sinnes for we hold also with S. Paul the imputation of Christs righteousnesse by faith as S. Paul saith Philip. 3.9 That I may be found in him not hauing mine owne righteousnesse which is by the lawe but that which is of the faith of Christ c. 2. But though we graunt as well an imputation of righteousnes as a not imputation of sinne concurring vnto iustification yet we denie that any inherent iustice or renouation of life is any part of this iustification neither doth the Apostle meane any such iustification here Christ rose for our iustification not thereby onely to giue vs an example of newenesse of life as Bellarmine and Pererius expound it wherein Tolet his owne fellowe Iesuite and Cardinall is against him as is before shewed qu. 42. but Christs resurrection is the cause and ground of our iustification which is imputed by faith as Ambrose expoundeth resurrexit c. vt nos gratia iustificationis donaret he rose againe to endue vs with the grace of iustification vt iustitiam credentium confirmaret to confirme the iustice of those which beleeue saith Hierome ista resurrectio credita nos iustificat this resurrection beeing beleeued doth iustifie vs saith Augustine 3. an inherent iustice we confesse which is our sanctification the fruit and effect of our iustification by faith but because it is imperfect in vs and not able to satisfie the iustice of God we denie that we are thereby iustified in his sight Controv. 19. Against Socinus corrupt interpretation of these words v. 25. Was deliuered vp for our sinnes Socinus will not haue this phrase to signifie any satisfactioÌ„ made by Christ for our sinnes but onely to betoken the cause or occasion of Christs death as the Lord is said to giue Israâ—l vp for the sinnes of Ieroboam who sinned and caused Israel to sinne 1. king 14.16 thus â—icked Socinus de Seruat part 2. p. 108. Contra. 1. Though sometime this phrase signifie the cause yet it is false that it so onely signifieth for the Scripture speaketh euidently that Christ was our reconciliation and that we haue redemption in him Rom. 3.24 25. our sinnes then onely were not the cause or occasion of his death but he so died for our sinnes as that he by his blood satisfied for them 2. It was the Pelagian blasphemie that Christ died for our sinnes to be an example onely vnto vs to die vnto sinne for thus the power and force of Christs death is extenuated which indeede causeth vs to die vnto sinne it doth not teach vs onely and shew vs the way this were to extoll the power of mans corrupt will against the grace of God 3. The instance of Ieroboam is altogether impertinent Israel was deliuered vp for Ieroboams sinnes which they imitated and followed if Christ were so deliuered vp for our sinnes then they must make him also to be a sinner with vs and to be polluted with our sinnes ex Perer dub 8. 20. Controv. Piscators opinion examined that our sinnes are remitted onely by Christs death not for the obedience and merit of his life These are Piscators words in his annotation vpon the 25. v. Omnia nostra pectata expiatâ— sunt per solam mortem Christi all our sinnes are expiated onely by the death of Christ and therefore neither originall sinne is purged by his holy conception nor the sinnes of omission by his holy life but by Christs death onely to this purpose many places of Scripture are cited and alleadged by him as Matth. 20.28 The Sonne of man came to giue his life a ransome for many Matth. 26.28 Which namely blood is shed for many for the remission of sinnes Act. 20.28 Christ hath purchased his Church by his blood Likewise he affirmeth that by Christs obedience in his death and vpon the crosse partâ—â— esse nobis vitam aeâ—ernam euerlasting life is obtained for vs as Hebr. 10.19 By the blood of Iesus we may be hold to enter into the holy place and other places are cited to the same effect Contra. 1. It is true that Christ onely by his death and other his holy sufferings paied the ransome and bare the punishment due vnto our sinne but seeing Christs blood had beene of no value if he had not beene most perfectly righteous his obedience and righteousnes must as well concurre vnto the remission of sinnes as his death and this is that which S. Peter saith 1. Pet. 1.19 We are redeemed with the pretious blood of Christ as of a Lâ—â—â—e vndefiled and without spot and c. 3.18 Christ hath once suffered for sinnes the iust for the vniust the innocencie then and integritie of Christ must be ioyned with Christs blood to make it an acceptable sacrifice 2. Whereas there are two parts of our iustification the remission and not imputing of sinnes and the imputation of Christs righteousness which two are not separated neither can the one stand without the other neither can there be any remission of sinnes vnlesse Christs righteousnes be imputed as S. Paul saith 1. Cor. 5.21 He hath made him to be sinne 〈◊〉 that knew no sinne that we should be made the righteousnes of God in him the merit of Christs obedience and righteousnes must needes concurre in the remission of sinnes yea Piscator in his annotation vpon the 4. v. confesseth that these words blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen idem valere to be as much in effect as to say blessed are they to whom iustice is imputed 3. But that seemeth to be a more straunge assertion to denie that possessio vitae eternat tanquam effectum adscribitur obedientiae Christi the possession of eternall life is ascribed as an effect to Christs obedience which is directly affirmed by the Apostle Hebr. 7.26 Such an high Priest it became vs to haue which is holy harmelesse vndefiled separate from sinners and made higher then the heauens what hath made Christ higher then the heauens but his holines perfection integritie and therefore he is able perfectly to saue them that come vnto God v. 25. 4. And further that we are iustified by Christs obedience the Apostle sheweth Rom. 5.13 As by one mans disobedience many were made sinners so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous here the Apostle saith directly that we are made righteous by the obedience of Christ. Piscator here answereth that by Christs obedience here is vnderstood his obedience in submitting himselfe willingly vnto death in which it was his fathers will he should suffer for vs. Contra. Our iustification consisteth of two parts of the remission of our sinnes and the making of vs iust before God the one is procured by Christs death the other is purchased by his obedience and righteousnes and that the Apostle speaketh not onely of Christs obedience vnto death but generally of his whole course of righteousnes both in life and death is euident because he calleth it the gift of righteousnes v. 17. and the raigning of grace
the other he ordained but he hateth the third that is sinne which he made not like as a iudge condemning a theefe neither hateth his person nor the punishment which is according to iustice but the crime of thes◠c. vpon this answer insisteth Pererius and before him Haymo non edit naturam quam fecit sed peccatum quod non fecit he hated not the nature which he made but the sinne which he made not so aso Gorrhan and the ordinarie gloss he hated nothing in Esau nisi originale peccatum but his originall sinne c. But the Apostle here speaketh of an hatred before Esau had done any euill and before the fight thereof 3. Neither doth it satisfie to say it is spoken comparatiuely Esau was hated that is lesse beloued as a man is bid to hate father and mother to cleaue to his wife that is loue them lesse then his wife for the Apostle calleth them the vessels of wrath afterward whom he is here said to hate therefore such are not beloued at all 4. This then is the solution hatred in God signifieth three things 1. the negation and deniall of his loue and of this degree of hatred sinne is not the cause but the will of God that electeth whom he will and refuseth whom he pleaseth thus God hateth Esau and all the reprobate 2. the decree of punishment and this proceedeth from the foresight of sinne and thus God is said to haue the wicked 3. it signifieth the anger of God and his abhorring of that which he hateth and thus God is said to hate iniquitte and of this hatred is that saying to be vnderstood thou hatest nothing that thou hast made for God in this sense hateth not his creatures but sinne in them Pareus dub 11. Quest. 15. Of the meaning of these words I will haue mercie on whom I will haue mercie 1. Origen and Heirome epist. ad Heath qu. 10. doe thinke that this is an obiection made by some as it were contradicting the Apostle But this is the Apostles answer rather to the former obiection is their iniquitie with God that he should elect one and reiect an other both of them beeing in the same state and condition to the which the Apostle maketh answer God forbid and giueth a reason of his answer here out of the Scripture 2. Chrysostome thinketh whom Theophylact followeth that by this sentence the Apostle staieth mans curiositie from requiring the cause why some are elected some are refused which is best knowne vnto God as the Lord answeared Moses who was desirous to know why all of the Israelites beeing guiltie of the same sinne in worshipping the golden calfe yet were not alike punished to whom the Lord answeareth thus in effect non est tuum scire Moses c. Moses it belongeth not to thee to know who are worthy of my mercie c. But in this sense there were small coherence in the Apostles speach for then there should be no answer made vnto the former obiection which the Apostle remooueth here Tolet annot 22. neither was this sentence vttered vpon any such occasion concerning the punishing of sinne of the Israelites and sparing of others but whereas Moses had made request to see Gods glorie and the Lord had granted him to see his backer partes and so in part yeelded vnto his request then this is added as a reason thereof I will haue mercie Mar. 3. Ambrose is farre wide who maketh this the sense of these words I will haue mercie on him on whom I will haue mercie that is quem praescivi whom I foresaw like after his error to returne vnto me so the ord gloss cui praescio misericordiam whom I foresaw mercie is to be shewed vpon the like glosse Thomas maketh mention of in his Commentarie I will haue mercie on him quem dignum praenonero misericordia whome I foresaw to be worthy of mercie But this is not agreeable to the Apostles minde 1. there had beene no occasion of any such obiection if the cause were in the foresight of mens worthines why some are elected and not others for then there had beene no shew of iniustice at all in God the reason had beene plaine Tolet annot 22. 2. this to giue vnto those which are worthie respicit iustitiam Dei respecteth the iustice of God whereas the Apostle here referreth all vnto Gods mercie Martyr 3. neither can that be a cause of election which is an effect thereof for to beleeue and to be obedient are effects of election then the foresight thereof cannot be the cause Pere dsiput 7. err 39. 4. Neither is this onely an Hebrew phraise signifying the same thing as Tolet ibid. as the Hebrewes for more vehemencie sake doe expresse the same thing by an emphaticall repetition neither yet are these words so curiously to be distinguished with Anselme as to referre thē to Gods mercy in calling in beleeuing in working that whom he sheweth mercy vpon in calling he will shew further mercie in giuing grace to beleeue and whom he giueth grace vnto beleeue they shall haue grace also to worke by their faith Lyranus and Pererius vnderstand the three degrees of Gods mercie in predestinating in giuing present grace and glorie to come and so make this the sense I will haue mercie in giuing grace to him on whom I haue mercie in electing him and to whom I giue finall grace I will shew mercie in giuing him future glorie Iunius much differeth not I will haue mercie ex facto in fact and indeed vpon whom I haue mercie decreto in my decree of election parallel 11. But Pareus better sheweth the reason of the ingemination and repeating of these words to shew 1. this mercie gratuitam to be franke and free and that there can be no reason or cause yeilded why God sheweth mercie but his owne gracious inclination to mercie 2. arbitrariam that it is arbritarie depending onely vpon the will of God 3. constantem that it is constant and immutable where he sheweth mercie he will haue mercie to the end 4. immensam this mercie is infinite and without measure not onely in bestowing one grace but many 5. Further it is to be obserued that thought the same word to haue mercie be reteined both in the Greeke translation of the Septuagint and in the latine in both partes of the sentence yet in the Hebrew there are two words the one in the former clause of the sentence canan which signifieth to shew grace and fauour the other in the latter part is racham to shew bowels of compassion and beside the Septuagint doe put the verbe in the present-tense in the latter part of both the clauses whereas in the originall the same tense and time is kept in both but this is no great difference the sense still notwithstanding remaineth the same 6. This then is the Apostles meaning whereas it was obiected that if God elect some and not others their case beeing the same the Lord
vnsound opinion 1. Bellarmine thus reasoneth that the Apostles did reach the Church at the first without Scriptures therefore they are not simply necessarie but onely for the greater profit of the Church like as an horse is necessarie for ones iourney for his more speedie trauaile but not simply necessarie because he may go a foot Bellar. l. 4. de verb. c. 4. Contra. 1. True it is that the writing of the Scriptures are not simply necessarie in respect of God for he by his absolute power could find a way to teach his Church otherwise but in respect of Gods ordinance which hath appointed the Scriptures for edifying of his Church they are necessarie as bread is necessarie for mans sustentation though God can nourish and maintaine life without bread 2. It is not true that the Apostles did teach without Scriptures for they had the prophetical writings first and afterward their owne and while the Apostles themselues were liuing and present the writing of the Gospel was not so necessarie as afterward 3. The writing then of the Gospel was necessarie 1. both in respect of that age present for the preuenting and stay of heresies which might be more strongely resisted and gainesayed by an euident and extant rule of faith 2. in regard of those Churches to whom the Apostles preached not by liuely voice it was necessarie that they should haue some perfect direction by writing 3. and that the ages also to come might haue a rule of their faith Arg. 2. The Church may as well now be instructed without the Scriptures as it was for the space of 2000. yeares before the lawe was written Bellar. ibid. Contra. 1. In the first age of the world the light of nature was not so much obscured as afterward when the law was written and therefore the argument followeth not the Scriptures were not necessarie then therefore not now 2. because the old world wanted the Scriptures to direct them that was the cause why they were giuen ouer generally to all kind of prophanenesse and therefore to preuent the like mischiefe afterward the Lord thought good to giue his written word to his Church Argum. 3. The Apostles did preach much more then they did write and many things they deliuered to the Church by tradition so that not the Scriptures by themselues are a totall rule and direction of the faith but partiall together with the traditions and ordinances of the Church Contra. 1. The Apostles did indeed speake more then they did or could write but yet they preached the same things and deliuered no other precepts concerning faith and manners but the same which they committed to writing 2. many things concerning orders and especially in particular Churches the Apostles left by tradition but no other precepts and rules of faith then they had written 3. The Scriptures are no partiall but a totall and perfect rule of faith for mensura adaequata esse debet mensurate the measure must be equall vnto that which is measured it must neither be longer nor shorter if then the Scripture should come short of faith it were no perfect rule nay it were no rule at all Pareus Now on the contrarie that the Scriptures are necessarie thus it is made plaine 1. From the author the Prophets and Apostles did write by the instinct of the spirit but the spirit mooueth not to any vnnecessarie or superfluous worke 2. from the office of the Apostles which was to teach all nations Matth 28.19 which seeing they could not doe in their owne persons it was necessarie that they should preach vnto them by their writings 3. from the ende and vse of the Scriptures 1. whether for instruction in doctrine for all Scriptures are written for our learning Rom. 15.4 or direction vnto vertuous liuing or decision of Questions and confuting of errors it was necessarie that the Scriptures should be writen to these vses as the Apostle sheweth 1. Timoth. 3.16 that the man of God may be perfect The Scriptures then were necessarie to be extant for the aforesaid purposes in so much that the Apostle saith if any Angel from heauen doe preach any other Gospel c. let him be accursed whereupon Chrysostome saith Paulus etiam Angelis de coelo descendentibus proponit Scripturas Paul euen propoundeth the Scriptures to the Angels descending from heauen in Galat. c. 1. 6. Morall observations 1. Observ. Of the happinesse of these times vnder the Gospel in comparison of the former times vnder the Lawe In that the Lord hath clearely manifested and opened vnto his Church by Iesus Christ the high mysteries which lay hid before therein appeareth the singular loue of God to his Church and the great preheminence which the faithfull now haue in comparison of the people of God vnder the Law as our Sauiour saith vnto his Apostles Blessed are your eyes for they see and your eares for they heare for verily I say vnto you that many Prophets and righteous men haue desired to see those things which you see and could not see them c. Matth. 13.16 17. the vse hereof is to stirre vs vp vnto thankefulnesse vnto God for this so great mercie shewed vnto his Church 2. Observ. The dangerous estate of those which are found to be contemners of the Gospel and Newe Lawe The greater light is reuealed and the more knowledge that men haue the greater obedience doth God looke for at their hand disobedience then now vnto the Gospel of truth is so much more greiuous then was transgression vnder the law as the times of light and knowledge in brightnesse exceede the dayes of ignorance and blindnesse thus the Apostle reasoneth the night is past and the day is at hand let vs therefore cast away the workes of darkenesse and put on the armour of light Rom. 13.12 So also Hebr. 2.2 the Apostle saith if the word spoken by Angels was stedfast and euerie transgression c. receiued a iust recompence of reward how much more if we neglect so great saluation c. More special obseruations vpon the whole Epistle 1. The Argument and Methode of S. Pauls epistles in generall and specially of this Epistle 1. Nicephorus lib. 2. c. 34. maketh the end and scope of Saint Paules Epistles to consist in these two things 1. that the Apostle what he preached beeing present he committed to writing to put them in memorie when he was absent 2. And that which he did more obscurely deliuer by word of mouth or passed ouer in silence he did in his writings handle and set forth more fully and plainely But the Apostle had diuerse other occasions offred him in his epistles then fell out in his sermons and therefore it is to be thought that although his sermons and writings agreed in the substance of doctrine yet he as occasion did mooue him in his epistles otherwise handleth matters then he did in his preaching 2. His Epistles then may be reduced to these fiue kinds 1. Some belong vnto doctrine wherein he layeth
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
in faith Pareus 4. And although S. Paul had giuen such excellent commendation before of their faith yet they might notwithstanding haue neede to be strengthened as Peter when he beganne to sinke in the waters had faith when he cried to Christ Saue me or els I perish yet Christ saith vnto him Why didst thou doubt O thou of little faith his faith had neede to be encreased 5. So here are three reasons of the Apostles desire to see them 1. that he might bestow vpon them some spirituall gift 2. to confirme and strengthen them 3. to be mutually comforted with them Aretius 33. Quest. Of the impediments whereby S. Paul was letted to come vnto the Romanes v. 13. I haue oftentimes purposed to come vnto you but haue beene let hitherto 1. Chrysostome thinketh he was hindred and letted by the Lord and so also Theophylact Dei iussis prohibeor I am inhibited by the commandement of God as Origen giueth instance of that place Act. 16.7 where Paul was not suffered by the spirit to goe into Bithynia 2. But Basil thinketh he was hindred by Satan as the Apostle saith he was letted by Sathan to come vnto the Thessalonians 1. Thessalon 2.18 where is to be considered a double difference betweene Gods hindering and Sathans first Sathan may hinder the outward actions but the inward purpose and desire he can not let but God can stay both secondly when Sathan hindereth it is by Gods permission for otherwise he could doe nothing but God often hindereth without the ministerie of Sathan at all Now in this place the first opinion is more agreeable because he entreated of God by prayer that he might haue a prosperous iourney therefore it seemeth that he letted him vnto whome he praied that he might haue opportunitie giuen him Tolet. 3. Origen ioyneth both together that he might be hindered first in the Lords purpose and then impediments might be cast in his way by Sathan so also Pareus Genevens and Aretius But for the former reason the first opinion is rather to be receiued 4. It beeing resolued vpon that God staied S. Pauls comming yet there is some diuersitie concerning the causes why the Lord should thus let him â—â— Sedulius thinketh that God saw not the hearts of the Romanes yet prepared to beleeue and therefore the Lord sent Paul then and not before quando praescâ—â—t eos creditâ—nos when he foresaw that they would beleeue But Sedulius is herein deceiued thinking that it was in the Romanes free-will to prepare their owne hearts to beleeue whereas euery good gift is of God Sam. 1.17 And if it were in mans power to beleeue every one might attaine vnto faith that would but the Apostle saith 2. Thess. 3.2 all men haue not saith And againe seeing the Apostle giueth such commendation of the Romanes saith there is no doubt but God had prepared their hearts 2. Hugo thinketh that Saint Paul was prohibited propter peccata Romanorum because of the sinnes of the Romanes This indeede sometimes is a let as Paul and Barnabas did shake off the dust of their feete against the Iewes and would no more preach vnto them because of their obstinacie and wilfull refusal Act. 13.51 Hyperius But this seemeth not to haue beene the cause here seeing the Apostle giueth such commendation of their faith v. 8. and of their goodnes c. 15.14 and obedience to the faith c. 16.19 3. There are also externall lets and impediments as his bonds imprisonment persecution Tolet. and he suffered by the way shipwracke and other casualties Aretius 4. But the most likely reason why the Lord staied S. Pauls comming to Rome was the necessitie of other Churches which the Lord would haue first established Gregorie teacheth this reason lib. 21. Moral c. 13. that God therefore letted him that he might more profit those Churches where he remained and S. Paul himselfe rendreth this reason Rom. 15.20 Therefore I haue beene oft let to come vnto you but now seeing I haue no more place in these quarters and also haue beene desirous many yeares againe to come vnto you c. his employment in other Churches deferred his comming to Rome Beza annot 34. Quest. Why S. Paul expresseth not the cause in particular which letted him 1. Gualter giueth this reason why the Apostle hauing diuers lets as namely new occasions continually offered in preaching the Gospel and beside his persecutions and afflictions and manifold troubles yet he maketh mention of none of these quia de his non poterat sine iactantiae suspicione because he could not speake of these things without suspition of boasting 2. But I rather approoue Chrysostomes reason non scrutatur Dominipropositum the Apostle doth not search into Gods purpose why such an Apostle was kept so long from such a famous citie when there was great hope of winning many vnto Christ it was sufficient that he was letted he is not curious to know the cause teaching vs thereby ne factorum rationem vnquam à Deo exigamus that we neuer require a reason of Gods works 3. And indeede Gods secret counsell herein is diuers waies vnsearchable 1. in respect of the teachers why sometime God sendeth many sometime few why some and not others why some are true pastors some wolues some true teachers some false 2. in regard of them which be taught why God sendeth preachers to one place and not vnto an other why Christ wrought miracles in Corazin and Bethsaida not in Tyrus and Sidon to bring them to repentance Matth. 11.21 3. and for the places why the Spirit suffered not Paul to preach in Asia and Bithynta Act. 16.6 7. And why in our daies in some certaine cities as at Constance God suffered the preaching of his Gospel to be intermitted 4. for the time why the Gospel is preached in some age and not in an other and some enioy it long some but a short time 5. for the manner why sometime the Gospel is preached obscurely and darkely sometime openly and manifestly why some preach it of enuie some of sincerities All these considerations doe set forth vnto vs how the iudgements of God are hid and vnsearchable Gryneus 4. And by this reason may the like obiection be answered why the Apostle was letted seeing his purpose was good that he might haue some fruite among them Because the Apostle beeing the Lords minister was not to prescribe the times and occasions fittest for the worke of the Gospel but to depend vpon God therein who best knewe how to sort out the best time for euerie purpose Quest. 35. Whether S. Pauls desire to goe to Rome beeing therein letted were contrarie to Gods will and so sinned therein 1. S. Pauls desire was not absolute but conditionall if it were the will of God for so he saith that I might haue a prosperous iourney by the will of God to come vnto you 2. But here we must consider of the will of God as it is secret and hid and as it is manifest and
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
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
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
morally he should be a lyar in act Pareus so then euery man is said to be a liar quia mentiri potest quamvis non mentiatur because he may and can lie though alwaies he doe not lie Tolet. 6. Quest. How the Prophet Dauid is to be vnderstood saying Euery man is a lyar Psal. 116.11 1. Some doe thus interpret nihil est firmum vel stabile in rebus humanis nothing is firme or stable in humane matters Theodoret to the same purpose also Euthymius fallax est humanae vita faelicitas the happines of mans life here is deceitfull But this beeing a most true position how could the Prophet say I said in my hast as correcting his hastie and vnaduised speach in thus saying 2. Some preferre this sense that Dauid beeing much troubled and perplexed with his manifold afflictions and sometime tempted with diffidence doth correct himselfe and confesseth that God notwithstanding was true though all men were liars Perer. but it is euident by the Prophets words that this is not a correcting but a corrected speach which he spake in his hast 3. Origen deliuereth a third sense that Dauid hauing reuealed vnto him the truth by faith saying a little before I beleeued and therefore I spake doth thankfully acknowledge that he had receiued the reuelation of the truth from God whereas all other men as Philosophers and the wise among the heathen were liars their writings were full of error and falshood But that by all he vnderstandeth not onely the vnbeleeuing Gentiles but all men in generall is euident v. 12. following as hath beene shewed before 4. Calvin whome the Genevens follow thus expoundeth nihil esse certi neque ab homine neque in homine that there is no certentie neither from man to be looked nor yet in man but this beeing a most true and aduised assertion why then should the Prophet there say he spake it in hast for so the word there signifieth as likewise Psal. 31.22 I said in my hast I am cast out of thy sight 5. Vatablus thinketh that Dauid meaneth those which said when Saul persecuted him that he should neuer enioy the kingdome and therefore he trusting to Gods promises saith they were all liers But why then should Dauid say I said in my hast as confessing that he thus spake in his heat and hast 6. Wherefore the meaning of the Prophet Dauid there is this that beeing oppressed with his manifold and great afflictions he had some distrustfull thoughts in so much that he began to thinke that euen Samuel and Nathan which had made vnto him such promises concerning the kingdome were but men and had spoken as men vnto him And this sense may be confirmed by the like place Psal. 31.22 cited before I said in my hast Iun. Caietan Iansenius But two obiections will be made against this interpretation 1. If Dauid be thus vnderstood this allegation should seeme to be impertinent for the Apostle groundeth vpon that saying of Dauid as a certen and vndoubted axiome which Dauid their vttered in hast Ans. 1. It is not necessarie to graunt that S. Paul citeth this place out of that Psalme the like saying is found Psal. 39.5 Euery man is altogether vanitie 2. but it may safely be admitted that the Apostle hath reference to this very place Psal. 116. and yet he keepeth the Prophets sense for though Dauid were deceiued in the particular application to Samuel and other Prophets yet the speach was true in generall euery man is a liar here was Dauids error that he tooke them to speake as other men this generall ground of Dauids speach the Apostle followeth here 2. Obiect The word there vsed bechaphzi Vatablus translateth in praecipiti mea fugâ— in my hastie flight the vulgar latine in excessu meo when I was beside my selfe for feare it neede not be translated in my hast Ans. 1. The word chapaz signifieth indeede all these to make hast to be astonished to mooue for feare to precipitate but the more vsuall and proper signification is to make hast as Exod. 12.10 Ye shall eate it in hast Psal. 104.7 they hast away 2. and whether it be translated in my hast or in my feare the sense is all one that Dauid spake thus in his heat and passion 3. and that it is not meant of his externall flight of bodie but rather of the acceleration and hast of his affections is euident by the like place Psal. 31.22 I said in my hast I am cast out of thy sight Quest. 7. Of the occasion of these words cited out of the 51. Psalme that thou mightest be iustified c. against thee onely haue I sinned The words in the 51. Psalme immediatly going before are these v. 4. Against thee onely haue I sinne and committed euill in thy sight how Dauid is said to haue sinned onely against God it is diuersely scanned 1. Gregorie thus expoundeth tibi soli peccavi against thee onely haue I sinned quia tu solus es sine peccato because thou onely art without sinne man is not said to sinne against man quia eum aut par aut grauior culpa inquinat because either he is defiled with the same or a greater sinne But though euerie man be a sinner this is no reason but that one man may trespasse against another 2. Origen thus expoundeth Dauid by these words of S. Paul 1. Cor. 2.15 the spirituall man discerneth all things yet he is iudged of none therefore against thee onely haue I sinned because others cannot iudge me quia spiritualis sum because I am spirituall c. But Dauid in this act was not spirituall but carnall 3. Caietan thinketh that Dauid so speaketh because he was king and had no superiour iudge to whom he was subiect and therefore he is said onely to sinne against God because he onely was his superiour Iudge But Dauid standeth not here vpon any personall prerogatiue he setteth forth the qualitie of his offence 4. An other exposition which P. Martyr mentioneth is he saith he sinned onely against God because he sinned against his lawe for although he had trespassed against Vrias and Bathshebe his wife yet those were sinnes none otherwise then as they were prohibited by Gods lawe But in this sense not onely Dauid but euerie one beside should be faid to sinne against God 5 Some giue this sense against thee onely that is chiefely he had so profaned Gods couenant abused his benefits caused the name of God by this his fall to be blasphemed that he had offended God most of all Mart. Gualter But they are two diuerse things to sinne onely against God and chiefely to offend him 6. Wherefore Dauid here hath relation to the secresie of his sinne which was caried so politikely that the world perceiued it not yea Ioab though he was priuie to Vrias death yet knew not the cause Vatab. Iun. and thus before them D. Kimhi this sense is warranted 2. Sam. 12.12 where the Lord saith thou didst
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
taketh this iustice to be Christ rather it signifieth the iustice or righteousnesse which is by faith to Christ so called both because of the efficient cause thereof namely God who worketh it in vs and in regard of the effect because it onely is able to stand before God Calvin 2. Without the Lawe 1. Origen here vnderstandeth the lawe of nature and giueth thiâ— exposition ad iustitiam Dei cognoscendam nihil opitulabatur lex naturae the law of nature did helpe nothing at all to the knowledge of the iustice of God but it was manifested by the written lawe of Moses but the Apostle excludeth not here the written lawe for them it were no consequent speach vnto the former where the Apostle denied iustification vnto all workes of the lawe in generall the same lawe then must be here vnderstood which he treated before that is generally both the naturall and written law 2. Augustine ioyneth this word without the lawe not vnto manifested but vnto righteousnesse so the righteousnesse without the lawe he expoundeth sine adminiculo legis without the helpe of the law lib. de spirit liter c. 9. but this sense first Beza confuteth by the order and placing of the words which stand thus without the lawe is righteousnesse made manifest not righteousnes without the lawe as S. Iames saith faith without works is dead not without works faith is dead for in this transposing of the words the sense is much altered Tolet addeth this reason that righteousnesse without the lawe that is the workes of the lawe was knowne euen vnto the faithfull vnder the lawe therefore the words without the lawe must be ioyned rather vnto manifested then to righteousnesse 3. But yet Tolet is here deceiued for he thus interpreteth absque lege without the lawe that is cossante lege the lawe ceasing and beeing abrogate the Euangelicall faith was manifested for although the workes of the morall law are commanded in the Gospel yet they bind not by reason of the legall bond or obligation but by vertue and force of newe institution thereof by Christ But our Sauiour faith directly that he came not to destroy the lawe and the Prophets Matth. 5.17 but if the morall lawe were first abrogated though it were againe reuiued by Christ it must first be dissolued 4. Ambrose well referreth without the lawe to manifested but he seemeth to restraine it to the lawe of ceremonies sine lege apparuit sed sine lege sabbati circumcisionis it appeared without the lawe but without the lawe of the Sabboth and circumcision and newe Moone c. But in all this disputation the Apostle chiefely entreateth of the morall lawe by the which specially came the knowledge of sinne 5. some referre this to the manifestation of the Gospel by the preaching of the Apostles when the Gentiles were called which had no knowledge of the lawe Mart. and many also among the Iewes which though they had not the lawe yet cared not for it as they say Ioh. 7.48 Doth any of the rulers or Pharisies beleeue in him but this people which knoweth not the lawe Gorrhan â—â— they vnderstand without the lawe that is without the knowledge of the lawe But the Apostle speaketh of that iustice which was manifested both to the Gentiles and the Iewes which had yet the knowledge of the lawe 6. Gryneus whereas the Apostle saith first that righteousnesse is reuealed without the lawe and yet immediately after he saith hauing witnesse of the law and the Prophets would reconcile them thus vnderstanding lawe in the first place of the letter of the lawe which doth not set forth the iustice of God by faith and in the other place the spirituall sense of the lawe 7. But the meaning rather of the Apostle is this that it is not the office of the lawe to teach faith and that beside the lawe there is an other doctrine in the Church concerning faith which doctrine of saluation and iustice by faith neither the naturall nor morall lawe can teach and though in the time of the lawe this doctrine of faith was taught the faithfull yet the knowledge thereof came not by the lawe And for the full reconciling here of the Apostle to himselfe three things are to be considered 1. that in the first place the lawe is vnderstood strictly for the doctrine of the morall lawe whether written or naturall which doth not properly teach faith in Christ afterward the lawe is taken for the bookâ— of Moses wherein many Euangelicall promises are contained beside the legall precepâ—â— Beza annot â—2 The lawe doth properly vrge workes it doth not professedly teach faith and yet it excludeth it not Pareus but accidentally it bringeth vs to Christ as forcing vs when we see our disease to seeke for a remedie 3. this doctrine of faith was manifested without the lawe that is more clearely taught and preached at the comming of Christ yet it was knowne vnto Moses and the Prophets though more obscurely for in that it is said to be manifested nor made or created it sheweth that it was before though not so manifest Perer. disput â—0 Faius So then those words but now doe both note the diuersitie of time and they are aduersatiue particulars shewing that our iustice is not reuealed in the lawe but otherwise and els where Quest. 27. How the righteousnesse of faith had witnesse of the lawe and the Prophets Fowre wayes are the law and Prophets found to beare witnesse and testimonie vnto the Gospell of faith 1. by the euident prophesies of Christ as our blessed Sauiour saith Ioh. 5.46 Moses wrote of me and S. Paul said before c. 2. Which he had promised before by his Prophets in the holy Scriptures and S. Peter saith Act. 10.43 To him also giue all the Prophets witnesse such euident testimonies out of the lawe and Prophets are these which are cited by the Apostles as that Rom. 10.6 The righteousnesse of faith speaketh on this wise say not in thy heart who shall ascend into heauen that is to bring Christ from aboue c. so the Apostle citeth an euident testimonie out of the 31. of Ieremie Hebr. 8.8 how the Lord would make a newe testament with the house of Iuda and many such testimonies in the newe Testament are taken out of the old 2. A second kind of testimonie were the types and figures which went before in the old Testament as the Paschal lambe the Manna the rocke the cloud did shadow forth Christ likewise some acts of the Patriarkes and Prophets did prefigure out Christ as Abrahams sacrificing of Isaac Salomons building of the Temple Ionas beeing in the bellie of the whale with such like 3. The sacrifices and oblations and the blood of rammes and goates did signifie the vnspotted lambe of God that should be slaine for the sinnes of the world Mart. 4. The lawe also by the effect thereof did beare witnesse vnto Christ as Augustine saith lex hoc ipso quod iubendo minando
And although by our redemption we are not deliuered or taken from God but reconciled vnto him yet are we deliuered from his wrath Rom. 5.9 and so from his punishing iustice 5. Argum. We are improperly said to be redeemed from that to the which the price was not paied but to the curse of the lawe and wrath that is the punishment of sinne the price was not paied for the bearing of the curse and the sustaining of the wrath of God for vs was the price it selfe therefore we are improperly said to be redeemed from the curse and wrath Answ. 1. The proposition is false for the captiue may be said to be redeemed from that to the which the price is not payed as from the gives fetters prison sword death though principally the redemption is from the hands of him which holdeth any in captiuitie so we may be redeemed from the curse of the lawe though the price were not payed vnto it 2. the curse of the lawe and wrath may be taken two wayes passiuely for the effect of the curse and wrath which is the punishment of sinne and in this sense the price is not paid to the curse or actiuely for the wrath of God and his irefull iudgement pronouncing the sentence of the curse and in this sense the price may be said to be paied vnto the curse that is the iustice and wrath of God inflicting the curse 6. Argum. The operation or curse of the lawe is euerlasting death but Christ did not vndergoe euerlasting death for vs therefore he was not made a curse for vs but onely for our cause he fell into some kind of curse for vs. Answ. 1. The proposition is generally true for the curse or operation doth not onely signifie the punishment due vnto the breach of the lawe but the sentence also pronounced against the transgressors of the lawe as it is said Deut. 21.23 cursed is euerie one that hangeth vpon a tree but euerie one that so hanged was not euerlastingly condemned as the theife that was converted vpon the crosse 2. yet it is most true that Christ in some sense suffred eternall death for vs for in euerlasting death two things are to be considered the greatnesse and infinitnes of the infernall agonies and dolors with the abiection and forsaking of God the other is the perpetuall continuance of such euerlasting horror and abiection the second Christ must needs be freed from both because of his omnipotencie it was impossible for him to be for euer kept vnder the thraldome of death and his innocencie that hauing satisfied for sinne beeing himselfe without sinne he could not be held in death and in respect of his office which was to be our deliuerer yet the verie infernall paines and sorrowe Christ did suffer for vs because our Redeemer was to suffer that which was due vnto vs and why els was our Sauiour so much perplexed before his passion which in respect of the outward tormēt of the body was exceeded by many Martyrs in their sufferings if he feared not some greater thing then the death of the bodie 3. And although sometime in Scripture the preposition for signifieth onely the ende or cause as Christ is said to haue died for our sinnes 1. Ioh. 3.16 yet it signifieth also for and in ones stead to doe any thing as Rom. 5.7 for a good man one dare die that is in his stead that he should not die and so Christ died for vs that is in our place and stead that we should not die eternally ex Pareo 7. Argum. As we are said to be sold vnder sinne so we are bought and redeemed by Christ but we were sold vnder sinne without any price payed therefore so also are we redeemed without the paying of any price Answ. The proposition is not true for it is a metaphoricall speach that we are sold vnder sinne thereby is signified the alienation and abiection from God by our sinnes but we are said to be redeemed properly wherein it was necessarie that a price should be paied for vs both to satisfie the iust wrath and indignation of God against sinne as also because of Gods immutable sentence thou shalt die the death which sentence must take place let the Lord should be found a lier and his word not to be true Christ therefore in redeeming vs by his death payed that price and ransome for vs which we otherwise should haue payed 8. Argum. Where there is a true and proper redemption the price is paied to him which holdeth the captiues in bondage but in this redemption purchased by Christ the price was not so paied for then the deuill should haue had it whose captiues we were therefore it is not properly a redemption Answ. 1. It is not true that we are principally and originally the deuills captiues first we are the Lords captiues as of an angrie and offended Iudge by our sinnes but secondarily we were captiued vnto Sathan because the Iudge deliuereth ouer sinners vnto him as the tormentor that power therefore which Sathan hath ouer sinners is a secondarie power receiued from God this is manifested in the parable Matth. 18.34 where the king deliuereth ouer the wicked seruant vnto the tormentor 2. The price then of our redemption was paied vnto God who had deliuered vs ouer as captiues for our sinnes and so the Apostle saith that Christ offred himselfe by his eternall spirit vnto God Heb. 9.14 not that God thirsted for the blood of his sonne but after 〈◊〉 salvation quia salus erat in sanguine because there was health in his blood as Bernard saith for thereby Gods iustice was satisfied and the veritie of his sentence established thou shalt die the death 3. But whereas it is further obiected that the price could not be payed vnto God 1. because God procured his owne sonne to pay the price of our redemption but be that detaineth captiues doth not procure their deliuerance 2. in paying the price of redemption there is some vantage accruing and growing to him to whom the price is paied but in our redemption there was no gaine or advantage vnto God we further answear thus 1. that in such a redemption wherein the Iudge desireth the life and safetie of the prisoner the Iudge himselfe may procure him to be redeemed and that out of his owne treasure 2. neither in such a kind of redemption doth the iudge seeke for any advantage to himselfe but onely the preservation of the lawes and common iustice as Zaleucus the gouernor of the Loerensians hauing made a lawe that he which was taken in adulterie should loose both his eyes did cause one of his sonnes eyes to be put out for the offence and one of his owne eyes by this he gained nothing but the commendation of iustice and so in our redemption the iustice of God is set forth otherwise there can be no lucre or advantage growing properly vnto God 4. Wherefore notwithstanding all these cauills and sophistications Christ properly and
a figure of Christ therefore as Christs righteousnesse is extended euen vnto those before the lawe so also was Adams sinne v. 14. Then the Apostle sheweth wherein Adam is vnlike vnto Christ namely in these three things 1. in the efficacie and power the grace of God in Christ is much more able to saue vs then Adams fall was to condemne vs v. 15. 2. in the obiect Adams one offence was sufficient to condemne but by Christ we are deliuered from many offences v. 16. 3. in the ende Adams sinne brought forth death but Christs righteousnesse doth not onely deliuer vs from sinne and death but bringeth vs vnto righteousnesse and life yea and causeth vs to raigne in life it restoareth vs to a more glorious kingdome and inheritance then we lost in Adam v. 17. The reddition or second part of this comparison sheweth wherein Christ of whom Adam was a type and figure is answearable vnto Adam namely in these three things propounded v. 12. first in the singularitie of his person one mans iustification saueth vs as one mans offence condemned vs v. 18. 2. in the obiect as Adams sinne was communicated to many so is Christs obedience v. 19. And here the Apostle by the way preuenteth an obiection that if sinne came in by Adam why entred the lawe he answeareth to the ende that sinne might the more appeare and be increased not simply but that thereby the grace of God might abound the more 3. in the ende as sinne had raigned vnto death so grace might raigne vnto eternall life 3. The questions and doubts discussed Quest. 1. What peace the Apostle meaneth ver 1. v. 1. Beeing iustified by faith we haue peace toward God 1. Oecumenius whom Harme and Anselme Lyranus Hugo followe doe reade here in the imperatiue habeamus let vs haue not habemus we haue and they vnderstand peace with men that the Iewes should no longer contend with the Gentiles about their lawe as though iustification came thereby seeing the Apostle had sufficiently prooued alreadie that we are iustified by faith But this exposition cannot stand 1. because the Apostle speaketh of such peace as we haue with God not with man 2. he speaketh in the first person we haue but S. Paul was none of these which did contend about the Lawe 2. Origen Chrysostome Theodoret vnderstand it of peace with God but in this sense let vs beeing iustified by faith take heede that we offend not God by our sinnes and so make him our enemie mihi videtur saith Chrysostome de vita conuersatione disserere the Apostle seemeth vnto me now to reason of our life and conuersation so Origen let vs haue peace vt vltra non adversetur caro spiritus that our flesh no longer rebell against the spirit But the Apostle here exhorteth not sed gratulatur eorum faelicitati he doth rather set forth with ioy the happines of those which are iustified Erasmus and it is not an exhortation but a continuation rather of the former doctrine of iustification Tolet annot 1. and here he sheweth the benefits of our iustification whereof the first is peace of conscience Pareus and this is further euident by the words following By whom we haue accesse which words beeing not vttered by way of exhortation but of declaration shewe that the former words should so likewise be taken Erasmus 3. Ambrose reading in the Indicatiue habemus we haue expoundeth this peace of the tranquilitie and peace of conscience which we haue with God beeing once iustified by faith in Christ thus the Apostle himselfe expoundeth this peace v. 10. When we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Sonne for they are our sinnes which make a separation betweene God and vs this sense followe Tolet annot 1. and in his commentarie Pareus Gryneus Faius with others 4. This then is resolued vpon that the Apostle speaketh here not of externall but internall peace there is pax temporis and pax pecteris a temporall and a pectorall or inward peace the other Christ giueth but through the malice of Sathan and the corruption of mans heart it may be interrupted and therefore Christ saith Matth. 10.34 That he came not to send peace but the sword but the other which is the inward peace of conscience Satan himselfe can not depriue vs of no man can take it from vs. But whereas there is a threefold combate within vs the fight betweene reason and affection betweene the flesh and the spirit and a wrestling with the terrors of Gods iudgements in the two first we cannot haue peace here but in part for still in the seruants of God there remaineth a combat betweene reason and affection the flesh and the spirit as S. Paul sheweth that it was so with him Rom. 7.23 he sawe another lawe in his members rebelling against the lawe of his minde and therefore we are not to hope to haue such peace vt non vltra caro adversetur spiritui that the flesh should no more rebell against the spirit as Origen thinketh but this inward peace is in respect of the terrors which are caused in vs by the feare of Gods iudgement against sinne from this terror we are deliuered by Christ Beza yet so as sometimes there may arise some feare doubts and perplexitie in the minde of the faithfull as it is written of Hilarion that beeing 70. yeare old and now neere vnto death he was somewhat perplexed and troubled in minde yet faith in the end ouercommeth all these dangers that we fall not vpon the rockes to make shipwracke of our faith and a good conscience 5. And we must here distinguish betweene pax conscientiae stupor conscienciae the peace of conscience and a carnall stupiditie for the one neuer felt the terror of Gods iudgments and therefore can haue no true peace the other hath felt them and is nowe by faith deliuered from them Calvin 6. Now whereas it is added We haue peace with God or toward God these things are here to be obserued 1. all the causes are here expressed of our iustification the materiall which is remission of our sinnes included in iustification the formall by faith the finall to haue peace with God the efficient through our Lord Iesus Christ Gorrhan 2. and in that he saith toward God Origen noteth that this is added to shewe that they haue neither peace in themselues because of the continuall combate betweene the flesh and the spirit not yet with Sathan and the world which continually tempt vs but with God we haue peace who is reconciled vnto vs in Christ and he saith toward God or with God to signifie that reconciliation is not onely made with God but that it is pleasing and acceptable vnto him that such a reconciliation is made Tolet. and further hereby is signified that this is a perpetuall peace because it is toward God with whom there is no change nor mutabilitie Faius Thorough Iesus Christ 1. Chrysostome seemeth thus to vnderstand
not imputed vnto them that is that God doe not punish them for it so to Philemon 18. if he haue hurt thee any thing at all impute it vnto me that is let me satisfie for it Faius Tolet in this sense the Apostle saith Rom. 4.8 Blessed is he to whom the Lord imputeth not his sinne his sinne shall not be laid to his charge in iudgement And so the Apostle saith here where no lawe is sinne is not imputted that is there is no punishment inflicted for sinne but by the prescript of a lawe seeing then that the punishment of death was inflicted vpon those which liued before the lawe it could not be for sinnes which they actually cōmitted which had no law to punish them therefore it was originall sinne which was punished by death and least it might be said that though there were no written lawe whereby sinne was imputed yet there was a naturall law which men transgressed and therefore were punished the Apostle sheweth in the next raise that euen death raigned ouer them which had committed no actuall sinne as Adam had done and therefore death was inflicted as a punishment not onely of actuall but originall sinne Beza 29. Quest. How death is said to haue raigned from Adam to Moses 1. Origen distinguisheth betweene the word pertransijt entred or passed which the Apostle vsed before v. 12. and regnavit raigned death entred ouer all both the iust and vniust but it raigned onely in those qui se peccato tota mento subiecerunt which did giue themselues wholly vnto sinne But the Apostle speaketh generally of all not onely of some that death raigned vpon by the generallitie of death he prooueth the generallitie of some and by this word regno he sheweth potentiam mortis the power of death tha◠none could resist it Martyr instar tyranni saeuijt it raged like a Tyrant Pareus 2. By death some vnderstand mons anima the death of the soule that is sinne which raigned from Adam vnto Moses Haymo Hug. but it is euident that the Apostle in this discourse distinguisheth death from sinne and prooueth by the effect the vniuersalitie of death brought in by sinne the generalitie of sinne also Origen seemeth to vnderstand mortem gehennae the death of hell vnto which all descended and therefore Christ went to hell to deliuer them this sense followeth also the ordinarie glosse and Gorrhan But in this sense it appeareth not why the Apostle should say vnto Moses for they hold that all the iust men euen vnder the law also went to hell But in truth the death of hell raigned not ouer the righteous either before the law or after from the which they were deliuered by Christ therefore the death of the bodie is here vnderstood which entred vpon all euen ouer infants which sinned not as Adam did 3. Vnto Moses 1. Origen by Moses vnderstandeth the Law and by the law the whole time of the law vsque ad adventum Christi vnto the comming of Christ who destroied the kingdome of sinne so also Haymo but in that the Apostle setteth Moses against Adam it is euident that he vnderstandeth the time when the law was giuen and what law he speaketh of is further shewed v. 20. The Law entred that offence should abound the dominion then of sinne and death there ended not 2. Some thinke this limitation is set because men were more afraid of death before Christs comming then after because they had not such hope of the resurrection Gorrhan but it is an hard and forced exposition to interpret vnto Moses vnto the comming of Christ as is shewed before 3. Some thinke it is said vnto Moses because then a remedie was giuen by the law in restraining of sinne and then first in Iudas capit destrui regnum mortis the kingdome of sinne beganne to be destroied and now euery where gloss ordinar but the law gaue no remedie against sinne for sinne then abounded much more v. 20. and the Apostle said before c. 4.15 That where no law is there is no transgression there is no such knowledge of sinne 4. Therefore vnto Moses noteth the time of the giuing of the law vsque ad legem per Mosen promulgatam vnto the law published by Moses gloss ordin not that death raigned not after Moses also but this is added to shew that death was in the world euen before the law Lyran. and so consequently sinne for of those greatest doubt might be made which liued before the law whether death entred vpon them as a punishment of their sinne 30. Quest. Of the meaning of these words which sinne not after the similitude of the transgression of Adam This verse hath diuers readings 1. some doe referre the last words after the similitude of the transgression of Adam vnto the first part of the sentence death raigned 2. some doe ioyne it with the next words before which sinned and of either of these there are seuerall opinions 1. They which distinguish the sentence and ioyne the first and last words together some as Chrysostome giue this sense that as death raigned vpon Adam so likewise it raigned ouer his posteritie but others doe make this the cause of death and mortalitie because they are borne like vnto Adam that is destitute of originall iustice Lyranus Tolet. annot 19. Tolet further would confirme this interpretation by diuers reasons 1. the preposition is 〈◊〉 which with a dative case sheweth the cause whereas an other word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is vsed to signifie in as Philip. 2.7 He was found in shape as a man and Rom. 8.3 In the similitats of sinneful flesh 2. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 similitude sheweth the similitude and likenes of nature 3. and this is most agreeable to the Apostles purpose to shew the cause why death raigned ouer all because they are borne sinners like vnto Adam Contra. 1. The Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is sometime taken for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in as before in the 12. vers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in whome and Tolet himselfe in that place sheweth that it is so vsed in other places of Scripture annot 15. 2. The word of similitude is better referred to the qualitie of Adams sinne then to the conformitie in nature 3. Neither needed the Apostle here shew the cause why death raigned ouer all but he bringeth in this as a proofe of that which he saide vers 12. that all sinned in Adam because all are subiect to death euen they which commit not actuall sinnes as infants it was therefore impertinent to repeat that which he intendeth to prooue 4. Now further this distinction of the verse is ouerthrowne by these two reasons 1. if the Apostle had saide ouer those which 〈…〉 and should haue put to no other addition he had contraried himselfe hauing set it downe vers 12. that in Adam all sinned and death therefore went ouer all how the◠could he say that death raigned ouer those that sinned not
reference to the time before spoken of from Adam vnto Moses and therefore he saith many not all as he on the other side specially meaneth the times of the Gospell when likewise many and not all beleeued in Christ annot 22. so also Faius But then this comparison should be imperfect for as Adams sinne hath infected all his posteritie since the beginning of the world to the ende thereof so Christ is the Sauiour of the world both from Adam to Moses and since 4. Augustine taketh the Apostle to meane all but yet he saith many to shewe the multitude of those that are saued in Christ for there are aliqua omnia quae non sunt multa some things all that are not many as the fowre Gospels are all but not many and there be aliqua multa some things many that are not all as many beleeuers in Christ not all for all haue not faith 2. Thess. 3. c. It is true that the Apostle by many vnderstandeth all as he said in the former verse and sometime the scripture calleth them many which are all as in one place the Lord saith to Abraham I haue made thee a father of many nations Gen. 17. in an other in thy seede all the nations of the earth shall be blessed but yet the reason is not giuen why the Apostle saith many not all 5. Some thinke he so saith many because Christ is excluded that came of Adam Piscator But Christ though he descended of Adam yet not by ordinarie generation therefore in this generall speach he needed not to be excepted as he was not included when the Apostle saith in whom that is in Adam all haue sinned 6. The reason then is this multos apponit vni he opposeth many to one that Adam beeing one infected many beside himselfe with his sinne as Adams sinne rested not in his person but entred vpon many so Christs obedience and righteousnesse staied not in his person but was likewise communicated to many Beza Pareus Quest. 40. How many are said to be sinners in Adam 1. Chrysostome by sinners vnderstandeth morti obnoxiot those that are subiect to death by reason of Adams sinne and he addeth this reason ex illius inobedientia alium fieri peccatorem quam poterit habere consequentiam by his disobedience others to become sinners it hath no coherence or consequence Contra. 1. True it is that sometime the word peccatores sinners is taken in that sense for men subiect to death and punishment as Bathsheba saith to Dauid 1. King 1.21 else when my Lord the King shall sleepe with his fathers I and my sonne Salomon shall be sinners c. that is put to death as offenders But yet in this place the word is not so taken for as to be made iust in Christ signifieth not to haue the reward of iustice but to be iustified indeed so to be made sinners sheweth not the punishment but the guiltines of sinne deseruing punishment as then in the former verse the effects were compared together condemnation in Adam and iustification vnto life in Christ so here the causes are shewed sinne on the one side causing death and righteousnesse on the other which bringeth to life 2. though Chrysostome faile in the interpretation of this place yet he denieth not but that in Adams all sinned and in many places he testifieth euidently of originall sinne as he calleth to radicale peccatum the rooted sinne hom 40. in 1. epist. ad Corinth And therefore the Pelagians did him wrong to make him an author of their opinion who denied originall sinne from which imputation of the Pelagians Augustine cleareth Chrysostome writing against their heresie and this point is cleared in this place for if all are subiect to death in Adam which Chrysostome here confesseth then all haue sinned in Adam for death could not enter vpon all without sinne 2. As Chrysostome vnderstandeth here onely temporall death whereunto all are subiect in Adam so some by condemnation mentioned v. 17. doe likewise insinuate the sentence onely of mortalitie Tolet. Origen vnderstandeth the expulsion of Adam out of Paradise but by the contrarie seeing the Apostle by iustification vnto life vnderstandeth the raigning in life eternall by death and condemnation is signified animae corporis damnatio the damnation of bodie and soule so expoundeth gloss interlin Gorrhan with others 3. Origen by sinners vnderstandeth consuetudinem studium peccandi the custome and studie of sinning as though the Apostle had meant onely actuall sinne but that proceedeth not from Adams disobedience properly as originall sinne doth 4. Neither yet doth the Apostle onely meane originall sinne which is by Adams disobedience in ipsius posteros propagatum propagated vnto his posteritie Faius for it is more to be a sinner then to sinne in Adam which the Apostle said before v. 12. 5. Wherefore the Apostle by sinners vnderstandeth both such as sinne originally in Adam peccatum contrabendâ— by the contagion or contraction of sinne and peccatum inteâ—andâ— which sinne actually by imitation Gorrh. so that we are not onely naturally euill by sinful propagation as the Apostle said before v. 12. in whom all haue sinned and so are by nature guiltie of death and condemnation v. 18. but beside as an effect of our naturall corruption there is a generall pravitie of nature and an habite of euill engendred in vs whereby we can doe no other then sinne so Adams disobedience hath made vs not onely naturaliter pravos naturally euill sed habitualiter peccatores habitually sinners Pareus Quest. 41. How the lawe is said to haue entred thereupon ver 20. 1. The occasion of these words is not so much to shewe that sinne raigned in the world euen after the lawe as it was in the world before the lawe from Adam to Moses v. 14. but the Apostle hauing shewed at large how we are deliuered from sinne and death brought in by Adam onely by Christ he preuenteth the obiection of the Iewes for it might haue beene replyed wherefore then serued the lawe if there were no remedie against sinne thereby the Apostle then answeareth that the lawe was so farre from sauing men from their sinnes that they were thereby the more encreased thus Chrysostome and Pet. Martyr with others 2. But this is not to be vnderstood of the lawe of nature as Origen who to decline the imputation of the lawe laid vpon it by wicked Marcion that it was giuen to an euill ende to encrease sinne will haue the Apostle to speake of the lawe of nature for the Apostle making mention of the lawe before v. 13. vnderstandeth the written lawe as he expoundeth v. 14. where he expressely speaketh of Moses neither was the lawe of nature giuen to that ende to encrease sinne no more then the morall lawe was but sinne entred occasionaliter by occasion onely of the lawe as shall be shewed in the next question 3. The lawe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 entred thereupon 1. the Latine interpreter readeth subintravit
righteousnesse Controv. 14. Concerning inherent iustice v. 13. Neither giue your members as weapons of vnrighteousnesse c. Bellarmine inferreth out of this place that as sinne was a thing inherent and dwelling in vs before our conuersion so instead thereof must succeede righteousnes per iustitiam intelligit aliquid inherens by righteousnesse he vnderstandeth a thing inherent in vs from whence proceed good workes Contra. 1. We doe not denie but that there is in the regenerate a righteousnesse inherent and dwelling in them which is their state of sactification or regeneration but by this inherent iustice are we not iustified before God but by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed onely for here the Apostle treateth not of iustification but of our sanctification and mortification which are necessarie fruits of iustification and doe followe it but they are not causes of our iustification 2. Wherefore this is no good consequent There is in the righteous an inherent iustice Erg. by this iustice they are iustified before God See further hereof Synops. Centur. 4. err 56. Controv. 15. Against the power of freewill in the fruits of righteousnesse v 20. When ye were the seruants of sinne ye were freed from righteousnesse Beza doth vrge this place strongly against the popish freewill for in that they are said to be free from iustice that is as Anselme interpreteth alieni à iustitia estranged from iustice it sheweth that they haue no inclination at all vnto iustice it beareth no sway at all nullum erat eius imperium it had no command at all ouer you Pererius disput 5. numer 33. maketh an offer to confute this assertion of Beza but with bad successe for those verie authors whom he produceth make against him first he alleadgeth Anselme following Augustine liberum arbitrium saith Augustine vsque adeo iâ— peccatoribus non perijt vt per ipsum maximè peccent c. freewill is so farre from beeing lost in the wicked that thereby they doe sinne most of all c. But who denieth this the wicked haue freewill indeed free from compulsion it is voluntarie but inclined onely vnto euill which Anselme calleth libertatem culpabilem a culpable freedome and he therefore fitly distinguisheth betweene these two phrases of the Apostle he saith they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 free not freed from iustice least that sinne might be imputed vnto any other then to themselues but afterward v. 22. he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 liberati freed from sinne to shewe that this freedome is not of our selues but onely from God and so he concludeth haec voluntas quae libera est in malis c. ideo in bonis libera non est quia non liberatur ab eo qui eam solus c. this will which is free in euill because they delight in euill is not therefore free in good things because it is not freed by him who onely can make it free from sinne c. With like successe he citeth Thomas in his Commentarie here who thus writeth semper itaque homo sive in peccato fuerit sive in gratia liber est à coactione non tamen semper liber est ab omni inclinatione man therefore alwaies whether he be in sinne or in grace is free from coaction and compulsion but he is not alway free from an inclination c. where he affirmeth the same thing which we doe that the will of men is free alwaies from compulsion for it alwaies willeth freely without constraint that which it willeth but it is not free at any time from an euill inclination it is not free à necessitate from a necessitie of inclining vnto that which is euill of it owne naturall disposition Controv. 16. Whether all death be the wages or stipend of sinne v. 13. The stipend of sinne is death Socinus part 3. c. 8. pag. 294. graunteth that eternall death is the reward of sinne and the necessitie of mortalitie and dying but not â—â—â— corporall death it selfe for Adam before sinne entred was created in a mortall state and condition and Christ hath redeemed vs from all sinne and the punishment thereof therefore corporall death is no punishment of sinne because it remaineth still neither hath Christ redeemed vs from it Contra. 1. It is euident in that the Apostle speaketh of death here absolutely without any restraint or limitation that he meaneth death in generall of what kind soeuer and of the corporall death he speaketh directly c. 5.12 by one man sinne entred into the world and death by sinne which is specially vnderstood of the bondage of mortalitie which Adam by his transgression brought vpon his posteritie 2. It is friuolous distinction to make a difference betweene death and the necessitie of dying for what else is mortalitie then a necessitie of dying which if it be brought in by sinne then death also it selfe 3. Adam though he were created with a possibilitie of dying if he sinned yet this possibilitie should neuer haue come into act if he had not actually sinned 4. Christ hath indeed deliuered vs from all punishment of sinne both temporall and eternall as he hath deliuered vs from sinne for as our sinnes are remitted neuer to be laid vnto our iudgement and yet the reliques and remainder of sinne are not vtterly extinguished so the Lord hath effectually and actually deliuered vs from eternall death that it shall neuer come neare vs but from temporall death as it is a punishment onely for he hath made it an entrance to a better life and he hath taken away the power thereof that it shall not seaze vpon vs for euer because he shall raise vs vp at the last day and then perfectly triumph ouer death for euer 5. Origen here vnderstandeth neither eternall nor temporall death but that qua separatur anima per peccatum à Deo whereby the soule is separated from God by sinne But then the Apostle had made an iteration of the same thing for sinne it selfe is the spirituall death of the soule and therefore the death here spoken of is an other death beside that namely that which followeth as the stipend of sinne which is euerlasting death vnto the which is in the next clause opposed eternall death Controv. 17. Against the distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes v. 23. The stipend or wages of sinne is death Faius by this place doth well confute that Popish distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes they say that veniall sinnes are those which in their owne nature are not worthie of death but the Apostle here noteth in generall of all sinne whatsoeuer that the stipend and wages thereof is death because all sinne is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the transgression of the law 1. Ioh. 3.5 and death is the wages of them that transgresse the 〈◊〉 that glosse then of Haymo vpon this place may seeme somewhat straunge hoc non de omnibus peccatis intelligendum est sed de criminalibus c. this is not to be vnderstood of all sinnes
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
might seeme to be partiall and vniust he answereth in effect thus much that whereas all are endebted to God and without Gods mercie like to perish here is no iniustice if God remit his debt to one and not to an other as Augustine saith debitum si non reddis habes quod gratuleris si reddis non habes quod queraris if thou doe not pay the debt which thou owest thou hast cause to be thankfull if thou doest thou hast no cause to complaine So then the Apostle here sheweth that betweene the decree of election and reprobation and the execution thereof there came betweene certaine subordinate causes all are sinners in Adam for mercie presupposeth miserie where the Lord then findeth all in miserie there if he shew mercie to some and not to others no man can accuse him of iniustice because he is not endebted or tied in his iustice vnto any but all are by nature the children of wrath if then he saue some out of that masse of corruption it is a worke of his mercie and no iniustice is to be imputed vnto him where in iustice nothing is due to any to this purpose Beza annot Quest. 16. How it is said It is not in him that willeth nor in him that runneth but in God that sheweth mercie 1. Origen and Heirom ad Hedib qu. 10. thinke that the Apostle speaketh here in the person of one that contradicteth and obiecteth against that which he had said and Chrysostome saith that the Apostle hero aliam obiectionem inducit bringeth in an other obiection But it is euident by this note of illation so then that the Apostle thus inferreth and includeth out of the former places of Scripture alleadged 2. Origen and Photius with other Greeke expositors supplie here the word solum onely as if the Apostle should meane It is not onely in him that runneth or in him that willeth but in God that sheweth mercie and Origen will haue this sentence to be vnderstood comparatiuely as those two other places Psal. 127. Except the Lord build the house they labour but in vaine that build it and 1. Cor. 3. Neither be that planteth is any thing nor he that watereth but God that giueth increase But these places are not like for the first is a ciuill action to build an house wherein the will of man hath some libertie though it cannot prosper without the blessing of God and like as the outward ministerie of man is nothing auailable vnto saluation without the assistance and concurrence of the spirit so neither can the will or endeauour of man doe any thing of it selfe toward the attaining of saluation but all must be ascribed to Gods mercie Martyr and beside the antithesis or opposition but in God that sheweth mercie excludeth that glosse onely for Gods mercie and mans will cannot in this opposition be ioyned as workers together seeing the one is excluded and the other admitted Pareus Calvin here also presseth Augustines reason that if the Apostles words admitted any such sense then they might as well be inuerted to say It is not in God that sheweth mercie but in him that willeth and runneth that is it is not onely in the one no more then in the other 3. Some of the Romanists that will not haue mans free will vtterly excluded in the worke of saluation haue this deuise that although there be somewhat in him that willeth and runneth yet all is ascribed to Gods mercie because miserecordia Dei praeuenit voluntarem hominis c. the mercie of God preuenteth the will of man c. and mans will beeing thus prepared then worketh together with grace Pererius numer 46. taking vpon him herein to confute Calvin Thomas Aquine in his Commentarie here moouing this question why seeing that as free will is not sufficient without grace so neither grace sufficeth without freewill yet all is ascribed to Gods mercie answeareth by a distinction because the grace of God is agens principale the principall agent mans will secundum instrumentale is the second agent and the instrument to the which the worke is not ascribed but to the principall agent as the axe is not said to make a chest but the artificer that worketh with it Contra. Pet. Martyr vseth the same similitude but to a diuers ende mans will indeede God vseth as an instrument but not any goodnes in mans will which it should of it selfe without grace the will of man concurreth as a naturall instrument in respect of the naturall facultie of calling but it hath no inclination to that which is good but as it pleaseth God to mooue it Mans will then is a naturall instrument of the action but not a morall instrument of the goodnes of the action this is wrought wholly by the mercie and grace of God therefore the ordinarie glosse here concludeth well out of Augustine restat vt totum Deo datur it remaineth that the whole be giuen vnto God volentem praevenit vt velit subsequitur â—e frustra velit he preuenteth man to make him will and followeth him with his grace that he doe not will in vaine c. And I preferre here the iudgement of Tolet and Bellarmine before other Romanists the first inferreth out of this place non fuit nisi ex sola voluntate Dei the calling of the Gentiles was onely of the will of God annot 23. the other likewise so expoundeth this place that it is onely the mercie of God nothing at all in the will of man that he perseuereth to the ende lib. 2. de grat c. 12. 4. Ambrose by mercie vnderstandeth the discerning iudgement of God as he giueth instance in Dauid and Saul how both of them asked pardon of God but God discerned vter bono animo peteret which of them asked of a good minde and so he will haue the meaning to be that it was not enough for a man to will and endeauour vnlesse God did confirme and allow of his endeauour But there is great difference betweene the mercie of God and the iudgement and approbation of God for but part of the worke is ascribed to the one whereas the whole is due to the other ex Mart. 5. Now touching the true meaning of the words 1. neither with Anastasius qu. 59. are they to be restrained to Esaus running and coursing in the field to hunt for venison for his father 2. nor yet with Tolet to Iacobs running to the flocke to fetch a kid Gen. 27. the Apostles doctrine is more generall 3. nor yet as the same Tolet annot 23. is this sentence onely to be applied in generall to the calling of the Gentiles and the reiection of the Iewes but with August epist. 101. doe we interpret this place of the particular predestination of euery one that it dependeth not vpon the foresight of the will and works of men but onely on the mercie of God 4. Osiander vnderstandeth it of the willing and running of naturall and vnregenerate men among
vnto that ende which the Lord will himselfe and so Hugo well saith that God invisibili operatione malas voluntates ad suum arbitrium temperat ordinat c. by his invisible operation doth temper and order euen wicked wills according to his owne mind c. yet God giueth vnto euill and perverse wills non corruptionem sed ordinem not corruption but order c. and he sheweth it by this similitude like as when one is cast downe headlong and is readie to fall if one make a way seeing he must needes fall that he tumble downe one way rather then an other he in some sort may be said to incline and make a way for him to fall and yet causeth or procureth not but onely disposeth his fall And thus God may be said to harden â—â—erly Outwardly also God hardeneth by his workes as either his mercies shewed vpon others as the Egyptians hated Gods people because the Lord blessed them and in this sense it is said that God turned their heart to hate his people Psal. 105.25 that is by creation of those benefits which he bestowed vpon them or by his iudgements inflicted vpon the wicked themselues as Pharaohs heart was the more hardened by the plagues which were sent of this kind also it is that the wicked are many times hardened by the ministerie and preaching of the word which is sent to conuert them but they peruert it to their destruction so it is said vnto the Prophet Isay 6.9 Goe c. and shut the eyes of 〈◊〉 people make their heart fatt the Prophet is said to harden their heart because it was hardened by occasion of his preaching Secondly God hardeneth by his instruments as when he deliuereth vp men vnto Sathan to be seduced by him and giueth them ouer into his power as God is said to haue stirred vp Dauid to number the people 2. Sam. 24.1 which was indeede the worke of Sathan 1. Chron. 21.1 so God bid the lying spirit to goe and deceiue Baals Prophets 1. Kin. 22.21 and the Apostle saith of the wicked that the God of this world hath blinded their minds 2. Cor. 4.4 Thirdly the wicked doe harden their owne hearts when God giueth them ouer vnto their owne wicked and corrupt desires as the Apostle speaketh of the heathen that God gâ—â—e them vp to their owne hearts lusts Rom. 1.24 And thus Pharaoh is said to haue hardened his owne heart And thus as hath beene shewed God is said to harden the heart But it will thus be obiected on the contrarie 1. Obiect To tempt man is all one as to harden him but God tempteth none Iam. 1.13 therefore neither doth he harden them Answ. God tempteth not with any such temptation as proceedeth from a corrupt begâ—â—ing such as are the tentations which are caused by mans own concupiscence for as God not tempted he hath no corrupt affections to be tempted so neither doth he tempt by inciting or stirring men vp to euill neither doth he in this manner harden but as God may tempt externally for the triall of mens faith and obedience as he tempted Abraham and so he tempted Israel in the desert so the Lord by externall meanes and in such manner as he haue said hardeneth in his iustice without any iniustice at all Martyr 2. Obiect If God hardened Pharaohs heart why then did he send Moses so often vnto him to bid him let his people goe God should seeme herein to be contrarie to himselfe in making shewe of one thing and yet intending an other Answ. Pet. Martyr here vseth this distinction Gods will is to be considered two waies there is voluntas signi vel antecedens the will of the signe or the wil going before and there is voluntas consequens seu beneplaciti the will following or of Gods good pleasure As when Ionas was sent to preach to the Niniuites that they should within 40. dayes be destroyed that was the will of the signe or the reuealed will of God but yet the Lord vpon their repentance purposed to spare them that was the secret wil and good pleasure of God yet were not these wills the one contrarie to the other but the one wrought for the other as Ionas preaching brought them to repentance that Gods pleasure might be fulfilled in spring of the citie so Moses was sent to Pharaoh to make him without excuse that Gods iustice might be manifest in giuing him ouer to the hardnes of heart 3. Obiect Hardnes of heart is of God hardnes of heart is sinne therefore is would hence followe that sinne is of God Ans. Hardnes of heart is not of God simply or as it is sinne but accidentally onely 〈◊〉 it is the punishment of sinne hardnesse of heart is then ascribed vnto God as the Iudge to Sathan as the tormentor and executioner to the wicked themselues as to the partie guiltie Pareus dub 16. 4. God is not angrie with his owne worke but he is angrie with men for their hardnes of heart therefore it is no way Gods worke Answ. Hardnes of heart as it is sinne or the cause of sinne it is not of God but the Lord is offended with it but as it is a punishment of sinne so is it of God and the Lord is pleased that the obstinacie of the wicked should be punished Gryneus Quest. 19. Of the obiection propounded v. 19. Thou wilt say why doth he yet complaine c. 1. This is the third obiection the first was of inconstancie which might seeme to be imputed vnto God in reiecting the Iewes which was answeared before v. 6. the second of iniustice in casting off some and choosing others before they had done any good or euill 5.14 now the third is of crueltie which might be furmised in God iâ— beeing an 〈◊〉 those that are hardened which notwithstanding is according to his owne will this phâ—â—â—ion the Apostle now beginneth to answear 2. Why doth he yet complaine or is angrie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word signifieth both the latine readeth queritur complaineth by the mistaking of which word some taking it for â—â—ritur with a dipthong which signifieth to be sought or enquired some haue here 〈◊〉 threefold sense as first it may be taken impersonally why is it enquired whence it 〈◊〉 one is good an other euill or passively wherefore is it sought for or why should any seeke to be good seeing all is as God will or actiuely why doth God complaine of sinners seeing all is according to his will so Gorrhan and the ordin gloss but the last onely is the right meaning the other two senses doe arise by the mistaking of the word 3. God complaineth in many places in the Scriptures of the wickednesse of men as Isa 1.26 How is the faithfull citie become an harlot so our Sauiour taketh vp this complaint ouer Ierusalem how often would I haue gathered together c. Matth. 23. now the obiection is why God should thus complaine seeing herein his will
father as Rom. 1.23 2. Cor. 1.3 and 11.31 2. Not euery one that is called God in Scripture is consequently that chiefe and great God 3. Christ is said to be ouer all that is men as the most excellent man of all not ouer all whatsoeuer 4. He is said to be ouer all with a limitation for he is not ouer him that hath subdued all things vnto him 1. Cor. 15.27 5. And in that he is ouer all he hath it not by nature but of gift Philip. 2.9 Contra. Erasmus seemeth first to haue giuen occasion to these newfangled Dogmatists who likewise in his annotations vpon this place thinketh this Scripture not so fit to prooue the diuine nature of Christ adding that herein there is no daunger seeing there are more direct places to prooue Christs Godhead by But Pet. Martyr here answeareth well non convenit vt Ecclesiae armamentarium sine causa exhauriatur c. it is not conuenient that the armorie of the Church should without cause be diminished seeing the fathers as Origen Chrysost Theophylact Cyprian cont lud lib. 2. c. 5. Hilarius in Psal. 122. doe all alleadge this place for the proofe of Christs deitie it is not fit that we should suffer it to be wrestled out of our hands their cauills are thus answeared 1. Where the father is said to be blessed for euer the Sonne is not excluded and in some places Christ is said expressely to be blessed for euer as Matth. 21.9 Blessed is be that commeth in the name of the Lord and if the Creator be blessed for euer Christ is included by whom all things were created Ioh. 1. Coloss. 1. 2. He which is said to be God ouer all as Christ here must of necessitie be that chiefe and great God 3. Some indeede reade super omnia ouer all things as Origen the Syrian and Latine interpreter and this is agreeable to that place Coloss. 1.17 He is before all things and in him all things consist and the Apostle nameth both things visible and invisible and so Origen well expoundeth he is aboue all things that is powers principalities and euerie thing that is named 4. He is aboue all things that is all creatures and aboue all as the father is aboue all and yet neither aboue the Sonne or the holy Ghost the father then is here excepted for Christ and his father are one non post patrem ipse sed de patre he is not after the father but of the father Origen 5. S. Paul in that place speaketh of the exaltation of Christ as he is Mediator and according to his humane nature and so he hath it by gift but as he is God he is ouer all by his eternall generation as the onely begotten Sonne of God Controv. 4. That the water in Baptisme doth not sanctifie or giue grace Chrysostome sheweth here a fit analogie and resemblance betweene the birth of Izaak oâ— Sara by the word of promise v. 9. and our spirituall regeneration in baptisme the barren wombe of Sarah he likeneth to the water which of it selfe hath no efficacie erat vterni ille aqua frigidior propter sterilitatem senectutem that wombe was more vnapt for generation then water because of the barrennesse and old age thereof like as then Izaak was borne of that barren wombe by the word of promise ita nos oportet ex verbo nasci so we are borne of the word To this purpose Chrysostome who maketh the element of water of it selfe but a dead thing and like vnto Sarahs barren wombe which could not haue conceiued but by the word of promise So the Apostle saith Ephes. 5.25 Cleansing it by the washing of water thorough the word the water cleanseth but by the operation of the word This then ouerthroweth that opinion of the Romanists which affirme that the sacramentall signe in the sacraments conferre grace See further hereof Synops. Centur. 2. err 76. Controv. 5. Against the vaine observation of Astrologers in casting of nativities v. 10. Rebecca when she had conceiued by one c. Augustine lib. 2. de doctrin Christian. c. 21. by this Scripture confuteth the folly of Mathematicians who in casting of mens natiuities doe obserue the aspect of the planets and so doe calculate and coniecture of the disposition of men for Esau and Iacob were borne at the same time of one and the same parents and yet they were of diuerse dispositions and qualities and conditions of life Controv. 6. That the soules had no beeng in a former life before they came into the bodie It was Origens error who therein did too much Platonize that the soules in the former life according to their workes good or euill were accordingly appointed of God to saluation or damnation But this error is euidently conuinced by the Apostle here for Esau and Iacob had neither done good nor euill before they were borne Lyranus addeth two other reasons to convince this error 1. if there had beene an other life before then the world was not created in the beginning as it is said Gen. 1.1 for that the soules had a beeing and beginning before 2. and temporale non potest esse causa aeterni no temporall thing can be the cause of that which is eternall the actions then and workes of the soule could not be the cause of the act of Gods eternall will Controv. 7. Whether the foresight of faith or workes be the cause of election This was in time past maintained by the followers of the Pelagian sect as it appeareth by the epistles of Prosper and Hilarius Arelatens sent to Augustine and not much differing is the opinion of the Greeke expositors as Theodoret in these words that the purpose of God might remaine according to election vnderstandeth the purpose of men foreseene of God according to the which he electeth But the Apostle euidently calleth it the purpose of God and therefore not of men Chrysost. and Photius cited by Oecumenius doe here vnderstand the purpose of God but where it is added according to election they say this election presupposeth a difference and diuersitie of wills foreseene of God The late Lutherans tread in the same steppesâ— who at the first did hold that the foresight of faith was the cause of election but now they haue somewhat refined that assertion and their opinion now is fidem non esse electionis causam meritoriam sed instrument alem that faith is not the meritorious but the instrumentall cause of election their arguments are these 1. Argum. Photius thus reasoneth electio de illis fit qui aliqua in re differunt election is said to be of those which differ in some thing God then did see some difference in them which he elected from others Contra. 1. Augustine at the first was somewhat mooued with this argument which made him deuise an other sense of the Apostles words to this effect that it was said vnto the children beeing not yet borne and before they had done either good
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
be answeared 4. Whereas to shunne these rockes of offence and to preuent these obiections some here haue found out a middle or meane way to referre the decree of reprobation partly to the will of God as the efficient partly to the foresight of sinne as the materiall cause thereof And here these distinctions are brought in 1. Lyranus thus distinguisheth that reprobation is either taken large largely and so it signifieth onely simplicem negationem ad gloriam a simple deniall of glorie and this hath no cause in Gods prescience but onely in the will of God or it is taken proprie properly for ordinario ad poenam an ordaining vnto punishment and so it is not willed or decreed of God nisi propter culpam but for sinne Bellarmine also fleeth to the same distinction of negatiue reprobation which is not to haue mercie positive to decree vnto condemnation of this the foresight of sinne he saith is the cause of the other the free will of God But seeing this negatiue reprobation containeth a priuation and deniall of euerlasting glorie this also must arise from the foresight of sinne for God excludeth none out of his kingdome but for sinne as the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 6.9 Know ye not that the vnrighteous shall not inherite the kingdome of God 2. Gorrhan hath this distinction there is a double kind of reprobation temporalis the temporall which is non appositio gratiae the not affording or giuing of grace and eterna voluntas non apponendi the eternall which is the will or purpose of not giuing of grace this is without the foresight of any merite but not the other like vnto this is that difference which some make betweene the decree and the execution of the decree the first is without respect vnto sinne but sinne commeth betweene before the other But this doth not satisfie as Pareus well obserueth for the same cause mooued God to decree punishment which mooueth him in time to execute punishment 3. Some doe thus consider of predestination that it is of two sorts there is decretum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a decree simply called of those things whereof God is the author and efficient cause himselfe such is the decree of election vnto life there is decretum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 secundum quod a decree after a sort which may also be called permissivum the decree of permission as the other is effectivum an effecting and working decree of this latter sort is the decree of reprobation the meanes which lead thereunto God onely permitteth and effecteth not as the sinne and iniquitie of men for the which they are worthily condemned to this purpose Rollocus in 8. ad Roman p. 181.182 But this doth not satisfie for the decree of damnation is as well an effecting decree as is the decree of election God willeth and decreeth the damnation of the wicked as effectually in his iustice as he effectually willeth the saluation of the elect as the wise man saith in the Proverbs 16.4 That the Lord hath made all things for his owne sake yea euen the wicked for the day of euill 4. Iunius against Pukâ—us resp ad ration 72. maketh two degrees of reprobation decretum praeteritionis the decree of preterition which is the purpose of God not to shew mercie and this is absolute without any respect vnto sinne then there is decretum ex praescientia the decree of reprobation issuing forth of God prescience and so none are decreed to be condemned but for sinne some call the first decretum non miserandi the decree not to shew mercie the other decretum puniendi the decree of punishment Pareus dub 8. p. 913. citeth Mr. Perkins who calleth them decretum deserendi the decree of desertion and ordinatio ad poenam an ordaining to punishment Pareus out of his owne iudgement saith that there are two acts of reprobation negativus the negatiue that is not to haue mercie and affirmativus the affirmatiue which is to condemne the negatiue act is either reprobation from grace or from glorie the first of these which is a reiection from grace be thinketh onely to proceed from the good pleasure of God but not the other all these distinctions are the same in effect which else where I haue followed allowing that distinction especially of Iunius as giuing full satisfaction in this matter But now I find some doubts and obiections which are not yet remooued by these distinctions 1. Seeing damnation necessarily followeth reiection and where grace is denied glorie cannot follow if the deniall of the one should be the absolute act of Gods will so by consequence should the other also 2. And the Scripture sheweth that the cause why God reiecteth man is for that they reiect God first as Samuel saith concerning Saul 1. Sam. 15.23 Because thou hast cast away the word of the Lord the Lord hath cast away thee and Rom. 1.24.27 the Apostle sheweth that the giuing vp of the Gentils vnto their hearts lusts was a iust recompence of their error therefore because the substraction and deniall of grace the hardening of the heart the blinding of the mind are punishments of sinne and sinne goeth before the punishment thereof it followeth that these things as they are not temporally inflicted but for sinne so neither are they eternally decreed but vpon the foresight of sinne 3. If God should absolutely reiect any otherwise thou for sinne and more are reiected then elected then should Gods iustice farre exceed his mercie and his seueritie farre surpasse his clemencie To this last obiection Thomas Aquin. maketh this answer by a distinction that bonum proportionatum communi status naturae c. the good things which are proportioned to the common state and condition of nature are found in the most but bonum quod excedit comâ—â—â—â— statum c. the good things which exceed the commoÌ„ state are found in few as they are found more which haue sufficient knowledge and direction for the gouernment of their life then they which want it such as are idiots and fooles but there are few which are found that haue the profunditie and depth of knowledge and of this kind of euerlasting life it exceedeth the common state and condition of humane nature and therefore it is no maruel if it be found in the fewest and smallest number to this purpose Thomas 1. part qu. 25. artic 7. But this answer is not sufficient he hath giuen a good reason why eternall life is not merited or procured by mans deserts because it is a gift which exceedeth the proportion and condition of mans nature but yet the reason appeareth not neither is the doubt satisfied why seeing God aboundeth in mercy euerlasting life is not giuen vnto the most therefore Thomus addeth further that Gods mercie appeareth in that he directeth some vnto life from the which the most decline by the common cause and inclination of nature And indeed this is the best and most sufficient answear that
Gods mercie herein exceedeth his iustice that whereas all men by nature are the children of wrath and God might iustly â—aue them in their sinne as he did the reprobate Angels yet out of that masse of corruption he saueth some to bring them vnto glorie so then vnlesse the fall and transgression of man he presupposed there is no way to magnifie Gods mercie aboue his iustice Thus Thomas Aquin though he mislike Augustines opinion who maketh the foresight of originall â—â—â—ne the ground of the decree of reprobation and thinketh that God absolutely reiecteth the reprobate without any foresight of sinne yet is constrained to seeke shelter here for the â—â—â—iding of this obiection 5. Wherefore fully to decide this great question and controversie touching the decree â—â— reprobation we will determine of it in this manner 1. There is reprobatio indefinita definita a reprobation indefinite that is that some â—â—e elected some reiected and a definite reprobation whereby some are certainely reiected and not others of the first the cause is onely in God for the demonstration of his mercie â—â—â—ard the elect and of his iustice and power toward the reprobate as the Apostle sheweth v. 22.23 and so the wise man saith Prov. 16.4 that God made all things euen the wicked for himselfe and to this purpose Thomas well saith that the reason of election and reprobation is taken from the goodnesse of God quae multiformiter in rebus representatur which by his meanes is diuersely represented and set forth in the creatures when aâ— some things are in an high some in a low degree If all should be elected Gods iustice should not appeare if all were condemned where were his mercie But of the definite and certaine reprobation why some are in particular reiected the cause is the foresight of their sinne 2. Againe reprobation is considered two waies absolute comparate absolutely as in reiecting these and these and comparatiuely in reiecting these rather then those of the first the reason is the generall corruption of mankind which transgressed in Adam who abused his freewill in choosing euill it beeing in his power to haue made choice of the good and so he brought all his posteritie into bondage vnto sinne in which state of corruption God iustly might haue left all if it had pleased him but of the comparatiue reprobation why God left others in their naturall corruption and freed others no reason can be giuen but the good pleasure of God as Saint Paul saith Ephes. 2.3 We were by nature the children of wrath as well as others but God who is rich in mercie through his great loue c. hath quickned vs so Augustine well saith quare hunc Deus trahat illum non trahat no◠〈◊〉 dijudicare si non vis errare why God draweth one out of that masse of corruption and not an other take not vpon thee to iudge if thou wilt not erre epistol 105. 3. We must distinguish betweene absolutum ius Dei and ordinatum the absolute right which God hath ouer his creatures and his moderate or subordinate right By his absolute right the Creator hath power to dispose of his creature as it pleaseth him to life or to death as the potter hath power of the same clay to make some vessels of honour some of dishonour and if the Lord should thus deale with his creature euen without any respect vnto sinne no man could accuse or challenge God But he dealeth not thus with vs secundum spiritum absolutum ius according to his strict and absolute right but according to his subordinate right whereby he proceedeth not against the creature either in condemning it or decreeing the same to be condemned without iust cause giuen by the creature And thus the Apostle dealeth in this place by the similitude of the potter v. 20.22 he sheweth what absolute power and right God hath if he would please to vse it and v. 22.23 he speaketh of the other ordinarie right and power which God indeed vseth in proceeding against the vessels of wrath prepared by their owne sinnes vnto destruction Pareus And Tolet here well obserueth that the Apostle maketh two answers vnto the obiection propounded one to stop the mouthes of gainesayers in vrging the absolute power of God the other to satisfie the faithfull in shewing that God doth not execute his wrath vpon any but for their sinne annot 28. Concerning this distinction of the strict or absolute right and power of God and his ordinarie or rather subordinate right though it be admitted on both sides both by Protestant and Popish writers yet there is this difference 1. Some doe thinke and so professe and teach that God vseth as well his absolute as subordinate power in the decree of reprobation and thus Bucer Calvin Zanchius affirme that God by his absolute will hath reprobate and reiected some without respect vnto their sinnes 2. Pareus who also acknowledgeth Gods power herein yet he would not haue this doctrine handled either in schooles or before the people but according to Gods subordinate power in reiecting no otherwise then for sinne p. 912. 3. Both these thinke that God bringeth this his absolute power into act but I thinke it more safe to hold that God might if it please him vse that absolute power which if he did none could accuse him of iniustice but he dealeth otherwise in this mysterie of reprobation refusing none but iustly for their sinne and this is that which Augustine affirmeth by way of supposition in this manner Si hominum genus quod creatum constâ—â— primitus nihilo c. if mankind which at the beginning God created of nothing were not brought forth endebted both to sinne and death and yet the almightie Creator should condemne some of them to euerlasting destruction who could say vnto him Lord why hast thou done so God in his infinite power might haue done thus but not according to the ordinarie course of iustice Then seeing I absolutely subscribe vnto the iudgement of Augustine seene before in the 2. opinion produced that mans originall corruption is the first ground of the decree of reprobation out of the which God in mercie saued some by the election of grace leauing others which adding to their originall corruption other actuall sinnes are made worthie of condemnation and so Augustine well concludeth investigabilis Dei miserecordia c. the mercie of God is vnsearcheable whereby he hath mercie on whom he will no merits of his going before and vnsearcheable is his truth whereby he hardeneth whom he will eius praecedentibus meritis his merites going before but the same with his vpon whom God sheweth mercie Learned Pareus hereunto agreeth dub 17. massa damnata propriè est obiectum c. the damned masse is properly the obiect of election reprobation Vrsinus also as Pareus hath set forth his workes defineth reprobation to be the immutable and eternall decree of God whereby he hath decreed in
his iust iudgement to leaue some in their sinnes c. and not beeing made partakers of Christ to condemne them for euer Iudicious Polanus hath the like definition of reprobation in his partitions It is the decree whereby God purposed to himselfe to leaue those of whom it pleased him not to haue mercie in euerlasting destruction vnto the which they should be obnoxious for their sinnes for the declaration of his iustice In these distinctions all the causes are touched of euerlasting damnation and the â—â—re-ordaining thereunto the efficient is Gods decree and purpose the materiall is sinne the formall the deniall of mercie and the leauing them to themselues the finall cause is the setting forth of the iustice of God And thus I trust it hath beene sufficiently shewed how the decree of reprobation may safely be held to proceede from the prescience of originall and actuall sinne and not to be an absolute act of Gods will and purpose as the decree of election is and in this resolution of this question whatsoeuer I haue before thought and written otherwise I set vp my rest as the safest from any inconuenience and the fittest to giue satisfaction to the contrarie obiections which are such as here follow 1. Obiect Seeing the number of the reprobate farre exceedeth the number of the elect how is Gods mercie magnified aboue his iustice Ans. They which hold an absolute reprobation without relation vnto sinne cannot here remooue this doubt for if God out of his owne will should cast off more then he receiueth he should be farre more iust then mercifull But this beeing first laid as a foundation that God casteth off none but for sin in that he saueth some out of that masse of corruption whereas he might iustly leaue all his mercie exceedeth his iustice and in these three points 1. in that God in the beginning made man righteous Ecclesi 7.31 and gaue him free-will so to haue continued if he would and if he had not willingly transgressed he should haue remained in the state of grace and fauour with God and not haue tasted of his iustice 2. after man had fallen and brought all his posteritie into the bondage of corruption Gods mercie appeared in sauing some whereas he might in iustice haue condemned all as he did the reprobate Angels that kept not their first state 3. his mercie is euident euen toward those which are left in their corruption that the Lord denieth not vnto them meanes whereby they might be called if they had grace to vse them and he suffereth euen the vessels of wrath with much patience not presently cutting theÌ„ off as he might in al these points Gods mercie exceedeth his iustice 2. Obiect When God had made Adam righteous it was in his power to haue kept him from falling that all might haue beene saued is not God therein accessarie to their sin is suffering that which he might haue hindered Ans. 1. 〈◊〉 was fit that the Creator hauing made man with free will should suffer the creature freely to exercise that naturall power and facultie which was giuen him as other creatures doâ—â— their kind 2. although God permitted Adam to fall yet he knew how to vse it for 〈◊〉 further demonstration of his glorie and in this behalfe it is iust with God to suffer euill â—â—â—â—e in the world which he knoweth how to turne vnto good as he suffered Iob to be 〈◊〉 of Sathan for the triall of his faith 3. But in that God saueth some out of that masse of corruption and perdition and not all how is he not now partial and an accepter of persons in dealing vnequally with those which are in equall state and condition Ans. Where one is bound to giue equally to all there it is partialitie and iniustice not to giue vnto all alike but in free and voluntarie gifts one may giue vnequally vnto those which are of equall sort without any touch at all as when a man hath two debters he may forgiue vnto one his debt and yet require it of another So God is not bound to giue his grace vnto any especially where they haue willingly fallen from his grace as Adam did in Paradise and we in him we beeing then all now endebted vnto Gods iustice in our naturall corruption God may haue mercie where and on whom he will it is lawfull for him to do with his owne as he will Matth. 20.15 4. Obiect It seemeth to be an hard and cruell part to destroie any for the setting forth of ones power and magnificence as the Turke and other Tyrants make no account of mens liues to serue their pleasure Ans. 1. No earthly potentate hath that power ouer his subiects which God hath ouer his creatures therefore though it be vniust in the one it is not in the other 2. for one to destroy another for his honour and glorie sake may seeme hard but to bequeath them to destruction worthily for their faults to get glorie thereby is not vniust so although God in the destruction and condemnation of the wicked intend his glorie yet they are worthily condemned for their sinne Obiect 5. He that willeth the end willeth also the meanes that bring and lead vnto that end if God haue appointed the damnation of the reprobate then he willeth also sinne which is the meanes to that end Ans. He that simply willeth the end willeth also the meanes but God simply willeth not the damnation of any but for their sinne Obiect 6. If God haue foreseene the sinnes of the reprobate and willeth their iust damnation for sinne how is it said he would haue all to be saued Ans. God simply willeth not the damnation of any but for sinne and no other thing appeareth in the reuealed will of God in that he offereth meanes of saluation to all but that he would haue all to be saued this then is to be vnderstood of the absolute and reuealed will of God 7. Obiect If God foresee the sinnes of the reprobate and decree their punishment why doth God complaine of sinners seeing his will in them is fulfilled Ans. Augustine answeareth 1. God iustly complaineth of sinners quia non cogit eos peccare because he doth not constraine them to sinne howsoeuer Gods decree cannot be altered yet their will is not forced they sinne willingly and so are iustly condemned 2. and when God complaineth of sinners by this meanes those on whom God sheweth mercie are called compunguntur corde and are pricked in heart howsoeuer the other are hardened Obiect 8. If the case so stand that the reprobate are appointed to damnation then it skilleth not what a man doth for though he should repent him yet if he be a reprobate it cannot helpe him Ans. If â—â—â—were apparant who were elected who a reprobate then indeed all contrarie endeauour were in vaine but seeing we haue no other way to prooue our election then by our faith and fruits we must thereby labour to make our election sure 2.
kind was the zeale of the false Apostles Gal. 4.17 They are ielous ouer you amisse they would exclude you that ye should altogether loue them they seemed to beare a great zeale and loue vnto the Galathians but it was onely for their owne aduantage and such was the zeale of Demetrius to Diana Act. 19. because his profit was hindered by the decay of Dianaes worship but a true and vnfained zeale is that when one seeketh onely the good of that which he loueth without respect to himselfe as Saint Paul was thus iealous ouer the Corinthians to seeke to ioyne them for their owne good vnto Christ. 2. Cor. 11.2 Now of this vnfained zeale there are two kinds one which hath knowledge the other is without and this is of two sorts for there is here a twofold knowledge required both of the thing which is desired and affected and of the wrong which is offered the Iewes wanted one of these for they had a knowledge of God though not perfect but they were ignorant of the other they thought the worship of God to â—â—nsist in the rites and ceremonies of the law and so Gods glorie to be hindered by the Preaching of the Gospel the Gentiles were ignorant of both for neither had they the knowledge of God at all neither did they know the way how to worship him and so were ignorant what hindered or furthered Gods glorie 3. Now in that the Apostle maketh this as a reason why he wished well vnto them and prayed for them because they had zeale though not according to knowledge this doth not iustifie their zeale or prooue that we may reioyce or take delight in any thing that is euill but because their zeale was a good thing in it selfe and they failed in the manner onely the Apostle so farre commendeth them as it is said that Christ loued the young man that professed his obedience and obseruance of the law though he were farre from perfection Mark 10.21 because he saw some good things in him So the Apostle commendeth the zeale of the Iewes here 4. Origen here obserueth that as the Apostle saith of zeale that they had a kind of zeale but not according to knowledge the like may be said of faith charitie and other graces that men may haue them after a sort but not according to knowledge as he hath faith without knowledge that is ignorant that faith without workes it dead and so he hath charitie without knowledge that beasteth of it before men Quest. 5. Why the Iewes are said to stablish their owne righteousnesse v. 3. 1. Theodoret thinketh it is called their owne righteousnesse because now the law was ceased and the obseruation of the rites and ceremonies thereof so also Gorrhan vnderstandeth it of the ceremonies of the law which now were abolished and of the traditions which themselues had invented but the Apostle meaneth principally the moral law and that workes thereof 2. Augustine thinketh it to be so called their owne righteousnesse that is an humanes and imperfect righteousnesse because they were not able to fulfill the law tract 26. in Iob. so also Anselme 3. Lyranus because the law was giuen them and so the righteousnesse thereof they tooke peculiarly to be theirs excluding the Gentiles 4. Chrysostome saith â—â— is tearmed theirs because it consisted in their owne labour whereas faith was the gift of God without their labour 5. Origen saith their owne righteousnes was that which so seemed vnto men but did not make them iust before God so also Tolet as the Apostle saith Rom. 4.2 If Abraham were iustified by workes he hath wherein to reioyce but not with God 6. But properly that is called man 's owne righteousnesse which is supposed to be inherent in him is wrought by his owne workes and labour that is Gods righteousnes which is without man and extrinsecally is applied vnto him by faith 3. This proper iustice of man signifieth not such righteousnesse as man seeketh to worke of himselfe but euen such as man worketh by grace for Gods righteousnesse and mans are opposed not onely in respect of the cause and beginning but in the forme and manner how it is applied the one by faith the other by workes and in the subiect the righteousnes of faith is inherent in Christ and applied to vs by faith the other hath man for the subiect thereof 4. The Iewes in refusing this righteousnesse of God commit three great faults 1. they are ignorant of true righteousnesse by faith 2. they ambitiously seeke to be iustified by their owne righteousnesse 3. they are contemners of Gods righteousnesse which is by faith and will by no meanes be subiect vnto it Quest. 6. How Christ is said to be the ende of the law The end of a thing is taken fowre waies 1. for the determination and extremitie and finall ending of it as Psal. 3.19 Whose end is damnation 2. it is also taken for that which first mooueth the agent and for the which all other things are intended 3. the end is the scope and marke which is aymed at as the end of faith is the saluation of our soules 1. Pet. 1. 4. the end also of a thing is the perfection thereof as loue is said to be the end of the commandements 1. Tim. 1.5 according to these diuerse acceptions is this place diuersely interpreted 1. Some take it in the first sense that Christ ended the ceremonies and legall rites in which it is said the law and the Prophets were vnto Iohn Matth. 11. but this is not the meaning here for thus Christ was an ende onely to the ceremoniall not to the morall law 2. The second way Christ is the end of the law but not directly for in generall the law was ordained to make man righteous and to iustifie him by the keeping thereof but seeing this righteousnesse could not be obtained by the law nor in the law the law bringeth vs vnto Christ and in him we obtaine righteousnesse which the law required but performed not so then the end of the law which was to iustifie a man is fulfilled in Christ thus Chrystsost quid vult lex hominem iustum facere c. what would the law make a man iust c. this the law could not effect but Christ hath effected it so Melancthon Christ is the perfection of the law donat id quod lex requirit he giueth that which the law requireth that is iustification by saith in Christ who hath fulfilled the law for vs so also Beza 3. Christ also is the end and scope aymed at in the old Testament all the Prophets gaue witnesse and testimonie vnto Christ as Lyranus citeth R. Selam and other learned Hebrewes that confessed that vniuersi Prophetae non sunt locuti nisi ad dies Messiae that all the Prophets did not otherwise speake but hauing relation to the Messiah as our Sauiour saith Ioh. 6.26 Moses wrote of mee 4. Christ also is the perfection and consummation of the law
mouthes and nothing els doth God require vnto saluation so Chrysost. in ore corde tuo salutis causa in thy heart and mouth is the casue of saluation so Oecumen brevis salus nihil indigens externis laboribus saluation hath but a short cut it needeth not externall labour facile credere animo ore confiteri potes c. thou mayest easily beleeue with thy minde and confesse with thy mouth by the operation of the spirit Calvin and it seemeth to be a proverbiall speach to shewe the readines and facilitie of that which is in the heart and mouth as it is said Psal. 81.10 Open thy mouth wide and I will fill it Faius so Lyranus ostenditur iustitiae per fidem Christi facilitas the facilitie of righteousnesse by the faith of Christ is shewed And here Origens distinction may be receiued who saith that two waies is Christ neere vs possibilitate in possibilitie and so he may be neere vnto vnbeleeuers for they may haue grace to beleeue and efficacia in efficacie and power and so he is neere vnto those which actually by the spirit doe beleeue with the heart and confesse to saluation 4. But where the iustice of faith is said to be easier then the iustice required by the law that is not vnderstood in regard of the beginning and efficient cause of faith for man hath no more power to beleeue of himselfe then to doe good workes for it is God that worketh iâ— vs both the will and deede Philip. 2.13 but the righteousnesse of faith is easier in regard of the manner of the work because the law requireth the obedience thereof to be performed by our selues but faith referreth vs for the performing of the lawe vnto Christ Neither doth our saluation depend vpon the force and efficacie of faith but vpon the worthines and vertue of Christ apprehended by faith as when a sicke man walketh leaning vpon his staffe it is his staffe that stayeth him not his hand which onely layeth hold vpon the staffe The iustice of the law is as if a weake and sicke man should be enioyned to stand by himselfe without a staffe but faith sheweth how our weakenes is propped and held vp by other helps â—s when a sicke man layeth his hand vpon a staffe Quest. 14. How Moses that preached the law is alleadged for iustification by faith Ob. The obiection is made out of that place Ioh. 1.17 The lawe was giuen by Moses but grace and truth came by Iesus Christ c. but if Moses also taught iustification by faith then grace also came by him Answ. 1. Pet. Martyr answeareth that Moses is said to giue the law because his principall intendment was to propound the law yet he giueth testimonie also to the Gospell because Christ was the ende of the lawe as the Apostles in the new Testament preach repentance which belongeth to the law but their principall scope and intent is to set forth the faith of the Gospell 2. Hereunto for more full answear may be added that the lawe giuen by Moses is taken two wayes either strictly for the precepts of the morall law and so Moses was the minister of the lawe onely and not of grace or for the whole doctrine deliuered by Moses wherein also Euangelicall promises are contained Quest. 15. How Christ is to be confessed v. 9. If thou shalt confesse with thy mouth c. 1. S. Paul here placeth the confession of the mouth first both because he followeth that order which Moses did who nameth it first and for that we doe not knowe the faith of others that beleeue in Christ but by their confession Mart. Pareus 2. By confession is vnderstood not a bare and naked acknowledgment of Christ but the invocation of his name beleeuing in him giuing praise vnto him and whatsoeuer belongeth vnto his worship and this must be such a confession as is ioyned with the beleefe of the heart and not with a generall and historicall beleefe onely such as the deuills haue but a confident trust in Christ in beleeuing him to be our redeemer and Sauiour 3. Here we are to consider of fowre sorts of men 1. some neither confesse Christ nor beleeue and they are atheists 2. some beleeue and confesse not they are timorous and fearefull as Peter when he denied his Master 3. some confesse and beleeue not such are hypocrites 4. some both confesse and beleeue and they are right Christians 4. The Apostle maketh speciall mention of the raising of Christ from the dead 1. because this was the most doubted of his death the Iewes and Gentiles confessed but his resurrection they would not acknowledge Mart. 2. and vnlesse Christ had risen againe all the rest had profited vs little because in his resurrection he obtained a perfect victorie ouer death hell and damnation Calvin 3. and this article of Christs resurrection praesupponis alios articulos presupposeth other articles of the faith and taketh them as graunted as if he rose he died and his death presupposeth his birth Gorrhan Quest. 16. How Christ is said to be raised by God 1. By God in this place is not necessarie to vnderstand the person of the father but the power of the Godhead in the whole Trinitie whereby Christ as man was raised vp So Christ as man was raised vp by the power of his father but as he is one God with his father so he is said to raise vp himselfe Iohn 2.18 Christ is also said to be raised by the spirit of sanctification Rom. 1.4 so then Christ is here considered three wayes as beeing one God with his father as the second person in the Trinitie and as he was man as he is God he onely raiseth is not raised as he is man he is onely raised and raiseth not as he is the Son of God he both raiseth himselfe and the father raiseth him the father raiseth the Sonne by the Sonne and the Sonne raiseth himselfe by the spirit of sanctification whereby he was declared to be the Sonne of God Rom. 1.4 Pareus annot in v. 9. 2. And generally concerning the workes of the Trinitie there is a threefold difference to be obserued for there are some workes wherein the Blessed Trinitie doe concurre together both in their diuine essence and persons and they are ioynt workers as all those which are called extra workes without them as all things now ruled and gouerned by Gods prouidence are so gouerned by the whole Trinitie as Ioh. 5.17 My Father worketh hitherto and I worke and the spirit of God also worketh Psal. 104.30 If thou send forth thy spirit they are created some workes are proper and peculiar vnto the glorious persons of the Trinitie as those which are called ad intra the inward workes as the father begetteth the Sonne is begotten the holy Ghost proceedeth these are so peculiar vnto each of them that what is proper to one agreeth not vnto an other and thirdly some works there are wherein the Blessed
leadeth vs vnto the righteousnesse of the law one way by the proper scope and intent thereof and to Christ an other way indirectly and by an accident because when we see our weaknes in performing of the law we are driuen to seeke vnto Christ that hath kept the law for vs. 2. the same answer serueth for the next obiection Christ is the end of the law one way as is said and the righteousnesse of the law an other 3. they differ rather as a thing perfect and imperfect of two diuerse kindes not as an infant and a man of yeares but as reasonable and vnreasonable creatures they agree onely in generall they are both a kind of iustice and haue one efficient cause God is the giuer and worker of the one iustice and of the other but they differ in the seuerall properties the one is imputed the other inherent and is by faith the other by workes 2. Neither yet doe these two kinds of righteousnesse differ as contrarie the one to the other as some thinke 1. one good thing is not contrarie to another but both the righteousnesse of the law and of faith are good 2. neither doth God command contrarie things but both the iustice of the law and of faith are commanded 3. and one contrarie doth expel an other but the righteousnesse of the law doth necessarily follow and accompanie faith though not to be iustified by it as sanctification doth accompanie iustification 3. Neither doe they differ onely ratione non re not in the thing or indeed but in a certaine respect as Gryneus saith they are vna specie of one and the same kind and that the distinction and difference betweene them is not realis sed rationis is not reall but rationall as the Peripaterike Philosophers doe make morall vertue and vniuersall iustice one and the same re subiecto in the matter it selfe and subiect and to differ onely ratione in a certaine respect for as it is considered as an habite of the word it is called vertue but as it giueth vnto euery one his own it is iustice so he thinketh these two kinds of iustice do differ not in nature and substance but onely in a certaine respect and rationall difference But vnder correction of so worthie a man there is a greater difference then thus betweene the the iustice of the law and the iustice of faith 1. Gryneus himselfe confesseth in the same place that they differ subiecto in the subiect for the iustice of faith is subiective in Christ by way of a subiect the iustice of the law hath man for his subiect therefore they differ otherwise then in a diuerse respect 2. that which differeth in forme matter qualitie subiect differeth more then onely in a certaine respect But the iustice of the law and of faith differ in all these 1. in forme the iustice of the law saith doe this and thou shalt be saued faith saith beleeue onely c. 2. in matter they differ the one consisteth of workes the other of faith 3. in qualitie the one is imperfect the iustice apprehended by faith is absolute and perfect 4. in subiect the iustice of faith is imputed vnto vs beeing inherent in Christ the iustice of the law is inherent in man and not imputed 4. Wherefore these two iustices 1. are neither one and the same as Stapleton 2. nor contrarie 3. not differing onely in a certaine respect as Gryneus 4. but they differ as diuers species or kinds of the same gender they are both iustice but the one inherent the other imputed the one consisteth in doing the other in beleeuing Par. dub 5. and Pet. Mar. will haue them differ as in Logike the difference and propertie of a thing the difference is that which giueth essence vnto a thing as Christs iustice applied by faith maketh our iustification the propertie is that which followeth the nature of a thing and so the iustice of the law in our holines and sanctification doth follow necessarily our iustification by faith Controv. 9. Whether the righteousnesse of the law and that which is by the law doe differ Pererius disput 2. maketh three kinds of iustice 1. one is iustitia legis the iustice of the law or the law of iustice which is that iustice when God by his grace doth helpe vs to fulfill the law 2. the iustice of faith is that which is giuen vnto those that beleeue in Christ. 3. iustitia ex lege iustice by the law is that which a man doth of himselfe without faith and grace onely by the strength of freewill and this is that iustice which the Apostle here setteth against the iustice of faith This distinction also hath Stapleton making the like difference betweene iustitia legis and iustitia ex lege righteousnesse of the law and righteousnesse by the law and Bellarmine as is before alleadged qu. 29. Contra. 1. As the righteousnesse of faith and by faith with Saint Paul are one and the same as Rom. 4.11 it is said to be of faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and here v. 6. righteousnesse which is by faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so neither doe the righteousnesse of the law and by the law differ for both of them haue the same definition he that doth the law shall liue thereby so that these termes of the law by the law through the law in the law in the matter of iustification are all one and in effect the same as that which he calleth the righteousnesse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the law Rom. 8.4 the same is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the law c. 10.5 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through the law Gal. 2.21 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the law Gal. 10.11 1. Concerning that distinction it faileth in one of the parts thereof for that which they call iustitiam ex lege righteousnesse by the law which a man doth without grace and faith onely schooled by the law and mooued by the terrour thereof that is no iustice at all for the law is holy and good Rom. 7.12 and the workes thereof holy and good but without faith and grace no man can doe any good thing neither doth Saint Paul dispute of any such imagined iustice but euen of those workes of the law which are done by men sanctified by grace as the Apostle giueth instance in Abraham and Dauid sanctified men Rom. 4. who yet by the workes of grace were not iustified 3. Indeed Augustine hath such a distinction betweene the righteousnes legis of the law which is fulfilled in vs by grace and ex lege by the law which is that righteousnesse which a man worketh by his owne freewill as is before alleadged qu. 29. But Augustines meaning is not that a man is iustified by either of these kinds of righteousnesse therefore that distinction as he vseth it is impertinent to this purpose for we affirme that the righteousnesse of the law whereby they pretended to be iustified is indifferently called of the law
tast of his mercie v. 32. and ascribe nothing to themselues 3. The conclusion consisteth 1. of an exclamation with an admiration of Gods wisdome and knowledge as vnsearchable which is shewed 1. by the secrecie thereof not to be found out by a creature v. 34. 2. by the bountie of God not prouoked by any mans giuing first vnto him 3. because God is the beginning and end of all things 2. then followeth the Apostles vow and wish that all glorie may be ascribed vnto God v. 36. 3. The questions and doubts discussed Quest. 1. Of the scope and intent of the Apostle in this chapter 1. Whereas the Apostle had in the ende of the former chapter shewed out of Isay how the Iewes for their obstinacie were reiected and the Gentiles called now he sheweth in this chapter for the comfort of the Iewes that all generally were not cast off but onely the vnbeleuers Origen and so least that the Iewes might haue despaired and some might also haue obiected as though hereby Gods promises to his people should haue beene made of no effect he sheweth this reiection of the Iewes not to be generall Par. and this he doth ne insultarent Gentiles least the Gentiles might haue insulted ouer the Iewes gloss ordin 2. So then partly to minister consolation to the Iewes Bucer partly to represse the insolencie of the Gentiles the Apostle sheweth three things concerning the reiection of the Iewes that it is not vniversalis vniuersall to v. 11. nor inutilitis vnprofitable to v. 25. nor irrecuperabilis irrecouerable from v. 25. to the ende Lyran. 3. And touching the first that their fall is not generall he sheweth first that all are not reiected as by his owne example then that some are assumed as seuen thousand were in Elias dayes and yet some reiected v. 8.9 Gorrhan Quest. 2. Why the Apostle maketh mention of the tribe of Beniamin whereof he was v. 1. I also am an Israelite of the seede of Abraham of the tribe of Beniamin c. 1. Pet. Martyr thinketh that Saint Paul would signifie here that he was not obscurely borne but of a noble tribe euen of Beniamin which came not of any of Iacobs handmaides but of Rachel his principall wife and out of the which Saul the first King of Israel was chosen 2. Tolet giueth a contrarie reason that least Saint Pauls calling might be ascribed to the dignitie of his tribe he sheweth he was of Beniamin which was vltima minima the last and least of all the tribes 3. the interlin glosse thinketh it is added because mention is made next before of the seed of Abraham lest he might be thought to be of Abraham by Ismael But this doubt was remooued before in that he saith he was an Israelite 4. Gorrhan giueth this coniecture alludit genus operi sequeti S. Pauls kindred and tribe is mentioned as agreeable to the worke that followed for as Rachel died in the birth of Beniamin so the Synagogue in the birth of Paul and as Iosephs cup was found in Beniamins sackes mouth so the word of Christ in the mouth of Paul and as Iacob saith of Beniamin Gen. 49. that he is a wolfe devouring the pray so Saint Paul spoiled the Iewish Synagogue and brought many as a pray vnto Christ. 5. But these collections are to curious S. Paul onely hereby sheweth that he was a Iew by nation not a Proselyte conuerted to the faith by rehearsing three of their principall Fathers Israel Abraham Beniamin Pareus that his kindred was so farre off from beeing an hinderance to him that he was chosen to be praeco gratia a preacher of grace Bucer and therefore all the Iewes were not reiected Quest. 3. How God is said not to cast off that people whom he knewe before v. 2. 1. Chrysostome taketh here Gods foreknowledge for his prescience by the which he did foresee the people whom he had chosen aptum fore fidem recepturum to be apt and readie to receiue the faith But herein the Greekes erred in attributing too much to mans freewill and the contrarie is euident out of the Scripture and reasons diduced from them that Gods prescience was no cause why he elected the people of Israel As 1. Deut. 7.7 the Lord saith he did not set his loue vpon them or choose them because they were moe in number c. he did of his meere loue choose them not for any respect vnto any thing in them 2. how could he foresee any goodnesse in them in whom naturally there is nothing but evill 3. and the Lord here saith v. 4. I haue reserued seuen thousand he ascribeth it to their own will but to his owne grace that they were so reserued 2. Some will haue this vnderstood comparatiuely ipsum praesciuit ante Gentes God did foresee them to be his people before the Gentiles so Oecumenius vnderstandeth it of the prioritie of the calling of the Iewes before the Gentiles But as Beza well obserueth the Apostle here speaketh not of vocation but of the decree of eternall predestination 3. Some interpret it thus which he knew before that is had before enlarged with many excellent benefits but it is euident by the circumstance of the place that the Apostle speaketh here of election before all time not of the collation of benefites in time ex Tolet annot 1. 4. Wherefore we must vnderstand that Gods prescience is taken foure waies 1. either largely for his foresight whereby he seeth and knoweth all things which are done in the world as Peter saith to our Sauiour Ioh. 21.17 Lord thou knowest all things and this generall prescience in God belongeth to his vnderstanding rather then will and is no cause of things for all that God in this sense knoweth he decreeth not 2. Gods prescience is taketh more strictly for his foreknowledge of those things which he decreeth to be both of good which he purposeth to worke and of euill which he purposeth to permit and this prescience is practicall the former is onely speculatiue 3. it is vsed yet in a more strict sense as when it signifieth the approbation and acceptance of God in his eternall loue as Rom. 8.29 Whome he knew before he predestinate and so praenoscere is probare to foreknow is to approoue as Origen saith and so Gods prescience differeth from election as the cause from the effect as it signifieth election and predestination it selfe and so Augustine taketh it here praescivit id est praedestinavit he foreknew that is predestinate so also Haymo Lyranus and so the meaning is whome he knew before ab aeterno electum amplexus whom he loued and embraced beeing elected from the beginning Beza and here the word praecognoscendi of foreknowing signifieth beneplacitum the good pleasure of God whereby he chose them to be his children Calvin for there is difference betweene these two words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to foresee and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to foreknow this signifieth a foreknowledge with
which the Prophet vseth Isay 29.10 which the Septuagint translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 compunction here much adoe is made about the signification of this word 1. Some take the signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is to mooue to drive and so interpret it spiritum commotionis the spirit of commotion perplexitie so the Syrian interpreter Anselme Faius but this should much differ from the Hebrew word which signifieth slumber commotion and rest or slumber are not one and the same 2. some doe take the other sense of the word compungo to pricke or peirce in which signification Chrysostome Theophylact Oecumenius by compunction vnderstand the setled obstinacie of the Iewes like as a thing nayled to a post moueth or stirreth not Haymo interpreteth it spiritum invidentiae the spirit of envie whereby they were offended at the calling of the Gentiles there are two kind of compunctions one is taken in the better part as Act. 2.37 they were pricked in their hearts to repentance so also the ordinar gloss and Lyranus vnderstand the envie of the Iewes to the doctrine of Christ but yet the reason appeareth not why the Septuagint should render the Hebrewe word tardemah slumber by a word signifying pricking or compunction 3. Therefore some are of opinion that the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rather signifieth soporem slumber as both Beza here and Tolet annotat 6. alleadge out of Hesychius who expoundeth it by an other Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rest ease and he seemeth to deriue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of â—â—â— the night whereof commeth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to sleepe and of this his opinion that the Septuagint translate this place by a word signifying slumber Tolet bringeth three reasons 1. because the Hebrew word tardemah signifieth a dead sleepe or slumber which sometimes they render by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. Sam. 26.12 which is a kind of stupiditie senselesnes or astonishment which in effect is all one 2. Psal. 60.5 Thou hast made vs to drinke the wine of giddines there an other word targelah is vsed of the like signification with tardemah which is a kind of giddines or drowsines such as is in those that slumber which word the Septuagint interpret 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word which they vse here 3. the words following eyes that they should not see and eares that they should not heare doe shew the effects of slumber or sleepe 4. But notwithstanding these coniectures seeing the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth compunction as not onely the Greeke interpreters Chrysostome Origen Theophylact Oecumenius who best knew the proper signification of the Greeke word do interpret but the Scripture also thereto beareth witnes as Act. 2.27 they are said to be pricked in their hearts 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the which word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 compunction is deriued I thinke this word fittest to be reteined yet in sense it is all one as if he should haue said the spirit of slumber whereof Osiander giueth this reason because they are as it were pricked and stirred when they are called to the Gospel as they which are indeed a sleepe are loath to be awaked Pareus addeth that the effect is put for the cause like as they which are fast a sleepe cannot with any stirring or pricking be awaked But I rather thinke that it is a metaphoricall speach because they which are pricked and so perplexed with griefe haue no sense of any other thing as Cyprian saith of some transpunctae mentis alienatione dementes they beeing madde and beside themselues in their pricked and pierced soule neglect to be cured and to be brought to repentance c. de orat dom so that the spirit of compunction is the same with a scared and cautherised conscience whereof the Apostle speaketh 1. Tim. 4.2 which is all one with a spirituall giddines or slumber and this answeareth to the word before vsed v. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they were hardened like as the hand which hath a hard skin drawne ouer feeleth not the pricke put vnto it 4. It is called the spirit of slumber or compunction which Haymo vnderstandeth to be the mind filled with envie but rather as Gods spirit worketh in vs euerie good grace so the euill spirit is the minister of wrath in the reprobate instigating and moouing them continually vnto euill whereupon they are called the spirit of fornication the spirit of couetousnesse and such like As God sent such a spirit of giddines and phrensie vpon Saul which did befor and make him madde with envie and malice 5. The last words vnto this day Some will haue a part of the Scripture here cited by the Apostle and so they referre vs to that place Deut. 29.4 The Lord hath not giuen you â—â— heart to perceiue and eyes to see and eares to heare vnto this day Tolet annot 7. Faius But there is great difference betweene these two testimonies the Lord hath not giuen them eyes to see which are the words of Moses and the Lord hath giuen them eyes that they should not see as here the Apostle citeth the text the first sheweth onely the negation and deniall of a gift the other expresseth further a iudgement of induration or hardening wherefore these words are no part of the testimonie but added by the Apostle and are to be ioyned with the last words in the 7. verse the rest haue beene hardened the words comming betweene beeing enclosed in a parenthesis vnto this day Beza Pareus as the Apostle saith 2. Cor. 1.15 Vnto this day the vaile is laid ouer their hearts 6. Now whereas two exceptions may be made to the Apostles alleagation here the one that the Apostle seemeth not to prooue directly that which he intended that the rest are hardened the other that his proofe is but weake beeing taken from a particular example of those times hereunto we answear 1. that the Apostles proofe is direct from the effect to the cause if God in his iustice hardened them then were they hardened their owne malice was the cause of their hardening properly and as we say per se of it selfe and the iustice of God per accidens accidentally 2. his proofe also as it is direct so is it forceable for that place Isay. 6. containeth a manifest prophesie of the obstinacie of the Iewes in the times of our Sauiour as is euident by the frequent application of it in the Gospel as Matth. 13.14 Act. 28.26 and say that were not a speciall prophesie yet because the rule of Gods iustice is certaine and constant and alwayes like it selfe the Lord finding greater obstinacie among the Iewes at the comming of his Sonne into the world their before was in like sort to exercise his iustice See further Iun. parall 21. lib. 2. Quest. 10. How God is said to send the spirit of slumber to giue eares not to heare c. 1. Their opinion here is refelled that
will haue God no wayes the cause of hardening the heart which is Pighius assertion as he is here confuted at large by Pet. Martyr who in this manner obiected 1. that place of the Prophet Isay is a prediction therefore not the cause of hardening Answ. It followeth not for euen that word which Isay preached did provoke the Iewes and they were thereby further hardened and though euerie prediction be not a cause of that which is to come yet such predictions as foretell of such things as the Lord himselfe will worke as here the Prophet speaketh of the hardening of the heart doe not onely shewe the thing but expresse the cause also 2. Ob. Nemo cogitur ad peccandum but no man is compelled to sinne Ans. We must here distinguish between violentia necessitas violence and necessitie true it is that God forceth and compelleth none to sinne yet they cannot otherwise chuse but sinne by reason of the corruption of nature to the which man hath enthralled himselfe in respect whereof it is impossible that man should beleeue of himselfe without the worke of the spirit as it is said Ioh. 12.39 they could not beleeue c. 3. Obiect Pighius saith that by impossibile here we are to vnderstand difficile that which is hard to be done not that it was simply impossible that they should beleeue but it was an hard matter for them so to doe Answer Neither doe we say that simply it is impossible in respect of the absolute power of God but ex hypothesi by way of supposition the blindnes and obstinacie of mans heart beeing presupposed and to say that a man may beleeue of himselfe though hardly is the euasion of the old Pelagians for of himselfe not onely hardly but not at all can a man beleeue as our Sauiour saith Without me ye can doe nothing Ioh. 15.5 4. Obiect Whereas that place by vs is vrged Mark 4.11 To you it is giuen to knowe the mysterie of the kingdome but to them c. all things are done in parables that they seeing may see and not discerne c. to shewe that God hath an hand and worke in blinding of the eyes of the obstinate Pighius will haue this word that to shewe not the finall but efficient cause because they were blind therefore Christ spake in parables they were not therefore blinded the more because he spake in parables Answ. 1. Their blindnes was not the cause of Christs speaking in parables for that had beene a reason rather why Christ would haue spoken more plainly vnto them but because they were wilfully blind he therefore spake in parables that they might continue in their blindnes still 2. these words that because doe not alwaies shewe the cause of a thing sed causam notitiae but the cause of the knowledge or manifestation of a thing which is by the effect as Luk. 7.47 our Blessed Saviour saith of the woman many sinnes are forgiuen her for she loued much by the effect of her great loue he doth demonstrate the cause the forgiuenesse of her sinnes so here Christ sheweth the cause of his preaching in parables by the effect the hardening of their heart and blinding of their eyes 4. and like hereunto is that place where the Lord saith concerning Pharaoh For this cause haue I raised thee vp that I might shewe my power in thee Rom. 9.17 that was the ende of the raising vp Pharaoh that God might get himselfe honour in his confusion as this was the ende of Christs preaching in parables that the Iewes might be confirmed in their obstinacie and hardnesse of heart 5. Obiect Whereas we also vrge that place of Isay 6.9 Make the heart of this people fat shut their eyes c. Pighius replyeth that God biddeth it to be done he is not said to doe it and in that he saith shut their eyes it is thus much in effect praedica excaecandos preach that their eyes shall be blinded c. Ans. 1. That which the Lord biddeth to be done is held to be done by the Lord himselfe beeing done by his commandement 2. and it is a very strange construction shut their eyes that is prophesie or preach that their eyes should be shut vp but thereby is signified that by the word which he preached they should be occasioned to stumble and their eyes should dazle at it as bleare eyes at the brightnes of the Sunne 3. and that God is the cause of their hardening aad blinding is euidently expressed Ioh. 12.40 he hath blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts 6. Obiect To this Pighius againe replieth that man in himselfe is the cause of his hardening and blindnes yet the Scripture so speaketh as though God blinded their eyes and yet he doth not as when they which haue tender eyes and are made more blind by looking vpon the Sunne who will say that the Sunne-beames are the cause of blindnes the fault is in the eyes And both S. Matthew c. 13.10 and S. Luke Act. 28.27 doe otherwise cite that place Isa. 6.9 the heart of this people is waxed fat making no mention at all of God to be the cause or worker of it Ans. 1. Doth the Scripture so say that God blindeth the eyes and is it not so this were to make the Scripture to speake one thing and to meane an other 2. that similitude maketh directly against him for though the first and principall fault be in the eyes yet accidentally the brightnes of the Sinne doth increase the blindnes of the eyes and so God in his iustice more hardeneth the hearts of the obstinate which they first hardened by their owne peruersnes and vnbeleefe 3. S. Matthew indeede and S. Luke doe in that manner cite that text therein following the reading of the Septuagint whereof diuers reasons are yeilded 1. some thinke that the Iewes falsified the Scriptures and therefore the Septuagint which translated them before they were corrupted were rather followed but Origen vpon that place Isa. 6. refuseth this conceit because it is not like that our Sauiour and the Apostles would haue left that fault vntouched if the Iewes had falsified the Scriptures 2. Hierome in his Commentarie also vpon that place reporteth an other opinion of certaine Ecclesiasticall writers who thought that Saint Luke because he was more skilfull in the Greeke tongue did rather follow the Septuagint but this reason is not sufficient for Saint Matthew though it might seeme probable for the other 3. some thought that the Septuagint did so translate that they might decline that blasphemie as they thought to make God the author of the hardenesse of the heart but Hierome taketh away this because in other places the Septuagint are not afraide so to translate as God hardened the heart of Pharaoh 4. Wherefore the Septuagint in their translation tooke that libertie not alwayes to render the words but the sense and the Apostles followe them because their interpretation was then receiued and well knowne and so
there is here a traiection of the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that so whereas the words stand in this order in the originall by your mercie that they may obtaine mercie they must be placed thus that by your mercie they may obtaine mercie the verie like traiection of this verie word see 2. Cor. 2.4 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but my loue that ye may know for but that you may know my loue thus also Beza here and Tolet annot 23. addeth this reason why those words for your mercie should not be ioyned with the former clause so now haue they not beleeued but with the latter that they may also obtaine mercie that one part of this comparison may answear another as he said before you haue receiued mercie through their vnbeleefe so now it followeth that they also should receiue mercie through your mercie And Chrysostome sheweth the reason why it is said that you should receiue mercie through their mercie not through their vnbeleefe because ye the Gentiles shall not be so saued vt quemadmodum Iudaei exire debeatis that as the Iewes you should goe out or fall away again sed vt illos manendo per aemulationem attrahatis but that ye may draw them on by continuing in the faith 4. This then is the force of the Apostles argument 1. There are three things compared with three the vnbeleefe of the Gentiles with the vnbeleefe of the Iewes the mercie which the Gentiles receiued in time past with the mercie which the Iewes shall receiue and then the occasions of both are set one against the other the occasion of the mercie shewed to the Gentiles was the vnbeleefe of the Iewes and occasion of mercie shewed to the Iewes was mercie extended to the Gentiles by the which the Iewes were prouoked to emulation Par. 2. The argument is from the lesse to the greater if the infidelitie of the Iewes was the occasion of mercie to the Gentiles much more the mercie shewed to the Gentiles shall be an occasion of shewing mercie to the Iewes for there is a greater force in that which is good then in that which is euill Gryveus and if the Gentiles which neuer beleeued were called to the saith much more like is it that the Iewes which had bin sometime beleeuers should returne to their former saith Tolet. Quest. 31. How God hath concluded and shut vp all in vnbeleefe v. 32. 1. Not that God inijcerit ijs incredulitatem did cast vpon them incredulitie hoc explodendum est this conceite must he exploded of all Origen God is no way the author of euill Photius 2. Nor yet is the Lord said to shut them vp onely permittendo in suffering them to be incredulous Origen glosse ordinarie Tolet Gorrhan for God is to be considered here not as a patient onely and sufferer but as an agent in some sort and a iust iudge 3. Chrysostome thus interpreteth he shut vp all that is demonstrauit incredulos he hath shewed them to be incredulous in which sense the Apostle saith Gal. 3.22 The Scripture hath concluded all vnder sinne c. that is the law serueth to reueale sinne as Saint Paul saith Rom. 3.20 By the law commeth the knowledge of sinne But this is not all for the iudge doth not onely declare and giue sentence against the malefactor and bring his offence to light but he also condemneth him and seeth his sentence be executed vpon him 3. Hierome in the Commentarie vnder his name saith God hath shut vp all non vi sed ratione not by force but by good reason which reason is thus expressed by Oecumenius vt alios per aliorum seruaret contentionem that he might saue some by the prouocation of others the ordinarie glosse giueth this reason vt gratia numeris esset gratissima that the gift of grace might be most acceptable c. when they are brought as it were out of prison vnto libertie But although Gods iudgements proceed with great reason and equitie yet God doth not euill that good may come thereof the reason and way then yet appeareth not how God is said to conclude all vnder sinne 4. Wherefore it remaineth that God is said to shut vp men in vnbeleefe as in a prison in punishing them as a iust iudge with the fetters as it were and gives of their owne blindnes and hardenes of heart as it is said c. 1.26 God gaue them vp to vile affections and c. 11.8 God hath giuen them the spirit of slumber like as a iudge doth inflict imprisonment vpon offenders and restraint of libertie so men are kept in the prison of infidelitie by the iustice of God their sinnes so deseruing But here is the difference ciuill imprisonment is for sinne yet it is not sinne but spirituall imprisonment in blindnes and vnbeleefe is sinne and God after a wonderfull and secret manner yet most iustly doth punish sinne with sinne as Augustine saith Quis dicat Achabum non peccasse credendo spiritui mendaci c. who can say that Ahab sinnned not in beleeuing the false spirit and who will say that sinne was not the punishment of sinne venientem de iudicio Dei proceeding from the iudgement of God lib. 5. c. 3. contra Iulian. And further here is great difference betweene these two for God to be author of shutting vp vnder vnbeleefe and of the shutting vp of vnbeleefe the first God in his iustice causeth the other man is the cause of himselfe Quest. 32. Of the Apostles exclamation v. 33. The deepenesse of the riches c. 1. Touching the occasion of these words 1. Origen thinketh this to be it quia alterius malitiae opus alterum vertat in salutem because he turned the malice of one to the salvation of an other as the ruine of the Iewes was the occasion of calling the Gentiles so also Chrysostome the Apostle wondreth quod contraria contrarijs curaverit because the Lord healed one contrarie by an other the Gentiles became to be beleeuers by occasion of the vnbeleeuing Iewes but the generalitie of the Apostles words speaking of the wayes of God would not be restrained vnto one particular 2. Faius vnderstandeth the whole mysterie of the Gospel the which as S. Peter saith the Angels yet desire to behold but this is too generall 3. Augustine and Haymo restraine it to this particular of the mysterie in the vocation of the Gentiles and the reiection of the Iewes 4. But beside this it may be applyed to the whole mysterie of predestination how God resecteth some and electeth others wherein humane reason must be silent Gryneus Calvin Hyperius Mart. 2. For the reading of the words 1. Some doe thus read O the deepenesse of the riches of the wisedome and knowledge of God as the vulgar latine making wisedome and knowledge to depend of riches but in this reading the Greeke coniunction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and which is set betweene riches and wisedome is omitted Chrysostome inserting that word thinketh that these two
his head and the Lord shall recompence thee that is God shall punish thine enemie and reward thee Faius addeth a third reason because it is vsuall in the Scripture by coales of fire to vnderstand some diuine plague iudgement as Ps. 18.13.120.4 But it is thus obiected against this exposition Haymo saith if one should doe well vnto his enemie with that minde to prepare for him greater punishment in hell non hoc iam est charitatis this should be no charitie in him so also P. Martyr we must seeke nothing els but their saluation we must not doe good to an enemie with any such intent to encrease their punishment likewise Pererius hath the same obiection est contra charitatem c. it is against charitie to doe well vnto our enemies with that intent vt gravius in malum incidant that they fall into a greater mischiefe Answ. In these words thou shalt heape coales c. the euent of the thing onely is shewed not the intent and purpose of the doer like as in the former verse he biddeth them not to auenge themselues but to giue way vnto the wrath and iustice of God not that we must in forbearing our owne reuenge pray vnto God with a reuengefull mind for that were also a breach of charitie but that we should so leaue our cause vnto God as a iust iudge who at due time will take reuenge if there be no amendment in our enemie 6. Wherefore the last exposition is most agreeable by heaping of burning coales to vnderstand the encreasing of their punishment but yet a secret condition must be implied that if they be not wonne by our charitie then burning coales are heaped to their punishment This conditionall sense followeth Gryneus thine enemie by thy beneficence is either become better or so will he loue thee againe or he is made worse and then he hurteth himselfe iram Dei in se concitando by stirring vp the anger of God against him these burning coales then are the wrath of God which is the more kindled against such vnthankfull persons that are not wonne by the kindnes and beneficence of those which haue recompenced them good for euill 31. Quest. Of these words v. 21. Be not ouercome of euill but ouercome euill with goodnes 1. The Apostle concludeth this place concerning patience in not reuenging our selues of our enemies with this excellent sentence which containeth a dehortation from impatience be not ouercome of euill and an exhortation to patience but ouercome euill with goodnes and so as Origen obserueth contraria contrarijs perimuntur one contrarie destroieth an other as euery thing is increased by the like as fire waxeth greater if fire be added to it and the darknes of the night is increased by a cloudie skie so euill is augmented when euill is added to it as if euill be recompenced with euill he is ouercome of euill qui malis provocatus reddit malum which beeing prouoked by euill rendreth euill againe but he ouercommeth euill with goodnes that hauing receiued euill restituit bona doth restore good things Origen 2. Erasmus noteth that here good and euil are not referred vnto the good or euill man but thereby are vnderstood wrong and beneficence or patience this is true but yet he that is impatient and is ouercome of euill thereby also becommeth euill as Haymo noteth similis efficeris thou art made like vnto him that did the wrong by not suffering of wrong as it is said Prov. 26.4 Answer not a foole in his foolishnes least thou also be like him 3. So this is an excellent perswasion to recompence euill with good because thereby we obtaine the victorie as Chrysostome here noteth inimicum tuum interroga c. aske thine enemie when he is most grieued when thou railest beeing railed vpon or when thou laughest the rayler to scorne he will answer thee the last c. and so Ambrose saith lib. 1. de offic c. 36. vindicare se non esse actum fortitudinis sed abiectionis timiditatis that for a man to reuenge himselfe is no act of fortitude but of cowardlines and timiditie it is a noble thing to ouercome but more noble to ouercome euill but most noble of all to ouercome euill with good Gorrhan 4. And as he ouercommeth that rendreth good for euill so he is ouercome which recompenceth euill for euill he onely doth not bring euill vpon himselfe but a greater euill then his enemie offered him for that was but malum poena the euill of punishment as it is called but he by his impatience and reuenge sibi infert malum culpa doth bring on him euill that is sinne Tolet and so he is ouercome of a threefold euill of the euill which his enemie put vpon him of the euill of his owne passion and corrupt affection and Haymo addeth the third à diabolo he is ouercome of the deuill 5. Lyranus here obserueth that alwaies it is not good to sustaine wrongs as when thereby datur andacia malefici malis the euill take greater encouragement and boldnes to doe euill and to this purpose he alleadgeth Gregorie in his moralls Quidam cum temporalia inobis bona subtrahant sunt tolerandi c. some are to be tolerated when they take from vs our temporalls some are to be staied in charitie not so much that they robbe vs not of ours quam ne non sita rapientes seipsos pendant c. as lest in taking that which is not theirs they destroy themselues c. But then we are to shew our patience when by defending our selues some great euill is like against the honour of God 6. P. Martyr also here mooueth this doubt whereas we are here bid to ouercome euill with goodnes that is to giue our enemie meat and drinke in his need what shall become of excommunicate persons with whom we are charged not to eat 1. Cor. 5.11 and such as are enemies to the truth whome we are not to bid God speede 2. epist. Iam. The answer is that we must not doe any of these things comitatis aut familiaritatis causa for familiaritie or acquaintance sake but onely to minister to their necessitie ne desimus officio charitatis that we be not behind in the dutie of charitie 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doctr. To ascribe all vnto Gods mercie and grace doth not hinder exhortations v. 1. I beseech you by the mercies of God c. Though S. Paul ascribe our saluation to Gods mercie as he said before c. 9. It is not in him that willeth nor in him that runneth but in God that sheweth mercie yet the Apostle notwithstanding ceaseth not to exhort and the reason is because our saluation is not wrought without meanes as preaching admonition exhortation and such like and therefore these meanes may be vsed and yet the foundation of Gods mercie in sauing vs shall remaine vnshaken Martyr M. Calvin saith further nullis praeceptis pia mens sic ad obsequium Dei formatur
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
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
ex conspectu mutuo maior laetitia oriatur by the mutuall sight one of an other greater ioy is caused in 4. ad Galatas See further Synops. Centur. 2. err 63. 5. Controv. That festivall daies ought not to be consecrated to the honour of Saints The Romanists hold the contrarie reasoning thus for their opinion 1. Argum. God is honoured in his Saints the festivals therefore which are instituted to the honour of the Saints are referred to and determined in God Ans. 1. No will-worship tendeth to the honour of God but the odoration of Saints is a will-worship therefore God can not thereby receiue honour 2. God rather is thereby dishonoured for they giue the honour due vnto God vnto creatures inuocating the name of Saints saying O S. Peter S. Paul heare vs. 2. Argum. The memorie of the Saints is to be honoured but festivals are dedicated to the memorie of Saints Ergo. Ans. 1. Popish festivals are not dedicated onely to the memorie of Saints but to their worship which is idolatrie 2. and the Saints may better be remembred then by erecting holy daies in their names namely by imitating of their godly zeale and setting before our eyes their good example see Hebr. 13.7 3. Argum. These festivals of the Saints haue beene receiued and confirmed by long custome and therefore are not to be reiected Ans. Cyrpian saith epist. ad Pompeium writing against the epistle of Stephanus Bishop of Rome consuetudo sine veritate vetustas erroris est custome without truth is but the oldnes of error Our arguments for the contrarie part that no festivals are to be consecrated to the honour of Saints are these and such like 1. All religious worship is due vnto God onely him onely shalt thou serue Matth. 4. but to dedicate daies vnto the honour of any is a religious worship Ergo. Augustine saith honoramus sanctos charitate non servitute we honour Saints with charitie not seruice de vera relig c. 55. 2. Argum. Festivall daies are not onely for the rest of the bodie but for the sanctifying of the soule but this is onely Gods worke therefore to him onely the right of festivall daies belongeth 3. In the old Testament there were no holy daies consecrated to the Patriarks as Abraham Isaak Iacob nor to any of the Prophets therefore neither ought any be so dedicated in the New 4. Christians are not to imitate Pagans in the rites of religion but in dedicating daies vnto Saints they imitate the Pagans apparently for so the Pagans did consecrate feasts to their inferiour gods as the Saturnals to Saturne the Bacchinals to Bacchus and such other herein Papists doe follow their example changing onely the names and this was done by the authoritie of one of their owne Popes Greg. l. 9. ep 71. festa Paganorum sensim esse c. the Pagan feasts are by little and little to be changed into Christian feasts and some things must be done to the similitude of theirs that they may more easily be brought to the Christian faith c. 6. Controv. Whether all the festivalls of Christians are alike arbitrarie to be altered and changed as shall seeme good to the Church Herein not onely the Papists are our aduersaries but some of our owne writers seeme to incline vnto this opinion The Papists affirme that the Sabbath is but an Apostolicall tradition and that it was charged from the last day of the weeke to the first by the authoritie of the Church Rhemist whereupon it will follow that the Church may alter it by the same authoritie if it shall so seeme good vnto an other day Learned Pareus hath also this position dub 4. hypoth 3. feriae Christianorum quantum ad genus sunt necessariae vt tamen quantum ad speciem maneant liberae c. the holy daies of Christians though they be necessarie in generall yet in particular are free that they may be changed and transferred if there be cause from one day to an other c. and he seemeth to account the dominicall day inter res medias among things indifferent hypoth 4. But I preferre herein the iudgement of that excellent diuine D. Fulke who concerning other festiuals of Christ and the holy Ghost thinketh that they may be changed as the Church shall see cause from certaine daies vnto other occurrent times and occasions or from the daies now observed to other as things in themselues indifferent but concerning the Lords day he writeth in these words But to change the Lords day and to keepe it on monday twesday or any other day the Church hath none authoritie for it is not a matter of indifferencie but a necessarie prescription of Christ himselfe deliuered to vs by his Apostles annot Revel c. 1. sect 7. The reason hereof is 1. because we finde that in the Apostles time the first day of the weeke was appointed to be the Lords day Act. 20.7 1. Cor. 16.2 Revel 1.10 who beeing directed by the spirit of God no doubt but herein also they followed either the expresse commandement of Christ or the speciall direction of the spirit 2. because there can not come the like reason of the altering of the Lords day while the world endureth as was in the first change namely for the commemoration of Christs resurrection 3. the Sabbath could not be changed but by the same authoritie whereby it was first instituted which was by God himselfe Wherefore to conclude this point the festiuals of Christians may be diuided into three sorts 1. some are of necessitie to be kept and bind in conscience as the Lords onely 2. other festiuals though not so necessarie yet are conuenient to be retained and can not be remooued without great scandall as the feasts of the Nativitie Circumcision Annuntiation Ascension of Christ and of the comming of the holy Ghost 3. some are meerely arbitrarie in the Church as all other festiuals of the Apostles See further hereof Synops. Centur. 2. err 87. and Hexapl. in Genes c. 2. 7. Conntrov Against Purgatorie v. 8. Whether we liue or die we are the Lords hence may be confuted the Popish opinion of purgatorie for they which are the Lords are alreadie purged by the blood of Christ and neede no other purgation by fire if they be not purged they are not the Lords for no vncleane thing can come into his sight so the Spirit saith Blessed are they which die in the Lord they rest from their labours Revel 14.13 all that die in the faith of Iesus die in the Lord if they die in the Lord they rest from their labours but they which are in purgatorie are in labour and sorrow still See further Synops. Centur. 2. err 11. 8. Controv. Whether Christ by his obedience and suffering merited for himselfe eternall glorie and dominion 1. It is the opinion of the Schoolemen that as Christ merited by his death for his members redemption from death and sinne so by his perfect obedience and most holy passion he
thy progenitors and brought vp in a good religion yet dost nothing that belongeth therevnto thou perhaps wilt say yet I will shewe thee those which doe these things namely monachos eremum incolentes the Monkes which inhabite the wildernesse But Christ said luceat lux vestra coram hominibus non coram montibus let your light shine before men not before the mountaines and yet saying thus non illis detraho aut montes occupant c. I doe not disgrace those which inhabite the mountaines but I am sorrie for those which dwell in cities that they onely can finde vertue among the other hortor itaque vt philosophiam ex montibus in vrbes reducamus I exhort therefore that we may bring againe Philosophie from the mountaines into cities vt ciuitates sint verae ciuitates that cities may be right cities indeede Observ. 8. Of the dignitie and excellencie of the calling of Christians v. 15. For whom Christ died the Apostle said before v. 8. Whether we liue or die we are the Lords for he hath bought vs with a price euen in dying and giuing himselfe a ransome for vs it is a great honour in the world to be the seruant of a great and mightie king the Queene of Ethiopia iudged Salomons seruants happie that attended vpon so wise a King the Carthaginian embassadors returning from Rome said se vidisse tot reges quot senatores that they had seene as many kings as senators But much more glorious is the condition of the faithfull whom Christ hath purchased to be his seruants and indeede not seruants but freemen yea so many kings for in him we are made Kings and Preists Revel 1.6 Observ. 9. Of true praise and commendation v. 18. Pleaseth God and is commended of men First we must seeke to please God and to be praised of him and then the praise of men will followe but he that first seeketh to please men cannot please Christ as the Apostle saith Galat. 1.10 If I seeke to please men I should not be the seruant of Christ he that is praised of men first is most like to be dispraised of God as our Blessed Sauiour saith Luk. 6.26 Woe vnto you when men shall praise you so did your fathers to the false Prophets And againe the Apostle saith 2. Cor. 10.18 he that commendeth himselfe is not allowed but whom the Lord commendeth Observ. 10. That nothing is to be done with a doubtfull minde or of ignorance v. 23. Whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne Chrysostome here hath a good morall touching this point that no man should pleade simplicie or ignorance in his doings 1. he distinguisheth of ignorance if thou art ignorant of those things which cannot be knowne praeter culpam erit it is without thy fault but ignorance through negligence such as the Iewes had excuseth not 2. An in modico orbis angulo c. the things belonging to saluation were not done onely in Palestina in a corner of the world but the Lord by his Prophet saith they all shall knowe me from the greatest to the least non vides rem istam loqui dost thou not see the thing it selfe to speake 3. But thou wilt say this knowledge is not to be exacted of a poore simple husbandman or Barbarian yes why not for how canst thou call him simple that is wise enough in worldly matters if he be wronged he can tell how to resist if violence be offred he will defend himselfe and in other matters he can prouide for himselfe how then is he simple 4. Tell me whom thinkest thou to be more simple those which liue now or which liued in Abrahams time surely thou wilt say they which liued then yet Abraham barbarus in medio barbarorum educatus c. barbarian brought vp among barbarians hauing no teacher his father beeing an idolater yet had the knowledge of God to this purpose Chryso to shew that ignorance can excuse none but euerie one is bound to examine all his actions that they proceede of faith CHAP. XV. 1. The text with the diuerse readings 1 We which are strong ought to beare the infirmities frailnes B. of the weake and not to please our selues not to stand in our owne conceits B. 2 Therefore let euerie one please his neghbour vnto good Be. L. Gr. rather then in that is good B. G. S. to edification 3 For Christ would not please himselfe but as it is written the rebukes of them which rebuke thee fell vpon me 4 For whatsoeuer things were written aforetime were written afore for our learning that thorough patience and comfort of the Scriptures we might haue hope 5 Now the God of patience and consolation giue you that ye he like minded like affected Be. thinks the same thing V. S. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to minde the same thing one toward an other according to Christ Iesus 6 That ye with one minde and one mouth may praise God euen the father of our Lord Iesus Christ. 7 Wherefore receiue ye one an other as Christ receiued vs to the glorie of God 8. Now I say that Iesus Christ was a Minister of the circumcision for the truth of God to confirme the promises of the fathers 9 And that the Gentiles might glorifie God let the Gentiles praise God G. for his mercie as it is written For this cause I will confesse thee among the Gentiles and sing vnto thy name 10 And againe he saith reioyce ye Gentiles with his people 11 And againe praise the Lord all ye Gentiles and laud ye him all people together 12 And againe Esaias saith there shall be a roote of lesse and he that shall rise to raigne ouer the Gentiles in him shall the Gentiles trust 13 Now the God of hope fill you with all ioy and peace in beleeuing that ye may abound in hope be rich in hope B. thorough the power of the holy Ghost 14 And I my selfe also am perswaded of you my brethren that ye are also full of goodnes loue L. and are able willing V. to admonish one an other 15 Neuerthelesse brethren I haue somewhat more boldly after a sort in part Gr. written vnto you as one that putteth you in remembrance through the grace that is giuen me of God 16 That I should be the Minister of Iesus Christ toward the Gentiles ministring sanctifying L. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. which signifieth serving or ministring in holy things the Gospell of God that the offring oblation of the Gentiles might be acceptable beeing sanctified by the holy Ghost 17 I haue therefore whereof I may reioyce in Christ Iesus in those things which pertaine to God 18 For I dare not speak of any thing I cannot endure to speak of any thing Be. see qu. 23. which Christ hath not wrought by me for the obedience of the Gentiles in word and deed 19 With the power of signes and wonders by the power of the spirit of God of the holy Ghost L. so that from Hierusalem and round
therefore it is not like that Moses would bid the Gentiles praise the people whome he had dispraised himselfe Iun. and yet this reading beeing admitted the Gentiles could not praise the people of God but they must praise their God also and God could they not praise and honour vnlesse they were first called to the knowledge of his name the second reading doth manifestly make the Gentiles the people of God as it were excluding the Iewes therefore the third is fittest ioyning both Gentiles and Iewes together in the praising of God the Apostle addeth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with for better explanation following the Septuagint 3. Againe whereas the Iewes obiect that the people of God in the Scriptures are sometime expressed by the name of goi a nation as Isa. 1.4 a sinnefull nation a people laden with iniquitie We answer that so it can not be here because the nations are called to reioyce with the people of God where the nations are manifestly distinguished from the people of God and though the word goi in the singular a nation doe sometime signifie the Iewes yet in the plurall goijm nations it signifieth the Gentiles 4. And herein lieth the force of this argument 1. the consequent is prooued by the antecedent by their ioy is inferred their partaking of the grace and knowledge of God for the which they ioy Par. 2. and further hereby is signified that they shall be associate to the people of God and be ioyned with them in the seruice of God Faius 3. nay by their zeale of Gods glorie and earnest reioycing they shall prouoke the Iewes to emulation Martyr 4. and beside hereby is insinuated the mercie which the Gentiles shall receiue for the more free the benefit is the greater cause there is of reioycing Tolet. v. 11. Praise the Lord all ye Gentiles and magnifie him all ye people Psal. 127.1 1. Haymo in the first place vnderstandeth the nations in the second the people of Gods that they should reioyce de salute fratrum for the saluation of their brethren quia auxâ—â— Deus numerum plebis because God hath encreased the number of his people by adding to the Gentiles glosse interlin and Gorrhan yeeldeth this reason because a people is defined to be rationabilis hominum caetus iuris consensu vtilitatis communione sociaetus a reasonable companie of men consociate together by the consent of a law and communitie of profit and such were the Iewes c. But such also were the Gentiles that had their lawes and common societies therefore it is not necessarie to make here this distinction 2. It sufficeth that this note of vniuersalitie all comprehendeth both Iewes and Gentiles that they should praise God for his mercie and truth in extending his louing kindnes to the Gentiles and in performing his promises made vnto the Fathers Calvin 3. and herein consisteth the force of the argument the Gentiles are willed by the Prophet to praise God which they could not doe without the knowledge of God at non frustra iubentur but they are not willed or commanded to praise God in vaine therefore they should praise God and consequently should obtaine mercie for the which God is to be praised 4. Chrysostome giueth two reasons why the Apostle here alleadgeth so many testimonies to prooue the vocation of the Gentiles and to suppresse the insolencie of the Iewes not to dispise the Gentiles videns ab omnibus illos Prophetis vocari seeing they were called and named by all the Prophets the other to teach the Gentiles modestie and humilitie seeing they were called onely of grace and mercie v. 12. There shall be a roote of Iesse c. this testimonie is cited out of the Prophecie of Isai. c. 11.10 but somewhat diuersly from the originall for both as Origen obserueth some things are omitted which the Prophet hath as in the beginning of the verse these words in that day and in the end his rest shall be glorious which words were not necessarie to the Apostles purpose and beside in the rest he followeth the translation of the Septuagint as he doth vsually as Origin noteth but when either minus necessaria videbuntur the things interpreted by the Septuagint seeme to be not greatly necessarie or when sensibus Scripturae vti vult magis quà m verbis interpretum he followeth the sense of the Scripture rather then the words of the interpreters so in these two cases the Apostle leaueth the Septuagint when either they adde any thing superfluously not in the originall or doe leaue the sense of the Scripture 2. But in this place S. Paul refuseth not the interpretation of the Septuagint because they retaine the sense though they read not the words whereas the originall readeth he shall stand vp as a signe to the people the Septuagint render he shall rise vp to raigne ouer the Gentiles in the same sense quia sub vexillo principis agat populus because the people doe gather vnder the ensigne of the Prince Beza Erasmus and whereas in the Hebrew text it is said they shall seeke vnto him the Septuagint read they shall must in him sperant qui concurrunt ad aliquem for they hope which runne vnto any to aske Eras. and no man seeketh that de cuius inventione desperet of the finding whereof he doubteth 3. A roote of Iesse 1. Origen interpreteth this name to signifie est mihi he is vnto me which he maketh to be the name of Christ and to signifie his eternitie as the Lord saide to Moses I am hath sent thee Exod. 3. but in the originall the proper name is Ishai which signifieth vir meus my man or husband which the Greekes turne into the name Iesse 2. Haymo giueth this for one sense that Christ is this roote of Iesse that he which in respect of his humanitie came of the stocke of Iesse he was in respect of his diuinitie creator radix Iesse the creator and roote of Iesse himselfe this sense followeth Gualter that this roote of Iesse was Christ himselfe the roote foundation and cause of all the fauours which God bestowed vpon that familie but Iesse rather is the roote and stocke himselfe and Christ as a graffe should grow out of his roote as the Prophet himselfe sheweth c. 11.1 or to speake more directly Iesse was as the roote Dauid as the tree out of that roote Marie as a branch of that tree and Christ as a budde of that branch Haymo 4. and it is called a roote because then that familie was obscure when Christ sprang vp out of it as the roote of the tree lieth hid in the earth and Iesse is named rather then Dauid because the kingdome of Dauid was then ceased onely the familie of Iesse still remained 17. Quest. Of the Apostles prayer v. 13. The God of hope fill you with all ioy and peace c. The God of peace 1. Origen noteth that the Apostle by occasion of the next words before in him shall the
Pastors also hac audiant oves vt alacriores faciant Pastores let the sheepe also heare this to make their Pastors more chearefull for a good sheepheard such an one as Christ would haue innumeris certat martyrijs doth put himselfe vpon many martyrdomes Christ died for him once hic millies propter gregem singulis diebus mori potest but he a thousand times yea euery day is in danger to die for his flocke wherefore knowing our labour dilectione vestra nos iuvate vos nostra helpe vs with your loue as we doe you with ours then he concludeth with this modest insinuation these things be spoken de optimis Pastoribus non de meipso mei similibus of the best sheepheards not of such as I am and others like vnto me 6. Lastly he saith vnto the people and they which are vnder their Pastors euen euery one also must pro parte pastorem agere domus suae vxoris liberorum domesticorum play the part of a pastor ouer his house wife and children and houshold servants Thus excellently Chrysostome according to his manner doth followe this morall which I haue abridged CHAP. XVI 1. The text with the diuerse readings v. 1. I commend vnto you Phebe our sister which is a minister a seruant B.G. of the Church of Cenchris Cenchrea B.G. but the word is in the plurall 2 That ye receiue her in the Lord as it becommeth Saints and that ye assist her in whatsoeuer busines shee hath neede of you needeth your ayde G. for shee hath beene helpefull succoured B. giuen hospitalitie G. beene assistant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. to many and to me also 3 Greete Priscilla and Aquila my fellow helpers helpers L.B.V. but the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Christ Iesus 4 Which haue for my life laid downe their owne necke vnto whome not I onely giue thanks but also all the Churches of the Gentiles 5 Likewise greete the Church that is in their house Salute my beloued Epenetus which is the first fruits of Achaia the first of Asiae Iâ—â—ad in Christ. 6 Greete Marie which bestowed much labour laboured much Gr. on vs. on you L.S. 7 Salute Andronicus and Iunia my cousins and fellow prisoners which are notable noble L. well taken B. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. among the Apostles 8 Greete Amphas my beloued in the Lord. 9 Salute Vrbanus our fellow helper in Christ and Stachys my welbeloued 10 Salute Apelles approoued in Christ. Salute them which are of Aristobulus houshold L.V.B.S. friends B.G. the first rather may be supplied out of the 5. v. 11 Salute Herodian my kinsman Greete them which are of the houshold of the friends B.G. of Narcissus which are in the Lord. 12 Salute Tryphena and Tryphosa which women labour in the Lord. Salute the beloued Persis which woman hath laboured much in the Lord. 13 Salute Rufus chosen in the Lord and his mother and mine 14 Salute Afyncritus Plegon Hermas Patrobas Hermes L.V. Mercurius B.G. but if he had beene called Mercurius it is like the same name should haue beene retained in Greeke as the name Rufus v. 13. and the brethren which are with them 15 Salute Phylologus and Iulia Nereus Nereas G. and his sister and Olympa Lympa S. Olympas B.G. and the Saints which are with them 16 Salute one an other with an holy kisse The Churches all the Churches L. ad of Christ salute you 17 Now I beseech you brethren marke them or obserue which cause make Gr. division and offences scandals Gr. contrarie to the doctrine which ye haue learned and auoid them 18 For they that are such serue not the Lord Iesus Christ but their owne bellies and with faire speech and flattering blessing Gr. deceiue the hearts of the simple innocents B. men not euill S.Gr. 19 For your obedience is gone abroad among all I am glad therefore of you but yet I would haue you wise vnto that which is good and simple concerning euill 20 The God of peace shall tread crush tread B.G.L.S. in the imperative Satan vnder your feete shortly quickly L.S. The grace of our Lord Iesus Christ be with you 21 Timotheus my workfellow helper G. and Lucius and Iason and Sosipater my kinsmen salute you 22 I Tertius which wrote out this Epistle salute you in the Lord. 23 Gaius mine host and of the whole Church saluteth you Erastus the steward chamberlaine B. treasurer V. cofferer L. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the steward Gr. of the citie saluteth you and Quartus a brother 24 The grace of our Lord Iesus Christ be with you all Amen 25 To him now that is of power to establish you according to my Gospel and preaching of Iesus Christ by the reuelation of the mysterie a long time since the beginning of the world B.G. from euerlasting time G. kept secret in silence Gr. 26 But now is opened and by the Scriptures of the Prophets at the commandement of the euerlasting God for the obedience of faith published made knowne among all nations 27 To God I say onely wise be glorie thorough Iesus Christ for euer Amen 2. The Argument methode and parts IN this chapter the Apostle concludeth the whole Epistle with familiar salutations and celebrating the praise of God there are fiue parts 1. He commendeth Phebe whome he sent vnto them v. 1. shewing what he would haue done vnto her and why 2. He sendeth greeting to certaine of speciall note among the Romanes for their singular vertues whose catalogue is set downe v. 3. to v. 18. 3. He exhorteth to take heede of schismatikes v. 17. which he enforceth by three reasons 1. one taken from the euill condition and effects of such persons v. 18. 2. an other from the person of the Romanes that they should ioyne wisdome with their simplicitie v. 19. 3. the third from the hope of victorie on Gods behalfe v. 20. 4. The Apostle setteth downe the salutations of others which he sendeth to v. 25. 5. Then the doxologie followeth wherein he setteth forth 1. the power of God what he is able to doe toward the Romanes 2. his goodnes toward all people in reuealing the Gospel a long time kept secret v. 25. the causes whereof he sheweth the author and efficient the commandement of God the instrument the Scriptures of the Prophets and the ende for obedience of faith v. 26. 3. his wisdome 4. his glorie which he desireth to be ascribed vnto God 3. The questions and doubts discussed 1. Quest. Of the diuers salutations sent by the Apostle in generall 1. As hetherto from the beginning of the 12. c. the Apostle hath deliuered diuers morall precepts and exhortations so now he propoundeth diuers examples of worthie and imitable persons among them 2. Which examples may be thus sorted out 1. he saluteth such speciall persons as were more familiarly knowne vnto him to v. 12. 2. either for some temporall benefit either generally bestowed vpon him together with other such an one was Phebe v. 2. or
haue beene S. Luke the inseperable companion of Saint Paul of whom he maketh mention in 3. places Col. 4.14 2. Tim. 4.11 Phil. 2.4 and here he is called Lucius after the Romane inflexion but it is more like to be Lucius of Cyrene mentioned Act. 13.1 who is their numbred among the Prophets at Antioch 2. Iosan was S. Pauls host at Thessalonica that endured so much for him Act. 17.5 3. and Sosipater as Origen thinketh is that Sopater of Berea which accompanied S. Paul sayling into Syria Act. 20.4 4. these three are called Saint Pauls kinsmen not onely because they were natione Iudaei Iewes by nation for so as Origen saith all the beleeuing Iewes were his kinsmen to whom he notwithstanding giueth not this title neither yet because they were of the same faith Gorrhan and as Origen thinketh this consanguinitie ex baptismo intrabat came in by baptisme but it seemeth they were sanguine iuncti neere in consanguinitie vnto Paul yet so as that they were ioyned in religion for otherwise Saint Paul would not haue made mention of them Theophyl whereby it is euident that Saint Paul had illustrem familiam a famous stocke that findeth of his kindred in diuerse places 5. I Tertius c. 1. this Tertius was Saint Pauls scribe who did write it from S. Pauls mouth as he endited it he is Tertius which signifieth the third non numero sed nomine not in number but in name Ambros. 2. he put in his name by Saint Pauls licence Lyran. whereby we see that the labours and ministrie of the faithfull are not forgotten with God as here the name of this Tertius is eternized to posteritie for his faithfull ministerie and seruice to Saint Paul and to the whole Church in writing his Epistles 3. neither as Chrysost. obserueth did he make mention of himselfe to get praise but rather by this his seruice to insinuate himselfe into the loue of the Romans 4. these words in the Lord may haue a treble sense either to ioyne them with his name I Tertius in the Lord that is of the faith of Christ Gorrhan or I haue written in the Lord for the Lords cause or I salute you in the Lord and this last sense is the fittest Beza 6. Gaius 1. Ambrose thinketh that this was he vnto whom S. Iohn wrote his third Epistle which may seeme probable because he is also there commended for his great hospitalitie as here yet Pareus thinketh he was not this Gaius because S. Iohn wrote long after S. Paul but this letteth not all falling out in one age 2. Origen thinketh this was that Gaius who was baptized by S. Paul at Corinth 1. Cor. 1.14 3. but he can not be that Gaius as Pareus thinketh who was one of S. Pauls companions mentioned Act. 20.4 for that Gaius is saide to be of Derbe therefore I consent rather with M. Beza and Tolet that there were three of this name one of Derbe Act. 24.4 an other a Macedonian Act. 19.29 the third of Corinth whom S. Paul baptized 1. Cor. 1.14 4. If he had beene onely S. Pauls host it had beene a singular commendation for no doubt the Apostle according to Christs rule did dignum exquirere hospitem seeke out a meete host to soiourne with Chrysost. but he was a common host of all the brethren that passed that way 5. Origen saith it was receiued traditione maiorum by tradition from their Elders that this Gaius was Bishop of Thessalonica Lyranus saith he was Bishop of Corinth of these reports there is no great certentie 7. Erastus the steward of the citie 1. The word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which properly signifieth a steward the vulgar Latine calleth him arcarius the cofferer but here diuers notations are giuen of this word arcarius some deriue it ignorantly of archos which signifieth a Prince or the chiefe glosse interl or of ab arce of the castle of the citie which he kept Hugo or of arca a cheft where the acts and writings of the citie were kept Lyran. the chamberlaine Genev. or the common treasurer of the citie Gorrh. and so Chrysostome taketh him to haue bin the quaestor aerarius the treasurer or receiuer Beza and the Syrian interpreter thinke he was the Procurator or gouerner so also Theophylact but he was more like to be the steward or annonae praefectus that made prouision for the citie he that had the laying out of the money for the common vse and receiued the rents of the citie Haymo Origen maketh a spirituall sense that he was steward of that citie cuius artifex Deus of the which the builder is God 2. This citie some take to be Athens Hugo Origen leaueth it in doubt what citie it should be because no name is expressed but it was Corinth the citie where S. Paul wrote this epistle 3. This is that Erastus whome S. Paul saith he left at Corinth 2. Tim. 4.20 namely to attend vpon his office yet he sometime ministred vnto Paul as he was sent with Timotheus into Macedonia Act. 19.21 his riches and office were no impediment to his calling 8. Quartus This is no word of number as the word signifieth the fourth but it was his name as Tertius of an other as there were also among the Romanes that were called Quinti Sexti c. 23. Quest. Of the doxologie that is of ascribing glorie vnto God wherewith the Apostle concludeth his Epistle in generall 1. Concerning the order and placing thereof Origen obserueth that wicked Marcion the heretike who had corrupted the Apostles writings putting in and out at his pleasure had quite cut off these two last chapters from this epistle beside there is an other difference among the Orthodoxall Expositors for some doe place this doxologie in the ende of the 15. chapter immediatly after these words Whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne and so Chrysostome doth treat of it in that place but Origen placeth it here 2. Chrysostome obserueth this to be the Apostles holy manner to shut vp and conclude his exhortations with praier for it belongeth vnto a teacher non solum sermone instruere not onely to instruct by speach but to entreat also the diuine helpe 3. Three arguments the Apostle coucheth together whereby he setteth forth the praise of God his power in beeing able to confirme them his wisdome in keeping secret the great mysterie for many yeares and manifesting it now his goodnes in reuealing the same and making it knowne vnto the Gentiles 4. But concerning the reading of this place it hath much troubled interpreters how it should be ioyned together in a good construction because in the last verse it is added To whome be praise thorough Iesus Christ which can not hang vpon this clause v. 25. to him that is of power c. Erasmus thinketh it were great impudencie to put out the relative 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to whome which is found in the most Greeke copies and therefore he professeth he can
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
place 1. epist. 2.10 he keepeth the same words but he changeth the order ye were in times past not vnder mercie but now haue obtained mercie this part of the sentence he maketh the last which with the Prophet is the first to reconcile this doubt 1. the vulgar Latine retaineth both beloued which was not beloued and shee which obtained not mercie hath obtained mercie but Beza coniectureth well that one of these was put into the text out of the margen by the vnskilfull writers for there is but one in the originall 2. Hierome to whom Erasmus subscribeth thinketh there were two readings of this place some had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not beloued some 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not pittied and the letter he would rather to be receiued but seeing the first reading is in the auncient originall as appeareth by the Syriake translation it is therefore the rather to be preferred 3. wherefore I approoue Iunius solution lib. 2. parall 13. and Pareus in this place that the Apostle in citing these testimonies doth followe the sense rather then the words for breuitie sake and the better to apply them to his present purpose 2. But as touching the scope of that place and the meaning of the words whereas the Prophet seemeth directly to speake of the Israelites the question is how the Apostle applyeth it to the Gentiles 1. Origen answeareth that God speaketh not in mountaines and rockes and other terrene places but in the heart there the conscience telleth euerie one whether he belong to the people of God or not c. But this is not sufficient to looke vnto the inward testimonie of the heart we must haue also externall testimonie from the Prophets of the calling of the Gentiles otherwise the Iewes will not be answeared 3. Therefore Chrysostome thinketh that the Apostle maketh this collection à pari from aparitie and equalitie Erasmus saith à simili from the like that seeing the Israelites for their sinne were cast off to be no people they were in the same case with the Gentiles that were no people also and therefore aequa ratione vocentur they may with as good right be called 3. some of our newe writers as Calvin Pet. Martyr thinke that the vocation of the Gentiles is prooued out of this place by a certaine consequent for the Prophets vse when they denounce iudgements against the people for their sinnes to raise them vp with spirituall comfort againe in Christ and vbi erigitur regnum Christi where the kingdome of Christ is set vp there must be a concurse of all people from all parts of the world Calvin 4. Augustine whom Haymo followeth vnderstandeth this place of the Iewes which were no people when they refused Christ and said we knowe not whom he is but were his people being afterward conuerted vnto Christ as 3. thousand were called at one sermon by S. Peter Act. 2. But this had not been to the Apostles purpose who intendeth to prooue the vocation of some from the Gentiles 5. Therefore the Prophet directly in that place prophesieth that they should become the people of God 1. because the Gentiles were knowne by this name not the people of God 2. and of the Israelites literally it cannot be vnderstood for they neuer returned againe to be a people Quest. 26. What is meant by the short summe or account which God shall make in the earth v. 28. 1. Touching the words here alleadged they are somewhat diuersly set downe in that place Isay. 10.21.22 for there the sentence standeth thus the consumption decreed shall overflowe with righteousnesse but here the word ouerflowe is omitted which some vnderstand of the ouerflowing of the iustice and righteousnesse of God by the knowledge of Christ into all the world Calvin some of the efficacie of the faith of the Gospel which shall ouerflowe to wash away and couer their sinnes as an ouerflowing streame doth wash and couer the earth Osiand and the word charatz determined and decreed is translated abbreviated and shortened thus the Septuagint doe reade that place keeping yet the sense which beeing a receiued translation thorough the world which had so continued 300. yeares the Apostle refuseth not to followe 2. Concerning the meaning 1. some interpret this word consummate to be Christ who was as it were abbreviated and shortened in respect of his incarnation Anacletus epist 2. Hier. epist. ad Algas qu. 10. 2. Origen applyeth it to Christs abridging of the law into two precepts the loue of God and our neighbour and to the short summe or compenâ—â—â—â— of the faith set forth in the Creede so also Cypr. de orat Dom. and Haymo 3. Tertullian vnderstandeth it of the doctrine of the Gospel which is abridged the multitude of legall cerimonies beeing cut off lib. advers Marcion so also Chrysostome and Theophylact. 4. Photius vnderstandeth it of the perfection of the Gospel after the which no other doctrine shall succeed as it succeeded the law 5. Ambrose lib. de Tobia c. 50. referreth it to the consummation or consumption of our sinnes in Christ. 6. Gorrhan wresteth it to the counsels of perfection giuen in the Gospel which the law had not but all these are wide for the Apostle here mindeth not any comparison betweene the law and Gospel 3. Therefore this sense is not agreeable to the scope of the Apostle to vnderstand by this short summe the finall remainder of the Israelites that should be saued that like as few of them returned from the captiuity of the Chaldeans which the Prophet historically intendeth so but a few of them should come vnto Christ from the captiuitie of sinne and Sathan and so the Apostle to this ende alleadgeth these testimonies to prooue by the Prophets the abiection of the Iewes as he out of the former affirmed the vocation of the Gentiles Quest. 27. Why God is called the Lord of hostes v. 29. 1. In the Greeke the Hebrew word Sabaoth is reteined which signifieth hostes 1. Faius giueth this reason why some Hebrew words are reteined in the Greeke and some Greeke in the Latine as kirieleeson Lord haue mercie vpon vs yea and some Latine words are still kept in the Greeke originall as Modius quadrans consul Centurio and the like that there might appeare vnum corpus ecclesiae but one bodie of the Church consisting of all these languages 2. But a better reason is rendred by Beza annotation that these Hebrew words beeing familiarly knowne were still vsed of the Christians because from the Iewes and Hebrewes first was deriued the Christians faith and so from the Greekes to the Romans And the reason why some latine termes were taken vp by the Grecians was the large dominion of the Romanes who together with the bounds of their Empire did also propagate their language 3. but these peregrine and strange words were not vsed vpon any superstition as though there were any holinesse in the words as the Romanists for that cause may seeme to commend the vse of
a strange tongue in their seruice 2. Now God was called the Lord of Sabaoth 1. some thinke in respect of the starres and host of heauen which the heathen worshipped to shew that he was superior to the gods of the heathen 2. some vnderstand the Angels by these hosts Lyranus 3. some Angels Men and Deuils and therefore the Prophet doth say thrice holy holy holy Lord God of Sabaoth Isay. 6. Gorrhan 4. some thinke that there is a relation to the hostes of the Israelites in the middest whereof the Arke went in the wildernes 5. But rather generally here must be vnderstood the whole host of heauen and earth Mar. as Gen. 2. ◠and not onely in respect of the number of them but propter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the decent and comely order wherein all things were made Faius 6. and this title is giuen vnto God in the old Testament not in the New to signifie that the law was then data in timore giuen in feare but in the new in loue Hug. 28. Quest. What is vnderstood by seede 1. Origen by this seede vnderstandeth Christ who as the seede is left in the earth so he was to be buried and rise againe and so fructifie to the euerlasting good of his Church but for this seede we had all beene as Sodome still in our sinnes Iunius in his parallels vpon this place misliketh not this application to Christ thinking that whereas the Prophet hath the word sarid remnant the Apostle of purpose turned it seede with reference to Christ that came of the Iewes but Beza and Martyr reiect this as not agreeable to the scope of the Apostle here 2. Photius in Oecumen vnderstandeth the Apostles but for whose preaching the whole world had beene left in their sinnes as Sodome 3. Gorrhan interpreteth this seede to be the word without the which we had beene as Sodome and Gomorrha paret essemus in poena quia similes in culpa we should haue beene equall in punishment because like in sinne glosse ordinar 4. But the Prophet hath relation to the ouerthrow and destruction of Sodome and Gomorrha wherein there were none left Chrysost. saue onely Lot and his companie who were strangers and so not of the citie so without Gods mercie the people had beene vtterly destroied in the captiuitie of Babylon if the Lord had not reserued a remnant to himselfe and so when Christ came to offer them spirituall deliuerance the whole nation generally refused him onely a small number cleaued vnto Christ thus Martyr Pareus 29. Quest. How the Gentiles obtained righteousnes that sought it not and the Iewes missed of it that sought it 1. Whereas this might seeme a strange paradox that they which seeke righteousnes should not haue it and they which seeke it not obtained it Origen thinketh here by a distinction to dissolue this knot it is one thing saith he sectari to follow which is vnderstood of a prescript forme of doctrine such as the written law was which the Gentiles had not and therefore could not follow it it is an other thing to follow the law of nature which the Gentiles had and followed but the Apostle here speaketh not of any law which the Gentiles followed at all but that they obtained that which they neither sought not followed 2. Chrysostome thinketh that the Apostle sheweth here the reason of the electing of the Gentiles and reiecting of the Iewes namely the faith of the one and the incredulitie of the other But these are not the causes of the decree of election and reprobation but the effects for three things the Apostle treateth of in this chapter concerning election and reprobation of the beginning thereof in Gods decree of the ende which is the glorie of God which two the Apostle hath handled hitherto and of the meanes saith of the one and incredulitie of the other which the Apostle toucheth here 3. Tolet here distinguisheth betweene the law of righteousnes and righteousnes it selfe the Iewes followed the law but not righteousnes because they did not the works of the law but abounded in sinne but it is euident that the Apostle by the law of righteousnes vnderstandeth the perfection which the law required which were the works of the law vnto the which the Iewes attained not 4. Some by the law vnderstand onely the ceremonies and rites of the law by obseruing whereof the Iewes could not attaine vnto righteousnesse but it is euident that throughout this epistle the Apostle vnderstandeth euen the workes of the morall law as c. 7. he directly maketh mention of that law whereof one precept is thou shalt not lust 5. Some make a difference here betweene iustitiam legis ex lege the iustice of the law and iustice by the law the iustice of the law is such workes which the law requireth but the iustice by the law is such workes as men doe according to the prescript of the law of their owne strength without faith the Apostle reiecteth this in the matter of iustification but not the other to this purpose Bellarmine lib. 1. iustificat c. 19. And so the Apostle here saith that the Iewes sought the law of righteousnesse but while by their owne power they sought to fulfill it they could not attaine vnto it he alleageth to this purpose Angustine who saith iustitiam legis non implet iustitia quae ex lege est c. the righteousnesse which is of the law fulfilleth not the righteousnesse of the law c. and the righteousnes by the law he interpreteth to be that quam homo suis viribus facit c. which a man doth by his owne strength But 1. it is euident that the Apostle indifferently vseth these phrases the righteousnesse of the law and by or from the law as he taketh the righteousnesse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of God Rom. 3.22 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by or from God Phil. 3.9 for one and the same so whether we say the righteousnesse of faith which the Apostle calleth the law of faith Rom. 3.27 and the word of faith Rom. 10.8 or the righteousnesse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by or through faith there is no difference but in words 2. Origen hath the like curious distinction vpon these words of the Apostle Rom. 3.30 who shall iustifie circumcision of faith and vncircumcision through faith betweene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of faith and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through faith he maketh this difference that to be iustified ex fide of faith is to beginne with faith and end with works and to be iustified through faith is to beginne with works and end with faith c. whereas the Apostle intendeth one and the same manner of iustification the like curiositie there is in this distinction betweene the righteousnesse of the law and by the law 3. And the verie words of the Apostle They followed the righteousnesse of the law shew as much which he interpreteth afterward They sought it by the workes of the