beene immortall 2. the Apostle saith Rom. 6.23 the wages of sinne is death he speaketh of death in generall euerie kind of death both spirituall and corporall is the reward of sinne 3. the propagation of sinne doth indeede bring with it also propagation of death as the Apostle here saith sinne entred by Adam and death by sinne if sinne then had not entred neither should death haue entred 3. But thus it is obiected on the contrarie that death to mankind is naturall and not brought in by sinne 1. Obiect The bodie of man is compounded of dissonant and contrarie qualities and therefore naturally is apt to be dissolued and if there be a naturall aptnesse and power to die there should also haue followed a naturall act of dying Answ. 1. Pererius answeareth that indeede if man be considered secundum nudam natura conditionem according to the bare and naked condition of his nature he was by nature mortall as other creatures but beeing considered as he receiued a supernaturall grace from God death was not naturall but a punishment of sinne Perer. numer 34. But this answear is insufficient and vntrue for there should not haue beene so much as any possibilitie of death in the world if sinne had not entred he then answeareth onely concerning the act of dying which should be suspended by a supernaturall gift he taketh not away the possibilitie of dying and this supernaturall gift was no other then the dignitie and excellencie of mans nature made by creation immortall if he had not sinned 2. wherefore our more full answear is that mans bodie though consisting of diuerse elements yet was made of such an harmonaicall constitution and temper as no dissolution should haue followed if he had not sinned such as shall be the state and condition of our bodies in the resurrection 2. Obiect If death be the punishment of sinne God should be the author of death because he is the author of punishment Answ. 1. Pererius saith that God is not directly the cause of death but either consequenter by way of consequent because he made man of a dissoluble matter whereupon death ensueth or occasionaliter by way of occasion because he tooke away from man that supernaturall gift whereby he should haue beene preserued from mortallitie but God efficiciter is not the efficient cause of death which is a meere priuation But this answear also is insufficient for neither should death haue followed by reason of any such dissoluble matter if Adam had not sinned neither needed there any such supernaturall gift beside the priuiledge and dignitie of mans creation 2. wherefore we answer further that as God created light darkenes he created not but disposed of it so he made not death but as it is a punishment God as a disposer rather and a iust iudge then an author inflicteth it 3. Obiect Christ died and yet had no sinne therefore death is a naturall thing not imposed as a punishment for sinne Answ. 1. Origen here answeareth that as Christ knewe no sinne yet per assumptionem â—â— uis dicitur factus esse peccatum c. yet by the taking of our flesh he is said to be made sinne for vs so also he died for vs c. the death then which he vndertooke was not a punishment vpon him in respect of his owne sinne which he had not but of ours which was imputed vnto him 2. Origen saith further mortem quam nulli debuit sponte non necessitate suscepit the death which he ought to none he did willingly vndertake not of necessitie as Christ himselfe saith I haue power to lay down my life and power to take it againe 3. adde herevnto that mors in eo imperium non habuit c. death had no power or command ouer lum Mart. for he rose againe from death triumphantly which sheweth that he yeelded not vnto death of necessitie for then he could not haue shaken off so soone the bands of death againe Quest. 23. Of the meaning of the Apostle in these words in whom all haue sinned and of the best reading thereof ver 12. 1. Erasmus will haue the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be interpreted eo quod or quandoquidem in so much or because so also Calvin Martyr Osiander and our English translations and Erasmus reason is because the Scripture vseth an other phrase in that sense as 1. Cor. 15.22 as in Adam all die the words are not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But this reason may be easily taken away for sometime in Scripture the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Heb. 9.17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the testament is confirmed in the dead Beza and Heb. 9.10 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in meates And this interpretation of Erasmus is the rather to be misliked because he would not haue this vnderstood of originall sinne but of euery ones proper and particular sinnes as Theodoret before him and so we should want a speciall place for the proofe of originall sinne 2. Wherefore the better reading is in whom that is in Adam all haue sinned so reade Origen Chrysostome Phatius in Oecumenius Theophylact whom Beza Pareus followe and there are three things which may serue for the antecedent to this relatiue in whom either sinne or death or that one man namely Adam before spoken of but not the first because sinne in the Greeke tongue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is of the feminine gender and so cannot answer vnto the Greeke relatiue which is of the masculine gender nor the second for it were an improper speech to say in the which death all haue sinned for as Augustine saith in peccato moriuntur homines non in morte peccant men die in sinne they are not said to sinne in death and so Augustine resolueth that in primo homine omnes peccasse intelliguntur all are vnderstood to haue sinned in the first man Adam c. and to this purpose Augustine in the same place alleadgeth Hilarius Quest. 24. Whether the Apostle meane originall or actuall sinnes saying in whom all haue sinned 1. Erasmus in his annotations vpon this place contending that it should be rather read for as much as all men haue sinned then in whom all men haue sinned thinketh that this place is not vnderstood of originall but of actuall sinnes who although he professe that he is an enemie to the heresie of the Pelagians which denie originall sinne yet contendeth both by the authoritie of the Fathers as Hierome and Origen and by the scope of the place that the Apostle must be vnderstood to speake of actuall sinnes But all this may easily be answered 1. those commentaries which passe vnder the name of Hierome are verily thought not to be his but Augustine coniectureth that they might be written by Pelagius that supposed author excepteth Abraham Isaac Iacob that they were free from this death namely the spiriturall death of the soule whereas euen
not imputed vnto them that is that God doe not punish them for it so to Philemon 18. if he haue hurt thee any thing at all impute it vnto me that is let me satisfie for it Faius Tolet in this sense the Apostle saith Rom. 4.8 Blessed is he to whom the Lord imputeth not his sinne his sinne shall not be laid to his charge in iudgement And so the Apostle saith here where no lawe is sinne is not imputted that is there is no punishment inflicted for sinne but by the prescript of a lawe seeing then that the punishment of death was inflicted vpon those which liued before the lawe it could not be for sinnes which they actually cōmitted which had no law to punish them therefore it was originall sinne which was punished by death and least it might be said that though there were no written lawe whereby sinne was imputed yet there was a naturall law which men transgressed and therefore were punished the Apostle sheweth in the next raise that euen death raigned ouer them which had committed no actuall sinne as Adam had done and therefore death was inflicted as a punishment not onely of actuall but originall sinne Beza 29. Quest. How death is said to haue raigned from Adam to Moses 1. Origen distinguisheth betweene the word pertransijt entred or passed which the Apostle vsed before v. 12. and regnavit raigned death entred ouer all both the iust and vniust but it raigned onely in those qui se peccato tota mento subiecerunt which did giue themselues wholly vnto sinne But the Apostle speaketh generally of all not onely of some that death raigned vpon by the generallitie of death he prooueth the generallitie of some and by this word regno he sheweth potentiam mortis the power of death tha◠none could resist it Martyr instar tyranni saeuijt it raged like a Tyrant Pareus 2. By death some vnderstand mons anima the death of the soule that is sinne which raigned from Adam vnto Moses Haymo Hug. but it is euident that the Apostle in this discourse distinguisheth death from sinne and prooueth by the effect the vniuersalitie of death brought in by sinne the generalitie of sinne also Origen seemeth to vnderstand mortem gehennae the death of hell vnto which all descended and therefore Christ went to hell to deliuer them this sense followeth also the ordinarie glosse and Gorrhan But in this sense it appeareth not why the Apostle should say vnto Moses for they hold that all the iust men euen vnder the law also went to hell But in truth the death of hell raigned not ouer the righteous either before the law or after from the which they were deliuered by Christ therefore the death of the bodie is here vnderstood which entred vpon all euen ouer infants which sinned not as Adam did 3. Vnto Moses 1. Origen by Moses vnderstandeth the Law and by the law the whole time of the law vsque ad adventum Christi vnto the comming of Christ who destroied the kingdome of sinne so also Haymo but in that the Apostle setteth Moses against Adam it is euident that he vnderstandeth the time when the law was giuen and what law he speaketh of is further shewed v. 20. The Law entred that offence should abound the dominion then of sinne and death there ended not 2. Some thinke this limitation is set because men were more afraid of death before Christs comming then after because they had not such hope of the resurrection Gorrhan but it is an hard and forced exposition to interpret vnto Moses vnto the comming of Christ as is shewed before 3. Some thinke it is said vnto Moses because then a remedie was giuen by the law in restraining of sinne and then first in Iudas capit destrui regnum mortis the kingdome of sinne beganne to be destroied and now euery where gloss ordinar but the law gaue no remedie against sinne for sinne then abounded much more v. 20. and the Apostle said before c. 4.15 That where no law is there is no transgression there is no such knowledge of sinne 4. Therefore vnto Moses noteth the time of the giuing of the law vsque ad legem per Mosen promulgatam vnto the law published by Moses gloss ordin not that death raigned not after Moses also but this is added to shew that death was in the world euen before the law Lyran. and so consequently sinne for of those greatest doubt might be made which liued before the law whether death entred vpon them as a punishment of their sinne 30. Quest. Of the meaning of these words which sinne not after the similitude of the transgression of Adam This verse hath diuers readings 1. some doe referre the last words after the similitude of the transgression of Adam vnto the first part of the sentence death raigned 2. some doe ioyne it with the next words before which sinned and of either of these there are seuerall opinions 1. They which distinguish the sentence and ioyne the first and last words together some as Chrysostome giue this sense that as death raigned vpon Adam so likewise it raigned ouer his posteritie but others doe make this the cause of death and mortalitie because they are borne like vnto Adam that is destitute of originall iustice Lyranus Tolet. annot 19. Tolet further would confirme this interpretation by diuers reasons 1. the preposition is 〈◊〉 which with a dative case sheweth the cause whereas an other word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is vsed to signifie in as Philip. 2.7 He was found in shape as a man and Rom. 8.3 In the similitats of sinneful flesh 2. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 similitude sheweth the similitude and likenes of nature 3. and this is most agreeable to the Apostles purpose to shew the cause why death raigned ouer all because they are borne sinners like vnto Adam Contra. 1. The Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is sometime taken for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in as before in the 12. vers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in whome and Tolet himselfe in that place sheweth that it is so vsed in other places of Scripture annot 15. 2. The word of similitude is better referred to the qualitie of Adams sinne then to the conformitie in nature 3. Neither needed the Apostle here shew the cause why death raigned ouer all but he bringeth in this as a proofe of that which he saide vers 12. that all sinned in Adam because all are subiect to death euen they which commit not actuall sinnes as infants it was therefore impertinent to repeat that which he intendeth to prooue 4. Now further this distinction of the verse is ouerthrowne by these two reasons 1. if the Apostle had saide ouer those which 〈…〉 and should haue put to no other addition he had contraried himselfe hauing set it downe vers 12. that in Adam all sinned and death therefore went ouer all how the◠could he say that death raigned ouer those that sinned not
also passe ouer vnto his posteritie euen in respect of the fault this he prooueth by the testimonie of the Hebrewes themselues iust by the words which they vse in circumcision which are these Deus noster pars nostra protector noster praecepit erui carneâ— nostram ab infâ—â—â—â— propter foedus suum quod posuit in causa nostra God our portion and our protector hath commanded that our flesh should be deliuered from hell for his couenant like which he hath placed in our flesh c. But infants which are circumcised haue not deserued hell by any actuall sinnes which they had committed therefore they are guiltie of hell in respect of originall sinne To this purpose also he produceth the testimonie of R. Salmo who giueth this note vpon that place Genes 2.4 These are the generations of heauen and earth c. that in two places onely this word teldoth generations is written fully namely with chalom in the beginning and ende in this place before Adams fall for in the beginning men were created secundum plenitudinem 〈◊〉 perfectioâ—â—â— in their fulnesse and perfection but after Adam had sinned their generations were corrupted and therefore Gen. 4. and other where that word it not expressed fully with chalom in the ende the other place is Ruth 4. These are the generations of Pâ—â—â—rs c. these the word toldoth is written fully because Christ the sonne of Dauid was the Sonne of Pâ—â—res for vntill he came the generation of man should not be restored â—â— Burgens 3. But there are euident places beside out of the old testament for the proofe of originall sinne as Genes 9.21 the imagination of mans heart is euill from his youth and Dauid confesseth Psal. 54. I was borne in iniquitie and in sinne hath my mothere conceiued me c. Controv. 11. That Adams sinne is entred into his posteritie by propagation not imitation onely against the Pelagians The Pelagians held these two hereticall positions concerning this matter 1. That Adams sinne is deriued into his posteritie nor by any naturall propagation but by corrupt imitation 2. the other that death is entred into Adams posteritie not as a punishment of Adams sinne but as a defect of nature issuing out of the fraile and brittle composition and constitution of mans bodie these strange assertions are thus confuted by Augustine 1. If the Apostle had spoken here of the beginning of sinne by imitation not by propagation non eius principium fecisset Adamum sed diabolum c. he would not haue made Adam the beginning but the deuill c. for he sinned first he was a lier from the beginning Iohn 8.44 2. As he in whom all are quickned and made aliue beside that he gaue an example of righteousnesse to those that imitate him dat etiam occultissimam fidelibus gratiam c. giueth also secret grace vnto the faithfull c. so he in whom all die beside the example of imitation in transgressing Gods commandement occulta etiam labe c. he also infected all his ofspring with the secret contagion of concupiscence Augustine lib. 1. de peccator merit remissi c. 9. 3. Further Augustine presseth these words of the Apostle Rom. 5.16 the fault is of one offence to condemnation but if men are onely guiltie of condemnation for their actuall sinnes he should haue said condemnationem fieri ex multis peccatis c. that condemnation came through many offences not through one epist. 89. ad Hilarium 4. And in an other place he vrgeth this reason because many in sinning doe not propound vnto themselues the example of Adam but haue other occasions which moue them as when a theefe killeth a man he did it nihil de Adamo cogitans thinking nothing of Adam but to this end that he might haue his gould c. Adams eating of an apple which was forbidden can yeeld no example of imitation to a murtherer and there are many wicked men in the world that neuer heard of Adams transgression to this purpose Augustine lib. 6. cont Iulian. c. 12. 5. Beside the Apostles words euidently conuinceth them for the Apostle saith as sinne entred so death by sinne then as death actually is propagated so also sinne Tolet. annot 15. And death is entred vpon all because all haue sinned seeing then infants die it followeth that they sinne but not actually therefore they haue originall sinne P. Martyr 6. Hence it is euident that the commentaries which passe vnder Hieromes name are forged for that author saith vpon this place insaniunt qui de Adamo per traducem ad â—â— asserunt venisse peccarum they are madde which affirme that sinne is come vpon vs as traduced and deriued from Adam c. for Hierome liuing in the same time that Pelagius broached his heresie did condemne and detect it as Augustine and other orthodoxall writers did Controv. 12. Of the manner how originall sinne is propagated against the Pelagians where it is disputed whether the soule be deriued from the parents The Pelagians to strengthen their error in denying the propagation of originall sinne from Adam to his posteritie obiected thus the seate and place of sinne is the soule but the soule is not propagated nor deriued by generation from the parents therefore neither sinne To this obiection diuerse answers are made 1. Some thinke that originall sinne is conueied by that carnall pleasure and delight which the parents haue in the act of generation but this is not so for these two reasons 1. because that carnall pleasure is not sinne 〈◊〉 some euill affection beside do concurre with it for without that delight there is no generation which if it were necessarily accompanied with sinne the Scriptures would not haue giuen libertie to marrie if it were in it selfe a sinnefull act 2. And if it were admitted that this naturall delight were sinne yet there by that infirmitie onely should be conueied whereas originall sinne is a generall corruption of nature 2. Some thinke that God createth the soules of men agreeable to their corrupt bodies like as he giueth vnto dogs and other creatures spirits answerable to their state and condition But this opinion is reiected likewise for if God should create or make any soule euill he should be the author of sinne 3. Some doe thinke that the soule of man is deriued also ex traduce as they tearme it and propagated from the parentes as the bodie is this opinion Tertullian seemed to fauour and Augustine holdeth it probable Genes ad liter c. 10. some of their reasons are these 1. because in the making of the woman it is not said that God breathed into her the breath of life as it is expressed of Adam and therefore it is like that she had as her bodie so her soule from Adam Answer Nay rather the contrarie is inferred because no mention is made of the soule and spirit of Eue that it had the like beginning which Adams had otherwise he would haue said this
of faith in any other gift it can not stand together for where merit and worke is the wages is not counted by fauour and so freely but by debt Rom. 4.4 2. The better answer then is that we are iustified freely although the condition of faith be required because faith doth not iustifie vt actus quidem noster est as it is an act of ours but all the vertue thereof proceedeth from the obiect as the Israelites beeing healed by looking vpon the brasen serpent obtained not their health by the very act of opening their eyes but by the obiect which they beheld which was the serpent And like as when a rich man giueth his almes vnto the poore though he stretch out his hand to receiue it yet is it said notwithstanding to be a free gift Tolet. annot 20. 3. But adde here further that as when a blind man putteth forth his hand but he that giueth is faine to direct it to receiue the almes or if a man haue a weake and withered hand which he is not able to stretch out vnlesse the other that giueth doe lift it vp in this case euery way the gift is free So our will is not of it selfe apt to beleeue or will any thing aright vnlesse the Lord direct it faith then beeing both the worke of God in straining our will and faith receiuing all the vertue from the obiect which it apprehendeth namely Christ it remaineth that faith notwithstanding we are iustified freely Faius 33. Quest. v. 25. To declare his iustice or righteousnes what iustice the Apostle vnderstandeth here 1. Chrysostome vnderstandeth the declaration of Gods iustice by the effects thereof like as God declareth his riches not that he is rich in himselfe but in making others rich and his power not in that he euer liueth himselfe but in raising others to life so his iustice is declared not in beeing iust in himselfe but in making others iust But this iustifying of sinners is a worke of Gods mercie not of his iustice 2. Theodoret herein will haue Gods iustice to be manifested because he did sustaine the sinnes of the world with patience forbearing to punish them but this likewise was an effect of his goodnes and mercie not of his iustice 3. Ambrose vnderstandeth this iustice of God in keeping and performing his promise but the iustice of God is not here to be taken in a diuers sense then before v. 22. the righteousnes of God by the faith of Iesus Christ. 4. Some doe take the iustice of God here for his goodnes mercie and clemencie as the Prophet Dauid vseth to pray Iudge me according to thy righteousnes that is thy goodnes Pareus but this seemeth not to be so proper here 5. Some vnderstand the iustice of God in not leauing sinne vnpunished Lyran. it was the iustice of God that the price of our redemption should not be paid otherwise then by the blood of Christ but this is not the iustice of faith which the Apostle spake of before 6. Therefore this iustice which the Lord manifested and declared is none other but the righteousnes of faith before touched and as the words here following doe shew by the forgiuenes of sinnes God reuealed and manifested this to be the true iustice whereby men are iustified before him euen the righteousnes of faith so August lib. de spir lit cap. 13. Anselme Tolet Osiander 34. Quest. What is meant by sinnes that are past v. 25. 1. Some think that this is vnderstood of the fathers in the law which were kept in Limbus who though thorough remission of their sinnes they were freed from punishment yet they were not receiued vnto glorie gloss ordin Gorrhan But Tolet confuteth this interpretation though he allow the opinion as not agreeable to the Apostles minde for the words are not to be so limited and restrained but generally the Apostle vnderstandeth such sinnes as he spake of before v. 23. All haue sinned and are depriued of the glorie of God And if the sinnes were not yet remitted vntill Christs comming vnto the Patriarks they could not be freed no not from the punishment 2. The Novatians vnderstand those former sinnes which were passed of sinnes going before vocation and iustification denying all remedie vnto sinnes committed afterward But this were to make the death of Christ of small force if there were no place for forgiuenes euen after one is iustified Dauid fell into those two grieuous sinnes of murther and adulterie after he was called and yet was restored againe 3. Catharinus with other Romanists vnderstand likewise sinnes going before iustification and baptisme the rest that follow after they say must be purged by other meanes as by repentance and satisfaction But the Apostle speaketh generally of all sinnes If any man sinne we haue an advocate with the Father Iesus Christ the iust 1. Ioh. 2.2 Christ is our aduocate as well for sinnes before baptisme as after but see more for the confutation of thir error among the Controversies 4. The Apostle then compareth not the persons but the sinnes and the times and sheweth that euen the sinnes committed vnder the law and from the beginning of the world were redeemed by no other way then by faith in Christ God by his patience did forbeare to punish those sinnes as not imputing them because of the Redeemer which was to come Agreeable hereunto is that place Heb. 9.15 For this cause is he the Mediatour of the new Testament that thorough death which was for the transgression in the former Testament they which were called might receiue the promise of euerlasting inheritance By conference of these places together it is euident that by sinnes that are past are meant not the sinnes going before baptisme or iustification but the sinnes committed vnder the old Testament to shew that there was no remission of sinnes from the beginning of the world but by faith in Christ. And this further appeareth because the Apostle faith v. 26. to shew at this time his righteousnes c. he setteth the present time of the Gospel and the reuelation of grace against the former times 35. Quest. Why the Apostle onely maketh mention of sinnes past Now the Apostle so extendeth the effect and fruit of our redemption by Christ vnto the sinnes passed as that the sinnes present and to come also shall be by vertue thereof remitted but he maketh mention only of the sinnes past and before committed for these reasons 1. Hereby the Apostle sheweth the imbecillitie of the law of Moses and the ceremonies thereof that they were expiationes non verae sed vmbratiles not true expiations but onely in shadow Pareus as the Apostle saith Heb. 9.9 that those gifts and sacrifices could not make holy concerning the conscience and so Thomas yeeldeth this reason vpon this place God remitted the sinnes before passed quae lex remittere non potuit which the law could not remit 2. Adamus Safhout addeth that the Apostle maketh mention onely of former sinnes to
sinnes for we hold also with S. Paul the imputation of Christs righteousnesse by faith as S. Paul saith Philip. 3.9 That I may be found in him not hauing mine owne righteousnesse which is by the lawe but that which is of the faith of Christ c. 2. But though we graunt as well an imputation of righteousnes as a not imputation of sinne concurring vnto iustification yet we denie that any inherent iustice or renouation of life is any part of this iustification neither doth the Apostle meane any such iustification here Christ rose for our iustification not thereby onely to giue vs an example of newenesse of life as Bellarmine and Pererius expound it wherein Tolet his owne fellowe Iesuite and Cardinall is against him as is before shewed qu. 42. but Christs resurrection is the cause and ground of our iustification which is imputed by faith as Ambrose expoundeth resurrexit c. vt nos gratia iustificationis donaret he rose againe to endue vs with the grace of iustification vt iustitiam credentium confirmaret to confirme the iustice of those which beleeue saith Hierome ista resurrectio credita nos iustificat this resurrection beeing beleeued doth iustifie vs saith Augustine 3. an inherent iustice we confesse which is our sanctification the fruit and effect of our iustification by faith but because it is imperfect in vs and not able to satisfie the iustice of God we denie that we are thereby iustified in his sight Controv. 19. Against Socinus corrupt interpretation of these words v. 25. Was deliuered vp for our sinnes Socinus will not haue this phrase to signifie any satisfactioÌ„ made by Christ for our sinnes but onely to betoken the cause or occasion of Christs death as the Lord is said to giue Israâ—l vp for the sinnes of Ieroboam who sinned and caused Israel to sinne 1. king 14.16 thus â—icked Socinus de Seruat part 2. p. 108. Contra. 1. Though sometime this phrase signifie the cause yet it is false that it so onely signifieth for the Scripture speaketh euidently that Christ was our reconciliation and that we haue redemption in him Rom. 3.24 25. our sinnes then onely were not the cause or occasion of his death but he so died for our sinnes as that he by his blood satisfied for them 2. It was the Pelagian blasphemie that Christ died for our sinnes to be an example onely vnto vs to die vnto sinne for thus the power and force of Christs death is extenuated which indeede causeth vs to die vnto sinne it doth not teach vs onely and shew vs the way this were to extoll the power of mans corrupt will against the grace of God 3. The instance of Ieroboam is altogether impertinent Israel was deliuered vp for Ieroboams sinnes which they imitated and followed if Christ were so deliuered vp for our sinnes then they must make him also to be a sinner with vs and to be polluted with our sinnes ex Perer dub 8. 20. Controv. Piscators opinion examined that our sinnes are remitted onely by Christs death not for the obedience and merit of his life These are Piscators words in his annotation vpon the 25. v. Omnia nostra pectata expiatâ— sunt per solam mortem Christi all our sinnes are expiated onely by the death of Christ and therefore neither originall sinne is purged by his holy conception nor the sinnes of omission by his holy life but by Christs death onely to this purpose many places of Scripture are cited and alleadged by him as Matth. 20.28 The Sonne of man came to giue his life a ransome for many Matth. 26.28 Which namely blood is shed for many for the remission of sinnes Act. 20.28 Christ hath purchased his Church by his blood Likewise he affirmeth that by Christs obedience in his death and vpon the crosse partâ—â— esse nobis vitam aeâ—ernam euerlasting life is obtained for vs as Hebr. 10.19 By the blood of Iesus we may be hold to enter into the holy place and other places are cited to the same effect Contra. 1. It is true that Christ onely by his death and other his holy sufferings paied the ransome and bare the punishment due vnto our sinne but seeing Christs blood had beene of no value if he had not beene most perfectly righteous his obedience and righteousnes must as well concurre vnto the remission of sinnes as his death and this is that which S. Peter saith 1. Pet. 1.19 We are redeemed with the pretious blood of Christ as of a Lâ—â—â—e vndefiled and without spot and c. 3.18 Christ hath once suffered for sinnes the iust for the vniust the innocencie then and integritie of Christ must be ioyned with Christs blood to make it an acceptable sacrifice 2. Whereas there are two parts of our iustification the remission and not imputing of sinnes and the imputation of Christs righteousness which two are not separated neither can the one stand without the other neither can there be any remission of sinnes vnlesse Christs righteousnes be imputed as S. Paul saith 1. Cor. 5.21 He hath made him to be sinne 〈◊〉 that knew no sinne that we should be made the righteousnes of God in him the merit of Christs obedience and righteousnes must needes concurre in the remission of sinnes yea Piscator in his annotation vpon the 4. v. confesseth that these words blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen idem valere to be as much in effect as to say blessed are they to whom iustice is imputed 3. But that seemeth to be a more straunge assertion to denie that possessio vitae eternat tanquam effectum adscribitur obedientiae Christi the possession of eternall life is ascribed as an effect to Christs obedience which is directly affirmed by the Apostle Hebr. 7.26 Such an high Priest it became vs to haue which is holy harmelesse vndefiled separate from sinners and made higher then the heauens what hath made Christ higher then the heauens but his holines perfection integritie and therefore he is able perfectly to saue them that come vnto God v. 25. 4. And further that we are iustified by Christs obedience the Apostle sheweth Rom. 5.13 As by one mans disobedience many were made sinners so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous here the Apostle saith directly that we are made righteous by the obedience of Christ. Piscator here answereth that by Christs obedience here is vnderstood his obedience in submitting himselfe willingly vnto death in which it was his fathers will he should suffer for vs. Contra. Our iustification consisteth of two parts of the remission of our sinnes and the making of vs iust before God the one is procured by Christs death the other is purchased by his obedience and righteousnes and that the Apostle speaketh not onely of Christs obedience vnto death but generally of his whole course of righteousnes both in life and death is euident because he calleth it the gift of righteousnes v. 17. and the raigning of grace
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
2. there is not in infants the similitude of Adams transgression for his sinne was actuall so is not theirs if he had said onely after the similitude of Adam and not added transgression there had beene more probabilitie in it thus to diuide the sentence but in that he addeth after the similitude of the transgression it is more fitly ioyned to the former words which sinned not 2. Now of those which ioyne the last clause with the former words some read them affirmatiuely thus death raigned c. ouer them which sinned after the similitude c. and Origen receiuing this reading expoundeth it of those which committed mortall and great sinnes as Adam did and so distinguisheth betweene the entring of death which went ouer the righteous and the raigning of death onely ouer those which gaue themselues wholly ouer vnto sinne Ambrose vnderstandeth this clause of Idolaters for they sinne like vnto Adam who was not free from idolatrie in forsaking the Creator Some vnderstand it of children that they are saide to sinne after the similitude of Adam quia ex peccatore nascuntur peccatores because they are borne sinners of a sinners Gorrhan But all these goe against the receiued reading which hath a negative ouer them which sinned not as also the Syrian interpreter readeth 3. Of those which read with a negative ouer them which sinned not Hier. l. cont Pelag. expoundeth it of the particular sinne of Adam in eating of the forbidden fruit that death raigned euen ouer those which had not committed that sinne so also Theodor. and Chrysost. though he otherwise diuide the sentence as is shewed before But none beside Adam did commit that sinne whereas the Apostle in saying euen ouer them also which sinned not insinuateth that there were some ouer whome death raigned that sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression and some which did not 4. Athan. ser. 4. cont Arr. saith that they sinned like to Adam which committed mortall and great sinnes they sinned not like to Adam that sinned not mortally and yet died as Ieremie and Iohn Baptist that were sanctified in their mothers wombe But in this sense the Apostle onely should shew that death raigned onely ouer those which had committed actuall sinnes and so he should not prooue that which he said before that in Adam all sinned not onely those which commit actuall but are guiltie onely of originall sinne 5. Oecumenius doth interpret this place of those which were before the Law which did not transgresse in legem datam against any law giuen vnto them as Adam did but onely against the law of nature and so he seemeth to vnderstand it onely of those which committed actuall sinnes but then the Apostles reason should not be generall enough if he concluded not all as well Infants as others to be sinners in Adam 6. Most of our new writers vnderstand this not to sinne after the similitude of the transgression of Adam to be sine lege peccare to sinne without a law as all they did which were from Adam to Moses as well infants as men of yeares so Mart. Bulling Melanct. Calv. But this had beene then a needlesse addition seeing all without exception from Adam to Moses sinned in that manner without a law but the Apostle in saying euen ouer them also sheweth that there were some beside those which sinned after the transgression of Adam 7. Wherefore I preferre Augustines exposition who taketh those to sinne after the similitude of Adams transgression that committed actuall sinnes and those not to sinne after that similitude which had no actuall but onely originall sinnes so also Ansel. Lyran. Gorrh. glosse inter Haymo and of our new writers Beza Parâ— Ofianà Pisc. with other so also Per. 31. Qu. How Adam is said to be the figure of him that was to come v. 14. 1. Origen by him which is to come vnderstandeth the next world that as by Adam we all in this life become mortall so in the next world vita reguabit per Christum life shall raigne thorough Christ. 2. Some vnderstand this according to that place 1. Cor. 10.11 all those things happened vnto them in tâ—pes so whatsoeuer was before or vnder the law were figures of those things which should be accomplished in the times of the Messiah Faius and Origen also to the same purpose But it is euident that the Apostle compareth the person of Adam and Christ together and touching those things which were wrought and accomplished in this life not deferred till the next 3. Augustine sometime referreth that which is to come not vnto Christ but vnto Adams posteritie that such as he was after he had sinned such was his posteritie lib. 1. de peccat mort c. 11. so also Haymo bringeth this in for one exposition sicut Adam peccator extitit as Adam was a sinner so all his posteritie are borne sinners but the word beeing put in the singular number and with one article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of him or one to come sheweth that it must be vnderstood of some speciall one not of all Adams posteritie 4. The commentarie vnder S. Hieromes name but falsly here bewraieth it selfe to haue beene written by some Pelagian whose heresie was that Adams sinne is deriued to his posteritie by imitation not by propagation these are the words Adam hauing first transgressed the commandement of God exemplum est legem praevaricari volentibus is an example to those which will transgresse the law of God as Christ is an example to those which will imitate him in fulfilling his fathers wil But wherein Adam is a type of Christ the Apostle sheweth in the rest of this chap. following where no mention is made of any such exemplarie imitation 5. Some referre this to such things as happened to Adams person as Eve was formed out of Adams side beeing asleepe so out of Christs side hanging on the crosse issued water and blood the Sacraments of regeneration by the which the Church is sanctified and saued Gorrhan Lyranus Pererius And as Adam was made ex terra virgine of the earth a virgin so Christ was borne of Marie the Virgin Haymo But Bellarmine presseth this further that as Adam was made out of the earth beeing yet not accursed so Christ of Marie qua omnis maledictionis ac per hoc omnis peccati expers fuit which was free from all malediction and so from all sinne c. But beside that none of the rest which vrge this similitude doe straine it thus farre but onely thus that as Adam was made out of the earth divina virtutes by the diuine vertue Lyran. sine humano opere without mans helpe Gorrhan so Christ was borne of a Virgin this strained and forced collection should be contrarie to the Apostle for if Marie were without sinne how is it true which the Apostle said before in whome all euer haue sinned 6. Herein then Adam was a type of Christ not in respect of such things as were personall
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
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
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
veniall sinne annot 1. Ioh. 1. sect 5. Contra 1. We confesse that the guilt and punishment of originall sinne is washed away by faith in Christs blood but yet the staine and blot remaineth still though in Christ we are deliuered from the punishment due vnto sinne yet the euill qualitie of our nature is not purged away namely our naturall pronenes and aptnes to euill which shall not fully be purged vntill the resurrection when we shall put off all corruption together with mortalitie to this purpose Augustine saith well Meminisse debemus omnium peccatorum plenam remissionem c. we must remember that there is full remission of our sinnes in baptisme hominis vero qualitatem non totam continuo mutari c. yet the qualitie or condition of man is not straite chaunged de peccator merit remissi lib. 1. c. 25. 2. and that originall corruption hath the verie nature of sinne euen after baptisme the Apostle sheweth euidently Rom. 7.7 where he calleth the concupiscence of our nature sinne see further hereof Synops. Centur. 3. er 11. Controv. 14. What originall sinne is against the Romanists and â—some others and specially against them which hold it to be Adams sinne imputed onely to his posteritie 1. Faber Erasmus in their annotations vpon this place seeme to be of opinion that originall sinne is onely a pronenesse and aptnesse vnto sinne which is graft in vs by nature But this is refelled by the Apostle here who saith that in Adam all haue sinned and therefore death also is entred vpon all death is the stipend of sinne if then death actually is gone ouer all so also sinne 2. Flacius Illyricus held originall sinne to be a kind of substance But this is a dangerous opinion God onely is the Creator of substances and natures but he made not sinne 3. As he giueth too much to originall sinne making it a substantiall thing in man so the Romanists too much extenuate it allowe it too little 1. Pighius and Catharinus thinke that originall sinne is nothing else but the preuarication and transgression of our first parents made their posterities onely by imputation because Adam in himselfe contained all mankind and God made his couenant not onely with him but with all his posteritie beeing then in his loines and so his sinne is imputed vnto them but there is nothing in men naturally that hath the proper nature of sinne which is defined to be dictum factum vel concupitum c. somewhat said done or coueted against the law of God which cannot be in infants to this purpose Catharinus and before him Pighius in 1. contr de peccat origin Contra. 1. Bellarmine lib. 5. de amissi grat c. 16. and Pererius disput 16. in 5. c. ad Roman would confute this opinion and prooue that originall sinne is a reall and inherent corruption in the nature of man and not imputed onely because as we were sinners in Adam so we are made iust by Christ which is not by the imputation of his righteousnesse but by an inherent iustice which is giuen vnto vs by the merits of Christ c. But this were to confute one error by another for the Apostle euidently and expressely sheweth c. 4.3 that Abrahams faith was imputed and counted vnto him for righteousnesse and therefore the iustice whereby we are counted iust before God is the iustice of Christ imputed to vs by faith so also Adams sinne is imputed to his posteritie but beside there is an euilnes and prauitie of nature procured by the transgression of Adam as beside the imputed righteousnes of Christ there is also in the faithfull an inherent righteousnesse also which is their holines and sanctification but they are not thereby iustified before God 2. We haue better reasons out of the Scripture to refute this assertion for where there is no sinne death hath no power because all are sinners by nature they all die otherwise the Apostle had not reasoned well that death raigned from Adam to Moses because all had sinned v. 14. And v. 19. the Apostle saith that by one mans disobedience many are peccatores constituti made sinners which is more then to be counted sinners or to haue sinne imputed 3. That definition is of actuall sinne which is of such things as are said done or coueted against the law of God But sinne is more generally taken for any thing which is contrarie to the law of God now the naturall rebellion and resistance of the flesh in not beeing subiect to the will of the spirit but continually striuing against it which is to be seene euen in children who seeth not that it is contrarie to the law of God and hath in it the nature of sinne 4. Dauid complaineth that he was borne in sinne and conceiued in iniquitie Psal. 51. and S. Paul Rom. 7. calleth his naturall corruption sinne dwelling in him So that these holy men confessed that they were sinfull by nature Otherwise if there were not in vs originall sinne by nature of our owne but onely Adams imputed it would follow that his posteritie should be punished not for their owne but anothers sinne which were against the rule of Gods iustice Martyr Controv. 15. That originall sinne is not onely the privation of originall iustice Bellarmine with other of the Romanists will not haue originall sinne to be any euill positiue qualitie in man but onely carentia iustitiae originalis habitualis aversio à Deo a wanting of originall iustice and an habituall aversion from and a forsaking of God Bellar. lib. 5. de amission grat c. 15. Lyranus addeth an other clause that originall sinne is a defect or want of originall iustice cum debito habendi eam with a due debt or obligation to haue the same c. Now their cheefe reason that originall sinne is no euill habite or positiue qualitie but onely a defect or privation is this because God is the author of all positiue things that haue a beeing or existence but he is no way the cause of originall sinne Bellarm. ibid. Thoring replic ad addit 5. Paul Burgens And if it were an habite Adam could not haue transmitted it to his posteritie Bellarm. ibid. Contra. 1. Paulus Burgens taketh exception to Lyranus difinition of originall sinne that it is not a meere priuation but habitus corruptus a corrupt habite like as in a disease there is not onely a priuation of health but there is also some positiue thing habet humores male dispositos the humors also are euill affected and disposed and so is it in originall sinne there is an euill qualitie and habite beside the want of originall iustice and therefore it is called concupiscence quae sonat aliquod positivum which foundeth and signifieth some positiue thing c. This exception of Burgensis is iust and his opinion herein is agreeable to the Apostle who calleth originall sinne peccatum inhabitans an in-dwelling sinne Rom. 7.20 and corpus mortis the bodie
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
here vseth that the bodie of sinne may be destroyed for the bodie is not crucified or destroyed but sinne which dwelleth in the bodie 3. Origen hath an other exposition by the bodie of sinne we may vnderstand proprium aliquod corpus the proper bodie of sinne whereof these are the members fornication vncleannes inordinate affection with other particular sinnes as S. Paul calleth them Coloss. 3.4 and this sense followeth Chrysostome this bodie of sinne he vnderstandeth to be vniuersam malitiā nostram the whole malice of our nature so Lyran. congeries peccatorum the companie of sinnes is called the bodie of sinne as there is a bodie also of vertues and good workes Gorrhan as Matth. 6.22 If thine eye be single the whole bodie shall be light if it be wicked the whole bodie shall be darke 4. And this multitude and companie of sinnes is so called for diuerse reasons 1. because as the bodie hath diuerse members so our inborne concupiscence brancheth forth into diuerse sinnes Mart. 2. propter robur tyrannidem because of the strength and tyrannie which it exerciseth in the children of disobedience Faius 3. quod ab eo facile homines divelli non possunt because men cannot easily be plucked from their sinnes no more then from their bodie Phocius 4. because men are addicted to their sinnes and loue it as themselues Photius ibid. 5. But in this place the Apostle vseth this phrase the bodie of sinne because he had spoken of crucifying before bodies vse to be crucified Pareus and we are as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it were concorporated with Christ which word the Apostle vseth Ephes. 3.6 and we were crucified in his bodie vpon the crosse together with him 5. But here we must take heede of the error of Florius Illyricus who did hold that originall sinne was a substance and not an accident onely because it is called here a bodie and the old man But this is a metaphoricall speach it is called a bodie by a certaine similitude as it is shewed before and the Apostle calleth it afterward verse 12. sinne in the mortall bodie it is therefore a kinde of spirituall bodie in these our mortall bodies 6. But in that the Apostle addeth that we should not serue sinne he sheweth that the regenerate are not quite freed from sinne but sinne doth not raigne in them neither are they seruants any longer vnto it so we must make a difference betweene these two peccare and peccato servire to sinne and to serue sinne the regenerate doe sinne while they are in the flesh but they doe no longer serue sinne Bucor Quest. 11. How the dead are said to be freed from sinne v 7. 1. Some do vnderstand this of the spirituall death in baptisme before spoken of Lyran. Ofiand P. Martyr thinketh that the Apostle speaketh of mortification which is the effect of iustification not de morte naturae of the death of nature But then this had beene a repetition of that which he said before vers 6. whereas it containeth rather a reason thereof 2. Some vnderstanding this to be spoken of the naturall death of the bodie from whence the Apostle taketh his similitude by beeing freed or iustified from sinne doe meane purgatum esse à peccatis to be purged from sinne Basil. lib. de baptis But this cannot be that all the dead should be purged from their sinne though they cease from the actions thereof 3. This better is interpreted of the naturall death that they which are dead do thenceforth cease from the actions of sinne and so Chrysostome vnderstandeth here the word iustified liber est à peccatis is free from sinne that is the actions of sinne cease Calvin like as a seruant when he dieth is free from the seruice of his master as Iob. 3.19 so he which is dead is free from the dominion of sinnes past then the theefe ceaseth to steale the adulterer to commit adulterie the word then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is iustified is the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is freed which word the Apostle vseth v. 18. and it is a synecdoche when one kind is taken for the whole to be iustified and absolued in iudgement is one kind of freedome and it is taken here for the generall to be set free as a theefe dying is set free by death as if he had beene iustified and absolued in iudgement Piscator 4. But hence it followeth not that the dead doe not sinne afterward they are free from the sinnes committed in the bodie yet the wicked euen after death beeing tormented in hell doe not cease to sinne beeing full of despaire blasphemie impenitencie and therefore their sinnes not ceasing their punishments cannot determine Let this be obserued against the opinion of the Origenists who inferre that because when men are dead there is an ende of their sinne that at the length there shall be an ende of their punishment and God shall haue mercie vpon them Quest. 12. What life the Apostle speaketh of v. 8. We beleeue that we shall also liue with him 1. Some vnderstand it of life euerlasting in coelo post generalem resurrectionem in heauen after the generall resurrection Haymo so also Origen Chrysostome Theodoret but it is euident that the Apostle speaketh of the life of grace v. 11. ye are dead to finde but are aliue to God c. 2. Neither is it to be vnderstood onely de vita gratiae of the life of grace as Lyran Tolet annot 8. and Basil vnderstandeth it of the newenesse of life lib. de baptism for the AApostle thus expoundeth himselfe 2. Tim. 2.11.12 if we be dead with him we shall also liue with him that is shall raigne with him as the Apostle saith in the next verse following if we suffer we shall also raigne with him 3. Wherefore the Apostle by liuing with Christ vnderstandeth generally both the life of grace present and of glorie afterward Mart. and this life is distinguished into three degrees 1. our regeneration in rising vnto newenes of life 2. our perseuerance in continuing vnto the end 3. the third degree is in euerlasting life after the resurrection Pareus Quest. 13. How death is said to haue had dominion ouer Christ v. 9. In that the Apostle saith v. 9. Death hath no more dominiō ouer him it is inferred that death had sometime dominion ouer him 1. Origen to remooue this doubt how death may be said to haue had dominion of Christ vnderstandeth it of his going downe to hell ad locum vbi mors regnavit vnto the place where death raigned but thus the doubt remaineth still for Christ whom he would haue descend to hell went thither as a conquerour hell had no dominion ouer him therefore that cannot be the meaning 2. and Haymo his interpretation is as harsh who by death vnderstandeth the deuil which had dominion by his ministers as he entred into the heart of Iudas Christo permittente by the permission of Christ it is
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
qu. Why the Apostle onely maketh mention of sinnes past 36. qu. How God is said to be iust and a iustifier of him which is of the faith c. v. 26. 37. qu. How reioycing is excluded not by the law of works but by the law of faith 38. qu. Of the difference betweene these two phrases of faith through faith v. 30. 39. qu. How the Law is established by the doctrine of faith Questions vpon the fourth Chapter 1. qu. Vpon what occasion S. Paul bringeth in the example of Abraham 2. qu. Of the meaning of the first verse 3. qu. Of the meaning of the 2. verse 4. qu. How the Apostle alleadgeth that testimonie concerning the imputation of Abrahams faith for righteousnes v. 4. 5. qu. Of the meaning of the words who counted this for righteousnes vnto Abraham 6. qu. What it was that Abraham beleeued 7. qu. Why Abrahams faith was imputed to him at this time and not before 8. qu. What imputation is and what to be imputed 9. qu. How Abrahams faith was imputed to him for righteousnes 10. qu. Whether Abraham were iustified by any thing beside his faith 11. qu. How S. Paul and S. Iames are reconciled about the manner of Abrahams iustifying 12. qu. Of the explication of the 4. and 5. verses 13. qu. Of the diuers kinds of rewards 14. qu. How it standeth with Gods iustice to iustifie the wicked v. 5. 15. qu. How our sinnes are said to be forgiuen and couered v. 7. 16. qu. In what sense circumcision is said to be a signe and wherefore it was instituted 17. qu. In what sense circumcision is called a seale of the righteousnes of faith v. 11. 18. qu. Whether the mysterie of faith in the Messiah to come were generally known vnder the Law 19. qu. Certaine questions of circumcision and first of the externall signe why it was placed in the generative part 20. qu. Certaine doubts remooued and obiections answered concerning circumcision 21. qu. How Abraham is saide to be the father of them which beleeue v. 11 12. 22. qu. How Abraham is saide to be the father of circumcision v. 12. 23. qu. How and where Abraham was promised to be heire of the world v. 13. 24. qu. Wherein Abraham was made heire of the world and wherein this inheritance consisted 25. qu. How faith is said to be made voide if they which are of the law be heires 26. qu. How they law is said to cause wrath 27. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 15. where no law is there is no transgression 27. qu. Who are meant by Abrahams seede which is of the law v. 16. 28. qu. Of the meaning of these words I haue made thee a father of many nations before God 29. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 17. who quickneth the dead and calleth those things which be not c. 30. qu. How God is said to call those things which be not as though they were 31. qu. Whether it be peculiar to God onely to quicken and raise the dead 32. qu. How Abraham is said against hope to haue beleeued vnder hope 33. qu. How Abrahams bodie is said to be dead v. 19. 34. qu. What promise of God made to Abraham it was whereof he is saide not to haue doubted v. 20. 35. qu. Whether Abraham doubted of Gods promise 36. qu. How Abraham is said to haue giuen glorie vnto God v. 20. 37. qu. What was imputed to Abraham for righteousnes 38. qu. Of these words Now it is not written for him onely c. v. 23. 39. qu. How Abrahams faith is to be imitated by vs. 40. qu. Wherein Abrahams faith and ours differ and wherein they agree 41. qu. How Christ is said to haue bin deliuered vp for our sinnes v. 25. 42. qu. Why the Apostle thus distinguisheth the benefits of our redemption ascribing remission of sinnes to Christs death and iustification to his resurrection v. 25. Questions vpon the fifth Chapter 1. qu. What peace the Apostle meaneth v. 1. 2. qu. Of the second benefit proceeding of our iustification which is to stand and persevere in the state of grace 3. qu. Of the benefit of our iustification the hope of euerlasting glorie 4. qu. How we are said to reioyce in tribulation 5. qu. How S. Paul and S. Iames are reconciled together the one making patience the cause of trialls or probation the other the effect 6. qu. Of the coherence of these words with the former because the loue of God is shed abroad in our hearts v. 5. 7. qu. What kind of loue the Apostle speaketh of saying the loue of God is shed abroad c. 8. qu. Why the loue of God is said to be shed abroad in our hearts 9. qu. Why it is added by the holy Ghost which is giuen vs. 10. qu. How Christ is said to haue died according to the time v. 6. 11. qu. Of the meaning of the 7. v. One will scarce die for a righteous man c. 12. qu. Of the difference betweene Christs dying for vs and those which died for their countrey 13. qu. Of the greatnes of the loue of God toward man in sending Christ to die for vs v. 8. 14. qu. Whether mans redemption could not otherwise haue beene wrought but by the death of Christ. 15. qu. Wherein the force of the Apostles reason consisteth saying Much more beeing reconciled we shall be saued by his life v. 9. 16. qu. Why the Apostle saith not onely so but we also reioyce in God c. v. 11. 17. qu. Whether any thing neede to be supplied in the Apostles speach v. 12. to make the sense perfect 18. qu. Who was that one by whome sinne entred into the world v. 12. 19. qu. What sinne the Apostle speaketh of here originall or actuall by one man sinne entred 20. qu. How sinne is said to haue entred into the world 21. qu. And death by sinne what kind of death the Apostle speaketh of 22. qu. Whether the death of the bodie be naturall or inflicted by reason of sinne 23. qu. Of the meaning of the Apostle in these words in whome all haue sinned and of the best reading thereof v. 12. 24. qu. Whether the Apostle meaneth originall or actuall sinnes saying in whome all haue sinned 25. qu. Of the coherence of these words Vnto the time of the Law was sinne in the world 26. qu. How sinne is said to haue beene vnto the time of the Law 27. qu. What sinne the Apostle meaneth which was in the world vnto the time of the law 28. qu. How sinne is said not to be imputed where there is no law 29. qu. How death is saide to haue raigned from Adam to Moses 30. qu. Of the meaning of these words which sinne not after the transgression of Adam 31. qu. How Adam is said to be the figure of him that was to come v. 14. 32. qu. Of the names and tearmes which the Apostle vseth in this comparison 33. qu. Of the comparison betweene Adam
reuealed against the will of God reuealed all desires and attempts cannot be without sinne against his secret will somewhat may be desired and yet without sinne so there beâ—â— subordination of our wills to the will of God as Augustine sheweth how sometime homo bona volutitate souls quod Deus non vult a man with a good mind willeth that which God willeth not as a good child desireth his fathers life whom the Lord will haue to die So Dauid prayed for his childs life of a fatherly affection when yet God purposed that the infant should die And againe saith Augustine it may be vt homo velit voluntate mala quod Deus vult bona that a man may wish and will that with an euill mind which God willeth well As an euill child may desire his fathers death which the Lord also purposeth August Enchirid. c. 101. So Paul in desiring here that which God willed not to come vnto the Romanes yet sinned not both because Gods will therein was not reuealed vnto him and beside he interposeth a condition if it were Gods will ex Pareo Quest. 36. How S. Paul was a debter vnto all v. 14. v. 14. I am a debter 1. The Apostle sheweth a thresold desire that he had to the Romanes first to come vnto them then to set them and now to preach vnto them which he amplyfieth by three reasons 1. from his owne office and calling 2. from the vertue and power of the Gospel v. 16. 3. on Gods behalfe the righteousnesse of God was reuealed c. Gorrham 2. This debt some take to be the gift of tongues which the Apostle had receiued in which behalfe he was a debter to all nations speaking with the tongues of them all Origen Theodoret But the other Apostles also had receiued the gift of tongues as well as Paul therefore in that sense they were debters as S. Paul was 3. Oleviane here maketh mention of a threefold debt 1. of nature as Esay 58.7 hide not thy selfe from thine owne flesh euery one is bound to succour his brother as beeing his owne flesh 2. the second bond of our debt is in regard of our redemption that we should willingly minister vnto them for whom Christ died 3. the third debt is in respect of our vocation and calling which the Apostle here hath relation vnto 4. So then Chrysostome and Ambrose doe well expound this debt of S. Pauls Apostolike calling so also Lyran. Pareus with others As he saith there was a necessitie laid vpon him and woe is vnto me if I preach not the Gospel 1. Cor. 9.17 5. But he is a debter first vnto God who is the creditor of whom he receiued all those graces which he had and therefore he was to dispose and employ them according to the will and Lawe of the Creator Faius who sent him vnto the Gentiles Act. 13.3 Separate me Paul and Barnabas c. which debt the Apostle is willing to discharge Hugo and because he could not yet come in person to preach vnto them he dischargeth his debt by writing Bucer 6. And he vseth this terme of debter least that he might be thought to be a busie bodie and noted of arrogancie for writing vnto the Romanes Mart. Quest. 37. Whom S. Paul vnderstandeth by the Grecians and Barbarians 1. Sometime the Apostle distinguisheth the nations into Iewes and Greekes v. 16. sometime into Iewes and Gentiles as Rom. 3.29 sometime he reckoneth vp altogether the Grecian the Iew Barbarian Scythian Coloss. 3.12 here he diuideth all other nations beside the Iewes into Greekes and Barbarians the Iewes he mentioneth not quia magister Gentium because he was the teacher or master of the Gentiles gloss 2. The Romanes are comprehended vnder the Grecians because from them they receiued their lawes and the knowledge of arts Martyr 3. Whereas he addeth both to the wise men and vnwise some take it for an exposition of the former by the Greekes vnderstanding the wise and by the Barbarians the vnwise Anselme Calvin Pareus But Chrysostome and Theodoret Gorrh. so also Beza annot Faius doe better referre it vnto particular men among the Greekes and Barbarians for there were among either of them some wise some vnwise 4. Anselme by the wise vnderstandeth righteous men by the vnwise sinners some beleeuers and vnbeleeuers But Chrysostome and Theodoret better interpret those to be wise men among the Gentiles which had humane wisdome and knowledge those to be vnwise which were ignorant and vnlearned 5. By this the Apostle sheweth that their humane wisdome was not sufficient to bring them to the knowledge of God And Chrysostome here well noteth how Plato a wise Philosopher thrice comming into Sicilia could not conuert one Tyrant but went away without any successe but Paul a tent-maker did not onely conuert Sicilia and Italie but runne thorough preaching almost the whole world 6. S. Paul here answereth a secret obiection it might haue beene said vnto him You may not spend so much time among the Grecians they are a people wise enough therefore he saith that not onely the vnwise but euen the most learned among them had neede to be instructed in the Gospel Tolet. 7. And Paul illud inculcat ob Iudeos doth vrge this because of the Iewes who thought that the preaching of the Gospel did onely belong vnto them Erasm. 8. Celsus against whome Origen did write did obiect this place to discredit the Gospel because it was offered to the vnlearned whereas he taketh that to be the most excellent doctrine that can be perceiued onely of the wise and learned But herein rather appeareth the dignitie and excellencie of the Gospel which propoundeth the way of saluation vnto all of what degree soeuer Faius And Gods wisdome herein sheweth it selfe that the Gospel beeing preached to the wise and vnwise both the one might be humbled when they see themselues to be fellow-schollers euen with the vnlearned whome they taught before and that the ignorant and simple should not despaire but that they also may come to the knowledge of saluation Calvin 9. And seeing the Apostle nameth the wise and vnwise not the rich or poore noble vnnoble because he speaketh of the knowledge of the Gospel which might seeme not so necessarie for them which were wise and learned Tolet. 10. And here is set forth a double commendation of the Gospel both from the excellencie thereof which was worthie the searching euen of the wise and learned Grecians and à facilitate from the facilitie thereof because the very vnlearned might be also capable of it Aretius 38. Quest. How Paul is not ashamed of the Gospel v. 16. 1. It might haue beene obiected vnto Paul The Gospel is euery where scorned and derided among the Gentiles and euery where it is spoken against therefore the Apostle professeth that he is not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ though it seeme neuer so contemptible vnto the world Olevian 2. And as he was not ashamed to preach the
the iust shall liue by faith haue no other meaning but this iustum secundum fidei norman vitam dirigere that the iust doth direct his life according to the rule of faith Contra. 1. He doth not place the words aright for thus are the words to be ioyned together the iust by faith shall liue so that by faith hath rather connexion with the first word the iust then with the last shall liue 2. the Apostle by life here vnderstandeth euerlasting saluation not our conuersion here as is said before v. 16. that the Gospell is the power of God to saluation to euerie one that beleeueth faith then bringeth to euerlasting saluation 2. The Rhemists haue this shift that faith together with workes must be here vnderstood to iustifie the Apostle saith not the iust shall liue by faith onely to this purpose also Bellarmine lib. 1. de iustificat c. 20. Contra. 1. If the whole life of the soule depended not vpon faith but partly vpon faith partly vpon workes then it might as well be said the iust shall liue by workes which were an absurd speach and not farre from blasphemie 2. the Apostle c. 3.28 excludeth works concluding that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the lawe then to liue by faith is to liue onely by faith as we are iustified onely by faith without workes 3. Nowe although the iust liue by faith and not by workes yet faith liueth by workes it must be a liuely and effectuall faith working by loue by the which the iust man liueth and not a dead faith 3. Pererius here slyeth to their old distinction of iustification the first which is by faith the second is perfited by workes so faith is said to iustifie a man because it is exordium fundamentum radix iustificationis the beginning foundation and roote of iustification Perer. dâ—sput 8. in 1. ad Roman sect 46. Contra. 1. That which he calleth the second iustification is properly satisfaction which is the fruit of iustification as the Apostle saith Rom. 6.22 beeing now freed from sinne and made seruants vnto God you haue your fruit in holines and the end euerlasting life where the whole state of the faithfull man is diuided into these three parts his iustification and freedome from sinne which is by faith the fruit of his iustification which is holynesse and the ende or reward which is euerlasting life 2. to liue by faith sheweth that not the beginning but the perfection of our life is by faith and by nothing but faith as the Apostle saith the iustice of God is reuealed from faith to faith faith is the beginning and end of this iustice there is no time wherein saluation is giuen vnto any but by faith as Thomas expoundeth see before quest 42. 4. Bellarmine hath an other deuise he maketh this the meaning the iust shall liue by faith that is ex fide patienter expectare quae Deus promisit by faith he doth patiently expect those things which God hath promised So he would haue it vnderstood rather of patient wayting and expecting then of iustifying lib. 2. de effect sacram c. 9. Contra. This patient expecting of Gods promises is indeede a fruit of iustifying faith for it is the ground of things hoped for and he that is iustified by faith hath this grace also of patient expectation but to liue by faith comprehendeth more 2. and that by this phrase to liue by faith the Apostle vnderstandeth to be iustified by faith is euident Gal. 2.20 Thus I liue not I now but Christ liueth in me and in that I now liue in the flesh I liue by the faith if the Sonne of God c. 3. And whereas Bellarmine further obiecteth that the Prophets meaning from whom the Apostle taketh this saying is none other but to note their patience that waited for the Lords promises it hath beene shewed before qu. 44. that the Apostle keepeth the Prophets sense and doth most fitly apply this sentence to iustification by faith 5. But the Romanists against iustification by faith onely thus obiect 1. It seemeth a verie absurd thing to make men beleeue that they shall be iustified by faith onely without either satisfaction for their sinnes or the workes of righteousnesse by this meanes nothing could be easier then by faith to be saued 2. And this doctrine will make men presumptuous that they will care for no good workes and so there should be no more vse either of precepts to exhort them vnto the workes of pietie nor of threatnings to terrifie them from sinne Contra. 1. Though that faith neede no satisfaction for sinne in our selues nor good workes as helping vnto iustification yet it apprehendeth the satisfaction made by Christs suffering for our sinnes and workes are also necessarie as testimonies of our faith though not as helpes of our iustification neither is such a faith liuely and effectuall so easie a thing seeing man hath no power of himselfe to attaine vnto it vnlesse God doe giue it and to beleeue in Christ as a Christian ought is found to be the hardest thing in the whole world 2. Neither is this a doctrine of presumption nor yet doth it make voide precepts and comminations for faith though it require not workes as causes and helpes to saluation yet it cannot be without them as fruits and effects so that the lawe of faith establisheth the lawe of workes as the Apostle sheweth c. 3.31 doe we then make the lawe of none effect through faith God forbid yea we establish the lawe Pareus Controv. 17. How the Gospel is the power of God to saluation to everie one that beleeueth v. 16. This and such like places which ascribe iustification and saluation to faith as Ioh. 3.16 that whosoeuer beleeueth in him should not perish Act. 13.39 by him euerie one that beleeueth is iustified Bellarmine would thus elude 1. he saith that these Scriptures must be vnderstood negatiuely that without faith none are iustified not that onely by faith they are iustified 2. then by all are vnderstood all nations that there is no difference between Iew and Gentile but that one common way to saluation is propounded to them all 3. And it beeing applyed to euerie particular man the meaning is that not faith of it selfe alone but with other things as hope charitie iustifieth Bellar. lib. 1. de iustifie c. 22. Contra. 1. Yes these sayings hold affirmatiuely that faith is sufficient vnto saluation for our Sauiour saith Iohn 5. he that beleeueth c. hath euerlasting life and is passed from death to life that which giueth a man a present assurance and reall possession of euerlasting life is alone availeable to saluation 2. True it is that none of what nation soeuer are excluded but euerie one that beleeueth wheresoeuer is iustified this confirmeth the doctrine of iustification by faith that there is no other way to saluation either for Iewe or Gentile 3. And if the Gospell be the power of God to saluation
entercourse is betweene God onely and his elect as Act. 13.48 thâ—â— beleeued as many as were ordained to eternall life God hath a speciall care of their saluation that are ordained vnto life 2. there is a mutuall relation betweene the faith of God and the elect the elect are by faith perswaded of the faith of God and the truth of his promises 3. on Gods behalfe there is offred his word on our part it is required that we should keepe that worthie thing which is committed vnto vs 2. Tim. 1.14 Gryneus Doct. 4. That the Sacraments depend not of the worthines of the Minister As the Apostle here saith shall their vnbeleefe make the faith of God without effect howsoeuer the minister be disposed the Sacraments want not their force and efficacie because they depend vpon the truth of God which the incredulitie or misbeleefe of man cannot make voide Martyr Doct. 5. There are alwaies some vnbeleeuers and incredulous persons in the Church Shall their vnbeleefe c. Then it followeth that as there were some vnbeleeuers euen among the Iewes so there are still such carnall men and hypocrites in the Church and yet it ceaseth not to be a Church we should not therefore be afraid when we see carnall men and euil liuers to remaine within the Church but consider that such there must be as the Apostle saith that they which are approoued may be knowne 1. Cor. 11.19 Pareus Doct. 6. Who shall iudge the world and how v. 6. Els how shall God iudge the world 1. Here we learne that God is the iudge of the world and he shall iudge the world by Iesus Christ Act. 17.31 2. and this iudgement of God consisteth both in his knowledge that nothing is hidde from him Eccles. 12.14 God will bring euerie work vnto iudgment and euerie secret thing and in his power whereby he now present both directeth ordereth and disposeth euery thing and afterward shal giue vnto euerie one according to his workes 3. God iudgeth two wayes 1. by his word reuealed which teacheth the true faith and worship of God and discerneth the true faith and doctrine from false so our Sauiour saith Ioh. 12.48 the word which I haue spoken shall iudge him This word then ought to be iudge of all controversies the Church cannot iudge because it is a partie as when the question is which is the true which the false Church here the Church is a partie therefore the word and not the Church must be iudge as the lawe is the iudge of ciuill controversies the Church notwithstanding is said to iudge but improperly when it searcheth out and pronounceth the sentence of the word 2. God iudgeth by his deed and worke both present in disposing euerie thing to that end which he thinketh best and in proposing examples of his iudgements euen in this life and therefore Dauid saith Psal. 9.5 thou sittest in the throne that iudgest right and by his iudgement to come in the finall execution of his sentence vpon all both good and bad wherein he shall reward euerie one according to his works ex Pareo Doct. 7. Our doctrine must be grounded vpon the Scriptures v. 10. As it is written hereupon Origen giueth this good note non nostras cum docemus sea spiritus sancti proferamus sententias let vs not bring forth our owne but the sentences of the spirit when we teach c. the Preacher of the truth must confirme his doctrine by the word of truth for faith must not be grounded vpon any mans word yea the Berrheans searched and examined the sermons of the Apostles by the Scriptures Act. 17.11 Therefore neither are such preachers to be commended which are verie rare in citing of Scriptures in their sermons but they are much more worthie of blame which are more frequent in the citing of prophane testimonies of Philosophers and Poets and such like then of the Prophets and Apostles Doct. 8. Of the corruption of mans nature v. 10. There is none righteous no not one 1. It is euident that mans nature is wholly corrupt as both the Scripture testifieth and daily experience sheweth 2. this corruption of nature is a generall deprauation and prauitie of nature beeing inclined vnto all euill and by this prauitie and euilnes it is made guilty of death 3. this corruption of mankind is not of God who created man good but of man himselfe through the instigation of the deuill 4. it is generall and vniuersall none are exempted from it there is none righteous v. 10. all haue sinned v. 13. 5. the knowledge thereof commeth by the lawe v. 20. 6. It must be knowne confessed and acknowledged of all that euerie mouth may be stopped v. 19. and God onely may haue the glorie 7. the remedie against this naturall prauitie and corruption is by the Redemption thorough Christ v. 24. Pareus Doct. 9. Of the difference of true and false religion v. 19. That euerie mouth may be stopped This is a true marke and touchstone whereby to discerne true religion from false for that religion which onely giueth honour vnto God and denieth all power vnto man to helpe toward saluation and so stoppeth mans mouth and taketh from him all ostentation and vaine glorie that is the true religion whereas on the contrarie that which giueth vnto man matter of ostentation and reioycing is to be suspected of falshood and hypocrisie such is the doctrine of Poperie which ascribeth much vnto mans free will and merits Doct. 10. Of true iustification by faith the manner propertie vse and end thereof v. 21. Now is the righteousnesse of God made manifest without the lawe c. from this place to the ende of the chapter S. Paul setteth forth the doctrine of iustification 1. how there is a right and true iustification which is by faith in Christ and a false iustification by the workes of the lawe 2. from the true iustification are excluded not onely the workes of the ceremoniall lawe and of freewill but all workes whatsouer for the lawe of faith is set against the lawe of workes in generall v. 27. 3. the first cause efficient of this iustification is the grace of God the next is redemption purchased by Christ v. 24. 4. the matter or obiect of iustification are all beleeuers v. 22. 5. the forme is the imputation and application of Christs righteousnesse obtained by his obedience and blood 6. the manner is through faith in his blood v. 25. 7. the ende is the declaration of the righteousnesse of God by the forgiuenesse of sinnes v. 25. 8. the effect thereof is our reconciliation with God v. 25. 9. it is reuealed in the Gospel v. 21. 10. and this iustification was not vnknowne vnto the faithfull vnder the lawe hauing testimonie of the lawe and the Prophets ver 21. Doct. 11. How God hath set forth Christ and to what ende v. 25. Whom God hath set forth to be a reconciliation 1. God hath set forth Christ to be our propitiator and reconciler
compared to the beasts that perish Psal. 49.12 but in Christ we are made like vnto the Angels In these and other points is our state more perfect in Christ then it should haue beene in Adam if he had not sinned Quest. 37. In what sense the grace of God is said to haue abounded vnto more v. 15. The vulgar Latine giueth occasion of this question which in the first clause readeth multi many be dead thorough the offence of one but in the second he saith grace in plures abundavit hath abounded vnto more and this reading seemeth Origen to follow Here then many doe busie themselues to shewe how grace in Christ hath abounded vnto more then sinne in Adam 1. Origen saith that they are said to be more because Adam himselfe from whom the death of sinne was deriued vnto others additur numero eorum c. is added to the number of them which haue receiued grace in Christ But this is too curious neither agreeable to the Apostles meaning for seeing the comparison is instituted betweene Adam and Christ though Adam indeede were saued by Christ yet each of these Adam and Christ with their ofspring must be considered here as in themselues neither can the adding of one to this number make them more which haue obtained grace in Christ then them which are lost in Adam 2. Some by those many which are dead in Adam vnderstand onely those which sinned by imitating of Adam that is commit actuall sinnes and so they reade the former verse affirmatiuely Death raigned ouer those which sinned after the like manner of the transgression of Adam and then the grace of Christ aboundeth vnto more euen vnto infants that sinned not in like manner as Adam did that is actually thus Ambros. gloss ordinar Gorrhan But in this sense infants should be out of the number of those that are dead in Adam whereas the Apostle saith in whom all haue sinned yea infants and all sinned in Adam 3. Pererius hath this quaint obseruation that there may be found of Adam carnally propagated and yet not infected with his sinne as the Blessed Virgin Marie yet none can be found spiritually regenerate but by the grace of Christ But this conceit of his is against the Apostle who saith that in Adam all sinned and Origen thus collecteth videsne vt à peccato nullum Paulus excuset see you not how the Apostle excuseth none from sinne If all haue sinned in Adam then cannot the Virgin Marie be exempted from originall sinne 4. Pererius hath an other conceit that the grace of Christ is said to haue abounded vnto more because that if God should create a newe kind of men not of Adam they should stand in neede of the grace of Christ and yet they not comming of Adam could not be infected with his sinne Perer. disput 10. But S. Paul speaketh not of a possibilitie of supposall how grace might abound vnto more but of the actuall and reall abounding of grace vnto many in Christ and if there were a newe creation of men they should be created in a perfect estate as Adam was before his fall and so should not keeping of that state haue neede of a redeemer in that behalfe 5. But this is a needelesse question seeing that in the originall in both places the Apostle vseth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 multi many not in the comparatiue plures more therefore this question is impertinent how the grace of Christ is said to haue abounded vnto more Neither doth the Apostle giue vnto the grace of Christ the preheminence in respect of the number but of the more powerfull effect as is shewed before quest 35. 6. Haymo in both places vnderstandeth the elect they are the many which are dead in Adam temporally and they are the many vnto whom grace hath much more abounded because in Adam onely they are infected with originall sinne in Christ both originall and actuall are pardoned But those whom the Apostle here calleth many ver 18. he expresseth to be all he meaneth then all mankind in generall which die in Adam Quest. 38. How all men are said to be iustified in Christ v. 18. 1. Huberus therein ioyning the right hand of fellowship with the old Pelagians hence would prooue the Vniuersalitie of grace that all in Christ are absolutely iustified as in Adam all die But then it would followe by the force of the Apostles comparison that all should verily be saued in Christ as they are by nature sinners in Adam see the confutation of this error at large among the controuersies 2. Some vnderstand this of the sufficiencie of iustification by Christ that it is sufficient for all if they had grace to receiue it Lyran. But the Apostle speaketh not of a possibilitie of iustification but of an actuall collation of this benefit as Adams sinne really and actually is transfused to his posteritie 3. Tolet vnderstandeth generally all men whosoeuer and by the iustification of life he would haue signified the resurrection which shall be of all men in generall both good and bad as all men are subiect to death in Adam both good and bad But the Apostle before v. 17. called that raigning in life which here he nameth the iustification of life but the wicked that rise againe shall not raigne in life therefore they are not partakers of the iustification of life 4. Haymo better vnderstandeth here the vniuersalitie of the elect omnes electos praedestinatos ad vitam all that are elect and predestinate vnto life that as Adam infected all his posteritie carnally descending of him so Christ iustifieth all which beleeue in him to the same purpose Augustine vnderstandeth omnes viuificandos all that are to be quickened and made aliue because none are iustified but in Christ lib. 6. cont Iulian. c. 12. so the interlinearie glosse vnderstandeth omnes sui all that are Christs all are iustified qui sunt Christi which are Christs Pareus Quest. 39. Why the Apostle saith v. 19. By one mans disobedience many were made sinners and not all 1. Origen by sinnes here vnderstandeth those which continue in a custome of sinne a righteous man may sinne but he therefore cannot be called a sinner and so not all borne of Adam but many are said to be sinners to the same purpose Tolet annot 25. But the Apostle speaketh here of Adams disobedience whereby many were sinners which is deriued by propagation and learned by imitation therefore he speaketh generally of all that sinned in Adam and not onely of some speciall sinners 2. Theodoret thinketh the Apostle nameth many because all did not continue in Adams sinne but some permanserunt in decretis naturae c. did remaine in the decree of nature and followed vertue as Abel Henoch Noe c. But euen those also were borne in sinne as the Apostle said before v. 12. that all sinned in Adam and they were sinners by nature though regenerate by Christ. 3. Tolet thinketh the Apostle hath
amorem tautopere hoc ardet desiderio for the loue of Christ he is so much inflamed with this desire it followeth not therefore he desireth to be separated from Christ therefore from his loue he wisheth not to be depriued amicita Christi sed fructu amicitiae of the friendship of Christ but onely of the fruit of his friendship which was euerlasting felicitie Pareus 2. Obiect If S. Paul herein respected the glorie of God in the saluation of the Iewes why did he not likewise wish to be separated for the saluation of the Gentiles Answ. S. Paul no doubt was readie to doe the like for them but there was not the like occasion for the Gentiles flocked to Christ and receiued the Gospell but the Iewes were stubborne and euerie where resisted their calling and therefore for them he maketh this vowe Mart. 3. Obiect But S. Paul knewe that he could not indeede be separated from Christ as he professed before c. 8.38 that nothing could separate him from the loue of God in Christ. Ans. 1. Lyranus thinketh that this vowe of Paul as likewise that of Moses was secundum dispositionem inferioris partis animae according to the disposition of the inferiour part of the mind where the affections are for loue nec mensuram scit nec modum knoweth neither measure nor manner not in the deliberate and reasonable part of the minde 2. But the better answear is that it was votum conditionale a conditionall not an absolute vowe if it were the will of God as Christs petition was for the passing away of the cuppe of his death if it were his fathers will Pareus so the Apostle speaketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after a sort and with condition if it might be Gryneus And to the same purpose before them Oecumenius 〈◊〉 absolute haec dixit tanquam possibilia sed sub conditione he spake not these things absolutely as if they were possible but with a condition for if Paul for the loue of Christ could haue beene separated from Christ he should againe haue beene so much the more firmely ioyned vnto Christ for if loue be the cause of vnion then so great loue of the Apostle would haue caused so much nearer coniunction 4. Obiect Though a man be bound by the rule of charitie to giue his temporall life for an others spirituall life yet he is not bound to giue his soule euerlastingly to perish if it were in his choice that others should not so perish like as one is not bound to redeeme an others bodily life by the losse of his so neither the spirituall life of the soule by the losse of his owne Tolet thus obiecteth annot 4. and therefore he inferreth that in this sense it had beene an inordinate and vaine desire in the Apostle Answ. 1. Some thinke that euery man is bound to redeeme the saluation of others by the losse of his owne sauing that fewe can attaine vnto such perfection of charitie for the rule of charitie is this that we should doe that for others which we would haue done for our selues now a man had rather that an other should giue himselfe to ransome him then he should perish and Christ was enflamed with such charitie that he became a curse for vs and the like minde should be in Christs members to wish to be accursed for their brethren as Origen inferreth Quid mirum si cum Dominus pro servis sit factus maledictum servus pro â—â—â—â—ribus anathema fiat what maruell is it when the Lord was made a curse for the seruants if a seruant become an anathema for his brethren Pareus also giueth instance in Christ who was made a curse for vs dub 1. Contra. 1. That saying of our Sauiour whatsoeuer you would that one should doe vnto you doe vnto them Augustine well vnderstandeth â—â—â—â—cta iusta voluntate of a right and iust minde not otherwise for if a man could be content vpon a lewde mind that his wife should commit adulterie with an other it followeth not that the other should yeeld his wife to his wicked desire so for a man to wish that an other would giue his soule for his were no iust or equall desire 2. Christ though he did beare the punishment due to vs and did beare the curse of the lawe yet he was neuer avulsâ—â— Ã Deo separated or pulled away from God Mart. and there is great difference between the person of the Redeemer and his exceeding loue and those which are redeemed who herein cannot be imitators of Christ. 2. As these doe iustifie Pauls desire hauing relation onely to the loue of his brethren so Chrysostome aymeth onely at the glorie of God that in respect thereof Paul made no account of his saluation but he expressely maketh not mention thereof for modestie sake lest he should seeme to boast too much of his loue toward Christ But Tolet sheweth the insufficiencie of this reason because Paul had professed before that nothing could separate him from the loue of Christ he might also as modestly haue wished here to be an anathema for Christ. 3. I preferre therefore Calvins solution that neither Saint Paul had here respect vnto the glorie of God alone or vnto the saluation of his brethren alone sed charitatem hominum in studio gloriae Dei contungimus but we ioyne the loue of men with a desire of the glorie of God c. he wisheth the saluation of his brethren with respect vnto the glorie of God as Moses in the like case in making request for his people therein desired the promoting of Gods glorie Now the Apostle saith for his brethren vt inserviret causae to apply himselfe to the cause in hand which was to testifie the great desire that he had to their saluation yet as ioyned with the glorie of Christ as is euident v. 5. where he addeth who is God ouer all Blessed for euer Mart. So then not withstanding these or any other such like obiections I preferre Chrysostomes interpretation of these words of the Apostle who in the zeale to Gods glorie loue to his brethren wisheth that he were cut off from Christ so they might be saued according to that saying in the Gospell that it were better that one of the members should perish then that the whole body should be cast into hell for the Apostle had herein respect vnto the glorie of God should haue more appeared in the sauing of the multitude of that nation as the whole bodie he beeing cut off but as one member then that he should be saued and the whole bodie perish to this purpose Chrysost. vpon that place in the Gospel Anselme likewise vpon this place saith that Paul optabat perire desired to perish so the rest might be saued and this sense he confirmeth by the like desire of two great Prophets Moses and Micah this latter c. 2.11 wisheth thus I would I were a man not hauing the spirit and that I did speake lies voluit se