members as weapons of vnrighteousnesse vnto sinne but yeeld giue G. B. exhibite L. apply V. S. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your selues vnto God as aliue vnto God from the dead and yeelde your members as weapons of righteousnesse vnto God 14 For sinne shall not haue dominion let it not raigne S. but the word is in the future tense for ye are not vnder the lawe but vnder grace 15 What then shall we sinne because we are not vnder the lawe but vnder grace God forbid let it not be Gr. as v. 1. 16 Knowe ye not that to whom ye yeeld your selues as seruants to obey his seruants ye are to whom ye obey whether it be of sinne vnto death or of obedience of the hearing of the eare S. vnto righteousnes 17 But God be thanked that ye haue beene the seruants of sinne but ye haue obeyed from the heart that forme of doctrine whereunto ye were deliuered 18 Beeing then made free from sinne ye are become the seruants of righteousnes 19 I speake after the manner of men I speake 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some humane thing Gr. L.V. because of the infirmitie of your flesh for as ye haue yeelded your members seruants to serue L. to the seruice S. but the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seruants to vncleanes and iniquitie to commit iniquitie so now yeeld your members seruants to righteousnes and holines vnto sanctification L. V. S. 20 For when ye were the seruants of sinne ye were free vnto righteousnes from righteousnesse G. B. that is the meaning but the word in the originall is put in the datiue 21 What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed for the end of those things is death 22 But now beeing freed from sinne and made the seruants of God ye haue your fruit vnto holines in holines G. holy fruits S. and the ende euerlasting life 23 For the stipend stipends Gr. wages G. reward B. of sinne is death but the gift of God the grace of God L. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a grace a gift is eternall life through Iesus Christ our Lord. 2. The Argument Method and Parts In this Chapter the Apostle sheweth the necessarie coniunction betweene iustification and holines and newenes of life and there are two parts thereof in the first to ver 12. he layeth downe the doctrine then he exhorteth v. 12. to the end In the doctrine he prooueth the necessitie 1. of mortification and dying to sinne propounded v. 1.2 from the efficacie of baptisme which signifieth that we are dead and buried with Christ v. 3.4 and from the ende of Christs crucifying v. 6.2 of sanctification propounded v. 8. prooued from the mysterie of baptisme v. 4.5 from the vertue of Christs resurrection who is risen and dieth no more ver 9.10 and then he concludeth ver 11. 1. The exhortation followeth which hath two parts 1. one dehorting from sinne which is propounded and explaned v. 12.13 then amplified by three arguments 1. from their present state and condition beeing vnder grace v. 14. with the preuenting of an obiection v. 15.2 from the inconveniencie of the seruice of sinne which is vnto death set forth by the contrarie v. 16.3 from the efficacie of the doctrine which they obeyed v. 17.2 the other part stirreth vp to newenesse of life propounded v. 18. amplified 1. à pari v. 19.20 as when they serued sinne they were free from righteousnesse so beeing freed from sinne they must be the seruants of righteousnesse ab effectis from the effects of sinne shame and death v. 21. which are amplified by the contrarie effects of sanctification holinesse v. 22. and eternall life set forth by the contrarie on the diuerse manner sinne deserueth death as the iust stipend but life eternall is not deserued it is Gods free gift v. 23. 3. The questions and doubts discussed Quest. 1. Of the meaning of these words shall we continue in sinne v. 1. 1. The Apostle preuenteth here an obiection which might be occasioned by the former words in the end of the fift chapter where the Apostle said where sinne abounded grace abounded much more by occasion of which words the Apostle might feare least two sorts of men might take advantage the false teachers which did continually picke quarrells with the Apostles doctrine as some affirmed that he said we might doe euill that good might come thereof c. 3.8 He might feare also least the weake might receiue encouragement hereby to nourish theâ— infirmities still 2. But either of these so inferring did misconster the Apostles words and in this kind of reasoning there are three Paralogismes or fallacies committed 1. they take non causam pro causa that which is not the cause for the cause for the abounding of sinne is not the cause of the abounding of grace Augustine saith non peccantis merito sed gratiae supervenient â—â—â—uxilio c. where sinne abounded grace abounded more not by the merit of the sinne 〈◊〉 by the meanes of helpe by grace c. the Apostles speach is to be vnderstood occasionaliter by way of occasion and they take it causaliter by way of a cause Hugo sinne in it owne nature is no more the cause of grace then the disease is of medicine Maâ—â— qui laudat beneficium medecinae non prodesse dicit morbos c. he that praiseth the benefit 〈◊〉 Phisicke doth not commend the disease Augustin so then mans vnrighteousnesse doth not in it selfe set forth the iustice of God but ex accidente by an accident Pareus proveniter bonitate Dei qui bona elicit ex malis it commeth of the goodnesse of God who decreeâ—â— good out of euill Lyran. 2. the second fallacie is in that they thus obiecting make the Apostles words more generall then he meant or intended them for the abounding of sinne is not the occasion of the abounding of grace in all but onely in those which acknowledge and confesse their sinnes Martyr as it is euident in damnatione malorum in the condemnation of the wicked Lyran. there Gods iustice rather then his grace and mercie sheweth it selfe 3. a third fallacie is they apply that to the time to come which the Apostle onely vttered of time past the abounding of sinne in men before their conuersion and repentance setteth forth the aboundance of the grace and mercie of God in the forgiuenesse of their sinnes past but not so if sinne abounded after their conuersion and calling Mart. 3. The Apostle propoundeth this obiection in the person of the aduersarie by way of interrogation thereby expressing both affectum indignantis the affection of one angrie and displeased that his doctrine should be thus perverted and he sheweth also securitatem conscientiae the securitie of his conscience that he was free from any such thought 4. By sinne neither doth the Apostle vnderstand the author of sinne namely the deuill as Origen for then one should be said improperly to remaine in sinne that is in the
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
as Bucer Hyper. for the Apostle speaketh of sinnes not of the law which sheweth the reward of sinne to be death 2. nor yet is the meaning it flie me per perpeirationem peccati by the committing of sinne Hugo inducendo ad opus in bringing sinne into act Lyran. for though one sinne may bring forth an other yet sinne is one thing death an other which is the stipend or wages of sinne 3. Osiander thus lepit eum adigere ad desperationem it begonne to driue him to despaire but the Apostle speaketh not of his particulate case but of the generall effect of sinne whereof he giueth instance in himselfe 4. therefore the meaning rather is concilionit vnibi mortem it procured death vnto me Pere ad mortem eternam tradit it deliuereth me ouer to eternall death Gorrhan addicit morti maketh one guiltie of death Fuius which must be vnderstood of the proper fruit and effect of sinne without the grace and mercie of God Quest. 21. How the law is said to be holy iust good and likewise the commandement 1. Concerning the first the commendation and titles of the law 1. Thomas and Caietane referre the holines of the law to the ceremoniall precepts the iustnes to the iudiciâ—s the goodnes to the morall 2. Lyranus it was holy in teaching our dutie to God iust in prescribing duties toward our neighbor good in respect of our selues teaching vs what is good and right 3. Haymo doth not distinguish these but saith the law is holy iust good because it commandeth holines equitie goodnes and intendeth to make the obseruers such so also Calvin Martyr with others 4. But Theodoret better distinguisheth them thus whom Oecomenius followeth the law is holy in respect of the matter because it prescribeth holy things iust in propounding rewards and punishments good in respect of the end to bring the obseruer vnto goodnes of life 5. Pareus distinguisheth them in like manner but he addeth further that all these titles are giuen vnto the law in the foresaid respects both with relation to the author who is most holy iust and good and to the doctrine it selfe of the law which is likewise holy iust and good and in regard of the effects of holines goodnes which is wrought in man before his fall and it shall bring forth in the state of glorie though now it faileth of the effect by reason of mans infirmitie 2. Whereas the Apostle speaketh both of the law and precept or commandement 1. Vatablus taketh them for the same herein following Origen but then the Apostle should seeme to commit a tautalogie 2. Oecumenius taketh the law for Moses law the precept for that which was giuen to Adam but this opinion is refused before 3. Theophylact will haue the commandement as generall the law as the particular because there are other commandements beside the law 4. so also Osiander Nazianzen as Faius reporteth him will haue the law so called in respect of vs because it containeth a rule of such things as are to be done and a commandement as it is prescribed of God 5. The most of our new writers do thus distinguish them the law quicquid ea pracipitur whatsoeuer is coÌ„manded therein Martyr Calvin and before them Hugo Cardin. 6. But I preferre Beza his interpretation whom Pareus followeth who by the law vnderstandeth generally the whole decaloge by the commandement that particular precept wherein he gaue instance before namely that Thou shalt not lust yet Haymo will haue one commandement here taken for all 22. Quest. How sinne is said to be out of measure sinnefull 1. Methodius in Epiphanius whom Gorrhan followeth still continueth his interpretation vnderstanding here the Deuill that he is this sinne out of measure by his manifold temptations causing men to sinne but the Apostle speaketh properly of sinne which is discerned and knowne by the law and so is not the Deuill Pareus 2. Ambrose as he is alleadged by Pet. Mart. doth inferre vpon these words out of measure that there is a certaine measure and degree of sinne the which if a sinner once passe his punishment shall be no longer deferred as he sheweth by the iudgement of God vpon the Sodomites and Cananites but this is not the Apostles meaning here 3. Faius will haue this vnderstood not of sinne it selfe but of the sinner that he is become by transgressing the law in a manner sinne it selfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the sinner is made as it were sinne But the Apostle still speaketh of the fruits of sinne in the sinner and as Origen saith finxit personam peccati he signeth a certaine person of sinne 4. The meaning then is this that sinne by the commandement was more inflamed and encreased quia minus peccati est si quod non prohibetur admittas it is a lesse sinne to commit that which is not forbidden Origen and so Ambrose because sinne of knowledge is worse then sinne of ignorance because it sheweth contempt l. de Iob. c. 4. and hereby the multitude of sinnes is expressed invalescenie cupiditate ruimus in omnia concupiscence and lust encreasing we rush into all sinnes Martyr and so Augustine expoundeth it of the abounding of sinne lib. 1. quest ad Simplic qu. 1. the vehemencie and rage of sinne is hereby signified which as it were rising against the lawe sinneth so much the more like as an horse that is vnbroken the more he is curbed with the bridle the more he stingeth out Par. and as he which is sicke of a feuer is more inflamed by wine which is by reason of the infirmitie the wine is not properly the cause LyraÌ„ 5. But whereas Hierome epist. ad Algas thinketh that the Apostle committeth here solecisme because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sinner is of the masculine gender and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sinne of the feminine Erasmus well obserueth that here is no solecisme at all for it is vsuall in the Aâ—oâ—â—e dialect to ioyne an adiectiue of the masculine with a substantine of the feminine as Beza obserueth the like Rom. 1.20 where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 eternall the other word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 power beeing of the feminine gender 6. But whereas the Apostle saith the law is iust it followeth not hereupon that we are iustified thereby for the Apostle else where saith Gal. 3.11 that no man is iustified by the law Gorrhan giueth this solution that the Apostle meaneth the ceremoniall law but euen the Apostle excludeth the morall law from beeing able to iustifie vs the best answer is that the Apostle sheweth what the law is in it selfe it was giuen to iustifie vs but that which was ordained vnto life is found to be vnto death as the Apostle said before v. 10. by reason of the iufirmitie of man and the corruption of his nature And againe whereas the Apostle saith here the lawe is good and yet the Lord by his Prophet saith Ezech. 20.25 I gaue them
may set one auncient writer against an other to this purpose Bellarm. lib. 3. de verb. Dei c. 14. Contra. 1. Though some Greeke copies might haue those words yet the most and the most auncient haue them not as is euident by the Greeke commentaries and the Syrian translator followeth the Greeke text as it is now extant 2. The Apostle speaketh not of a bare consent vnto euill but of fauouring patronizing and taking pleasure in them which is more then to doe euill for this one may doe of infirmitie the other proceedeth of a setled malice 3. the vnderstanding is in the iudgement of the minde not in the practise and therefore to know a thing and yet not to know or vnderstand it includes a contradiction 4. the Greeke authors and commentaries are more to be respected in this case for the finding out of the best reading in the Greeke then the Latine writers 23. Controv. Against the Popish distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes v. 32. Worthie of death Hence the Rhemists inferre that some sinnes are mortall that is worthie of damnation some veniall that is pardonable of their owne nature and not worthie of damnation Contra. 1. This distinction is contrarie to the Scripture which saith the wages of sinne is death Rom. 6.23 no sinne is excepted and whosoeuer continueth not in all things written in the law is vnder the curse Gal. 3.10 And if any sinne were veniall in it owne nature it would follow that Christ died not for all sinnes for those sinnes which are pardonable in themselues neede not Christs pardon 2. Indeede there are degrees of sinne and some are worthie of greater condemnation then others and are more easily pardoned yet in Gods iustice euery sinne deserueth death which are through Gods mercie made veniall both the lesse and greater sinnes so that one and the same sinne may be mortall to the impenitent and yet veniall to the penitent beleeuer 6. Morall observations 1. Observ. v. 1. Called to be an Apostle none then must take vpon them any Ecclesiasticall function but they which are thereunto called and appointed of God Heb. 5.4 2. Observ. v. 5. For obedience to the faith the Lord straightly chargeth that obedience should be giuen to the faith of his Sonne whence are these sayings Psal. 2.12 Kisse the Sonne Matth. 17.5 Heare him they then professe not the Gospel of Christ truly who make onely a shew thereof in words but denie obedience in deede 3. Observ. v. 7. Grace to you and peace this inward peace of conscience is that peace which can not be taken from vs all other things in the world are temporall but the grace and fauour of God and this inward peace ne morie ipsa abscinduntur are not cut off by death it selfe Chrysost. for this peace we ought all to labour which Christ hath left vnto vs after an other manner then the world leaueth peace Ioh. 14.27 4. Observ. v. 8. I giue thanks c. for you all This is true charitie to pray one for an other and to giue thankes vnto God for the graces bestowed vpon others as if they were conferred vpon our selues And as here the Apostle praieth for the Church so the Church praieth for the Apostle S. Peter Act. 12.5 the Pastor and people are hereby taught one to pray for an other 5. Observ. v. 12. That I might haue consolation together with you Herein the Apostles modestie appeareth who taketh not himselfe to be so perfect but that he might receiue some comfort euen by the faith of the Romanes Let no man therefore despise the gifts and graces of others for euery one may profit by an other euen as one member helpeth an other 7. Observ. v. 13. I haue beene letted hetherto Seeing the purposes of holy men as here this of S. Paul was hindred it teachet vs that we should commend and commit all our purposes and counsels to Gods prouidence and fatherly direction 8. Observ. v. 17. The iust shall liue by faith Hence Chrysostome inferreth that men should take heede of curiositie to know a reason of Gods works but they onely must beleeue As Abraham was not curious when God bad him sacrifice his sonne but he obeyed without any further reasoning or disputation But the Israelites when they vnderstood that the Cananites were as gyants because they saw no reason or likelihood to ouercome them doubted and so fell in the wildernes so he concludeth vides quantum sit incredulitatis barathrum you see what a dangerous downefall incredulitie is and what a safe defence faith is 9. Observ. v. 24. Wherefore God gaue them vp to the lusts c. The Lord sometime gaue the idolatrous Samaritans ouer to lyons 2. King 17. but he giueth ouer these idolatrous Gentiles to their owne hearts lusts and vile affections which did more tyranize ouer them then lyons and tygres for when the bodie is giuen vp to wild beasts and depriued of life nothing happeneth against the condition of our mortall nature but when the minde is ruled by lust and so the affection preuaileth against reason this is monstrous and vnnaturall Perer. disputat 20. 10. Observ. Which is to be blessed for euer We are taught by the example of the Apostle when as we speake of the maiestie of God to breake forth into his praise as the Apostle doth here and c. 9.5 1. Tim. 1.17 11. Observ. Chrysostome further obserueth that as God still remaineth blessed though his glorie were defaced by the idolaters as much as in them lay so likewise the members of Christ when they are reuiled and railed vpon are not thereby hurt nonne vides adamanters cum percutitur percutit iterū like as the adamant when it is smitten it smiteth againe and leaueth a dint in the hammer that striketh it The second Chapter 1. The text with the diuers readings THerefore thou art inexcusable O man O sonne of man T. whosoeuer thou art that iudgest thy neighbour T. but this is not in the originall for wherein thou iudgest an other L.T. in that that thou iudgest an other G. or in that wherein thou iudgest an other but in the originall it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for wherein the antecedent is omitted thou condemnest thy selfe for thou that iudgest doest the same things not thou doest the same things which thou iudgest L. in the originall it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thou iudging that is which iudgest the relatiue is referred to the person not to the thing 2 But we know are sure B. that the iudgement of God is according to truth against those V. B.T.Be G. vpon those L. the preposition is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in against which commit such things 3 And thinkest thou this O thou man that iudgest them which doe such things condemnest them which c. Be. but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here vsed signifieth properly to iudge 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to condemne that thou shalt escape the iudgement of God 4 Or despisest thou the riches
his wrath and make his power knowne suffer with long patience the vessels of wrath prepared to destruction â—ere God should seeme to doe that which is euill as to prepare the vessels of wrath to destruction for a good ende namely to declare his power 2. Likewise to permit and suffer euill to be done in the world to exercise his iudgâ—ments or declare his prouidence seemeth to be euill as when he suffered Iosephs brethâ—â—â— to sell him into Egypt that Iacobs familie by this meanes might be prouided for for he which suffereth euill to be done when he may hinder it seemeth to consent vnto it and so is accessarie thereunto as a Magistrate sinneth in suffering adulterie murther and other sinnes to goe vnpunished Ans. Concerning the first obiection it is not euill that some are vessels of wrath prepared to destruction 1. because it is Gods will which is alwaies iust and holy yea Gods will is a perfect rule of iustice 2. and that which tendeth to Gods glorie can not be euill as God getteth himselfe glorie in the condemnation of the wicked 3. that which is lawfully done can not be euill but God in reiecting some doth that which he may doe by lawfull right to dispose of his owne as it pleaseth him as no man can reprooue the potter in making some vessels of honour some of dishonour of the same piece of clay 4. but seeing in the ende Gods reiecting and reprobating of some namely such as by their sinnes deserued eternall death appeareth to be most iust it must needs also be good for that which is iust is good 2. To the other obiection of Gods permission it may be likewise answered 1. to permit euill to be done and to consent to euill doe not necessarily follow one the other he that permitteth onely hath a will not to hinder but he that consenteth approoueth that which is done 2. and that God consenteth not to that which he permitteth is euident because he punisheth sinne which he suffreth to be done 3. God in permitting euill to be done onely consenteth to that good which he draweth out of euill and for the which he suffreth the same to be done 4. the case is not like betweene God permitting euill to be done and the Magistrate for 1. God is free and is not tied to any lawe but the Magistrate suffring euill therein doth contrarie to Gods lawe or mans 2. Man oftentimes of some sinister affection suffreth euill either because he is hindered by some greater power and cannot punish it or he is corrupted and so winketh at sinne but none of these are incident to God 3. If the Magistrate propound vnto himselfe some good ende in vsing connivence iâ— some sinnes yet he is not sure to effect it as God is 4. Beside it belongeth vnto the Creator to giue vnto his creatures freely to worke according to their nature for otherwise he should restraine the ordinarie course of things But this no way concerneth the Magistrate in his connivence ex Pareo Quest. 14. In what sense the Apostle denieth the lewes to be more excellent then the Gentiles v. 9 v. 9. What then are we more excellent there is a double sense of these words some thinke that this is spoken in the person of the faithfull which were vncircumcised as though they were more excellent then the Iewes which abused the blessings which the Lord had bestowed vpon them but if the Apostle had spoken here of the vncircumcised he would not haue named himselfe as one of them are we more excellent therefore the other sense is better that the Apostle speaketh here in the person of the Iewes least they might haue gloried too much in their preheminence and prerogatiues which the Apostle had yeelded vnto them before the Gentiles v. 1. 2. Now the Apostle in denying vnto the Iewes that excellencie which he before had yeelded vnto them v. 1. is not contrarie to himselfe for the reconciling whereof 1. Some thinke that S. Paul before spake of the excellencie of the Iewes beyond the Gentiles before the comming of Christ but here of their state in the Gospell when they had no such preheminence as the Apostle saith Coloss. 3. that in Christ there is neither Iewes transgressing against the lawe were no better then the Gentiles as Ezech. 5.10 she hath changed my iudgements into wickednesse more then the nations c. 2. Some giue this solution that then preheminence was in respect of the promises on Gods behalfe which he made vnto the Iewes but in respect of their owne nature they were sinners as well as others Thomas Pererius they had no preheminence by their owne merits to this purpose Gualter Hyperius Aretius with others But Tolet refuseth this vpon this reason because in this sense neither should a Christian man haue any preheminence before a Gentile seeing the one meriteth more at Gods hand then the other these things wherein they excell non 〈◊〉 proprijs acciperunt they haue not receiued by their owne merits annotat 6. 3. The preheminence then before graunted and now denied is neither in respect of the diuers times nor of their persons but of the cause in hand that although the Iewes had some ciuill and Ecclesiasticall prerogatiues they had the law circumcision which the Gentiles had not yet concerning their manner of iustification before God it was all one the Iew was no more iustified by works then the Gentile but both of them were iustified onely by faith Par. Tol. 15. Quest. Of the meaning of certaine phrases which the Apostle vseth v. 9. We haue alreadie prooued and vnder sinne 1. The Greeke word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. some translate criminati sumus we haue accused Greeke schol Beza Pareus but it had beene sufficient to haue said we haue shewed both Iewes and Gentiles to be vnder sinne this was a sufficient accusation it selfe without any such expresse addition that he had accused them Tolet. 2. Pererius maketh this the sense I haue alleadged this as a cause that all are vnder sinne namely as the cause and occasion why the Iewes in the matter of iustification are not preferred before the Gentiles Per. Haymo but that the Apostles speach should be imperfect saying thus much in effect we haue shewed this as the cause that all are vnder sinne not shewing whereof it should be a cause 3. Tolet deuiseth an other sense expounding it by the passiue we haue beene all accused that both Iewes and Gentiles are vnder sinne but the Greeke construction will not suffer this sense for Iewes and Gentiles is put in the accusatiue and so can not answer vnto the word accused 4. Some thus interpret causis redditis ostendimus we haue shewed by rendring the cause why all should be vnder sinne that the Apostle had not onely shewed this but tendred also the cause Chrysost. Ambr. Sedul Erasm. Vatabl. but Beza thinketh that the word is not found in that sense 5. Wherefore the best interpretation is this
speaketh of such as are rewarded for their worke before God and not seeing quod vllum opus ex debitâ— remunerationem Dei poscat that any worke by due debt can require reward at Gods hand he turneth the Apostles meaning an other way and by debts vnderstandeth sinnes as they are called in the Lords prayer and so he also thinketh he speaketh of the wages of sinne as S. Paul saith Rom. 6. That the wages or stipend of sinne is death But the Apostle here speaketh euidently of the wages due vnto good workes not to euill the wages is not counted by fauour but in rendring the wages of sinne there is no fauour but iustice 4. The Schoolemen likewise are grossely deceiued who thinking the Apostle doth set downe this as a positiue rule before God haue here deuised two interpretations 1. they vnderstand this working and not working of the works following iustification and so he that worketh is rewarded uot of fauour onely because of his faith but for the debt also of his workes gloss interlin but he that worketh not that is hath no time to worke is rewarded onely of grace But this glosse is conuinced of many errors 1. in ioyning faith and workes together whereas the Apostle before c. 3.28 ascribed iustification to faith without workes 2. to say that our workes are rewarded by debt is to make God endebted vnto man for the worke which is not farre from blasphemie 3. he that hath true iustifying faith can neuer be without some workes or fruits thereof be his time neuer so short as appeareth in the theife vpon the crosse 5. Gorrhan beside this exposition hath an other to vnderstand the Apostle to speake of workes going before iustification and then he giueth this sense that to him which doth some good workes before faith if he should be rewarded the reward should be of debt which is false for then it should not be of grace but to him that worketh not any such worke before faith righteousnesse is imputed by faith c. Here also are diuerse errors 1. â—o imagine that there can be any good workes at all before faith 2. he imagineth the Apostles speach to be conditionalll if any reward be giuen wheras the Apostle setteth it down â—â—sitiuely the wages is counted not if it be 3. the Apostle speaketh in all that discourse of all workes whether going before iustification or following after for all workes of the lawe are excluded c. 3.28 now all good workes are such as the lawe requireth therefore euen such good workes are shut out from iustifying as well such as followe iustification as goe before 4. all these errors arise out of the misvnderstanding of this place where the Apostle speaketh by way of supposition from the ciuill vse of rewards among men that if there were any such meritorious working before God the wages should in like manner be due by debt Quest. 13. Of the diuerse kinds of rewards 1. Wages or reward is either due by debt per proportionem operae cum re by the proportion of the worke with the reward after a Geometricall kind of proportion as when a labourer is couenanted with to haue so much for his worke as in a due estimation it is valued at there is a wages which is of fauour by promise and not by debt and then it signifieth the same thing that fructus a kind of fruit or commoditie that followeth ones labour as Psal. 127. the fruit of the wombe is called a reward and so life eternall is called a reward because the Lord hath promised to giue it as a fruit following the labour of his Saints Fai. 2. And further life eternall is called a reward by a certaine similitude because that as in ciuill workes the reward commeth after the worke is done so life eternall followeth after mens fruitfull labour in this life Mart. and againe it is called a reward in respect of the thing done not for the manner of the doing because that as the wages is giuen to the worker of debt so is saluation rendred to him which beleeueth of grace Pareus 3. But properly eternall life is not a wages or reward for these reasons 1. because the things are not equall which are giuen and receiued the eternall reward farre exceedeth the worth of our temporarie and imperfect obedience 2. he that meriteth the wages most doe it ex proprio of his owne but we haue nothing which we haue not receiued it is not our owne 3. he that meriteth must be no way bound vnto him that payeth the wages for his seruice but all that we doe or can doe it is our dutie to doe Quest. 14. How it standeth with Gods iustice to iustifie the wicked v. 5. v. 5. But beleeueth in him that iustifieth the vngodly this may seeme to be contrarie to that Exod. 34.7 where the Lord saith he will not hold the wicked innocent and Prou. 17. it is called an abhomination to iustifie the wicked 1. Bucer hereunto answeareth that S. Paul here speaketh of the first iustification which if it should not be of the wicked none at all should be iustified for we are all the children of wrath and the Lord findeth vs all wicked before we are iustified But Moses speaketh of him which continueth in his sinne and disobedience afterward 2. Gryneus thus answereth that although it be not lawfull for a man to iustifie the wicked yet God may doe it that is omni lege superior aboue all lawe and the reason of this difference is because God onely hath right and power to forgiue sinnes because they are committed chiefly against him Faius 3. Pareus addeth further that then it is vniust to iustifie the wicked when as it is done without cause and against the rule of iustice there beeing no satisfaction made by the offender himselfe or some other for him but with God it is so for he iustifieth the wicked hauing receiued a sufficient satisfaction by the death of Christ who hath payed the price of our redemption 4. To this also may be adioyned that this must be vnderstood in sen su diuiso in a diuided sense that God iustifieth the wicked not him that remaineth wicked but was so before he was iustified Faius Anselmus vnderstandeth him to be wicked that beleeueth not he then which beleeueth is no longer to be counted wicked so then whom God iustifieth be also sanctifieth and of an vnrighteous man he is made righteous which righteousnesse is imperfect here in this life and therefore it cannot iustifie Par. dub 4. Quest. 15. How our sinnes are said to be forgiuen and couered v. 7. 1. First it is here to be observed that whereas S. Paul bringeth in this testimonie out of the Psalmes Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen and whose sinnes are couered to prooue the former proposition that God imputeth righteousnesse without workes that these two to remit and couer sinnes and to impute righteousnesse are taken for one and the same thing for
it is the obedience and righteousnesse of Christ whereby both our sinnes are remitted and iustice imputed vnto vs As Luk. 18.13 the Publican saith O God be mercifull vnto me a sinner and it is said of him v. 14. that he went home iustified c. so then for God to shewe mercie in forgiuing sinne and for man to be iustified doe both concurre together and the one doth necessarily followe the other 2. Further the privatiue graces of the spirit as in the remitting of sinne the hiding of iniquitie and the not imputing of sinne are not seuered from the positiue graces as in the imputing of righteousnesse Gryneus 3. Now sometime sinne in Scripture is said to be remitted sometime to be hid and couered and further to be not imputed likewise to be washed away which are all the same in effect but yet in a diuerse respect for there are fowre things to be considered in sinne 1. the first is the inordinate act of sinne which beeing once done cannot be vndone this is said to be couered not as though it were not but because it is not imputed the Lord seeth it not to punish it 2. there is in sinne the offence committed against God which the Lord is said to forgiue and remit like as one man remitteth and forgiueth the iniurie and wrong done against him 3. there is the blot and staine of sinne whereby the soule is defiled and polluted and that is said to be washed away 4. there is the guilt of eternall death in respect whereof sinne is said not to be imputed Faius 4. Now the reason why these are all one to impute righteousnesse to remit sinne is this because these are immediately contrarie one to the other to be a sinner and to be iust he that is a sinner is not iust and so consequently he that is iust is reputed no sinner Par. dub 5. Quest. 16. In what sense circumcision is said to be a signe and wherefore it was instituted 1. It was signum memorativum a signe of remembrance or commemoration of the couenant which was made betweene God and Abraham and of the promises which he receiued namely these three 1. of the multiplying of his seede 2. of inheriting the land of Canaan 3. of the Messiah which should be borne of his seede 2. It was signum representativum a representing signe of the excellent faith of Abraham as it is afterward called a seale of the righteousnesse of faith 3. it was signum distinctivum a signe of the distinguishing the Hebrewes from all other people 4. it was signum demonstrativum a signe demonstrating or shewing the naturall disease of man euen originall sinne and the cure thereof by Christ. 5. it was signum praesigurativum a signe prefiguring baptisme and the spirituall circumcision of the heart Perer. Quest. 17. In what sense circumcision is called a seale of the righteousnesse of faith v. 11. 1. Origen thinketh that it is so called because in circumcision was sealed and lay hid and secret the righteousnesse of faith which should afterward be reuealed and vnfolded in Christ and that it was a signe in respect of the beleeuing Gentiles and a seale vnto the vnbeleeuing Iewes shutting them vp in vnbeleefe vntill they should be called in the ende of the world But 1. in this sense it was not a seale to shut vp and keepe secret seeing that Abraham was commended for his beleefe and the iustice of faith was not vnknowne or as aâ— hid and secret thing to the fathers 2. Neither doth S. Paul here speake of vnbeleeuers but of those which beleeue whose father Abraham was 2. Chrysostome and Theodoret expound circumcision to be a seale that is testimonium fidei acceptae a testimonie of faith receiued but a seale serueth more then for a witnesse or testimonie there are witnesses vsed beside 3. Thomas thinketh it was called a seale that is expressum signum an expresse signe hauing a similitude of the thing signified as because hs was promised to be a father of many nations he receiued this signe in the generatiue part But though a seale haue the marke or print of the stampe yet is it not called a seale for that but in respect of the thing sealed and â—â—â—ified 4. Neither doth it onely signifie signum distinctivum a distinguishing signe of the people of the Hebrewes from others for it had beene enough to say it was a signe 5. But because a seale is more then a bare signe it is for confirmation as kings letters paâ—â—â—ts are sealed for better assurance circumcision therefore serued as a seale vt obsignaret 〈◊〉 fidei to seale the righteousnesse of faith by the which seale the promises of God cordibus imprimuntur are imprinted in the hearts Calvin Quest. 18. Whether the mysterie of faith in the Mâ—ssiah to come were generally knowne vnder the lawe The occasion of this question here is because the Apostle saith that circumcision was the seale of the righteousnesse of faith seeing then that all the people were circumcised it may seeme that generally all of them had this knowledge of the Messiah to come 1. Augustine as P. Martyr citeth him seemeth to be of opinion lib. 3. de doctrin Christian that onely the Patriarkes and Prophets and more excellent men beeing illuminate by the spirit did apprehend this mysterie of faith in the Messiah to come and that the common people did onely knowe in generall that God was worshipped by those signes and ceremonies which were prescribed in the lawe but the ende and scope of them they did not knowe But by three aguments it may appeare that the knowledge of the Messiah was more generall 1. the Prophets did euerie where shewe the insufficiencie of the externall ceremonies and sacrifices that they were not those things which God required at their hands so that the people could not be ignorant by the continuall doctrine of the Prophets that some further thing was signified thereby 2. yea the Prophet Isay hath most direct prophesies of the Messiah that by his stripes we are healed and that God had laid vpon him the iniquities of vs all c. 53. 3. at the comming of Christ it is euident that there was a generall expectation of Christ as Philip said to Nathanael Ioh. 1.45 We haue found 〈◊〉 of whom Moses did write in the lawe and the Prophets and the woman of Samaria said Iob. 4.25 I knowe well that Messiah shall come 2. But though the knowledge of the Messiah were more generally reuealed then to the Patriarkes and Prophets onely yet is it not to be thought that the people did know in particular the meaning of euerie ceremonie but onely generally that they aimed at the Messiah neither yet had all the people this knowledge there were some carnall men among them which onely did adhere vnto the externall signes ex Mart. Quest. 19. Certaine questions of circumcision and first of the externall signe why it was placed in the generative part 1. Hereof these three
inhabitants regnans sinne dwelling in vs and raigning in vs before iustification it both dwelleth in the faithfull and raigneth but after it dwelleth but raigneth not againe before the righteous are iustified by faith there is no sanctitie in them but vpon their iustification presently followeth sanctification whereby they are become holy and full of good workes though some reliques of sinne remaine There are three things then specially here to be considered in sinne macula culpa poena the blot of sinne the fault or offence and the punishment now after we are iustified by faith the fault is remitted the punishment acquired but some blot and blemish remaineth Now that in the iustified and regenerate remaineth some seede and reliques of sinne it thus is manifest 1. The Apostle confesseth that there was sinne dwelling in him Rom. 7.20 2. Dauid when he thus spake Psal. 32. Blessed is he whose wickednesse is forgiuen had now many yeares beene the seruant of God and yet he confesseth he had sinnes which had neede of forgiuenesse Bucer 3. the verie word it selfe of not imputing of sinne presupposeth a being of sinne for that which is not at all cannot be said not to be imputed for of that which is not there can be neither action nor passion Faius and that which is couered appeareth not not because it is not but because it is couered 2. Now for answear vnto the arguments obiected 1. the error of the Pelagians rather cleaueth vnto the Romanists then the Protestants who affirme that in baptisme there is sealed remission of all sinnes as well going before baptisme as following after whereas the Papists extend the vertue of baptisme vnto the sinnes onely before going neither doe we say that the sprigges onely of sinne are pruned the roote remayning still but that the very roote thereof is killed though some sprigges doe sprout still yet they shall neuer branch out to beare the like bitter fruit as before And as we are free herein from the error of the Pelagians so let them take heede that the error of Origen be not here worthily fastened vpon them who vpon this place of the Apostle writeth to this effect that when the soule of a sinner leaueth and forsaketh sinne then his iniquities are said to be remitted and when it beginneth to doe well then it hideth and couereth sinne bonis recentibus with newe good things But when it is come to perfection vt nullum in ea vestigium inveniri possit nequitiae that not a footesteppe of sinne can be found in it c. then the Lord is said not to impute sinne c. Here Origen concurreth with the Romanists or they rather with him that there remaineth no relique of sinne in the faithfull after iustification and that they couer and hide their sinnes by their good workes which doth quite ouerthrowe and peruert the Apostles sense who alleadgeth these testimonies out of the Psalmes to prooue that righteousnesse is imputed without workes which were no proofe at all if sinnes were couered and hid by good workes Beza annot 2. Not to impute sinne vnto a sinner continuing and remaining still in the strength of his sinne were indeede no iustice but to a sinner that repenteth of his sinne and amendeth it is iust with God not to impute sinne for the worthinesse of Christ. 3. All these testimonies produced of the taking and washing away sinne are vnderstood of remitting the fault and offence and acquitting the punishment it followeth not but that there remaineth some blot and blemish still 4. Christs merit is as effectuall to take away sinne as Adam was to bring it in and in the ende Christ shall vtterly abolish the verie relikes and remainder of sinne which though Christ by his infinite power could effect all at once yet it pleaseth him to worke it by degrees to beginne our iustification here and to finish it in his kingdome 5. How our sinne is couered in Gods sight and how the Lord is said not to see it Augustine sheweth well si texit peccata Deus noluit advertere si noluit advertere noluit animadvertere si noluit animadvertere noluit punire c. if God haue hid our sinne he would not marke it if he would not marke it neither would he chastice it if not chastice it then not punish it neither must ye so vnderstand that the Prophet said our sinnes are hid quasi ibi sunt c. vivunt as though they be there and are aliue c. to this purpose Augustine who by the hiding and Gods not seeing of our sinnes vnderstandeth his not seeing them vnto punishment And although sinne in it selfe be hated and detested of God yet it followeth not that the faithfull should be hated for sinne dwelling in them because they hate it and iudge it in themselues sinne then is to be considered two wayes in it selfe and as it cleaueth and adheareth to the person yet seeing the person of the faithfull wherein it is found is not addicted and wholly enclined vnto it but likewise hateth and abhorreth it the Lord loueth their person accepted in Christ though he hate that which is euill in them as they themselues also doe Controv. 4. Against workes of satisfaction v. 8. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne The opinion of the Romanists is here confuted that after remission of the offence in sinne and the guilt of eternall death there remaineth yet some temporall punishment to be satisfied for and yet there is full remission of sinne for the temporall punishment is extra substantiam peccati c. is not of or belonging to the substance of sinne but as an adiunct and a thing annexed to it Perer. disput 3. numer 13. Contra. 1. It followeth necessarily that where sinne is punished it is imputed and laid vnto the sinners charge But vnto them that are iustified nothing is laid vnto their charge as the Apostle saith Rom. 8.33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods chosen it is God that iustifieth therefore where sinne is not imputed and remembred no more there it is not thought of to be punished for how should it stand with equitie for God to punish the sinne which is remitted 2. No punishment is properly of the nature and substance of sinne but necessarie consequents and effects thereof euerlasting punishment it selfe is not belonging to the substance of sinne as Pererius confesseth that inest peccato secundum substantiam it belongeth to sinne in respect of the substance thereof for God hath appointed and decreed eternall death as the iust punishment of sinne but no substantiall part of sinne hath God ordained for then be should ordaine that which is euill If then one part of the punishment of sinne be discharged then the other also or else there should not be a full remission of sinne Controv. 5. Of imputatiue iustice against inherent righteousnesse v. 8. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne This is an
by righteousnes thorough Iesus Christ v. 21. And further this is yet more euident where the Apostle saith Rom. 4.25 Christ was deliuered to death for our sinnes and is risen againe for our iustification whence it is gathered that iustification is more then remission of sinnes onely which as it was wrought by his death so the other was compassed by all other his holy actions Piscator answereth that iustification is here affirmed of the resurrection because it is an euident demonstration of our iustification which was obtained by the death of Christ. But I preferre rather Augustines interpretation lib. 10. cont Faust. c. 10. Ista resurrectio credita nos iustificat c. this resurrection of Christ beeing beleeued doth iustifie vs non quod reliqua opera merita Christi excluduntur c. not that the rest of his merits and works are excluded sed omnia consummantur c. but because all was perfected and finished in his death and resurrection here Augustine affirmeth two things both that all Christs merits and works concurre in our iustification as also that the beleeuing of Christs resurrection is as verily a cause of our iustification not a demonstration onely as his death was of the remission of our sinnes See before this place more fully expounded quest 42. and Piscators exposition refuted artic 5. So then to finish this matter if Christs death onely effected and wrought our iustification then should the rest of his workes and actions be superfluous whereas whatsoeuer he did in life or death was wrought for vs as Thomas in his commentarie vpon this place alleadgeth out of Damascen omnes passiones actiones illius humanitatis fuerunt nobis salutifera vtpote ex virtute divinitatis prouenientes all the passions and actions of his humanitie did tend vnto our saluation as proceeding from the vertue of his Diuinitie 6. Morall observations v. 7. Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen Peter Martyr here noteth well that our sinnes onely doe hinder our blessednes for iustificatio est inchoata beatitudo our iustification is an happines inchoate or begun so then when our sinnes shall be fully taken away then our beatitude and blessed estate shall no longer be deferred as our happines begunne bringeth with it the remission of sinne so when it is finished all our sinnes with the remainder of them shall be cleane purged v. 13. The promise that he should be heire of the world Although the faithfull haue the promises of this life so farre as the Lord seeth it to be expedient for them yet their peculiar inheritance is the kingdome of heauen the children of God therefore must comfort themselues in the hope and expectation of their proper inheritance though in the meane time they be stripped and dispossessed of the things of this life As Abraham had the land of Canaan promised him and yet he himselfe had no inheritance in it no not the breadth of a foote Act. 7.5 so we must be reuiued with the hope of our celestiall inheritance though we possesse little in this world as Abraham was promised to be heire of the world not so much of that present as of that to come v. 18. Abraham aboue hope beleeued vnder hope This teacheth vs that we should neuer despair or cast off our hope but comfort our selues in God though we see no meanes as Abraham beleeued Gods promise concerning the multiplying of his seede though he saw no reason thereof in nature such a godly resolution was in Iob cap. 13.15 Though he slay me yet will I trust in him Then God showeth himselfe strongest when we are weakest and his glorie most appeareth when he helpeth vs beeing forsaken of all other worldly meanes v. 20. And gaue glorie vnto God As Abraham praised and glorified God for his mercie and truth so we ought to magnifie God and set forth his praise for all his mercies toward vs the Lord is not so well pleased with any spirituall sacrifice and seruice as when he returne vnto the praise of euery good blessing as the Prophet Dauid saide Psal. 116.12 What shall I render vnto the Lord for all his benefits I will take the cuppe of sauing health and call vpon the name of the Lord this is all the recompence that either God expecteth at our hands or we are able to performe to giue him thanks for all his benefits v. 23. Now it was not written for him onely c. but for vs c. Seeing then that the Scriptures are written generally for all the faithfull we haue all interest in them and therefore euerie one of Gods children should hereby receiue encouragement diligently and carefully to search the Scriptures as appertaining and belonging euen vnto him as our Sauiour saith Ioh. 5.39 Search the Scriptures for in them you thinke to haue eternall life who would not search his ground verie deepe if he thought he should finde gold there so much more should we be diligent in searching the Scriptures which shewe vs the way to eternall life which is farre beyond all the treasures of the world v. 25. Who was deliuered to death for our sinnes Seeing then that Christ died not in vaine but brought that worke to perfection for the which he died this now maketh much for the comfort of Gods children that their sinnes are verily done away in Christ and blotted out in his death this was S. Pauls comfort that Christ came into the world to same sinners of whom he was the chiefe 1. Tim. 1.15 This also teacheth vs to die vnto sinne which was the cause that Christ was giuen vp vnto death as Origen well obserueth quomodo non alienum nobis inimicum omne ducitur peccatum c. how shall not euerie sinne seeme strange and as an enemie vnto vs for the which Christ was deliuered vp vnto death The fifth chapter 1. The text with the diuers readings v. 1. Then beeing iustified by faith we haue peace not let vs haue peace S. L. toward God thorough our Lord Iesus Christ 2 By whome also we haue had accesse thorough faith into this grace wherein we stand by the which we stand Be. and reioyce vnder the hope Be. G.V. in the hope L.S. of the glorie of God of the sonnes of God L. but this is added 3 Neither that onely but also we reioyce in tribulation knowing that tribulation of afflection V.S. oppression Be. bringeth forth patience worketh G. in vs S. but this is not in the originall 4 And patieâ—â—â—e proofe B.S.L.V. or experience Be. G. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. and proofe or experience hope 5 And hope maketh not ashamed because the loue of God is shedde abroad in our hearts by the holy Ghost which is giuen vnto vs 6 For Christ when we were yet weake at his time B.G. that is the appointed time S. according to the time Gr. died for the vngodly not to what ende when we were yet weake died Christ for the
vngodly L. it is not put interrogatiuely but passiuely in the originall 7 Doubtlesse one will scarce die for a righteous man but yet for a good man for one which is profitable to him Be. he readeth the sense not the words it may be one dare die 8 But God setteth out his loue toward vs seeing that while not seeing if that while S. we were yet sinners Christ died for vs. 9 Beeing iustified therefore by his blood much more shall we be saued thorough him from wrath 10 For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God God was reconciled to vs S. by the death of his Sonne much more beeing reconciled we shall be saued liue S. by his life 11 And not onely so but we also reioyce in God thorough our Lord Iesus Christ by whome we haue obtained V. Be. receiued Gr. reconciliation atonement B.G. 12 Wherefore as by one man sinne entred into the world and death by sinne and so euen so B. death went ouer all men in whome namely Adam Be. not in as much as S.V.B. all men haue sinned 13 For vnto the time of the law was sinne in the world but sinne is not imputed while there is no law 14 But death raigned from Adam vnto Moses euen ouer them that sinned after the like manner after the similitude Gr. of the transgression of Adam which was the figure of him that was to come 15 But yet not as the offence so is also the gift for if by the offence of that one many be dead much more the grace of God and the gift by grace which is of one man by one man B.G. hath abounded vnto many 16 And not as that which entred by one which sinned not as the sinne of one S.L. for the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sinning or that sinned or as by one that sinned death entred V. for that followeth in the next verse so is the gift for the fault sinne B. not iudgement S.L.V. because of the words following to condemnation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. came of one offence which must be supplied out of the next clause vnto condemnation but the gift is of many offences to iustification 17 For if by one offence Be. better then by the offence of one B.G.S.V.L. for so much is expressed in the words following death raigned thorough one much more shall they which receiue the abundance of grace that abundance of grace G. and of the gift of righteousnes raigne in life thorough one that is Iesus Christ 18 Likewise then as by one offence Be. not the offence of one cater see the former vers the fault came vpon all men to condemnation so by one iustification Be. not the iustification of one B.G. cum caeter for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put in the first place otherwise it should be put after as in the next verse the benefit redounded vnto all men to the iustification of life 19 For as by the disobedience of one many were made sinners so by the obedience of one many shall be made righteous 20 Moreouer the Law entred thereupon by the way V. in the meane time B. that the offence should encrease B. Be. abound V. G. but where sinne increased grace abounded much more 21 That as sinne had raigned vnto death in death V. S. L. so is the word in the originall is in but he meaneth vnto death as appeareth by the other opposite part vnto eternall death so might grace also raigne by righteousnes vnto eternall life thorough Iesus Christ our Lord. 2. The Argument Methode and Parts In this chapter the Apostle pursueth the former proposition wherewith he concluded the fourth chapter that Christ died for our sinnes and now he sheweth the manifold benefits which we haue by the death of Christ with an ample proofe and demonstration of the same So then this chapter is deuided into two parts the first containing a rehersall of the benefits which we haue by Christs death to v. 6. the second a proofe and demonstration thereof to the ende of the chapter 1. In the first part there is 1. set forth the foundation of all other benefits which we obtaine by Christ namely iustification by faith v. 1. 2. then the benefits and graces either internall which are these sowre peace of conscience bold accesse to Gods presence perseuerance hope of glorie v. 2. or externall which is constancie and reioycing in tribulation which is amplyfied both by the effects patience experience hope which is described by the effect it maketh vs not ashamed v. 5. and by the efficient cause thereof the loue of God shed in our hearts by the holy Ghost v. 5. 2. Then followeth the probation hereof which consisteth of two arguments the one taken from the state and condition of such as were reconciled by Christ they were enimies this argument is handled from v. 6. to 12. the other argument standeth vpon a comparison and collation betweene Adam and Christ the losse which we had by the one and the benefit which we are made partakers of by the other from v. 12 to the ende In the first argument there is 1. the proposition that Christ died for the vngodly v. 6. ◠the illustration thereof à dissimili by an vnlike comparison betweene man and God the first part is expressed v. 7. that a man will not die for an vnrighteous man and an enemie which is shewed by the contrarie because hardly for a righteous man will one die vnlesse he be also a friend much lesse for an vnrighteous man and an enemie the other part of the comparison followeth 1. shewing that Christ died both for vs beeing vnrighteous v. 8. and enemies also v. 10. 2. then he inferreth two conclusions 1. the certaintie of our saluation beeing now iustified and made friends v. 9.10 2. the ioy and consolation which springeth and ariseth hereof v. 11. The second argument consisting of a comparison betweene Adam and Christ is thus handled there is the proposition concerning Adam shewing wherein he was like wherein vnlike vnto Christ to v. 18. then the reddition or second part concerning Christ v. 18. to the ende First Adam is like in three things 1. in his person he was but one and yet the author of sinne to all 2. in the obiect his sinne was communicated to all though himselfe but one 3. in the effect and issue this sinne brought forth death all this is propounded v. 12. that sinne entred by one man into all the world then it is prooued by 3. arguments 1. by the office of the lawe which is not to bring in sinne but to impute sinne v. 13. therefore though sinne were not so much imputed before the lawe as after yet was it in the world before 2. by the effects death was in the world before the lawe and it raigned also vpon infants that had not sinned actually as Adam had done and therefore sinne much more which brought forth death v. 14. 3. Adam was
first Adam sinned beeing in and a part of the world and in him all mankind sinned beeing then in his ioynes 21. Quest. And death by sinne what kind of death the Apostle speaketh of 1. Ambrose here vnderstandeth onely the death of the bodie when the soule is separated from the bodie There is an other death saith he which is called the second death in hell quam non peccato Adae patimur sed eius occasione proprijs peccatis acquiritur which we suffer not by reason of Adams sinne but by occasion thereof it is procured by our sinnes so Ambrose is herein deceiued for Adam was threatned to die the same day he should eate of the forbidden fruit Gen. 2.17 but he died not then the bodily death Augustine who seemeth to be of the same minde with Ambrose that the death of the bodie onely was threatened not the second death quod eam Deus occultam esse volait propter dispositionem novi Testamenti c. which God would haue kept secret because of the newe Testament wherein it should be manifestly declared Augustine I say thus answereth this reason that although Adam and Eue did not that day die the corporall death yet because from that time forward mutata in deterius vitiata natura their nature decayed and was corrupted and the necessitie of death was brought in they then beganne to die c. and Ambrose to the same purpose saith that there was after that no day not houre wherein they were not merit obnoxij subiect to death But the words of the text moriendo morieris in dying thou shalt die doe seeme to imply an actuall death which then they should die not a potentiall onely Pererius is of the same opinion numer 38. that S. Paul here speaketh of the death of the bodie because after our Parents had eaten of the forbidden fruit the Lord said to Adam Dust thou art and to dust thou shalt returne But this is no good argument they were subiect to the death of the bodie Ergo to no other death 2. Some were of opinion that the spirituall death is here onely meant because they did not the same day die the death of the bodie but liued 900. yeares after so Philo lib de â—legor leg Mosaic and Eucherius lib. 1. in Genes Gregor epistol 31. ad Eulog the Pelagians to whom consenteth impious Socinus were also of the same opinion that the spirituall death onely must be here vnderstood but vpon an other reason because they thought the death of the bodie to be naturall But neither of thâ—â— reasons conclude not the first for the same day they became mortall though actually they died not nor the second for Adam being created according to Gods image was made immortall he was not then mortall by nature 3. Pererius hath here an other conceit by himselfe that the death of the soule was also a companion of originall sinne if it be taken onely for the separation of the soule from God and the privation of eternall life but not as it signifieth beside the euerlasting torments of hell numer 39. But 1. this assertion includeth a contradiction for if the death of the soule depriue sinners of eternall life it consequently casteth them downe to hell 2. seeing Christ the second Adam deliuered vs from that thraldome whereunto we were brought by the sinne of the first Adam and he hath redeemed vs from the torments of hell it followeth that by Adams transgression we were made guiltie of hell 4. Wherefore the founder opinion is that sinne brought into the world the death both of bodie and soule as Haymo well interpreteth mors animae corporis in omnes homines pertransijt the death both of the bodie and soule went ouer all men c. Origen giueth this reason these two kinds of death are here signified quia corporalem mortem vmbram illiaâ— dixeris c. because you may call the corporall death a shadow of the other namely the the death of the soule that wheresoeuer that invadeth the other doth necessarily followe c. he thinketh the death of the soule to be here specially meant as in that place of Ezechiel The soule that sinneth shall die but so as the corporall death must necessarily followe Theophylacts reason concludeth as much who saith by the sinne of one sinne and death invaded the world abcessisseque hominis vnius id est Christi virtute and both are remooued and taken away by the vertue and strength of one that is Christ c. Thus then the argument is framed what is recouered in Christ was lost in Adam but Christ restoareth vs both to the eternall life of the soule and the life of the bodie in the resurrection therefore by Adams transgression we died both in bodie and soule Pareus Pet. Martyr addeth further that as there is a double life of the soule whereby we seeke such things at are heauenly and spirituall and of the bodie which seeketh those things that concerne the preseruation of the bodie so vtramque hanc vitam mors inflicta propter peccatum sustulit so both these liues death inflicted by sinne hath taken away Faius giueth this reason in Adam we are the children of wrath now the wrath of God invadeth not the bodie onely but the soule also By death then here we must vnderstand first the spirituall and eternall death of the soule which is to be cast out of Gods presence into hell whereunto all are subiect without the mercie of God in Christ secondly the death of the bodie which is the separation of the soule from the bodie thirdly all the forerunners and consequents of both these deaths as sickenesse weakenes corruption in the bodie griefe horror despaire and such like in the soule Pareus Quest. 22. Whether the death of the bodie be naturall or inflicted by reason of sinne 1. Seneca hath this saying mors hominis non poena est sed natura death is the nature of man not a punishment and of the same opinion seemeth Iosephus to be who writeth lib. 1. antiquit that Adam if he had not sinned futurum fuisse longissima vita tardissimaque senectute should haue had a long life and a slow old age c. he thinketh then that he should haue died though it had beene long first The Pelagians also were in the same error that Adam was by reason of his nature subiect to death not because of sinne as Agustine reporteth their opinion lib. 1. de peccat merit c. 9. and wicked Socinus agreeth with them that death is naturally incident to men as to briut beasts and that Adams posteritie is subiect to death propter propagationem generis non imputationem peccati because of the propagation of their kind and nature not for the imputation of sinne 2. But this opinion is diuersly confuted by the Scriptures 1. Man was at the first created according to Gods image then as God is immortal so man if he had not sinned should also haue
to either of them but of that which by them redounded to many and this similitude and correspondencie is ex contrarijs by the contrarie as Origen well obserueth and that in these three respects what they are in themselues considered what to their posteritie and wherein 1. They were both authors and beginners Adam was the beginning of mankind quoad esse naturae in respect of the naturall generation Christ is the beginning quoad esse gratiae in respect of the spirituall regeneration by grace Lyran. 2. as Adams sinne did not hurt himselfe onely but his posteritie so the grace of Christ is communicated to all his spirituall generation 3. as death and sinne came in by Adam so life and righteousnes by Iesus Christ as the Apostle followeth this comparison in the rest of this chapter and â—â— large 1. Cor. 2.15 Here follow certaine questions touching this comparison made by the Apostle betweene Adam and Christ. 31. Quest. Of the names and tearmes which the Apostle vseth in this comparison 1. In the transgression and fall of Adam the Apostle vseth diuers words and tearmes which either expresse the cause of Adams fall the ruine and fall it selfe and the fruits for iâ— these three are Adam and Christ compared together 1. the cause is set forth in generall tearmes as it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sinne v. 12. or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 transgression v. 14. or more speciall as it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 disobedience v. 19. 2. the fall of man is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lapsus the fall or ruine of man v. 15. 3. the effect are either the guiltines of sinne called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 16 or the punishment which is either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 death v. 12. or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 condemnation euerlasting death v. 16. 2. In the iustification purchased by Christ are likewise expressed the causes the worke it selfe and the effects which follow 1. the causes the efficient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the grace of God v. 15. called also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the abundance or redounding of grace v. 17. the formall cause is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the obedience of Christ v. 19. 2. the worke of our iustification is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the gift v. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the gift by grace v. 15. and the gift of righteousnes v. 17. 3. then the fruit and effect thereof is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the iustification of life or vnto life v. 18. 3. But yet if we will more exactly distinguish these words this difference may be made betweene them these three words which the Apostle vseth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 15 16. the first signifying grace the other two beeing translated the gift doe thus differ the first sheweth the grace and fauour from the which the benefit proceedeth the second is the coâ—â—lation of the benefit the third betokeneth the benefit it self which is conferred as if a Prince should giue a great treasure to redeeme one out of captiuitie this fauour of the Prince is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the grace the free giuing of it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the donation the others enioying of it and receiuing of this libertie is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the benefit or gift Beza 4. So these other 3. words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iustifying iustification iustice doe thus differ the first signifieth the merit of Christs iustice whereby we are iustified the second the action it selfe of iustification whereby Christs iustice is communicated to vs the third the iustice it selfe which is imputed and communicated vnto vs Tolet. annotat 24. Quest. 33. Of the comparison betweene Adam and Christ in generall 1. Origen well obserueth that this comparison is per genus similis per speciem contraria it is alike in the generall resemblance but contrarie in the particular in two things there is a generall agreement and resemblance 1. that there is one that giueth beginning and is the author vnto the rest 2. in plures aliquid diffundtur on both sides as the beginning is from one so there is somewhat conueyed vnto many 2. The specificall difference consisteth in the contrarietie and disparitie and the excellencie the disparitie is that one was the author of sinne vnto condemnation the other of righteousnesse vnto life the excellencie is in that the gift is not so as the offence but much more powerfull and abundant of both these the disparitie and excellencie more followeth to be added in the two next questions So then here are three things to be considered in this comparison as Photius obserueth cited by Oecumenius similitudo contrarietas excellentia the similitude or likenes the contratietie and disparitie and the excellencie 3. Now whereas the Apostle from this verse vnto the 19. v. seemeth to vse diuerse iterations of the same thing we shall finde by a dilligent viewe and examination of the Apostles sentences that he doth not repeate the same things as Pellicane thinketh eadem repetit propter infirmas conscientias c. he repeateth the same things because of weake consciences which often thinke that sinne is more powerfull then grace c. But Oecumenius saith better nequaquam iterum atque iterum eadem repetit Apostolus c. the Apostle doth not againe and againe repeat the same things as one would thinke but diligentissime copulat he doth most dilligently couple and ioyne the principall heads together Quest. 34. Of the disparitie and vnlikenesse betweene Adam and Christ in this comparison The difference and disparitie betweene them is in these sixe seuerall points 1. In the persons compared Adam is considered as a meere man v. 12. but Christ was both God and man he is called Iesus Christ our Lord v. 21. 2. They differ in that which is conferred Adam propagateth to his posteritie sinne and death v. 12. Christ communicateth to his righteousnesse and life v. 15.16 3. The meanes are farre different Adams disobedience brought in sinne Christs obedience procureth life v. 18.19 4. The persons vpon whom these things are conferred differ for from Adam death and sinne are deriued vpon all in generall v. 12.18 but righteousnesse is communicated onely to those which receiue the abundance of grace by faith v. 17. 5. The manner how these things are conueyed are diuerse Adams sinne is transmitted by naturall propagation but life and righteousnesse by Christ are communicated by grace v. 15. the gift is by grace 6. The sequele and endes are contrary the offence is vnto condemnation v. 16. but iustification by Christ is vnto life eternall v. 18. Quest. 35. Of the excellencie and superioritie which the benefit by grace in Christ hath beyond our fall and losse in Adam 1. The first excellencie is generally in the power and efficacie of the worker for it was necessarie that he that should ouercom sinne and death should be superiour to both for if he had beene of equall power he could not haue dissolued
Sathans worke the strong man could not be bound but by a stronger then he Mart. And more particularly this excellencie appeareth in the author and efficient cause Adams sinne was vnius puri hominis of one and the same a meere man but the gift was Christi hominis Dei of Christ God and man Lyran. that was of our but this non solum patris sed filij gratia was not onely the grace of God the father but of his sonne Chrysost. 2. An other point of excellencie is generally in the worke it selfe and the manner of it 1. if sinne beeing a privative were so forcible vnto condemnation much more the iustice and grace of Christ beeing a thing positive is auaileable fortior vita quam mors iustitia quà m peccatum life is stronger then death and righteousnes then sinne Origen 2. fortius est mortuum resuscitare c. it is a more powerfull thing to raise one beeing dead then to kill one that is aliue Osiand 3. Chrysostome addeth further magis videtur rationi consonum c. it seemeth more agreeable to reason that one man should purchase saluation and redemption then condemnation to and for an other if then that were done which was more against reason for one to worke an others condemnation much more the other 3. As our redemption and iustification by Christ is more excellent then our condemnation by Adam in respect of the more excellent and powerfull cause as the Apostle sheweth v. 15. as is before expressed so it excelleth in regard of the more excellent fruits and effects whereof one is declared v. 16. that whereas one offence of Adam entred vnto the condemnation of many in Christ not onely that sinne is pardoned but all other our actuall sinnes non solum illud peccatum per gratiam est oblatum sed reliqua omnia not onely that fault is taken away by grace but all the rest also Chrysost. 4. An other effect is that in Christ we receiue abundance of grace v. 17. non tantum peccata sublata sed iustitia prastita our sinnes are not onely taken away but righteousnes also is giuen vs Chrysost. which he further thus setteth forth by this similitude like as if a Prince should deliuer a man that is enthralled with his wife and children and not onely restoare him to libertie but set him in a princely throne or as if a medecine should be giuen not onely to heale the disease but whereby the bodie should be made much stronger Lyrau so Christ non solum iustificat à peccatis sed etiam inducit ad gloriam doth not onely iustifie vs from our sinnes but also bringeth vs to glorie Lyran. 5. Chrysostome addeth one excellent priuiledge further which we obtaine in Christ that whereas death came by Adam in Christ we obtaine that by death we receiue no hurt sed plurimi luchri tulerimus but much good as 1. death perswadeth vs and the remembrance thereof to liue soberly and honestly 2. hic sunt Martyrum coronae death was the occasion of the crowne of martyrdome 3. and thereby we are made fitte for immortalitie 6. Origen herein placeth the excellencie of this effect that not onely death no longer raigneth sed duo conferuntur bona two good things are conferred life is giuen in stead of death Christ our life raigneth in vs and we also shall raigne in life with him This then is the abundance of grace that we receiue in Christ. 1. in that we are not onely purged from our sinnes but iustified in Christ. 2. and sanctified in him 3. made fellow heires with Christ and restored to be the sonnes of God 4. and brought to euerlasting glorie 36. Quest. Some other opinions refused wherein this excellencie should consist 1. Some thinke that herein consisteth the excellencie of grace because the sinne of Adam was deriued onely vnto men the grace of Christ is reuealed to Angels Perer. disput 12. This is true that euen the Angels doe stand by Christ but it is not the meaning of Saint Paul here for he speaketh expressely of the abounding of this gift of iustification vnto men v. 18. 2. Pererius further saith that by originall sinne which we haue from Adam we are onely made subiect poenae damni to the penaltie of losse which is the privation of the grace and glorie of God but in Christ we are deliuered from the penaltie not onely damni of the losse but sensus of feeling and suffering the torments of hell But the Apostle is contrarie who saith that by the offence of one sinne came vpon all to condemnation v. 18. the euerlasting condemnation then of bodie and soule is due vnto men by nature in respect of originall sinne without the mercie of God in Christ and elswhere the Apostle saith we are all the children of wrath by nature Eph. 2.2 to the children of wrath belongeth all kind of punishment not onely in the priuation of life and glorie but in the actuall feeling and suffering of eternall torments 3. The ordinarie glosse saith that death in Adam raigned onely temporaliter temporally but grace and life in Christ eternally but death in Adam should haue raigned eternally if Christ had not redeemed vs not onely temporall but eternall death is the reward of 〈◊〉 then seeing all sinned in Adam all by nature are subiect euen to eternall death 4. Pet. Martyr obserueth out of Oecumenius an other point of excellencie in Christ aboue Adam for Adams sinne cooperans habuit omne nostrum peccatum had euerie one of our sinnes to helpe and worke together with it but the grace of Christ came vpon all sine nostra cooperatione without our ioynt working for not onely the faithfull and beleeuers but infidels also and vnbeleeuers shall rise againe from death But Pet. Martyr taketh these exceptions to this obseruation 1. Adams sinne without our actuall sinnes was sufficient to condemne his posteritie 2. though the vnbeleeuers shall rise againe it shall be to their further condemnation it shall be no benefit vnto them 3. though Gods grace doe worke without vs yet there is somewhat required in the faithfull that they should beleeue though that also be the gift and worke of God in vs. 5. Wherefore the true excellencie of the grace of Christ aboue the sinne and condemnation by Adam consisteth in those points declared in the former question because in Christ we are restored to a more excellent state then we lost in Adam 1. by Adam we are depriued of a temporall paradise in Christ we are restored to an heauenly 2. in Adam we are excluded from the eating of the materiall tree of life but in Christ we feede of the bread of heauen which giueth eternall life 3. in Adam it was giuen vs posse non mori non peccare a possibilitie not to sinne not to die but in Christ we shall obtaine non posse peccare mori that we cannot die nor sinne in the next life 4. by Adams sinne we are
but euen swallowe vp Calvin and in respect of our selues who the more we feele the burthen and ouerflowing of our sinne the more we haue occasion to extoll and magnifie the grace of God Osiander So here are two ends of the lawe expressed the neâ—â—â—â— ende is the manifestation and encrease of sinne the remote ende is the more abounding of grace but here is the difference the first ende is vniuersall for in all men both beleeuers and vnbeleeuers the law worketh the encrease insight and knowledge of sinne but the other ende is particular and peculiar 〈◊〉 to the faithfull that by the abounding of sinne grace may more abound toward them which is not properly caused by the encrease of sinne but thorough the mercie of God Pareus Quest. 44. Of the raigne of sinne vnto death and of grace vnto life 1. Before the Apostle had ascribed the kingdome vnto death v. 14. Death raigned from Adam c. but here vnto sinne because death indeede raigneth by sinne as the Apostle saith The sting of death is sinne 1. Cor. 15.56 death could haue no power ouer vs but thorough sinne Martyr 2. But to speake more distinctly where the Apostle giueth the kingdome vnto death he speaketh of the times before the law when as death did apparantly raigne in the world but sinne was not so apparant till the lawe came but sinne is said to haue raigned after the lawe was giuen because sinne then more abounded So that three estates of the world are here described the first from Adam to Moses when sinne was in the world but death raigned the third is from the comming of Christ who raigned by righteousnesse vnto life destroying both the kingdome of sinne and death Tolet. 3. By death Chrysostome seemeth to vnderstand the death of the bodie mors ex haec presenti vita eijcit death doth cast vs out of this life c. but eternall death is here also comprehended potestatem habuit deijciendi c. it had power to cast vs downe to eternall death Lyran. as may appeare by the other opposite part of eternall life Piscator 4. But whereas in the first clause mention is made onely of the raigning of sinne vnto death but in the other there are three mentioned grace righteousnesse and life Origen thinketh that the deuill must be vnderstood to be set against the grace of Christ ab inuentis rebus author inventi nominatur the author of the invention is named in the things invented c. for sinne came in by the deuill some thinke that the wrath of God must be supplied which raigned by sinne Piscator but I thinke rather with Calvin that beside the necessarie parts of the comparison the Apostle maketh mention of grace vt fortius in figuret memoria c. that it might better sticke in our memorie that all is of grace 5. The Apostle speaketh of the time past sinne had raigned because that although sinne doe still raigne in the children of disobedience yet in the faithfull it raigneth no more Par. 6. By righteousnesse some vnderstand iustitiam operum the righteousnesse of 〈◊〉 gloss interlin so also Bellarmine lib. 2. de iustificat c. 6. but the iustice of Christ is rather vnderstood as the Greeke interpreters well expound and as is euident by the clause in the ende By our Lord Iesus Christ who is notwithstanding both our iustification and sanctification 7. The ordinarie glosse here well obserueth that in the kingdome of sinne mention is not made of Adam from whom sinne came because the Apostle speaketh not onely of originall but of actuall sinnes both which are remitted in Christ. 8. Thorough Iesus Christ our Lord Iesus per gratiam Dominus per iustitiam nostre per gloriam Iesus by grace Lord by his iustice and ours because he bringeth vs to glorie Gorrhan 4. Places of Doctrine Doct. 1. Of the difference betweene Christian and worldly hope v. 5. Hope maketh not ashamed This is the propertie of the hope of Christians that is neuer confoundeth them or maketh ashamed because it is founded vpon Gods promises who both is immutable and changeth not and is also omnipotent able to performe whatsoeuer he promiseth But so it is not in humane or worldly hope for that often putteth man to rebuke because he is deceiued in his hope and faileth in the thing hoped for and the reason is for that he reposeth his confidence in man who is either deceitfull and hopeth not his promise or is not of power to performe it therefore the Prophet saith Cursed be the man that trusteth in man and maketh flesh his arme Ierem. 17.5 Doct. 2. Of the properties and effects of faith v. 2. Beeing iustified by faith 1. Vnto faith is ascribed iustification as in these words and remission of sinnes in purifying the heart Act. 15.9 2. faith is the foundation of thing hoped for Heb. 11.1 3. it is the cause of the producing and bringing forth of good fruit Iam. 2.8 Shewe me thy faith out of thy workes c. 4. it ouercommeth the tentations of Sathan for by the sheild of faith we quench all his fierie darts Ephes. 6.18 5. by faith we attaine vnto the vnderstanding of the word of God which otherwise is vnprofitable Isay. 7.9 Vnlesse yee beleeue ye shall not vnderstand as some translations doe reade and the Apostle saith that the word did not profit the Israelites because it was not mixed with faith Heb. 4.2 6. faith obtaineth our requests in prayer Iam. 2.16 the prayer of faith saueth the sicke 7. it worketh the saluation of the soule Luk. 7.50 Thy faith hath saued thee Doct. 3. Of the raigne and dominion of death v. 14. Death raigned from Adam to Moses Before sinne entred into the world death had no dominion but now it hath gotten a tyrannicall and generall dominion ouer men both of all sorts and conditions both young and old and in all ages as here it is said to raigne euen from Adam to Moses that age was not exempted from the dominion of death wherein sinne seemed least to abound but Christ hath ouercome death and destroyed the dominion thereof both in that he hath taken away the sting thereof which is sinne that death is not hurtfull vnto them that beleeue but bringeth their soules vnto euerlasting rest and in the generall resurrection our bodies which death had seazed on shall be restored vnto life as our Blessed Sauiour saith I am the resurrection and the life c. Ioh. 15.25 Doct. 4. Of the difference of sinnes v. 14. Euen ouer them that sinned not after the like manner c. Here the Apostle setteth downe this distinction of actuall and originall sinne some doe sinne in like manner as Adam did that is actually some not in like manner that is there is a secret and hid sinne in the corruption of nature which is not actuall but in time breaketh forth into act as the seede sheweth it selfe in the hearbe Doct. 5. There is no saluation
of death originall sinne then hath a kind of existence for how else could it be called a bodie of sinne or death see more hereof elsewhere Synops. Cen. 4. err 14. 2. Concerning the reasons obiected 1. God is the author of euerie substance and of euery naturall qualitie but not of vnnaturall dispositions or qualities as neither of diseases in the bodie nor of vices in the minde this euill qualitie was procured by mans voluntarie transgression 2. and though habites which are personall and obtained by vse and industrie are not transmitted to posteritie yet this euill habite was not personall in Adam as he is considered vt singularis persona as a singular person but by him it entred into the nature of man as he was totius humanae naturae principiū the beginning of the whole nature of man 3. Burgensis taketh another exception vnto Lyranus addition and he thinketh that Adams posteritie is not bound to haue the originall iustice which was giuen to Adam for they haue no such bond either by the law of nature for that originall iustice was supernaturally added or by any diuine precept for God gaue vnto Adam no other precept but that one not to eate of the forbidden fruite and therefore they were not bound at all to haue or reteine Adams originall iustice Thus Burgens Contra. 1. Herein I rather consent vnto Thoring the Replic vpon Burgens who thus argueth that this debt or bond to haue originall iustice was grounded vpon the law of nature which is the rule of right reason for by nature euery one is tied to seeke the perfection and conseruation of it kind and this originall iustice tended vnto the perfection of man which though it were supernaturally added vnto man yet it was not giuen him alone sed pro tota natura for the whole nature of man and so he concludeth well that man is culpable in not hauing this originall iustice though not culpâ actuali quae est suppositi by any actuall fault which belongeth to the person or subiect yet culpâ originali quae est natura by an originall fault which is in nature To this purpose the Replic And this may be added further that if Adams posteritie were not debters in respect of this originall iustice then were they not bound to keepe the law which requireth perfect righteousnesse and so it would follow that they are not transgressors against the law if they were not bound to keepe it the first exception then of Burgensis may be recieued but not the second 2. Pighius also who denieth originall sinne to be a privation or want of originall iustice holdeth it to be no sinne to want that iustice which is not enioyned by any law vnto mankind for no law can be produced which bindeth infantes to haue that originall iustice and therein he concurreth with Burgensis Contra. But this obiection is easily refuted for first man was created according to Gods image in righteousnesse and holines which image Adams posteritie is bound to retaine but he by his sinne defaced that image and in stead thereof begate children after his owne image Gen. 5.3 in the state of corruption And whereas Pighius replieth out of Augustine that the image of God in man consisteth in the three faculties of the soule the vnderstanding memorie and will Augustine must not be so vnderstood as though herein consisted onely the image of God but as therein is shadowed forth the misterie of the Trinitie for the Apostle expressely sheweth that this image of God is seene in righteousnes and holines Ephes. 4.24 An other lawe is the lawe of nature which is the rule which euery one is to followe Cicero could say that convenientur viuere c. to liue agreeably to this law is the chiefe ende of man to this lawe euen infants are also bound there is a third lawe which is the morall which saith thou shalt not lust which prohibiteth not onely actuall but originall concupiscence And whereas Pighius here obiecteth that a lawe is giuen in vaine of such things as cannot be avoided therein he sheweth his ignorance for it is not in mans power to keep the lawe for then it had not beene necessarie for Christ to haue died for vs who came to performe that which was impossible by the lawe Rom. 8.3 yet was not the lawe giuen so in vaine for there are two speciall vses thereof both to giue vs direction how to liue well and to bring vs to the knowledge of sinne xe Mart. 4. This then is originall sinne 1. it consisteth partly of a defect and want of originall iustice in that the image of God after the which man was created in righteousnesse and holines was blotted out by the fall of man partly in an euill habite disposition and qualitie and disorder of all the faculties and powers both of bodie and soule This was the start of man after his fall and the same is the condition of all his posteritie by nature Augustine also maketh originall sinne a positiue qualitie placing it in the concupiscence of the flesh not the actuall concupiscence but that naturall corruption which although it be more generall then to containe it selfe within the compasse of concupiscence onely yet he so describeth it by the most manifest effect because our naturall corruption doth most of all shew and manifest it selfe in the concupisence and lust of our members 2. The subiect then and matter of originall sinne are all the faculties and powers of soule and bodie the former is the pravitie and deformitie of them the efficient cause was the peruersnes of Adams will the instrument is the carnall propagation the end or effect is euerlasting damnation both of bodie and soule without the mercie of God Martyr 3. Originall sinne is taken either actiuely for the sinne of Adam which was the cause of sinne in his posteritie which is called originale origmans originall sinne giuing beginning or passiuely for the naturall corruption raised in Adams ofspring by his transgression which is tearmed originale originatum originall sinne taking beginning 4. Of this originall sinne taken both waies there are three misserable effects 1. participatio culpa the participating in the fault or offence for we were all in Adams loines when he transgressed and so we all sinned in him as here the Apostle saith 2. imputatio reatus the imputation of the guilt and punishment of sinne we are the children of wrath by nature subiect both to temporall and eternall death 3. there is naturae depratatio vel deformitas the depravation and deformitie of nature wherein there dwelleth no good thing Rom. 17.18 Controv. 16. Of the wicked heresie of Marcion and Valentinus with the blasphemous Manichees 1. Origen out of the words of the former verse where the Apostle speaketh of our attonement and reconciliation by Christ confureth the heresie of Marcion and Valentinus whose opinion was that there was some substance quae naturaliter Deo sit inimica which naturally is
an others subiects euen Gods and though the wicked doe obey sinne willingly yet it is of necessitie also because it is not in their power to resist sinne 2. Gregorie better observeth vpon this place that the Apostle saith not let not sinne be but let it not raigne quia non esse non potest it cannot but be in our members but it may not raigne 3. Pererius here confuteth Beza for giuing this note vpon this place the Apostle sheweth how farre we are dead to sinne while we are in this life vt reluctetur spiritus non tamen vincat that the spirit alway resisteth but ouercommeth not c. whereupon he thus cauilleth that if the spirit ouercome not the flesh then is it ouercome of the flesh But Beza his meaning onely is that our sanctification is not perfect in this life but that there remaineth some relique of sinne which alwayes resisteth the spirit as the Apostle sheweth in his owne example c. 7. so the spirit ouercommeth in part because sinne raigneth not in the regenerate but there is not a perfect victorie in this life because sinne hath a dwelling still and beeing in vs in this mortall flesh though the kingdome thereof be subdued Quest. 18. What the Apostle meaneth by mortall bodie ver 12. Let not sinne raigne in your mortall bodie c. 1. Chrysostome thinketh this is added by way of encouragement to signifie certamina in hac re temporaria esse that the strife and combate herein is but temporarie so also Photius he sheweth quod temporaria sit contra peccatum lucta that the fight against sinne is but temporall because the bodie is mortall and for a time 2. Origen hath two interpretations first the Apostle speaketh of the dead bodie to shewe that sinne neede not raigne in vs for he that is dead is free from sinne but the Apostle saith not in mortuo sed mortali corpore in the dead but in the mortall bodie there is great difference betweene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dead v. 7. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mortall which is the word vsed here 3. Further he saith that the Apostle calleth this bodie mortall ad distinctionem alterius corporis quod immortale est to distinguish it from that other bodie which is immortall when sinne shall haue no dominion or command at all ouer vs this sense Tolet also followeth 4. The ordinarie glosse further addeth that here is a secret promise of immortalitie si non regnet peccatum if sinne raigne not the bodie nowe mortall shall be afterward immortall 5. Theophylact thinketh that mention is made of the mortall bodie to signifie that all the pleasures of the bodie are but momentanie minus sunt stabiles corporis voluptates and therefore they are not much to be desired to the same purpose Bucer ne innitamur rei fallacissima that beeing admonished by our owne frailtie we should not trust to so vncertaine and deceitfull a thing 6. Theophylact noteth beside that hereby the Apostle insinuateth mortalitatem hanc fuisse corpori à delicto inditam that this mortalitie was inflicted vpon the bodie by reason of sinne and so we should by the meditation of death and mortalitie be terrified from sinne 7. But as these notes and collections may safely be receiued so this further may be added that the Apostle maketh mention specially of the mortall bodie because the partes and members thereof are the instruments of sinne that although the minde are inward faculties be tempted yet that we should resist and not bring the euill motions and suggestions into execution and this may appeare to be the Apostles meaning by the next words v. 13. neither giue your members as weapons of vnrighteousnesse c. Beza 8. Some thinke that the Apostle insinuateth the daunger of eternall death that if sinne doe raigne corpus moriturum est in aeternum the bodie shall die eternally gloss interlin but the bodie is said to be mortall in respect of the present mortall state because it is subiect to death 9. P. Martyr thinketh the meaning to be this because the concupiscence which the Apostle would not haue here to raigne in vs is per corpus derivatum deriued from Adam to vs by the bodie But I preferre the former interpretations but especially the 7. yet so as that with Ambrose by mortall bodie we vnderstand the whole state of man both the powers of soule and bodie by the figure synecdoche when one part is taken for the whole So also Pareus Faius Quest. 19. Of those words that yee should obey it in the lustes c. v. 12. 1. The Syrian interpreter readeth that yee should obey the lusts thereof but here the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is omitted which is referred to the first antecedent sinne that ye should not obey it that is sinne which is put in the feminine gender in the lusts thereof that is of the bodie and therefore Beza to take away the anbiguitie explaineth it thus that yee should obey sinne in the lusts thereof 2. The Apostle putteth it in the plurall lusts because from the prauitie and corruption of our nature doe arise many and diuerse lusts and concupiscences Martyr 3. Thus sinne is compared to a tyrant raigning and raging the lusts are as the edicts and precepts of sinne whereby it raigneth and ruleth men yeelding to their corrupt concupiscence as are the vassals and slaues of sinne Calvin 4. The Apostle expoundeth himselfe what he meant before by the raigning of sinne that is to obey it no man in this mortall bodie can be void of concupiscence and vnlawfull desires but the faithfull must striue against them and not become subiect vnto them Pellican 5. This obedience consisteth in two things the one to be at command to obey and yeeld subiection vnto sinne the other to take vp armes in the defence of sinne which is touched in the verse following Pareus 6. Concupiscence is taken two waies sometime it is the name fomitis innati of that inborne occasion and originall of sinne sometime actus interioris of the inward act of the minde whereof there are three degrees there is propassio the propassion or first motion then delectatio the delight thirdly consensus the consent the Apostle here speaketh not of the first motion which no man can helpe but of the second and third which by Gods grace may be staied that a man neither delight in or consent vnto those euill motions which arise in his mind gloss ordinar 7. Neither is this a superfluous exhortation vnto them whom he said before v. 11. to be dead to sinne that sinne should not raigne in them because our mortification is not here perfect but euery day more and more we must proceed therein and by such exhortations is our mortification still perfited Pareus 8. And here by lusts we must vnderstand not the naturall desire and lust of the bodie as after meate drinke sleepe and such like but the vnnaturall vnnecessarie and
but onely of those which are criminall such as S. Iohn speaketh of c. 5. there is a sinne vnto death I say not that thou shouldest pray for it c. for the Apostle speaketh there of sinne against the holy Ghost which shall neuer be forgiuen for the which it is in vaine to pray If the Apostle there should meane all criminall sinnes then it would follow that we should not pray for the conuersion of heretikes adulterers murtherers and such like We confesse that there are some mortall sinnes some veniall but not in their nature to the faithfull and penitent all sinnes are veniall to the vnbeleeuers and impenitent sinnes are morttall it is the mercie of the forgiuer not the qualitie of the sinne that maketh it veniall yet this taketh not away the difference of sinnes as though they were equall for small sinnes are more easily pardoned and great sinnes where they are forgiuen are more hardly pardoned where they be not they are more or lesse punished according to the greatnes of the sinne see further of this point Synops. Centur. 4. er 6. Controv. 18. That euerlasting life cannot be merited by good workes Arg. 1. v. 23. But the gift of God is eternall life The Apostle in chaunging and inuerting the order of his speach whereas he had said the stipend of sinne is death faith not the stipend of righteousnes is eternall life but the gift of God c. euidently sheweth that euerlasting life is not due as a reward merited by our workes but as a gift of grace through Christ Iesus Thus Chrysostome expoundeth this place he saith not merces benefactorum vestrorum vna aeterna sed donum Dei life eternall is the reward of good workes but it is the gift of God Theodoret non dixit eam esse mercedem sed gratiam c. he saith not eternall life is a reward but grace or fauour Nam licet quis summam absolutam iustitiam praestiterit for although one could performe a perfect iustice yet temporall things are not correspondent to eternall Theophylact non quasi retributionem laborum dat eam Deus sed ex gratia per Christum qui hac omnia nobis promeruerit God giueth not eternal life as a recompence of our labour but by grace through Christ who hath merited all these things for vs. Answ. Our aduersaries-doe all here concur in this answer that euerlasting life is therfore called a grace quia bis meritis redditur quae gratia contulit because it is rendred for and vnto those workes which were wrought in vs by grace so Pererius eternall life though it be due vnto good workes yet it is giuen freely nam merita illa principaliter à Dei gratia profecta sunt for these merites to which it is due doe principally proceed from the grace of God c. Pere disput 7. numer 42. so also Tolet in his annotat and the Rhemistes vpon this place also Stapleton hath the same answer which they all would seeme to take from Augustine who saith the Apostle might haue said the stipend of our iustice is eternall life but he called it the grace of God that we should vnderstand ipsa bona opera quibus vita eterna redditur ad Dei gratiam pertinere that good workes themselues to the which eternall life is giuen doe belong vnto the grace of God August de grat liber 8.9 Contra. 1. Whereas Augustine saith recte potuisse dicere the Apostle might haue well said otherwise it is enough for vs that the Apostle did not in this place say otherwise and as Pet. Martyr saith by this meanes most euident places of Scripture might be auoided if we may say aliter potuisset dici it might otherwise thus or thus haue beene said 2. but for the thing it selfe Augustine is so farre from approouing the merite of workes to eternall life that he maketh the good workes themselues to belong vnto grace as he saith else where pro hac gratiam qua ex fide viuimus accepturi sumus aliam gratiam in qua sine fine in calis vinimus for this grace wherein we liue by faith we shall receiue an other grace and fauour wherein we shall liue without end in heauen in Psal. 14.4 3. for how can God be a debter to vs to bestow a second grace because he conferred an other grace before we are endebted to God for the former grace he is not a debter to vs to bestow a second grace as Bearnerd well saith merita omnia Dei dona sunt ita homo magis propter ipsa Deo debiter est quam Deus homini our merits are Gods gifts and so for them man is more debted to God then God to man de annunt Mar. serm 1. Argum. 2. Where the crowne is of mercie it is not of merite but the crowne of euerlasting life is in mercie Psal. 103.4 which crowneth thee with mercie and compassions Answ. Pererius hath here two answers 1. that either by mercie we may vnderstand Gods protection in this life whereby he compssaeth his children as with a crowne 2. or if we take it for the crowne of euerlasting life it is called a mercie because the merites for the which it is rendred promanant principaliter ex gratia per misericordiam data doe principally flow forth from grace giuen them in mercie Pere disput 9. Contra. 1. If Gods protection in this life be of mercie without our desert then much more euerlasting saluation is of mercie which is lesse merited 2. the other is a meere cauill for what graces soeuer any haue receiued in this life how perfect soeuer they be here they shall haue need of mercie in the day of iudgement as the Apostle saith 2. Tim. 1.18 the Lord graunt that he may finde mercie with the Lord at that day c. beside the mercies receiued in this life he wisheth he may also finde mercie then so Augustine collecteth vpon these words Iam. 2.13 there shall be iudgement mercilesse to him that sheweth no mercie that they which haue liued well shall haue iudgement cum misericordia with mercie they which haue liued euill shall haue iudgement without mercie where then there is need of mercie there is no standing vpon merite Argum. 3. That which is of grace cannot be also of works as the Apostle reasoneth Rom. 11.6 if it be of grace it is no more of workes or else grace were no more grace c. but eternall life is of grace Ergo not of workes Answer 1. The Apostle may either here speake of the naturall workes of men and so such workes do destroie grace not of the workes of grace which are indeed meritorious of eternall life 2. the Apostle speaketh of election which is of grace non propter hominum opera prvoisa not vpon the foresight of mans workes Thus Pererius disput 8. numer 48. Contra. 1. The Apostle excludeth euen the workes of grace for the question is of good workes not of
the law wrought in him all manner of concupiscence supposeth some to haue beene before 3. Hierome epist. 121 and Origen following him do take this for the time of childhood for then sinne is dead because they haue no knowledge of it for if a child smite his father or mother it is counted no fault and when they come to yeares of discretion sinne reviveth But the reviuing of sinne sheweth that it liued before which cannot be said of children that sinne first liued and afterward died and then reviued againe 4. Augustine lib. 1. contr 2. epistol Pelag. thus vnderstandeth the Apostle that before the lawe of Moses was giuen man is said to haue liued as without lawe and sinne then to haue beene dead because it was not perfectly knowne before the lawe was giuen so also Chrysostome Haymo But if all this be referred to the time before the lawe was giuen Paul could not haue giuen instance in himselfe as he doth 5. Wherefore S. Pauls meaning is that he was aliue without the lawe that is vinere miâ—ividebar I seemed to be aliue vnto my selfe when as yet beeing a Pharisie he had not full vnderstanding of the lawe then sinne also seemed to be dead because as yet he did not feele the burthen of sinne nor his conscience did not pricke him while he contented himselfe with the outward obseruation of the lawe thus Pareus Osiander Beza Calvin And further it is here to be considered that there is a twofold death of sinne non vera a death not in truth when sinne lurketh onely and lyeth hid and sheweth not it selfe of this the Apostle speaketh here and there is mors vera a true death of sinne when we truely die vnto sinne in Christ which death the Apostle treated of before c. 6. Quest. 18. How sinne is said to haue reuiued 1. Origen here maketh mention of the error of the Pythagorian heretikes who imagine that the soules of men liued before in the bodies some of birds some of beasts when they liued as it were without a lawe and so sinne is said to reviue in the soule But this is a grosse error for in those creatures which haue no reason sinne cannot be said to liue or haue any beeing at all and therefore not to reviue 2. Bucer seemeth thus to vnderstand it that sinne liued before that is qualis coram Deâ— erat apparuit it appeared such as it was before God but now it is said to reuiue because it is made knowne to vs but the liuing and reliuing or reuiuing of sinne must be vnderstood in respect of the sinne 3. The most doe vnderstand it simply without any relation a former life of sinne capa apparere it beganne to appeare gloss ordinar interlin apparnit delictum esse it appeared to be sinne Theophylact incepit vires explicare Mart. it began to shewe the strength which sense is not much to be misliked 4. Some haue here reference vnto the first knowledge of sinne which Adam had after his transgression as Augustine vixerat aliquando in Paradiso quando contra datum praceptum satis apparebat admissum c. it liued sometime in Paradise when it sufficiently appeared by the transgression of the commandement c. but afterward it lieth as dead in children till they come to the knowledge of the law then peccatum in notitia 〈◊〉 hominis reviviscit quod in notitia primi hominis aliquando vixerat sin reviveth in the knowledge of man that is borne which sometime was aliue in the knowledge of the first man c. to this purpose August lib. 1. ad Bonifac. c. 9. which sense Pareus followeth likewise Tolet. Haymo addeth further that sinne liued not onely in Adam but in Cain who said his sinne was greater then could be forgiuen but it died in their posteritie which came vnto that error that they thought that to be no sinne which was sinne But seeing the Apostle speaketh of the reviving of sinne in himselfe we must not goe further then the Apostle to seeke out this first life of sinne 5. Wherefore as Beza well obserueth a threefold state and condition of the Apostles life is here to be considered when he liued sub ignorantiam legis vnder the ignorance of the law that sinne raigned afterward he liued sub cognitione legis vnder the knowledge of the law but onely of the outward letter obseruing the externall works onely of the law whereas he before made conscience of no sinne at this time sinne seemed to be dead he pleased himselfe in his outward obedience then he came to the sight of his sinne and so he died his conscience accused him that he was worthie of eternall death Quest. 19. How sinne is said to haue deciued v. 11. 1. The meaning is not as Methodius and Ambrose likewise Haymo that the deuill seduced Adam for not Adam but Eue was seduced as Saint Paul saith 1. Tim. 2.2 but the deceitfulnes of sinne consisteth herein 1. inducitur error practicus there is brought in a practicall error that the sinner is deceiued by the pleasantnes of the obiect thinking that to be good which is euill Tolet annot 14. as Eue was deceiued by the pleasantnes of the apple 2. operit laqueum peccati it hideth the poison and not the sinne Hugo it sheweth the baite and hideth the hooke 3. cogitationem auertit à supplicijs it turneth aside our cogitation from the punishment of sinne and perswadeth a man that either the sinne is not so great and shall haue either no punishment or but a small and so it bringeth a man to vnbeleefe not to giue credit to the word of God who threatneth sinners as the Deuill first perswaded Eva that she should not die at all Martyr 3. Some will haue this word expounded non de re ipsa sed de notitia not of the thing it selfe but of the knowledge that at length he perceiued how farre he had beene deceiued and lead out of the way Hyper. But it rather sheweth the proper effect of sinne taking occasion by the law which is to deceiue the other to acknowledge our error is the effect of the law and not of sinne as Pellican well vnderstandeth here sinne taking occasion by the law doth draw vs out of the way as a sicke man taketh occasion to act those things which are forbidden ex mandato medici by the charge giuen by the Physitian to the contrarie 4. Then the Apostle sheweth three effects of sinne taking occasion by the law first it deceiueth then it worketh all manner of concupiscence and then it killeth it bringeth death to the soule Mart. so impostura causa est concupiscentiae c. imposture or deceit is the cause of concupiscence and concupiscence of death Oecumen Thus euery man is tempted seduced and entised by his concupiscence as S. Iames saith 1.14 Quest. 20. How sinne is said to haue staine him 1. Not occisum me esse ostendit it sheweth that I was staiue and dead by the law
set against the law of the minde and the law of sinne against the law of God like as then the regenerate minde is conformable to the law of God so the vnregenerate members are captived to the law of sinne in the members which is the corruption of nature euen originall sinne 31. Quest. Why these are called lawes and why they are said the one to be in the inner man the other in the members 1. For the first 1. Chrysostome giueth this reason it is called the law of sinne propter vehementem exactam obedientiam because of the exact and forced obedience which is giuen vnto it for the laws of tyrants are so called abusive though not properly Calvin lex quia dominatur it is a law because it ruleth gloss 2. Lyranus a law is called à ligando of binding ducit membra ligata ad mala it leadeth the members and holdeth or tieth them to that which is euill they can doe no other 3. Pererius sicut lex dirigit c. as the law directeth to that which is good so the lawe of sinne to that which is euill 4. legitime factum est it commeth iustly to passe that illi non serviat suum inferius t. caro that mans inferiour that is his flesh should not serue him seeing he serued not his superiour namely God gloss ordinar Anselmus so it is called a lawe as in iustice imposed of God vpon man for his disobedience 2. For the second the one is called the lawe of the minde and inner man the other the lawe of the members and outward man 1. not that the minde and reason onely wherein the naturall lawe is written is the inner man and the sensitive part is the flesh as Lyranus Gorrhan with others which opinion is confuted before quest 26. for euen the minde is corrupt and so carnall in the vnregenerate as the Apostle speaketh of some which were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 corrupt in their minde 2. Timoth. 3.8 2. But the regenerate part is called the inner man and the vnregenerate both in soule and bodie the outward 1. because intus potissimum regnat it raigneth chiefely within and is discerned chiefely and knowne in the mind Mart. 2. quia in cordis conuersione c. because it consisteth in the heart nec patet hominum oculis and is not open and apparent vnto the sight of men Pareus in which sense it is called the hid man of the heart 1. Pet. 3.4 3. and because non externa vel mâ—â—dana quaerit it seeketh not things externall belonging to the world whereas appetitus carnis vagi sunt extra hominem the fleshly appetite is wandring and as it were without a man Calvin and as Caietane carnalibus officijs immersae sunt the faculties of the outward man are drenched as it were and wholly spent in carnall offices 4. and the regenerate part is called by the name of the inner man and the minde per excellenciam because of the excellencie for as the minde is more excellent then the bodie so is the spirit then the flesh Calvin Quest. 32. Of the Apostles exclamation O wretched man that I am 1. The word which the Apostle here vseth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth one that is perpetus pugnis fatigatus wearied with continuall combates Beza like as a champion which striuing along time is like at last to be ouercome of his aduersaries vnlesse he be helped the vulgar latine readeth O vnhappie man but that is not so fit 2. neither doth the Apostle thus crie out either as a man in despaire or doubting by whom he should be deliuered but he sheweth his great desire vox est anhelantis it is the voice of one breathing and panting desiring to be deliuered from this seruitude Calvin 3. and by this exclamation certaminis gravitatem ostendit he sheweth the greatnes of this combate out of the which he was not able to wrestle by his owne strength and if Paul were not able who is it is then a patheticall speach like vnto that Psal. 86. Who will giue me the wings as it were of a done Faius 4. And in this crying out the Apostle sheweth the state of all men in this life into what miserie they are brought by their sinne and likewise his desire longing to be deliuered therfrom Pareus Quest. 33. What the Apostle vnderstandeth by this bodie of death from the which he desireth to be deliuered 1. Ambrose by the bodie of death vnderstandeth vniuersitatem vitiorum a general collection of sinnes which he called before the bodie of sinne but there was not in the Apostle such a gathering together and confluence of all sinne 2. Pererius chargeth Calvin to agree with Ambrose who vnderstandeth by the bodie of death massam vel congeriem peccati ex qua homo constatus the masse and heape of sinne whereof man consisteth and thereupon he crieth out ô hominem impurum atque impium O wicked and filthie man that is not ashamed so to charge the Apostle c. Whereas Calvin onely saith that there were in the Apostle reliquiae peccati some reliques of sinne of that masse of sinne and corruption which is in man Calvin then and Melancthon do thus vnderstand the Apostle naturam hanc carnalem immersam esse peccato that this carnall nature is wholly drowned and drenched in sinne so also Martyr vitiatam corruptam naturam intelligit he vnderstandeth our corrupt nature but the Apostle speaketh of death here not of sinne 3. neither is the bodie of death taken here properly for sinne as Faius thinketh it was called before the bodie of sinne c. 6. and it is considered tanquam moles onus incumbens as a masse or burthen lying vpon vs so also Roloch it is taken for sinne in this place which is in the bodie and in the whole man likewise Piscator mortem intelligit peccatum inhabitans by death he vnderstandeth the sinne that dwelleth in vs and so before them Vatablus à concupiscentia c. he wisheth to be deliuered from concupiscence which did make him guiltie of eternall death and before him Photius in Oecumenius applyeth it to the corporall and sinnefull actions which bring the death of the soule But in their meaning the Apostle should say in effect who shall deliuer me from this sinnefull bodie what could an vnregenerate man haue said more 4. neither yet doe I approoue of their opinion which referre it onely to the mortalitie of the bodie as Theophylact morti subiecti subiect to death Lyranus quia sancti resurgent c. because the Saints shall rise in an immortall bodie and Pererius à corpore mortis huius from the bodie of this death that is subiect to mortalitie and corruption for the Apostle hath respect thus crying out vnto the conflict between the flesh and the spirit from which he desireth to be deliuered 5. Cassianus by the bodie of death would haue vnderstood the terrene busines and necessitie quae spirituales
opinion examined that our sinnes are remitted onely by Christs death not for the the obedience and merit of his life Controversies vpon the 5. Chapter 1. contr Whether a good conscience and integritie of life be the cause of peace with God 2. contr Against invocation of Saints 3. contr Of the certaintie of salvation and of perseverance 4. contr That the tribulation of the Saints is not meritorius though it be said to worke patience 5. contr That we are not iustified by the inherent habite of charitie 6. contr Against the heresie of impious Socinus who denieth that Christ died for our sinnes and payed the ransome for them 7. contr Against other obiections of Socinus and other impugning the fruit and efficacie of Christs death in reconciling vs to God his Father 8. con That Christs death was a full satisfaction for our sins against Socinus his cauils 9. contr That Christs death was not onely satisfactorie but meritorious against Socinus Certaine controversies touching Originall sinne 10. cont That there is originall sinne in men by the corruption of nature against the opinion of the Hebrewes 11. contr That Adaws sinne is entred into his posteritie by propagation not imitation onely against the Pelagians 12. contr Of the manner how originall sinne is propagated against the Pelagians where it is disputed whether the soule be deriued from the Parents 13. contr Against the Pelagians and Papists that originall sinne is not quite taken away in Baptisme 14. contr What originall sinne is against the Romanists and some some others and specially against them which hold it to be Adams sinne imputed onely to his posteritie 15. contr That originall sinne is not onely the privation of originall iustice 16. contr Of the wicked heresie of Marcion and Valentinus with the blasphemous Manichees 17. cont That all sinnes are mortall and worthie of death by nature 18. contr That Henoch and Elias are not yet aliue in the bodie 19. contr The Virgin Marie conceiued in originall sinne 20. contr Againe meritts 21. contr That the punishment of originall sinne is euerlasting death 22. contr That Christs essentiall iustice is not infused into vs. 23. contr Against the Patrons of vniuersall grace 24. contr Against the Popish inherent iustice 25. contr That we are iustified both by the actiue and passiue obedience of Christ. 26. contr Against the Philosophers who placed righteousnes in their owne workes 27. contr Against the Manichees and Pelagians the one giuing too much the other too little to the lawe 28. contr Of the assurance of salvation 29. contr Of the diuerse kinds of grace against the Romanists Controversies out of the 6. Chapter 1. contr Against the administring of the Sacraments in an vnknowne tongue 2. contr Concerning inherent iustice 3. contr That the Sacrament of Baptisme doth not conferre grace by the outward worke 4. contr That Baptisme serueth as well for the remission of sinnes to come as of sinnes past 5. contr Whether in Baptisme our sinnes be cleane taken away 6. contr Of the baptisme of infants 7. contr Of the assurance of salvation 8. contr That Christ shall not die in the next world againe for those which were not healed here 9. contr Against the Sacrifice of the Masse 10. contr Concerning freewill 11. contr That concupiscence remaining in the regenerate is properly sinne 12. contr Whether a righteous man may fal into any mortall or deadly sinne 13. contr Against the Manichees 14. contr Concerning inherent iustice 15. contr Against the power of freewill in the fruits of righteousnesse 16. contr Whether all death is the wages of sinne 17. contr Against the distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes 18. contr That everlasting life cannot be merited by good workes Controversies vpon the 7. Chapter 1. contr Against Purgatorie 2. contr Of the lawfulnes of second marriage 3. contr Whether the marriage bond be indissoluable before the one partie be dead 4. contr That the disparitie of profession is no cause of the dissolution of marriage 5. contr Whether the bill of diuorce permitted to the Iewes did lawfully dissolue matrimonie vnder the Law 6. contr Against the workes of propitiation 7. contr Against the Heretikes which condemned the Lawe 8. contr That we are freed by grace from the strict and rigorous observation of the lawe 9. contr That concupiscence though it haue no deliberate consent of the will is sinne forbidden by the commandement 10. contr That the commandement thou shalt not lust is but one 11. contr Against freewill Controversies out of the 8. Chapter 1. contr That concupiscence remaining euen in the regenerate is sinne and in it selfe worthie of condemnation 2. controver That none are perfect in this life 3. controver That regeneration is not the cause that there is no condemnation to the faithfull 4. contr Against the Arrians and Eunomians concerning the dietie of the holy Ghost 5. contr Against the Pelagians that a man by nature cannot keepe and fulfill the lawe 6. contr The fulfilling of the lawe is not possible in this life no not to them which are in the state of grace 7. con That not the carnall eating of Christs flesh is the cause of the resurrection but the spirituall v. 11. 8. contr Against merits 9. contr Whether in this life one by faith may be sure of salvation 10. contr Against the invocation of Saints 11. contr That a strange tongue is not to be vsed in the seruice of God 12. contr That euerlasting glorie cannot be merited 13. contr That hope iustifieth not 14. contr Whether hope relie vpon the merit of our workes 15. contr Against the naturall power and integritie of mans will 16. contr That predestination dependeth not vpon the foresight of faith or good workes 17. contr Against the opinion of Ambrosius Catharinus concerning predestination 18. contr That election is certaine and infallible of grace without merit and of some selected not generally of all 19. contr That the elect cannot full away from the grace and fauour of God and be wholly giuen ouer vnto sinne 20. contr Whether a reprobate may haue the grace of God and true iustice 21. contr That the elect by faith may be assured of euerlasting salvation Controversies out of the 9. Chapter 1. contr That succession of Bishops is no sure note of the Church of Christ. 2. contr Against the old heretikes the Manichees Arrians Nestorians confuted out of the 5. ver 3. contr Against the prophane and impious collections of Eniedinus and Socinus late heretikes 4. contr That the water in baptisme doth not sanctifie or giue grace 5. contr Against the vaine observation of Astrologers in casting of nativities 6. contr That the soules had no beeing in a former life before they came into the body 7. contr Whether the foresight of faith or workes be the cause of election 8. contr That not onely election vnto grace but vnto glorie also is onely of the good will of God 9. contr That the Apostle treateth as well of
Apostle setteth downe the sinnes of the Gentiles despitefull B. or contumelious L. doers of wrong G. proud boasters inuenters of euill things disobedient to parents without vnderstanding couenant breakers dissolute L.R. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not standing to composition without naturall affection such as can not be appeased without fidelitie L.R. truce breakers B.V. but that was said before mercilesse 31. Which knowing the iustice of God the righteousnes B. law G. right of God G.Be. iudgement of God the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iustice that they which doe such things are worthie of death Be. B.G.V. not did not vnderstand that they which doe such things are worthie of death L. for these words did not vnderstand are not in the originall nor that it condemneth to death those which doe such things T. for the word is in the plural are worthie of death but fauour G. or applaud Par. or haue pleasure in B. or patronize Be. not consent L. the word signifieth more then a bare consent those which doe them 2. The Argument and parts of the Chapter IN this Chapter the Apostle after the salutation and exordium of the Epistle falleth to prooue iustification by faith against the Gentiles first shewing their manifold sinnes and bad works whereby they were so farre from beeing iustified that thereby they incurred euerlasting damnation The parts are 1. the inscription to v. 8. 2. the exordium or introduction to the matter to v. 17. 3. the proposition and argument concerning iustification by faith v. 17.18.4 the confirmation or proofe tow 31. 1. The inscription or salutation sheweth 1. the person that saluteth and sendeth greeting which is Paul described by his office and calling in generall a seruant of Iesus Christ in speciall an Apostle to what ende to preach the Gospel v. 1. which is set forth 1. by the antiquitie v. 2.2 the excellencie of the subiect thereof Christ Iesus who is described by the singularitie of his person God and man v. 3.4 and by his office set forth in generall by the worke of our redemption which was finished by his sanctification and resurrection v. 4. and in speciall he was the author of the conuersion and calling of the Apostle v. 5.3 by the effect of the Gospel to winne obedience to the faith among the Gentiles 2. The persons saluted are the Romanes whom he setteth forth by their externall condition generall they were Gentiles speciall at Rome and spirituall what they were called by whom by Christ to what to be Saints v. 6.7 3. The salutation it selfe v. 7. he wisheth vnto them grace and peace 2. In the exordium or proeme 1. there is his gratulation or giuing of thanks for their faith v. 8.2 the testification of his loue toward them confirmed by an oath in which his loue is expressed by two effects 1. his earnest prayer to God to come vnto them v. 9.10 2. his longing desire in himselfe to see them v. 11. with the ende v. 12.3 a preoccupation of a question or purgation of himselfe that he yet came not vnto them where he sheweth 1. the lets of his purpose v. 13.2 his purpose which yet he continued to come vnto thē which is confirmed both by the end to haue some fruit among them v. 13.2 and by his calling in generall he was a debter to all the Gentiles who are set forth by distribution v. 14. in speciall and so consequently he was readie to preach the Gospel vnto them And by this mention made of the Gospel he taketh occasion to passe vnto the matter 3. The third part is the proposition that iustification is by faith where we haue first the occasion whereupon he bringeth it in I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ then the proposition it selfe that the Gospell is the power of God to saluation to euerie one that beleeueth v. 16. and the proofe thereof taken from the Prophet Habacuke v. 17. 4. The fourth part is the confirmation of this proposition that men are iustified by faith which he sheweth by this disiunction they are either iustified by faith or by workes but not by workes which he prooueth by this distribution first that the Gentiles cannot be iustified by workes in this chapter to the 17. v. of the next then that neither the Iewes can chalenge any thing by their workes thence to the ende of the 2. chapter the Gentiles cannot be iustified by their workes because by their workes beeing full of impietie and iniquitie they are made guiltie of eternall death and of the wrath of God the argument standeth thus they which are full of impietie and iniquitie are subiect to the wrath of God this proposition is expressed v. 18. But the Gentiles are such full of impietie and iniquitie Ergo the assumption or second part is prooued distributiuely first their impietie is shewed toward God to v. 28. then their iniquitie toward men v. 32. In the proofe of their impietie first the sinne is shewed then the punishment their sinne in that wittingly and against their knowledge they depraued the worship of God their knowledge is set forth both by the light of nature in them v. 19. and by the creatures v. 20. their deprauation of Gods worship is expressed in the causes their vnthankefulnesse which brought forth vanitie of minde and foolishnesse v. 21.22 the effect in worshipping corruptible things in stead of God v. 23. then the punishment followeth they were giuen vp to their hearts lusts v. 24. 2. As they depraued Gods worship wittingly against their knowledge so they did it willingly their sinne is shewed in their voluntarie forsaking of the Creator v. 25. their punishment in beeing giuen ouer both women and men to vile affections v. 26.27 Then followeth the demonstration of their iniquitie which consisted 1. both in doing things not comely which is declared both by shewing the cause thereof then beeing giuen ouer to a reprobate mind procured by their contempt and wilfull neglect of the knowledge of God v. 28. and by a particular enumeration of the diuerse sinnes which they committed the seuerall distribution whereof see afterwards qu. 72. 2. they did not onely commit such things themselues but they also fauoured and patronized such as did them v. 32. so then the conclusion must followe that the Gentiles made themselues by those their euill workes worthie of death and so consequently thereby depriued themselues of life and saluation 3. The questions and doubts discussed Quest. 1. Why Paul setteth his name before this epistle 1. Chrysostome giueth this reason why neither Moses prefixeth his name before his bookes not yet the Euangelists Mathew Marke Luke Iohn before their gospels ille quippe praesentibus scribentes c. for they writing vnto these which were present had no cause to set to their names But Paul quia longe remotis scribebat c. because he did write to those which were a farre off had reason to set to his name after the manner of epistles
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
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
his life whereby he merited the imputation of his righteousnesse for the merite of Christs passion depended vpon the holines and worthines of his person which was manifested in his life 2. There are two partes of our iustification remission of our sinnes and the making of vnrighteous the one was the proper worke of Christs death that paied the ransome due vnto our sinnes the other of his perfect holines and righteousnesse which was manifested in his rising from the dead and therefore the Apostle ioyneth them both together Rom. 4.28 Who was deliuered to death for our sinnes and is risen againe for our iustification see further of this matter Controv. 20. in c. 4. Controv. 26. Against the Philosophers who placed righteousnesse in their owne workes The heathen Philosophers and wise men were vtterly ignorant of this making of men righteous by an others obedience for they held them onely to be righteous which by continuall exercise and practise of vertue attained vnto an habite of well doing which they ascribed onely to their owne industrie and endeuour Contra. These wise heathen in many things bewrayed their grosse and palpable ignorance 1. they knew not what remission of sinnes was neither how sinne entred into the world or how it was taken away they thought that by their well doing onely afterward the former memorie of their sinnes was worne out whereas it is in God onely to blot out the remembrance of sinne 2. they ascribed their vertues such as they were to their owne free-will and endeuour whereas Christian religion teacheth vs that God is the author of all good things and that man of himselfe is not able to thinke or conceiue a good thought 3. they erred in seeking to be made righteous and iust by their owne workes which beeing imperfect and diuerse waies blemished are not able to iustifie vs before God who is absolutely perfect true it is that euery Christian must endeuour to liue well and aduance his faith with fruitfull workes but it is Christs perfect obedience and not our owne which is imperfect that maketh vs truly righteous before God Controv. 27. Against the Manichees and Pelagians the one giuing too much the other too little to the law v. 30. The law entred that the offence should abound c. the Manichees vrge these and such like places against the law as though it were euill not distinguishing betweene the proper effects of the law which it worketh of it selfe as the Prophet Dauid expresseth them Psal. 19. It conuerteth the soule giueth wisedome to the simple giueth light to the eyes c. and the effects of the law which it worketh by reason of the weaknesse of man as it serueth to reueale the knowledge of sinne and to make it more abound But the Apostle himselfe that here thus testifieth of the law confesseth that in it selfe the law is holy Rom. 7.12 for although we are not able to performe that which the law commandeth yet the things are holy iust and good which the law requireth and the desire of the godly longeth after them As the Manichees detracted from the law so the Pelagians ascribed too much vnto it for they held that the law was sufficient to saluation and that if a man did once vnderstand what was to be done by the strength of nature he could doe it the law then serued to reueale vnto them the will of God and there owne strength sufficed in their opinion to performe it They beeing further vrged that the grace of God was necessarie did in words acknowledge it but by grace they vnderstood first the nature of man which was first giuen him of God then the doctrine onely and knowledge of the law The Popish schoolemen differed not much from this opinion who hled that a man by the strength of nature may keepe the precepts of the law quoad substantiam operis in respect of the substance of the worke but not quoad intentionem praecipientis according to the intention of the lawegiuer But it is euident out of the Scripture that no not the regenerate much lesse naturall men are able to keepe the commandements of God perfitly as S. Paul sheweth by his owne example Rom. 7. And if it were as the Pelagians held that the lawe were sufficient to saluation then Christ died in vaine Controv. 28. Of the assurance of saluation v. 21. Grace might raigne by righteousnesse vnto eternall life c. Hence it is euident that life is a consequent of righteousnesse as death is of sinne and that the faithfull are as sure to obtaine life if they haue righteousnesse as Adam and Adams children were sure to die after they haue sinned So Chrysostome vpon this place collecteth well Noli itaque cum iustitiam habeas de vita dubitare vitam enim excellit iustitia mater quippe illius est do not therefore doubt of life and saluation if thou haue iustice for iustice excelleth life beeing the mother thereof This is contrarie to the erroneous and vncomfortable doctrine of the moderne Papists that it is presumption for any man to be assured of his saluation see further hereof elswhere Synops. Centur. 4. err 25. Controv. 29 Of the diuerse kinds of grace against the Romanists v. 21. So might grace also raigne c. The Popish Schoolemen haue certaine distinctions of grace which either are not at all to be admitted or else they must be first qualified before they can be receiued 1. Of the first kind is that distinction of grace that there is gratia gratis data gratia gratum faciens grace freely giuen and grace that maketh vs acceptable vnto God two exceptions may be taken hereunto 1. there is no grace but is freely giuē otherwise it were not of grace that is of fauour but they in making one kind of grace onely that is freely giuen they insinuate that there are other graces which are not freely giuen 2. the grace which maketh vs acceptable to God they hold to be a grace or habite infused for the which we are accepted wherein they erre in ascribing that to a created or infused grace which is onely the worke of the free grace and fauour of God toward vs this word grace is either taken actively for the loue grace and fauour of God or passiuely for those seuerall gifts and graces which are wrought in vs by the fauour of God the first grace is as the cause the other graces are the effects the first is without vs the other within vs the first is the originall grace in God the other are created graces Now we hold that we are made acceptable vnto God onely by the first grace of God toward vs which is grounded in Christ the Romanists ascribe our acceptance with God to the other see further hereof Synops. Centur. 4. err 27. 2. Of the other sort is the distinction of grace operans cooperans working and working together as the working grace is that which alone changeth the will and maketh it willing
harder to say that the deuill had dominion then death ouer Christ. 3. Origen hath an other exposition that Christ dominatum pertulerit mortis quia formam servi susceperat did beare the dominion of death because he tooke vpon him the forme of a seruant and vpon all such death hath dominion but it was not necessarie that Christ should haue died though he had taken vpon him our nature seeing he was without sinne which causeth death 4. Wherefore death is said to haue had dominion quia sponte volens se subiecit mâ—rti because he willingly submitted himselfe to death for our sinne Mart. Calvin Quest. 14. How Christ is said to haue died to sinne v. 10. 1. Hilarie lib. 9. de Trinitat thus readeth that which died died once to sinne and vnderstandeth it of Christs bodie making the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a relatiue of the neuter gender so also Laurentius Valla and Iacobus Stapulens but this would seeme to fauour the Nestorian heresie that diuideth Christs person to say that Christ died not but his bodie died and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be taken for the coniunction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that he died as Galath 2.20 in that now I liue to this purpose Erasmus Beza 2. For the meaning Hilarie thus expoundeth Christ died to sinne quia mortuus corpore because he died in the bodie wherein was the similitude of sinne lib. 9. de Trinit so also Augustine in Enchirid. 3. Haymo thus mortuus est semel peccato id est semper he died once to sinne that is alwaies because he neuer had sinne at all 4. Some vnderstand sinne as the cause wherefore Christ died that the sinnes of the world were the cause why Christ died so Ambrose he died for sinne that is for or because of sinners serm 18. in Psal. 18. 5. But the better sense is that Christ died to sinne that is tollendo to take away sinne so Chrysostome mortuus est vt illud tollerat he died for sinne to take it away Christ died otherwise to sinne then we doe ille expiando nos amitiendo he to expiate and purge our sinnes we to leaue it Pareus Quest. 15. How Christ is said now to liue vnto God ver 10. 1. Oecumenius thus vnderstandeth he liueth to God eo quod sit Deus because he is God that is by his diuine vertue 2. Pareus thus ad gloriam Dei patris he liueth to the glorie of God his father that by his life the Church should be glorified but thus Christ liued in the dayes of his flesh both by the power of God and to the glorie of his father as our Blessed Sauiour himselfe saith Ioh. 6.57 As the liuing father hath sent me so liue I by the father 3. Neither is Christ said so to liue vnto God as we are said in the next verse to be aliue vnto God that is by the spirit of grace for so Christ liued vnto God all the dayes of his flesh 4. Chrysostome thus expoundeth it to liue to God sine fine vinere is to liue without ende that is eternally neuer any more to die 5. But not onely the eternitie of Christs life is hereby expressed but the glorie and maiestie also as Haymo interpreteth he liueth in gloriam paternae maiestatis in the glorie of the maiestie of his father as Reuel 18. And am aliue but was dead and behold I am aliue for euermore c. 6. And by this phrase is expressed the indissoluble vnion which Christ hath with God the father the Apostle hereby doth not onely signifie that he now liueth in eternall happines sed indivulse Deo haerere but is inseparably ioyned vnto God Martyr Quest. 16. Of these words v. 11. likewise thinke yee c. 1. Likewise thinke ye 1. Origen saith the Apostle vseth this word because this death which he speaketh of namely dying to sinne in cogitatione consistit non in effectu consisteth in the cogitation not in any externall effect 2. Chrysostome because that which he speaketh of non potest ad oculum repraesentari cannot be represented to the eye but is apprehended by faith 3. Haymo giueth this sense they must in memoriam reducere often bring to remembrance and bethinke themselues that they are dead to sinne so also Tolet annot 15. and Faius 4. but the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth rather collect yee gather ye it is the inference of the conclusion from the head to the members that we are certainely dead by the commemoration of his death so is the word vsed c. 3.28 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we conclude Beza Pareus 2. Dead to sinne but aliue to God Some doe interpret this of the life of the Saints in the resurrection when they shall liue to God for euer neuer to die any more but the Apostle speaketh of the life of grace as the next verse sheweth 3. In Iesus Christ c. 1. Origen maketh this the sense to liue in righteousnesse holines peace is to liue in Christ because Christ is all these and to the same purpose Chrysostome he that hath obtained Christ hath receiued euery vertue and grace with him 2. Gorrhan referreth it to the imitation of Christ making the seuere parts of Christs life an example of so many degrees of our spirituall life to his conception answeareth propositum the purpose of newe life to his natiuitie our regeneration to his death our labour in dying to sinne to his sepulture cessatio vitiorum the ceasâ—ing of sinne to his resurrection answeareth nova vita iustorum the newe life of the righteous to his asscention processus virtâ—tum our proceeding in vertue to his sitting at the right hand of God gloria beatorum the glorie of the Blessed Saints 3. But here is more signified then a similitude or conformitie to and an imitation of Christ the Apostle expresseth the author and efficient cause of our dying vnto sinne and liuing vnto God namely Christ Iesus Christo auxiliante Christ helping vs Oecumen Christi opere by the worke of Christ gloss interlin per Christum mediatorem by Christ our Mediator Lyran. as the Apostle saith Galath 2.20 I liue by faith in the Sonne of God Bucer Pareus with others Quest. 17. How sinne is said not to raigne c. ver 12. 1. Chrysostome and Theodorets obseruation seemeth here to be somewhat curious that the Apostle speaketh of the raigning not of the tyrannizing of sinne the difference betweene which two is this the one is of necessitie the other is voluntarie he would not haue them willingly to submit themselues in obedience vnto sinne although it doe play the tyrant in suggesting euill thoughts and desires yet they should resist them and not suffer sinne to haue a peaceable kingdome to this purpose Theodoret But this distinction is not necessarie for the kingdome of sinne in man is a meere tyrannie the kingdome properly in man is peculiar to the spirit because sinne vsurpeth vpon them that by right are
and iustice are contrarie therefore they are not both naturally in God 4. Naturall properties are not vnequally in God but his iustice and mercie are vnequall for his mercie exceedeth his iustice 5. Mercie is nothing els but a griefe conceived vpon an others miserie but there is no such thing in God Contra. Before these arguments be answeared these considerations must be premised 1. that mercie is otherwise in God then in man in man indeede it is a griefe or compassion conceiued vpon an others miserie but in God it is onely a propension and readinesse of the diuine will to helpe those which are in miserie 2. Mercie in God either signifieth the inclination power facultie and propertie to shewe mercie and this is naturall in God or the act and exercising of that propertie toward the creature and this is so naturall in God as yet it is directed by his will 3. a thing is said to be naturall two wayes either that which onely proceedeth from the instinct of nature as the fire naturally burneth or that whereunto nature inclineth yet not without direction of the will as thus a man is said to speake to vnderstand naturally So God is both wayes naturally mercifull in himselfe the first way toward his creatures the second now to the arguments we answear 1. The Apostle speaketh not of the naturall propertie but of the act of mercie which is directed by the will of God 2. all the naturall properties which are in God he alwaies vseth not nor towards all as his iustice power long animitie mercie they are alwaies in God but he exerciseth them as it pleaseth him 3. iustice and mercie are not contrarie but crueltie is opposed to mercie neither is there any contrarietie in God but in the effects in diuerse subiects as the Sunne with the same heat mollifieth the waxe and hardeneth the clay 4. neither are these properties vnequall in God but the effects and acts onely are vnequall as it pleaseth God to dispose in his freewill 5. humane mercie is such as is described but the diuine mercie is of an other nature as hath beene shewed now the contrarie arguments that mercie is a naturall propertie in God are these 1. The Scripture describeth God by his mercie Exod. 34. he is called the father of mercie rich in mercie God is described by his naturall properties 2. all vertues in God are essentiall and naturall but mercie is one of Gods vertues 3. iustice is naturall in God but mercie is a part of Gods vniuersall iustice 4. mercie and compassion is naturall in men they which haue it not are called inhumane they are beasts rather then men therefore much more is it naturall in God for euery good thing in the creature proceedeth from the fountaine of goodnes in the Creator See more hereof in Pareus dub 12. Controv. 13. Whether the mercie of God in the forgiuenesse of sinne be an effect of Gods free and absolute will onely and be not grounded vpon Christ against the heresie of Socinus and Ostorodius v. 18. He hath mercie on whom he will Blasphemous Socinus and Ostorodius a Samosatenian heretike directly impugning the eternall dietie of Christ by occasion of these words doe affirme that God of his free mercie without any satisfaction purchased by Christs death forgiueth sinnes vnto the penitent Socinus first maketh these and such like obiections 1. The Apostle here saith he hath mercie on whom he will therefore of his owne will be remitteth sinnes without Christ. 2. He doth forgiue sinnes for his owne sake Isai. 43.25 therefore not for Christ. 3. If God should forgiue sinnes for Christs satisfaction then both mercie and iustice should be seene at once in the worke of our saluation by Christ. 4. God may remit sinnes without satisfaction for he may depart from his right and remit of his owne as it pleaseth him 5. God requireth onely repentance and innocencie of life in them whose sinnes are pardoned and he forgiueth onely for that which he requireth 6. Many examples are extant in the old Testament of sinnes pardoned and mercie shewed without Christ as in Abel Henoch and others that pleased God by faith beleeuing onely that God is that he is a rewarder of the righteous Heb. 11.6 therefore without Christ. 7. God promiseth Ierem. 31. to be mercifull vnto their iniquites and to remember them no more but where he requireth satisfaction for sinne he remembreth it and is not mercifull vnto it 8. We are commanded one to forgiue an other as God in Christ forgaue vs but we must forgiue without any satisfaction Ergo so God forgaue vs. 9. The remission of the debt excludeth all payment and satisfaction for it to this purpose Socinus lib. de Servator The other impious heretike thus also obiecteth 1. Gods loue is set forth to vs in Scripture before Christ died for vs Ioh. 3.16 Ephe. 1.4 but Christs satisfaction sheweth that God was offended with vs before 2. God did remit our sinnes freely by grace Rom. 3.24 but grace and satisfaction are contrarie 3. This doctrine of satisfaction by Christs death maketh God cruell that would not receiue mankind vnto his fauour but by the most cruell death of his Sonne 4. It maketh God a Tyrant in punishing the innocent for offenders 5. The Sonne should be more mercifull then his Father for he forgiueth without satisfaction so doth not his Father 6. If Christ had truely satisfied for vs he should haue suffered eternall death and so neuer haue risen againe which had beene impossible these and other such obiections this wicked Ostorodius hath in a booke written in the Germane tongue against Tradelius cited by Pareus dub 13. Contra. Before we come to answear these obiections the state of the question must first be opened 1. the question here is not of the power propertie and facultie of shewing mercie which is naturall in God and absolute in him without any condition 2. but of the act and exercising of this propertie which is either generall toward all creatures and toward all men both good and bad vpon whom he suffereth the sunne to shine and the raine to fall Matth. 5.45 or speciall toward the elect in giuing them his grace and forgiuing their sinnes whereof the Apostle speaketh Tit. 3.4 When the bountifulnes and loue of God our Sauiour toward men appeared c. according to his mercie be saued vs. 3. this speciall act of Gods mercie must be considered two wayes according to the causes foregoing which are none other but onely the good pleasure of God no merit of any creature no not of Christ himselfe was the cause of his mercie toward the elect but as the Apostle saith he hath mercie on whom he will but there are certaine conditions which doe accompanie or followe this free act of Gods loue and mercie for the effecting of the worke thereof in the sanctification and glorification of the elect which are these three the ransome made by Christ faith in the
Redeemer and our conuersion and turning to God which conditions God receiueth not of vs but conferreth vpon vs the first without vs the two other he worketh in vs that all may be of grace these things beeing thus promised the contrarie arguments are thus answeared 1. The Apostle speaketh of Gods first decree and purpose to shewe mercie in electing some by his grace which indeede is an absolute act of Gods will without any other motiue and if we vnderstand it of Gods mercie in forgiuenesse of sinne it is his will also it should not be done without Christ Ioh. 6.40 This is his will that euerie one which beleeueth â—â— the Sonne should haue eternall life the argument then followeth not God hath mercie on whom he will therefore without Christ. 2. Therefore God forgiueth sinnes for his owne sake because he forgiueth them for Christ who is the Iehovah and eternall God that forgiueth sinnes 3. Neither are Gods iustice and mercie shewed in the same subiect Gods iustice is seene in the satisfaction of his Sonne but his mercie toward vs. 4. 1. The argument followeth not God can therefore he will 2. neither doth that rule alwaies hold that one may remit of his owne right as much as he will this must be added if it be without wrong done to an other as the Parent cannot remit vnto his child feare and obedience because this is against the lawe of iustice and so against God 3. so in this case God cannot remit sinnes without some satisfaction not in respect of his infinite power but of his iustice which is not to suffer his Maiestie to be violated without iust punishment for this were to denie himselfe 5. 1. Neither is it true that God onely requireth of sinners repentance for the punishment due vnto sinne must be satisfied for which Christ did for vs. 2. neither if innocencie of life were sufficient is it in our power to performe it 3. and further God doth not pardon sinne for that which he requireth of vs it is his mercie in Christ for the which he pardoneth that which he requireth of vs is a condition to be performed by vs not the cause 6. It is false that the faith of Abel and Henoch and of other holy Patriarkes had no relation to Christ for although expresse mention be not made thereof yet alwaies it must be vnderstood for the Apostle saith Coloss. 1.23 that it pleased God by Christ to reconcile all things to himselfe and all the promises in him are yea and Amen 2. Cor. 1.20 therefore the promises made to the fathers were grounded vpon Christ and they were reconciled vnto God by no other way then by faith in him 7. If God had required satisfaction of our selues for sinne then indeede had our sinne beene remembred but although Christ hath satisfied for our sinnes yet to vs they are freely forgiuen and so not remembred any more 8. The Apostle saith Ephes. 4.32 Forgiuing one an other as God for Christs sake forgaue vs though Christ hath satisfied for vs yet God requireth no satisfaction at our hands therefore herein we are to imitate God to forgiue one an others priuate offences without satisfaction as God forgaue vs But in publike offences and ciuill debts this rule holdeth not for if in such trespasses no satisfaction should be made the course of iustice should be perverted 9. The remitting of the debt excludeth all solution and paiment of debt by the partie to whom the debt is remitted and not otherwise and so the Lord requireth not of vs any satisfaction or solution of our debt which is discharged by Christ. The like answear may be made vnto the other obiections 1. God loued the elect with an eternall loue and herein appeared his loue that he sent his Sonne to die for the elect yet in respect of their sinfull estate they had neede of a reconciler so they were eternally beloued in Gods election and yet in respect of their present state God was offended with them as a father that purposeth to make his sonne his heire may yet in the meane time be angrie with him for his misdemenour See before c. 5. coher 7. a more full answear 2. We are saued freely by grace notwithstanding the redemption by Christ as the Apostle sheweth Rom. 3.24 if satisfaction had beene required of vs or if we were to haue ransomed our selues it had not beene freely by grace but now it is 3. God was not delighted in the death of his Sonne in that simply he was put to cruel death but in that thereby all the elect were saued which sheweth not crueltie but mercie in God in accepting the death of one for all 4. Neither was Christ forced the innocent to die for sinners but he willingly offered himselfe to die for vs therein was no tyrannie at all 5. As though God the Father and God the Sonne are not all one in substance the same mercie proceedeth from them both and the Sonne as he is God remitteth not without the satisfaction of the Mediator 6. Eternall death is to be considered in the infinitenesse and greatnes of the torments of soule and bodie and in the eternitie and euerduring thereof Christ did endure the one that is vnspeakeable torments in bodie and soule for vs but not the other because of the dignitie of his person which suffered and the necessitie of the worke of our redemption which he perfected which could not haue beene performed if eternitie of punishment had beene vpon the redeemer inflicted Now how contrarie this blasphemous assertion of these heretikes is to the Scriptures is euerie where euident for there is no truth that hath more plentifull euidence out of the Scriptures then that Christ by his death did satisfie for our sinnes and by faith in him we obtaine remission of our sinnes and not otherwise as Galat. 1.4 Which gaue himselfe for our sinnes that he might deliuer vs from this present euill world Galat. 3.13 Christ hath redeemed vs from the curse of the law when he was made a curse for vs Eph. 1.7 By whom we haue redemption thorough his blood euen the forgiuenes of sinnes 1. Pet. 2.23 Who his owne selfe bare our sinnes in his bodie vpon the tree c. 1. Pet. 3.18 Christ hath once suffered for our sinnes the iust for the vniust that he might bring vs to God c. and an hundreth such places and more may be produced out of the old and new Testament for the confirmation of this truth he that is desirous to see more of this matter I referre him to learned Pareus treatise dub 13. vpon this chapter Controv. 14. Against the maintainers of Vniuersall grace v. 18. He hath mercie on whom he will and whom he will he hardeneth Hence then it is inferred that he hath decreed to haue mercie on some and not vpon others then they are in error which thinke that God doth indifferently offer grace to all and that he hath elected all vnto life if
in fulfilling and performing it he hath perfited the ceremoniall law beeing the substance whereof the ceremonies were but shadowes he hath performed the morall law both in his actiue obedience in fulfilling euery part thereof by his holy life and by his passiue obedience in bearing the curse and punishment due by the law for vs and in this sense Augustine saith Christus sinis legis perficiens non interficiens Christ is the perfiting not the destroying end of the law tract 55. in Iohn Of all these the second and last interpretation are most agreeable to the scope of the Apostle who in these words bringeth a proofe of that which he said before that the Iewes were ignorant of the righteousnesse of God because they were ignorant of Christ the true end of the law both directly in respect of Christ who fulfilled the law and was in all things obedient vnto it which thing the law intended and indirectly in respect of vs whose weakenesse it discouereth in not beeing able to keepe the law and so directeth vs to Christ beeing therein a schoolemaster to vs as the Apostle saith Gal. 3. â—â— Quest. 7. How Christ is said to be the end of the law seeing the law requireth nothing but the iustice of workes The law is taken two wayes 1. more largely for the whole doctrine contained in Moses and the Prophets and in this sense the law directly maketh mention of Christ as in this place Saint Paul doth prooue the righteousnesse of faith by the testimonie of Moses as our Sauiour himselfe also saith had you beleeued Moses you would haue beleeued me he wrote of â—â— Ioh. 5.46 2. The law is taken more strictly for the precepts onely of the morall law wherein although faith in Christ be not directly commanded yet it is implied and intended in which sense Christ is said to be the end of the law in these three respects 1. in respect of his personall obedience and righteousnesse which the law required 2. in regard of the satisfaction by Christs death for the punishment due by the law 3. and in iustifying vs by faith in him that is our righteousnesse whereunto the law bringeth vs as a schoolemaster leading vs vp by the hand as the glasse shewing the spottes doth admonish the beholder to mend them so the law discouering our sinnes sendeth vs to seeke out the onely true Physitian to heale them Quest. 8. That Christ is not the end of the law that we by grace in him should be iustified in keeping of the law 1. Pererius saith that Christ is said to be the end that is the perfection and consummatioÌ„ of the law quia fide in Christo impetratur gratia c. because that by faith in Christ grace is obtained to fulfill and keepe the law disput 1. numer 2. and Stapleton Antidot p. 617. insisteth vpon the same point that by this fulfilling of the law which we obtaine by faith in Christ we are iustified Contra. 1. We denie not but this also is one of the ends of our comming to Christ to shew our obedience in keeping Gods commandements as Zacharie saith in his song Luk. 2.75 That we beeing deliuered out of the hand of our enemies should serue him c. in holines and righteousnesse all the daies of our life yet this is neither required as the principall end which is to be iustified by faith in Christ as here the Apostle saith neither is this our obedience enioyned to that end that we should be iustified thereby for we are iustified by faith before we can bring forth any fruits of obedience and therefore by such workes as follow our iustification we are not iustified and beside our obedience is imperfect and can not iustifie vs in the sight of God but this our obedience is necessarie to shew our conformitie vnto Christ and to iustifie our thankfulnes for the benefit receiued by Christ and to be a pledge and an assurance of our perfect regeneration in the next life 2. Herein then Christ is the end of the law that we by faith in him which hath fulfilled the law perfitly should be iustified without the fulfilling of the law in our selues 1. for the Apostle saith not Christ is the end of the law to euery one fulfilling the law but to euery one that beleeueth 2. this end would take away the force of Christs death for to giue vs grace to fulfill the law our selues it was not necessarie that Christ should haue died for he might by his diuine power without his death haue conferred that grace vpon vs. 3. and againe if Christ gaue vs power to keepe the law our selues this were to establish our owne righteousnesse for that is our owne righteousnesse which is performed by vs though not by our owne strength but the doctrine of faith doth not establish our owne righteousnesse Quest. 9. What life temporall or spirituall is promised to the keepers of the law v. 5. 1. Origen vpon this place thinketh that the law onely promised to the obseruers thereof temporall not eternall life so likewise Theodoret Ambrose Anselme Lyranus Tolet annot 5. Pererius disput 1. numer 3. doe vnderstand it of escaping onely corporall death which was inflicted vpon the transgressors of the law as idolaters adulterers murtherers But this were no great benefit seeing many vngodly men might be free from these offences which by the law were punished by death and yet in other points might be offenders against the law 2. Augustine lib. de spirit lit c. vnderstandeth it of the spirituall life of faith and iustification thereby per fidem concilians iustificationem facet legis iustitiam vivat in ea c. he that hath obtained iustification by faith doth the righteousnesse of the law and may liue thereby But this were to confound the law and the Gospel whereas the Apostle here speaketh onely of the righteousnesse which the law requireth 3. The law then promised eternall life vnto the obseruers thereof but that it was impossible for any perfitly to keepe the law so Chrysostome well interpreteth that men should haue beene iustified in keeping of the law if it had beene possible but because it was not possible iustitia illa intercidit that iustice falleth to ground our Sauiour also saith If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandements Matth. 19.16 meaning eternall life as the young man had asked the question what he should doe to haue eternall life Pererius answeareth that this must be vnderstood of a iust man which out of a liuely charitie keepeth the commandements But Christ there speaketh not of the iustice of faith working by loue but of such keeping and obseruing of the commandements as the law required if any could haue attained vnto it for as the question was not of beleeuing but of doing what shall I doe so Christ maketh his answer of such iustice as was required by the law 4. But if the law doe promise and propound eternall life to the obseruers
esse activam causam peccati that God is the actiue cause of sinne Antid p. 715. and the like slaunder is vttered by Becanus p. 6. that the God of the Calvinists is author peccati the author of sinne See more hereof c. 9. quest 18. 11. Quest. Of the meaning of those words Let their table be made a snare c. v. 9. 1. Concerning the place here cited out of Psal. 69. v. 22. Origen obserueth that the Apostle doth not tie himselfe to so many words for some he addeth as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a net or trappe which neither the Hebrew nor the Septuagint haue and some he omitteth as coram ipsis before them so also Erasmus but Beza obserueth that this latter is not omitted for vnto them is equivalent to before them further both Martyr Beza Pareus Calvin thinke that the Hebrew word lishlomius signifieth pacifica their prosperous things which the Septuagint read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a retribution as though the word were leshillomiâ—â— retributions but Iunius and Pagnine doe there interpret the world lishlominâ— retributions because of the preposition lamed being set before which signifieth for a recompence or retribution 2. Now for the meaning of the words 1. Origen by their table vnderstandeth the Scriptures which were a scandale vnto them in that they peruerted them to their owne hurt as where the Scriptures describe the Messiah to be a glorious deliuerer which must be vnderstood spiritually they were offended because they looked for a temporall deliuerance 2. Haymo doth vnderstand by the table collatio verberum in mensa their conferences together at the table how to take Christ but in this sense their table was a snare to others rather then to themselues 3. Lyranus doth thus distinguish these three their table because a snare in perverting the Scriptures and a trappe when they were taken by Titus and Vespasian and a scandale when to the infamie and opprobrie of that nation their nobles were put to torment and shamefull death by the Romanes 4. But the better interpretation is this by the table as Chrysostome expoundeth we vnderstand omnes illorum delicia all things wherein they delighted as their prosperitie their publike state their Temple Calvin the hauing of the Scriptures sacrifices and such other spirituall or temporall blessings the Prophet prayeth that all may be turned to their hurt and he vseth three similitudes let them be a snare as birds are taken when they thinke to find foode a trappe as beasts are caught and entrapped in the net and a scandale as that whereat men doe stumble in their going and running and fall 3. For a recompence vnto them 1. The interlin glosse vnderstandeth the retribution of eternall death 2. Haymo and Lyranus haue speciall reference to Christ that as they would haue blotted out his name so their name is perished as they killed him so they were killed of the Romanes 3. but it generally rather sheweth a retalion and recompense in their iust punishment for all the wrongs and iniuries which they had offered to the seruants of God and specially to Christ himselfe Pareus 4. Let their eyes be darkened and bowe downe their backe 1. Lyranus by the darkening of the eyes interpreteth the error of their vnderstanding and by the bowing of their backes the error of their will 2. Gorrhan vnderstandeth error in faith and manners 3. deprime â—â—eribus conscientiae hold them downe with the burthen of their conscience Pellic. aeterna servitute opprime oppresse them and keepe them vnder with euerlasting seruitude Melancthon following Chrysostome and Theophylact. 4. But the generall sense is better that they are deprived of all strength both inward and outward for the backe or loines as it is in the Hebrewe signifieth the strength so their eyes are blinded they are voide of all vnderstanding in spirituall things and they are likewise depriued of all grace and strength both spirituall they haue no endeauour or will to that which is good Genevens Pareus as also temporall their authoritie and gouernment is taken from them they liue in perpetuall seruitude Gryneus Quest. 12. Whether it be lawfull to vse any imprecation as Dauid doth here 1. Origen seemeth to be of opinion that it is not lawfull and therefore he hath here a strange interpretation he thinketh the Prophet prayeth not against the Israelites but for them that their eyes might be darkened ne videant perversa that they see not peruerse things as it had beene happie for Marcion Basilides and Valentinus and other heretikes that they had not seene those perverse errors which they held But seeing both that which goeth before let their table be made a snare c. and that which followeth bowe downe their backe are imprecations made against them how can this comming between be taken to be a praier for them 2. Augustine agreeing in the same opinion that no imprecation is lawfull yet followeth an other imprecation he thinketh that the Prophet spake this non optantis voto sed spiritu providentis not as with a desire of one that wisheth but with the spirit of one foreseeing and foretelling what should happen lib. 1. de serm Dom. in monte so Haymo haec verba non optantis voto sed praedicentis officio dicuntur these words are not vttered with a wishing desire but by way of prediction c. so also the ordinar gloss and these reasons may be alleadged against imprecations 1. Our Blessed Sauiour biddeth vs to pray for our enemies Matth. 5.46 S. Paul also saith Rom. 12.14 Blesse them which persecute you blesse I say and curse not c. 2. The example of our Sauiour is against imprecations who prayed for his enemies he cursed them not 3. Yet we haue some forren examples of such as refused to make imprecations as Baâ—â—â—â— would not curse the people of Israel and a certaine woman Priest of Athens could not be hired to curse Alcibiades making this answer that it was her office to pray for other not to curse them much more should Christians abstaine from cursing 3. Wherefore for the solution of this question these distinctions must be premised 1. the cause must be considered whether it be priuate which concerneth ones person onely in which cause it is vnlawful to curse or whether it be publik concerning the glory of God wherein imprecations are vsed as S. Peter sentenced Ananias to death Act. 5. laid a curse vpoÌ„ S. Magus Act. 8. S. Paul cursed Elymas the sorcerer Act. 13. or it may be a priuate cause yet ioined with the glory of God as Elisha cursed the children which called him bald head 1. King 2. 2. The condition calling of them which vse imprecations must be considered whether they do it of a priuate affection which is vnlawfull or of a propheticall spirit as the Prophets Apostles did as it is said of Paul that wheÌ„ he cursed Elymas he was ful of the H. Ghost Act. 13.9 herein they as Prophets
voluntarie connivence or negligence of the keeper or some other way as it were made by God for so we reade that Peter escaped out of prison the doores beeing opened by the Angel before him Act. 12. but this is not rashly to be done for the aforesaid reasons but vpon good warrant when God shall as it were make a way for a man to set him free Quest. 8. What kind of iudgement they procure to themselues which resist the magistrate 1. Whereas the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth both condemnation as Beza damnation as the vulgar Latine iudgement as the Syrian interpreter punishment as Piscator some take this to be vnderstood not of eternall punishment but of the temporall inflicted by the Magistrate when as the powers beeing offended doe either punish rebells with death or cast them into prison Haymo so also Vatablus 2. Lyranus contrariwise interpreteth it de aeterna morte of euerlasting death not excluding also temporall punishment so also Martyr 3. Some vnderstand poenam punishment generally without limitation Olevian Piscator Iunius annot 4. Some will haue the punishment in this life vnderstood whether inflicted by the Magistrate or by God himselfe who will take reuenge for the transgression of his owne ordinance as is euident in the fearefull punishment of rebellious Cote Dathan and Abiram Numb 16. Pareus Gualter and so before them Chrysostome and Theophylact cum à Deo tum ab hominibus poenas daturum he shall endure punishment both from God and men 5. But all these are better ioyned together that such as resist the Magistrate are punished by the publike lawes and God often taketh reuenge also beside they make themselues guiltie of euerlasting damnation which is due vnto the transgression of Gods commandement and the violating of his ordinance Faius 6. Tolet hath here this conceite by himselfe it is said they shall receiue iudgement because beeing not restrained by the Magistrate whom they stand not in awe of they cast themselues into those sinnes for the which damnationem incurrunt they incurre damnation but here the Apostle speaketh of that punishment which is due for the resisting of Gods ordinance 7. Pareus here obserueth well these two things that the purposes and endeauours of such are frustrate and beside they shew their madnes and foolishnes in beeing accessarie to their owne punishment for it is an vnwise part for one to procure his owne hurt Quest. 9. How the Prince is not to be feared for good workes but for euill 1. Concerning the words in the originall they stand thus Princes are not a feare of good workes and so the vulgar Latine that is for good workes as the Syrian interpreter putteth it in the datiue bonis operibus to good workes so also Tertullian readeth in scorpian and Beza followeth this sense and the meaning is that they are not a terror or to be feared ratione boni operis by reason of the good worke Lyran. or his qui sunt boni operis to them which are of good workes Gorrhan so before him Chrysostome bene agentibus to those which doe well good workes are here to be vnderstood not as Diuines take them for morall workes but for ciuill workes agreeable to the publike lawes which are either against the diuine lawe whereof the Magistrate ought to haue speciall care or against the positiue constitution Pareus 2. Touching the occasion of these words Tolet will haue them to depend of the former sentence and to shewe the cause why they which resist the powers doe receiue iudgement to themselues because they contemne the Magistrate who is ordained to restraine euill workes and so they without restraint fall into euill and so incurre punishment but the better coherence is to make this an other argument to mooue obedience to the higher powers from the vtilitie thereof as Chrysostome or à duplici sine from the twofold ende of magistracie which is for the punishment of the euill and praise of the good 3. They which doe good workes must feare the Magistrate still but timore reverentiae non seruili c. with a reuerent not a seruile feare as the malefactors doe which hauing a guiltie conscience are afraide of punishment to be inflicted by the Magistrate Gorrhan Quest. 10. What it is to haue praise of the power v. 3. 1. Whereas often it falleth out that the Magistrate doth punish the good and encourage the wicked how then is this true which the Apostle saith doe well and thou shalt haue the praise of the same the answear is that first we must distinguish betweene the power it selfe and authoritie which is ordained of God to these ends for the reward of the good and punishment of the euill and the abuse of this power secondly although gouernours abusing their power do offend in some particulars yet in generall more good commeth by their gouernement then hurt as vnder cruell Nero there was some execution of iustice for Paul was preserued by the Romane captaine from the conspiracie of the Iewes and appealed vnto Caesar which was then Nero and his appeale was receiued 2. It will be obiected that euen vnder good Princes where there is punishment for offenders yet the righteous receiue not their reward 1. Origen thus vnderstandeth these words thou shalt haue praise of the same c. that is in the day of iudgement ex istis legibus landem habebis apud Deum by these lawes thou shalt haue praise with God for keeping them c. but the Apostle speaketh not of hauing praise by the lawes but of the power that is the Magistrate 2. Augustine thinketh it is one thing to be praised of the power that is to be commended and rewarded by it an other laudem habere ex illa to haue praise of it that is exhibit se laude dignum he sheweth himselfe worthie of praise whether he be actually praised or not of the power Tolet alloweth this sense though he take the distinction betweene these phrases to be somewhat curious so also Haymo but the Apostle speaketh not simply of hauing praise and commendation but of hauing it from the Prince 3. the ordinar glosse thus thou shalt haue praise of the power si iusta est ipso laudante if it be iust it will praise thee si iniusta occasionem prebente if vniust it will giue thee occasion of praise so also Gorrhan it shall praise thee either causaliter by beeing the cause of thy praise or occasionaliter by beeing the occasion c. causa erit maigris coronae it shall be the cause of thy greater crowne gloss interlin laudaberis apud Deum thou shalt be praised with God Haymo but the Apostle speaketh of receiuing praise from the power as Chrysostome and Theophylact well obserue erit laudum tuarum praeco futurus he shall be a setter forth of thy praise 4. Bucer thinketh that the Apostle alludeth vnto the custome of the Grecians and Romanes among whom they which had done any
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