitur lesse is spoken and more vnderstood Pareus Mart. Faius for the reason following for it is the power of God c. sheweth that he did euen glorie in it 4. But whereas two things might haue hindred Paul shame and feare of the two which feare seemeth to be the greatest pull-back for shame is de amissione honoris but for the losse of honour feare is de amissione vitae for the losse of life S. Paul yet saith rather he is not ashamed then he feareth not both because his not fearing had commended himselfe but his not beeing ashamed commendeth the Gospel as not beeing a vile and contemptible things as also persecution was not yet generally mooued among the Christians which the Apostle needed to feare but yet it was generally contemned Tolet. 39. What the Gospel or Evangel signifieth 1. Euangel um the Euangel is sometime taken for the sacrifice which vsed to be offered vnto the gods among the heathen for the bringing of good newes and tidings in which sense Cicero taketh it â suaves epistolas quibus Evangelaum de beri fateor ad Attic. O sweete epistles which I count worthie of an Evangel that is of such an offering or sacrifice 2. It signifieth the bringing of any good newes or tidings as Ior. 20.15 Cursed be the man that brought my father tidings saying A man child is borne vnto thee the word is bessar which the Septuagint doe translate by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to bring good newes 3. This word is appropriated to signifie the glad tidings of our redemption purchased by Christ as the Angels say vnto the shepheards Luk. 2.10 Behold I bring you tidings of great ioy the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Rom. 10.15 Beautifull are the feete of them which bring glad tidings of peace and bring glad tidings of good things where the faine word is vsed in the Greeke but in Isa. 52.7 from whence that testimonie is taken the word is bissar which betokeneth the bringing of good newes or tidings some times formore euidence the word good is added as 2. Sam. 18.27 besarah tobah good tidings 40. Quest. Of the definition of the Gospel It is the power of God vnto saluation to euery one that beleeueth This definition consisteth of three parts 1. of the efficient cause the power of God 2. the ende to saluation 3. the forme to euery one that beleeueth 1. It is the power of God 1. The power of God is diuers there is his creating power whereby he made the world but this power is that which is ioyned with his loue and fauour in Christ whereby he wrought the redemption of man which is so much greater then the other because when he made the world none resisted him but Sathan opposeth himselfe in the worke of our redemption Faius 2. There is a power also of God vnto perdition and damnation but this is his power vnto saluation Chrysost. Origen 3. But how is the Gospel the power of God seeing it setteth forth the humilitie of Christ in his sufferings death and passion Answ. These were infirmitates voluntariè assumptae infirmities which our blessed Sauiour did voluntarily take vpon him and therein he most of all shewed his power in destroying the kingdome of Sathan by such meanes Hugo 4. Neither doe we here vnderstand the essentiall power of God but his organicall power Pareus or by a metonymie the declaration of his power whereby the preaching of the Gospel is made effectuall Faius 2. Vnto saluation 1. This saluation consisteth presently in the remission of sinnes and afterward in the inheritance of eternall life not like the saluation which is promised by men as by Magistrates to their subiects by Physitians to their patients but it is the euerlasting saluation of our soules Mart. 2. Though outwardly the Gospel appeare vile and contemptible yet it hath a secret vertue to work vnto eternall life As there be certaine naturall things which make no shew outwardly yet inwardly are full of vertue as pepper feeleth outwardly as cold but it is hoat in operation Theodor as a pill which the Physitian giueth though it seeme nothing yet it is of great efficacie to expell diseases Tolet. 3. The Gospel worketh to some vnto condemnation it is the sauour of death vnto death but that is not properly the effect of the Gospel which is giuen vnto saluation but by reason of mens incredulitie so the Gospel not by it owne proper effect but accidentally worketh vnto condemnation Marâ— 3. To euery one that beleeueth 1. The Gospel is offered vnto all but it onely profiteth vnto saluation vnto those that beleeue like as a medicine is onely effectuall to those that receiue it Pareus 2. Christ is the efficient cause of saluation but faith is organon appreâ—â—sivum c. the apprehending instrument like as the light is the cause of our seeing but the eye also must be rightly disposed which is the organs of seeing Aretius 3. Neither is this vnderstood of euery beleefe beleeuers are not here taken for such as to whom the historie of the Gospel is onely knowne but such as are sealed by the spirit of grace and are assured they are the sonnes of God and crie Abba father Rom. 8.15 Gryneus 4. And thus the Apostie falleth into the very cheife argument and scope of this whole Epistle that we are iustified by faith and not by the works of the law Gualter 41. Quest. Of the difference betweene the Law and the Gospel 1. In that the Gospel requireth beleefe vnto saluation therein it differeth from the law whose righteousnes is this not to beleeue but to doe those things which are therein commanded as the Apostle sheweth Rom. 10.5 Mart. 2. The Gospel is the power of God that is effectuall mightie liuely in operation but the law is weake and impotent Rom. 8.3 it was weake because of the flesh 3. The Gospel vnto saluation but the law is the ministerie of condemnation 2. Cor. 3.9 4. The Law was giuen onely to the people of Israel but the Gospel is proposed to all both Iew and Gentile 5. The Law consisted in observatione ceremoniarum externa cultu in
appointed for generation so the Syrian translator re quae non est ex natura vsae sunt they vsed the thing both which was not of nature c. 3. So likewise the men with men wrought filthines actiuely in forcing vpon other vnnaturall acts of vncleannes and passiuely in suffering others to doe it this was the sinne of Sodome for the which they were destroied Socrates is noted among the Philosophers for masculine venerie which Plato condemneth And the Apostle may seeme to haue speciall relation here vnto the abominable vncleannes of the Romanes and specially 〈◊〉 who was a monstrous beast for such sinnes against nature Pareus Chrysostome 〈◊〉 elegantly sheweth how whereas by Gods ordinance in lawfull copulation by mariage two became one flesh both sexes were ioned together in one by this Sodomiticall vnâ—â—â—nnes the same flesh is diuided into two the men with men working vncleannes with women and so serue in stead of two sexes 68. Quest. How one sinne is punished by an other vpon these words And receiued in themselues such recompence of their error c. v. 27. 1. There are some sinnes which are as punishments of former sinnes which are non tormenta peccantium sed incrementa vitiorum not so much the torment of sinners as the encreasing of sinne as Augustine saith And here we may make a foure-fold distinction of sinnes 1. some are not onely sinnes but the causes also of sinnes following as Gregorie giueth instance of one giuen vnto riot and excesse in eating and drinking which causeth him through the lustines of his flesh to commit adulterie here his Epicures life is both a sinne and the cause of an other sinne namely adulterie 2. Some sinnes are both the cause of an other sinne following and the punishment of a former as if the adulterer proceed further to commit murther here adulterie is the punishment of his gluttonie and the cause of murther 3. And there is a sinne which is the punishment of a former sinne though it bring forth no new sinne as murther here is the punishment of adulterie 4. Some sinnes are neither the causes nor punishment of other sinnes but simply sinnes in themselues as namely when any one repenteth of his sinne and proceedeth no further 2. But here it will be obiected that euery sinne is voluntarie but the punishment of sinne is involuntarie how then can sinne be a punishment and euery punishment of sinne is iust and so of God but sinne is vniust and not of God therefore not a punishment To this obiection diuers answers are made 1. The master of the sentences lib. 2. distinct 36. giueth this solution that sinne is said to be a punishment not as it is a fault committed by the will but in respect of the effect which it worketh in the soule which is the corrupting of the minde and making it guiltie of damnation But in this sense euery sinne should be a punishment of sinne because the minde is thus corrupted and made guiltie euen by the first sinnes which one committeth 2. Therefore Thomas Aquinas addeth further that sinne in respect of the nature thereof because it is voluntarie is not a punishment but in respect of the cause which is the subtraction or remoouing of the grace of God whereby he falleth into further sinne And further he explaneth the matter thus that sinne is a punishment 3. waies either in respect of somewhat going before as the absence or subtracting of the grace of God or somewhat which accompanieth sinne either in the minde as the corrupting and polluting of it or without as crosses and troubles which are sent for sinne or els in respect of somewhat ensuing and following as the torment of conscience But all these the subtracting of grace outward trouble and remorse of conscience may concurre in the first sinnes which are not the punishment of any precedent sinnes therfore a further reason hereof is to be found out 3. Wherfore God in punishing one sinne by an other is to be considered as a iust Iudge that not onely by subtracting his grace as Pererius not by giuing Sathan power ouer sinners to draw them further into sinne as Hyperius but by the secret working of his iustice in ordering and directing all things according to his will he so disposeth and effecteth that the wicked are giuen ouer to greater impietie and iniquitie to commit sinne with greedines so then this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 recompence hath neither reference vnto the sinners themselues who regard herein nothing but their owne inordinate pleasure not yet vnto Sathans worke who intendeth nothing but the contumely of God and the destruction of the vngodly but it is referred vnto God who in punishing sinne by sinne onely respecteth the due course of his iustice in thus recompencing their former error God then is no way accessarie to their sinnes but concurreth as a iust Iudge in punishing their former sinnes with greater following Pareus Faius here noteth well a difference betweene the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Apostle here vseth which signifieth a iust and full recompence answering and correspondent vnto the merit of their sinne which word is onely vsed of euill works but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a reward is giuen vnto good works as be conferred of grace not answering vnto any merit before going 3. As thus it hath beene shewed how sinne is the punishment of sinne so also one sinne may be the cause of an other and that either directly or indirectly directly when as a man by one sinne is inclined to commit an other and that three waies 1. in respect of the ende as when one through couetousnes committeth murther to enioy an others wealth 2. or by suggesting the matter of an other sinne as gluttonie bringeth forth adulterie 3. or in respect of the efficient and moouing cause as when one by practise and continuance in sinne is growne into an habit of sinning which still stirreth him vp to heape sinne to sinne Indirectly one sinne causeth an other by remoouing that which should keepe one from sinne as namely when the sinne first committed excludeth the grace of God whereby one should be preserued from sinne Thom. prim secund qu. 80. art 2. 69. Quest. How the Gentiles are said not to regard to know God v. 28. 1. Origen thinketh that the Apostle setteth downe here three kinds of impieties against God first of them which worshipped idols to v. 23. which was the generall sinne of the Gentiles secondly of those which worshipped the creature rather then the creator v. 25. such were the Philosophers and Astronomers which were skilfull in the obseruation of naturall things thirdly he thinketh heretikes here to be noted that regard not to know God But the Apostle seemeth still to continue in the same argument setting forth the sinnes of the Gentiles that as before he shewed how they polluted and defiled themselues so now he describeth other sinnes as fruits of their idolatrie namely such as are
the iust shall liue by faith haue no other meaning but this iustum secundum fidei norman vitam dirigere that the iust doth direct his life according to the rule of faith Contra. 1. He doth not place the words aright for thus are the words to be ioyned together the iust by faith shall liue so that by faith hath rather connexion with the first word the iust then with the last shall liue 2. the Apostle by life here vnderstandeth euerlasting saluation not our conuersion here as is said before v. 16. that the Gospell is the power of God to saluation to euerie one that beleeueth faith then bringeth to euerlasting saluation 2. The Rhemists haue this shift that faith together with workes must be here vnderstood to iustifie the Apostle saith not the iust shall liue by faith onely to this purpose also Bellarmine lib. 1. de iustificat c. 20. Contra. 1. If the whole life of the soule depended not vpon faith but partly vpon faith partly vpon workes then it might as well be said the iust shall liue by workes which were an absurd speach and not farre from blasphemie 2. the Apostle c. 3.28 excludeth works concluding that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the lawe then to liue by faith is to liue onely by faith as we are iustified onely by faith without workes 3. Nowe although the iust liue by faith and not by workes yet faith liueth by workes it must be a liuely and effectuall faith working by loue by the which the iust man liueth and not a dead faith 3. Pererius here slyeth to their old distinction of iustification the first which is by faith the second is perfited by workes so faith is said to iustifie a man because it is exordium fundamentum radix iustificationis the beginning foundation and roote of iustification Perer. dâ—sput 8. in 1. ad Roman sect 46. Contra. 1. That which he calleth the second iustification is properly satisfaction which is the fruit of iustification as the Apostle saith Rom. 6.22 beeing now freed from sinne and made seruants vnto God you haue your fruit in holines and the end euerlasting life where the whole state of the faithfull man is diuided into these three parts his iustification and freedome from sinne which is by faith the fruit of his iustification which is holynesse and the ende or reward which is euerlasting life 2. to liue by faith sheweth that not the beginning but the perfection of our life is by faith and by nothing but faith as the Apostle saith the iustice of God is reuealed from faith to faith faith is the beginning and end of this iustice there is no time wherein saluation is giuen vnto any but by faith as Thomas expoundeth see before quest 42. 4. Bellarmine hath an other deuise he maketh this the meaning the iust shall liue by faith that is ex fide patienter expectare quae Deus promisit by faith he doth patiently expect those things which God hath promised So he would haue it vnderstood rather of patient wayting and expecting then of iustifying lib. 2. de effect sacram c. 9. Contra. This patient expecting of Gods promises is indeede a fruit of iustifying faith for it is the ground of things hoped for and he that is iustified by faith hath this grace also of patient expectation but to liue by faith comprehendeth more 2. and that by this phrase to liue by faith the Apostle vnderstandeth to be iustified by faith is euident Gal. 2.20 Thus I liue not I now but Christ liueth in me and in that I now liue in the flesh I liue by the faith if the Sonne of God c. 3. And whereas Bellarmine further obiecteth that the Prophets meaning from whom the Apostle taketh this saying is none other but to note their patience that waited for the Lords promises it hath beene shewed before qu. 44. that the Apostle keepeth the Prophets sense and doth most fitly apply this sentence to iustification by faith 5. But the Romanists against iustification by faith onely thus obiect 1. It seemeth a verie absurd thing to make men beleeue that they shall be iustified by faith onely without either satisfaction for their sinnes or the workes of righteousnesse by this meanes nothing could be easier then by faith to be saued 2. And this doctrine will make men presumptuous that they will care for no good workes and so there should be no more vse either of precepts to exhort them vnto the workes of pietie nor of threatnings to terrifie them from sinne Contra. 1. Though that faith neede no satisfaction for sinne in our selues nor good workes as helping vnto iustification yet it apprehendeth the satisfaction made by Christs suffering for our sinnes and workes are also necessarie as testimonies of our faith though not as helpes of our iustification neither is such a faith liuely and effectuall so easie a thing seeing man hath no power of himselfe to attaine vnto it vnlesse God doe giue it and to beleeue in Christ as a Christian ought is found to be the hardest thing in the whole world 2. Neither is this a doctrine of presumption nor yet doth it make voide precepts and comminations for faith though it require not workes as causes and helpes to saluation yet it cannot be without them as fruits and effects so that the lawe of faith establisheth the lawe of workes as the Apostle sheweth c. 3.31 doe we then make the lawe of none effect through faith God forbid yea we establish the lawe Pareus Controv. 17. How the Gospel is the power of God to saluation to everie one that beleeueth v. 16. This and such like places which ascribe iustification and saluation to faith as Ioh. 3.16 that whosoeuer beleeueth in him should not perish Act. 13.39 by him euerie one that beleeueth is iustified Bellarmine would thus elude 1. he saith that these Scriptures must be vnderstood negatiuely that without faith none are iustified not that onely by faith they are iustified 2. then by all are vnderstood all nations that there is no difference between Iew and Gentile but that one common way to saluation is propounded to them all 3. And it beeing applyed to euerie particular man the meaning is that not faith of it selfe alone but with other things as hope charitie iustifieth Bellar. lib. 1. de iustifie c. 22. Contra. 1. Yes these sayings hold affirmatiuely that faith is sufficient vnto saluation for our Sauiour saith Iohn 5. he that beleeueth c. hath euerlasting life and is passed from death to life that which giueth a man a present assurance and reall possession of euerlasting life is alone availeable to saluation 2. True it is that none of what nation soeuer are excluded but euerie one that beleeueth wheresoeuer is iustified this confirmeth the doctrine of iustification by faith that there is no other way to saluation either for Iewe or Gentile 3. And if the Gospell be the power of God to saluation
iudged in this that he beleeued not though for other things which he doth he shall not be iudged as it is said he that beleeueth shall not be iudged or condemned that is he shall not be iudged secundum hoc quod credit in that that he beleeueth yet in other things he shall be iudged 2. Such an one not beleeuing in Christ yet doing well though he haue not eternall life yet gloria operum poterit non perire by the glorie of his workes he may be kept from perishing to this purpose Origen lib. 2. in c. 2. ad Roman 2. Contra. 1. The first position of Origen that any thing done without faith can be acceptable to God is contrarie to the Scripture Heb. 11.6 Without faith it is impossible to please God neither doth that argument followe from the contrarie for one euill worke is sufficient to condemne a man but one good worke is not sufficient to obtaine reward for he that doth one good worke may haue many euill workes beside for the which he deserueth to be punished that other glosse of his of the iudging of beleeuers and the not iudging of vnbeleeuers is coÌ„futed by the words of our Sauiour Ioh. 5.24 he that beleeueth hath euerlasting life and shall not come into condemnation he is not freed then from iudgement onely in part because he beleeueth but simplie he shall neuer enter into condemnation for he which hath a liuely faith which is effectuall working by loue hath not onely a naked faith but is full of good workes and where he is wanting his imperfect obedience is supplied by the perfect obedience of Christ apprehended by faith 2. Neither doth the Scripture allowe any third place beside heauen and hell after this life that any not hauing eternall life should be preserued from perishing for they which are not counted among the sheepe at the right hand of Christ for whom the kingdome is prepared they belong vnto the goates at the left hand and shall goe into euerlasting fire prepared for the deuill and his Angels 3. This straight and inconuenience Origen is driuen vnto because he taketh these Iewes and Grecians to be vnbeleeuers whereas the Apostle vnderstandeth such among the Gentiles as beleeued in God and liued thereafter such were they which liued with Melchisedek Iob the Niniuites Cornelius as Chrysostome vpon this place sheweth whom Faius followeth 22. Quest. Of the diuerse acceptions of the word person v. 11. This word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is either giuen vnto God or to creatures and the same either without life or to such as haue life as to man 1. It is attributed to God three wayes 1. the face of God signifieth his iudgement against sinners 1. Pet. 3.12 the face of God is against those which doe euill 2. it is taken for the spirituall presence of Christ 2. Cor. 2.10 I forgaue it for your sakes in the sight or face 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Christ. 3. it is taken for the diuine hypostasis in the Trinitie as Christ is said to be the engraued forme of the person of his father Heb. 1.3 2. Things without life are said to haue a certaine face as Luke 12.56 the face of heauen 3. Properly this word face is giuen vnto man and it 1. either signifieth his countenance as Iesus is said to haue fallen vpon his face Matth. 26.39 2. or the bodilie presence as the Apostle saith he was kept from the Thessalonians concerning his face but not in heart 1. Thessal 2.17.3 or it is taken for some respect of the gifts of bodie minde or some externall condition as of honour riches or such like in this sense it is said of Christ Mark 12.14 thou carest not for the person of any and S. Iude saith of certaine false teachers that they haue mens persons in admiration for aduantage sake Iud. v. 16 and in this sense it is taken here Gryneus 4. The person then of man betokeneth some qualitie or condition in him for the which he is respected either naturall as the gifts of the minde sharpnes of wit memorie vnderstanding or of the bodie as strength come lines beutie or such as are attained vnto by labour and industrie as learning knowledge of arts wisdome or externall in worldly respects as if he be rich honourable of authoritie or such like 5. Further some respect of persons is necessarily ioyned with the cause as a fault in an aged man or minister or one that hath knowledge is greater then a slippe of a young man or one that is ignorant some respect of persons is diuided from the cause as whether he be rich or poore honourable or base and in this sense persons are not to be respected Martyr 23. Qu. How God is said not to accept the persons of men The Apostle hauing made mention of the equall condition of the Iewes and Gentiles both in punishment and reward addeth this as a reason because God is no accepter of persons in respect of their nation and kinred So S. Peter saith God is no accepter of persons 〈◊〉 in euery nation he that feareth God c. is accepted with him Act. 10.34 35 here the respecting of persons is vnderstood of the nation or countrey likewise S. Paul saith Gal. 3.28 that in Christ There is neither Iew nor Grecian bond nor free male nor female that is in Christ there is no respect of persons Deut. 16.19 Thou shalt not accept any person neither take any reward to preferre any for gifts or rewards beside the merit of his cause is to haue respect of persons God then accepteth no mans person he preferreth not any for his riches countrey honour strength or any other such qualitie but iudgeth euery man as his cause is and aâ— his works are But thus it will be obiected on the contrarie 1. Obiect Moses entreateth the Lord to spare his people for Abraham Isaak and â—â—kobs sake Exod. 32. herein then the Lord had respect of persons Ans. Some giue this answer that in temporall things such as was the forbearing to punish the people God may haue respect to persons but not in eternall Mart. But it may be better answered that God had not respect to the persons of these Patriarks but to his gracious promise which he had made vnto them as there Moses saith Remember Abraham c. to whome thou swarest by thy selfe c. 2. Obiect S. Paul would haue vs doe good to all but specially to the houshold 〈◊〉 faith Gal. 6.10 here the person is respected Ans. The person is not respected here but the cause for the faithfull are preferred in respect of their faith which is the cause why they haue the preheminence 3. Obiect But God doth elect some vnto saluation some are reiected whereas all by nature are the children of wrath and in the same common condition to giue then vnequall things as life or death to those which are in the same equall condition seemeth to be done with respect of persons Ans. 1.
Some giue this solution that there is no acception of persons in donis gratuitis in gifts of gratuitie and freely bestowed as election vocation are of the free gift of God he calleth and electeth whome he will but a person may be accepted in the distribution of that which doth of right appertaine vnto one and so the Lord accepteth no ma◠person but rewardeth euery one according to his worke Peter disput 6. numer 42. 2. Beza thus answereth that in the decree of election there can be no acception of persons when God electeth some before they haue any beeing and so are yet no person at all 3. But this answer is more full and sufficient there are three things to be considered in the accepting of persons 1. when some externall condition is respected beside the merit of the cause 2. and this is done contrarie to the law of equitie 3. and not without iniur◠done vnto an other when of partiall affection that is taken from one which is his right and adiudged to an other But none of these are seene in Gods election 1. he respecteth not any condition or qualitie in them which are elected but he maketh choice of them of his owne good pleasure 2. he is not tied to any law and so transgresseth no law 3. he doth not wrong vnto any in exempting some from destruction which in the rigour of his iustice is due vnto all like as Augustine putteth the case of two debters if the Creditour doe forgiue his debt vnto one and exact it of an other he doth no wrong it is free for him to doe what he will with his owne Matt. 20.15 Pareus Faius so as Augustine well determineth ibi acceptio personarum recte dicitur vbi ille qui iudicat relinquens causae meritum c. there acception of persons is rightly saide to be when he that iudgeth leauing the merit of the cause doth finde somewhat in the person for the which he giueth sentence with one against an other c. lib. 2. ad 2. epist. Pelagian c. 7. But to doth not God for he findeth no difference in the persons but all beeing in the same cause of damnation he of his owne free will forgiueth his debt vnto some and requireth it of others 4. Obiect But it is an accepting of persons as well cum aequalibus in aequalia tribnuntur c. when vnequall things are giuen to those which are equall in cause as when all are guiltie and yet one is saued an other condemned as when the persons are vnequall as the innocent condenmed and the guiltie freed God seemeth in the first kind to haue respect vnto persons freeing some from condemnation which belongeth in the rioour of Gods iustice to all Answ. 1. It is not simply an accepting of persons to giue vnequally where the cause is equall but when this is done with respect vnto some qualitie in the person as because he is rich or honourable or such like and the other is not But God doth not so he electeth some before other not for any respect to their persons but of his meere grace and fauour 2. betweene the decree of Gods election and the execution thereof there commeth the faith and pietie of the elect which maketh a manifest difference betweene them and the reprobate which freeth God from all partialitie who iudgeth men according to the qualitie of their workes See more afterward 3. addition to the places of doctrine 24. Quest. Of the meaning of these words v. 12. As many as haue sinned without the law shall perish without the law 1. Ambrose exposition here seemeth somewhat strange who vnderstandeth this not of the law of nature but of the law of Moses to the which the Gentiles were bound to giue assent and therefore duplici nomine sunt rei they are guiltie two waies because they did not giue assent vnto the law giuen by Moses nor receiued Christ c. Pererius refelleth this interpretation because the law of Moses did onely bind the Hebrewes neither were any of the Prophets commanded to publish the law of Moses to the Gentiles as afterward the Apostles were commanded to preach it to the Gentiles But Tolet somewhat qualifieth and excuseth Ambrose making this his meaning that he speaketh onely of the Gentiles who liued after the publishing and preaching of the Gospel who then were bound to beleeue and to receiue the writings of Moses and the Prophets which prophesied of Christ yet in this sense he thinketh that Ambrose expresseth not the Apostles full meaning who speaketh generally of the Gentiles both before and at the comming of Christ. 2. Chrysostome whome Anselme followeth doth interpret this to be iudged without a law levius puniri to be more easily punished for the Gentile hauing not the law as the Iew had is thereby somewhat excused But the Apostles purpose is not to shew any inequalitie of punishment betweene the Iew and Gentile but onely howsoeuer they are vnequall in knowledge yet because they are equall in sinne they shall both indifferently be punished 3. Some contrariwise doe make the case of the Gentiles more grieuous they shall perish without the law meaning the written law but the Iewes shall be iudged onely that is not punished eternally but for a time who afterward shall be saued this opinion is imputed to Origen hom 3. in Levit. and he insinuateth as much in his commentarie vpon this place Augustine reselleth this opinion concion 25. in Psal. 118. And it is euidently confuted by the saying of our Sauiour Matth. 11. that it shall be more easie for the Sodomites in the day of iudgement then for the vnbeleeuing Iewes Perer and they that haue done euill whether Iew or Gentile shall goe into euerlasting fire Matth. 25.46 Here then iudgement is taken for condemnation as it is vsuall in the Scripture as Ioh. 5.29 They that haue done euill shall come forth to the resurrection 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of iudgement that is condemnation Tolet. 4. Pererius here maketh mention of the like opinion of certaine of their Catholikes who by iudging here vnderstand certaine transitorie paines in purgatorie which such shall endure but they shall not finally perish because they hold the foundation namely faith in Christ But Pererius confuseth them because the Apostle speaketh of such Iewes as beleeued not in Christ and therefore did not hold the foundation 5. Gregorie hath this obseruation vpon those words he maketh two degrees of those which shall be saued in the day of iudgement and two likewise of them which shall be condemned first alij iudicantur regnant some shall be examined first for their life and afterwards enter into Gods kingdome such as repented them of their former sinnes and did good workes such Christ shall say vnto for I was hungrie and ye gaue me meate c. alij electorum non iudicantur reginant others of the elect should not be iudged at all but presently reigne with Christ such are they
the which naturall reason iuduceth was some way sufficient to the Gentiles vnto saluation c. But nothing can be acceptable to God without faith not that generall faith and knowledge of one God but the knowledge of God in Christ for he is the way and doore and without him is no entrace into life 6. Wherefore the Apostle here describeth the Gentiles in generall euen before the times of the Gospel and such as had no other direction then by the lawe of nature which they had as the Apostle sheweth by these two arguments both by the externall workes of the lawe and by the inward testimonie of their conscience But the Apostle faith not they fulfilled the lawe they onely did certaine things prescribed in the lawe Martyr And he speaketh rather de notitia naturali quam de implenda legis facultate of the naturall knowledge which they had not of any power or facultie to fulfill the lawe Calvin Beza And he meaneth not all the Gentiles in generall but the wiser sort among them as Solon Socrates Aristides the Sciptoes Catoes with other who outwardly did some externall workes which the lawe commanded though they wanted the inward obedience Pareus Quest. 27. How any thing can be said to be written in the heart by nature seeing the minde is commonly held to be as a bare and naked table v. 15. Which shewe the effect of the lawe written in their heart It is the opinion of the best Philosophers as of Plato in Philebo that the soule of man by nature is like vnto a booke wherein nothing is written or like vnto a bare naked table Aristot. lib. 3. de anima c. 4. how then doth the Apostle here say that the lawe is written in their heart Answ. 1. Plato was of opinion that all things were at the first written in the soule but when it commeth into the bodie is blotted out againe and forgotten and vpon this ground that opinion is mentioned by the Platonists that scire est reminisci to know is nothing els but to remember But this assertion presupposeth that the soule of man had a beeing without the bodie and that there is a certaine promptuarie or seminare of soules from whence the soules are deriued into the bodies But this opinion is contrarie to the Scripture which affirmeth that God formeth the spirit of man within him Zach. 12.1 the soule of man is created within him in his bodie infundendo creatur creando infunditur it is created by infusion into the bodie and iufused by creation 2. therefore a better answer is that whereas Aristole saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that nothing is written in the vnderstanding it must be vnderstood actually yet potentia in possibilitie euerie thing is written there because the vnderstanding is apt and hath a capacitie to receiue and apprehend euerie thing 3. neither is that axiome of Philosophie generally to be vnderstood but to be restrained to such principles as are not engendred in the mind without instruction experience and obseruation as is the knowledge of arts otherwise there are some principles which are by nature imprinted in the soule as first the naturall conclusions which the soule apprehendeth of it selfe without any other demonstration as that God is to be worshipped parents are to be honoured that good and honest things are to be desired secondly there are certaine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 generall notions which are at the first apprehended onely by the sense as that the fire burneth that the whole is greater then the part and such like ex Perer. Quest. 28. Of the Lawe of nature what it is It shall not be amisse by occasion of these words of the Apostle who speaketh here of the lawe of nature written in the heart a little to digresse and briefly touch certaine questions of this matter and first we will see what this lawe of nature is and of what precepts it consisteth 1. It is euident by the Apostle here that there is a lawe of nature which he prooueth by â—o effects the one externall in the performance of some things agreeable to the lawe the other internall in the testimonie of the conscience But in this inward testimonie there are two things to be considered there is first that which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the comprehension of certaine practicall principles and a naturall discerning betweene good and euill iust and vniust then there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the conscience which either accuseth one for doing euill or excuseth him in choosing of that which is good the synteresis doth frame the proposition the syneidesis or cosncience the assumption as thus the naturall lawe reacheth that parents must be honoured and that they which disobey parents are worthie of punishment thus the proposition is framed out of the principles of nature then the conscience of the guiltie person supplyeth the assumption But we Cham Esau Absolom haue disobeyed our parents therefore we deserue punishment and the like practicall syllogismes may be made in other commandements Gryneus 1. Melancthon thus defineth the lawe of nature it is a knowledge of certaine principles belonging to the practise of life and of the conclusions thence necessarily inferred agreeable with the eternall rule of truth which God hath planted in the mind of man to be a testimonie vnto man that there is a God which ruleth and iudgeth the actions of men c. In this description there are the former causes expressed of the law of nature 1. the materiall cause or the obiect thereof wherein it is occupied and whereof it consisteth namely of certaine practicall principles with the conclusions gathered thereupon for the speciall scope of this naturall direction is for the the practise of life and not for speculation and in this naturall knowledge are not onely contained the first principles as parents are to be honoured but the conclusions thence diducted as out of this principle in generall euery one is taught by the light of nature in particular to conclude that therefore he must honour his parents 2. the formall cause is the agreement with the rule of truth and the equitie of Gods written lawe for the lawe of nature is a summarie abridgement of the morall lawe 3. then the efficient cause and author is God who hath written and imprinted this law in the heart of man as Ambrose thus defineth this naturall law quam Deus omnium creator singulorum hominum pectoribus iufudit which God the Creator of all hath infused into euerie mans breast epist. 71.4 then the end is that it should be a testimonie of the diuine prouidence and iudgement whereby he ruleth all things and in the ende will iudge the actions of men This description of the lawe of nature agreeth with the Apostles definition here it is the effect of the lawe written in our hearts the effect or worke sheweth the matter of the lawe the forme written the efficient for it is Gods writing the ende
to their faith which sheweth it selfe by their works 3. some he saith thus interpret he shall render according to their workes that is post opera sua after their works 4. some say they shall be rewarded according to their works but with the temporall blessings in this world not with life eternall 5. some graunt that the righteous shall be rewarded according to their workes if any could be found that had such workes which are worthie of reward the like answers Pererius imagineth to be made by the Protestants numer 39. but neither of them name what Protestants they are that thus answer we insist vpon none of these solutions 2. But we can otherwise satisfie all these reasons obiected 1. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to render signifieth not onely a iust retribution but a gift of fauour as in that place giuen in instance Matth. 20.8 the reward is said to be rendred not onely to them which had laboured first which might seeme to haue deserued it but vnto those that came at the last houre to whome it was giuen of fauour and therefore simply v. 14. it is expressed by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to giue 2. In that place Matth. 25. it is shewed to whome not for what the reward shall be giuen good works are required as a condition in those which are to be saued not as a meritorious cause of their saluation Pareus for in the same place our Sauiour sheweth the originall and fountaine of their saluation Come ye blessed of my father inherit the kingdome prepared for you from the foundations of the world their saluation then dependeth vpon the free and gratious election of God not vpon their works Faius 3. The argument followeth not from the merit of euill workes to the merit of good workes for there is great difference in the way of meriting betweene them 1. good works are the gifts of God and proceede from him but euill workes haue their beginning from man 2. good works are imperfect and therefore merit not euill workes are perfectly euill and therefore are worthie of punishment 3. good works are commanded and so it is our dutie to doe them and therefore thereby we doe not merit but euill workeâ— are forbidden and there is no dutie but rather the transgression of dutie in doing them Gryneus 4. And concerning this place it prooueth no merit of workes the Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to workes not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 propter opera for workes so that this sheweth the measure rather then the merit of workes As this phrase is taken Matth. 9.29 according to your faith be it vnto you and Matth. 22.3 according to their workes doe not And this phrase is thus expounded Revel 22.12 My reward is with me to render vnto euery one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according as his worke is Pareus so then according to their workes noteth the qualitie not the merit of their worke that is good workes shall be recompensed with reward and euill workes with punishment Faius And mention is made here of works that God shall iudge according as he findeth mens works to shew that he is no accepter of persons neither regardeth the outward appearance but that which is in truth Gualter And that it is not one and the same thing to reward for works and according to works Gregorie well sheweth in Psal. 149. v. 9. aliud est secundum opera reddere aliud pâ—â—pter ipsa opera reddere in eo enim quod secundum opera dicitur ipsa operum qualitas intell giuer c. it is one thing to render according vnto works an other for works for in that it is said according vnto works the qualitie of the worke is vnderstood that whose works appeare to be good his recompence should be glorious c. Pererius thus answereth to this place of Gregorie that he speaketh of the substance quantitie and qualitie of works in themselues which beeing compared with the celestiall glorie are not worthie thereof but as they are considered in Christ by whose vertue and merit they are made meritorious so are they worthie of that euerlasting reward to the same purpose also Tolet. annotat 6. Contra. But Gregorie must be vnderstood to speake of the works of the faithfull which receiue all their actiuitie worthines and acceptance from Christ and the Apostle likewise speaketh of the faithfull Rom. 8.18 I account that the afflictions of this present time are not worthie of the glorie which shall be shewed vs euen then the works and sufferings of the faithfull are excluded from meriting Faius 3. Now further that no works of the Saints are meritorious it may further be shewed by these reasons 1. there must be a proportion betweene the merit and the reward but betweene our works and the euerlasting reward there is no proportion the reward by many degrees exceeding the worthines of the best works 2. there are no good works without faith for without faith it is impossible to please God Heb. 11.6 wherefore whatsoeuer is promised to works per fidem consequimur we doe obtaine by faith 3. that which a man meriteth must be of his owne not of his of whome he meriteth now our good works are of God they are not of our selues and therefore by them we can not merit at Gods hand 4. that wherein men are endebted vnto God can not merit for then be should be endebted vnto vs not we vnto him for the wages is not of fauour but of debt Rom. 4.4 But all which we can doe is no more but our dutie we owe our best seruice vnto God as our blessed Sauiour saith When ye haue done all those things which are commanded you say we are vnprofitable seruants we haue done that which was our dutie to doe Luk. 17.10 But here some will answer that we are said to be vnprofitable seruants onely in respect of God because he is not profited or furthered by our seruice but yet good works are profitable to our selues Contra. True it is that good works are profitable because thereby we testifie our faith we doe good vnto others and make our owne saluation sure but it followeth not because they are profitable that therefore they merit eternall life Martyr they are as Bernard saith via regui non causa regnandi the way vnto the kingdome not the cause of the kingdome 4. Controv. Which are to be counted good workes v. 7. Which by continuance in good works seeke c. The Romanists doe not hold those onely to be good works which are commanded by God but such also as are enioyned by the Church and the gouernors thereof Concil Tridentiâ— sess 6. c. 10. And according to this rule they count the saying and hearing of Masse going in pilgrimage inuocating of Saints praying for the dead offering vnto images good works Contra. There are two euident rules to examine good works by 1. because God onely is good and the fountaine and author of
goodnes therefore nothing can be good but that which is according to his will which is no where reuealed but in his word then no worke can be good vnlesse it be wrought according to the prescript of Gods word 2. there can come no good worke from man who is prone to euill and to nothing but euill by nature vnlesse then a man be regenerate and borne a new which is by faith in Christ be can doe no acceptable worke Both these are euident out of Scripture 1. that without faith it is vnpossible to please God Hebr. 11.6 and whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne Rom. 14.23 2. and that by faith we are regenerate and made the sonnes of God Ioh. 1.12 As many as receiued him to them he gaue power to be the sonnes of God euen to them that beleeue in his name All such workes then as haue neither warrant out of Gods word not yet proceede from faith such as all superstitious works are so much commended and commanded in Poperie are not to be counted good works Gualter 5. Controv. Whether any good workes of the faithfull be perfect 1. The Romanists doe hold that some workes of the righteous are so perfect that they be not sinne so much as venially in them they haue no blemish at all Concil Tridentin can 25. de iustificat Pererius vrgeth that act of Abrahams obedience in sacrificing his sonne which was not onely omnis peccati vacuum c. void of all sinne but it was perfectly good as appeareth by that excellent promise which the Lord made thereupon to Abraham so it is said of Dauid that he was a man according to Gods owne heart disput 4. in c. 2. numer 33. Contra. 1. That act of Abrahams obedience was not rewarded for the perfection of the worke but because it proceeded from faith he beleeued God and therefore it was counted vnto him for righteousnes 2. And it is hard to say whether Abraham did not cast some doubts in his mind when he was first commanded of God to sacrifice his onely sonne there might be some naturall reasoning within him which notwithstanding he did ouercome by faith Ambrose thinketh lib. 1. de Abrah c. 8. that when Abraham said to his seruants Tâ—rie you here with the asse for I and the child will goe yonder and worship and come againe to you captiose loquebatur c. spake cunningly or captiously least his seruants should perceiue whereabout he went 3. And as for Dauid he had many infirmities and imperfections from some of which euen his best works might not be free he was said to be according to Gods heart both comparatiuely in respect of Saul and others and because he fought God vnfainedly not in shew and hypocritie as Saul did otherwise that he was not imply according to Gods heart the great sinnes wherein he fell doe declare 2. But that there is some blemish imperfection and defect euen in the best works of the Saints though we affirme not as Pererius slandereth Luther that all the workes of the regenerate are sinne it is thus made euident out of the Scripture 1. The Prophet Isai saith c. 64.6 All our righteousnes is as stained clouts euen their best actions were defiled and polluted to this place diuers answers are found 1. Pererius out of Augustine thus interpreteth that iustnia nostra diuine comparata iustitiae c. out righteousnes beeing compared to the diuine iustice is like vnto a filthie and menstrâ—â—â— cloath this is then spoken comparatiuely to this purpose August serm 43. Contra. And we herein concurre with Augustine that although the worke of the Saints seeme 〈◊〉 perfect and excellent before men yet in regard of that perfection which God requireth of vs they are found to come farre short so that if they be compared with the iustice of God not which he hath in himselfe but which he commandeth and requireth of vs our best works will appeare to be imperfect and full of wants 2. He vrgeth Hieromes exposition who applieth this place to the incredulous Iewes after the comming of the Messiah whose sained legall holines was as vncleane thing in the sight of God because they beleeued not in Christ exhibited to the world Contra. It is euident by the text it selfe that be Prophet speaketh of that age then present v. 10. Zion is a wildernes Ierusalem is a deseâ— 3. Therefore Pererius insisteth vpon this third inpretation that the Prophet speaketh of the hypocrites among the Iewes and of their legall righteousnes which was an vncleare thing beeing not sanctified by the spirit of God and the Prophet speaketh in the first person as including himselfe as the manner of the Prophets is for humilitie sake condescending vnto the infirmitie of the people and therein also shewing his charitable affection and compassion toward them Contra. It is euident 1. that the Prophet speaketh not onely of their legall obseruations but of all their morall obedience whatsoeuer for the words are generall All our righteousnes is as a stained clout 2. neither doth he meane the hypocrites onely but he comprehendeth all the people excluding no not the better sort as he saith v. 8. But now O Lord thou art our father and v. 9. Lowe beseech thee behold we are all thy people but the wicked and hypocrites are not alone Gods people neither is God said to be their father for the godly and faithfuls sake among them they may be so counted but not alone by themselues 2. To this purpose may be vrged that place Psal. 143.2 Enter not into iudgement with thy seruant for in thy sight shall none that liueth be iustified c. Hence it is euident â—hat no not the iust in their best works are iustified in the sight of God but the Lord can finde sufficient matter against them euen in their most perfect works as Iob saith c. 9.30 If I wash my selfe with snow water c. yet shalt thou plunge me in the pit c. Pererius here sheweth fiue reasons why the iust desire that God would not enter into iudgement with them 1. because of the vncertentie of their election and present iustice 2. many of them may fall into deadly and great sinnes which they are not sure whether they be remitted 3. yea and the best men haue their veniall faults which can not altogether be taken heed of in this life 4. and euen in their best works plures negligentiae immiscentur many negligences and scapes are intermingled 5. their good workes are of God and not of themselues and therefore they can not in the rigour of iustice expect a reward at Gods hand Perer. disput 4. numer 37. Contra. 1. Of these fiue causes some are false some are impertinent and some directly make against him 1. That the righteous and faithfull are not certaine of their election nor of remission of sinnes is false and contrarie to the Scriptures for S. Paul was both sure of his election desiring to be dissolued and to be
acception of the word hath no place here for this declaration of one to be iust by works is before men before God there neede no such declaration for he knoweth what is in man but this iustification is before God which the Apostle here speaketh of it is therefore iustification in deede and not the declaration of it onely 6. Some thinke that the Apostle speaketh of the legall iustification which is by works which if any could doe they should be iustified thereby but it is impossible for any to keepe the law Calv. Pareus Beza annotat But it is euident that the Apostle speaketh not here of a thing impossible to be done and of iustification vpon that supposall if any could be doers of the law but he setteth this downe affirmatiuely and positiuely that they which liued according to the law should be iustified as he said before v. 6. that God will reward euery one according to his workes And as the hearers of the law onely are not iustified so the hearers and doers are iustified but some heare the law in fact verily and in deede therefore some also were verily and in deede doers of the law 7. The meaning then of this sentence is the same with that v. 6. God will approoue iustifie reward them that doe the works of the law whether Iew or Gentile yet it followeth not that a man is therefore iustified by the workes of the law But God approoueth and rewardeth the workers not the hearers or professors so here the Apostle entreareth not of the cause of iustification which is faith without the works of the law but of the difference betweene such as shall be iustified and such as are not Faius they onely which haue a liuely faith which worketh and keepeth the law in part and supplieth the rest which is wanting in themselues by the perfect obedience of Christ they shall be iustified not those which onely professe the law and keepe it not the Apostle then here sheweth who shall be iustified not for what 8. But this place maketh nothing at all for iustification by works 1. if a man is iustified by doing the works of the law either he is iust before he doe the works or nor iust if he be iust then he is iustified before he doe those workes then is he not iustified by those workes if he be not iust then can he doe no good workes whereby he is made iust for the workes done before faith as Tolet himselfe confesseth non possunt iustum afficere can not make one iust Here the Romanists haue no better answer then to confesse fidem sine operibuâ— primaâ— efficere iustificationem that faith without workes doth effect the first iustification which is encreased by workes which they call the second iustification Tolet. ibid. And thus they are driuen to consent with Protestants that iustification is by faith without works as for that distinction of the first and second iustification the vanitie of it is shewed before 2. If workes did iustifie then it would followe that the iustice whereby we are made iust should be an actuall iustice not habituall because that is actuall which worketh the contrarie whereof is maintained by Bellarmine who prooueth by sundrie reasons that one is formally made iust not by an actuall but an habituall iustice wherewith the minde is endued lib. 2. de iustific c. 15. Controv. 8. That it is not possible in this life to keepe the lawe 1. Pererius disput 7. numer 55. taketh vpon him to prooue against Calviu legem divinam impleri posse that the lawe of God may be kept in this life he meaneth by a man in the state of grace 1. Otherwise Dauid had not said true Psal. 18.21 I kept the wayes of the Lord and did not wickedly against my God 2. S. Paul saith he that loueth his brother hath fulfilled the Lawe Rom. 13. 3. What wisedome were there in God to command things impossible vnto man or what iustice to punish him for not keeping of that which was not in his power 2. Contra. 1. Dauids keeping of the wayes of God must be vnderstood either of some particular act of his obedience wherein he behaued himselfe vprightly as Psal. 7.3 If I haue done this thing or if there be any wickednesse in mine hands or els it must be vnderstood of his faithfull endeauour as farre as he was enabled by grace for Dauids sinnes which are mentioned in the Scripture doe euidently shewe that he did not keepe all the wayes of God 2. If a man could perfectly loue his brother as he ought he might fulfill the lawe but so can no man doe and there is as Hierome distinguisheth 2. kinds of iustice or fulfilling the lawe there is a perfect iustice which was onely in Christ and an other iustice quae nostrae competit fragilitati which agreeth vnto our frailtie dialog 1. cont Pelagian and thus may the lawe be fulfilled 3. The commandements are not simply impossible for man in his creation had power to keepe them if he would Gods wisedome is seene in giuing his lawe vnto man beeing vnable in himselfe to keepe it that it might be a schoolemaster to bring him vnto Christ Galat. 3.19 and his iustice appeareth in punishing man for transgressing that lawe which sometime he was able as he was created of God to keepe and now may perfectly performe it by faith in the obedience of Christ who hath deliuered vs from the curse of the lawe 3. Now that it is not possible for a man no not in the state of grace to keepe the lawe of God it is thus shewed out of the the Scripture 1. S. Paul saith Rom. 7.19 To will is present with me but I finde no meanes to performe that which is good a man regenerate now can doe no more then S. Paul could who confesseth that he was vnable to doe that which was good and agreeable to the lawe 2. If a man by grace could keepe the law by grace he hath power to redeeme himselfe from the curse of the lawe for as he which keepeth not euerie thing contained in the law is vnder the curse so he that keepeth all things which the lawe commandeth is free from the curse but no man can redeeme himselfe from the curse of the lawe for Christ hath redeemed vs from the curse of the lawe Galat. 3.13 3. Further The lawe is not of faith Galat. 3.12 but if the lawe might be kept by grace and faith then should it be of faith 4. And if a man regenerate were able to keepe the lawe then it were possible for a man in this life to be without sinne for where no transgression of the lawe is there should be no faâ—e for sinne is the transgression of the law 1. Ioh. 3.4 see more hereof Synops. Centur. 4. â—rr 63. pag. 916. Controv. 9. Whether by the light of nature onely a man may doe any thing morally good Bellarmine hath this position that a man if no tentation doe vrge
to himselfe thereby to set forth God iustice but this euent followed this word that doth not then shewe the cause but the order rather and euent of the thing Perer. where is not relation to Dauid that he did it to this end but vnto God who turned this euill vnto good 2. or these words that thou maist be iustified are not to be referred to the words immediately going before but to the 3. verse I knowe mine iniquities Dauid therefore sheweth not quo sine prius fecerit mal◠with what intent he did euil before sed quo fine nunc faciat bonis but with what end he now did well in confessing his sinne namely that God might receiue glorie thereby 3. Vatablus also referreth these words vnto the 2. verse where he saith wash me thoroughly from my sinnes and then these words in sense are to be annexed that thou maist be iustified c. this was not then sinis peccati sed precationis not the ende of Dauids sinne but of his prayer that God in forgiuing his sinne might appeare to be iust and true of his promises in forgiuing the sinnes of the elect Quest. 11. Of the meaning of the 5 6 7 8. verses 1. Now followeth the third obiection issuing out of the former for if Gods iustice and truth in keeping his promises doe appeare in remmitting the sinnes of the faithfull that notwithstanding their sinnes yet he is faithfull in performing his promises then it would followe that our vnrighteousnesse commendeth the iustice of God and hereupon ensue three other inconueniences 1. That God should be vnrighteous in punishing that which maketh for his glorie 2. nay he should not be said to be so much as a sinner by whom the the glorie of God is promoted v. 7. Why am I yet comdemned as a sinner 3. and it would followe that if by our sinnes the iustice of God were set forth we should still commit sinne and doe euill that good might come thereof the setting forth of Gods glorie Gorrhan 2. Whereas the Apostle saith according to the Greeke text I speake 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to man Origen seemeth to approoue and followe another reading as though it should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against man for the Greeke preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with an accusatiue case signifieth according but with a genitiue against and so he would ioyne it to the former words is God vnrighteous which inferreth or inflicteth punishment against man But there is an other word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I speake which should be quite cut off in this sense beside this phrase I speake according to man is vsuall with the Apostle which he vseth vpon diuerse occasions 1. to decline envie when he is forced to speake of himselfe and his owne doings he thus speaketh according to the wisedome of men 1. Cor. 15.31 2. Cor. 11.16 2. sometime he vseth this forme of speach when he taketh somewhat from the common vse of men for a more liuely demonstration of that which he hath in hand Rom. 6.19 1. Cor. 9.8 3. sometime according to man is as much as according to the flesh and after the guise of carnall men and so the Apostle here speaketh in the person of a carnall man Beza annot 3. But whereas v. 7. the Apostle saith why am I yet condemned as a sinner the most interpreters agree to make it a part of the same obiection that God should seeme vniust in punishing sinners by whom his glorie is set forth Tolet maketh it rather an answear to the obiection that S. Paul prooueth by two arguments that God is not vnrighteous one by his office that he is iudge of the world the other by the execution of his iustice that if God were not iust I should not be punished as a sinner but the former words going immediately before if the veritie of God hath more abounded thorough my lie vnto his glorie sheweth that it is part of the obiection which also is continued still in the verse following And c. why doe we not euill c. 4. By veritie here v. 7. is not vnderstood the veritie of doctrine and by a lie erroneous and false doctrine as Origen here sheweth by diuerse particular instances of the false positions of the Philosophers how the veritie and truth of God hath thereby more manifestly appeared But by vertue rather the iustice of God and constancie in keeping his promises is vnderstood and by a lie the perfidiousnesse of men whereof the Apostle spake before v. 3. 5. Now to this obiection the Apostle maketh 4. answers 1. he reiecteth this impious calumniation as blasphemous and absurd thinking it worthie of no better answer saying God forbid 2. he addeth a reason taken from Gods office he is the iudge of the world both present and to come who doth both gouerne the world in equitie and shall as the supreame iudge giue vnto euerie man according to his workes he therefore cannot be vniust 3. to the last part of the obiection he saith first that they doe blaspheme the Apostle v. 8. in raising such a slaunder of him as though he should teach any such doctrine that men should doe euill that good may come thereof 4. then he saith their damnation is iust which words some doe vnderstand actiuely that the Apostle condemned such positions referring whose to the obiections but it is better vnderstood passiuely of their persons that for this their blasphemie they deserue to be condemned of God Pareus 6. Thus the Apostle answeareth pithily to these cauills and obiections repelling them that howsoeuer men may imagine yet God is most iust in punishing of sinners though thereby his glorie is set forth So that thus much is insinuated in the Apostles answer that it followeth not that God should therefore forbeare the punishment of the wicked because by their iniquitie his iustice and goodnesse is more set forth because it is not of their sinne that any good commeth thereof but of Gods goodnesse they per se by themselues are no causes of the setting forth of Gods glorie but per accidens by an accident God thereby taketh occasion to manifest his iustice in their condigne punishment as he did in the destruction of Pharaoh his wisedome as he did vse the malice and envie of Iosephs brethren to effect his purpose in bringing him to honour his clemencie in doing good to his Church as by Iudas treacherie Christ was deliuered vp to death for the redemption of the world But therefore none of their sinnes were excused because they had no such intent to set forth Gods glorie but God who brought light of darknesse was able by their works of darkenesse to manifest the light of his truth Pareus Like as when the Iudge condemneth a malefactor his vprightnesse appeareth in his iust condemnation and the greater the disease is the more commendable is the skill of the Physitian in healing it yet no thankes is due either to the malefactor for
his wrath and make his power knowne suffer with long patience the vessels of wrath prepared to destruction â—ere God should seeme to doe that which is euill as to prepare the vessels of wrath to destruction for a good ende namely to declare his power 2. Likewise to permit and suffer euill to be done in the world to exercise his iudgâ—ments or declare his prouidence seemeth to be euill as when he suffered Iosephs brethâ—â—â— to sell him into Egypt that Iacobs familie by this meanes might be prouided for for he which suffereth euill to be done when he may hinder it seemeth to consent vnto it and so is accessarie thereunto as a Magistrate sinneth in suffering adulterie murther and other sinnes to goe vnpunished Ans. Concerning the first obiection it is not euill that some are vessels of wrath prepared to destruction 1. because it is Gods will which is alwaies iust and holy yea Gods will is a perfect rule of iustice 2. and that which tendeth to Gods glorie can not be euill as God getteth himselfe glorie in the condemnation of the wicked 3. that which is lawfully done can not be euill but God in reiecting some doth that which he may doe by lawfull right to dispose of his owne as it pleaseth him as no man can reprooue the potter in making some vessels of honour some of dishonour of the same piece of clay 4. but seeing in the ende Gods reiecting and reprobating of some namely such as by their sinnes deserued eternall death appeareth to be most iust it must needs also be good for that which is iust is good 2. To the other obiection of Gods permission it may be likewise answered 1. to permit euill to be done and to consent to euill doe not necessarily follow one the other he that permitteth onely hath a will not to hinder but he that consenteth approoueth that which is done 2. and that God consenteth not to that which he permitteth is euident because he punisheth sinne which he suffreth to be done 3. God in permitting euill to be done onely consenteth to that good which he draweth out of euill and for the which he suffreth the same to be done 4. the case is not like betweene God permitting euill to be done and the Magistrate for 1. God is free and is not tied to any lawe but the Magistrate suffring euill therein doth contrarie to Gods lawe or mans 2. Man oftentimes of some sinister affection suffreth euill either because he is hindered by some greater power and cannot punish it or he is corrupted and so winketh at sinne but none of these are incident to God 3. If the Magistrate propound vnto himselfe some good ende in vsing connivence iâ— some sinnes yet he is not sure to effect it as God is 4. Beside it belongeth vnto the Creator to giue vnto his creatures freely to worke according to their nature for otherwise he should restraine the ordinarie course of things But this no way concerneth the Magistrate in his connivence ex Pareo Quest. 14. In what sense the Apostle denieth the lewes to be more excellent then the Gentiles v. 9 v. 9. What then are we more excellent there is a double sense of these words some thinke that this is spoken in the person of the faithfull which were vncircumcised as though they were more excellent then the Iewes which abused the blessings which the Lord had bestowed vpon them but if the Apostle had spoken here of the vncircumcised he would not haue named himselfe as one of them are we more excellent therefore the other sense is better that the Apostle speaketh here in the person of the Iewes least they might haue gloried too much in their preheminence and prerogatiues which the Apostle had yeelded vnto them before the Gentiles v. 1. 2. Now the Apostle in denying vnto the Iewes that excellencie which he before had yeelded vnto them v. 1. is not contrarie to himselfe for the reconciling whereof 1. Some thinke that S. Paul before spake of the excellencie of the Iewes beyond the Gentiles before the comming of Christ but here of their state in the Gospell when they had no such preheminence as the Apostle saith Coloss. 3. that in Christ there is neither Iewes transgressing against the lawe were no better then the Gentiles as Ezech. 5.10 she hath changed my iudgements into wickednesse more then the nations c. 2. Some giue this solution that then preheminence was in respect of the promises on Gods behalfe which he made vnto the Iewes but in respect of their owne nature they were sinners as well as others Thomas Pererius they had no preheminence by their owne merits to this purpose Gualter Hyperius Aretius with others But Tolet refuseth this vpon this reason because in this sense neither should a Christian man haue any preheminence before a Gentile seeing the one meriteth more at Gods hand then the other these things wherein they excell non 〈◊〉 proprijs acciperunt they haue not receiued by their owne merits annotat 6. 3. The preheminence then before graunted and now denied is neither in respect of the diuers times nor of their persons but of the cause in hand that although the Iewes had some ciuill and Ecclesiasticall prerogatiues they had the law circumcision which the Gentiles had not yet concerning their manner of iustification before God it was all one the Iew was no more iustified by works then the Gentile but both of them were iustified onely by faith Par. Tol. 15. Quest. Of the meaning of certaine phrases which the Apostle vseth v. 9. We haue alreadie prooued and vnder sinne 1. The Greeke word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. some translate criminati sumus we haue accused Greeke schol Beza Pareus but it had beene sufficient to haue said we haue shewed both Iewes and Gentiles to be vnder sinne this was a sufficient accusation it selfe without any such expresse addition that he had accused them Tolet. 2. Pererius maketh this the sense I haue alleadged this as a cause that all are vnder sinne namely as the cause and occasion why the Iewes in the matter of iustification are not preferred before the Gentiles Per. Haymo but that the Apostles speach should be imperfect saying thus much in effect we haue shewed this as the cause that all are vnder sinne not shewing whereof it should be a cause 3. Tolet deuiseth an other sense expounding it by the passiue we haue beene all accused that both Iewes and Gentiles are vnder sinne but the Greeke construction will not suffer this sense for Iewes and Gentiles is put in the accusatiue and so can not answer vnto the word accused 4. Some thus interpret causis redditis ostendimus we haue shewed by rendring the cause why all should be vnder sinne that the Apostle had not onely shewed this but tendred also the cause Chrysost. Ambr. Sedul Erasm. Vatabl. but Beza thinketh that the word is not found in that sense 5. Wherefore the best interpretation is this
corrupt branches Pareus There is none that doth good no not one here none are excluded some thus giue the sense none sauing one namely Christ gloss interlin Gorrhan and so Augustine before them but the originall will not beare that sense the words are none vnto one that is no not one v. 13. Their throat is an open sepulchre 1. They are instar voraginis like vnto a gulph to destroy men and therefore are compared to a sepulchre 2. and an open sepulchre quod tetros spargit odores which sendeth forth stinking smells so they doe vtter filthie and vaine words 3. and they are likened to an open sepulchre quia vsus scelerum verecundiam sustulit their custome in sinne hath taken away all shamefastnes and modestie they are impudent in their sinne Origen 4. and as an open graue can neuer be satiate but it receiueth one bodie after an other so they doe still seeke to deuoure men and as it were eate them vp with their filthie and slanderous tongues They haue vsed their tongues to deceit where they can not openly deuoure they attempt to doe it by craft and deceit gloss interlin The poison of aspes is vnder their lippes The biting and venemous tongue is thus resembled 1. because this serpent doth morsu inficere infect and poison by biting Gryneus 2. it is insanabile a poison incurable gloss interlin Pellic. 3. and they are incorrigible and intractable like as the serpent stoppeth the eares and will not heare the voice of the charmer v. 14. Their mouth is full of cursing and bitternes 1. Their mouth is said to be full because ex pleno oris vasculo out of their mouth as a full vessell doe continually flow forth bitter and cruell words Origen 2. as they haue gall and bitternes in their heart Act. 8.23 so they doe vtter it with their mouth Gryneus 3. thus the Apostle sheweth how they abuse all the instruments of speaking their throat their tongues their lippes their mouth Tolet. 4. And as before they were giuen to flatterie and deceit so they sometime brake forth into open blasphemie both against God and man Calvin 5. Haymo specially refereth it to the bitter and blasphemous words which the Iewes vttered against Christ charging him to haue a deuill and crying out against him to be crucified v. 15. Their feete are swift to shed blood 1. The Apostle hetherto alleadged those testimonies out of the Psalmes now he citeth the Prophet Isa because in the mouth of two or three witnesses euery word shall be established Faius 2. by the feete are vnderstood their affections as Origen expoundeth consilium quo agimus iter vitae the counsell whereby we take in hand the trauell of this life and hereby their readines is signified vpon euery occasion to shed blood Tolet. 3. as Doeg by his false tongue caused many innocent Priests to be slaine Gryneus 4. and by this phrase of shedding is shewed how they doe vilipend the blood of the Saints powring it out as water Gorrhan v. 16. Destruction and calamitie are in their waies 1. Whereas the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contrition Origen vnderstandeth it of their sinne and disobedience whereby they doe â—â—â—rere iugum domini cast off and beat in pieces the Lords yoake so also the Greeke scholâ—â—â— as by the way he vnderstandeth life so by contrition sinne whereby the life is worne as the way is beaten with trampling 2. some vnderstand it passiuely of the destruction and â—â—lâ—mitie which was brought vpon them by the Romanes gloss interlin Haymo Gorrhaâ— 3. but it is better taken actiuely for the destruction and calamitie which they bring vpon others they are the authors and deuisers of nothing but mischiefe Gryn Calv. Pare as the Romane histories doe write of Hannibal who in his dreame following one that was sent of Iupiter to be his guide into Italie seemed to see behind him an huge serpent deuouring and destroying all as he went whereby was signified the horrible vastitie which he should bring vpon Italie v. 17. The way of peace they haue not knowne 1. Origen vnderstandeth Christ to be 〈◊〉 way of peace whome they acknowledged not so also Haymo Gorrhan gloss 3. but thereby is signified their turbulent nature who delighted in warre and filled the world with tumults and troubles Gryneus Pareus and although some among the heathen did seeke to preserue the peace and tranquilitie of the commonwealth yet it did not helpe them any thing toward their euerlasting peace Osiand v. 18. The feare of God is not before their eyes 1. As the feare of God is the beginning of true wisdome and pietie so the want of that feare giueth way vnto all impietie and therefore sine retinaculo currunt ad malum they runne into all kind of mischiefe without any stay Lyran. These doe not say there is no God yet they doe not feare God August ex Beda and so are giuen ouer to all impietie 20. Quest. v. 19. Whatsoeuer the Law saith what is here vnderstood by the law and how diuersly this word is taken Hierome epist. 151. noteth this word Law to haue sixe seuerall significations in the Scripture 1. it is taken precisely for the Law giuen by Moses which contained both morall precepts iudiciall and ceremoniall as Ioh. 1.17 The Law was giuen by Moses 2. the law signifieth not the precepts onely but the historie of the old Testament as S. Paul calleth Abrahams historie concerning his two sonnes the law Gal. 4.22 3. the book of the Psalmes is called the law Ioh. 15.25 It is written in the law they hated me without a cause 4. the prophesie of Isai is called the law 1. Cor. 14.21 In their law it is written by men of other tongues c. will I speake vnto this people which testimonie is taken out of Isa c. 28.21 5. the spirituall sense and meaning of the old Testament is called the law as the Apostle saith The Law is spirituall Rom. 7. 6. the law is taken for that naturall light which is imprinted in the minde by nature as S. Paul saith c. 2.14 The Gentiles which haue not the law are a law vnto themselues Here then by the Law the Apostle generally vnderstandeth the old Testament as the booke of the Psalmes and the Prophets 21. Quest. It saith to them which are vnder the law who are here vnderstood to be vnder the law 1. Origen taketh here the law for the naturall law vnder the which not onely the Iewes but the Gentiles also are vnder and this he would prooue by two reasons 1. because it followeth afterward that euery mouth may be stopped but the mouthes of the Gentiles could not be stopped by the written law which was not giuen vnto them 2. the Apostle also saith afterward that by the law commeth the knowledge of sinne which is not the written but the naturall law for both Cain and the brethren of Ioseph did confesse and acknowledge their sinne before yet there was any
prepared for you for when I was hungred ye gaue me meate he sheweth not the cause of their saluation but the condition state qualitie of those which should be saued to this purpose Faius see further before c. 1. quest 26. and controv 7. Quest. 25. How by the lawe came the knowledge of sinne 1. The Apostle here confirmeth that which he said before that none are iustified by the workes of the lawe by the contrarie vse of the lawe because thereby commeth the knowledge of sinne therefore iustice and righteousnesse is not attained thereby 2. The lawe Origen vnderstandeth of the lawe of nature Augustine onely of the morall lawe lib. de spirit liter c. 8. but indeed the lawe is vnderstood here in generall both the naturall for euen before the lawe written by the lawe of nature Abimelech knew that adulterie was sinne Genes 20. but the morall more by the which came a more full knowledge of sinne likewise by the ceremoniall and iudiciall lawe sinne was manifested but after a diuerse manner ex accidente accidentally because the one was appointed in expiationem for the expiation the other in poenam for the punishment of sinne Tolet. annot 14. 3. Now diuerse wayes doth the written lawe whereof the Apostle specially speaketh reueale sinne 1. Ambrose sheweth that before the law written there was some knowledge of sinne as he giueth instance in Ioseph who detested the sinne of adulterie to the which his mistresse enticed him but it is so said quia lex ostendit peccata non impune futura because the lawe sheweth that sinnes shall not goe vnpunished so also Theodulus 2. and by the written lawe peccata clarius fuerunt cognita sinnes were more euidently knowne and some were knowne to be sinnes that were not so taken before leviora quaque non cognoscebantur esse peccata the smaller sinnes were not knowne as concupiscence Hierome as the Apostle saith he had not knowne lust vnlesse the law had said thou shalt not lust quaedam etiam grauiora c. and some things by the lawe were knowne to be greater then before gloss ordinar 3. Oecumenius thus expoundeth because sinne was encreased by the knowledge of the lawe for he that sinneth wittingly is so much the more a grieuous offender 4. And before the lawe written sinne was knowne as beeing against reason but by the law it is discerned as beeing against the will of God and so the nature and qualitie of sinne is more fully and perfectly knowne by the lawe Perer. 5. and euen the knowledge of sinne before the lawe written did issue out of the grounds and principles of the morall lawe which were imprinted by nature in the minde Faius 4. But whereas the lawe sheweth as well what things are honest and vertuous as it discouereth sinne the Apostle onely toucheth that vse of the lawe which is to reueale sinne both because it was more pertinent to his purpose which was to shewe that there is no iustification by the lawe because thereby we haue the knowledge of sinne and for that men are more prone vnto the things forbidden in the lawe then to the duties commanded so that the lawe doth not so much teach our dutie to God and our neighbour as that we doe not performe that which is our dutie Beza 5. Now further whereas the Apostle saith by the lawe commeth the knowledge of sinne we must supply the word onely not that the lawe doth nothing else but reueale sinne for it iudgeth and condemneth sinne likewise but here the opposition is between the knowledge of sinne and the remission thereof the lawe onely giueth the one the agnition or knowledge of sinne not the remission Perer. by the lawe is cognitio peccati non consumptio the knowledge of sinne not the consumption of sinne gloss 6. But it will be obiected that in Leuiticus there are oblations prescribed for sinne and the Priest was to pray for such as had sinned and it should be forgiuen them Gorrhan answeareth that it was onely a legall remission quoad poenam non quoad culpam onely concerning the punishment of the lawe not of the fault But Lyranus answeareth better that such sacrifice for sinne was protestatio Christi passuri a protestation or profession of Christ which was to suffer so that such remission of sinnes though it were vnder the lawe yet was not by vertue and force of the lawe but by faith in Christ for the sinnes of the offerers were forgiuen at the prayers of the Priests which could not be heard if they were not of faith 7. It will here be further obiected that the politike and ciuill lawes of Princes intend more then the shewing of sinne they also doe helpe to reforme sinne and reclaime men from it therefore Gods lawe should doe more then manifest sinne Answ. 1. Humane lawes doe onely require an externall ciuill iustice but the lawe of God discouereth the corruption of the heart so that herein there is great difference betweene them Melancth 2. Humane lawes may by proposing of rewards and punishments helpe to perswade and induce men but they cannot instill or infuse obedience into the heart 3. God also intendeth more then the reuealing of sinne by his lawe for if any could keepe it they should liue thereby which while none is able to doe yet the law beside the discouering of sinne ferueth as a Schoolmaster to bring vs to Christ so that it is thorough mans owne infirmitie that the lawe giueth not life and it sheweth Gods power and wisedome that turneth the lawe vnto our good namely to bring vs vnto Christ which by our infirmitie is become vnto vs the minister of death 8. So then there are two other speciall vses and benefits of the lawe beside the reuealing of sinne the one that concerning faith it is a Schoolmaster to bring vs to Christ and touching manners and life it sheweth vs the way wherein we should walke Mars 9. There is a double knowledge of sinne by the lawe there is one which is weake and vnprofitable which neither thoroughly terrifieth the conscience nor reformeth the life such was the knowledge which the heathen had of sinne as the poets in their satyricall verses did set forth the sinnes of their times but themselues followed them there is an other effectuall knowledge of the lawe whereby the soule is humbled and this is of two sorts when such as is ioyned onely with terror of conscience without any hope such was the knowledge of sinne which Cain and Iudas had that betrayed Christ or it hath beside some liuely hope and comfort such was Dauids agnition and confession of his sinne But this comfort is no worke of the lawe it is wrought in vs by the spirit of grace Martyr Quest. 26. Of the meaning of these words The righteousnesse of God is made manifests without the lawe 1. Ambrose by the iustice of God vnderstandeth that iustice wherewith God is iust â—estans promissa sua in keeping his promises Origen
taketh this iustice to be Christ rather it signifieth the iustice or righteousnesse which is by faith to Christ so called both because of the efficient cause thereof namely God who worketh it in vs and in regard of the effect because it onely is able to stand before God Calvin 2. Without the Lawe 1. Origen here vnderstandeth the lawe of nature and giueth thiâ— exposition ad iustitiam Dei cognoscendam nihil opitulabatur lex naturae the law of nature did helpe nothing at all to the knowledge of the iustice of God but it was manifested by the written lawe of Moses but the Apostle excludeth not here the written lawe for them it were no consequent speach vnto the former where the Apostle denied iustification vnto all workes of the lawe in generall the same lawe then must be here vnderstood which he treated before that is generally both the naturall and written law 2. Augustine ioyneth this word without the lawe not vnto manifested but vnto righteousnesse so the righteousnesse without the lawe he expoundeth sine adminiculo legis without the helpe of the law lib. de spirit liter c. 9. but this sense first Beza confuteth by the order and placing of the words which stand thus without the lawe is righteousnesse made manifest not righteousnes without the lawe as S. Iames saith faith without works is dead not without works faith is dead for in this transposing of the words the sense is much altered Tolet addeth this reason that righteousnesse without the lawe that is the workes of the lawe was knowne euen vnto the faithfull vnder the lawe therefore the words without the lawe must be ioyned rather vnto manifested then to righteousnesse 3. But yet Tolet is here deceiued for he thus interpreteth absque lege without the lawe that is cossante lege the lawe ceasing and beeing abrogate the Euangelicall faith was manifested for although the workes of the morall law are commanded in the Gospel yet they bind not by reason of the legall bond or obligation but by vertue and force of newe institution thereof by Christ But our Sauiour faith directly that he came not to destroy the lawe and the Prophets Matth. 5.17 but if the morall lawe were first abrogated though it were againe reuiued by Christ it must first be dissolued 4. Ambrose well referreth without the lawe to manifested but he seemeth to restraine it to the lawe of ceremonies sine lege apparuit sed sine lege sabbati circumcisionis it appeared without the lawe but without the lawe of the Sabboth and circumcision and newe Moone c. But in all this disputation the Apostle chiefely entreateth of the morall lawe by the which specially came the knowledge of sinne 5. some referre this to the manifestation of the Gospel by the preaching of the Apostles when the Gentiles were called which had no knowledge of the lawe Mart. and many also among the Iewes which though they had not the lawe yet cared not for it as they say Ioh. 7.48 Doth any of the rulers or Pharisies beleeue in him but this people which knoweth not the lawe Gorrhan â—â— they vnderstand without the lawe that is without the knowledge of the lawe But the Apostle speaketh of that iustice which was manifested both to the Gentiles and the Iewes which had yet the knowledge of the lawe 6. Gryneus whereas the Apostle saith first that righteousnesse is reuealed without the lawe and yet immediately after he saith hauing witnesse of the law and the Prophets would reconcile them thus vnderstanding lawe in the first place of the letter of the lawe which doth not set forth the iustice of God by faith and in the other place the spirituall sense of the lawe 7. But the meaning rather of the Apostle is this that it is not the office of the lawe to teach faith and that beside the lawe there is an other doctrine in the Church concerning faith which doctrine of saluation and iustice by faith neither the naturall nor morall lawe can teach and though in the time of the lawe this doctrine of faith was taught the faithfull yet the knowledge thereof came not by the lawe And for the full reconciling here of the Apostle to himselfe three things are to be considered 1. that in the first place the lawe is vnderstood strictly for the doctrine of the morall lawe whether written or naturall which doth not properly teach faith in Christ afterward the lawe is taken for the bookâ— of Moses wherein many Euangelicall promises are contained beside the legall precepâ—â— Beza annot â—2 The lawe doth properly vrge workes it doth not professedly teach faith and yet it excludeth it not Pareus but accidentally it bringeth vs to Christ as forcing vs when we see our disease to seeke for a remedie 3. this doctrine of faith was manifested without the lawe that is more clearely taught and preached at the comming of Christ yet it was knowne vnto Moses and the Prophets though more obscurely for in that it is said to be manifested nor made or created it sheweth that it was before though not so manifest Perer. disput â—0 Faius So then those words but now doe both note the diuersitie of time and they are aduersatiue particulars shewing that our iustice is not reuealed in the lawe but otherwise and els where Quest. 27. How the righteousnesse of faith had witnesse of the lawe and the Prophets Fowre wayes are the law and Prophets found to beare witnesse and testimonie vnto the Gospell of faith 1. by the euident prophesies of Christ as our blessed Sauiour saith Ioh. 5.46 Moses wrote of me and S. Paul said before c. 2. Which he had promised before by his Prophets in the holy Scriptures and S. Peter saith Act. 10.43 To him also giue all the Prophets witnesse such euident testimonies out of the lawe and Prophets are these which are cited by the Apostles as that Rom. 10.6 The righteousnesse of faith speaketh on this wise say not in thy heart who shall ascend into heauen that is to bring Christ from aboue c. so the Apostle citeth an euident testimonie out of the 31. of Ieremie Hebr. 8.8 how the Lord would make a newe testament with the house of Iuda and many such testimonies in the newe Testament are taken out of the old 2. A second kind of testimonie were the types and figures which went before in the old Testament as the Paschal lambe the Manna the rocke the cloud did shadow forth Christ likewise some acts of the Patriarkes and Prophets did prefigure out Christ as Abrahams sacrificing of Isaac Salomons building of the Temple Ionas beeing in the bellie of the whale with such like 3. The sacrifices and oblations and the blood of rammes and goates did signifie the vnspotted lambe of God that should be slaine for the sinnes of the world Mart. 4. The lawe also by the effect thereof did beare witnesse vnto Christ as Augustine saith lex hoc ipso quod iubendo minando
neminem iustificabat satis indicabat c. the lawe in this selfesame thing that it iustified none in bidding and threatning did sufficiently shew that man is iustified by the gift of God c. Quest. 28. Of these words v. 22. The righteousnesse of Go by the faith of Iesus Christ vnto all and vppon all 1. Here the Apostle toucheth first the efficient and principall cause of this righteousnes which is God then the materiall cause Christ with his obedience both actiue and passiue in performing the lawe and bearing the punishment thereof for vs then the instrumentall cause which is faith and the subiect wherein this faith is seene and vnto whom it belongeth euen vnto all and vpon all 2. The faith of Christ is not here taken actiuely for the faith which Christ had but passiuely for the faith whereby Christ is had and possessed And by faith here is not vnderstood a generall assent onely or naked knowledge but a firme perswasion of the heart ioyned with a sure and certaine knowledge of things hoped for as the Apostle ioyneth both together Hebr. 11.1 defining faith to be the ground of things hoped for there is the assurance and confidence and the euidence of things which are not seene there is the knowledge 3. This faith doth not iustifie effective as working an habituall iustice in vs nor materialiter materially as though faith in it selfe were that whereby we are iustified but it iustifieth obiective as it apprehendeth Christ and organice iustrumentally as it applyeth the righteousnesse of Christ to them which beleeue Pareus 4. Further concerning faith it differeth much from opinion suspition science or knowledge opinion though it incline vnto the truth yet it is vncertaine and doubtfull so is not faith suspition giueth but a weake assent but faith is a firme and sure perswasion as opinion is an vncertaintie of the iudgement so is suspition in the will and assent neither are in faith knowledge bringeth a firme assent but it is by demonstration of reason now faith beleeueth beyond reason And of faith there are two kinds one is a vaine and temporarie faith which is fruitlesse and without charitie as in the parable of the sower some seede fell in stonie and thornie ground such faith iustifieth not there is a liuely and effectuall faith which is onely in the Saints and this is the true iustifying faith which yet admitteth diuerse degrees in some it bringeth forth thirtie in some sixtie in some an hundred fold there are two impediments of faith the one is curiositie to seeke fully to comprehend the things which we beleeue the other is doubtfulnesse to be vncertaine of them Both these Basil toucheth writing of faith ne contendas videre ca qua precul reposita sunt neque eae quae sperentur ambigua statuas striue not to gaze vpon those things which are set farre off neither hold vncertaine the things hoped for Mart. 5. Here it shall not be amisse to note the diuersitie of phrases which the Apostle vseth when he speaketh of faith it is called the righteousnesse of God c. 1.17 and of or from God Philip. 3.10 righteousnesse by faith c. 3.22 and of faith c. 5.1 righteousnesse without works c. 3.28 the righteousnesse of faith c. 4.11.13 righteousnesse in the blood of Christ c. 5.9 righteousnesse by the obedience of Christ c. 5.19 righteousnesse not our owne Philip. 3.9 righteousnesse imputed of God c. 4. v. 6.10 6. And whereas it is added toward all and vpon all 1. Some doe thus distinguish that the first all noteth the Iewes the second the Gentiles Oecumen some by the first vnderstand the Apostles by the second those which were afterward called Anselme super omnes vpon or aboue all interpreteth supra captum omnium aboue the teach or capacitie of all But this is rather doubled to shew neminem excludi that none of the faithfull are excluded Pareus and in that he saith aboue or vpon all Gods ouerflowing iustice is signified which ouerfloweth as waters Faius 2. But this vniuersall particle all must be restrained onely vnto those which beleeue for as Ambrose saith habet populus Dei plenitudinem suam c. the people of God haue a certaine fulnesse specialis quaedam censetur vniuersitas c. and there is a speciall kind of vniuersalitie when the whole world of the elect seemeth to be deliuered out of the whole world c. de vocat gent. lib. 1. c. 3. Quest. 29. What it is to be depriued of the glorie of God v. 23. 1. Origen vnderstandeth these words effective by way of the effect quomodo auderes peccator gloriam Deodare how should the sinner presume to giue glorie vnto God the praise of God is not seemely in a sinners mouth 2. Oecumenius taketh the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 literally thus interpreting they are left behind post tergum est gloria beneficentia Dei the glorie and beneficence of God is behind thy backe that is Gods grace doth preuent thee because a man is iustified freely without his own works 3. Some by the glorie of God vnderstand iustification whereby Gods glorie appeareth Lyran. per quam gloriosus apparet by the which the Lord appeareth glorious so also gloss ordinar Hugo Gorrhan 4. Faius by this glorie vnderstandeth that image of God in righteousnesse and holinesse after the which man was created which man hath blotted out by his fall so also Martyr applyeth it to the corruption of mans nature 5. Theodoret taketh this glorie for the presence of the grace of God in which sense the arke of the couenant was called the glorie of God because there he shewed himselfe visibly present as when the Philistians had takes the Arke it is saide the glorie is departed from Israel 1. Sam. 4.22 6. Melancthon by glorie would haue vnderstood that grace acceptance and approbation which men haue with God beeing iustified by faith so also Osiander Tolet Caietan vnderstand gloriâ—â— hominis apud Deum the glorie of man that is his acceptance with God and there is here a secret opposition betweene glorie with men which we may attaine vnto by workes as the Apostle sheweth c. 4.2 and glorie with God to this purpose also Calvin and Piscatur 7. Wherefore with Chrysostome we here vnderstand rather the glorie of eternall life he that offendeth God non ad eos pertinet quibus ascribenda est gloria doth not appertaine vnto those to whom eternall glorie shall be ascribed and so Beza also well giueth the sense of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is vsed of those which came short in the race and cannot attaine vnto the marke or price that is set before them so also Gryneus they cannot attaine ad metam vitae illius gloriosae to the marke of that glorious life which is set before vs in heauen of this glorie the Apostle spake before c. 2.10 to euerie one that doth good shall be glorie and honour the meaning then is that all
men by their sinne are strangers and as banished men from God and his kingdom which is not recouerable by mans workes neither is there any way to come vnto God and euerlasting saluation but onely by faith in Christ So that all religions whatsoeuer are condemned beside the Christian faith as not beeing able to bring vs vnto God Pareus Quest. 30. Of iustification freely by grace v. 24. 1. Here the Apostle expresseth all the causes of our iustification 1. the efficient which is the grace of God that is not the doctrine of the Gospel freely reuealed as the Pelagians vnsterstand it nor the graces of the spirit infused as the Romanists but by the grace of God we vnderstand the free mercie and goodnesse of God toward mankind 2. the formall cause and manner is in that we are freely iustified without any merit of our owne the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 freely is sometime taken in an other sense as Galat. 2.22 if righteousnesse were by the law then Christ died 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without cause but here it signifieth firely 3. the meritorious and working cause is Christ Iesus who hath redeemed vs and the instrumentall cause is faith 4. the ende in respect of vs is our saluation and iustification in respect of God the manifestation of his righteousnes to his glorie 2. Thorough the redemption 1. This word is taken improperly for any deliuerance out of daunger as God is said to haue redeemed his people out of the thraldome and captiuitie of Egypt but properly it signifieth such deliuerance as when any thing beeing in an others occupying is freed and exempted by paying the price and such redemption is either corporall as when men are deliuered from externall and corporall bondage or spirituall such is our redemption by Christ whose death the price of our redemption was in respect of the deede corporall beeing historically done but in regard of the effect and fruit it was spirituall in redeeming vs from the spirituall bondage of sinne the deuill and hell 2. This redemption is taken two waies either properly for the very worke of our redemption purchased by the death of Christ or for the effect thereof the consummation of that worke of our redemption in euerlasting life as it is taken Rom. 8.22 Pareus 3. But it will be obiected that we are not freely iustified seeing that Christ hath paied the ransome for vs how then is that said to be freely done where a price is paied Answ. It is free ex parte hominū on mans behalfe because no price for their redemption is exacted of them but ex parte Christi on Christs part it was not free because he paied a most sufficient and exact price for our redemption So the Prophet saith Come buie without money Isa 55.1 they are saide to buie saluation because it is bought for them by Christ and yet without money because Christ paied the debt for them Tolet. So in the worke of our redemption are seene both the iustice and free mercie of God the first in that Gods wrath was so testified by the death of Christ the other toward vs in that God hath giuen his sinne freely to die for vs. 31. Quest. How God is said to haue proposed or set forth Christ to be our reconciliation 1. Whome God hath set forth or proposed Ambrose readeth disposed and some vnderstand it of the publike exhibiting and proposing of Christ in the preaching of the Gospel Tolet. but this word rather sheweth the euerlasting purpose and decree of God from the beginning of the world to giue his sonne for our redemption so is the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taken Rom. 8.28 euen to them that are called of his purpose Faius And hence may two obiections be answered 1. how it might stand with the iustice of God that his most innocent Sonne should die for others Answ. This was Gods purpose from the beginning of the world it was the decree of the whole Trinitie that the Sonne of God should be the Redeemer of the world yea and Christ also offered himselfe 1. Tim. 2.8 Faius 2. Some obiect how the death of Christ and whence it should haue vertue to reconcile vs vnto God what proportion is there betweene the infinite sea of mens sinnes and the short death of Christ that was not extended beyond three daies Answ. The vertue of Christs death dependeth of the purpose of God he so appointed decreed and purposed that by this meanes the world should be redeemed the Lord in his infinite power could haue appointed other meanes but he thought none fitter for the recouering of our decaied estate Pareus 2. Christ is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the reconciliation which some thinke may be taken in the masculine gender that he is our reconciliator Tolet. annot 21. where there is a manifest allusion vnto the propitiation of the Arke which was called cappareth the propitiatorie Christ was then signified by that golden propitiatorie which couered the Arke from whence the Lord deliuered his oracles Origen is here somewhat curious in his typicall applications by the gold vnderstanding the puritie of Christ by the length breadth his diuinitie and humanitie but I omit them as too curious obseruations Beza thinketh that the Apostle in saying whome God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath proposed alludeth vnto the propitiatorie which was then kept within the vaile but now is publikely proposed and exhibited that vaile beeing remooued but the Apostle in this word proposed hath reference rather to the purpose and counsell of God as is before shewed 3. Through faith in his blood 1. by blood is vnderstood by a synecdoche the whole sacrifice of Christ which was the consummation of his obedience And he saith in his blood that is by his blood as the instrument of our redemption for there are two instruments of our redemption one on Christs part his death and shedding of his blood the other on ours which is our faith Mart. these words in his blood some doe referre vnto the word reconciliation Theodoret Anselme Tolet some vnto the next words before through faith as the Syrian interpreter But it may very well be ioyned with both that our reconciliation was purchased by Christs blood and Christs blood can not profit vs vnlesse we beleeue it to haue beene shedde for vs. Pareus 32. Quest. How we are said to be iustified freely seeing faith is required which is an act in the beleeuer 1. This obiection may further be vrged thus that is freely bestowed which is conferred without any helpe or worke in the receiuer seeing then a man must bring faith which is a worke of the will how is he said to be iustified freely Ans. 1. Tolet first hath this answer that we are said to be iustified freely through faith because faith is the free gift of God and it is giuen vs freely to merit our saluation by faith But he himselfe misliketh this answer for to be iustified freely and by the merit
two the Apostle manifestly distinguisheth Rom. 6.22 Beeing freed from sinne c. you haue your fruit in holines holines then and sanctitie is the fruit of our iustification whereby we are freed from sinne Againe Apoc. 23.11 He that is righteous let him be righteous still be that is holy let him be holy still here these two to be iust and holy are manifestly distinguished 16. Controv. Against the works of preparation going before iustification Pererius concerning the works and motiues of preparation tending to iustification hath these positions 1. There are sixe of these preparatiue motions faith the feare of God hope to obtaine pardon the loue of God the purpose of a new life repentance and sorrow for sinnes past thus he alleadgeth out of the Councell of Trent sess 6. can 6. so also Stapleton in Antidot 2. These works of preparation proceede partly from mans free will partly from the assistance of the spirit concurring and hereof it is that sometime the worke of our conuersion is ascribed vnto man as Ioel 2. Turne vnto me with your whole heart Iam. 4. Draw neere vnto God and he will draw neere vnto you sometime it is giuen vnto God as Ier. 31. Conuert vs and we shall be conuerted 3. These works of preparation though they doe not merit the grace of iustification â—â— condigno of condignitie yet de congruo by way of congruitie they may that is God seeth it to be meere and conuenient that such works of preparation should be rewarded with the grace of iustification following Perer. disput 7. Contra. 1. Concerning faith it is no where said in Scripture to prepare or dispose vnto iustification but in deede to iustifie by the imputation of the righteousnes of Christ and as for the other preparations they follow iustification they doe not prepare a way vnto it â— for good works follow iustification as the fruit and effect thereof Rom. 6.22 Beeing freed from sinne you haue your fruit in holines And againe there is no good worke or motion but it is commanded in the law seeing then that we are iustified by faith without such works they can not goe before iustification as preparatiues thereunto 2. The Scripture ascribeth euery good worke motion and thought of the minde vnto God for of our selues we are not able to thinke a good thought 2. Cor. 3.5 and our Sauiour saith Ioh. 15.5 Without me you can doe nothing wherein the Scripture exhorteth men to be conuerted and to draw neere vnto God that sheweth not this power to be in themselues but by these exhortations the spirit of God worketh in them and stirreth them vp that by grace they should seeke to doe that which they finde no strength in themselues to performe 3. But that distinction of merit of congruitie and condignitie is vaine and friuolous for in the matter of iustification there is no merit at all the whole worke is ascribed onely to grace Eph. 2.8 By grace are ye saued thorough faith not of your selues it is the gift of God not of works c. least any should boast if all boasting be taken away then there is no merit for of merits men may boast Augustine hath an excellent testimonie to this purpose Vocantis est gratia percipientis vero gratiam postea sunt opera bona c. Grace is of the caller and then good works belong vnto those which haue receiued grace quae non pariant gratiam sed quae à gratia pariantur c. which works doe not beget grace but are begotten of grace for the fire doth not burne thereby to waxe hoate but it is first hoat and then it burneth and the wheele therefore runneth not well that it may be round but it is first round and then it runneth well so nemo propterea bene operatur vt accipiat gratiam c. no man therefore worketh well to receiue grace but because he hath receiued grace by the saâ—â—e he worketh well lib. 1. ad Simplician qu. 2. no works then going before the grace of iustification haue any worthines in them at all to procure grace 17. Controv. What iustifying faith is Pererius that he may euery where shew some tricke of his Popish profession misliketh three things in that description of faith which is vsually receiued by Protestants for whereas we thus define faith that it is a confident assurance of the heart whereby we are perswaded of the remission and forgiuenes of our sinnes in Christ he taketh exception to these three points 1. He denieth that faith is any such confidence and assurance which he graunteth must be ioyned with faith but that faith is not such assurance and confidence he would thus prooue Eph. 3.12 the Apostle saith by whome we haue boldnes and entrance with confidence by faith in him here it appeareth that confidence is a distinct thing from faith Againe 1. Tim. 3.13 They that haue ministred well get themselues a good degree and great libertie as the faith here the Apostle sheweth that confidence is a diuers thing from faith and that it springeth from charitie and a good conscience Contra. 1. Pererius first argument is faith worketh confidence therefore it is not the same with confidence Answ. 1. This argument may rather be retorted faith worketh confidence therefore it is much more a kind of confidence for as the cause is so is the effect 2. faith is not the same with that confidence which it worketh but they are thus distinguished faith hath a generall assurance confidence in all Gods promises out of this fountaine doe proceede those speciall acts of confidence as to pray confidently to be confident in tribulation which are as little riuers running forth out of the same head and fountaine 2. His second argument is this confidence is wrought by charitie and a good conscience therefore not by faith Ans. The argument followeth not for there may be diuers causes of the one and the same thing faith worketh confidence and yet the same is more encreased and confirmed by a good conscience because the Sunne giueth heat doth it follow that the fire doth not heat also like as the warmth of the Sunne may be augmented by the heat of the fire so may the assurance of faith by charitie and a good conscience be encreased See further Synops. Centur. 4. err 48. 2. Pererius second exception is that the obiect of faith is not the assurance of remission of sinnes The Eunuch when he was baptised beleeued onely that Iesus Christ was the Sonne of God Act. 8. And Paul required none other faith of the keeper of the prison but that he should beleeue in the Lord Iesus and so he should be saued Act. 16. Abrahams faith was counted vnto him for righteousnes which was no other faith then to beleeue that in his seede that is in Christ all the nations of the world should be blessed of none of these was required such faith to beleeue their sinnes were forgiuen them to this purpose Pererius
And although by our redemption we are not deliuered or taken from God but reconciled vnto him yet are we deliuered from his wrath Rom. 5.9 and so from his punishing iustice 5. Argum. We are improperly said to be redeemed from that to the which the price was not paied but to the curse of the lawe and wrath that is the punishment of sinne the price was not paied for the bearing of the curse and the sustaining of the wrath of God for vs was the price it selfe therefore we are improperly said to be redeemed from the curse and wrath Answ. 1. The proposition is false for the captiue may be said to be redeemed from that to the which the price is not payed as from the gives fetters prison sword death though principally the redemption is from the hands of him which holdeth any in captiuitie so we may be redeemed from the curse of the lawe though the price were not payed vnto it 2. the curse of the lawe and wrath may be taken two wayes passiuely for the effect of the curse and wrath which is the punishment of sinne and in this sense the price is not paid to the curse or actiuely for the wrath of God and his irefull iudgement pronouncing the sentence of the curse and in this sense the price may be said to be paied vnto the curse that is the iustice and wrath of God inflicting the curse 6. Argum. The operation or curse of the lawe is euerlasting death but Christ did not vndergoe euerlasting death for vs therefore he was not made a curse for vs but onely for our cause he fell into some kind of curse for vs. Answ. 1. The proposition is generally true for the curse or operation doth not onely signifie the punishment due vnto the breach of the lawe but the sentence also pronounced against the transgressors of the lawe as it is said Deut. 21.23 cursed is euerie one that hangeth vpon a tree but euerie one that so hanged was not euerlastingly condemned as the theife that was converted vpon the crosse 2. yet it is most true that Christ in some sense suffred eternall death for vs for in euerlasting death two things are to be considered the greatnesse and infinitnes of the infernall agonies and dolors with the abiection and forsaking of God the other is the perpetuall continuance of such euerlasting horror and abiection the second Christ must needs be freed from both because of his omnipotencie it was impossible for him to be for euer kept vnder the thraldome of death and his innocencie that hauing satisfied for sinne beeing himselfe without sinne he could not be held in death and in respect of his office which was to be our deliuerer yet the verie infernall paines and sorrowe Christ did suffer for vs because our Redeemer was to suffer that which was due vnto vs and why els was our Sauiour so much perplexed before his passion which in respect of the outward tormēt of the body was exceeded by many Martyrs in their sufferings if he feared not some greater thing then the death of the bodie 3. And although sometime in Scripture the preposition for signifieth onely the ende or cause as Christ is said to haue died for our sinnes 1. Ioh. 3.16 yet it signifieth also for and in ones stead to doe any thing as Rom. 5.7 for a good man one dare die that is in his stead that he should not die and so Christ died for vs that is in our place and stead that we should not die eternally ex Pareo 7. Argum. As we are said to be sold vnder sinne so we are bought and redeemed by Christ but we were sold vnder sinne without any price payed therefore so also are we redeemed without the paying of any price Answ. The proposition is not true for it is a metaphoricall speach that we are sold vnder sinne thereby is signified the alienation and abiection from God by our sinnes but we are said to be redeemed properly wherein it was necessarie that a price should be paied for vs both to satisfie the iust wrath and indignation of God against sinne as also because of Gods immutable sentence thou shalt die the death which sentence must take place let the Lord should be found a lier and his word not to be true Christ therefore in redeeming vs by his death payed that price and ransome for vs which we otherwise should haue payed 8. Argum. Where there is a true and proper redemption the price is paied to him which holdeth the captiues in bondage but in this redemption purchased by Christ the price was not so paied for then the deuill should haue had it whose captiues we were therefore it is not properly a redemption Answ. 1. It is not true that we are principally and originally the deuills captiues first we are the Lords captiues as of an angrie and offended Iudge by our sinnes but secondarily we were captiued vnto Sathan because the Iudge deliuereth ouer sinners vnto him as the tormentor that power therefore which Sathan hath ouer sinners is a secondarie power receiued from God this is manifested in the parable Matth. 18.34 where the king deliuereth ouer the wicked seruant vnto the tormentor 2. The price then of our redemption was paied vnto God who had deliuered vs ouer as captiues for our sinnes and so the Apostle saith that Christ offred himselfe by his eternall spirit vnto God Heb. 9.14 not that God thirsted for the blood of his sonne but after 〈◊〉 salvation quia salus erat in sanguine because there was health in his blood as Bernard saith for thereby Gods iustice was satisfied and the veritie of his sentence established thou shalt die the death 3. But whereas it is further obiected that the price could not be payed vnto God 1. because God procured his owne sonne to pay the price of our redemption but be that detaineth captiues doth not procure their deliuerance 2. in paying the price of redemption there is some vantage accruing and growing to him to whom the price is paied but in our redemption there was no gaine or advantage vnto God we further answear thus 1. that in such a redemption wherein the Iudge desireth the life and safetie of the prisoner the Iudge himselfe may procure him to be redeemed and that out of his owne treasure 2. neither in such a kind of redemption doth the iudge seeke for any advantage to himselfe but onely the preservation of the lawes and common iustice as Zaleucus the gouernor of the Loerensians hauing made a lawe that he which was taken in adulterie should loose both his eyes did cause one of his sonnes eyes to be put out for the offence and one of his owne eyes by this he gained nothing but the commendation of iustice and so in our redemption the iustice of God is set forth otherwise there can be no lucre or advantage growing properly vnto God 4. Wherefore notwithstanding all these cauills and sophistications Christ properly and
inward circumcision of the heart which is by faith 2. Anselmus thinketh that the Apostle reporteth here that which he said before that Abraham is the father of them which beleeue though they be vncircumcised but he toucheth here rather the other part that Abraham is the father of the circumcision also which he further explaineth that he meaneth not such as onely haue the carnall circumcision but such as walke in the steppes of Abraham 3. By walking in the steppes the Apostle vnderstandeth not here the fruites and effects of faith but rather faith it selfe in which respect Abraham is said to be the father of the faithfull Beza annot And herein they must followe the steppes of Abraham 1. he was not counted iust not by any merits or workes of his but by faith 2. this faith was ioyned with a constant and full assurance herein they must be like vnto Abraham 4. Origen here obserueth that though at this time he were called Abram not Abraham when he was pronounced iust by faith Gen. 15. yet the Apostle retaineth that name which was afterward imposed by the Lord quod enim divinitus sumitur obseruari in posterum convenit for that which is once appointed of God it is fit afterward to be observed Quest. 23. How and where Abraham was promised to be heire of the world v. 13. 1. Gryneus by the world vnderstandeth by a Synecdoche of the whole taken for a part the land of Canaan which was promised to Abraham and his seede but the Apostle speaketh here not of a temporall but of a spirituall promise 2. Faius Osiander with others doe apply it vnto Canaan also but mystically as it was a type and figure of the kingdome of heauen 3. Lyranus will haue this fulfilled in Christ to whom was giuen all power in heauen and earth so also Peter Martyr and Caluin who alleadgeth that place Heb. 1.2 Whom he hath made heire of all things 4. Pareus by the world vnderstandeth the world of the faithfull and beleeuers dispersed ouer the world and so in effect it is the same which he said before that Abraham should be the father of all which beleeue whether of the circumcision or vncircumcision So also Origen here referreth vs vnto that promise Gen. 15. that in Abraham all the kinreds of the earth should be blessed likewise Beza 5. As this last seemeth to be the fittest interpretation so I thinke it best to ioyne both these last together that Abraham was made heire of the world that is the father of all beleeuers in the world yet so as this was chiefely performed in Christ as it is said Psalme â—â— I will giue the heathen for thine inheritance and the vttermost parts of the earth for thy possession And so S. Paul also Galath 3. vnderstandeth the seede of Abraham vnto whom the promise was made of Christ to this purpose the ordinarie glosse that Abraham was heres mundi secundum propositum exemplum heire of the world in respect of his example of beleeuing but Christ secundum potestatem in regard of his power Quest. 24. Wherein Abraham was made heire of the world and wherein this inheritance consisted 1. This inheriting of the world is not meant of any temporall dominion which snoâ—â— fall vnto the posteritie of Abraham as the Iewes dreamed for the obiect of faith is spirituall not temporall as it is defined by the Apostle to be the euidence of things that are not seene Heb. 11.1 2. It must therefore be referred vnto Christ. 1. Abraham in Christs right is promiseâ—â— the inheritance of the world which should be chiefely accomplished in the celestiall inheritance 2. and now in the earth this spirituall inheriting of the world is vnderstood of the Church of Christ which is dispersed thorough the world 3. and beside the faithfull onely haue true tight and interest vnto the temporall things of this life which the wicked 〈◊〉 bold as vsurpers as the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 3.21 all things are yours and ye Christs and Christ Gods Pareus Quest. 25. How faith is said to be made voide if they which are of the lawe be heires 1. Haymo by the promise here vnderstandeth the blessing which was promised to Abraham should in his seede come vpon all nations so that if they which were of the lawe and circumcision should onely be heires vnto Abraham that promise should not be accomplished that all nations should in his feede be blessed 2. Origen thus expoundeth evacuabitur id that should be evacuated and made voide that Abraham was iustified by faith his meaning is that the word of God should not be found true so also Osiander taketh here faith for the constancie of Gods promises it would follow that God did not stand to his promise seeing the promise was made to the faith of Abraham but faith is not taken in that sense in this chapter but thereby is meant beleefe in God and the relying vpon his promises 3. Bucer and Calvin giue this sense that seeing faith is ioyned with an assured confidence and trust if the promise were made to the keeping of the law which beeing a thing impossible would make doubtfulnesse and distrust in the minde this were contrarie vnto the nature of faith and so in this respect faith should be made voide 4. Tolet here referreth vs to that place Galat. 3.17 where the Apostle reasoneth from the time that the lawe which came 400. yeares after the promise could not make voide the promise which was made before but if the inheritance came by the lawe then should the promise which was made first be of no effect which were verie absurd and inconuenient 5. But the Apostle rather reasoneth here from the contrarie and diuerse nature of the lawe and promise for the lawe requireth workes and so the reward is of due debt the promise is of faith and so the reward is of grace and fauour these then doe one destroy an other for that which is of fauour cannot be of desert and due debt if the inheritance then come by the lawe of workes the lawe of faith is made voide and so Gods promise should be frustrate which is impossible Pareus in ver 14. Quest. 26. How the lawe is said to cause wrath 1. This is not brought in as an argument and proofe of the former speach that the promise is of no effect if the inheritance were by the lawe but it is a new argument to prooue that inheritance is not by the lawe by the contrarie effect because the promise procureth a blessing but the lawe wrath and so malediction therefore the inheritance is not by the law 2. Origen by the lawe vnderstandeth the lawe of the members which maketh vs captiue vnto sinne and indeede causeth wrath and where this law is not there is no transgression Haymo thinketh it may be of the lawe of nature but it is euident that the Apostle speaketh of the written lawe of Moses as he calleth the Iewes Abrahams seede of the lawe v.
16. that is which had receiued the lawe 3. By wrath some would vnderstand the wrath and indignation in the transgressor his contumacie and rage against God who hath by lawe restrained him of his licentious libertie Origen and Haymo referre it to the penaltie of the law as an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth but it rather signifieth the wrath and indignation of God in iudging and punishing of sinne not onely temporally but eternally Calvin 4. Now the lawe worketh wrath not of it selfe for it is holy iust and good but in respect of the weakenes and corruption of man which taketh occasion by the lawe as contrarie vnto it to be the worse as we see that in nature one contrarie by the resistance of an other becommeth so much the more violent as expereince sheweth in the breaking out of lightening and thunder and in the terrible noise of gunshot where two contraries meete together the fierie hoat nature of the brimstone and the cold qualitie of the saltpeter both tempered together in the gunpowder Mart. 5. But although the lawe occasionaliter by way of occasion procureth wrath yet it hath an other ende and effect vnto the godly for vnto them it is a schoolemaster to bring them vnto Christ so that Christ is the ende of the lawe not onely because he hath abolished the ceremonies of the lawe and so is the ende and fulfilling thereof but because the law directeth vs vnto Christ who hath fulfilled the lawe for vs which it was impossible for vs to keepe 6. Now the holy Apostle doth of purpose thus speake of the law as saying that by it commeth the knowledge of sinne that it causeth wrath that it is the ministerie of death that by this meanes he might abate that great opinion and estimation of the law which the Iewes conceiued of it hoping thereby to be iustified but otherwise as the law is considered in it selfe he giueth it the due commendation as afterward is shewed in the 7. chapter like as now the Preachers of the Gospel doe giue vnto good works their due praise and commendation but yet they detract from them as not beeing able to iustifie vs. Mart. 26. Quest. Of the meaning of these words v. 15. Where no law is there is no transgression 1. Origen here obserueth that the Apostle saith not where is law there is transgression for then all those holy men which liued vnder the law should be held to be vnder transgression but he saith in the negatiue where there is no law there is no transgression But this collection is not good for the contrarie must be inferred out of the Apostles words where there is no law there is no transgression therefore where there is a law there is transgression or els there should be no coherence in the Apostles words whereas this is added as a proofe of the former clause that the law causeth wrath 2. Now touching the coherence Gorrhan maketh here two arguments why the inheritance can not be by the law because by it there is neither remissio poenae remission of the punishment the law causing wrath nor yet remissio culpae remission of the fault because by the law commeth transgression Gryneus maketh this the coherence because idem est index c. there is the same foreshowne both of the transgression and punishment namely the law But thus better doth the sentence hang together the Apostle prooueth that the law causeth wrath by the cause thereof for that it causeth transgression so then transgression is set in the middes betweene the law and wrath for the law bringeth forth transgression and transgression wrath Pareus 3. But this should seeme to be no good argument no law no transgression therefore where there is law there is transgression as it followeth not no creature no man Ergo a creature a man Ans. The Apostle here reasoneth not à genere-ad speciem from the genus to the species as in the instance proposed but from the contrarie by the like connexion of the causes and effects as this followeth well in the like where the Sunne is not risen there is â—â— day light therefore the Sunne beeing risen it is day Pareus 4. Now concerning the meaning of these words Haymo thinketh it may be vnderstood either of the lawe of nature and so infants not yet hauing vnderstanding of this lawe cannot be transgressors against it or of the Evangelicall lawe which the Pagans not hauing are not held to be so great offenders as they which haue reciued it or of the morall lawe of Moses where that lawe is not non est tanta praevaricatio neque sic imputatur there is not so great transgression neither is it so much imputed This latter sense is to be preferred for thoroughout this chapter the Apostle vnderstandeth the lawe of Moses 5. And further for the true vnderstanding of these words it must be obserued 1. that the Apostle saith not where is no lawe there is no iniquitie for the old world and the Sodomites committed iniquitie before the lawe was written but he saith there is no transgression which is referred to the lawe written gloss ordin 2. this is simply true of things indifferent as were the ceremonies before they were commanded by lawe for then it was no sinne to omit them but of things euill in their owne nature it must be vnderstood after a sort that there was not so great transgression before the law was giuen as after Lyran. 3. and hereof these two reasons may be giuen both quia homines nituntur in vetitum men are most bent vnto that which is forbidden and so by the prohibition of the lawe the stubbornenesse of mans heart was increased as also because by the lawe came the knowledge of sinne and so the seruant that knoweth his masters will and doth it not is worthie of more stripes Lyran. 4. So then the Apostle denieth not but that sinne which is committed against the conscience euen where there is no lawe is sinne non est reus tantae transgressionis c. he is not guiltie of so great transgression as he which knoweth the lawe and breaketh it Calvin Quest. 27. Who are meant by Abrahams seede which is of the Lawe v. 16. 1. The Apostle in this verse vrgeth two arguments to prooue that the inheritance is not of the law but of faith because it is of grace for to be iustified by faith and by grace with the Apostle are all one and because the promise is firme but if it were by the law it should be vncertaine and not firme because of mans weaknes who is not able to performe the law Calvin Chrysostome further saith that the Apostle here speaketh of two chiefe good things or benefits the one is quod quia data sunt firma sunt the things which are giuen are firme the other quod vniverso semini data sunt they are giuen to the whole seede of Abraham 2. By the seede which is of the law
promised but that he had also a particular confidence of his acceptance with God and remission of his sinnes in the Messiah promised doth euidently appeare by these two arguments 1. The Apostle saith that Abraham was partaker by faith of that blessednesse which the Prophet Dauid speaketh of v. 7. Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen then it followeth ver 9. Came the blessednesse vpon the circumcision or vpon the vncircumcision 2. the like faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousnesse which is imputed to vs v. 23. but our faith is to beleeue that Christ was put to death for our sinnes and rose for our iustification v. 25. therefore Abrahams faith was an assurance of remission of his sinnes in Christ. Controv. 15. That faith doth not iustifie by the merit or act thereof but onely instrumentally as it applyeth and apprehendeth the righteousnesse of Christ. Bellarmine hath an other sophisticall collection vpon these words v. 22. therefore it was imputed to him for righteousnesse here saith at the Apostle rendreth the reason why faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousnesse because he in beleeuing gaue glorie vnto god therefore he was iustified merito fidei by the merit or worthinesse of faith which notwithstanding was his grace and gift Bellar. lib. 1. de iustif c. 17. Contra. 1. Abraham was not iustified because he in beleeuing gaue glorie vnto God that indeede was an act and fruit of his faith but it was his faith onely for the which he was iustified as the Apostle saith afterward v. 24. it shall be likewise imputed to vs for righteousnes which beleeue c. 2. the Apostle saith to him that worketh not but beleeueth c. faith is counted for righteousnesse then it will followe that where faith is counted or imputed for righteousnesse there is no worke faith then iustifieth not as a worke by the act of beleeuing for then faith should not iustifie without works which is the scope of all the Apostles discourse that by faith righteousnes is imputed without workes v. 6. faith then doth not iustifie actiuely as it is a worke but passiuely as it apprehendeth the righteousnesse of Christ. 3. If faith be the gift of God as Bellarmine confesseth then can it not merit for he that meriteth must merit of his owne where there is grace and fauour as in the bestowing of gifts freely there is no merit v. 4. 4. I will here oppose against Bellarmine the iudgement of Tolet and so set one Iesuite against an other and a Cardinall against his fellowe he thus ingeniously writeth vpon these words non existimes Paulum merito fiderascribere iustitium c. thinke not that Paul ascribeth righteousnesse to the merit of faith as though because he beleeued he was worthie of the righteousnesse of God but he signifieth Deum ex gratia acceptare fidem nostram in iustitiam that God of grace and fauour accepteth our faith for righteousnesse Controv. 16. The people are not to be denied the reading of the Scriptures v. 23. Now it is not written for him onely but for vs c. Hence it is euident that the Romanists offer great wrong vnto the people of God in barring them from the reading of the Scriptures for they are to be admitted to the reading of the Scriptures for whom they are written but they are written for all that beleeue in Christ the reading then of the Scripture serueth to coÌ„firme our faith therfore they belong generally vnto the faithfull Par. But it will be obiected that the vnlearned doe not vnderstand the Scriptures and therefore they are to depend vpon the fathers of the Church for the vnderstanding of them and not to venture vpon them themselues Answ. 1. Nay the sense of the Scripture is most safely taken from the Scripture which is the best interpreter of it selfe 2. the Fathers and expossitors are to be heard and consulted with so farre forth as they agree with the Scriptures but the sense of the Scripture 〈◊〉 not depend vpon their fancies which haue no warrant by Scripture as Hierome vpon theâ— 23. chap. of Mathew giueth instance of a certaine interpretation of one of the Fatherâ— that Zacharias the sonne of Barachias mentioned there v. 35. to haue beene slaine betweene the Temple and the Altar was Zacharie the father of Iohn Baptist And Hierome searching out which of the Fathers had made this interpretation found that it was Basil and then he concludeth this seeing it hath no warrant out of the Scriptures eadem facilitate contemnitur qua probatur is as easily reiected as it is affirmed See further of the vulgar reading of Scripture and of the manner of interpreting the same Synops. Centur. 1. err 3. and err 9. Controv. 17. Against the heretikes which condemned the old Testament and God the author thereof v. 24. Which beleeued in him that raised vp Iesus c. Origen very well inferreth vpon these wordes that seeing the God whom Abraham beleeued was able to quicken the dead was the same that raised Iesus from the dead non erat alius Deus legis alius Domini nostri Iesu Christ. c. there was not then one God of the law and another of our Lord Iesus Christ c. But there was the same God of the old and new Testament which is obserued by Origen against the wicked Marcionites and Manichies who condemned the old Testament and the author thereof So also whereas the same heretickes vrged these wordes of the Apostle v. 15. where no law is there is no transgression and thereupon inferring the contrarie where there is a law there is transgression would thereby conclude that the law is the cause of transgression and so condemne the law Origen doth thus returne this their collection vpon themselues that as where the law is there is transgression of the law so where faith is there is transgression against faith but as faith is not the cause vt quis praeuaricetur à fide that one transgresse against faith neither shall the law be the cause of transgression against the law Controv. 18. Whether iustification consist onely in the remission of sinnes v. 25. Who was deliuered to death for our sinnes and is risen againe for our iustification Pererius taketh occasion here to inuergh against Protestants thus affirming of vs qui â—â—â—â—em vim iustificationis ponunt in sola remissione peccatorum donationem vero iustitiae c. which doe place all the force of iustification onely in the remission of sinnes but the donation of iustice whereby the minde is rectified and newenesse of life wrought in vs they do reiect and abandon Perer. disput 10. err 49. and to the same purpose Bellar. lib. 2. de iustif c. 6. and the Rhemists take vpon them to confute the Protestants because they hold iustification to be onely remission of sinnes and no grace inherent in vs annot in 4. ad Rom. Sect. 6. Contra. 1. It is a false imputation that we place iustification onely in the remission of
or life without Christ. v. 17. Much more shall they which receiue c. raigne in life c. As in Adam sinne and death entred and so raigned ouer all so life raigneth by Iesus Christ then they which are not graft by faith into Christ but remaine onely in Adam cannot be pertakers of life they are still vnder the kingdome of sinne and death wherefore the Turkes Iewes and all other that are without the knowledge and faith of Christ howsoeuer they dreame of a kind of Paradise and terrene happinesse after this life yet they can haue no assurance of life seeing they are strangers from Christ So S. Peter saith Act. 4.12 That there is no other name giuen vnder heauen whereby we must be saued Doct. 6. That life doth accompanie righteousnesse v. 17. The Apostle saith that they which receiue the gift of righteousnesse shall raigne in life then as sinne raigned vnto death so righteousnesse raigneth vnto life wheresoeuer then righteousnesse is found whether inherent as in the Angels or imputed as in the faithfull who haue the righteousnesse of Christ imputed vnto them by faith there is the kingdome of life then they which doe feele the kingdome of righteousnesse to be begunne in them who both by faith are iustified in Christ and their faith is effectuall working by loue they are assured to enter into life as S. Paul knewe after he had kept the faith and fought a good fight that there was a crowne of righteousnesse laid vp for him 2. Tim. 4.8 Doct. 7. Of the vse of the lawe v. 20. The lawe entred c. that the offence should abound c. This is the proper vse of the lawe to bring a man to the knowledge of his sinne and to shewe him in what state he standeth by nature a transgressor of the lawe and so subiect to the curse but we must not rest in this vse of the lawe there is a second and more principall ende that by the abounding of sinne grace may more abound and in this sense the Apostle calleth the lawe a schoolemaster to bring vs to Christ Galath 3.19 that we by the lawe seeing our owne weakenesse and vnsufficiencie should seeke vnto Christ Iesus to finde righteousnes in him which cannot be obtained by the lawe 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. Whether a good conscience and integritie of life be the cause of peace with God Pererius disput 1. in c. 5. numer 2. vrgeth that place of the Prophet Isay c. 32.17 s he worke of iustice shall be peace euen the worke of iustice and quietnesse and assurance for euer whereupon he inferreth that opera iustitiae c. the workes of iustice and the keeping of Gods commandements doe worke in vs this tranquilitie and peace of the minde Contra. It might be here answeared that peace of conscience is the worke of our true iustice that is Christ who is called the Lord our iustice or righteousnesse Ierem. 23.10 but that this interpretation agreeth not with the former words v. 16. Iudgement shall dwell in the desert and iustice in the fruitfull field where the Prophet speaketh of the externall practise and exercise of iustice 2. Iunius seemeth to vnderstand these disiunctiuely the fruites of the spirit which should be powred vpon them v. 15. should bring faith iustice peace as the Apostle sheweth these to be the fruites of the spirit Rom. 14.17 righteousnesse peace ioy in the holy Ghost so also Faius But this distinction here cannot be admitted because it is directly said the worke of iustice shall be peace tranquilitie 3. But the best answer is that righteousnesse procureth peace not effective because it worketh this inward peace which is wrought in vs by the grace of iustification but declarative it declareth confirmeth and assureth vnto vs our peace as S. Peter exhorteth that we make our election and calling sure by good workes 2. Pet. 1.9 not that our workes make our election sure in it selfe which dependeth on the purpose of God but it is made sure vnto vs so the peace of conscience wrought in vs by faith is confirmed and ratified vnto vs by a good life euen as good workes are testimonies of our faith and in that sense are said by S. Iames c. 2. to iustifie Controv. 2. Against invocation of Saints 1. By whome we haue accesse through faith this text is well vrged by Peter Martyr and Pareus against the invocation of Saints for if by Christ we haue accesse vnto God what neede we the helpe of other mediators and intercessours the Papists then doe much derogate vnto the glorie of Christ in bringing an other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to enter vs and cause vs to haue accesse vnto God And further two arguments may be vrged out of the Apostles words he saith we haue accesse by him through faith but Saints are not the obiect of our faith we must onely beleeue in God Ioh. 14.1 Ye beleeue in God beleeue also in me 2. we haue accesse vnto this grace namely whereby we are iustified but by the Saints we are not iustified therefore by them we haue not accesse and entrance Controv. 3. Of the certaintie of saluation and of finall perseuerance v. 5. We haue accesse vnto this grace wherein we stand Calvin out of this place refuteth two errors of Popish sophistrie the one that the faithfull for the present cannot be certaine of the grace of God and of the remission of their sinnes the other that they are not sure of finall perseuerance But to stand in grace signifieth to be sure of the grace and fauour of God one may attaine vnto the fauour of the Prince but he is not sure to continue in it But Gods fauour in Christ is most constant whom Christ loueth he loueth to the end Iob. 13.1 Tolet here foisteth in one of his Popish drugs that tranquilitie and peace of conscience and certaintie of remission of sinnes is not the fruit or worke of faith in the faithfull for the wicked that knowe not their sinnes haue also a quiet conscience Tolet. annot 1. Contra. There is great difference between a senslesse and a quiet cōscience the wicked feele not the pricke of conscience because their sinnes are concealed from them but the faithfull haue peace of conscience after the sight of their sinnes which they know to be remitted in Christ So Paul was aliue without the law but afterward when sinne reviued he died Rom. 7.9 where then the conscience is cast into a slumber of securitie sinne reviuing awaketh troubleth it but where sinne is remitted in Christ the conscience ceaseth to be troubled and perplexed as in the wicked Controv. 4. That the tribulation of the Saints is not meritorious though it be said to worke patience We must vnderstand that the Apostle diuersely vseth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worketh for it is sometime ascribed vnto the principall efficient cause as vnto God the author and worker of all good things in vs 2. Cor. 5.5 sometime
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
inordinate lasts as specially after these things which concerne the tast feeling and such like Faius Quest. 20. How we are not to giue our members as weapons vnto sinne v. 13. 1. Chrysostome here noteth that the bodie as a middle and indifferent thing betweene sinne and righteousnesse it may be both vsed as weapons for sinne and as an instrument of righteousnesse as both the souldier vseth armour of defence for his countrie and the theefe against it and he maketh mention here of two Kings God and sinne shewing what great difference and oddes there is betweene them that it should be a shame for vs to leaue the seruice of God and to betake vs to the vile seruitude of sinne 2. Origen here also ascribeth a difference in the Apostles phraise he speaking of iniquitie maketh mention onely of our members which must not be giuen as weapons vnto it but he willeth vs to giue our selues vnto God because when first we haue deuoted our selues our inward minde and desire to Gods seruice so we shall make also our members instruments of holines 3. Theophylact noteth that sinne is called by the name of iniquitie because he that sinneth in scipsum vel in proximum iniurius est is iniurious and vniust against himselfe or his neighbour 4. By members we must not vnderstand onely the externall partes of the bodie as the eyes eares hands but the inward also as will affection heart that none of these must become the instruments of vnrighteousnesse Pareus 5. The Apostle setteth downe two partes of our seruice vnto God as he did before of seruice to sinne the first is obedience and subiection giue your selues vnto God the other is to striue and fight for the kingdome of righteousnesse as before he forbad them to vse their members as weapons for sinne Pareus 6. The Apostle inserting these words as aliue from the dead giueth a reason why we should not serue sinne but bequeath our selues to the seruice of God because we hauing receiued so great a benefit as to be raised in Christ from the death of sinne should now as no more dead but as liuing serue God and therefore in this regard iustum est it is iust as Chrysostome inferreth so the Apostle saith are aliue and therefore potestis yea may and ye were dead and therefore debetis ye ought to giue your selues vnto God gloss interline Origen maketh it as an effect and consequent of the former that in giuing your selues to God yea by this meanes shall die vnto sinne and liue vnto righteousnesse but it is rather a reason taken from the ende of our spirituall mortification as is obserued before out of Chrysostome Quest. 21. What it is not to be vnder the law but vnder grace v. 14. There are two things which doe encourage men to fight bonitas causa facilitas victoriae the goodnes of the cause and the facilitie of the victorie both these arguments the Apostle vseth here the goodnesse of the cause he shewed before which was to take part with God and to fight his battels against sinne the easines of the victorie he now setteth forth because we are not vnder the law but vnder grace which doth helpe vs and giue vs strength to resist sinne But these words are diuersely expounded 1. Origen vnderstandeth here the law of the members which continually resisteth against the law of the minde But as Beza well noteth the law of the members is not put absolutely without any other addition as it is here but alwaies something is added by way of explanation 2. Neither doth the Apostle speake here of the ceremoniall or iudiciall law from both which we are free from the first wholly both from the obligation but not from the substance in obseruing the equitie of these lawes the Apostle speaketh of neither of these but of the morall law against the which the concupiscence of the flesh continually inciteth and stirreth men vp 3. The Apostle then speaketh here of the morall law in the which three things are to be considered the substance in the obseruation thereof and the consequents either iustification in obseruing it or malediction if it be not obserued the question is in which of these respects we are said to be free from the law and not vnder it in this place it is confessed of of all that we are free from the iustification by the workes of the law the question is here of the other two the malediction of the law and the obseruation or obedience of it some take the first to be here meant that not to be vnder the law but vnder grace is not to be vnder the curse of the law but to haue remission of sinnes in Christ so Haymo ye are not vnder the law quae punit damnat peccatores which punisheth and condemneth sinners but vnder the grace of Christ that is the remission of sinnes to the same purpose Vatablus to be vnder grace is to haue the conscience assured omne peccatum nobis remissum esse c. that all sinne is remitted vs by the mercie of God so also Calvin they are not vnder the law that is opera eorum non exiguntur ad severum legis examen their workes are not now exacted according to the seuere censure and examination of the law thus also Melancthor Piscator likewise legi satisfecistis in Christo yea haue satisfied the law in Christ But Beza refuteth this interpretation vpon this reason because the Apostle speaketh not here of the remission of sinnes but of mortification and of the fruites of righteousnesse begunne in vs by the spirit 4. Some doe vnderstand it of the obseruation of the law in respect of the manner not of the substance for we are still vnder the obedience of the law to performe the holy workes and duties which are therein prescribed but we are not now vnder the law for the manner of our obedience to be forced thereunto by feare and terrour but the grace of God maketh vs willing and able in some measure to keepe the law which prescribed what was to be done but helped not toward the doing thereof thus Augustine Lex reos faciebat iubendo non adiuvando gratia adiuvat vt quisqne sit legis factor the law made men guiltie in commanding not in helping but grace helpeth euery one to be a doer of the law And to this purpose he maketh sowre degrees of men ante legem sub lege sub gratia in pace before the law vnder the law vnder grace in peace ante legem non pugnamus before the law we do not so much as fight or striue against sinne at all vnder the law pugnamus sed vincimur we fight but are ouercome vnder grace pugnamus vincimus we fight and by grace ouercome sinne in pace ne pugnamus quidem but in the state of peace which is in the kingdome of heauen we shall not so much as fight because then all our spirituall enemies shall be
euill but all good workes are of grace for God worketh in vs both the will and the deed Phil. 2.13 and that euen good workes which are of grace are excluded the Apostle sheweth elsewhere Ephes. 2.8 By grace are ye saued c. not of workes least any man should boast of himselfe for ye are his workemanship created in Christ Iesus vnto good workes c. 2. The Apostle indeed speaketh of the election of grace but yet the rule is generall that grace and workes in the matters of saluation cannot be matched together for he prooueth election to be of grace and not of workes by his generall axiome or proposition because that which is of grace cannot be of workes and if election be of grace and not of workes then euerlasting life also which dependeth of our election must of necessitie be of grace also Argum. 4. That which is of workes is by debt as the Apostle saith Rom. 4.4 To him that worketh the wages is not counted by fauour but by debt But God is endebted to no man therefore life eternall is not of workes because it is not by debt Answer Pererius here answereth by indistinction that there is a lawfull kind of meriting de condigno of worthines the one is perfect and absolute which presupposeth no gift of grace whereof it dependeth such were the workes of Christ which were absolutely meritorious ex rigore iustitiae euen according to the strict rule of iustice by the reason of the excellencie of his diuine nature beeing vnited in one person to his humanitie there is another kind of merit ex suppositione diuinae gratiae vpon the presupposall of diuine grace so the workes of men proceeding of grace and their free will working together are merita apud Deâ—â—â— merites with God like as naturall things though they haue that vertue and actiuitie from God are the true causes of their effects Pere disput 10. numer 53. Contra. 1. This answer ouerthroweth it selfe for if mens good workes proceed of the grace and gift of God then cannot God be any waies endebted for his owne as Dauid saith 1. Chron. 29.14 All things come of thee and of thine owne hand haue we giuen thee and the Apostle saith Rom. 11.35 Who hath giuen vnto him first and he shall be recompenced if then we might challenge any thing at Gods hands as a debt by way of recompence we must first giue vnto him 2. There is not the like reason of naturall and supernaturall things the naturall causes haue their vertue at once from God and then they afterward worke according vnto that nature and propertie wherewith they were once endued but in supernaturall the grace of God is necessarie ad omnes actus to euery act as the horse when he goeth of his owne accord is the naturall cause of his going but the order that directeth him is the cause of his going in the way and of his going to such a place so grace is the cause of our well doings we concurre indeed as naturall causes of the action but the goodnes of the action is onely from God 3. God then is not endebted vnto man for the merite of his worke neither in iustice in respect of vs is he bound to recompence vs but yet he is another way endebted in respect of his promise and so it is iust with him in regard of his word and promise to performe that which he hath promised which promise he made onely of his free grace and this point is touched also by Pererius praesertius vero adiuncta Dei promissione de remunerandis c. especially the promise of God being adioyned for the rewarding of the good workes of the righteous c. in regard of this promise we graunt which is meerely of grace not for the merite of the worke the Lord worketh himselfe a voluntarie debter of eternall life Argum. 5. The Apostle saith Rom. 8.18 That the afflictions of this present life are not worthie of the glorie which shall be shewed c. here he euidently sheweth that our workes are not meritorious or worthy of eternall life Answer Pererius here also thus distinguisheth that workes may three wayes be considered in respect of the naturall cause as they proceed from mans freewill in respect of the matter wherein they are expressed and the time of continuance which are but temporall and for a time and thirdly as they are wrought in vs by the grace of God in the two first respects they haue no cause of merit but in the third conuenientem habent proportionem equalitatis dignitatis c. they haue a fit proportion of equalitie and worthines with the reward of eternall life thus Pere disput 11. Contra. 1. The verie scope of the place taketh away this distinction for the Apostle v. 17. saith If we suffer with Christ c. he speaketh of such sufferings and afflictions as are endured for Christ which are the workes of grace for a man of himselfe without grace cannot suffer for Christ therefore euen good workes as they proceed in vs of grace are not meritorious or worthy of eternall life 2. Good workes are so farre from beeing meritorious causes of eternall life that they are not alwaies and in all causa sine qua non the cause without the which we cannot attaine vnto life as in infants and in them which are of yeares though without good workes they cannot be saued yet good workes are rather a beginning of eternall life then the cause thereof 3. To conclude this point therefore in a merit there must fowre things concurre 1. it must be a free seruice which we otherwise are not bound vnto 2. it must be of our owne 3. it must be perfect 4. it must be proportionable to the reward But our workes faile in all these 1. we can performe nothing vnto God but that we are alreadie bound to doe 2. neither haue we any good thing of our owne which we haue not receiued 3. and our best workes are imperfect 4. and betweene our temporall seruice and an euerlasting reward there is no proportion therefore we cannot merite See more hereof Synops. Centur. 4. er 79. 6. Morall obseruations Observ. 1. Of perseuerance v. 4. So we also walke in newnes of life Origen hence well collecteth that this newnes of life semel facta non sufficiat once done sufficeth not ipsa novitas innovanda est this newnes must still be renewed from day to day as the Apostle saith 2. Cor. 4.16 our inward man is renewed daily for as that which waxeth old is euery day oulder and oulder so that which is new must continually be renewed otherwise it ceaseth to be new so that we must walke on still perseuere and encrease in this newnes of life Observ. 2. Of the continuall strife with sinne v. 13. Neither giue your members weapons The Apostle vsing this phrase of weapons sheweth that there is a warre in vs some fight for sinne and make their members weapons
were remooued as a rubbe or blocke out of our way Faius 2. Diuerse waies did sinne take occasion by the law 1. the corruption of mans nature turneth good things to the occasion of euill as the Pharisies by Christs comming and preaching had the more sinne and the Apostle saith Hebr. 10.29 Of how much more punishment suppose ye he is worthie which treadeth vnder foote the Sonne of God habet peius supplicium occasionem per exhibitum maius beneficium the greater punishment is occasioned by the greatnes of the benefit exhibited Chrysostome sinne then is encreased by the giuing of the law because of mens vnthankfulnes for so great benefite 2. And beside such is the corruption of mans nature vt ea quae prohibentur magis desiderentur which are forbidden are more desired Origen so was the commandement giuen to Adam an occasion that he coueted the more to eate of the forbidden fruite and like as there are foure diseases which are the worse for the applying of medecines vnto them as the gangrena and the leprosie called elephantiasis much like a restie horse that the more he is spurred kicked the more he giueth backe or as if a sicke man-beeing forbidden to drinke cold water should the more desire it Martyr 3. An other reason is because mans nature desireth libertie and therefore refuseth to be bridled by law and yet it is destructio libertatis the verie destruction and ouerthrow of libertie for a man to doe what he lift sine fraeno legis without the bridle of a law Lyranus 4. And further by the law commeth the knowledge of sinne and so mans corrupt nature hauing sinne shewed it doth then beginne to couet it as the Sunne light sheweth the beautie of a faire woman and then the lustfull eye is caried with a desire after her Gorrhan or like as Ambrose resembleth it as the art of Physicke sheweth the nature of persons to auoid them and yet one abuseth his knowledge in doing hurt by them lib. 1. de Iacob vita brat c. 4. And this was the reason why Solon would make no law against parricides least that men by that occasion might thinke of that sinne which they did not dreame of before 5. Adde hereunto that as a circumstance may accidentally stirre vp that which is a cause of it selfe of the action as Dauids walking vpon his house carried his eye to looke vpon the beautie of Bersheba and so to desire her the like occasion might sinne take by the law Pareus 6. And the Deuill tooke occasion by the law more strongly to tempt man to make his sinne the greater in transgressing of the law 7. And one contrarie accidentally is encreased by an other as hoat water is more strongly congealed Gorrhan 8. And euery nature adversantibus adversatur resisteth that which resisteth it as one stone breaketh an other Hugo so vice resisteth vertue 3. But it is further to be considered that the words are sinne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taking occasion for the law indeede gaue not occasion but sinne tooke it Beza Calvin 15. Quest. Of what time S. Paul speaketh when he knew not the law and afterward sinne tooke occasion by the law c. 1. Methodius vnderstandeth it of the time while yet Adam had not receiued the commandement of not eating the forbidden fruit but it hath beene shewed before that the Apostle speaketh here of the morall law giuen by Moses as appeareth by that particular instance of the tenth and last commandement 2. Origen will haue it vnderstood of the Apostles childhood and so also Hierome that then he knew not sinne but these things which the Apostle mentioneth as the working of concupiscence and the reviving of sinne are not incident into the age of children 3. Chrysostome vnderstandeth the time before the law when many sinnes were not knowne till the law came and so he thinketh that the Apostle in his owne person describeth the state of all those which liued before the law but in this sense the person of S. Paul should be excluded who liued not in those times 4. Wherefore he aimeth at that time when he was a Pharisie before he had the true knowledge of the law for the Pharisies contented themselues onely with the externall observation thereof as is euident Matth. 5. where our Sauiour deliuereth the law from their corrupt gloses Pareus Faius Quest. 16. What the Apostle meaneth by all concupisence v. 8. 1. Chrysostome vnderstandeth augmentum concupiscentiae the encrease of concupiscence which was more inflamed 2. Augustine summā consummatam concupiscence perfected which now after the law giuen did not onely couet euill things but lege prohibita forbidden by law 3. Ambrose because after the law came then all sinne came before there was sinne sed non omne quia crimen prauaricationis decrat but not all because the sinne of transgression and preuarication was not yet ex gloss 4. Martyr expoundeth it of all actuall sinnes but the Apostle speaketh onely of concupiscence 5. By all concupiscence then we may vnderstand with Hierome omnes perturbationes animae all the passions and perturbations of the mind epistol 151. and with Anselme cuiusque peccati contra quodcunque mandatum concupiscentiam the concupiscence of euerie sinne whatsoeuer against euery commandement with Faius euery kind of concupiscence not onely the concupiscence of the flesh but the concupiscence of the eyes which Saint Iohn speaketh of 1. epist. c. 2. with Gorrhan euery degree of concupiscence cogitationem consensum opus the thought the consent the action with Pareus all the vitious motions of the concupiscence primas secundas both the first and second with Oecumenius quas non noueram concupiscentias ex lege didici c. I learned by the law concupiscence which I knew not and those which I had learned I committed Quest. 17. In what sense the Apostle saith sinne was dead and he aliue without the law v. 8. 1. Methodius in Epiphan haeres 64. by sinne vnderstandeth the time of mans innocencie when the deuill lay as dead because yet there was no commandement giuen whereby man should be allured vnto sinne Ambrose by sinne likewise interpreteth the deuill but he referreth it to the time before the law when the deuill was secure hauing man sure enough in his possession But this opinion is reiected before for how could the Apostle say v. 20. that sinne dwelled in him if he meant the deuill by sinne and he saith that sinne reuiued when the law came then in this sense the deuill must be supposed to haue beene aliue before to haue beene busie in working before he tempted Adam 2. Theodoret and Caietane following him doe vnderstand this to be spoken of the time of mans innocencie when as sinne was dead there was no sinne at all before the law was giuen But beside that man could not be said to be aliue in Paradise without a law beeing created with the law of nature the Apostle saying that sinne by
he be called a man of desires that is beloued and excepted of God yet had his sinnes which he confessed in his owne name and person as Dauid is said to be a man after Gods owne heart yet he had his sinnes and imperfections Arguments for the affirmatiue part that S. Paul speaketh in his owne person as of a man regenerate First these two points must be premised that the Apostle speaketh of himselfe not of another still continuing his speach in the first person I am carnall I will I consent I delight and so throughout that it should be a great forcing of the Apostles speach to make him to speake of another and not of himselfe secondly the Apostle from the 14. v. to the end speaketh of his present state who was then regenerate as may appeare because while he was yet vnder the law he speaketh as of the time past v. 9. I was aliue and v. 10. sinne seduced me but from the 14. v. he speaketh of the time present I am carnall and so throughout to the end of the chapter Argum. 1. Hence then is framed our first reason the Apostle speaketh of himselfe as he then was because he speaketh in the present tence but then he was a man regenerate Ergo. Theophylact answereth the Apostle saith I serue v. 15. that is serviebam I did serue Contra. As the Apostle saith I serue so he saith I delight in the law of God v. 22. and in this verse 25. I thanke God c. which immediately goe before the other I serue but those words must be vnderstood as they are vttered of the time present therefore the other also Argum. 2. Gregorie vrgeth these words v. 18. to will is present with me he that saith he will per infusionem gratiae quae in se iam lateant semina ostendit doth shew what seede lyeth hid in him by the infusion of grace lib. 29. moral c. 15. Ans. Euen the vnregenerate by nature doe will that is good they may imperfecte velle 〈◊〉 siue gratia in peccato imperfectly will that is good without grace euen in the state of sinne Tolet. in tractat c. 9. Contra. There is bonum naturale morale spirituale that which is naturally good morally good spiritually good the first one by nature may desire as bâ—ute beasts doe the same and therein they doe neither good nor euill the second also in some sort as the heathen followed after morall vertues but they did it not without sinne because they had no faith but that which is spiritually good the carnall haue no mind at all vnto for it is God which worketh both the will and the deed Phil. 2.13 Argum. 3. Augustine presseth these words v. 17. It is not I that doe it but sinne that dwelleth in mee this is not vox peccatoris sed iusti the voice of a sinner but of a righteous man lib. 1. cont 2. epist. Pelag. c. 10. Ans. A sinner may be said not to doe euill not because he doth not consent vnto it but because he is not onely mooued of himselfe but drawen by his concupiscence Tolet. ibid. Contra. There is nothing in a man to giue consent vnto any action but either his spirituall or carnall part but in the vnregenerate there is nothing spirituall but all is naturall therfore whatsoeuer such an one doth he wholly consenteth he himselfe is not one thing and his sinne another to giue consent but he is wholly mooued and lead of sinne Argum. 4. Augustine addeth further the Apostle thus beginneth the 8. chapter there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus which words follow as inferred vpon the other which sheweth that the Apostle spake before of those which were in Christ Iesus Ans. Nay rather those words following vpon the other who shall deliuer me c. which the Apostle vttereth of a man not yet deliuered or freed from his sinne and maketh answer the grace of God c. shew that he spake before as of our not beeing in the state of grace Tolet. ibid. Contra. 1. It is the bondage of corruption which the Apostle desireth to be deliuered from as is shewed before qu. 33. neither doth the Apostle answer the grace of God c. but I giue thankes to God as likewise hath beene declared qu. 34. before but one not in the state of grace cannot giue thanks vnto God therefore the immediate connexion of these words c. 8. sheweth that he spake before of those which are in Christ. Argum. 5. Further Augustine thus reasoneth a carnall man cannot delight in the law of God in the inner man as Saint Paul doth neither indeed is there any inner man that it regenerate and renewed in those which are carnall Pareus Ans. 1. The vnregenerate may delight in the law as Herod did and it is nothing else but velle bonum to will that which is good Tolet. ibid. and they haue also the inner man which is the mind as the outward man is the bodie Contra. 1. The carnall cannot delight in the law but they hate it as Psal. 50.17 this hatest to be reformed and hast cast my words behind thee Herod gaue care to Iohn Baptist not of loue but for feare for afterward he put him to death Hypocrits and carnall men may stand in some awe and feare a while but it is not of loue nor in truth or from the heart 2. the inner part is that with spirituall and renewed but in the wicked their verie mind is defiled Tit. 1.15 therefore in them there is no inner man see before qu. 26. Argum. 6. The Apostle desireth to be deliuered from his corruptible and sinfull bodie hoping then for perfect libertie but in the resurrection the carnall shall haue no such libertie they shall rise to greater miserie Augustine Ans. The deliuerance there spoken of is by iustification from sinne not in the resurrection Tolet. ibid. Contra. The Apostle euidently speaketh of beeing deliuered from this bodie of death that is his mortall bodie which shall not be till the resurrection Argu. 7. The children of God that are regenerate do onely find in themselues the fight combate betweene the spirit and flesh Gala. 5.17 as the Apostle doth here v. 22. Pareus Argum. 8. The vnregenerate doe not vse to giue thanks vnto God but they sacrifice to their owne net as the Prophet saith Hab. 1.16 they giue the praise to themselues But S. Paul here giueth thankes Faius Argum. 9. No man but by the spirit of God can hate and disalow that which is committed against the law of God as the Apostle doth here v. 15. Hyperius Argum. 10. To what end should the Apostle thus at large shew the effects and end of the law for their cause qui prorsus sunt à Deo alieni which are altogether straungers from God and care not for his law Faius by these and such like reasons it is concluded that S. Paul speaketh in the person of a man regenerate Quest. 37.
If it be decent for a Bishop to be the husband of one wife as Christ is of one Church why will they not then allow them to haue any wife at all 4. Christ indeede is the husband but of one Church at one time yet the Church of the old Testament and the Church of the new did one succeede an other so then this resemblance may hold very well if likewise a Bishop be the husband of one wife after an other Controv. 3. Whether the marriage bond be indissoluable before the one partie be dead 1. Pererius would prooue the negatiue that marrying cannot be dissolued quoad viâ—culum in respect of the bond if it be lawfully contracted but onely quoad torum in respect of their bedding and conuersing together no not for fornication but after death by this place of the Apostle v. 3. If while she liueth she take an other man she shall be called an adulteresse the Apostles words are generall that till death part them neither of them is free Contra. 1. The Apostle speaketh of marriage as it was instituted of God which by Gods ordinance was to continue as long as life lasteth for God appointed in the beginning that the man should cleaue vnto his wife here then the Apostle had no cause to speake of the cases wherein diuorce is admitted either civilly as the law of Moses permitted the men to giue a bill of diuorce to the women or by Christian libertie or immunitie as in the cases of fornication or desertion for when there happeneth any other separation of mariage then by death it falleth not out nisi per vitium but by the fault of the one as Chrysostome here obserueth for the Iewes were permitted to giue their wiues a bill of diuorce for the hardnes of their heart as our Sauiour saith Matth. 15. and either their wiues were in fault for the which cause they dismissed them or they were in fault in seeking to be rid of their wiues likewise in diuorce vpon fornication the partie diuorced was in fault but in the case of desertion the partie forsaking was in fault so none of these separations was without the fault of the partie but the Apostle speaketh of the institution of marriage according to Gods ordinance as it is found and entire without any such impediment or let comming betweene in which sense it is not dissolued but by death 2. Erasmus further answereth that the Apostle onely taketh his similitude from marriage and in a similitude it is not necessarie that euery thing should agree neither is it to be pressed in euery point 3. But that in two cases the mariage bond may be dissolued beside death by the fault of either partie delinquent namely for fornication and vpon wilfull desertion it is euident the first by the words of our Sauiour Matth. 19.9 Whosoeuer shall put away his wife vnlesse it be for whordome and marrie another c. committeth adulterie the other by that place of the Apostle 1. Cor. 7.15 if the vnbeleeuing depart let him depart a brother or sister is not in subiection in such things Pareus dub 1. see further else where Synops. p. 685. 687. Controv. 4. That the disparitie of profession is no cause of the dissolution of marriage v. 4. If the man be dead Gorrhan here putteth in a distinction of ciuill death which is by profession ante carnaletu copulam before carnall knowledge or naturall which is by death properly for it is the common opinion of that side that the man or woman hauing contracted matrimonie may either of them forsake the other before the consummation of marriage to take vpon them the profession of single life The Romanists also haue another opinion that marriage contracted in the time of infidelitie before baptisme is dissolued and made void if either of the parties afterward be conuerted to the Christian faith Bellar. de matrimon c. 12. But these two exceptions for the disparitie of religion or profession to dissolue matrimonie are contrarie to the rule of our Sauiour Matth. 19.9 who alloweth no marriage to be dissolued but for fornication and Saint Paul directly prescribeth that the woman should not forsake her vnbeleeuing husband if he be content to dwell with her 1. Cor. 7.13 See further hereof Synops. Centur. 3. er 82. er 95. Controv. 5. Whether the bill of diuorce permitted to the Iewes did lawfully dissolue matrimonie vnder the law This question ariseth by reason of the Apostles generall words here that if the woman take another man as long as the first liueth she is called an adulterer hence then this doubt is mooued what was to be thought of the men which dismissed their wiues vnder the law and married others and the woman likewise so dismissed married againe whether it were adulterie in them 1. Some are of opinion that by the bill of diuorcement giuen the verie bond of matrimonie was dissolued and that then it was lawful for either partie to marrie againe as Scotus Dorandus Poludanus in 4. Sententiar distinct 33. Caietanus in 24. Deuter. Abulens in c. 19. Matth. qu. 49. and Burgens against Lyranus in 24. Deuter. But the words of our Sauiour Christ make against them who saith that Moses permitted them so to doe for the hardnes of their heart Matth. 19.8 it was therefore tolerated onely and suffered because of their infirmitie it was not made lawfull and our Sauiour Christ addeth from the beginning it was not so this their instance then of distinguishing their wiues was a departing from the first institution 2. Wherefore their opinion is more sound which thinke that although because of the hardnes of their heart to auoid a greater mischeefe namely vxoricidium the murthering of their wiues they were permitted to send them away yet the marriage was not in truth dissolued they married againe sine poena legali without any legall punishment but yet non sine peccato not without sinne Thus Pererius shewing the same to be the opinion of Thomas Bonaventure Lyranus with others and before them Augustine lib. 19. cont Faustum c. 26. and Hierome in c. 2. Malach. And further Augustine sheweth that Moses intendment in graunting a dismission of the wife vpon a bill of diuorcement was to haue them reconciled that whereas onely the Scribes were to write the bills of diuorcement of purpose henc interposuit moram he put in this caution to delay the matter that while the man went vnto the Scribe while his bill was in writing his minde might be altered especially by the perswasion of the Scribe who in his discretion was not to write any such bill if reconciliation might otherwise be had So then of this libertie of the Iewes the like iudgement is to be giuen as of the polygamie or marriage of many wiues that neither was void of infirmitie which God did beare within those times but neither was euer simply lawfull the first institution beeing violated Controv. 5. Against the workes of propitiation v. 4. That we
are not inheritors as Abraham gaue gifts vnto his other sonnes but left the inheritance to Izaak but here all the sonnes of God are heires 2. Haymo observeth that here an inheritance is confirmed in the death of the father but God dieth not though now he seeme to be absent from vs and afterward when we are admitted to our inheritance we shall see him as he is gloss ordinar and yet Christ dying left vs as an inheritance his peace but this is most strange that here the heire must first die and be mortified before he can come to the inheritance whereas in the world he dieth that leaueth the inheritance 3. And among men the inheritance must be deuided into parts if all the sonnes be heires but here tota habetur à quolibet bono the whole inheritance is enioyed of 〈◊〉 one admitted thereunto though not alike but in degrees Lyran. 4. â—nd this our inheritance is not limited as the Apostle saith all things are yours 1. Cor. 3.21 whether things present or to come for the present Christ hath left vs his peace my peace I giue vnto you and he hath left vs his Testament as his will that we should beleeue it Haymo who further sheweth how we shall be heires with Christ both of his glorie for when he appeareth we shall be like him 1. Ioh. 3.3 and of his dominion and power as he promiseth his Apostles that they shall sit vpon twelue seates and iudge the twelue tribes of Israel Matth. 19. And this prerogatiue shall not be giuen onely to the Apostles but euen the Saints shall iudge the world as the Apostle sheweth 1. Cor. 6.3 Par. This twofold inheritance of Christs glorie and dominion is well touched by Origen Christus non solum in partem haereditatis sed etiam in consortium potentiae adducit Christ doth bring vs not only into a part of his inheritance but into the fellowship of his power But whereas Christ onely is named to be heire I will giue the nations for thine inheritance Psal. 2. we must vnderstand that he onely is the naturall heire beeing the onely begotten sonne of God but we are heires by adoption and grace and so are admitted to be heires with Christ. 5. But here Chrysostom hath an harsh note that the Iewes vnder the lawe were not heires as our Sauiour saith Matth. 8. that the children of the kingdome shall be cast out whereas our Sauiour there speaketh of the hypocrites and false worshippers among the Iewes not generally of all as there are also among Christians many hypocrites and false children that shall neuer be heires And the Apostle in saying Galat. 4.1 The heire as long as he is a child differeth nothing from a seruant c. euidently sheweth that euen the faithfull vnder the lawe were heires though kept vnder the ceremonies and rudiments of the lawe for a time as children that shall be heires vnder tutors and gouernours Quest. 22. How these words are to be vnderstood if so be yee suffer with him 1. They which followe the Latine translation here si tamen c. yet if or if notwithstanding we suffer with him doe thinke that our sufferings are the cause of our glorie afterward so Stapleton and the Rhemists inferre that as Christs passions were a cause of his glorie so is it in his members but the Apostle remooueth this conceit inferring in the next verse That the afflictions of this life are not worthie of the glorie c. but betweene the cause and the effect there is a worthinesse and a due proportion See further hereof among the controversies following 2. Ambrose whom Calvin and Beza followe thinke this is required as a condition that they which looke to be glorified must first be partakers of Christs suffrings and so our suffrings are necessarie as a condition and the way wherein we should walke and as a 〈◊〉 of our obedience not as a cause this sense may safely be admitted And here a difference is to be made between the legall conditions and Euangelicall for there 1. the condition requireâ— was exactly to be performed and a perfect obedience was required to satisfie the lawe but in the Gospel our willingnesse and godly endeauour is accepted in Christ though we come short of the precept 2. there the reward could not be had without the condition performed here though if time and place serue we must shewe our obedience yet in some cases the promise is had without the condition as the theefe vpon the crosse was saued without any such condition of obedience 3. the obedience of the lawe was exacted as a cause of the reward propounded but in the Gospell it is necessarie onely as a fruit of our obedience the cause is the mercie of God and his gracious promises in Christ. 3. Chrysostome will haue the Apostle to reason here from the greater to the lesse that if God did so much for vs when we had done nothing at all much more will he reward vs if we suffer for him 4. But here I subscribe rather to Pet. Martyr who thinketh that the Apostle maketh mention here of the suffrings of the Saints because they are argumenta indicia arguments and tokens that they are the heires of God for in their constant suffrings they haue experience of the power and goodnesse of God whereby they are kept and preserued vnto saluation Pareus indifferently followeth this and the second interpretation Quest. 23. How we are said to suffer together with Christ. 1. Not in compassion onely toward the suffrings of Christ but by imitation in beeing partakers of the like afflictions must we suffer with him Erasmus 2. Neither doe the Saints by the merit of their suffrings attaine vnto the kingdome of heauen as Christ did by his as the Rhemists here note but we must suffer with Christ onely to shewe our obedience and conformitie to our head 3. Nor yet is it enough to suffer for many are punished for their euill doing and there are that will endure much in the world vpon vaine-glorie but our suffrings must be for righteousnes sake as Christs were 4. And herein must our suffrings be like vnto Christs that as he yeelded himselfe to the death of the crosse 1. both to shewe his obedience vnto the will of God 2. and to take away our sinne so we likewise in our afflictions should shew our obedience because so is the will of God and that we thereby should seeke to mortifie sinne in vs Mart. 5. Now the passions of the Saints are of two sorts they are either internall in mortifying the lusts of the flesh or externall in suffring persecution and trouble for Christs sake 6. And as we suffer with Christ when we beare the like rebukes for the truth as he did so also Christ suffereth in vs and together with vs the afflictions of his members he taketh to be his owne as he said to Saul why persecutest thou me Quest. 24. Of the meaning of the 18.
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 merit is an act of iustice and iustice is a kind of equalitie where there is no equalitie there is no iustice and so no merit Thom. in 1. secund qu. 114. ad 1. 4. If the sufferings of this life are neither in quantitie nor qualitie proportionable to the glorie which shall be reuealed then can they not be meritorious for betweene the merite and reward there must be a proportionable equalitie and an equall proportion Notwithstanding then all these cauillous answers this place of the Apostle that the sufferings of this time present are not worthie of the glorie is verie pregnant to ouerthrow the merite of the sufferings and other workes whatsoeuer of the Saints in respect of the reward of euerlasting life Controv. 13. That hope iustifieth not v. 24. We are saued by hope by this place both the Rhemists here in their annotations and Pererius numer 82. doe inferre that faith doth not onely iustifie but that hope and charitie doe iustifie as well as faith as here the Apostle saith we are saued by hope Contra. This cauill may diuersely be remooued 1. by beeing saued the Apostle vnderstandeth not to be iustified for our iustification is presently had and possessed but by saluation he signifieth the perfection and accomplishment of our redemption and adoption in Christ therefore they would deceiue vs by the homonymie and diuerse takings of the word to be saued sometime signifieth to be iustified Tit. 3.5 but so it is not here 2. We must vnderstand the Apostle to speake of hope as ioyned with saith hope hath relation to faith by the which we are iustified freely D. Fulk And when as these things as our iustification saluation are ascribed to hope or charitie we must so take it that the manner of our iustification is shewed not by the causes but by the effects like as then in the will we looke to the foundation in a tree to the roote so when the Scripture setteth forth any commendation of hope and loue we must looke vnto faith from whence they spring and without the which they cannot stand Mar. 3. The Apostle doth not here treat of the cause of iustification sed quo fulcro in ea iustitia sustentemur quae nobis per fidem obtingit but by what prop we are sustained and vpheld in that righteousnesse which happeneth vnto vs by faith Gualter so that hope is not the cause of saluation but it is as the way and meanes whereby saluation begunne in vs by faith is brought vnto perfection Controv. 14. Whether hope doth relie vpon the merite of our workes The Master of the sentences affirmeth lib. 3. sperare sine meritis non spem esse sed praesumptionem that to hope without merits is not hope but presumption so also Gorrhan illud quod ex meritis patienter expectatur c. that which is patiently expected by merits is most certainely had and obtained of God they reason thus Argum. 1. S. Paul affirmeth that patience bringeth forth experience or triall or probation and experience hope Rom. 5.4 if hope then arise of our patience and experience it hath dependance of our workes Ans. 1. It is euident that Saint Paul doth not in that place make his gradation by the causes for tribulation is not the cause of patience seeing many by tribulation are driuen to despaire but the Apostle onely setteth downe the order of those instruments which the spirit of God vseth to worke hope in vs thereby 2. and properly hope causeth patience not patience hope for the Martyrs if they were not thereto enduced by hope could neuer endure such vnspeakeable torments like as the Marchant would neuer put himselfe into such daungers by Sea if the hope of gaine mooued him not thereunto and so S. Iames sheweth that the probation and triall of our faith bringeth forth patience c. 3. faith beeing tried and prooued by affliction worketh patience and faith bringeth forth hope 3. yet we denie not but that as hope originally causeth patience so by our patience and experience our hope is also the more strengthened and confirmed Now on the contrarie that it is but a weake and indeed a false hope which dependeth vpon workes it is thus euident 1. because by this meanes hope should be contrarie to faith which iustifieth a man freely without relation to his workes if hope then should be tied to the condition of workes it should be opposite to faith 2. our workes are imperfect if hope be built vpon an imperfect and vncertaine ground it can haue no certaintie in it selfe 3. Some are conuerted to God hauing no good workes as the theefe vpon the crosse yet he had hope in Christ praying vnto him to be remembred in his kingdome Controv. 15. Against the naturall power and integritie of mans will v. 26. We know not what to pray as we ought this ouerthroweth that error of the Pelagians who ascribed vnto man power by nature to keepe the law of God but how can this be seeing a man cannot tell how to pray as he should if he be not ayded by the grace of Gods spirit he must needes come short of keeping the law that faileth in this principall part of Gods seruice namely prayer for if a man know not of himselfe how to pray and so cannot serue God as he ought he faileth in a cheef part of the law of God And wheras there are three degrees in the proceeding of euery action the thought conceiueth the wil consenteth the act work persiteth none of al these are in mās power not the first we are not able of our selues to thinke any thing and it is God which worketh both the other namely the will and the deed Phil. 1.13 And as these places doe exclude this heresie of the Pelagians who extoll the power of nature altogether so also they ouerthrow the error of the Semipelagians the Papists who ioyne freewill and grace as workes together Controv. 16. That predestination dependeth not vpon the foresight of faith or good workes v. 16. Those whom he knew before he also predestinate Chrysostome and other Greeke expositors following him as Theophylact Theodoret Oecumenius hence inferre that Gods prescience is the cause of predestination praeuidet Deus c. God first foreseeth who are meete and worthy to be called and then he doth predestinate them so also Ambrose and Heirome in their Commentaries vpon this place doe interpret that to be the purpose of God whereby he decreed to call vnto the faith those whom he foresaw would beleeue Lyranus saith that Gods prescience is praeambulum ad praedestinationem a preamble and as an inducement to predestination The Lutherans doe somewhat incline vnto this opinion as Osiander in his annotation here quos antequam nascerentur c. praeuidit c. whom in his infinite wisedome he foresaw such as should please God c. The moderne Papists are not here all of one opinion The most learned among them doe affirme election by grace ante
omnium operum prouisionem before the foresight of any workes Bellar. lib. 2. de grat c. 10. and Pererius is of the same iudgement disput 22.23 vpon this chapter but our Rhemists are more grosse in this point they say that Christ hath not appointed men by his absolute election c. without any condition or respect of their workes Hebr. c. 5. sect 7. Now this opinion that predestination is grounded vpon the foresight of faith or good workes is thus euidently confuted Argum. 1. That which is Gods worke in man is no cause in mans behalfe why he should be elected but faith and to beleeue is the worke of God Ioh. 6.29 This is the worke of God that yee beleeue c. Ephes. 2.8 By grace are ye saued through faith not of your selues it is the gift of God therefore the foresight of faith is not the cause of election 2. Argum. That which is the effect of predestination is not the cause but faith and good workes are the fruit and effect as Act. 13.48 As many as were ordained to eternall life beleeued he saith not as many as were foreseene to beleeue were ordained c. Eph. 2.4 He hath chosen vs that we should be holy it is the end and fruit of our election our holines therefore not the procuring or inducing cause 3. Argum. There is one and the same reason and manner and cause of election vnto all but some are saued without prouision or foresight of their workes as infants which die in their infancie for their good workes which are not could not be foreseene it cannot be here answered that their good workes are foreseene which they would haue done if they had liued for if one may be elected for the foresight of good workes which he might haue done by the same reason one might be condemned vpon the foresight of euill works which he might haue committed but this standeth not with the iustice of God 4. Argum. First the end is propounded then the meanes are thought of as tending to that end the meanes are no inducement to decree or set downe the end of a thing life eternall is the end the meanes and way thereunto are faith and vertuous workes these then foreseene of God could not be a motiue to decree the end 5. Augustine was sometime of opinion that although God hath not chosen the good workes of men in his prescience elegit tamem fidem in praescientia yet in his prescience he made choice of faith in exposition huius epistol But afterward Augustine retracteth this opinion lib. 1. Retractat c. 23. ingeniously confessing nondum diligenter quaefieram c. quaenam sit electio gratiae I had not diligently enquired not found out what is the election of grace which is no grace si vlla merita praecedant if any merits goe before 6. Some Popish writers haue deuised how to reconcile Augustine with the rest of the fathers and they haue found out this distinction that there are two kinds of predestination one ad gratiam to receiue grace and this they say is without any foresight of faith or works and the other is ad gratiam vnto glorie and life eternall which proceedeth from the foresight of faith and workes of this kind of predestination speake the Greeke fathers and Augustine of the other Thus Ruard Tapper Dryedon Gabriel Vasquez as they are cited and approoued by Parerius disput 24. Contra. 1. Augustine euidently speaketh of predestination to eternall life where he deliuereth his first opinion of the foresight of faith for these are his words Quid elegit Deus in eo what did God elect in him whom he did predestinate vnto life eternall 2. That is a vaine and idle distinction for predestination comprehendeth both the ende and the meanes thereunto as the Apostle saith Ephes. 1.11 in whom we are chosen when we were predestinate c. that we which first trusted in Christ should be to the praise of his glorie here both the meanes to beleeue or trust in Christ and the end euerlasting glorie are both comprehended vnder predestination 3. in this distinction there is a vaine and absurd tautologie for who would aske this question whether the foresight of grace and faith in a man were the cause that God ordained him to haue grace and faith 7. Tolet to helpe out this matter saith that the foresight of faith as a motiue vnto election and the election by grace may well stand together for here faith foreseene is not considered as a merit but as causa sine qua non a cause without the which God hath purposed not to call those which shall be saued but notwithstanding it is bene placitum the good pleasure of God not the merit of man annot 31. Contra. In this question of predestination we must distinguish betweene the decree it selfe and the execution of the decree in the execution good workes are required not as a meritorious cause of life eternall but onely as such a cause without the which life eternall cannot be â—â—ad and this we graunt but if Gods decree should arise of any such foresight it is now an inducement and motiue not a cause onely sine quae non without the which not and so Gods good pleasure should not be the first cause higher then the which the Apostle goeth not Ephes. 1.5 if the foresight of faith or good workes should induce the Lord to elect for now election should not stand vpon the will and pleasure of God but vpon the will and inclination of man Controv. 17. Against the opinion of Ambrosius Catharinus concerning predestination This Popish writers opinion is that God hath ordained all men vnto eternall life yet with this difference Some he hath absolutely appointed vnto saluation without any condition whose head is Christ and then the blessed Virgin Marie the number of those thus predestinate is certaine and none of them can perish there is an other sort of men which are ordained vnto saluation not absolutely but vnder condition of their obedience vpon the foresight of their merits and some of those come vnto eternall life some doe not of this opinion Sixtus Senensis Catharinus scholar professeth himselfe to haue beene Biblioth lib. 6. annot 248. and that he preached it for tenne yeares together and in diuerse cheefe cities of Italie till he saw the inconuenience and manifold difficulties that would follow vpon that doctrine and then he gaue ouer Contra. This opinion hath diuerse absurdities 1. it alloweth some to be saued which are not predestinate vnto life contrarie to the Scripture which onely promiseth euerlasting deliuerance and saluation vnto them which are written in the booke of life Dan. 12.1 Reuel 17.8 c. 20.12 2. It maketh Gods ordinance and decree to be vncertaine that many whom he appointeth to saluation yet are not saued 3. it maketh a diuersitie in the ordinance of God to saluation that some are absolutely elected some vpon condition onely whereas there is one end and the
hath appointed as Ier. 51.11 God is said to haue raised vp the spirit of the King of the Medes against Babel and yet it is certaine that they sinned in this action which God stirred them vp vnto for God stirred them vp to one end to be ministers of his iudgements vpon that wicked nation but they therein satisfied onely their owne cruell and couetous mind as Isai 10.5 the Lord saith concerning Ashur I will giue him a charge against the people of my wrath c. but he thinketh not so they considered not wherefore the Lord 〈◊〉 them as the end of his wrath 4. Lastly the end must be considered wherefore God raised vp Pharaoh to a most holy and iust end for the setting forth of his glorie as the wise man saith Prov. 16.4 The Lord hath made all things for his owne sake yea euen the wicked against the day of euill In these foresaid respects God is said to haue raised vp and ordained Pharaoh without any touch of iniustice at all Quest. 18. How the Lord is said to harden whom he will v. 18. 1. Origen thinketh that this sentence is part of an obiection propounded in the person of some other and so also Chrysostome But it appeareth to be the Apostles owne assertion both by the note of illation therefore he hath mercie c. and because the obiection followeth in the next words v. 19. thou wilt say vnto me then which sheweth this to be no part of the obiection Beza Gryneus 2. Some thinke that God hardneth by permission onely as Oecumen indurat i. durâ—â—â— esse permittit he hardeneth that is suffereth and permitteth to be hardened so also Bellarmine permittit eos male agere he permitteth them to doe euill But this permission doth suppose God either otiosum vel invitum either to be idle and negligent or against his will to suffer things so it will cast vpon God either an imputation of negligence or indulgence as Heli permitted his sonnes to sinne or of impotencie in permitting things which he cannot hinder therefore this deuise of bare permission doth not satisfie 3. Nor yet did God harden him per patientiam by his patience in sparing to punish him Origen dilatione poenae by deferring of his punishment Basil in Oecumen for in this sense Pharaoh rather hardened his owne heart in abusing Gods longsuffering as the Apostle speaketh of those which through their hardnesse of heart despise the bountifulnesse of God Rom. 2.42 God cannot be said this way to harden it 4. Hierome thinketh that God doth harden the vessels of wrath and malâ—â—fieth the vessels of mercie causis praecedentibus vpon causes proceeding or going before because some beleeued in Christ some beleeued not Hierome epist. 150. resp ad qu. 10. But Pererius refuseth this opinion and vpon good ground because he maketh the wills and dispositions of men to be the first cause why God sheweth mercie on some and hardeneth others as the same heate of the Sunne mollifieth the wax and hardneth the clay whereas the Apostle soli voluntati diuinae aperte assignat doth manifestly assigne the cause to the onely will of God Pere disput 10. numer 55. 5. And farre be it from any to thinke that God is the proper efficient cause of the hardening of mans heart which is the worke of Sathan as Pererius slaundereth Calvin to say Deum causam esse efficientem indurationis that God is the efficient cause of the hardening of the heart c. And thus he challenging Calvin because he saith that this word to burden in Scripture signifieth not onely permission sed diuinae irae actionem but an action of the diuine wrath which is most true but yet as the hardning and hardnesse of the heart is sinne the Lord hath nothing to doe with it 6. Pererius thinketh that by hardening here we may vnderstand ipsam reprobationis originem the verie beginning of reprobation that is the will and purpose of God non miserandi not to shew mercie But hardening of the heart is an effect or consequence rather of reprobation then reprobation it selfe and thus he will make God the proper cause of this induration and hardening which he charged Calvin with before 7. To vnderstand therefore how God is said to harden the heart it must be considered that there are two degrees thereof desertio induritae the leauing and forsaking of men in their hardnes of heart which is either non apponendo vel subtrahendo gratiam in not giuing or in subtracting his grace as Augustine saith he hardeneth not impertiendo malitiam sed non impertiendo gratiam not by imparting malice but by not imparting his mercie and grace epistol 105. ad Sixtumi non quia irrogatur aliquod quo fit homo deterior sed quo ferrer melior non irrogatur not because any thing is irrogated to make man worse but nothing is irrogated to make him better â—lib 1. ad Simplici qu. 2. and he likeneth it to the freezing and congealing of the water by the absence of the Sunne which is done non impretiendo frigiditatem sed non apponendo calorem not by imparting coldnesse but in not putting to heat The other degree in hardening is inflictio grautoris duritiae the inflicting of a greater blindnesse and hardnes of heart which is done three wayes either immediately by God himselfe or mediately by Sathan or by themselues that are hardened and so we reade in Exodus that God is said 8. times to haue hardened Pharaohs heart and thrice Pharaoh hardened his owne heart and fiue times his heart is said simply to be hardened Pareus First God inflicteth the hardnesse of heart as a punishment when either inwardly he giueth them vp to their owne desires not onely in denying vnto them necessarie graces but so working by his invisible power that their corrupt wills are more and more hardened as it is said Reuel 22.11 He that is filthie let him be filthie still hardnesse then of heart as it is a punishment of former sinnes is iustly inflicted by God as Augustine saith prioribus meritia c. hoc redditum est Pharaoni vt cor eius induraretur this was giuen as a iust recompence to Pharaohs former euill merits in afflicting the people of God that his heart was hardened c. As hardnesse of heart is a punishment of former sinnes so it is of God And God by his immediate power hardeneth the heart two wayes 1. the generall facultio whereby euerie one mooueth and willeth this or that is of God Luther vseth this similitude as Pet. Martyr alleadgeth him like as the rider that forceth a lame and halting horse is the cause of his going but his halting pase proceedeth from the lamenesse of the horse so God hardeneth as the generall moouer but the euillnes of the action proceedeth from the corruption of man 2. But more then this God doth by a more speciall prouidence so ouerrule euen the hearts of wicked men that they are ordered
or euill the elder shall serue the younger least the purpose of God should remaine according to election which he supposeth to rise of some difference in the parties elected to this purpose Augustine lib. ad Simplician quest 2. But this parenthesis or interlaced sentence is â—â—tered by the Apostle affirmatively That the purpose of God might remaine c. it cannot therefore be drawne to a negatiue sense And indeede Augustine whether vpon this or some other reason otherwise expoundeth these words epist. 115. 2. But the best answear is that the proposition is not true for election in God presupposeth not a difference God may make election euen in things in themselues equall by the right of his Creatorship and make a difference as euidently appeareth in the creation of the world when all things were equall at the first in that indigested himpe and masse whereout the creatures were made and yet our of it were different creatures made some lightsome as the Sunne and starres some darke and obscure as the earth and earthly things And so the Lord in his decree of predestination made a difference in his election according to his good pleasure of things which differed not before And so there is a difference indeede in those which are elected from others sed non invenit Deus sed ponit ipse in hominibus differentiam but God findeth not any such difference in men but he maketh it Pet. Martyr the difference then dependeth not of the nature of the things but of the purpose and counsell of God 2. Arg. 1. S. Paul saith Ephes. 1.4 He hath elected vs in him that is in Christ but none are in Christ without faith that then which ioyneth vs to Christ is the cause of election 2. againe 2. Thess. 2.13 we are said to be chosen to saluation in faith 3. and Heb. 11.6 It is impossible to please God without faith the elect are pleasing to God therefore by faith they were accepted 4. and seeing faith is the instrumentall cause of saluation why not also of election Thus the Lutherans reason for the foresight of faith Contra. 1. Not euerie thing whereby we are ioyned vnto Christ is the cause of election but that whereby we were first giuen vnto Christ which is the absolute and free mercie of God who elected vs of his free grace and mercie and in Christ appointed to bring those whom he elected vnto eternall life And the Apostle doth expound himselfe what he meaneth by beeing elected in Christ that is he hath predestinate vs to be adopted thorough Christ faith then in Christ is not the cause of election but a meane subordinate to bring the elect vnto saluation 2. We are said to be chosen in faith not faith foreseene as the cause of election but in faith present as a meane vnto saluation 3. The same answear may serue to the third place obiected which must be vnderstood likewise de fide praesenti non praevisa of faith present not of faith foreseene for God thorough his mercie elected vs beeing yet his enemies his loue therefore was before any foresight of faith by his mercie he made vs acceptable vnto himselfe by the election of grace before he sawe any thing in vs. 4. It followeth not that euerie thing which is the cause of saluation should be the cause of election it is true in the generall cause which is the mercie of God which causeth as well the one as the other but not in the next and immediate causes as for example the father is the cause of his son and the son of the nephew and yet the son is not the cause of the father so election is the cause of faith and faith of saluation but it therefore followeth not that faith should be the cause of election And Hunnius that was at the first a great patrone of this cause in the ende argueth that faith in the mysterie of election was to be considered neither vt causam meritoriam as a meritorious or instrumentall cause sed vt partem illius ordinis c. but as a part of that order which God had appointed that is a meane vnto saluation Pareus dub 6. 3. Arg. If God simply should elect some and refuse others without foresight of their faith how is he not an accepter of persons Ans. The accepting of person is when against the rule of iustice a man of no good parts or qualites is preferred before him that is well qualified But there is no feare of this in Gods election for he findeth all alike in themselues none endued with any good gifts or qualities but as he giueth them therefore herein he is no accepter of persons in preferring one before an other all beeing alike Now on the contrarie side that the foresight of faith or any thing in man is not the cause of election but onely the good pleasure and will of God it may be thus further confirmed 1. The Apostle in saying not by workes but by him that calleth excludeth whatsoeuer in man for if either the foresight of faith or of any other thing and not onely of works should be the cause of election then it should not be onely in the caller as the Apostle here saith Mart. Pareus Tolet annot 19. 2. The effect of election is not the cause faith with the fruits thereof are the effects of election Ephes. 1.4 he hath chosen vs that we should be holy Pareus 3. The eternall decree of God is not founded in that which is temporarie the faith or good workes of men are but temporarie things and therefore they cannot be the ground and foundation of Gods eternall decree Faius 4. Faith is the worke of God Ioh. 6.29 therefore not the cause of his election so the same thing should be the cause of it selfe and so also be before it selfe Pareus 5. If election depended vpon the foresight of good workes then it would followe that we are iustified by workes for from election and predestination proceedeth our vocation and from vocation iustification and if election be out of the foresight of works then iustification also which followeth election by degrees Mart. 6. Lyranus addeth this reason further Deus non vult finem propter ea quae sunt ad finem God will not appoint the ende for those things which tend vnto the ende but rather these are for the ende now faith and works are but the way to the ende and therefore they cannot be the cause of the appointment of the end that is that men should attaine vnto euerlasting glorie Lyran. vpon this place 7. Tolet also annot 16. vrgeth this reason whereas the Apostle saith v. 14. is there iniquitie with God if he had meant that the difference in the decree of election ariseth out of the foresight of faith then the reason had beene apparent and there had beene no shew at all of any iniustice in God and so no place for this obiection at all See further of this question before c.
endebted to the diuine iustice quod siue exigatur siue donetur nulla est iniquitas which though it be exacted or pardoned there is no iniquitie ad Simplic lib. 1. qu. 2. In this assertion there is no inconueniencie to say that God beholding and foreseeing all men by the voluntarie transgression of Adam in the state of corruption did of his free mercy elect some to be saued in Christ the others he left in their corruption and so for their sinnes decreed thē to damnation for here can be no imputation of iniustice at all for it is free where one hath diuerse debters to remit the debt vnto one and to exact it of another So then if the reason be demanded why some are reiected of God it may be answeared that mans voluntarie transgression bringing all his posteririe into bondage beeing foreseene of God is a sufficent cause of their reiection but if it be further demaunded why God out of this masse of corruption hath elected some and not others there no other reason can be giuen but the good pleasure of God Ephes. 1.5 so that the absolute decree of reprobation is grounded vpon the foresight of mans corruption but of the comparatiue as why one is reiected and left and not an other no reason can be rendred but Gods gracious and free purpose Against this opinion of Augustine there are two principall obiections 1. Pererius disput 12. thus obiecteth the Angels had no originall sinne they were all created in the state of grace and yet some of them were elected some reprobate therefore sinne is not the cause of reprobation Ans. 1. As the Angels were created in the state of grace so also was Adam in Paradise and as Adam fell by voluntarie transgression and so enthralled his posteritie so did the Angels that fell abuse the gift of freewill and so for their pride were iustly condemned for euer so then the foresight of the apostasie of the reprobate Angels was the cause of their reiection and condemnation as the Apostle saith Iud. 6. The Angels which kept not their first estate he hath reserued in euerlasting chaines as man then hath originall sinne out of the which proceed actuall sinnes which are the ground and cause of reprobation and condemnation so the Apostate Angels for their sinne of pride were reiected onely here is the difference that the Angels fell irrecouerable falling by their owne pride beeing not seduced but man falling by the sedition and tentation of the deuill hath a redeemer in Gods mercie prouided for him 2. Pareus thus obiecteth the foresight of originall corruption is generall and common to all mankind therefore it cannot be the cause of the reprobation of some onely dub 8. argum 4. so also Vrsinus catech 3. p. 357. Ans. Not simply the foresight of originall corruption which all are subiect vnto but it beeing considered together with Gods decree because he purposed to deliuer some and not others is the cause of reprobation 3. Some doe wholly referre the decree of reprobation and election onely to the will and purpose of God and thinke that no other cause can be rendred why God hath elected some and condemned others but the absolute will pleasure and purpose of God their reasons are these 1. As God loued Iacob before he had done any good so he hated Esau without any respect vnto the euill which he did Rom. 9.11 2. The Apostle also saith v. 18. That God hath mercie on whom he will and whom he will be hardeneth Gods will is the cause of both 3. And God is compared to the potter that as he hath power ouer the clay to make thereout vessels of honour or dishonour as he thinketh good so much more the Lord may out of the same masse make some vessels of mercie some of euerlasting shame 4. Our Blessed Sauiour maketh this the reason why God had hid the misterie of saluation from the wise men and reuealed it to babes because O Father thy good pleasure was such Matth. 11.25 Ans. 1. Why God loued not Esau as well as Iacob the cause was onely the gracious purpose of God and hereof neither the good workes of the one nor the euill workes of the other were the cause yet both of them beeing considered in their originall corruption as it was Gods mercie to deliuer the one so it was no iniustice to leaue the other 2. here the hatred of God is taken onely for the not conferring of his grace and loue which God freely bestowed without respect vnto workes but that hatred which is an ordaining of men vnto euerlasting punishment is not without respect vnto their sinnes 2. Mercie presupposeth miserie and hardening a corrupt inclination in the heart before for the which it is hardened here then mans miserable estate is insinuated out of the which some by Gods mercie are deliuered 3. By that similitude the Apostle sheweth what God may doe by his absolute power not what he doth he dealeth not with men as the potter with the clay though he might that is stricto absoluto iure by his strict and absolute right but aequissimis rationibus vpon most equall and iust conditions he might doe as the potter doth but yet he taketh not that rigorous and strict course 4. It is indeed Gods good pleasure to reueale the secrets of his will to whom he pleaseth and to hide them from whom he will because he is not bound vnto any he may doe with his owne as he please and bestow his graces freely but if he should keepe them from all none had cause to complaine seeing their naturall blindnes and corruption was brought vpon them by the voluntarie corruption of Adam and though it was Gods gracious favour to reueale vnto some his will yet the rest were hardened and blinded iustly through their owne wilfulnesse and obstinacie against the truth And further against this opinion of the absolute decree of reprobation without any respect vnto the sinnes of men originall and actuall these two strong obiections are made first there would be an imputation of iniustice vpon God if he should decree any to be condemned but for sinne for like as none are indeed in time condemned but for sin as the Apostle saith Ephes. 5.6 For such things commeth the wrath of God vpon the children of disobedience c. so the decree of damnation before all time must be vpon the foresight of sinne Secondly whereas God in Scripture is set forth to be exceeding aboundant in mercie as Psal. 25.10 All the waies of the Lord are mercie and truth and Psal. 144.9 His mercies are ouer or aboue all his workes and Iames 2.13 mercie reioyceth against iudgement Now the Lord should be accused of seueritie and inclemencie and farre more readie and prompt vnto iustice then mercie if he out of his owne will should decree more to be condemned then to be saued these obiections the former position of the absolute decree of damnation beeing maintained cannot possibly
Pet. 1.10 2. for one to be a reprobate and yet to repent are contraries for he that is a reprobate can neuer haue grace to repent and he that hath grace truely to repent may be assured he is no reprobate Obiect 9. But if God haue foreseene the sinnes of the reprobate and that which God foreseeth must needs come to passe then the reprobate sinne of necessitie they cannot doe otherwise how then can they be iustly punished for that which they cannot auoid Ans. There is a double kind of necessitie the one is called antecedens necâ—â—â—â—â—tas an antecedent necessitie or going before which proceedeth from necessarie and working causes as when a thing is forced by violence and strength as a stone out of the hand it is necessarie it should goe there is consequens necessitas a following necessitie or by way of consequent which is vpon supposition of the effect as when we see one fit this beeing supposed that we see him fit it is now necessarie beeing done and yet he was not forced to fit so it is in this case the reprobate doe sinne necessarily not by a necessitie forcing their will but an infallible necessitie following the effect for they therefore sinne not because God did foresee they would sinne but therefore God foresaw it because they would sinne The reprobate then do sinne freely without any compulsion and therein are guiltie though they were foreseene to sinne and because of the corruption of their nature could doe no other And thus is this doctrine deliuered from all those cauils and obiections and man iâ— found onely to be the cause of his owne ruine and destruction but the beginning of our saluation is from God according to that saying of the Prophet Hoshea c. 13.9 perditio tâ—â— ex te Israel salus ex me thy perdition O Israel is of thy selfe thy salvation of me and so I ende and conclude this point with that saying of Tertullian Deus de suo optimus de nostro iustus c. God is good and mercifull of his owne and iust in that which is ours c. lib. de resurrect that is the originall of mercie is from God but the occasion of his iustice is from sinne which is of our selues Controv. 11. Of the difference betweene the decree of election and reprobation and of the agreement betweene them Whereas in both these there are two things to be considered the decree and the execution thereof here are diuerse opinions Some will haue a correspondencie in election and reprobation in both and these also are deuided Some only in the former that is the decree Some will haue a difference in both as well in the manner of the decree as in the execution 1. Of the first opinion were the Pelagians and some of the Romanists which hold that both the decree of election is grounded vpon the foresight of faith and the good vse of freewill as also the execution of that decree in the giuing of eternall life they will haue procured by good works as reprobation both in the decree and execution proceedeth from sinne and the foresight thereof So the whole worke of election they will haue to take beginning from man as reprobation doth Thus the Rhemists hold that election is not without the condition and respect to workes annot Heb. c. 5. sect 7. Becanus the new diuinitie Reader in Mentz hath this assertion that predestination is ex praescientia conditionata c. of a conditionall prescience whereby God foresaw that one would well vse the grace offered and not an other c. 1. de praedestinat loc 5. But herein other Romanists do dissent from them as Bellarmine Tolet Pererius as hath beene shewed before controv 7. 2. Other Romanists will haue an agreement both in the decree and execution but after an other manner as Pererius following Thom. Aquin. disput 5. numer 34. disput 12. numer 66. saith that God is the cause of reprobation as well as election quantum ad duo principium terminum in respect of these two the beginning and the ende concerning the beginning which is the decree he saith there is nulla causa meritoria ex parte hominis no meritorious cause of either on mans behalfe but in respect of the last effect there is a meritorious cause in man both of his good works vnto eternall life and of euill workes to condemnation But Pererius in two points is farre wide both in making good workes meritorious of eternall life which is the free gift of God Rom. 6.23 and in assigning the beginning or first cause of reprobation and so of condemnation in the will of God and not in the sinne of man contrarie to that saying of the Prophet alleadged before Hos. 13.9 Thy perdition is of thy selfe O Israel as their Latine text readeth 3. Some doe make great difference in the execution of these decrees for good workes are not meritorious of saluation as euill workes are of damnation the reason of which difference is because euill workes are perfitly euill but our good workes are imperfect and so not proportionable to the most excellent and perfect reward and good workes are not our owne nor of our selues as euill workes are and therefore they merit not but the decree as well of election as reprobation they hold to be alike without any relation vnto workes good or euill thus worthie Calvin Beza Martyr with other of our learned new writers 4. But it is the safer way thoroughout from the beginning of the decree to the execution to hold a perpetuall difference betweene election and reprobation that we are elected freely without respect vnto faith or workes for otherwise we should haue chosen God first and not he vs and so we are also saued freely not for our workes and yet neither without them But in the way of damnation neither were the wicked decreed to be condemned neither yet shall they actually be condemned but for their sinne and the foresight thereof 1. because the beginning of damnation is from man but the decree of reprobation is the beginning of damnation therefore that decree must proceed from the foresight of something worthie of damnation in man 2. that for the which God condemneth man he decreed him to be condemned but for sinne is man condemned 3. otherwise if it it were Godâ— absolute will to reiect more then he electeth his iustice should exceede his mercie see before contr 10. Controv. 12. Whether mercie be a naturall propertie in God or an effect onely of his will against Socinus v. 18. He hath mercie on whom he will Socinus that blasphemous heretike lib. 1. c. 1. by occasion of these words goeth about to prooue that Mercie is not a naturall propertie in God but a voluntarie act 1. Because the Apostle saith He hath mercie on whom he will 2. God alwaies vseth his naturall properties but mercie he alwaies sheweth not as toward impenitent sinners 3. Contrarie properties are not naturally in God but his mercie
and iustice are contrarie therefore they are not both naturally in God 4. Naturall properties are not vnequally in God but his iustice and mercie are vnequall for his mercie exceedeth his iustice 5. Mercie is nothing els but a griefe conceived vpon an others miserie but there is no such thing in God Contra. Before these arguments be answeared these considerations must be premised 1. that mercie is otherwise in God then in man in man indeede it is a griefe or compassion conceiued vpon an others miserie but in God it is onely a propension and readinesse of the diuine will to helpe those which are in miserie 2. Mercie in God either signifieth the inclination power facultie and propertie to shewe mercie and this is naturall in God or the act and exercising of that propertie toward the creature and this is so naturall in God as yet it is directed by his will 3. a thing is said to be naturall two wayes either that which onely proceedeth from the instinct of nature as the fire naturally burneth or that whereunto nature inclineth yet not without direction of the will as thus a man is said to speake to vnderstand naturally So God is both wayes naturally mercifull in himselfe the first way toward his creatures the second now to the arguments we answear 1. The Apostle speaketh not of the naturall propertie but of the act of mercie which is directed by the will of God 2. all the naturall properties which are in God he alwaies vseth not nor towards all as his iustice power long animitie mercie they are alwaies in God but he exerciseth them as it pleaseth him 3. iustice and mercie are not contrarie but crueltie is opposed to mercie neither is there any contrarietie in God but in the effects in diuerse subiects as the Sunne with the same heat mollifieth the waxe and hardeneth the clay 4. neither are these properties vnequall in God but the effects and acts onely are vnequall as it pleaseth God to dispose in his freewill 5. humane mercie is such as is described but the diuine mercie is of an other nature as hath beene shewed now the contrarie arguments that mercie is a naturall propertie in God are these 1. The Scripture describeth God by his mercie Exod. 34. he is called the father of mercie rich in mercie God is described by his naturall properties 2. all vertues in God are essentiall and naturall but mercie is one of Gods vertues 3. iustice is naturall in God but mercie is a part of Gods vniuersall iustice 4. mercie and compassion is naturall in men they which haue it not are called inhumane they are beasts rather then men therefore much more is it naturall in God for euery good thing in the creature proceedeth from the fountaine of goodnes in the Creator See more hereof in Pareus dub 12. Controv. 13. Whether the mercie of God in the forgiuenesse of sinne be an effect of Gods free and absolute will onely and be not grounded vpon Christ against the heresie of Socinus and Ostorodius v. 18. He hath mercie on whom he will Blasphemous Socinus and Ostorodius a Samosatenian heretike directly impugning the eternall dietie of Christ by occasion of these words doe affirme that God of his free mercie without any satisfaction purchased by Christs death forgiueth sinnes vnto the penitent Socinus first maketh these and such like obiections 1. The Apostle here saith he hath mercie on whom he will therefore of his owne will be remitteth sinnes without Christ. 2. He doth forgiue sinnes for his owne sake Isai. 43.25 therefore not for Christ. 3. If God should forgiue sinnes for Christs satisfaction then both mercie and iustice should be seene at once in the worke of our saluation by Christ. 4. God may remit sinnes without satisfaction for he may depart from his right and remit of his owne as it pleaseth him 5. God requireth onely repentance and innocencie of life in them whose sinnes are pardoned and he forgiueth onely for that which he requireth 6. Many examples are extant in the old Testament of sinnes pardoned and mercie shewed without Christ as in Abel Henoch and others that pleased God by faith beleeuing onely that God is that he is a rewarder of the righteous Heb. 11.6 therefore without Christ. 7. God promiseth Ierem. 31. to be mercifull vnto their iniquites and to remember them no more but where he requireth satisfaction for sinne he remembreth it and is not mercifull vnto it 8. We are commanded one to forgiue an other as God in Christ forgaue vs but we must forgiue without any satisfaction Ergo so God forgaue vs. 9. The remission of the debt excludeth all payment and satisfaction for it to this purpose Socinus lib. de Servator The other impious heretike thus also obiecteth 1. Gods loue is set forth to vs in Scripture before Christ died for vs Ioh. 3.16 Ephe. 1.4 but Christs satisfaction sheweth that God was offended with vs before 2. God did remit our sinnes freely by grace Rom. 3.24 but grace and satisfaction are contrarie 3. This doctrine of satisfaction by Christs death maketh God cruell that would not receiue mankind vnto his fauour but by the most cruell death of his Sonne 4. It maketh God a Tyrant in punishing the innocent for offenders 5. The Sonne should be more mercifull then his Father for he forgiueth without satisfaction so doth not his Father 6. If Christ had truely satisfied for vs he should haue suffered eternall death and so neuer haue risen againe which had beene impossible these and other such obiections this wicked Ostorodius hath in a booke written in the Germane tongue against Tradelius cited by Pareus dub 13. Contra. Before we come to answear these obiections the state of the question must first be opened 1. the question here is not of the power propertie and facultie of shewing mercie which is naturall in God and absolute in him without any condition 2. but of the act and exercising of this propertie which is either generall toward all creatures and toward all men both good and bad vpon whom he suffereth the sunne to shine and the raine to fall Matth. 5.45 or speciall toward the elect in giuing them his grace and forgiuing their sinnes whereof the Apostle speaketh Tit. 3.4 When the bountifulnes and loue of God our Sauiour toward men appeared c. according to his mercie be saued vs. 3. this speciall act of Gods mercie must be considered two wayes according to the causes foregoing which are none other but onely the good pleasure of God no merit of any creature no not of Christ himselfe was the cause of his mercie toward the elect but as the Apostle saith he hath mercie on whom he will but there are certaine conditions which doe accompanie or followe this free act of Gods loue and mercie for the effecting of the worke thereof in the sanctification and glorification of the elect which are these three the ransome made by Christ faith in the
mouthes and nothing els doth God require vnto saluation so Chrysost. in ore corde tuo salutis causa in thy heart and mouth is the casue of saluation so Oecumen brevis salus nihil indigens externis laboribus saluation hath but a short cut it needeth not externall labour facile credere animo ore confiteri potes c. thou mayest easily beleeue with thy minde and confesse with thy mouth by the operation of the spirit Calvin and it seemeth to be a proverbiall speach to shewe the readines and facilitie of that which is in the heart and mouth as it is said Psal. 81.10 Open thy mouth wide and I will fill it Faius so Lyranus ostenditur iustitiae per fidem Christi facilitas the facilitie of righteousnesse by the faith of Christ is shewed And here Origens distinction may be receiued who saith that two waies is Christ neere vs possibilitate in possibilitie and so he may be neere vnto vnbeleeuers for they may haue grace to beleeue and efficacia in efficacie and power and so he is neere vnto those which actually by the spirit doe beleeue with the heart and confesse to saluation 4. But where the iustice of faith is said to be easier then the iustice required by the law that is not vnderstood in regard of the beginning and efficient cause of faith for man hath no more power to beleeue of himselfe then to doe good workes for it is God that worketh iâ— vs both the will and deede Philip. 2.13 but the righteousnesse of faith is easier in regard of the manner of the work because the law requireth the obedience thereof to be performed by our selues but faith referreth vs for the performing of the lawe vnto Christ Neither doth our saluation depend vpon the force and efficacie of faith but vpon the worthines and vertue of Christ apprehended by faith as when a sicke man walketh leaning vpon his staffe it is his staffe that stayeth him not his hand which onely layeth hold vpon the staffe The iustice of the law is as if a weake and sicke man should be enioyned to stand by himselfe without a staffe but faith sheweth how our weakenes is propped and held vp by other helps â—s when a sicke man layeth his hand vpon a staffe Quest. 14. How Moses that preached the law is alleadged for iustification by faith Ob. The obiection is made out of that place Ioh. 1.17 The lawe was giuen by Moses but grace and truth came by Iesus Christ c. but if Moses also taught iustification by faith then grace also came by him Answ. 1. Pet. Martyr answeareth that Moses is said to giue the law because his principall intendment was to propound the law yet he giueth testimonie also to the Gospell because Christ was the ende of the lawe as the Apostles in the new Testament preach repentance which belongeth to the law but their principall scope and intent is to set forth the faith of the Gospell 2. Hereunto for more full answear may be added that the lawe giuen by Moses is taken two wayes either strictly for the precepts of the morall law and so Moses was the minister of the lawe onely and not of grace or for the whole doctrine deliuered by Moses wherein also Euangelicall promises are contained Quest. 15. How Christ is to be confessed v. 9. If thou shalt confesse with thy mouth c. 1. S. Paul here placeth the confession of the mouth first both because he followeth that order which Moses did who nameth it first and for that we doe not knowe the faith of others that beleeue in Christ but by their confession Mart. Pareus 2. By confession is vnderstood not a bare and naked acknowledgment of Christ but the invocation of his name beleeuing in him giuing praise vnto him and whatsoeuer belongeth vnto his worship and this must be such a confession as is ioyned with the beleefe of the heart and not with a generall and historicall beleefe onely such as the deuills haue but a confident trust in Christ in beleeuing him to be our redeemer and Sauiour 3. Here we are to consider of fowre sorts of men 1. some neither confesse Christ nor beleeue and they are atheists 2. some beleeue and confesse not they are timorous and fearefull as Peter when he denied his Master 3. some confesse and beleeue not such are hypocrites 4. some both confesse and beleeue and they are right Christians 4. The Apostle maketh speciall mention of the raising of Christ from the dead 1. because this was the most doubted of his death the Iewes and Gentiles confessed but his resurrection they would not acknowledge Mart. 2. and vnlesse Christ had risen againe all the rest had profited vs little because in his resurrection he obtained a perfect victorie ouer death hell and damnation Calvin 3. and this article of Christs resurrection praesupponis alios articulos presupposeth other articles of the faith and taketh them as graunted as if he rose he died and his death presupposeth his birth Gorrhan Quest. 16. How Christ is said to be raised by God 1. By God in this place is not necessarie to vnderstand the person of the father but the power of the Godhead in the whole Trinitie whereby Christ as man was raised vp So Christ as man was raised vp by the power of his father but as he is one God with his father so he is said to raise vp himselfe Iohn 2.18 Christ is also said to be raised by the spirit of sanctification Rom. 1.4 so then Christ is here considered three wayes as beeing one God with his father as the second person in the Trinitie and as he was man as he is God he onely raiseth is not raised as he is man he is onely raised and raiseth not as he is the Son of God he both raiseth himselfe and the father raiseth him the father raiseth the Sonne by the Sonne and the Sonne raiseth himselfe by the spirit of sanctification whereby he was declared to be the Sonne of God Rom. 1.4 Pareus annot in v. 9. 2. And generally concerning the workes of the Trinitie there is a threefold difference to be obserued for there are some workes wherein the Blessed Trinitie doe concurre together both in their diuine essence and persons and they are ioynt workers as all those which are called extra workes without them as all things now ruled and gouerned by Gods prouidence are so gouerned by the whole Trinitie as Ioh. 5.17 My Father worketh hitherto and I worke and the spirit of God also worketh Psal. 104.30 If thou send forth thy spirit they are created some workes are proper and peculiar vnto the glorious persons of the Trinitie as those which are called ad intra the inward workes as the father begetteth the Sonne is begotten the holy Ghost proceedeth these are so peculiar vnto each of them that what is proper to one agreeth not vnto an other and thirdly some works there are wherein the Blessed
Trinitie concurreth in their diuine power and essence as they are one God yet with a speciall relation to their persons as God the Father Sonne and holy Ghost both created redeemed the world and sanctifie the elect but the worke of the creation is specially ascribed to the person of the Father the redemption to the person of the Sonne the worke of sanctification to the person of the holy Ghost considered together with their infinite and omnipotent Godhead Quest. 17. Whether to beleeue in the heart be not sufficient vnto salvation without confession of the mouth v. 10. With the heart man beleeueth vnto righteousnesse and with the mouth he confesseth to salvation 1. Lyranus thinketh that the Apostle onely giueth instance here of those which are in casis mortis at the point of death in whom it is sufficient to beleeue and confesse when they haue no time to worke But the Apostle describeth one generall way and rule whereby all are iustified 2. The Greeke scholiast thinketh that whereas the beleefe of the heart is sufficient yet mention is made of confession in two respects both in regard of others which by this confession are to be instructed and the time of persecution when it is necessarie to make publike confession of the faith But this which the Apostle requireth is to be performed of euerie beleeuer and at all times 3. Bellarmine inferreth out of this place fidem non sufficere ad salutem that faith is not sufficient vnto saluation but that the confession of the mouth and other works are also required as causes concurring vnto saluation which place he saith is so euident that in the colloquie at Altenburge one for ad salutē to saluation would haue put de salute of saluatiō But we are not driuen to such a straight as to vse any such shift we will send Bellarmine to his auncient Cardinal Tolet who vpon this place thus writeth oris confessio nos non iustificat à peccato c. sed iustificati tenemur eam palam profiteri c. the confession of the mouth doth not iustifie vs but beeing iustified we are bound publikely to professe it that we may obtaine euerlasting saluation c. confession then of the mouth is not required as a cause of saluation because it is no part of iustificatiō but as a necessary effect that followeth 4. Pet. Martyr thinketh that by saluation here is not vnderstood as in the former verse the remission of sinnes but vlteriorem perfectionem a further degree of perfection in them that are iustified as the Apostle in the same sense biddeth vs to works out our saluation with trembling and feare Phil. 2. so also Gorrhan interpreteth ad salutem to saluation ad salutis perfectionem to the perfection of saluation But this were to giue way vnto them which ascribe onely the beginning of saluation vnto faith and the perfection vnto works 5. Wherefore the Apostle maketh not here confession the cause of saluation as beleefe is of iustification but faith is the cause also of confession which is required not as a cause but tanquam medium as a way and meane vnto saluation for iustification and saluation are here to be considered as the beginning and ende by faith we are iustified which faith must bring forth liuely fruits as the confession of the mouth and the profession of the life before we can attaine to saluation to this purpose Pareus dub 8. likewise M. Calvine saith the Apostle sheweth onely how a true faith may be distinguished from a fained faith the faith which iustifieth must be such a faith as bringeth forth liuely fruits as the franke confession of the mouth And Beza addeth that the Apostle maketh faith and beleefe here the cause both of iustification and of saluation because the confession of the mouth to the which saluation is ascribed is an effect and fruit of faith and so according to that rule in Logike causa causae est causa causati the cause of the cause is the cause of that which is caused by that cause And so as Beza well concludeth confession is via qua pervenitur the way whereby we come vnto eternall life as also other good workes in the life are the way but not the cause which as Origen collecteth are here also included vnder confession for he can not confesse Christ to be risen from the dead which doth not walke in newnes of life as the Apostle saith which God hath ordained for vs to walke in them Eph. 2.10 now we vse to walke in the way 18. Quest. Of these words Whosoeuer calleth vpon the name of the Lord shall be saued v. 13. 1. The word here translated saued in that place of the Prophet Ioel 2.32 signifieth to be deliuered which in effect is all one the Septuagint reading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall be saued doe put the consequent for the antecedent for he that is deliuered shall consequently be saued the Prophet there prophesieth of the spirituall benefits which the Church of God should receiue by the Messiah and so we are here to vnderstand not any temporall but a spirituall and eternall deliuerance 2. This sentence is brought in by the Apostle vpon these two occasions both to prooue his former generall proposition that God is rich in mercie to all both Iew and Gentile for the Prophet generally saith whosoeuer excluding none whether Iew or Gentile Calvin as also the Apostle sheweth the difference betweene the iustice of the lawe which requireth doing and the iustice of faith which requireth nothing but beleeuing and confession in the invocating of the name of God Melancth 3. Calleth 1. Gryneus thinketh that invocation the principall part of the worship of God is here taken for the whole as also Origen saith invocare nomen adorare Deum vnum to invocate the name of God and to worship God are one and the same But as Pet. Martyr thinketh invocation here rather is taken properly for the prayers of the faithfull 2. neither doth he speake of any invocation but of that which is in faith whereof the Apostle maketh mention 1. Cor. 12.3 No man can say that Iesus is the Lord but by the holy Ghost so the ordinar gloss he that prayeth invocateth but this he can not doe nisi prius credat vnlesse he beleeue before 4. Shall be saued He saith not he shall obtaine that which he prayeth for for many times one may pray ignorantly for that which is not meet for him but yet by his faithfull prayer he shall come vnto saluation Mart. 5. By the name of the Lord Origen well vnderstandeth Christ Iesus as he sheweth by that place of S. Paul 1. Cor. 1.3 with all that call on the name of our Lord Iesus and he further thus inferreth if that Enoch Moses Aaron did call vpon God and he heard them sine dubio c. without doubt they called vpon the Lord Iesus and Gorrhan giueth this reason why Christ is said to be the
Apostle expresseth the Hebrew word sorer by these two rebellious and gainesaying so also Beza But Iunius parall 19. thinketh rather that the Apostle doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 compendiously in one word expresse the Prophets meaning which is set forth in many words in that place Isa. 65.3 a rebellious people which walketh a way that is not good after their owne imaginations a people that prouoke me euer to my face c. all this the Apostle comprehendeth in these two words rebellious and gainsaying 2. By all the day 1. Origen vnderstandeth litterally the day wherein Christ did hang vpon the crosse c. and so a part is taken for the whole gloss ordinar but then it should not haue beene said all the day 2. Haymo interpreteth it to be the whole time Dominicae predicationis of the Lords preaching vnto his passion 3. But Oecumenius better taketh it for all that time which went before since they came out of Egypt so also Gryneus with M. Calvin and others vnderstand all that time since the Lord begunne to take speciall care of this people and thus the Prophets vse to speake as Ierem. 7.13 I rose vp earely to speake vnto you c. but ye would not heare toto tempore legis Mosaicae all the time of the law of Moses Lyran. 3. I stretched out my hands 1. not vpon the crosse as Origen and Ambrose for Christ said before he suffered that he would haue gathered them together as the henne her chicâ—â—us but they would not Martyr 2. neither is thereby onely signified the miracles which Christ shewed and the benefits bestowed vpon them as Haymo and as Gorrhan by the extending the left hand signifieth their protecting from euill and by the right hand the collaâ—â—â— of benefits 3. But hereby we vnderstand generally all those meanes which the Lord vsed not onely by his benefits but by his threatnings promises preaching of his word whereby he would haue called them to repentance Pareus 4. Yet they were still a rebellious and gainsaying people rebellious in heart and gainsaying in their mouth contrarie to those two speciall works of grace before spoken of the 〈◊〉 of the heart and the confession of the mouth Pellican so here three sinnes are set 〈◊〉 in the people their ingratitude that regarded not Gods mercie in calling them 〈◊〉 incredulitie in their rebellion obstinacie in gainsaying three vertues also are described 〈◊〉 seruants of God the Prophets their patience in suffering signified by the stretching out of their hands their perseverance all the day the cause for the which they suffered against a rebellious and gainsaying people 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doct. A good intention maketh not a good action v. 1. They haue the zeale of God but not according to knowledge Hence it is euident that make a good action it is not sufficient to haue a kind of zeale and good intention for them beleeue had beene excused for putting Christ to death which they did of a blind zeale 〈◊〉 here the Apostle confesseth that they had zeale but it was not according to knowledge â—â— therefore it was a false and erroneous zeale such as they were ruled with that should â—â—â—ke they did God seruice in killing his seruants Ioh. 16.2 Doct. 2. Of the kinds of prayer v. 1. My hearts desire There is oratio mentalis vocalis a mentall and vocali prayer the one onely in the mind the other vttered by the voice of the first our Sauiour speaketh Matth. 6.6 When thou prayest enter into thy chamber of the other v. 9. after this manner pray yee And Saint Paul sheweth them both in this place that his hearts desire was c. he prayeth both with his heart and voice and the praier of the heart is the more principall Doct. 3. How to discerne true loue and freindship v. 2. That they may be saued c. Herein Saint Pauls true affection appeared toward his countrie men the Iewes in wishing their saluation whatsoeuer one freind wisheth vnto an other beside this it is nothing hence it is that Saint Paul in all his Epistles beginneth his salutation with grace and peace this was Abrahams commendation that he had a case to instruct his familie children and seruants in the waies of God Gen. 18.18 Doct. 4. Of the consent betweene the law and the Gospel v. 4. Christ is the end of the law So then herein both the law and the Gospel agree that both of them doe ayme at Christ the law looketh vnto him as the end and the Gospel also requireth obedience to the law but Christ is couertly insinuated in the law but openly shewed in the Gospel the law leadeth indirectly vnto faith and the Gospel as it were indirectly pointeth at the law requyring the obedience thereof not as a cause but as a â—â—â—ie testimonie and consequent of iustification and so that is fulfilled which S. Paul saith Rom. 3.31 doe we then make the law of none effect through faith God forbid yea we est 〈◊〉 the law Doct. 5. Of the difference betweene the law and the Gospel v. 5. He that doth these things shall liue thereby c. Hence may be gathered there differences betweene the law and the Gospel 1. the law commandeth things impossible and not in mans power as in euery point to keepe and fulfill the law the Gospel onely requireth faith and beleefe 2. the law worketh terrour and perplexitie of conscience breeding doubts and questions in the mind who shall ascend to heauen to bring vs thâ—â—â—er who shall descend to hell to keepe vs from thence But the Gospel bringeth comfort and peace of conscience and assurance of saluation 3. the righteousnesse of the law is grounded vpon the law of Moses but the iustice of faith vpon the Gospel this is the word of faith v. 8. Doct. 6. Of the diuerse kinds of calling and sending to preach v. 18. How shall they preach vnlesse they be sent c. Though the Apostle doe here especially speake of the extraordinarie calling such as was this of the Apostles yet it is true of the ordinarie calling of preachers that none must take vpon them to preach vnlesse they be sent of God which is either immediately as the Prophets were so called of God in the old Testament or mediately by the authoritie of the Church or by them to whom it is committed which kind of mediate calling is not in euery Church the same in respect of some circumstances which are left to the libertie of the Church Pareus but yet the same end must be propounded which is the edifying of the Church and none ought to be sent which are not meete for such are not sent of God but runne vncalled and vnsent and as intruders But no man as the Apostle saith ought to take this honour vpon him but he that is called of God Hebr. 5.4 Here I cannot omit that obseruation of Faius who thinketh the sending of Ionas to haue beene ordinarie from the companie of the Prophets
planted in 2. Concerning the reading of the words thou wast graft in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for them that is in their place as the Syrian interpreter translateth but Erasmus refuseth this reading as ridiculous and will haue the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in to be here redundant and superfluous as the like phrases are vsed often in the Hebrew as percussus in gladio smitten in the sword and so he would haue it referred vnto the oliue into the which they were planted likewise some of our owne interpreters read insicus illis graft into them Bucer Martyr But the other reading is the better graft in for them for it hath relation to the braunches broken off and as yet no mention is made of the right oliue tree Lyranus by in them vnderstandeth the braunches yet standing as the Apostles into whom the Gentiles were planted but plants are not properly graffed into the braunches but into the stock therefore the better sense is graft in for them in loco factorum in the stead of the broken braunches so glosse interlin Gorrhan Tolet and of our writers Beza Faius Pareus Genevens or among them B. 3. Was graft in the Apostle sheweth a threefold benefit bestowed vpon the Gentiles first they were planted in stead of the incredulous Iewes which were as braunches broken off then they are made partakers of the roote that is of the faith of Abraham and the Patriarkes Lyran. and made one Church with them and thereby they are partakers of the farmes of the oliue which the ordinarie glosse vnderstandeth of the Apostles who receiued of the fatnes of the spirit to conuay it to the Gentiles Gorrhan of the fatnes of charitie but rather generally thereby is meant the doctrine and grace of Christ Lyran. and all the spirituall graces which the Lord conferreth vpon his Church as the Prophet Dauid saith Psal. 63.3 My soule shall be satisfied as with marrow and fatnes c. Pareus 4. But it will be obiected that the Iewes by nature were a wild oliue as well as the Gentiles as Saint Paul saith Ephes. 2.3 We were by nature the children of wrath as well as others Ans. True it is that in respect of originall corruption there is no difference but the Iewes were the right oliue because they were descended of beleeuing parents to whom the â—â—â—â—ise was made 5. Ambrose here noteth a difference betweene spirituall and externall planting as Origen also obserueth the same husbandmen vse to graffe good plants into a sower stocke not fowre and wild plants into a good stocke but here it is otherwise the wild oliue is planted into the true oliue And the reason is this the Apostle res magis causis quam causas rebus â—â—â—vit did applie the things vnto his cause not the cause to the things from whence he taketh his similitude Origen Quest. 23. Of the meaning of these words Thou bearest not the roote but the roote thee v. 18. Boast not thy selfe against the branches c. 1. This is the consequent or conclusion inferred out of the former reason that the Gentiles considering their former state and condition that they were the branches of a wild oliue should not insult against other which words beside this conclusion doe include two secret reasons against this reioycing 1. Because none ought to reioyce in themselues but onely in the Lord 1. Cor. 1.31 Gryneus 2. Ambrose noteth how it is a thing displeasing vnto God to reioyce in the calamitie and ouerthrowe of others and therefore the Gentiles should offend God if they insulted ouer the Iewes because of their incredulitie Thou bearest not the roote but the roote thee 1. for the connexion of these words because the Apostle passeth from the branches to the root against the which the Gentiles reioyced not Chrysostome thinketh that the Apostle doth it because he would affoard vnto the Iewes vmbram solatij a certaine shadowe of comfort and nothing else and he thinketh that in words onely he seemeth to allay their griefe not in deede but farre be it from vs to thinke that the Apostle should as it were double with his owne nation in so serious a matter hauing made so solemne a protestation before c. 9.1 I speake the truth in Christ I lie not 2. Gryneus maketh this to be the coherence the branches which are graft in should imitate the root it lamenteth for the branches which are broken off and so should they which are planted in but this rather is the reason of the coherence if they should insult against the branches they should in a manner also lift vp themselues against the root which bore those braunches euen against Abraham the Parent of the Iewes Pareus 3. This then is a newe argument that they ought not to insult against the Iewes the branches for so consequently they should insult against the roote it selfe which were either an absurd thing that the braunch should vaunt it selfe against the roote that beareth it or an vncomelie thing to insult against him from whom thou hast receiued so great benefits as they beeing graffed into the roote are made partakers of the fatnes thereof 4. This roote is said to beare the Gentiles and not they the root because they had their conuersion from the Iewes and not the Iewes from them Lyranus as our Bl. Sauiour saith Ioh. 4.22 saluation is of the Iewes the Iewes might receiue the ground of Philosophie and of other arts from the Gentiles but that is not the fatnes of the Oliue nor the sappe of the roote which is faith in Christ which was the faith of Abraham rooted and grounded in Christ. Quest. 24. Of those words v. 22. if thou continue in his bountifulnes 1. Chrysostome giueth this sense si ea feceris if thou dost those things which are answearable to the diuine goodnes non enim fide sola opus est for we haue not neede onely of faith here c. But the Apostle speaketh euidently of the goodnes of God not of man and so Osiander thereby vnderstandeth clementiam Dei the clemencie of God if thou continue in the grace and fauour of God the interlin glosse thus expoundeth si totum Des tribuas if thou ascribe all vnto God But here rather the cause is taken for the effect as the goodnes of God for faith which is wrought in vs by the goodnes and grace of God as afterward v. 31. by mercie is vnderstood faith giuen in Gods mercie and this to be the sense appeareth by the contrarie v. 23. If they abide not still in vnbeleefe 2. If thou continue This neither sheweth that it is in mans power to continue for all is ascribed to the goodnesse and mercie of God neither yet can it be hence gathered that the elect may fall away and not continue but these conditionall speaches are vttered to work in the faithfull a greater care and to stir them vp and take away from them all carnall securitie 3. Or els thou also shalt be
the propertie of opposition between grace and works remaineth as well in the election to the second grace as to the first if grace be admitted works are excluded for they cannot stand together 2. And all kind of works are excluded from election for good works are not the cause but the effect and fruits of election as Haymo here sheweth out of Saint Paul Eph. 1.6 he hath chosen vs in him that we should be holy c. Controv. 4. Against freewill Chrysostome vpon these words v. 4. I haue reserued to my selfe c. graunteth that God attulit potiorem partem brought the better part but they which were called brought their will volentes sulvat he saueth those which are willing Tolet annot 4. subscribeth vnto Chrysostome herein and refuseth Augustine who ascribeth all vnto grace and further he affirmeth that the nature of grace is not taken away though somewhat be presupposed in man dum modo non sit illud meritorium so it be not held to be meritorious or the cause of grace As when a Prince doth propound ample rewards to all commers though they that come onely haue the rewards yet their comming is no meritorious cause of receiuing the reward but the grace and fauour of the Prince so God elected some to be iustified by faith quos praevidit libero arbitrio concursuros whom he foresawe would concurre with their free-will to this purpose Tolet. Contra. 1. Chrysostomes speach that God saueth onely those which are willing if it be vnderstood with these two cautions that this willingnes is wrought by grace and yet beeing so wrought it is no cause of iustification may safely be receiued for true it is that none are saued against their will But yet God ex nolentibus volentes facit of vnwilling maketh them willing if Chrysostome be otherwise vnderstood as ascribing here strength to mans freewill it is a great error 2. And herein I preferre Augustines iudgement who well obserueth de bon perseueran c. 18. that the Lord here saith not relicti sunt mihi they were reserued for me or they reserued themselues for me but I haue reserued to shewe that it was Gods grace whereby some were reserued and not the act of their owne will Haymo also hath the same note he saith not relicti sunt are left but I haue left or reserued that is per gratiam reservani I haue reserued by grace gloss interlin 3. If any thing be presupposed in man as helping vnto his calling it hindreth and obscureth the worke of grace if it be but a preparation onely though not meritorious and it is directly against the Scripture that a man hath any will to come to God of himselfe as Ioh. 6.44 No man can come vnto me except the father drawe him Rom. 9.16 it is not in him that willeth or runneth but in God that sheweth mercie Philip. 2.13 It is God that worketh in you both the will and the deede how then can mans will of it selfe concurre with the grace of God that example alleadged is not like for to come to receiue the Princes reward is a ciuill thing wherein mans will hath some freedome but in spirituall actions it hath no libertie at all vntill it be freed by grace as our Blessed Sauiour saith Ioh. 8.36 if the Sonne shall make you free then are you free indeede Controv. 5. That vniuersalitie and multItude is not alwaies a note of the true Church v. 4. I haue reserued to my selfe seuen thousand Like as the paucitie and fewenes of professors in Elias time was no preiudice to the truth nor yet the multitude of idolaters a proofe that they were the Church so neither is the great number of nations people powers Cardinals Bishops Priests Monkes an argument for the Papall Church for in Noahs time the visible Church was contained in his familie and his Arke did beare the little barke of the Church of God and in Sodome onely in Lots house was there an exercise of true pietie yea our Sauiour calleth his a little flocke though therefore the Church of Christ consisted of smaller numbers then it doth which still encreaseth and shall we trust more and more toward the comming of Christ yet the smalnes of the number should be no matter of exception as it was not either in the time of Elias or of our Blessed Sauiour and his Apostles when as a thousand to one were enemies to true godlines see before Synops. Centur. 1. nr 19. Controv. 6. Of the sufficiencie of Scripture and of the right way to interpret the same v. 8. According as it is written By this often allegation of Scriptures and by collation of one with an other as here the Apostle compareth Isaias and Dauid together we gather a double vse of Scripture the one that all doctrine of faith must be derived from thence as throughout this epistle the Apostle for the proofe of his doctrine onely alleadgeth the Scriptures and therefore our Blessed Sauiour faith Ioh. 5.39 Search the Scriptures c. for they are they which testifie of we Christ admitteth no other witnesse of him and his doctrine but the Scriptures And in that the Apostle doth illustrate and interpret one place of Scripture by an other we see that the Scripture is the best interpreter of it selfe that which in one place is obseurely insinuated otherwhere it may be found more plainly and perspicuously expressed See more hereof Synops. Centur. 1. err 10.12 Controv. 7. Against the Iewes Chrysostome vpon these words bowe downe their backes alwayes v. 10. sheweth how this prophesie is now verified in the perpetuall desolation of the Iewes for whereas the Israelites were 200. yeares in Egypt God yet in his mercie deliuered them though they there committed fornication and were guiltie of diuerse other sinnes afterward beeing deliuered after the Lord had a long time suffered and endured them with patience at the length he punished them with 70. yeares captiuitie beeing deliuered from thence they were vexed vnder Antiochus three yeares but now more then three hundred yeares are past and yet they haue not so much as alicuius spei vmbram the shadowe of any hope when as they neither commit idolatrie nor some other sinnes for the which they were before punished Whereupon it must needes followe that the Iewes to this day are afflicted for not beleeving in Christ. To this purpose Chrysostome wrote more then a thousand yeeres since and so he then prophetically expounded that the Iewes backes should for euer be bowed downe and kept vnder vntill such time as they should vniuersally be called God open their eyes at the length that they seeing the cause why the wrath of God is thus kindled against them may at the last with faith and repentance turne vnto him Controv. 8. Whether any of the true branches may be broken off v. 17. Though some of the branches be broken off c. It may seeme then that some branches may be broken off and so some of
the elect perish Answ. It followeth not the branches may perish therefore the elect 1. That the elect cannot possibly fall away is shewed before contr 1. the Scripture saith they that trust in Iehovah shall be as mount Sinai which is not mooued but standeth fast for euer Psal. 125.1 not that the elect are so stable of themselues that they cannot be mooued for there is no creature but of it selfe is mutable and subiect to change but the Lord vpholdeth such by his grace as it is said Psal. 37.24 Though the righteous fall be shall not be cast off for the Lord putteth vnder his hand 2. We must distinguish of the branches some are true and right branches and they are the faithfull and elect which cannot be broken off some are counterfeit branches which were neuer elected and they may fall off so Christ sheweth Ioh. 15. that the vine may haue some vnfruitfull branches which are cast off but the fruitfull branches he neuer casteth away so the Apostle c. 9.7 doth make a difference among the children of Abraham all were not his right children that were of his seede Controv. 9. Against the heresie of Valentinus and Basilides that held some things to be euill some good by nature Whereas S. Paul maketh mention of the wild oliue and of the true oliue v. 17. Origen taketh occasion to confute the heresie of the foresaid heretikes and their followers whose assertion was this that there were two natures of soules some were made good and they should be saued and neuer fall away some were euill and they could not but perish 1. Origen refelleth this hereticall paradox out of this place for here some branches of the oliue tree were broken off because of their vnbeleefe and so of good became bad and the branches of the wild oliue were planted in and so of bad became good this difference was not in the diuersitie of their nature and further he vrgeth these words of our Blessed Sauiour Math. 12.33 Either make the tree euill and the fruit euill or make the tree good and the fruit good whereupon he inferreth vt ostenderet arborem bonam vel malam non nasci sed fieri to shewe that a tree is not borne good or euill but is so made 2. Thus farre Origen proceedeth well but after going about to shew the cause whence it commeth that some trees are good some bad he falleth into other errors himselfe 1. ascribing this difference onely to the power of free will for these are his words vnusquisque ex arbitrij potestate aut bona oliva aut oleafter efficitur euery one by the power of free will is made either a true oliue or a wild oliue which he prooueth by the example of the creatures which are all of one nature but by certaine accidentall qualities bring forth diuerse kinds as of trees hearbs and such like so there is one and the same nature of reasonable creatures the difference is out of the diuers motions of their free will and to this ende he presseth that saying of our blessed Sauiour wake the tree good and his fruit good as though it were in mans power to make himselfe a good tree 2. he addeth that whereas God so in his prouidence disposeth that there are outward exhortations ministred sometime to good sometime to euill it is in mans power obedire si velit to obey if he will him that provoketh him vnto goodnes and if he will to despise him 3. and to mend the matter withall he saith further that by this libertie of will he that is ramus oliuae a branch of the right oliue may fall away to misbeleefe and an other that is but a wild oliue may conuert vnto the faith and become a branch of the true oliue Thus Origen playeth the Philosopher rather then the diuine Contra. 1. The Apostle is contrarie to Origen for he saith v. 20. Thou standest by faith therefore not by free will for faith is not of our selues it is the gift of God Eph. 2.8 neither is the example of the creatures like for the diuersitie of their kinds proceedeth of the seuerall properties of their different natures whereas the difference betweene men is not from their nature but by the grace of God which separateth them 1. Cor. 4.7 Who separateth thee and what hast thou that thou hast not receiued and whereas Christ saith facite make ye this word as Pet. Martyr well sheweth non efficientiam sed hypothesin significat doth signifie not an efficiencie but a supposition as if he should haue said you must thus thinke and imagine with your selues that the tree must first be good before it can bring forth good fruit and this to be the meaning appeareth by the words following how can ye speake good things when ye are euill 2. Neither is it mans power to giue care vnto wholesome doctrine and obey it if he will for then why is it said of Lydia Act. 16.14 whose heart God opened that she attended to the things that Paul spake 3. Neither is it possible for them that were true branches of the right oliue to be broken off they were neuer truly graffed in that are broken off though they so seemed as they which are said to be blotted out of the booke of life were neuer indeede there written at all Rev. 17.8 and thus witnesseth S. Iohn 1. epist. 2.19 They went out from vs but they were not of vs for if they had beene of vs they would haue continued with vs. 10. Controv. That there was the same spirit of faith and the same spirituall substance of the Sacraments vnder the old Testament and in the new v. 17. And made partaker of the roote P. Martyr doth well obserue out of these words so also Pareus with others that there was eadem substantia res spiritus c. the same substance matter spirit in both Testaments though their Sacraments in respect of the outward signes and ceremonies were diuers for there was but one roote of faith both of the Iewes and Gentiles we are not planted into an other oliue but are made partakers of the fatnes of the same oliue tree this is contrarie to the doctrine of the Romanists which denie that the Sacraments of the old Testament had the same spirituall substance with the Sacraments of the new See further Synops. Centur. 2. err 97. 11. Controv. That the Scriptures are the iudge of euery one in particular Whereas Gretserus in the colloquie at Ratisbone sess 9. p. 111. denied impudently that the Scripture iudged him because it no where said Thou Gretser errest and cried out with â— blasphemous mouth let the Scripture iudge me indicet me spiritus si potest let the holy spirit iudge me if he can Pareus out of this place taxeth his ignorance and impudencie for the Apostle speaketh in particular v. 20. Thou standest by faith 21. take heede he spare not thee and in like manner the commandements were propounded in particular as speaking
haec vera est c. this is the true renovation of the minde to preferre the will of God before our owne c. and Beza maketh it a part of the exhortation be ye transformed c. and doe your endeauour to prooue what Gods will is c. that like as they which fashion themselues to the world followe the will thereof so you should transforme your selues by the newenes of your minde to the will of God and this sense is most agreeable so this is added both as a principall part and cause of our renovation and it is a fruit also thereof a further degree of more perfect knowing the will of God as our Sauiour saith Ioh. 9.17 If any man doe his will he shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God 2. May prooue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. he neither meaneth a curious probation to trie whether a thing be so or not for this were to doubt of the will of God whether it were good and perfect 2. neither is it taken onely for to search and consider for a man cannot be renewed at all that hath not alreadie searched out the good will of God 3. not yet doe we vnderstand a bare knowledge of the will of God for many which are not regenerate doe knowe Gods will and yet doe it not as the Apostle c. 2. reprooued the Iewes for teaching the lawe to others and not knowing it themselues 4. nor yet doth it signifie onely an experimentall knowledge as the interlinearie gloss and Lyranus for he that is renewed cannot but haue experience of the will of God 5. but this probation signifieth a discerning with iudgmēt of those things which are good as S. Paul saith Phil. 1.10 that ye may discern things that are excellent as he that hath a perfect tast discerneth of the goodnes of meates 3. What is the good will of God and acceptable and perfect 1. Concerning the reading of these words some will not haue these epithets good perfect acceptable to be ioyned vnto the will of God but to be referred to all the cause before going as to the offring vp of their bodies a liuing seruice not to fashion themselues to this world and to be renewed in the mind all this is good acceptable and perfect so Augustine epist. 85. and Ambrose some doe make it an absolute sentence by it selfe adding the coniūction and and what is good acceptable perfect c. Bucer But the vsuall reading is the best which the vulgar Latine followeth to make these three epithets and attributes of the will of God thus also reade Clemens lib. 2. stromat Basil regul brev resp 276. Chrysost. serm 12. Cyprian epist. 77.2 by the will of God we vnderstand not here that facultie and power in God whereby he willeth but the thing which he willeth in which sense we say in the Lords prayer thy will be done Matth. 6. and Matth 12.50 Whosoeuer doth the will of my father c. 4. The good will c. 1. Origen here distinguisheth betweene the will of God simply so called and his good and acceptable will for it is the will of God when he inflicteth punishment but that is his good and acceptable will when he doth any thing in mercie 2. Chrysostome also will haue the old lawe to be the good will of God but the acceptable and perfect will of God is his will reuealed in the new testament 3. Basil regul brev 276. make three degrees of things agreeable to Gods will some good some are better some best of all which are called perfect as Tolet giueth this instance to loue our friend is a good thing to doe well vnto him is better to loue our enemie is the best and most perfect 4. Anselme referreth it to the three states incipientium proficientium perfectorum of beginners of those that goe forward and of such as are perfect or to three conditions of life of the married the continent and virgins 5. Lyranus vnderstandeth the first of bona natura the good things of nature the second of the good things of grace the third of the good things appertaning to glorie But all these observations are curious neither to the Apostles minde who doth here commend vnto vs the will of God reuealed in the old and newe testament as a perfect rule of all our actions which is called good because the word of God prescribeth nothing but that which is good and it is acceptable because nothing is pleasing vnto God but that which he himselfe prescribeth and is agreeable to his will this rule also is perfect because the word of God containeth all things which tend to the perfection of the creature so that all other helpes are vaine idle and superfluous Quest. 9. What the Apostle vnderstandeth by grace I say by grace c. 1. Origen by grace vnderstandeth virtutem sermonis the vertue and power of speach which was giuen to the Apostle one may speake eloquently and learnedly and yet not with grace to edifie the hearers 2. Ambrose interpreteth grace of the gift of wisedome giuen to the Apostle this sense Haymo also followeth as S. Peter giueth this testimonie of S. Paul how he wrote according to the wisedome of God giuen vnto him but Chrysostome refuseth this the Apostle saith not I say by the wisedome giuen vnto me 3. he therefore as also Theodoret vnderstandeth the grace of the spirit 4. but more particularly the Apostle vnderstandeth the speciall grace of his Apostleship which was committed vnto him in which sense the Apostle saith Rom. 11.16 Thorough the grace that is giuen me of God that I should be the minister of Iesus Christ so here is a metonymie the cause is put for the effect and that the Apostle ascribeth his calling vnto grace he thereby both freeth himselfe from all ambition that he intrudeth not himselfe as also presseth his Apostolike authoritie that they might more readily obey Mart. Calv. I say which some thinke to be an exposition of the former words that now the Apostle beginneth to shew what the good and perfect will of God is Tolet but the Apostle rather entreth into a newe matter that as hitherto he had generally exhorted to common duties so now he descendeth to speciall Mart. and here dicere to say is taken for iubere to command Calvin Gorrhan taketh it for prohibeo I forbid but there followe many precepts as well as prohibitions to the which this preface of the Apostle hath reference To everie one among you the Latine translator readeth to all but not so fitly for now the Apostle in saying to euerie one speaketh to all in generall and to euerie one in particular Origens obseruation here is somewhat curious all among you that is they which are in God that is the faithfull for they onely are said to be the Apostle noteth all indifferently noble vnnoble high or lowe which were among them Chrysostome Quest. 10. What it is to vnderstand aboue that which is meete
words pleasantnes of countenance for all those are signified by hilaritie or chearefulnes Tolet so Chrysost. verbis rebus corpore c. in words deedes yea with seruice of the bodie the poore must be helped with chearefulnes Chearefulnes is required in heart in words in countenance euery way 1. in respect of God he loueth a chearefull giuer 1. Cor. 9. Pareus 2. in respect of the kingdome of heauen which such hope for quis regnum accipiens maestus est who receiuing a kingdome is sorowfull Chrysost. lucrum est alijs benefacere c. it is a gaine to doe well to others and euery man reioyceth in his owne gaine Theodoret. 3. againe such as were emploied in these seruices as old men and widows are naturally giuen to morositie and therefore they haue neede of this precept to dispose themselues to chearefulnes Pareus 4. the worke it selfe which was to deale with the diseased sicke and feeble was such as might breed loathsomnes and therefore the Apostle doth hearten them that they should not giue ouer this worke of mercie thorough nicenes that they should not disdaine with their owne hands if neede were to handle their sores and diseases Tolet. 5. the consideration of the common condition of mankind that there is eadem omnium sors the same lot of all that they are subiect to the same diseases and infirmities this should mooue them in such workes of mercie to be chearefull and willing Gualter 6. ne moerorem addant moerori that they should not adde griefe vnto griefe for the poore seeing them which attend them to doe it vnwillingly would thereby be grieued the more Mart. Beza 17. Quest. Of the Christian affection of loue and the properties thereof The Apostle hauing hitherto touched certaine speciall and particular duties belonging vnto Ecclesiasticall offices proceedeth vnto generall and first concerning Christian brotherly loue which he sheweth how it should first consist in the inward affection and then in the outward act v. 10. in giuing of honour c. Concerning the first this loue must be verus true without simulation then discretus discreete we must not loue but hate that which is euill thirdly it must be firmus firme cleauing vnto that which is good and it must be vniversalis vniuersall common without acception of persons we must be affectioned one toward an other c. Lyranus 1. Let loue be without dissimulation 1. The Apostle beginneth with loue which giueth a rellish and tast as it were to all other vertues euen faith without charitie is not right 1. Cor. 13.2 it is the badge and cognizance whereby we are knowne to be the disciples of Christ Ioh. 13.35 therefore the Apostle first beginneth to shew what this loue is 2. Origen vnderstandeth this loue generally of the loue of God and our neighbour but Chrysostome applieth it onely to brotherly loue and so the precepts following shew 3. this loue must be without dissimulation which Origen defineth thus when one loueth onely God and that which is pleasing to God Chrysostome giueth this rule when one loueth an other and doth vnto him as vnto himselfe but S. Iohn giueth a perfect description of this kind of loue 1. epist. 3.18 My little children let vs not loue in word or tongue but in deede and in truth he then loueth without dissembling that sheweth his loue in act and in deede so S. Paul describeth true charitie 1. Tim. 1.5 out of a pure heart good conscience faith vnfained where are expressed the subiect or place of this loue a pure heart the cause thereof is faith vnfained the perpetuall companion or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the ioynt-worke is a good conscience as the Apostle to the Hebr. 10.22 let vs draw neere with a true heart in the assurance of faith sprinkled in our hearts from an euill conscience Gryn From this true and syncere loue these are farre of 1. they which doe nourish hatred in their heart but colour it with pretensed friendship onely watching an opportunitie of reuenge such was Cain toward Abel and Ioab toward Abner 2. they which pretend friendship toward other but onely for hope of some gaine and profit to themselues these are selfe-louers and not louers of others as Felix propounded fauour vnto S. Paul but he hoped for some bribe Act. 24. 3. they also which professe loue and obedience but onely for feare as they which obserue those which are mightie and of authoritie because they are afraid of their greatnes and power doe not loue without dissimulation 2. Hating that which is euill or rather abhorring c. 1. Chrysostome obserueth an emphasis in the Apostles phrase he saith not abstaining but prosequnting with hatred and that vehemently the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Apostle addeth alwaies somewhat to the sense as he sheweth in diuers instances 2. Haymo taketh this for a generall precept that we should hate the deuill and his members but it seemeth rather to belong to the precept of loue 3. and in this sense some giue this interpretation that they should in their loue abstaine from all euill hurt deceit malice and follow goodnes Calvin Pellican some thinke that good and euill signifie here that which is profitable or vnprofitable and so he that loueth should procure the good not the hurt of him whome he loueth Pareus but the meaning rather is that we should so loue as that we be not partakers with men in their sinnes neither should be withdrawne from God but cleaue to him as the onely good so Chrysostome saith this is added because there is dilectio in malis a loue friendship in euill things as in them that are fellows in robbers c. so Origen qui proprium errantem videt non corrigit c. he that seeth his brother erring and correcteth him not he loueth not in truth so Lyranus also sic ametur natura vt vitium odio habeatur let nature be so loued as yet vice be hated this sense followeth Pet. Mart. some are so foolish to thinke that they loue their brethren cum illis consentiant ad libidines when they consent vnto them to lust and other vices to the same purpose Gualter dilectionis praetexiu non facienda m 〈…〉 la euill things must not be done vnder pretense of loue 3. Cleauing to that is good 1. that is saith Haymo to God who is the chiefe good but this is too generall 2. here we vnderstand that which is morally good Gryn which is agreeable vnto the will of God who is onely good 3. and the meaning is that we should so adhere vnto that which is good that no respect of any friendship or any thing whatsoeuer should draw vs away from it 3. Chrysostome noteth a singular force in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cleaving adhering the same word is vsed of the coniunction betweene man and wife Matth. 19.5 shewing the neare coniunction that should be betweene
quae tanquam ardentes faces taciuntur in coelum which as burning brands are cast vp into heauen so also Osiander semper habemus c. we alwaies haue somewhat either to aske for our selues or our brethren or to giue thanks for I take of all the rest these two that we must be readie vpon euery occasion to turne vs vnto God by praier and when we pray to pray instantly and feruently 3. But here the question will be asked why the Lord heareth not our praiers presently that we neede not continue so in praier and our Sauiour saith God at the instance of the praiers of his children will auenge him quickly Luk. 18.8 The answear is that God heareth quickly and performeth our requests quickly as he is said to doe a thing quickly that doth it quamprimum se offer at occasio as soone as opportunitie serueth so that mora non est in Deo sed in sensu nostro the stay is not in God but in our sense Martyr like as a carver first finisheth one part of his worke then an other so God bringeth forth euery thing in due time Olevian and further by this meanes when God deferreth our requests our faith is exercised and tried and illustrius est c. the benefit is so much the greater when it commeth Gualter and further we must pray continually because so is the will and pleasure of God as the Apostle saith 1. Thess. 5.17 Pray continually in all things giue thanks for this is the will of God in Christ Iesus Olevian 21. Quest. Of the communicating to the necessitie of the Saints and of hospitalitie v. 13. Communicating to the necessitie of the Saints c. 1. The word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vses rather then necessities as the vulgar Latin readeth and Erasmus least we should thinke that they are not to be succoured but in extreame necessitie Beza Tolet answeareth that yet the other word necessitie is better retained because all that want are in necessitie annot 23. but the word should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if it were to be translated necessities as Erasmus noteth also 2. And yet though we are commanded to minister to the vses of the Saints we must not giue supplie delicijs to their dainties and bestow superfluously vpon them Theophyl as afterward in time of superstition liberalitie was turned into superfluitle 3. Origen maketh mention of an other reading as though the word should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 memories which Ambrose followeth and giueth this sense that we should remember the Saints to imitate and follow their life and godly example but the vsuall reading is rather to be receiued and so Chrysostome Theophylact and the Syrian interpreter read 4. And where the Apostle saith communicating Haymo following Origen obserueth that the Apostle saith not giue as it were of almes but communicate honestiori vocabulo vsus est the Apostle vseth a fitter terme to shew that the Saints had as it were an interest in their goods and beside as Calvin obserueth this word sheweth a communicating in affection that they should release them as though they themselues suffered with them as the Apostle saith remember thâ—se that are in bonds as if your selues were bound with theÌ„ Chrysost. obserueth further vpon this word communicate quod plus accipiant quaÌ„ praestant they receiue more then they bestow res ista negotiatio est for this matter is a kind of marchandise the one coÌ„municateth teÌ„poral things the other spiritual making them partakers of their prayers 5. But Tolets glosse is here very corrupt sit particeps meritorum he that giueth is partaker of their merits which the Saints haue in their sufferings for the passions of the Saints merit not though the Lord crowne their sufferings in mercie the Apostle saith the afflictions or sufferings of this life are not worthie of the glorie which shall be reuealed Rom. 8. but God indeede shall reward the works of charitie exercised vpon the Saints in which sense our Sauiour saith Luk. 18. make ye friends of the vnrighteous mammon that when ye want they may receiue you into euerlasting habitations for although good works are not the cause of euerlasting life yet they are a rule according to the which God will giue euerlasting life Martyr 6. Now the Apostle nameth the Saints which were the faithfull redeemed by Christs blood and sanctified by his spirit shewing that although charitie should be extended to all yet specially we should preferre domesticos fidei such as are of the houshold of faith Gualt as the Apostle saith Gal. 6.10 and by this is signified that we should not exercise our charitie on them onely which are knowne vnto vs but euen vpon strangers and all the godly Osiand as the Samaritane did shew mercie on him that fell among the cues and further here we learne what the dutie is which we should performe vnto the Saints not in caruing and painting their images when they are dead but in succouring their necessities while they liue Pareus 7. So here there are three speciall motiues vnto this dutie of beneficence compassio necessitatis dilectio sanctitatis liberalitas communicationis the compassion of necessitie the loue of sanctitie and in communicating liberalitie Gorrhan Following or pursuing hospitalitie 1. Chrysostome obserueth how the Apostle in euery one of these precepts vseth emphaticall phrases as he said before continue in prayer not pray onely and communitie to the vses of the Saints not giue so here he saith not embrace hospitalitie but pursue follow it 2. in those daies the Apostles and other disciples went preaching from citie to citie and they had not their publica hospitia common hospitals to receiue strangers and therefore this exhortation was then most needefull Osiand 3. Origen obserueth and so Haymo that where he saith follow hospitalitie he would not that we should onely receiue them that come vnto vs sed requiramus but we should seeke them and follow them and vrge them to come home vnto vs as Abraham and Lot did the same note hath Chrysostome and Martyr Gualter for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to pursue to apprehend one that fleeth and so the Saints which otherwise of modestie would not offer themselues should be invited and intreated and followed after Tolet. 4. Gorrhan further noteth in this word that it signifieth that assidue we should continually practise hospitalitie â—â— frequentia hospitum sit nobis onerosa that the frequencie of strangers should not be burthensome vnto vs. 5. And seeing that hospitalitie was euen commended among the heathen who worshipped Iuppiter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the God of hospitalitie yet the Athenians made it a capital offence not to shew the way to a stranger much more should it be practised among Christians and the Apostle here doth not exhort vnto any base seruice for it is a princely and noble worke to giue hospitalitie as it is said of Titus the Emperour that he was wont to
readeth consentientes humilibus consenting to the humble that is saith Origen amare humiles to loue the humble he consenteth with the humble quei cum humilibus se humiliat which humbleth himselfe with those that are humble Haymo humiliorum imitatores imitators of those which are humble gloss interlin consenting to the humble that is in heart and not with the mouth onely gloss ordin Gorrhan all these vnderstand by the humble the lowely referring it to their persons 2. Some vnderstand this word of the things rather then of the persons and take it in the neuter gender that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the humble may answear vnto 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the high things before spoken of Calvin Beza Pareus so also Osiander humilia curate tractate c. respect and handle humble things likewise Tolet let them embrace base things quae vilea mundus reputat which the world counteth base And this sense is to be admitted by reason of the opposition of the words though not onely 3. Faius saith non tam res ipsae quam hominum affectus spectantur not so much the things themselues as the affections of men are here considered true it is that the obiect cannot be seuered from the affection but it is euident that the Apostle by high and lowe things meaneth the obiect of pride and humilitie 4. Pet. Martyr comprehendeth both base things and base persons that we should apply our selues vnto both neither dispising the one not refusing the other euen meane and base ministeries and seruices to profit our brother as our B. Sauiour disdained not to wash his Apostles feere and this is most agreeable to the Apostles meaning now the other word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not well translated by the Latine interpreter consentientes consenting it properly signifieth impetu quodam correpti carried us it were with force shewing how prone we ought to be to descend to lowe and base things Beza rendreth it obsecundantes submitting your selues the Syrian interpreter adhaerentes cleauing Vatablus accomodantes applying your selues our English making your selves equall c. giueth the meaning rather then the sense of the word Be not wise in your selues 1. Chrysostome thus interpreteth it ne putetis vos sufficere vobis ipsis thinke not that your are sufficient for your selues God hath so made vs vt alter alterum opera iudigeat that one standeth in neede of an other so also Theophylact vnderstandeth it of those which dispise the counsel of others and yet Moses dispised not the counsell of his father in lawe 2. Ambrose thinketh they are said to be wise in themselues which turne their wsedome altogether to their owne profit and not to the good of others so also the interlin gloss and Gorrhan ne prudentiam apud vos tantum exerceatis c. exercise not your wisedome onely for your selues but for your neighbours also 3. Basil regul brev resp 260. interpreteth those to be wise to themselues qui solam humanam prudentiam c. which onely haue humane wisedome and regard not the diuine will and pleasure such we call worldly wise 4. Haymo he is wise in himselfe who non authori sapientia deputat c. doth not ascribe vnto the author of wisedome that wisedome which he hath 5. But all these are the effects of arrogancie he which taketh himselfe to be wise dispiseth the counsell of others consulteth not with God neither ascribeth the praise to him here then the Apostle toucheth the verie roote and beginning of pride which is propriae prudentiae opinio the opinion of a mans owne wisedome Marlorat so that here the Apostle remooueth an other let and impediment of humilitie which is arrogancie and that is apud seipsum nimium sapere to be too wise in himselfe such the Prophet Isay speaketh against we vnto them that are wise in their owne eyes and prudent in their owne sight Isay. 5.21 Pareus so Origen before them hic cum arrogantia stultus est c. qui suam stultitiam quasi sapientiam colit he is arrogant and foolish who adoreth his owne folishnesse as if it were wisedome c. But here Lyranus aduertiseth well that prudence and wisedome is here not taken properly but in a certaine similitude for vera prudentia non nisi in bonis true wisedome and prudence is onely found in the good it is craft not wisedome which the wicked haue Now this arrogancie is the cause of all errors which are of three sorts either errors in opinion and iudgement or in practise of religion or in life and conuersation for hereupon some haue deuised newe doctrines and strange worship not contenting themselues with the simplicitie of Gods word as though they were wiser then God and they giue themselues euer vnto grosse sinnes in their life holding scorne to be admonished by others Gualter Quest. 25. How euill is not to be recompenced for euill v. 17. 1. Chrysostome noteth the generalitie of the speach recompence to no man whether beleeuer or vnbeleeuer not to a beleeuer because he is thy brother not to an infidel and vnbeleeuer that thou mayest winne him Haymo 2. Origen obserueth that reddere malum to render euill is a greater sinne quam inferre malum then to offer euil at the first for it may be that he did it ignorantly non sensisse malum c. that he perceiued it not to be euill which he did but he that recompenceth euill sheweth that he was not ignorant that it was euill 3. this precept concerneth onely particular wrongs it is not extended to magistrates that render euill vnto offenders according to the lawe in Deut. an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth and yet punishment is not euill because it is opus iustitiae a worke of iustice Gorrhan Martyr 4. here that pharisaicall doctrine is reprooued that they were to hate their enemies and loue their friends 5. and if it be a sinne to render euill for euill much more to recompence euill for good the one is incident into our humane corrupt nature but the other is plaine diabolicall 6. Calvin thinketh that this precept is somewhat larger then that which followeth avenge not your selues for in some cases euill may be rendered for euill sine manifesta vltione without manifest reuenge as when one refuseth to giue entertainment succour to one in his need and so the other to requite him withdraweth his hand in his necessitie so also Gualt but Martyr misliketh this I cannot see saith he how he which willingly doth render euill for euill doth not intend to take revenge and the Apostle he thinketh doth inculcate the same precept againe because it is so necessarie thus also Pareus but this difference betweene them may be soone taken away for Calvin saith onely without manifest reuenge there may be a reuenge in all kind of retalion but in some the revenge is more manifest then in other Quest. 26. How honest things are to be procured before all men
God 2 Whosoeuer therefore setteth himselfe against the power resisteth B.G.L. but there is an other word for that afterward resisteth the ordinance of God and they that resist shall receiue to themselues condemnation iudgement V. 3 For rulers B. magistrates G. Be. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are not to be feared are not a feare Gr. for good works but for euill wilt thou then not feare be without feare G. the power doe well so shalt thou haue praise of the same 4 For he is the minister of God for thy good wealth B.G. but if thou doe euill feare for he beareth not the sword in vaine without cause L. for nought G. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for he is the minister of God and reuenger for wrath to take vengeance G. on him that doth euill 5 Wherefore it is necessarie to be subiect not because of wrath onely but also for conscience sake 6 For for this cause pay ye also tribute for they are Gods ministers bending themselues seruing L.B. applying themselues G. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with force and strength applying see c. 12.12 to the same purpose 6 Giue vnto all men their dutie tribute to whome ye owe tribute custome to whom custome feare to whome feare honour to whom honour 8 Owe nothing to any man but to loue one an other for he that loueth an other his neighbour L.S. hath fulfilled the Law 9 For this Thou shalt not commit adulterie Thou shalt not kill Thou shalt not steale Thou shalt not beare false witnesse Thou shalt not couet and if there be any other commandement it is briefly comprehended capitulated Gr. not restoared L. fulfilled S. in this saying namely B.Be. in this Gr. Thou shalt loue thy neighbour as thy selfe 10 Charitie doth not euill to the neighbour therefore is charitie the fulfilling of the Law 11 And that considering knowing Gr. the season that it is now time the houre Gr. that we should be raised awake B. from sleeepe for now is saluation nearer vs better then our saluation is nearer L.B.G. then when we beleeued 12 The night is past on passed before L. praecessit but it is better interpreted processit is past on Be. and the day is approached is atiband G. is come nigh B. let vs therefore cast away the works of darknes and put on the armour of light the habit which beseemeth the light Be. ad 13 So that we walke honestly as in the day not in ryoting Be. or gluttonie G. in musike S. or drunkennes neither in chambring and wantonnes nor in strife and envying 14 But put ye on the Lord Iesus Christ and take no care make no perswasion Gr. B. for the flesh to fulfill the lusts thereof 2. The Argument method and parts IN this Chapter from the generall exhortation to the offices of charitie the Apostle commeth vnto particular duties as vnto the Magistrate and then falleth againe into the commendation of loue dehorting from grosse vices and corruptions of life so then of this chapter there are three parts 1. the first of dutie to be exhibited to the magistrate to v. 8. 2. of loue in generall v. 8 9 10. 3. the exhortation is extended from v. 11. to the ende 1. In the first the proposition is expressed v. 1. euery soule must be subiect to the magistrate which is confirmed by diuers reasons 1. from the author or efficient cause which is God amplified by the contrarie that may which resist magistrates resist against the ordinance of God 2. from the effects the punishment of those which disobey v. 2. 3. from the double ende of magistracie or gouernment the praise of wel-doers v. 3. and the punishment of them that doe euill v. 4. 4. from the inconuenience that ensueth he that disobeieth violateth a good conscience therefore for conscience sake we must be subiect v. 5. 5. from a part to the whole they pay tribute therefore they must yeeld obedience also in other things v. 6. 6. ab aequo from the equitie of it we must pay vnto all that which is due but subiection is due vnto the magistrate as he prooueth by diuers particulars v. 7. Ergo. 2. In the second part the Apostle exhorteth vnto mutuall loue 1. from the rule of equitie it is a common debt which one oweth vnto an other 2. from the effects it is the fulfilling of the law v. 8. which he prooueth 1. by a particular induction v. 9. 2. by remoouing of the contrarie effects loue doth none euill vnto our neighbour therefore it is the fulfilling of the law 3. Then the Apostle concludeth with a generall dehortation from certaine vices which is ioyned with an exhortation to the contrarie vertues And the same is either generall vrged by two arguments 1. one taken from the state of the regenerate saluation is nearer now then before v. 11. 2. the other from the circumstance of time which is propounded figuratiuely the night is past and the day is come v. 12. Then the particular exhortation followeth v. 13. with a dehortation from the contrarie vices and so he concludeth againe generally concerning both v. 14. 3. The questions and doubts discussed 1. Quest. Of the occasion which mooued the Apostle in this chapter to entreat of the dutie of subiects to the Magistrate 1. Chrysostome thinketh that the Apostle hauing treated in the former chapter of patience and not rendring euill for euill doth very oppotunely now mooue obedience vnto the Magistrate multo enim magis illis qui benefaciunt c. for much more ought we to obey them which deserue well of vs if we should not be auenged of them which doe euill 2. Beside he giueth an other reason that whereas the Christians had in those daies many troubles tentations and trialls it was needlesse van as tentationes superaddere to adde vaine idle tentations and occasions of trouble namely in resisting the Magistrates 3. Calvin thinketh that this precept was added especially because of the Iewes to whom it seemed a very vnmeete thing that progenies Abraha in servitute maneret that the progenie of Abraham should remaine in seruitude vnder heathen gouernors the same reason is touched by Peter Martyr 4. Pareus addeth that S. Pauls doctrine concerning Christian libertie as he said before c. 6. we are not vnder the law but vnder grace might haue beene misconstrued as though Christiās should not be subiect to ciuil laws therfore he seasonably vrgeth ciuil obediēce 5. Adde hereunto that the Christians were defamed as enemies vnto the policie of Commonwealths and ciuill Magistracie which false surmise was the cause of the persecuting of Christians as Clemens Alexandrin lib. 4. stromat therefore the Apostle to giue satisfaction to the Gentiles thus exhorteth this mooued Iustinus Martyr in his 2. apologie vnto Antonius the Emperor to cleare the Christians by many arguments of this surmised imputation Tolet. 6. And further whereas the Apostle before had taught that Christians should not avenge themselues some might haue gathered thereupon that it
notable exploit were praised publikely or priuately but S. Paul speaketh in generall of the office of all Magistrates whatsoeuer 5. Pet. Martyr thinketh that it is no small part of praise absolvi in iudicio to be absolued in iudgement as it was no small praise to Cato beeing so often accused still to be freed and absolued it is also a great praise for a man to be so innocent that nothing can be obiected against him in iudgement as Fimbria beeing asked what he could obiect vnto Scevola so innocent and harmelesse a man answeared quia telum toto suo corpore non receperit because he receiued not his weapon whole into his bodie but it is one thing to receiue praise and reward another to be freed onely from punishment 6. Wherefore I take this to be the better answear that first the Apostle speaketh here of the power it selfe and of the true ende wherefore it was ordained and not of the personall faults in those that abuse this power for if the good be not rewarded as well as the euill punished it is the fault of the gouernors adde hereunto because it is not possible for a Prince to reward all good subiects that by praise we must vnderstand omnia commoda privilegi\%a c. all the priuiledges and commodities which are by the lawes offered to good subiects Pareus they are praised that is counted worthie qui participent omnibus ijs bonis c. to be made partakers of all those benefits and commodities for the which commonwealths came first together Bullinger as good subiects enioy libertie possession of their lands and goods defense from wrong and such like and as occasion may serue may receiue also praise and encouragement from the Magistrate Quest. 10. How the Magistrate is said to be Gods minister for our wealth or good 1. Some vnderstand this onely of the power to punish loco Dei vindicat he taketh revenge in Gods place gloss interlin Lyranus 2. Haymo giueth these two senses he is Gods minister to defend thee from wrong or for thy good that thou doe no evill but this expresseth but one part of this ministring power 3. therefore Chrysostome better voluntati Dei cooperatur c. he worketh according to Gods will in punishing of the euill and in rewarding the good and therefore he is called his minister so also Theophylact voluntati Dei obsequitur he obeyeth the will of God as in commanding chastitie in forbidding auarice and theft like as the Lord is so must the minister be but God loueth the iust and punisheth the wicked therefore so should the magistrate do that is Gods minister 3. and generally they are Gods ministers 1. because they are ordained of God 2. they are as gods in earth in respect of their preheminence and authoritie ouer others 3. in regard of their office because they doe execute iustice in the earth in awarding rewards to the righteous and punishments to the wicked 4. whereas the Prince is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the minister of God which name and title also agreeth to the spirituall pastors who are the ministers of God yet they are ministers in a diuerse kind both agree in their institution which is from God and in the generall ende which is to seeke the good of Gods people yet they differ both in the obiect for the pastors charge is onely about spirituall things the Prince is occupied also in caring for temporall as also in the meanes for the Prince by his sword and coactiue power procureth the good of his subiects but the pastor seeketh it by the preaching of the word the administration of the Sacraments and discipline and other spirituall meanes For thy good That which the Apostle called before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 praise now he nameth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 good which is either naturall morall ciuill or spirituall good the Magistrate procureth all these the naturall good as in preseruing the liues and bodies of his subiects the morall good in commanding vertue and punishing vice the civill in maintaining their goods and possessions their spirituall good in setting forth and defending the true religion Pareus 11. Quest. How the Magistrate is said not to beare the sword for nought v. 4. 1. Lyranus doth indifferently vnderstand this of the materiall sword which the ciuill power hath or of the Ecclesiasticall but the whole course of the Apostles speach sheweth that he speaketh of the Civill power to whome tribute and such other customes belong 2. By the sword he vnderstandeth the power of exercising and drawing forth the sword against offenders and he alludeth to the custome of Princes which haue the sword carried before them and other ensignes of their authoritie 3. There are three vses of the civill sword the one is ad vindictam to be reuenged of the euill ad protectionem bonorum for the protection of the good and ad executionem iustitiae for the execution of iustice 4. He beareth not the sword 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in vaine that is temere rashly Beza because he hath his authoritie from God nor sine causa the vulgar Latin without some certaine cause or ende namely the punishment of the euill 5. And so he is called a reuenger vnto wrath 1. which some vnderstand of the diuine wrath which is executed by the Magistrate or to shew the wrath of God in time to come Gorrh. Hug. 2. rather by wrath we vnderstand the punishment it selfe inflicted which is an effect of wrath Pareus Tolet Sa. Quest. 12. Of the right vse of the sword both in time of peace and warre 1. Concerning the vse of the sword in time of peace three things are requisite 1. that there should be good lawes enacted and established 2. that there should be vpright iudgement according to those lawes 3. that of such iudgements once giuen there should be iust execution 1. In the making of lawes three things must concurre the matter of the lawe the end and scope and the extent 1. for the matter it must be agreeable to the lawe of nature and to the will of God Princes must not make lawes according to their owne minde but such as may be consonant to the pure and perfect will of God hereupon it was that the law-makers among the Gentiles would alwaies ascribe the invention of their lawes to some one of the gods to winne more credit vnto them Zoroastres who gaue lawes to the Bactrianes and Persians did make Oromazen whom they held to be a god the author of his lawes Trismegistus among the Egyptians Mercurius Minos among the Cretensians Iuppiter Carundas among the Carthaginians made Saturnus his author Lycurgus among the Lacedemonians Apollo Solon Draco among the Athenians Minerva Xamolpis among the Scythians Vesta Numa among the Romanes the goddes Egeria and Mahomet commended his Alcaron to the Arabians vnder the name of Gabriel the Arkeangel But these were their fabulous conceits we haue indeede the booke of God a perfect
be vnordained but the Ecclesiasticall censure of excommunicating kings is onely an humane ordinance not commanded nor warranted by the word Ergo 2. An excommunicate person is in the same degree with an heathen and Publican Mat. 18.17 but an heathen Magistrate is to be obeyed for such were the gouernours in S. Pauls time to whom he willeth subiection to be giuen Rom. 13.1 3. Christian religion ouerthroweth not the policie of Commonwealths neither is God the author of confusion but if Princes excommunicate should be disobeyed great disorder and confusion should follow in the commonwealth for the canons forbid palam vel secrete loqui to speake openly or secretly with excommunicate persons part 2. c. 11. qu. 3. c. 1. or to goe vnto the house of one that is excommunicate ib id c. 26. or to receiue any that is excommunicate into their house c. 29. and they are decreed not to be homicides qui contra excommunicatos armantur which take armes against excommunicate persons caus 23. qu. 5. c. 27. and an excommunicate person non audiendus in iudicio must not be heard in iudgement decret Gregor lib. 1. tit 29. c. 21. Now who seeth not what confusion would be brought vpon the commonwealth if the subiects might neither speake and conferre with the king nor resort vnto him and that they might take armes against him standing excommunicate 4. No Ecclesiasticall lawe can dispense and take away the ciuill and naturall lawe as for the sonne to doe his dutie to his father the wife to her husband the seruant to his Master though they stand excommunicate yea the Popish decrees allowe all these to doe their seruice euen vnto excommunicate persons as thus stand the words of the canon anathematis vinculo has subtrahimus videlicet vxores liberos seruos ancellas c. we doe release from the bond of excommunication wiues children seruants maides c. which did attend vpon excommunicate persons part 2. c. 11. qu. 3. c. 103. If these domesticall inferiours may performe their duties to persons excommunicate how much more lawfull is it for subiects to doe the like to their Princes because the necessitie of the state so much the more requireth it 5. The Popes censure of excommunication is vniust and vnlawfull and therefore voide by their owne lawes as part 2. c. 11. quest 3. it is decreed iniustam damnationem irritam that an vniust damnation is of no force c. 1.46 non est petenda solutio vbi inique fertur sententia absolution is not to be craued where the sentence is vniustly laid c. to this purpose is the decree of Gelasius B. of Rome there expressed Now the Popes excommunicating is vnlawfull for diuerse reasons 1. because he is an incompetent iudge he excommunicateth Princes who are not of his iurisdiction and the lawe is cui denegatur executio denegatur sententiae pronuntiatio to whom the execution of the sentence is denied the pronouncing of the sentence is c. Cod. lib. 3. tit 26. leg 3. but the Pope out of his precinct and iurisdiction hath no power to execute his sentence Ergo the denouncing thereof belongeth not vnto him 2. Their owne canons hold that qui inimici sunt iudices esse non possunt they which are enemies can be no iudges Caus. 3. qu. 5. c. 15. but the Pope is a professed enemie to kings whom he excommunicateth 3. They are not held to be excommunicate which are excommunicate by heretikes c. 24. qu. 1. c. 36. but the Pope holdeth many hereticall points of doctrine for proofe hereof see Synops. Papis thoroughout 4. It is not lawfull for any to excommunicate in their owne cause See the decree of Gregor c. 23. qu. 4. c. 27. but this doth the Pope 5. Their law is that no man should be excommunicate antequam causa probetur before the cause be prooued c. 2. qu. 1. c. 11. but how can the causes of Princes he prooued before an incompetent iudge where no man appeareth to answear for them 6. An excommunicate person cannot excommunicate c. 24. qu. 11.4 but the Pope standeth excommunicate himselfe according to that decree of the Toletane councell 12. c. 1. non erat ab anathematis sententia alienus aut à divina animadversionis vltione securus quisquis contra salutem principis deinceps aut crexerit vocem aut commouerit caedem aue quamcunque quaesierit laedendi vltionem he shall not be free from the sentence of excommunication or secure from the reuenge of the diuine animadversion whosoeuer hereafter doth either lift vp his voice against the safetie of the Prince or plotte to murther him or seeke to be reuenged by procuring any hurt vnto him c. the like decree see Toletan 4.74 Toletan 5.4 Toletan 7.1 Now then because it is apparantly known that the Pope practiseth against the safetie and state of Princes not of his faction he standeth excommunicate and so his excommunication is of no value 6. If Kings ought not at all to be excommunicate de iure by the right of their imperiall authoritie then de facto if they chaunce in fact to be excommunicate obedience notwithstanding is to be yeelded vnto them but the first is true as is partly shewed before and further appeareth by the reasons sometime vsed by the Colledge or Church Leodievs against the excommunication of Paschalis the 2. in this manner si quis vetus novum Testamentum gestaque revoluerit c. If any man turne ouer the old and new Testament and the things done therein he shall euidently find quod aut minime aut difficile possunt Reges Imperatores excommunicari that Kings and Emperors either not at all or verie hardly are to be excommunicate they may be admonished rebuked by discrete men because those whom Christ the King of kings hath appointed in his place in earth damnandos salvandos suo iudicio reliquit c. he hath reserued to be condemned or saued to his owne iudgement c. here are two reasons of this assertion the one taken from the authoritie of the old and new Testament wherein no such president is to be found the other from the eminencie of the Princely estate which Christ hath reserued to his owne iudgement An other reason which they vrge is this Paulus pro malis regibus orari vult c. Paul will haue euill Kings prayed for that we may lead a quiet life esset apostolorum imitari Apostolum it were Apostolike to imitate the Apostle c. Kings must then be prayed for and blessed they must not be anathematized and accursed How farre the Ciuill state may proceed in resisting a Tyrant Here Pareus hath this position that the inferior Magistrates beeing subiects may defend themselues the Commonwealth and the Church and the true saith euen by force of armes against a Tyrant so these conditions be obserued 1. When either the Prince degenerateth to a Tyrant and maketh hauock of all offering notorious wrongs against all law
and equitie to his subiects and forceth them to Idolatrie and false religion 2. if that without such defence they cannot be safe their liues bodies and consciences 3. that vnder pretence of such defense they seeke not their owne reuenge with other respects vnto themselues 4. that all things be done with moderation not to the vndoeing of the state but the preseruation of it his reasons are these 1. From the institution of God and the end of the ordinance of Magistracie which is to be auenged of euill doers and for the praise of the good they doe not beare the sword for naught the inferiour Magistrates then hauing the sword may exercise their power in restraining the tyrannie of superior gouernours and for this cause inferiour Magistrates are ioyned with the superior not onely as helpers but to moderate their licentious and outragious gouerment and therefore where they bridle the insolencie of Tyrants vtuntur gladio per legitimam vocationem diuinitus sibi tradito they vse the sword deliuered vnto them from God by a lawfull vocation 2. Like as a furious and mad man may be remooued from the gouerment as Nabuchadnezer was cast forth by publike authoritie Dan. 4.31 so a Tyrant also who differeth not from a mad and furious man 3. They which haue power to constitute the Magistrate as where they enter by election of the Senat consent of the people or by other electors appointed haue power also to restraine their immoderate gouerment 4. This is confirmed by many commendable examples out of sacred and forren stories the people resisted Saul that he should not put Ionathan his sonne to death 1. Sam. 14.45 the Israelites in the time of the Iudges often were deliuered by their Iudges whom God raised vp from their oppressors Athalias was remooued from her tyrannicall gouernment 2. kin 11. the Macchabees defended thēselues and their country against the rage and furie of the Syrian Kings the Romans expelled their vitious Kings so did they depose their cruell Emperors as Nero Maximinus Traianus is commended for that saying when he gaue the sword vnto a chiefe officer hoc pro me vtere si iusta imperavero contra me si iniusta c. vse that for me if I command iust things and against me if vniust The Prince Electors remooued Wencelaus a man giuen to idlenes and luxurious life from the Empire in his stead appointing Rupertus the Countie of Palatine one of the Electors to this purpose Pareus But here certaine differences are to be obserued for where either there is an extraordinarie calling as in the time of the Iudges or where the kingdome is vsurped without any right as by Athaliah or where the land is oppressed by forren invaders as in the time of the Macchabees or where the gouernment is altogether Electiue as the Empire of Germanie in all these cases there is lesse question of resistance to be made by the generall consent of the states And yet where none of these concurre God forbid that the Commonwealth and Church should be left without remedie the former conditions obserued when either havock is made of the Commonwelth or of the Church and religion How farre priuate men may be warranted in denying obedience vnto Tyrants Here Pareus hath two propositions 1. That it is not lawfull for a priuate man without a lawfull calling to take armes either before the daunger to invade a tyrant or to defend thēselues in the time of daunger or to revenge himselfe after daunger if he may be defended by an ordinarie power c. for vnlawfully to resist the power is to resist Gods ordinance and one ought rather to die then to sinne and here that saying of the Lacedemonians taketh place si duriora morte imperetis potius moriemur if ye command things more heauie then death we will chuse rather to die 2. His other position is That it is lawfull for subiects beeing meere priuate men if a Tyrant as a theefe and violater of chastitie doe offer them violence and they neither can implore the ordinarie power nor by any other meanes escape the daunger to defend themselues and theirs for the present against a Tyrant as against a private person that maketh an assault for if it should not be lawfull to make such resistance in case of necessitie there should be no remedie left against the furious outrage of Tyrants which would tend to the vtter dissolution of humane societie and beside against whom defense by the Magistrate is lawfull in case of necessitie where that cannot be had a priuate defense is allowed for then leges armant privatos the lawes doe arme priuate men but it is lawfull for the inferior Magistrates to defend the priuate subiects in cases before limited against the furie and outrage of Tyrants Ergo c. to this purpose Pareus But this last position of his must receiue some further qualification for if a priuate man might lawfully defend himselfe when any notorious wrong is offered to him by a Tyrant men in this case should be iudges of their owne wrongs and as their iudgement is partiall in their owne case so they would take great libertie to defend themselues wherefore these conditions must further be here obserued 1. It must be considered whether in these wrongs that are offered the Tyrant doe transgresse his owne lawes if he doe then he is held to be but as privatus grassator a priuate assaulter otherwise if the lawes beare him out in these wrongs they are rather to suffer and endure then vse any resistance as the band of Christian souldiers which were put to the sword for their Christian faith at the commandement of the cruell Emperor Maximianus resisted not but yeelded themselues Otto Phrinsigens lib. 2. c. 45 because then the lawes of the Empire were for the maintenance of Idolatrie and a whole Citie of Phrygia professing Christianitie was destroyed and burnt with fire vsing no resistance Euseb. lib. 8. c. 11. 2. The subiect must wisely discerne whether he be forced to be an agent or patient in these wrongs he is rather to die then to be compelled to consent to any euill as a woman attempted by a Tyrant to adulterie should resist rather vnto death then prostitute her body but if they be patients onely and are not forced to doe any thing or consent against their conscience the case is otherwise 3. It must be also waighed wherein this wrong is offered if it be onely in the goods and substance of the subiect no resistance is to be made for the goods of the subiect are more lyeable to the command of the Magistrate then any thing beside so Naboth refused to yeeld his inheritance and patrimonie vnto Ahab but without any resistance but if a mans life be assaulted or the chastitie of his wife or the libertie and safetie of his children against all colour of law nature teacheth a man here to vse defence 4. Further the cause must be considered for the which
the subiect is assaulted if it be a ciuill matter resistance may more safely be vsed but if it be the cause of religion therein they should rather shew their patience in suffering as we read in the persecutions of the primitiue Church of 20. thousand Martyrs that were burnt together in a Temple without any resistance at all who for their number might haue sustained the brunt of the aduersaries but they willingly yeelded themselues to the fire 5. Likewise this discreete consideration must be vsed whether there be not hope to escape the daunger without resistance or whether by resisting a way may be opened of deliuerance or whether by their escaping many of their brethren shall not be brought into greater daunger for where any of these things doe happen it is not safe to resist 6. They must in such extremities so defend themselues as that they vse no assault vpon the person of their Prince to put his life in daunger for therein they manifestly transgresse the publike lawes it is one thing to vse a necessarie defense an other to make an assault Dauid though he stood vpon his owne guard and had a great band of men attending vpon him yet when Saul twice fell into his hands he spared to lay any violent hands vpon him with these restraintes and limitations some defense may be graunted euen vnto priuate subiects against Tyrants otherwise it is daungerous both in respect of their conscience in resisting the power and for the euil example whereby other seditious persons may be encourraged Thus much of this question how farre resistance may be made against the ciuill power how farre also and in what manner the Tyrannie of the Pope the Antichrist may be resisted see among the Controversies contr 3. Quest. 18. How we should not owe any thing to any man but to loue one an other 1. Touching the occasion of these words Augustine thinketh that the duties before membratim fusa nunc ipso circuitu clauduntur deliuered by partes now are shut vp together de doctrin Christian. 4. c. 20. Lyranus also thinketh that here inferiors are taught that they owe charitie to their superiors so also Mr. Calvin thinketh this precept of the Apostle to be a confirmation of his former doctrine of obedience to Magistrates because violat charitatem c. he doth violate charitie who denieth obedience 2. Beza thinketh that the Apostle remooueth the impediment of obedience because the want of charitie is cause of quarrels and suits whereupon the Magistrate is constrained by his authoritie to force men to render vnto euerie one their owne and so by this meanes magistratus nomen invidio sum sit it commeth to passe that the name of the Magistrate is odious and envied 3. Erasmus collecteth out of Ambrose but not rightly as Beza here noteth that hitherto the Apostle shewed what dutie was to be yeelded to the heathen Magistrates but now he teacheth the dutie which must be rendered to Christian Magistrates 4. But the truth is the Apostle from speciall duties belonging to superiors ascendeth higher to treat of the generall dutie of loue which is common to all 2. Owe nothing there are two kinds of debts there is a Ciuill debt and a Naturall debt the ciuill is either common to all as the paying of tribute yeelding of obedience must be performed by euery one to the superiors or concerneth onely some particular persons which are endebted by promise and contract or some other bond vnto others there is also a naturall debt either peculiar and proper to some as of the children to the parents of scholers to their Masters wiues to their husbands or common to all as is mutuall loue here by the Apostle commended 3. There are three kind of wayes whereby one may be a debter to another either when he payeth nothing of his debt as if he owe an hundred shillings and pay none at all or if he pay but part and not all as but tenne and if he pay the whole debt due at one time but not at another as if he should pay euery day a shilling till the whole debt be paid and he hold the payment one day or two but fayle in the rest the debt of charitie is not of either of the first kinds but of the third a man sheweth charitie once or twice he is bound to shew it still Tolet. 4. The debt of charitie different from other debts in these three points 1. as Chrysostome saith it is such a debt vt semper reddatur semper debeatur that it both is alwaies paied and yet is alwaies owing not like vnto other debtes which beeing paied cease to be due and so both redditur cum impenditur it is restored when it is paied debetur cum reddita fuerit and it is owing when it is rendered because it must be shewed at all times 2. nec cum redditur omittitur charitie is not lost from him that sheweth it as money which is paid goeth from him that payeth it 3. may charitie reddendo multiplicatur is multiplyed by the paying of it cum redditur ab homine crescit in homine when it is rendered by a man it encreaseth in man gloss ordinar ex Augustine so some things when they are communicated to many minuuntur non augentur are diminished not encreased as mony and all terren things some things are neither encreased nor diminished when they are communicated as the light and the sound of a voiceâ— some things non minuuntur sed augentur are not diminished but encreased as charitie and all spirituall things Gorrhan 5. Origens conceit is here verie straunge who by debt vnderstandeth sinne vult ergo omne debitum peccati solvi he would therefore euery debt of sinne to be paid and not to remaine with vs. But the Apostle speaketh not of any such spirituall debt whereby we stand indebted to God neither is it in our power to pay that debt but of outward debts and duties vnto men 19. Quest. How he that loueth his brother fulfilleth the law 1. He which loueth his brother doth not in euery particular and in act keepe euery part in the law for one may loue his brother though in that instant he doe not performe all the acts of charitie as in feeding him if he be hungrie and such like but yet he fulfilleth all these duties virtute potestate in possibilitie and hauing an aptnes and power thereunto both because charitie is the cause and beginning of all the duties which as it mooueth him to one dutie so it will stirre him vp to the rest as also it is the ende and scope of the law which is to maintaine charitie and it is modus the manner how the law should be obserued for whatsoeuer externall dutie one doth if it be not in loue it is nothing as S. Paul sheweth 2. Cor. 13.2 3. 2. But here a question is mooued by Chrysostome how the Apostle reduceth all the law vnto this one precept of louing
as a support and supply of the manifold charges which the Prince is put vnto in maintaining his officers and Ministers in founding and raising Churches schooles hospitals in waging battell and such like our Blessed Sauiour refused not to pay poll money to the officers Matth. 17. Doct. 5. A Christian is bound to pay his debts v. 6. Owe nothing to any man c. Though charitie require that no extremitie should be vsed in rigorous exacting of debts yet euerie one that is endebted ought to haue a care of discharging his debts as Christian religion doth not ouerthrowe the generall policies of states and commonwealths so neither doth it dissolue priuate contracts and couenants the Prophet did by a miracle bring vp the axe that was fallen into the water to restore it againe to the owner of whom it was borrowed 2. King 6.5 Doct. 6. That Christian religion taketh not away the obedience of subiects This euidently appeareth out of the whole chapter wherein the Apostle sheweth fowre speciall bands of obedience 1. the authoritie of God who instituted magistrates 2. the feare and awe of conscience which is more then the feare of any humane lawes 3. the dutie of charitie which is to yeeld vnto euery one their owne 4. the puritie of Euangelicall doctrine which forbiddeth all vice and commandeth vertue Therefore the Romanists doe cause the Gospell of Christ to be slaundered so much diminishing and empayring the authoritie of Magistrates by exemption of Ecclesiasticall and other priuiledged persons But Tolet annot 12. here telleth vs that notwithstanding some persons are exempted yet for all this the Ecclesiasticall state doth confirme and corroborate the secular obedience as by the Magistrates authoritie is diminished in some sort the particular power of parents ouer their children of Masters ouer their seruants and yet also their authoritie is confirmed and strengthened by the care and prouision of the superiour Magistrate and so is the secular state confirmed by the Eccesiasticall though it seeme in some respect to be empayred Contra. 1. The example is not alike for the lawe commandeth obedience of children to their parents of seruants to their Masters it exempteth them not as they free Ecclesiasticall persons altogether yet in case the parent or master may command any thing against the state for then they are not to be obeyed neither is the ciuill Magistrate to require any thing against God 2. the Ecclesiasticall state by preaching confirmeth obedience to the Prince and the Prince by his authoritie countenanceth the Ministers but when as subiects are so freed that the Prince hath no power ouer thē it is a manifest empairing of their authoritie 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. Whether the Pope and other Ecclesiasticall persons ought to be subiect to the Ciuill power This doctrine is agreeable to the rule of truth the word of God that all persons as well Ecclesiasticall as temporall ought to be subiect and obedient to the Ciuill power both touching their causes and persons which is denied by the Romanists whose obiections to prooue the exemption and immunitie of both are these 1. Obiect The superiour ought not to be subiect to the inferiour but the Ecclesiasticall power is superious vnto the Ciuill as beeing occupied in a more excellent matter about spirituall things therefore it ought not to be subiect and Bonifacius the 8 in the extravagant which beginneth vnum sanctum inferreth as much out of this place v. 1. the powers that be are ordained of God that there are degrees and order between the powers themselues some are superiour to others Contra. 1. We graunt that wherein the Ecclesiasticall function is superiour as in the preaching of the word and administration of the Sacraments therein it is not subiect to the Ciuill power to receiue direction from them but from the word of God but yet in other things which appertaine vnto the bodily life and concerne ciuill subiection and obedience they ought to be subiect 2. And yet euen in things meerely Ecclesiasticall the Prince hath a compulsiue power to see that the Ministers of the Church doe their duties and that they preach no false doctrine and to remooue such as are scandalous either by doctrine or life 3. there is no such matter of order or difference betweene the powers themselues gathered out of this place their ordaining hath relation to God by whom they were instituted not to any such distinction and order among themselues 2. Obiect The Imperiall constitutions doe exempt Cleargie men from the iudgement of secular Courts Novel 79.83.123 Contra. 1. Then their immunities such as they are they enioy onely by humane priuiledge not by diuine right 2. neither are they by the lawe exempted from the ciuill power in criminall causes but onely in certaine ciuill for the lawe saith omnes secundum leges vivant etiamsi ad diuinam abmum pertineant let all liue according to the lawes though they belong vnto the house of God lib. 10. de mandat princip 3. though Princes of their munificence graunted certaine immunities and priuiledges to Clergie men as to free them frō personall seruice as to goe to warre to watch to ward and such like and from base and servile workes as to digge to plowe to cart as also from extraordinarie taxes and burthens yet they are not for all this discharged of their ciuill obedience these freedomes were giuen them that they might better attend vpon their Ecclesiasticall function not to the preiudice of the secular power 4. and although Princes should wholly exempt the Clergie from the Civill power the question is not what they haue done but what they may do for Princes haue not power vt rescindant leges Dei to cut off the lawes of God which do subiect all soules vnto the higher powes Mart. neither can Princes free any from the naturall and diuine bond to the which they are obliged as to exempt the child from the obedience of the father and the wife from her husband and so consequently the subiect from the Prince the seruant from the Master 5. adde hereunto that some of these priviledges which are thus vrged are conficta forged some malis artibus extenta extented by cunning Gualter 3. Obiect It is not fit that the sheepe should iudge the sheepeheard Princes are as sheepe vnto their ecclesiasticall Pastors therefore they ought not to iudge them Contra. 1. Princes are not to iudge them concerning their doctrine and the word of God in respect whereof they are fed and feede not but in all other ciuill things the Magistrate is as a Pastor and sheepehead himselfe and therefore in these things he hath a command ouer ecclesiasticall persons 4. Obiect Ministers are the seruants of the most high God and chiefe king of the world therefore it is not fit that a terrene gouernour should iudge them Contra. The Prince also is the seruant of God and is in Gods place in earth to iudge other seruants of God like as a
Antichrist are wicked and abhominable 2. Princes are commanded to render vnto the whore as she had done to them and to recompence her double Revel 18.6 this is their warrant the commandement of God 3. and it is prophesied and foretold that the Princes shall hate the whore and make her naked deuoure her flesh and consume her with fire Rev. 17.16 This prophecie shall not fall to the ground and Princes for their part must endeauour to make it good 4. Controv. Whether the ciuill Magistrate hath any power or authoritie in matters of Religion Because there is a great question mooued betweene the Romanists and vs concerning the power of the Ciuill Magistrate in causes Ecclesiasticall and in religious affaires first of all it is necessarie that the state of the question be considered which shall be deuided into certaine propositions of two sorts first generall touching the foundation and institution of Kings and other superiour Magistrates and then more particular of the execution of their office 1. There is in the Commonwealth a superior authoritie called architectonica as the framer and chiefe builder of the Commonwealth to the which it belongeth to institute and ordaine lawes and to see that iustice be exercised according to those lawes this beeing the supreame and highest authoritie can not be in subiects and so not in the Ecclesiasticall persons but in the king onely 2. To this power it belongeth to prouide for the good in generall that belongeth to the subiects whether it be ciuill or spirituall for the good of the subiects is the intendment of the lawmaker 3. Yet least this power should erre in making of lawes it receiueth direction for the ciuill lawes from the rule of equitie and prudence confirmed by experience for Ecclesiasticall lawes from the word of God 4. Vnder this supreame authoritie there is the Ciuill and Ecclesiasticall power but not alike the Ciuill is simply inferior vnto it altogether depending of it but the Ecclesiasticall though it be subiect vnto it in respect of the externall policie yet in respect of the obiect which is spirituall the word of God and of that direction which it giueth out of the same to the magistrate it is not simply inferior as the other 4. This supreame architectonicall power though properly it be ciuill in respect of the obiect acts condition and state thereof yet in some sort it is also an Ecclesiasticall power as it hath ouersight also of the Church 5. This princely power though it haue the ouersight and chiefe care of Church and Commonwealth as the chiefe steward and disposer yet it can not execute all the offices and functions belonging to either as some it can not excuse ob defectum facultatis for want of facultie and skill as to minister Physick to teach in schooles some for the defect of dignitie in the things themselues which beeing base are not incident into the maiestie of the King as to digge to plow and such like some propter defectum iuris for the defect of lawfull right and calling as the Prince is not to preach the word to conferre orders to minister the Sacraments because he is not thereunto called nor appointed 6. This supreame and Princely power though it be incident both to the Christians and Pagane magistrats yet it is so much the more perfect in a Christian gouernment in as much as both of himselfe by the light of nature and in himselfe by direction from others in ciuill things and by illumination of Gods spirit within and iustruction without in spirituall matters he hath better vnderstanding Now concerning the execution of this supreame and princely power these propositions are to be maintained which are without any controversie 1. Princes ought not onely to take care about the affaires of the Common-wealth and to be altogether carelesse of religion but euen vnto Ecclesiasticall affaires and matters of religion they ought to extend their Princely care and watchfulnes 1. the Prince is the minister of God for our good but the good of the subiect is not onely ciuill and temporall but spirituall concerning religion 2. euen the heathen did ascribe vnto their kings a principall care euen of religion whereupon the Emperors of Rome were styled Pontifices maxiâ—i the high Priests or Prelates and Aristotle writeth lib. 3. politic c. 10. that the Lacedemonian kings had the command of warre rei divinae cultum exercuisse and did exercise diuine worship vnlesse they were such sacrifices as were necessarily to be done by a Priest that therefore which by a common consent of nations was giuen vnto kings ought not to be denied to Christian Princes 3. the care of religion otherwise concerneth the Prince rather then priuate persons these onely are to wish well vnto it and to accept of it but the Prince ought to be an agent without whose power nothing can be effected publikely for the maintenance of religion 2. It belongeth to the Imperiall power to maintaine true religion and to see that no confused mixture of religions be admitted for this is giuen as a reason in the time of the Iudges why some followed idolatrie and strange worship because there was no king in Israel but euery one did that which was good in his owne eyes Iudg. 17.4 if there had beene then a king they should not haue beene suffered euery one to follow their owne fansies 3. Christian Princes are by their laws and edicts to restraine all blasphemie idolatrie heresie sacriledge and such like because Princes are to be feared for euill works their office is to restraine euill works whatsoeuer such as these are and they are appointed to procure the good of their subiects and consequently to take out of the way all impediments which may hinder their good such as these are the Romanists graunt thus much that the Princes by their lawes should prouide against heresie but they will exclude the Prince from all iudgement of heresie which must be in their opinion determined onely by the Church but of this matter more shall be said afterward 4. The Ciuill Magistrate is not to assume vnto himselfe or take vpon him the execution of any Ecclesiasticall function as to preach to binde or loose to minister the Sacraments because they are not thereunto called and without a calling none are to intrude themselues into those ministeriall functions Hebr. 5. the examples of Ieroboam who would haue sacrificed and his hand withered 1. king 13. and of Vzziah who attempted to haue offered incense and was therefore stricken with the leprosie 2. Chron. 26. doe teach kings to keepe themselues within the limits and bounds of their callings 5. Neither hath the Prince authoritie in matters of religion concerning the worship of God and the doctrine of faith to appoint what it pleaseth him but he must therein be directed by the word of God for this was the sinne of Ieroboam that set vp two golden calves of his owne invention and if it be not lawfull for
the Ecclesiasticall gouernors whose speciall charge is about religion to bring in their owne inuentions as Aaron sinned in setting vp a golden calfe much lesse may the Ciuill powers presume that way Three things are signified vnder the name of religion and religious matters 1. the doctrine of the Church 2. the discipline and gouernment in generall that there should be Pastors and teachers in the Church neither of these are to be swaied by the Prince but they are to be directed by the word 3. but the speciall oeconomie of the Church as touching the number of the Pastors and who ought to be appointed thereunto this appertaineth to the care and office of the Magistrate 6. Princes are bound to haue the ministers and Pastors of God in reverence because they are the Embassadors of Christ 2. Cor. 5.20 and to see them sufficiently maintained because the labourer is worthie of his hire and it concerneth the spirituall good of these subiects that sufficient Pastors should be prouided for them to minister vnto them spirituall foode and besides they must submit themselues to the doctrine precepts and exhortations deliuered by the Pastors out of Gods word as Dauid gaue eare vnto Nathan and suffered his reprehension and our blessed Sauiour saith he that heareth you heareth me c. All these propositions are not at all controverted betweene our adversaries the Papists and vs thus then standeth the state of the question 7. The office of the Prince is as in Ciuill matters to prouide all things concerning the ciuill good of the subiect to see that right and equitie be maintained so also to take care touching their spirituall good that true religion be continued and taught in the Church according to the word of God vnto the which care and charge belong these particulars 1. The Prince in himselfe and for his particular is to take knowledge and to vnderstand true religion to be able to discerne it from error and false worship and to this ende to be exercised himselfe in the law and word of God Deut. 17.19 2. Then it is his part to cause to be set downe a perfect forme of religion and Ecclesiasticall gouernment squared out according to the line of truth and rule of Gods word and by godly lawes to establish the same as Iosias did 2. king 23.3 3. He must also see that sufficient and able Pastors be prouided for the Church which may instruct the people in the waies of God as Iehosaphat did 2. Chron. 19.8 4. Further the Princes care must be to see that these Pastors doe their dutie in preaching true and sound doctrine and in administring discipline vprightly as Dauid appointed the Levites their offices 1. Chron. 16. 5. And the Prince is also to remooue ignorant erroneous and delinquent Pastors and to see vice duly punished as Salomon remooued Abiathar from the priesthood to appoint Councells and Synods to that ende for the redresse of enormous faults The state of the question beeing thus propounded we will first see how it is impugned by our adversaries and examine some of their arguments 1. Stapleton thus prooueth that the Prince hath no power in Ecclesiasticall matters because the sheepe haue no iurisdiction ouer the Pastor but the Magistrate is of the number of the sheepe Ergo. Ans. 1. There is a double Ecclesiasticall powers one is properly and simply so called which consisteth meerely in Ecclesiasticall matters as in preaching the word administring the discipline of the Church this power belongeth onely to Ecclesiastikes there is an Ecclesiasticall power improperly so called which is ciuilly exercised about Ecclesiasticall persons and causes and this is in the Ciuill magistrate so Constantine said vos estis Episcopi in ecclesia ego extra ecclestam sum Episcopus à Deo constitutus ye are Bishops within the Church I also without the Church am a Bishop appointed of God Euseb. lib. 4. c. 24. de vit Constantin 2. As Princes are sheepe to be ordered and directed by the word of God so they haue an Ecclesiasticall power but they are Pastors also in regard of their gouernment and the Ministers as subiects and so sheepe also vnder the magistrate and thus Princes haue an Ecclesiasticall power 2. Argum. That which neither the Emperors would euer assume vnto themselues nor the Church giue vnto them no way belongeth vnto them but to be Iudges of Ecclesiasticall matters neither they challenged nor the other yeelded Ergo for proofe of the precedent part is alieadged how Theodosius the Emperor said illicitum esse Imperatorem se interserere ecclesiasticis tractatibus that it is not lawfull for the Emperor to enterpose himselfe in Ecclesiasticall affaires Cyril tom 4. epist. 17. Hilarius writ to Constantine the Emperor vt indices non vsurpent cognoscere causas Clericorum c. that the Iudges vsurpe not vpon thē to take cognizance of the causes of Clergie men c. Ambrosius refused to dispute with Auxentius the heretike before Valentinian the Emperor of the orthodoxall faith c. Ans. 1. It is vntrue that the Emperors assumed no such Ecclesiasticall power to themselues for Constantinus both called together the Bishops to that great assembly of the Nicene Councell prescribed them a rule of their conference to decide all controversies by the Scriptures and he himselfe sate among them and iudged the causes with the rest and did by his lawes establish and command to be obeied the things there agreed vpon as Eusebius witnesseth lib. 3. c. 12. Theodosius must be vnderstood to speake of matters meerely and absolutely Ecclesiasticall as of the doctrine of faith and therein the Ciuill power is not to giue rules of faith so also must Hilarie be vnderstood if he meane otherwise Chrysostomes iudgment is to be preferred who subiecteth euen Apostles Prophets Bishops to the Ciuil power that of Ambrose was a matter of fact and concludeth not 3. Argum. If Princes should make Ecclesiasticall laws the vnitie of faith could not be kept because in euery seuerall kingdome there would be a seuerall religion Ans. 1. The argument followeth not for religion is not to depend vpon the opinion or will of the Prince but it must be squared out by the word of God which Princes following can not differ in the substance of religion though they may varie in some circumstances and externall rites but if Princes will not be ruled by Gods word but follow other directions then they may frame vnto themselues diuers religions so then it is not the fault of the power but the abuse thereof and the personall fault of Princes if by this meanes a varietie of religion be brought in 2. neither if this power be denied vnto kings and the whole authoritie of Ecclesiasticall lawes were onely in men of the Church if they refuse to be guided by the word is this inconvenience helped for in Moses absence the whole power beeing in Aarons hand yet a different worship in setting vp a golden calfe from that which Moses
merited both to himselfe and his members the glorifying of his bodie and the manifestation of his Godhead to this purpose Lombard lib. 3. distinct 18. and some of our Protestant writers seeme to incline to this opinion as Pet. Martyr 1. Pet. Martyr would prooue so much out of this place v. 9. Christ therefore died and rose againe c. that he might be Lord of the quicke and dead whereupon he inferreth thus which dominion though God might haue conferred vpon him gratis freely yet meritis eius dare maluit he did choose to giue it rather for his merits Answ. Though I reverence the iudgement of this learned writer whose worthie commentaries vpon the Scriptures are not inferiour to any of our newe writers yet herein vpon better reason I must dissent from him The argument followeth not Christ therefore died c. therefore by his death he merited 1. like as this is no good reason the Martyrs die to the ende to set forth Gods glorie Ergo they merit the setting forth of his glorie that indeede is the ende and consequent the other is not the meriting cause but precedent onely 2. Christ died then to that ende because this was the way and order appointed of God whereby he should come to exercise his dominion 2. Lombard in the place before recited vrgeth that place Philip. 2.7.8 he became obedient to the death of the crosse c. wherefore God hath exalted him here the exaltation of Christ is the reward of his humiliation and this the meriting cause of the other Answ. 1. This word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore doth not alwaies signifie the cause or merit but the order also and sequele of a thing as Genes 22.16 Because thou hast done this thing c. I will exceedingly blesse thee c. and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in thee vnlesse any will thinke that Abraham by that one act of obedience in being readie to sacrifice his sonne merited to be the father of Christ according to the flesh in whom all the earth should be blessed see the like Heb. 1.9 Because thou hast loued righteousnesse c. God hath anointed thee with the oyle of gladnes aboue thy fellowes c. but the deitie or to be deified cannot be merited 2. The Apostle then in this place sheweth the order of the passion and glorification of Christ as Luk. 24. Ought not Christ to haue suffered these things and so to enter into his glorie likewise S. Peter 1. ep c. 1.11 ioyneth together the sufferings of Christ and the glorie which should followe 3. The Rhemists vrge that place Heb. 29. We see Iesus for the passion of of his death crowned with glorie and honour Answ. The words are displaced which in the originall stand in this order We see Iesus a little lower then the Angels by the passion of his death crowned with glorie and honour c. so that these words by the passion of his death must be ioyned with the former clause made a little lesse then the Angels not with the latter crowned with honour c. 2. An other opinion is that euerlasting glorie was gratuitum donum a free gift conferred vpon Christ not merited as Pareus collecteth by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he gaue him as of free gift a name aboue all names c. Phil. 2.9 Answ. 1. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not alwaies signifie to giue freely as the wife is said in profane authors 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to gratifie her husband in yeelding the vse of her bodie which yet is her dutie to performe 2. and it were better to say that Christ receiued his glorie of merit then by grace and favour to shew a difference betweene Christ and his members for we receiue all by grace Christ not by grace but as his due receiued his glorie 3. and for the further explanation of that place Philip. 1.9 1. some thinke that Christ onely merited the glorie of his bodie for his soule was glorified ab ipso instanti incarnationis from the verie instant of his incarnation Lyranus 2. some thinke that he merited onely manifestationem the manifestation of his glorie which he had before secundum rem indeede so also Lyranus 3. Augustine vnderstandeth this gift to be giuen per gratiam vniens non adoptans by the grace of vnion not of adoption 4. Ambrose interpreteth it de naturali donatione ab aeterno of the naturall donation from all beginning as Christ is the Sonne of God post crucem manifestatur quod à patre cum generatur accepit after his passion that is manifested which he receiued of his father in his generation I ioyne two of these expositions together that the glorie which was due vnto Christs humanitie in respect of his vnion was not now first conferred after his passion but then manifested which manifestation was not merited but did fall out in that order as God had appointed as due vnto Christs humanitie by reason of that vnion 3. This then is our opinion that Christ did not merit any thing for or to himselfe but all which he wrought and purchased was for vs as may appeare by these reasons 1. To what ende Christ was borne died and suffered to the same he rose againe and was glorified but he was borne and died not for himselfe but for vs Isay. 9.6 to vs a child is borne and he was not offered for his owne sinnes Heb. 7.27 which he had not therefore neither receiued he glorie for himselfe but for vs to this purpose Ambrose de fide resurrection c. 24. si nobis non resurrexit vtique non resurrexit qui cur sibi resurgeret non habebat if he did not rise for vs he did not rise at all for he had no cause to rise for himselfe But that saying of Ambrose will be obiected vpon that place to the Philipians 2. quid quantum humilitas mercatur hic ostenditur what and how much his humilitie merited here it is shewed Answ. The fathers doe vse this word merere to merit in a large sense it signifieth impetrare obtinere â—o obtaine a thing or posse contingere to be able to fall out as Ambrose saith epistola meruit pervenire in manus tuas the epistle merited to come to your hands that is might or obtained to come But he is otherwise absolutely of iudgment that no works can truely or properly merit at Gods hand as de vocat gent. lib. 1. c. 5. Ambrose or Prosper thus writeth nulla possunt tam praeclara opera existere quibus hoc quod gratis tribuitur per retributionis iudicium habeatur there can be no such excellent workes whereby that should be had by way of retribution and recompence which is freely giuen for so the redemption by Christs blood vilesceret should waxe vile and be of small worth 2. M. Calvin addeth this reason Christi gratiam obfuscat it would much obscure the grace of Christ if
qu. Why the Apostle onely maketh mention of sinnes past 36. qu. How God is said to be iust and a iustifier of him which is of the faith c. v. 26. 37. qu. How reioycing is excluded not by the law of works but by the law of faith 38. qu. Of the difference betweene these two phrases of faith through faith v. 30. 39. qu. How the Law is established by the doctrine of faith Questions vpon the fourth Chapter 1. qu. Vpon what occasion S. Paul bringeth in the example of Abraham 2. qu. Of the meaning of the first verse 3. qu. Of the meaning of the 2. verse 4. qu. How the Apostle alleadgeth that testimonie concerning the imputation of Abrahams faith for righteousnes v. 4. 5. qu. Of the meaning of the words who counted this for righteousnes vnto Abraham 6. qu. What it was that Abraham beleeued 7. qu. Why Abrahams faith was imputed to him at this time and not before 8. qu. What imputation is and what to be imputed 9. qu. How Abrahams faith was imputed to him for righteousnes 10. qu. Whether Abraham were iustified by any thing beside his faith 11. qu. How S. Paul and S. Iames are reconciled about the manner of Abrahams iustifying 12. qu. Of the explication of the 4. and 5. verses 13. qu. Of the diuers kinds of rewards 14. qu. How it standeth with Gods iustice to iustifie the wicked v. 5. 15. qu. How our sinnes are said to be forgiuen and couered v. 7. 16. qu. In what sense circumcision is said to be a signe and wherefore it was instituted 17. qu. In what sense circumcision is called a seale of the righteousnes of faith v. 11. 18. qu. Whether the mysterie of faith in the Messiah to come were generally known vnder the Law 19. qu. Certaine questions of circumcision and first of the externall signe why it was placed in the generative part 20. qu. Certaine doubts remooued and obiections answered concerning circumcision 21. qu. How Abraham is saide to be the father of them which beleeue v. 11 12. 22. qu. How Abraham is saide to be the father of circumcision v. 12. 23. qu. How and where Abraham was promised to be heire of the world v. 13. 24. qu. Wherein Abraham was made heire of the world and wherein this inheritance consisted 25. qu. How faith is said to be made voide if they which are of the law be heires 26. qu. How they law is said to cause wrath 27. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 15. where no law is there is no transgression 27. qu. Who are meant by Abrahams seede which is of the law v. 16. 28. qu. Of the meaning of these words I haue made thee a father of many nations before God 29. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 17. who quickneth the dead and calleth those things which be not c. 30. qu. How God is said to call those things which be not as though they were 31. qu. Whether it be peculiar to God onely to quicken and raise the dead 32. qu. How Abraham is said against hope to haue beleeued vnder hope 33. qu. How Abrahams bodie is said to be dead v. 19. 34. qu. What promise of God made to Abraham it was whereof he is saide not to haue doubted v. 20. 35. qu. Whether Abraham doubted of Gods promise 36. qu. How Abraham is said to haue giuen glorie vnto God v. 20. 37. qu. What was imputed to Abraham for righteousnes 38. qu. Of these words Now it is not written for him onely c. v. 23. 39. qu. How Abrahams faith is to be imitated by vs. 40. qu. Wherein Abrahams faith and ours differ and wherein they agree 41. qu. How Christ is said to haue bin deliuered vp for our sinnes v. 25. 42. qu. Why the Apostle thus distinguisheth the benefits of our redemption ascribing remission of sinnes to Christs death and iustification to his resurrection v. 25. Questions vpon the fifth Chapter 1. qu. What peace the Apostle meaneth v. 1. 2. qu. Of the second benefit proceeding of our iustification which is to stand and persevere in the state of grace 3. qu. Of the benefit of our iustification the hope of euerlasting glorie 4. qu. How we are said to reioyce in tribulation 5. qu. How S. Paul and S. Iames are reconciled together the one making patience the cause of trialls or probation the other the effect 6. qu. Of the coherence of these words with the former because the loue of God is shed abroad in our hearts v. 5. 7. qu. What kind of loue the Apostle speaketh of saying the loue of God is shed abroad c. 8. qu. Why the loue of God is said to be shed abroad in our hearts 9. qu. Why it is added by the holy Ghost which is giuen vs. 10. qu. How Christ is said to haue died according to the time v. 6. 11. qu. Of the meaning of the 7. v. One will scarce die for a righteous man c. 12. qu. Of the difference betweene Christs dying for vs and those which died for their countrey 13. qu. Of the greatnes of the loue of God toward man in sending Christ to die for vs v. 8. 14. qu. Whether mans redemption could not otherwise haue beene wrought but by the death of Christ. 15. qu. Wherein the force of the Apostles reason consisteth saying Much more beeing reconciled we shall be saued by his life v. 9. 16. qu. Why the Apostle saith not onely so but we also reioyce in God c. v. 11. 17. qu. Whether any thing neede to be supplied in the Apostles speach v. 12. to make the sense perfect 18. qu. Who was that one by whome sinne entred into the world v. 12. 19. qu. What sinne the Apostle speaketh of here originall or actuall by one man sinne entred 20. qu. How sinne is said to haue entred into the world 21. qu. And death by sinne what kind of death the Apostle speaketh of 22. qu. Whether the death of the bodie be naturall or inflicted by reason of sinne 23. qu. Of the meaning of the Apostle in these words in whome all haue sinned and of the best reading thereof v. 12. 24. qu. Whether the Apostle meaneth originall or actuall sinnes saying in whome all haue sinned 25. qu. Of the coherence of these words Vnto the time of the Law was sinne in the world 26. qu. How sinne is said to haue beene vnto the time of the Law 27. qu. What sinne the Apostle meaneth which was in the world vnto the time of the law 28. qu. How sinne is said not to be imputed where there is no law 29. qu. How death is saide to haue raigned from Adam to Moses 30. qu. Of the meaning of these words which sinne not after the transgression of Adam 31. qu. How Adam is said to be the figure of him that was to come v. 14. 32. qu. Of the names and tearmes which the Apostle vseth in this comparison 33. qu. Of the comparison betweene Adam
doe by their imprecation inflict that punishment which is appointed of God 3. The things must be considered which are wished vnto any by these imprecations they are either temporall which may tend vnto their amendment as Ps. 89.16 fil their faces with shame that they may seek thy name these imprecations are more tollerable which a man sometime wisheth against himselfe that he may be afflicted with some crosse or other rather then to fall into sinne or they are eternall but euerlasting destruction cannot be denounced against any without Gods speciall warrant 4. The persons are to be distinguished which are cursed they are such of whom there is hope of amendment or such as are in a desperate state and professed enemies to God and godlines against whom such imprecations doe lie as S. Iohn will not haue vs to pray for those whom we see to sinne vnto death 1. epist. c. 5. 5. The manner and kind of imprecations must also be looked into some are extraordinarie whereunto men were directed by a propheticall and extraordinarie spirit of the lawfulnesse of such imprecations there is no question or ordinarie wherein these circumstances must be considered 1. the persons that curse they must thereunto be called as the publike Magistrate or minister and parents in their families 2. the persons that are cursed must be intractable and incorrigible and refuse all wholesome admonition 3. the manner must be this they must not curse absolutely but with a condition that such may be converted or confounded 4. with what affection not hating their persons but detesting their vices against the which they open their mouthes to curse Now in Dauids imprecation all the things before requited concurred it was Gods cause he had a propheticall spirit they were professed enemies to God the reasons before alleadged doe conclude only against priuate curses in our owne cause against persons not desperately euill and without any speciall direction Quest. 13. Of the ende of the stumbling of the Iewes v. 11. v. 11. Haue they stumbled that they should fall c. 1. Chrysostome here obserueth well the Apostles wisedome that when he speaketh of the execation and reiection of the Iewes he alleadgeth Scripture least he might be thought to speake of euil will consolationem à seipso ponit but the consolation he bringeth in his owne name that his loue toward them might appeare as here ye sheweth a double ende of their stumbling one that thereby saluation might come vnto the Gentiles the other that by the calling of the Gentiles the Iewes againe might be provoked and stirred vp to beleeue in Christ the first end serueth to beat downe the pride and insolencie of the Gentiles the other to comfort the Iewes that they should not thinke their fall to be irrecouerable 2. Haue they stumbled c. 1. The Latine translator addeth haue they so stumbled that they should fall which Tolet iustifieth and would haue the meaning to be this nor that the ende of the falling of the Iewes should be the calling of the Gentiles but that their fall was not without recouerie and Origen hath the like obseruation shewing here the diuerse kinds of falling some fall and neuer rise againe as Lucifer who shall neuer no not in the end of the world be restoared the fall of others is recouerable as here the Iewes did not so stumble vt ab omni legis observantia declinarent to decline from the whole obseruation of the law 2. But Erasmus well obserueth that here the Apostle speaketh not de magnitudine lapsus sed de eventu of the greatnes of their fal but of the euent for the Apostle throughout this whole epistle doth exaggerate the sinne of their incredulitie neither is this particle so in the originall neither doe the Greek expositors Chrysost. Theoph. Oecumen insert it 3. yet this must be added further to Erasmus observation that the calling of the Gentiles was not onely the euent which followed the incredulitie of the Iewes but it was the ende and scope for the which God suffered the Iewes to fall for this event must not be seuered from the providence of God Beza annot 4. nor yet is this question so propounded as though the Iewes did stumble and fall with any such intention to profit the Gentiles as Gryneus seemeth to note no man that is in his right minde will hurt himselfe which the Iewes should haue done if they of purpose had stumbled to fall But Photius obserueth that the Iewes as much as in them lay did so stumble vt corruerent to fall altogether nec sic affecti sunt c. neither were they so affected that any good should come thereby to themselues or others sed Deus illorum casu c. but God vsed their fall both for the saluation of the Gentiles and their owne emendation 5. Theophylact must here also be warily and aduisedly read the Iewes are not so fallen vt se nequeant quando velint attollere that they can not raise vp themselues againe when they will c. for this were as though the Iewes of purpose had fallen that the Gentiles might come in and then they would returne againe neither is it in any mans power to returne when he will for ones conuersion is as life from the dead v. 13. as one can not raise himselfe from the dead so neither can he conuert and turne vnto God 6. Haymo and Augustine before him put in the word solum onely that is they haue not stumble onely to fall as though no good should come thereby but God did not suffer them to stumble at all to fall God propounded not to himselfe their fall as an end of their stumble for God delighteth not in the destruction of any but God respected two singular good ends in the fall of the Iewes the vocation of the Gentiles and their owne conuersion Pareus Quest. 14. How the stumbling and falling of the Iewes brought salvation to the Gentiles v. 11. Through their fall salvation commeth to the Gentiles 1. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not well here translated delictum as the Latin interpreter which Anselme interpreteth peccatum sinne and vnderstandeth it of that speciall sinne of the Iewes in putting Christ to death so also Gorrhan but it here signifieth rather lapsum their fall as Erasmus well noteth to answear vnto the former question haue they stumbled that they should fall so also Tolet annot 9. 2. But we must not thinke that the fall of the Iewes was properly the cause of the calling of the Gentiles but it was the occasion rather for euill is not of it selfe the cause of that which is good but God by his power draweth good out of euill for otherwise as Lyranus alledgeth out of Augustine in his Euchiridion Deus non permitteret mala sieri nisi inde eliceret maior a bona God would neuer suffer euill to be vnlesse he did thereout draw greater good This is like as Pet. Martyr resembleth it
as there is a saying in Philosophie that the corruption of one thing is the generation of an other not that it is the cause thereof but the efficient hauing expelled one forme doth bring in an other and as in a syllogisme out of false and vntrue propositions a true conclusion may be inferred not by the force of the premises but of the syllogisme and forme of reasoning so Gods prouidence as the chiefe efficient cause doth by occasion of that which is euill bring forth that which is good 3. Anselme thinketh that the reiection of the Iewes was the occasion of the calling of the Gentiles because thereupon followed their dispersion through the world and by that meanes they brought the Scriptures to the Gentiles But this was an occasion rather that after that the Iewes had reiected the preaching of the Apostles they turned to the Gentiles neither was there any such necessitie that the one should be reiected before the other could be called if it had so pleased God they might haue beene called together But this consequence that vpon the reiecting of the Iewes the Gentiles were called depended both vpon the will and pleasure of God who had appointed it should so be Martyr and vpon the conuenience of the thing the Iewes were high minded and could not endure that the Gentiles together with them should be the people of God but they were like the dogge in the maunger that would neither eate himselfe nor suffer the oxe to eat therefore it was requisite that their pride should be first abated and they humbled by seeing them to be called to be a people that were no people so the question here is not what God could doe but what the Iewes had done and would doe by their good will neither they themselues would come nor suffer the Gentiles to enter Pareus 4. And though the Iewes had not beene reiected at all yet the Gentiles also should haue beene called but in the second place as Chrysostome sheweth out of that place Act. 13.46 vobis oportuit primum annuntiari verbum the word of God ought first to haue bin preached vnto you but now through their incredulitie it came to passe vt inverteretur hic ordo that this order was inuerted so in the parable Luk. 14. after that they which were inuited to the feast refused then the good man of the house saith vnto his seruant exi cito goe forth quickly into the streets c. the Gentiles then should haue beene called though the Iewes had not beene incredulous but not so quickly Quest. 15. How the Iewes were prouoked to follow the Gentiles 1. Whereas the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth properly to prouoke to emulation the vulgar latine doth not well translate vt emulentur illos to imitate or emulate them referring it to the Iewes that they should emulate the Gentiles either imitande in imitating them as Lyranus expoundeth and before him Photius that saith the Gentiles were examplaria examples herein to the Iewes or invidendo in envying the faith and knowledge of the Gentiles Gorrhan 2. Some referre it to the Gentiles as Origen vnderstandeth it of the faith of the Gentiles which should prouoke the Iewes to emulation Anselme vnderstandeth it thus that the Gentiles should imitate the Iewes that is such as beleeued among them but this is impertinent to the Apostles purpose some as Chrysostome Theodoret Ambrose do applie it to the Gentiles that they should prouoke the Iewes by their example to beleeue 3. But it is better referred vnto God that he should prouoke the Iewes to emulation by the example of the Gentiles when they saw themselues the auncient people of God to be neglected and the Gentiles which were forelorne to be receaued in Martyr But Tolet refuseth this and would haue it referred either to the Gentiles or their faith because no mention is made of God before but of the Gentiles annot 9. yet I preferre Pet. Martyrs reason totum ad Deum refortur all is referred to God and Pareus prooueth it by that place Deut. 32.21 I will prouoke you to emulation by a nation that is no nation But Tolet obserueth well that the word their vsed by Moses is in hiphil of the word kanah which signifieth to emulate or enuie and in hiphil to cause to emulate and so the Apostle is to be translated here as likewise v. 14. If I might by any meanes prouoke them of my selfe where the Latine interpreter so readeth also and therefore he fayleth here in translating that they might emulate them whereas he should haue said to prouoke them to emulation 4. But it will be obiected that this is no commendable thing by enuie or emulation to be brought to be beleeue the answer is that God simply approoueth not such emulation or enuie but as he can vse that which is euill to good purposes so by this emulation it pleaseth him to incite and stirre vp the Iewes to returne vnto him like as the husband putteth away his adulterous wife that she thereby may be prouoked by a kind of emulation left an other should be receiued in her place to seeke to be reconciled Pareus 5. But here we must vnderstand that the better sort of the Iewes shall be prouoked not all for the obstinate thereby are made worse Martyr and further the Apostle must not be taken to speake of the Iewes in particular for they which stumble and fell away were not restored but of the nature in generall that though some were vnbeleeuers yet the whole nation was not cast off Calvin Beza Quest. 16. What is meant by the diminishing of the Iewes and their abundance v. 12. 1. Whereas the Apostle had shewed that the falling away of the Iewes was an occasion of the calling of the Gentiles it might be obiected that the conuersion of the Iewes might likewise be an occasion of the falling away of the Gentiles hereunto the Apostle answeareth negatiuely and he confirmeth his answear by an argument from the lesse to the greater that if their empayring and diminishing and pouertie as it were were the riches of the Gentiles much more their plentifull calling for God can turne that which is euill to the good of the Gentiles much more that which is good 2. By the riches of the world we vnderstand both the multitude of the Gentiles called to the knowledge of Christ Pareus and that wherewith they were enriched namely the knowledge of the Gospel Genevens 3. By the diminution 1. Haymo whom Lyranus and Gorrhan follow vnderstand the Apostles which were but few and as the abiects of the people yet they enriched the Gentiles by their preaching if the conuersion of a few was so profitable to the Iewes much more the conuersion of the whole nation in the end of the world but the Apostle expoundeth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the ruine of the Iews which he vsed before by this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 diminution he meaneth not then