may set one auncient writer against an other to this purpose Bellarm. lib. 3. de verb. Dei c. 14. Contra. 1. Though some Greeke copies might haue those words yet the most and the most auncient haue them not as is euident by the Greeke commentaries and the Syrian translator followeth the Greeke text as it is now extant 2. The Apostle speaketh not of a bare consent vnto euill but of fauouring patronizing and taking pleasure in them which is more then to doe euill for this one may doe of infirmitie the other proceedeth of a setled malice 3. the vnderstanding is in the iudgement of the minde not in the practise and therefore to know a thing and yet not to know or vnderstand it includes a contradiction 4. the Greeke authors and commentaries are more to be respected in this case for the finding out of the best reading in the Greeke then the Latine writers 23. Controv. Against the Popish distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes v. 32. Worthie of death Hence the Rhemists inferre that some sinnes are mortall that is worthie of damnation some veniall that is pardonable of their owne nature and not worthie of damnation Contra. 1. This distinction is contrarie to the Scripture which saith the wages of sinne is death Rom. 6.23 no sinne is excepted and whosoeuer continueth not in all things written in the law is vnder the curse Gal. 3.10 And if any sinne were veniall in it owne nature it would follow that Christ died not for all sinnes for those sinnes which are pardonable in themselues neede not Christs pardon 2. Indeede there are degrees of sinne and some are worthie of greater condemnation then others and are more easily pardoned yet in Gods iustice euery sinne deserueth death which are through Gods mercie made veniall both the lesse and greater sinnes so that one and the same sinne may be mortall to the impenitent and yet veniall to the penitent beleeuer 6. Morall observations 1. Observ. v. 1. Called to be an Apostle none then must take vpon them any Ecclesiasticall function but they which are thereunto called and appointed of God Heb. 5.4 2. Observ. v. 5. For obedience to the faith the Lord straightly chargeth that obedience should be giuen to the faith of his Sonne whence are these sayings Psal. 2.12 Kisse the Sonne Matth. 17.5 Heare him they then professe not the Gospel of Christ truly who make onely a shew thereof in words but denie obedience in deede 3. Observ. v. 7. Grace to you and peace this inward peace of conscience is that peace which can not be taken from vs all other things in the world are temporall but the grace and fauour of God and this inward peace ne morie ipsa abscinduntur are not cut off by death it selfe Chrysost. for this peace we ought all to labour which Christ hath left vnto vs after an other manner then the world leaueth peace Ioh. 14.27 4. Observ. v. 8. I giue thanks c. for you all This is true charitie to pray one for an other and to giue thankes vnto God for the graces bestowed vpon others as if they were conferred vpon our selues And as here the Apostle praieth for the Church so the Church praieth for the Apostle S. Peter Act. 12.5 the Pastor and people are hereby taught one to pray for an other 5. Observ. v. 12. That I might haue consolation together with you Herein the Apostles modestie appeareth who taketh not himselfe to be so perfect but that he might receiue some comfort euen by the faith of the Romanes Let no man therefore despise the gifts and graces of others for euery one may profit by an other euen as one member helpeth an other 7. Observ. v. 13. I haue beene letted hetherto Seeing the purposes of holy men as here this of S. Paul was hindred it teachet vs that we should commend and commit all our purposes and counsels to Gods prouidence and fatherly direction 8. Observ. v. 17. The iust shall liue by faith Hence Chrysostome inferreth that men should take heede of curiositie to know a reason of Gods works but they onely must beleeue As Abraham was not curious when God bad him sacrifice his sonne but he obeyed without any further reasoning or disputation But the Israelites when they vnderstood that the Cananites were as gyants because they saw no reason or likelihood to ouercome them doubted and so fell in the wildernes so he concludeth vides quantum sit incredulitatis barathrum you see what a dangerous downefall incredulitie is and what a safe defence faith is 9. Observ. v. 24. Wherefore God gaue them vp to the lusts c. The Lord sometime gaue the idolatrous Samaritans ouer to lyons 2. King 17. but he giueth ouer these idolatrous Gentiles to their owne hearts lusts and vile affections which did more tyranize ouer them then lyons and tygres for when the bodie is giuen vp to wild beasts and depriued of life nothing happeneth against the condition of our mortall nature but when the minde is ruled by lust and so the affection preuaileth against reason this is monstrous and vnnaturall Perer. disputat 20. 10. Observ. Which is to be blessed for euer We are taught by the example of the Apostle when as we speake of the maiestie of God to breake forth into his praise as the Apostle doth here and c. 9.5 1. Tim. 1.17 11. Observ. Chrysostome further obserueth that as God still remaineth blessed though his glorie were defaced by the idolaters as much as in them lay so likewise the members of Christ when they are reuiled and railed vpon are not thereby hurt nonne vides adamanters cum percutitur percutit iterū like as the adamant when it is smitten it smiteth againe and leaueth a dint in the hammer that striketh it The second Chapter 1. The text with the diuers readings THerefore thou art inexcusable O man O sonne of man T. whosoeuer thou art that iudgest thy neighbour T. but this is not in the originall for wherein thou iudgest an other L.T. in that that thou iudgest an other G. or in that wherein thou iudgest an other but in the originall it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for wherein the antecedent is omitted thou condemnest thy selfe for thou that iudgest doest the same things not thou doest the same things which thou iudgest L. in the originall it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thou iudging that is which iudgest the relatiue is referred to the person not to the thing 2 But we know are sure B. that the iudgement of God is according to truth against those V. B.T.Be G. vpon those L. the preposition is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in against which commit such things 3 And thinkest thou this O thou man that iudgest them which doe such things condemnest them which c. Be. but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here vsed signifieth properly to iudge 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to condemne that thou shalt escape the iudgement of God 4 Or despisest thou the riches
they also without the mercie of God were subiect by nature vnto euerlasting death 2. But Origen manifestly interpreteth the Apostle to speake of originall sinne for he saith as Leui was in Abrahams Ioynes when he payed tithes to Melchizedeck sic omnes homines erant iu lumbis Adae c. so all men that are born were in the Ioynes of Adam and when he was expelled out of Paradise they were expelled with him c. 3. touching the scope of the place that which followeth v. 13. vnto the time of the lawe was sinne in the world comprehendeth also originall sinne which Erasmus would haue vnderstood onely of actuall that this place might be taken so likewise as shall be further shewed when we come to that place 2. But Theodoret goeth yet further then Erasmus for he doth not onely exclude originall sinne here applying the Apostles words onely to actuall sinne but he thinketh further that Adams sinne was not the cause of the entrance of sinne vpon his posteritie but the occasion onely for they hauing sinned became mortall and beeing mortall they begat mortall children and so were subiect to perturbations and consequently vnto sinne and so he concludeth vim peccati non esse naturalem c. that the force of sinne is not naturall for then they which sinne should be free from punishment for that which is naturall cannot be helped sed naturam ad peccatum procliuem esse factam but yet nature was made prone and apt to sinne to this purpose Theodoret But the Apostle euidently sheweth that not onely death is entred into the world but sinne also for how could infants in the iustice of God be subiect vnto death if they were not also guiltie of sinne 3. But the Pelagians goe yet a steppe further and denie that there is any originall sinne at all and that Adams sinne is not transfused to his posteritie by any naturall propagation but onely a corrupt imitation which heresie shall be confuted among the controversies Quest. 25. Of the coherence of these words vnto the time of the lawe was sinne in the world 1. Some make this connexion that the Apostle directly prooueth his former assertion v. 12. that in Adam all sinned and therefore are subiect to death and this is prooued by the contrarie because before there was any lawe giuen men were not punished for their actuall sinnes which were then in the world for there is no imputation of sinne vnto punishment where is no lawe seeing then death was not inflicted for actuall sinnes it followeth that it was for originall sinne Tolet. But this is not the coherence for he taketh sinne onely for actuall sinne whereas the Apostle spoke before of originall sinne 2. Some will haue all this verse to containe an obiection and to be vttered by S. Paul in the person of the adversarie and obiecter Where no lawe is there is no sinne imputed but before Moses there was no lawe giuen therefore no such sinne was imputed But all the words of this verse cannot containe the obiection because the first clause vnto the time of the law was sinne in the world are contrarie to the obiection for it is affirmed that sinne was in the world which the obiectio excepteth against beside Beza well obserueth that where the Apostle speaketh in the person of an other he inserteth some note or signification thereof 3. Calvin suspendeth all this sentence by a parenthesis which Beza misliketh because it hath a very good coherence with the former verse 4. Some thinke that the Apostle here maketh not an obiection but rather preuenteth it and maketh answear vnto a supposed obiection for it might haue beene thus excepted a-against the former words in whom all haue sinned that there was no lawe giuen vntill Moses and where no lawe is there is no imputation of sinne to this obiection the Apostle answeareth by way of cōcession vnto part that though sinne be not imputed without a law yet sinne was in the world before the lawe as it appeareth by the effects thereof namely death which reigned ouer all as it followeth v. 14. to this purpose Martyr Piscator Lyran. 5. But this rather is the right coherence and connexion of these words with the former whereas the Apostle had inferred that all in Adam were sinners and so subiect to death instance might be giuen of those which liued vntill the time of the law that vnto them sinne was not imputed because they had no lawe giuen them Then the Apostle answeareth this obiection proouing that death came into the world because of originall sinne and first he taketh it for graunted that there was then sinne in the world before the Lawe v. 13. as also death then he reasoneth thus if death were in the world and not inflicted for actuall sinnes then was it imputed for originall but it was not inflicted for actuall sinnes which he proueth by two reasons first by that which was obiected there was no lawe giuen for actuall sinnes and therefore they were not imputed secondly by the instance of children which committed no actuall sinnes and yet died therefore death entred into the world because of originall sinne Pare Quest. 26. How sinne is said to haue beene vnto the time of the lawe 1. Some doe vnderstand this sentence inclusiuely including also the time of the lawe and expound vnto the lawe vnto the ende and terme of the lawe for sinne was both before and vnder the lawe which could not take away sinne vntill Christ came thus Augustine lib. 1. de peccat remission c. 10. and Thodoret likewise Haymo who vnderstandeth by the lawe finem legis initium gratiae the ende of the lawe and beginning of grace and maketh it like vnto this speach the Hunnes raigned vsque ad Attylam regem vnto king Attylas that is vnto his death But the words following are against this exposition sinne is not imputed where is no lawe for if the time vnder the lawe be here comprehended how could it be said that then sinne was not imputed whereas by the lawe it is most of all imputed 2. Origen hath this singular exposition by himselfe he vnderstandeth here not the written but the naturall lawe and he supplieth the word mortuum dead sinne is dead vnto the time of the lawe that is till children come to yeares of discretion to vnderstand the lawe of nature and light of reason sinne is not imputed vnto them As it is forbidden that a child should smite his parents but in a boy of 4. or 5. yeare old it is counted no sinne so to doe and to this purpose he also interpreteth the word world the Apostle saith not among men but in the world because in the world there are vnreasonable creatures which are not capable of sinne and so he thinketh that S. Paul vnderstandeth children which are not yet capable of reason to this effect Origen But first it is euident that the Apostle by the lawe vnderstandeth the written lawe of Moses as
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
to the second or next vnderworking cause as the Apostle saith of beneficence or liberalitie that it worketh or causeth thanksgiuing vnto God sometime the effect is ascribed by this word vnto the instrumentall cause as Rom. 4.15 the lawe is said to worke or cause wrath and our light and momentanie afflictions are said to cause or worke vnto vs an exceeding weight of glorie 2. Cor. 4.17 because they are meanes to withdrawe our mindes from earthly things and to stirre vp faith in vs So tribulation worketh patience not as the efficient cause but as the organe and instrument whereby the spirit worketh patience in vs it procureth patience not sicut causa effectum c. as the cause the effect as Caietan but eam exercendo augendo ostendendo in exercising encreasing and shewing forth our patience Gorrh to the same purpose Pererius exercendae patientiae materia occasio est tribulation is the matter and occasion of exercising our patience This then is to be vnderstood according to the phrase of Scripture which doth vse to pronounce that of the signe and instrument which is proper vnto the thing as when it speaketh of the Sacraments for of it selfe tribulation worketh not patience as is seene in the wicked who thereby are driuen to impatience and despaire here then is no place to prooue any merit in the afflictions of the faithfull Controv. 5. That we are not iustified by the inherent habite of charitie Whereas the Apostle saith v. 5. The loue of God is shed abroad in our hearts c. Pererius vnderstanding the Apostle to speake here of that loue and charitie which is infused as an habite into the minde whereby we loue God setteth downe here certaine positions concerning this inherent charitie 1. he affirmeth that this charitie is that iustice whereby we are formally made iust and righteous before God disput 2. numer 10. 2. this charitie whereby we are iustified he affirmeth esse donum omnium donerum maximum to be a gift farre exceeding all other gifts 3. this charitie re non distingui à gratia gratum faciente is not indeede distinguished from grace making vs acceptable vnto God 4. Against the opinion of Caietane Scotus Gabriel he holdeth that there is in those which are iustified the habite of charitie permanent and remaining when the act ceaseth whereby they are formally made iust before God otherwise they should not be helde to be iust before God in their sleepe or when they cease to worke disput 3. numer 17.18 Contra. Although all these questions are here impertinent because the Apostle treateth not here of the charitie or loue which is in man toward God but of Gods loue toward vs as hath beene shewed at large before quest 7. yet it shall not be amisse briefly to counterpoise these erroneous assertions with the contrarie true and sound positions 1. An inherent righteousnesse and infused charitie in the faithfull we denie not but not such as whereby we are formally made righteous and iustified before God both because all our righteousnesse is as a stayned cloth Esay 64. it is imperfect and weake and therefore not able to iustifie vs and for that the Scripture testifieth that it is the righteousnesse of Christ which is applyed by faith whereby we are iustified before God as the Apostle calleth it The righteousnesse of God thorough the faith of Christ Rom. 3.22 Philip 3.9 2. Charitie is not simply the greatest of all other gifts and so absolutely preferred before faith but onely wherein they are compared together namely in respect of the continuance because faith and hope shall cease when we enioy those things which are beleeued and hoped for but loue shall remaine still so Chrysostome expoundeth the Apostle 1. Cor. 13.13 Thus Hugo saith well that charitie is said to be the greatest quia non excidit because it falleth not away but otherwise faith is the greater in quantum est cognitio generans omnes alias virtutes as it is a knowledge and engendreth all other vertues 3. The Thomists are herein contrarie to the Iesuite who affirme that gratia gratum faciens grace which maketh vs acceptable to God is in respect of charitie as the soule is to the powers and faculties which proceede from it And so indeede the grace that maketh vs acceptable vnto God is the loue and fauour of God in Christ which is as the efficient cause of that other loue and charitie which is infused into vs and wrought in vs by the holy Ghost And that our loue of God maketh vs not first acceptable vnto him the Apostle euidently testifieth 1. Iob. 4.10 Herein is loue not that we loued him but that he loued vs we were first then accepted and beloued of God before we could loue him againe 4. We graunt that faith hope and charitie are habits of the minde infused by the spirit and permanent in the soule for as the wicked doe attaine vnto euill habites of vice and sinne so the faithfull haue the habite of vertue but this is the difference that an euill habite is acquisitus gotten by euill custome but the good habites of the intellectuall vertues of faith loue hope are iufusi infused and wrought in vs by the spirit But we denie that by any such inherent habite we are made formally iust they are not causes of our iustification but rather the fruits and effects we haue the habite of faith because the spirit of God worketh in vs beleefe and we loue God because he loued vs first and gaue vs his spirit which worketh this loue in vs Faius So then the faithfull euen in their sleepe are iustified not by any inherent habit but because they are accepted of God in Christ as the Apostle saith Christ died for vs that whether we wake or sleepe we should liue together with him Controv. 6. Against the heresie of impious Socinus who denieth that Christ died for our sinnes and payed the ransome for them Whereas the Apostle here saith v. 8. that Christ died for vs we according to the Scriptures so vnderstand it that he offered a sacrifice for our sinnes Heb. 10.12 that he as our high Priest offred himselfe for our redemption Heb. 7.27 that he was our suretie and paied our ransome for vs Heb. 7.22 and saued vs from our sinnes in bearing the punishment due vnto the samâ—â—nd so he died for vs that is in our place and stead and so purchased our redemption 〈◊〉 wicked Socinus thus wresteth and misconstrueth these words that Christ died no 〈◊〉 wise for vs then for our profit and benefit in confirming by his death his doctrine and example of life by the which he saith he brought saluation vnto the world and not by dying for vs as in our stead or to pay by his death our ransome his wicked obiections are these 1. Obiect The Apostle saith 1. Ioh. 3.16 He laid downe his life for vs and we ought to lay downe our liues for the brethren Christ died for
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
other Apostles which were iudged to be Apochryphall bookes and of no authoritie 1. because in the writings of those which succeeded the Apostles no mention is made of them 2. the stile is diuerse from the stile of the Apostles 3. and the doctrine contained in those bookes dissenting from the doctrine of the Apostles 3. Beside these two latter sorts of bookes all the rest are vndoubtedly held to be Canonicall and of equall authoritie and therefore that distinction of Sixtus Senensis is to be taken heede of who calleth some bookes of the New Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 canonicall of the first sort some 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 canonicall of the second sort which were sometime doubted of for by this meanes should they not be of equall and the like authoritie And beside he saith that these latter were held by some of the fathers to be Apochryphall bookes vnderstanding Apochryphal bookes for such as had an hid and vnknowne author But indeede the Apochrypha are so called not for that their author was vnknowne for then diuerse of the Canonicall bookes should be Apochrypha but because they were of an hid and obscure authoritie in which sense none of the fathers euer held any of the Canonical bookes of the New Testament to be Apochrypha 4. As the Heretikes brought in counterfeit bookes of their owne into the New Testament so they reiected diuerse parts of the Canonical bookes 1. Faustus the Manichie held diuerse things to be false in the New Testament Augustin lib. 33. cont Faust. c. 3. 2. The Ebionites receiued none but the Gospel according to Saint Matthew Iren. l. 1. c. 26. 3. the Marcionites onely allowed S. Lukes Gospel Epiphan haeres 42.4 the Acts of the Apostles and S. Pauls epistles the Tatiane and Seueriane heretikes reiected Euseb. l. 4. c. 29. 5. Marcion and Basilides the epistles to Timothie Titus and to the Hebrewes Hierom. praefat ad Titum 4. Places of doctrine in generall 1. Doct. Of the excellencie of the Newe Testament aboue and beyond the Old 1. It excelleth in the the matter and doctrine the law promiseth life onely to those that keep it the Gospel vnto those which beleeue in Christ Rom. 10.5 6. 2. In the subiect the lawe was written in tables of stone but the Gospel is written by the spirit of God in the fleshie tables of our hearts 2. Cor. 3.2 3. In the end the old Testament was the ministration of death and the killing letter the other is the ministration of the spirit which giueth life 2. Cor 3.6 7. 4. In the condition and qualitie the law imposed the hard yoke and seruitude of ceremonies which was impossible to be borne Act. 15.10 but Christs yoke is easie Math. 11. which of seruants adopteth vs to be the sonnes of God Rom. 8.15 5. In the minister Moses was the typical Mediator of the Olde Testament but Christ the Lord and builder of the house is the Mediator of the New Heb. 3.3 6. In the fruites and effects the Old Testament could not purge the conscience from sinne but the sprinkling of the blood of Christ purgeth the conscience from dead workes Heb. 9.13 14. 7. In the manner the old Testament was folded vp in types and figures as Moses vailed the glorie of his face but now we see the glorie of the Lord in the Gospell with open face 2. Cor. 3.18 8. In the ratification the old Testament was confirmed with the blood of beasts the New by the death of Christ quest 17.18 9. In the seales the old was attended vpon by bloodie sacrifices and other such like hard Sacraments as circumcision which was painefull to the flesh the New hath easie and vnbloodie sacraments as the seales neither so many in number namely Baptisme and the Eucharist 10. Another excellencie is in persons whom this New Testament concerneth which is not giuen onely to one people and nation as the old was but vnto the Catholike Church of God dispersed ouer the face of the earth as the Apostles are commanded to goe and teach all nations Matth. 28.19 In these respects the Apostle thus giueth preheminence to the New Testament before the old Heb. 8.6 he hath obtained a more excellent office in as much as he is the Mediator of a better Testament which is established vpon better promises Not that Christ was not Mediator also of the old Testament for without him neither can there be any Church nor couenant made with the Church but because Christ but shadowed forth in the old Testament is more fully reuealed and manifested in the New 5. Places of confutation 1. Controv. Against those which thinke it is against the nature of the New Testament to be committed to writing Of this opinion are certaine of a fantasticall spirit which to this purpose abuse that place of Ieremie 32.33 I will write my lawe in their hearts and that of S. Paul 2. Cor 3.3 You are our epistle written not with inke but with the spirit whence they would inferre that the Newe Testament is not to be written but that it consisteth in reuelation and the instinct of the Spirit Contra. 1. If the Newe Testament were not to be extant in writing then the Apostles had done a superfluous and vnnecessarie worke in writing the bookes of the Newe Testament whereunto they were directed by the spirit of God and S. Iohn is directly commanded to write Apocal. 14.13 and S. Paul saith that all Scripture is giuen by inspiration 2. Tim. 3.16 The spirit of God then mooued them to put in writing these holy bookes of the Newe Testament which are part of the Scripture 2. It followeth not because the Lord writeth the Gospel in our hearts by his spirit that therefore it is not to be written for by the writing thereof which is preached and read saith is wrought in the heart by the operation of the spirit as the Apostle saith Rom. 10.17 that faith commeth by hearing and hearing by the word And againe the Prophet there sheweth a difference betweene the lawe and the Gospell the law gaue Precepts but could not incline the heart to obedience but the Gospel doth not onely command faith but by the operation of the spirit worketh the same thing which it requireth 3. In the other place of the Apostle 1. they would make the Apostle contrarie to himselfe as though he should speak against the writing of Euangelical precepts whereas the Apostle did write that very epistle with inke 2. he speaketh not of the Gospel but of the Corinthians whom he calleth his Epistle 3. and by the latter in that place he vnderstandeth not the writing with inke or such like but the externall doctrine without the grace and life of the spirit such as the doctrine of the Law was 2. Controv. Against the Romanists which hold that the writing of the Gospel and other Scriptures is not simply necessarie to saluation First we will examine the arguments which are brought by them to confirme this their
Apostle setteth downe the sinnes of the Gentiles despitefull B. or contumelious L. doers of wrong G. proud boasters inuenters of euill things disobedient to parents without vnderstanding couenant breakers dissolute L.R. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not standing to composition without naturall affection such as can not be appeased without fidelitie L.R. truce breakers B.V. but that was said before mercilesse 31. Which knowing the iustice of God the righteousnes B. law G. right of God G.Be. iudgement of God the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iustice that they which doe such things are worthie of death Be. B.G.V. not did not vnderstand that they which doe such things are worthie of death L. for these words did not vnderstand are not in the originall nor that it condemneth to death those which doe such things T. for the word is in the plural are worthie of death but fauour G. or applaud Par. or haue pleasure in B. or patronize Be. not consent L. the word signifieth more then a bare consent those which doe them 2. The Argument and parts of the Chapter IN this Chapter the Apostle after the salutation and exordium of the Epistle falleth to prooue iustification by faith against the Gentiles first shewing their manifold sinnes and bad works whereby they were so farre from beeing iustified that thereby they incurred euerlasting damnation The parts are 1. the inscription to v. 8. 2. the exordium or introduction to the matter to v. 17. 3. the proposition and argument concerning iustification by faith v. 17.18.4 the confirmation or proofe tow 31. 1. The inscription or salutation sheweth 1. the person that saluteth and sendeth greeting which is Paul described by his office and calling in generall a seruant of Iesus Christ in speciall an Apostle to what ende to preach the Gospel v. 1. which is set forth 1. by the antiquitie v. 2.2 the excellencie of the subiect thereof Christ Iesus who is described by the singularitie of his person God and man v. 3.4 and by his office set forth in generall by the worke of our redemption which was finished by his sanctification and resurrection v. 4. and in speciall he was the author of the conuersion and calling of the Apostle v. 5.3 by the effect of the Gospel to winne obedience to the faith among the Gentiles 2. The persons saluted are the Romanes whom he setteth forth by their externall condition generall they were Gentiles speciall at Rome and spirituall what they were called by whom by Christ to what to be Saints v. 6.7 3. The salutation it selfe v. 7. he wisheth vnto them grace and peace 2. In the exordium or proeme 1. there is his gratulation or giuing of thanks for their faith v. 8.2 the testification of his loue toward them confirmed by an oath in which his loue is expressed by two effects 1. his earnest prayer to God to come vnto them v. 9.10 2. his longing desire in himselfe to see them v. 11. with the ende v. 12.3 a preoccupation of a question or purgation of himselfe that he yet came not vnto them where he sheweth 1. the lets of his purpose v. 13.2 his purpose which yet he continued to come vnto thē which is confirmed both by the end to haue some fruit among them v. 13.2 and by his calling in generall he was a debter to all the Gentiles who are set forth by distribution v. 14. in speciall and so consequently he was readie to preach the Gospel vnto them And by this mention made of the Gospel he taketh occasion to passe vnto the matter 3. The third part is the proposition that iustification is by faith where we haue first the occasion whereupon he bringeth it in I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ then the proposition it selfe that the Gospell is the power of God to saluation to euerie one that beleeueth v. 16. and the proofe thereof taken from the Prophet Habacuke v. 17. 4. The fourth part is the confirmation of this proposition that men are iustified by faith which he sheweth by this disiunction they are either iustified by faith or by workes but not by workes which he prooueth by this distribution first that the Gentiles cannot be iustified by workes in this chapter to the 17. v. of the next then that neither the Iewes can chalenge any thing by their workes thence to the ende of the 2. chapter the Gentiles cannot be iustified by their workes because by their workes beeing full of impietie and iniquitie they are made guiltie of eternall death and of the wrath of God the argument standeth thus they which are full of impietie and iniquitie are subiect to the wrath of God this proposition is expressed v. 18. But the Gentiles are such full of impietie and iniquitie Ergo the assumption or second part is prooued distributiuely first their impietie is shewed toward God to v. 28. then their iniquitie toward men v. 32. In the proofe of their impietie first the sinne is shewed then the punishment their sinne in that wittingly and against their knowledge they depraued the worship of God their knowledge is set forth both by the light of nature in them v. 19. and by the creatures v. 20. their deprauation of Gods worship is expressed in the causes their vnthankefulnesse which brought forth vanitie of minde and foolishnesse v. 21.22 the effect in worshipping corruptible things in stead of God v. 23. then the punishment followeth they were giuen vp to their hearts lusts v. 24. 2. As they depraued Gods worship wittingly against their knowledge so they did it willingly their sinne is shewed in their voluntarie forsaking of the Creator v. 25. their punishment in beeing giuen ouer both women and men to vile affections v. 26.27 Then followeth the demonstration of their iniquitie which consisted 1. both in doing things not comely which is declared both by shewing the cause thereof then beeing giuen ouer to a reprobate mind procured by their contempt and wilfull neglect of the knowledge of God v. 28. and by a particular enumeration of the diuerse sinnes which they committed the seuerall distribution whereof see afterwards qu. 72. 2. they did not onely commit such things themselues but they also fauoured and patronized such as did them v. 32. so then the conclusion must followe that the Gentiles made themselues by those their euill workes worthie of death and so consequently thereby depriued themselues of life and saluation 3. The questions and doubts discussed Quest. 1. Why Paul setteth his name before this epistle 1. Chrysostome giueth this reason why neither Moses prefixeth his name before his bookes not yet the Euangelists Mathew Marke Luke Iohn before their gospels ille quippe praesentibus scribentes c. for they writing vnto these which were present had no cause to set to their names But Paul quia longe remotis scribebat c. because he did write to those which were a farre off had reason to set to his name after the manner of epistles
weakenesse came vpon them by their owne apostasie and falling away from God and that light which they had they depraued neither did they acknowledge their infirmitie but became vaine and foolish in the opinion of their owne strength neither is God debter or bound vnto any but bestoweth his graces freely 2. Pererius disput 16. insisteth onely vpon the first part of this answeare shewing that there is a double kind of ignorance vna est causa culpae one kind of ignorance is that which is the cause of fault or sinne and this excuseth there is an other cuius causa culpa est the cause whereof is our fault and this excuseth not and such was the ignorance of the heathen which was caused by their owne wilfull neglecting and abusing of the light of nature giuen vnto them 3. Peter Martyr hath yet a further answer he distinguisheth between the ignorance of the heathen and their imbecillitie or weakenesse this the heathen would not haue pretended because they ascribed all vnto freewill and therefore they would not haue complained of want of strength the Apostle then toucheth that which was most likely to haue beene obiected by thē namely their ignorance sheweth how euen in that behalf they were also inexcusable c. But seeing as is shewed before euē their natural knowledge was insufficient to saluation the same doubt remaineth stil therfore those two other exceptions concerning their imbecillitie which P. Martyr mentioneth as that it happened by their owne default and that they did not practise that little knowledge which they had but abused it may also be admitted touching their ignorance as before Pareus answeared sufficiently 4. Hereunto further may be added that distinction of ignorance which Gryneus borroweth from Augustine not eueris one which is ignorant is excused sed is solùm qui non habuit vnde disceret but he onely that had not whence to learne And therefore S. Paul excuseth himselfe by his ignorance that he persecuted Christ I did it ignorantly thorough vnbeleefe 1. Tim. 1.13 But such was not the ignorance of God which the Gentiles had hauing naturall meanes offred vnto them which they depraued and abused Quest. 59. v. 21. How the Gentiles are said to haue knowne God and yet glorified him not as God 1. Some thinke that in Scripture that ignorance which is caused by a mans owne fault when he may haue knowledge if he will himselfe it is called by the name of science and knowledge in Scripture as Ioh. 7.28 Christ saith to the Iewes ye both know me and whence I am because they might haue knowne if they would Iustin. resp 140. ad 44. Gentium so also Photius and Sedulius But this is not the Apostles meaning here for he saith not when they might haue knowne God but when they knewe God they therefore had some knowledge of him 2. Some thinke that they had the true knowledge of God but they against this knowledge malitiously and against their owne conscience worshipped other gods so Ambrose Anselm But 1. it cannot be shewed that any of the Philosophers no not they which come nearest vnto the truth had the true knowledge of God for euen Socrates Plato Seneca allowed the worship of the heathen gods and practised it as is before shewed qu. 57. and if any of them thought that the images were no gods yet those which they worshipped were either deuils or Angels as Athanas. sheweth orat cont idol 2. the Apostle here saith that they became vaine in their imaginations which sheweth that they were without the true knowledge of God Anselm answereth that they had once the true knowledge of God and afterward lost it But the Apostle saith otherwise that they did withhold the truth in vnrighteousnesse v. 18. they lost not that knowledge of the truth which they had but suppressed it and kept it vnder with their vaine imaginations 3. Origen seemeth to thinke that they were vtterly voide of all true knowledge of God dum formas imagines requirunt in Des in semetipsis imaginem Dei perdiderunt while they imagined formes and images to be in God they lost in themselues the image of God for there were some Philosophers which held God to be a spirit without any forme or image 4. Some whereas it is said Ioh. 1. the world knewe him not and yet here the Apostle saith when they knewe God c. giue this solution that the world knewe the onely God but not the Sonne Gorrham But the Apostle speaketh here onely of such knowledge of God as naturally may be attained vnto but the knowledge of the Trinitie exceedeth the strength of nature 5. Wherefore the Apostle is thus to be vnderstood that they knewe the true God in part but not perfectly they held some truths concerning the diuine nature but they mingled many vntruthes and falsities therewith they acknowledged a God but they either denied his prouidence and power or they communicated the duine honour vnto others which were not gods and thus they knewe him and yet knew him not In this sense Christ said to his Apostles Ioh. 14.4 Whether I goe ye knowe and the way ye knowe and yet Thomas saith immediately Lord we knowe not whether thou goest how then can we knowe the way So they knewe Christ because they sawe him and he was among them but yet they knewe him not perfectly his power they as yet did not fully vnderstand So the Gentiles knew God in some sort but such an one as he was they did not knowe Augustine to this purpose giueth instance in one of their chiefe Philosophers Hermes Trismigestus how he confesseth many things of the true God the maker of the world tamen obscuritate cordis ad ista delabitur c yet by the darkenesse of his heart he falleth to say that he would haue men subiect vnto those gods which are made by men Beda ex Augustin so they kept the truth as the same Augustin saith in doctrina multis falsitatibus permixta in doctrine mingled with many falshoods And though some among the heathen did hold certaine true principles of God yet there were others more grosse and foolish and were vtterly ignorant of the diuine nature taking the fire wind starres and such like to be gouernours of the world as it is in the booke of wisdome c. 13.1 2. see before of this matter quest 52. Quest. 60. v. 21. How the Gentiles did not glorifie God neither were thankefull but became vaine 1. Did not glorifie him as God this word to glorifie is taken two wayes either to conceiue an honourable opinion of God and to magnifie him and set forth his praise as Ioh. 11.4 this sickenesse is not vnto death but for the glorie of God that the Sonne of God may be glorified thereby or it signifieth the worship due vnto God as Isay. 43.23 Neither hast thou honoured or glorified me with thy sacrifices Theodoret so likewise Chrysostome and Origen seeme to take it in the first sense
Vriah to be killed and the same Ioab also was Dauids instrument to number the people though be misliked it himselfe 3. They which giue counsell or any kind of helpe or assistance to the euill for which cause Iehosaphat was reprooued of the Prophet Iehu because he aided the idolatrous king of Israel in battell and here they also are included which doe promote vnworthie and vnmeete persons to office and therefore S. Paul chargeth Timothie to lay hands suddenly on none neither to be partaker of other sinnes 1. Tim. 5.4 They which commend the wicked in their euill doing and so extenuate their sinne as Psal. 10.5 the wicked man is said to blesse the couetous 5. They which by any signe in word or deede seeme to giue consent vnto the sinnes of others as Saul kept their garments which stoned Steuen and to gaue consent vnto his death 6. They which are partakers with others in their sinne and part stakes with them as Psal. 50.18 When thou seest a theese thou runnest with him and art paraker with the adulterer 7. They which doe not rebuke and correct others when it is in their power which was the sinne of Hell who vsed too much connivence and forbearance toward his sonnes 1. Sam. 2.8 They which giue intertainement vnto the wicked as vnto theeues robbers strumpets and such like 9. Such as conceale and keepe secret others sinnes whereby their heart is hardened and so they continue in their sinne Hyper. Quest. 77. Whether all the Gentiles were guiltie of these sinnes which are here rehearsed by the Apostle Many among the Gentiles in respect of the rest were men of ciuill life and gaue example of diuerse morall vertues such among the Grecians were Aristides Phacion Socrates among the Romanes the Scipioes Catoes with others But yet none of them are exempted out of the Apostles reprehension 1. because none of them were free from the most of these sinnes though they were not guiltie of all 2. they wanted true faith and therefore their vertues were but speciosa peccata goodly sinnes 3. And in respect of their naturall corrupâ— disposition euen the best of them were enclined vnto all these sinnes sauing that the Lord bridled in some of them the corruption and badnesse of their nature that there might be some order and gouernement among the heathen otherwise their common wealths would soone haue come to confusion 4. And those which gaue any good example among the heathen were so fewe that they are not to be named among the rest Peter Martyr 4. Places of doctrine v. 1. Paul a seruant of Iesus Christ. Christs seruice is perfect freedome there are three kinds of seruice 1. the seruice of God which is either generall belonging to all Christians which is the seruice of their profession whereof the Apostle speaketh Rom. 6.19 or speciall which is in that vocation to the which any are called whereof see Matth. 25.14 Luk. 12.43 2. Ciuill seruice which may very well stand with the seruice of God see 1. Cor. 7.11 3. there is the seruice of sinne Rom. 8.16 and seruice to please men Gal. 1.10 and this seruice is contrarie to the seruice of God Pareus Called to be an Apostle There are two kinds of calling one is vnto saluation the other is to some office in this life The first is either externall which is generall to all by the light of nature and knowledge of the creatures especiall by the preaching of the word or internall by the inward working of Gods spirit which is peculiar to the elect The calling to some function in this life is either priuate as of men to their seuerall vocations or publike which is either Ciuill of Magistrates in the time of peace leaders and Captaines in the time of warre or Ecclesiasticall which is either immediate from God as of the Prophets and Apostles or mediate by men which is either ordinarie such as is the ordination of Bishops and Ministers now or extraordinarie by lot as was the election of Matthias Act. 1. To be an Apostle There is a threefold difference betweene Apostles and other Pastors 1. They were immediatly called of Christ the other mediately are appointed by men 2. in respect of their doctrine and writings both the authoritie thereof they are free from error and are part of the Canonicall Scripture but so are not the doctrine and writings of the other they must be subiect to the writings of the Apostles as also their doctrine was confirmed and ratified by miracles Mart. 3. in their authoritie and office the Apostles were not tied vnto any place but were sent to preach to the whole world but Pastours now haue their particular and speciall Churches Pareus Set apart God the father set apart Paul to be an Apostle Gal. 1.1 and Iesus Christ Act. 9. and the holy Ghost Act. 13.2 these three then are one God for it belongeth onely vnto God to send Prophets and Apostles and Pastors to his Church therefore all such are condemned whome the Lord hath not sent Ierem. 14.15 Gospel of God which is afterward vers 16. and chap. 15.19 and in other places called the Gospel of Christ which is an euident testimonie of Christs eternall Godhead Pareus v. 2. Which he had promised before c. Concerning the Gospel of Christ 1. Euangelium the Evangel signifieth a ioyfull message of the grace of Christ 2. though the Gospel be diuers in circumstance for there is Gospel promised by the Prophets and the Gospel performed by Christs comming yet it is one and the same in substance 3. the efficient and author thereof is God it is called the Gospel of God the materiall cause is Iesus Christ God and man the formall the declaration and manifestation of him to be the Sonne of God v. 4. the end is to saluation v. 16. the effects obedience to the faith v. 5. v. 3. concerning his Sonne here the person of Christ is described to be both God and man Man as he was borne of the seede of Dauid and he was also declared to be the Sonne of God Piscator According to the flesh In that the Sonne of God is said to be made of the seede of Dauid after the flesh it sheweth against the Nestorian heretikes that there are not two Sonnes but one Sonne the same both God and man and that according to the flesh he was made there the propertie of his natures is still reserued against the Eutychians and Suenkefeldians which destroied the vnitie of Christs humane nature By reason of this vnion of the diuine and humane nature of Christ that which was done in one of his natures is ascribed to his whole person and here we are to consider of a threefold communion of the properties of Christs diuine and humane natures one vnto the other 1. some things are really common to both his whole person and natures as such things which belong to the office of the Redeemer as to sanctifie
away the feare and awe of the gods from cities and brought in error And if the first vse had remained castius dij obseruarentur the gods should more chastly and sincerely haue beene worshipped still to this purpose Augustine reporteth the words of Varro lib. 4. de ciuit dei c. 31. 4. The daily offence and hinderance that commeth by images set vp in the Churches sheweth the inconueniencie of them for they drawe away mens minds from true deuotion and their eyes are first set to gaze vpon such obiects therefore the Lacedemonians forbad that any images should be set vp in their Counsell house least that by the sight thereof their mindes might be drawne away from the busines of the commonwealth which they came together to consult about Augustine also giueth this reason concion 2. in Psal. 103. because by the verie place some honour is giuen to images when they are set vp in Churches Martyr 5. The first that are found to haue made account of images among Christians for any religious vse was Marcellina the companion of the heretike Carpocrates who priuately had the images of Christ Paul Homer Pythagoras which she vsed to burne incense vnto Augustin lib. de haeres ad Quodvult Deum But among the auncient Christians the publike vse of images in places of prayer was condemned Epiphanius comming to a Church in the diocesse of the Bishop of Ierusalem there seeing a picture in a cloath caused it to be cut in peices and he writ an epistle vnto the Bishop of Ierusalem that he should not suffer any such thing to be done in his Churches which epistle Hierome translated into Latinâ— therein shewing his consent with him In the Elibetan Councell can 36. it was decreed that no pictures should be made vpon the walls of the Churches Leo Isauricus had a Councell at Constantinople wherein images were condemned yet after this they were restoared by Irene the Empresse and Tharasuos patriarke of Constantinople in the 2. Nicene synode And about the same time Carolus the great held a Councell in Germanie where the decrees of the said Nicene synode were abrogated ex Martyr Now on the contrarie it will be thus obiected for the vse of images 1. The Lord in diuerse visions did shewe himselfe in certaine representations as Dan. 7. like an auncient man and Matth. 3. the holy Ghost appeared in the likenesse of a doue Answ. 1. That which God did grant vnto certaine persons vpon some certaine and speciall occasions must not be drawne into a generall rule neither is it lawfull to leaue a generall precept vnlesse some speciall prohibition can be shewed Pareus 2. So the Lord in Scripture is likened vnto a lion they may as well inferre thereupon that they may so picture him Gualter 3. And there is great difference betweene the writing of Scripture and a picture for the Scripture speaking of such visions and representations expoundeth it selfe and sheweth the meaning thereof but a picture is dumbe and idle Martyr 4. and though such visions may be historically represented yet it followeth not that they should be set vp for any religious vse Faius 2. Obiect Many miracles haue bin done before images as Eusebius maketh mention of a brasen image of Christ at Cesarea and there was an other image of a woman by touching the hemme of his garment vnder the which grew an herbe that after it came vp so high as the skirts of the image had a soueraigne power against all diseases Answer 1. This image the historie beeing admitted was not set vp in any religious place but openly in the citie as a monument of that miraculous worke 2. God might in the beginning of Christianitie shew such miracles as Peters shadow healed the sicke for the confirmation of the Christian faith which miracles are now ceased 3. this miracle beeing admitted yet euen such images when they are abused to idolatrie may notwithstanding be broken downe as the brasen serpent had a speciall vertue to heale the biting of serpents in them that looked vpon it yet notwithstanding Hâ—z Isiah brake it doune when it began to be abused to superstition 2. Obiect God hath punished such as offered any contumelic or disgrace to such images as beeing the signes of God as Socrates writeth lib. 7. tripartit histor how Iulian remooued the said image of Christ at Cesarea and caused his owne to be set vp instead thereof but it was cast downe by lightening and when the heathen had drawne the other image in disgrace round about the streetes the Christians tooke it vp and preserued it c. Ans. 1. Images set vp for such idolatrous and superstitious vses are no signes of God and therefore the honour giuen vnto such is a contumelic and dishonour vnto God for the will of him that giueth honour is not the rule of honour but of him that is honoured 2. yet euen the disgrace and despight offered to such false signes of God redoundeth sometime vnto God when they are done with an intention to dishonour God Pareus as Iulian did disgrace that image vpon his hatred to Christ and therefore the Lord did therein shew his power see further against the adoration of images Hexap in Exod. c. 20. Command 2. Controv. 4. 22. Controv. Of the corrupt reading of the vulgar Latine translation v. 32. The Latin translation thus standeth Who when they knew the iustice of God did not vnderstand that they which doe such things are wortie of death not onely they which doe them but they also which consent vnto the doers c. whereas according to the originall the words are thus truly translated The which knowing the iustice of God how that they which commit such things are worthie of death not onely doe the same but haue pleasure in them c. B. or fauour those that doe them So that the Latin translation faileth 1. both in the words for these words did not vnderstand and they which doe them are not in the originall 2. as also in the sense for according vnto the Greeke reading the Apostle maketh it a more heinous thing to fauour and patronize euill doers then to be a doer of euill but after the other reading the latter is the greater 3. beside after the vulgar Latin the words include a contradiction for when they knew the iustice of God how could they chuse but vnderstand it 4. Chrysostome Oecumenius Theophylact doe read and interpret this place according vnto the Greeke text Bellarmine here answereth 1. that some Greeke copies had had these word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they vnderstood not as appeareth in Origens commentarie and Titlemannus affirmeth that he had seene an ancient Greeke copie with those words 2. it is a greater sinne to doe euill as to commit murther then onely to consent 3. they might haue a theoricall knowledge and yet faile in practise and so not vnderstand in effect 4. Cyprian Ambrose Sedulius Hayme Anselme doe read here according to the vulgar Latine so we
the more inexcusable because they knew their masters will and did it not 5. Thou allowest or triest the things that are excellent they had a discerning iudgement by the knowledge of the law to know good from euill iust things from vniust 6. Then that which was the cause of this their discerning they were instructed in the law and trained vp in the precepts thereof 7. Then follow their titles which they tooke vpon them to be masters and teachers of others a guide to the blind a light of them which were in darknes both of the Gentiles which were blind in respect of other nations and the more simple and ignorant Iewes But these priuiledges did nothing profit them because they followed not that which they taught others Pareus 39. Quest. How the Iewes are said to commit sacriledge v. 22. 1. They were not guiltie of sacriledge in giuing the diuine worship vnto idols as Gorrh. for the Iewes after their returne out of captiuitie excepting some in the time of the Macchabees who for feare were compelled to worship idols were free from idolatrie and if it had beene so S. Paul would haue directly charged them with idolatrie as he did before with adulterie 2. Neither is hereby vnderstood contemptus divinae maiestatis the contempt of the diuine maiestie Calv. Piscat for that is afterward touched by the Apostle v. 23. Thorough breaking of the law dishonourest thou God 3. Nor with Origen is the meaning Christum verum templum Dei violas thou dost violate Christ the true temple of God for in ioyning sacriledge with idolatrie he meaneth some externall sinne and the violence offered to the name of Christ is compreheÌ„ded vnder blasphemie which is obiected v. 24.4 Gryneus vnderstandeth it of arrogating to their owne merits that which was peculiar to the grace of God Pareus of the polluting of Gods seruice with their inuentions but some externall sacriledge is signified as is faide 5. Some referre it to that particular sinne of robbing and spoiling the house of God as the sonnes of Eli appropriated to themselues the things offered to God Martyr but S. Paul seemeth specially to touch the sinnes of that age present thou art called a Iew. 6. Some take this sacriledge to be meant of buying and selling the Priests office Osiand and in taking to their owne vse things ordained for the temple Lyran. Syriack interpret Haymo But the Iewes which were at Rome were not guiltie of those abuses committed against the Temple at Ierusalem 7. Therfore this sacriledge was rather the couetousnes of the Iewes who attrectabant idolathyta did handle things offered to idols and so committed sacriledge in vsing those things to their priuate commoditie which were consecrate to idolatrie which by the law of God should haue beene destroied Chrysost. Theophyl as the manner of the Iewes is at this day to buie chalices and other implements which are stolne out of the idolatrous Churches of the Romanists this is called sacriledge because such things as were dedicate to idolatrie no man was to conuert to his owne vse Gualt and Calvin misliketh not this sense 40. Quest. How the name of God was blasphemed by the Iewes and whether this testimonie be rightly alleadged by the Apostle v. 24. The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you as it is written There are two kinds of blasphemie one is in word wher the name of God is taken in vaine whereof we haue an example Levit. 24. when the blasphemer was stoned to death Grâ—â— and here there is great difference betweene these two blasphemare blasphemiam dieâ—â— to blaspheme and to say a blasphemie he blasphemeth which of set purpose profaneth and abuseth the name of God but one may through infirmitie and perturbation of mind spâ—â—â—â— that which is blasphemie and yet not blaspheme as Iob that complained that God had peruerted or ouerthrowne him Iob 18.6 the other kind of blasphemie is when that is giuen vnto God which appertaineth not vnto him as that he is cruell vniust or that is denied vnto him which is due vnto him as if any denie his prouidence mercie wisdome Faius 2. Here the Iewes are said to blaspheme God diuers waies 1. they did both themselues contumelia Deum afficere offer contumelie vnto the name of God in blaspheming Christ ad id alios inducunt and they teach others to doe so likewise Theoph. Gorrh. 2. they blasphemed God in the contempt of his law for he that willingly transgresseth the law contemneth it and the author of it Basil. reg brev resp 4. 3. and they did not onely blaspheme God themselues male vivendo in euill liuing but occasionem praebendo in giuing occasion to the Gentiles to speake euill of God and of his religion because he had chosen such a wicked and disobedient people Lyran. and of this latter kind of dishonouring and blaspheming God speaketh the Apostle here 3. Now for the allegation it selfe 1. some thinke that the Apostle borroweth this testimonie from the Prophet Isa 52.5 They that rule ouer them make them to houle saith the Lord and my name all the day continually is blasphemed so Origen Theophyl Tolet but the two things will be here alleadged 1. that the Apostle neither followeth the Prophets words for here are neither thorough you nor among the Gentiles 2. nor yet keepeth his sense for he speaketh of the blasphemie of the Chaldeans who insulted against God as though he were not able to deliuer his people Ans. 1. First of all those words are in the translation of the Septuagint which the Apostle followeth as beeing best knowne vnto the Grecians and Romanes and because there is eadem sententia the same sentence and sense Lyran. 2. And in that the Chaldeans blasphemed God as though he either would not or could not deliuer his people the occasion was ministred by themselues who for their sinnes were carried into captiuitie vpon which occasion their enemies blasphemed 2. Some referre vs to that place Ezek. 36.23 And I will sanctifie my great name which was polluted among the heathen among whome ye haue polluted it Hierome Ostand Calvin where it is euident that the Iewes by their euill life caused the name of God to be polluted among the heathen 3. But the Apostle rather hath reference to both those places not so much alledging a testimonie as shewing the agreement of that prophesie to those times then present that the Iewes by their euill life caused the name of God to be blasphemed and euill spoken of among the Gentiles Mart. Pareus 41. Quest. In what sense the Apostle saith Circumcision is profitable v. 25. Seeing the Apostle in other places vtterly reiecteth circumcision as Gal. 5.2 If ye be circumcised Christ shall not profit you any thing and v. 5. for in Iesus Christ neither doth circumcision attaâ—le any thing c. hence two doubts arise 1. how the Apostle saith here Circumcision is profitable if thou doe the law 2. seeing none could keepe
eviciâ—â—â— probavimus we haue prooued before Oecumen Genevens we haue sufficiently shewed by reason that all are vnder sinne so also the Syrian interpreter readeth pronuntiaviâ—â—s we haue pronounced and gloss interl rationibus ostendimus we haue shewed by reason 2. Vnder sinne which signifieth three things 1. that although the act of sinne doe passe yet there remaineth still a blot in the soule and conscience and a guiltines of sinne as Iosu. 22.17 we are not clensed from the wickednes of Peor vnto this day Perer. 2. to be vnder sinne is tenerireatu to be held guiltie of sinne Pareus to be subiect vnto the curse and malediction due vnto sinne Piscat and so guiltie to euerlasting damnation 3. and beside it signifieth the seruitude vnder sinne that they doe walke and liue in sinne and can not be deliuered from the tyrannie thereof Tolet. as to be vnder the law is to be in subiection thraldome and vnder the curse of it Pareus 16. Quest. Whence the Apostle alleadgeth these testimonies v. 10. to 18. 1. All these allegations according to the vulgar Latin edition are taken out of the 13. Psalme where all those sentences stand together in this order wherein they are cited here And one Lindanus a Popish writer would prooue hereby the Hebrew text to haue beene corrupted by the Iewes because onely v. 10 11 12. are there found Psal. 14. according to the Hebrew originall and he affirmeth that he had seene an Hebrew copie thought to haue beene Augustins the Monke that was sent into England where these eight verses doe stand in the Hebrew text as they are here alleadged by S. Paul But Pererius misliketh this assertion 1. he vrgeth Hieromes opinion who was more auncient then that Augustine who findeth not all these sentences in the Hebrew 2. it is not like that the Iewes could all conspire to corrupt the Greeke text who otherwise are found to haue beene alwaies most carefull to preserue the Scriptures vncorrupted neither had they any reason to rase out any of those sentences seeing therein is contained no manifest prophecie of Christ. 3. and concerning that Hebrew copie Ioannes Isaac sometime professor of the Hebrew tongue at Coâ—â—â— writing against Lindanus thinketh it was patched together by some vnskilfull Hebriciâ—â— who might turne the Latine into Hebrew 2. Pererius thinketh that the Hebrew text is not corrupted in that place yet he would haue the vulgar Latine translation to be retained because of the antiquitie thereof which â—â—serteth all those verses in the 14. Psalme But if he acknowledge the Hebrew to be perfect and the Latine translation to put in more then is in the Hebrew why should not the Latine text be corrected according to the Hebrew 3. Therefore the truth is as Hierome thinketh proem l. 16. comment in Esaiam that this whole text is not taken out of the 14. Psalme sed partim ex Isaia partim ex Psalmis esse contextum but is framed together partly out of the Prophet Isai partly out of the Psalmes the 10 11 12 verses here are alleadged out of the 14. and 53. Psalme the first part of the 14. v. is out of the 5. Psal. v. 10. the second out of the 140. Psal. v. 3. the 14. v. out of the 10. Psal. v. 7. the 15 16 17. v. out of Isa. 59.7 8. the 18. v. out of Psal. 36.1 Pareus the same is also affirmed by Origen that these testimonies are cited partly out of the Psalmes partly out of the Prophet Isai but the 16. v. Destruction and calamitie are in their waies he saith non recordor vbi scriptum sis c. I remember not where it is written but I thinke it may be found in some one of the Prophets c. this may seeme strange that Origen so diligent a searcher of the Scriptures should not finde where these words are seeing they follow in the very same place of the Prophet Isai as Hierome also obserueth 4. But that is well obserued by Origen that whereas S. Paul doth not follow the very same words which are in the Psalme puto dari in hoc Apostolicam authoritatem I thinke saith he that this is done by Apostolike authoritie to teach vs when we vse the testimonie of Scripture sensum magis ex eo quam verba rapiamus that we rather take the sense then the words c. 17. Qu. Of the matter and order obserued by the Apostle in citing these testimonies In these testimonies the Apostle first sheweth the sinnes of men then their punishment their sinnes either of omission in leauing some duties vndone to v. 13. then of commission in committing such things as were euill to v. 16. the sinnes of omission are either concerning faith or manners concerning faith three waies nec credunt per fidem they neither beleeue by faith there is none iust nec intelligunt per scripturam neither doe they vnderstand by the Scripture nor seeke God per investigationem by searching after him v. 10 11. Concerning manners 1. they decline out of the way in turning away from God 2. they are become vnprofitable that is to their brethren 3. neither doe they good that is to themselues v. 12. The sinnes committed are of two sorts ad inducendum alios in errorem to bring others into error ad incutiendum terrorem and to smite into them terror the first is done three waies 1. openly in corrupting with euill words their mouth is an open sepulchre 2. secretly in deceiuing they haue vsed their tongues to deceit 3. in cloaking their malice with fained words the poison of aspes is vnder their lippes They doe strike terror into them 1. mala imprecando in wishing euill their mouth is full of cursing 2. necem intentando by threatning death and destruction there is bitternes in their mouth 3. in shedding of blood Then followeth their punishment which is of two sorts 1. poena non culpa a punishment and no fault either eternall destruction or temporall calamitie with the meritorious cause in their waies 2. there is a punishment which is both a punishment and a sinne which is first their wilfull ignorance and blindnes v. 17. they haue not knowne the way of peace then their obstinacie the feare of God is not before their eyes Gorrhan But this distribution may seeme to be too curious we therefore will content our selues with this plaine enumeration of sinnes which are here set downe by the Apostle 1. be accuseth all men of iniustice and vnrighteousnes there is none righteous v. 10. 2. of ignorance and blindnes there is none that vnderstandeth v. 11. 3. of apostasie and falling away from God to abominable idolatrie v. 12. 4. of deceit and craft 5. of cursing and bitternes v. 13. 6. of crueltie their feete are swift to shed blood 7. they are turbulent and enemies to peace v. 17. 8. they are prophane casting off all feare of God v. 18. Pareus 18. Quest. How none are said to be iust seeing Noah and other
hath receiued saith if he liue we should call him iust if he liue euill c. lib. 83. quest quest 76. Controv. 21. How S. Paul and S. Iames are reconciled together Whereas S. Paul here saith v. 28. We conclude that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the lawe but S. Iames affirmeth c. 2.24 You see then how that of workes a man is iustified and not of faith onely c. they may seeme at the first sight to be contrarie they are then thus reconciled 1. Not as Erasmus and Caietanus who doubt of the authoritie of the epistle of S. Iames for though it were a while doubted of yet was it at length receiued by a generall consent of the Church to be of Apostolik authoritie as it is acknowledged to be by Origen hom iâ— Ios. Cyprian in symbol Epiphan haeres 76. Augustine lib. 2. de doctrin Christ. c. 8. Daâ—â—as lib. 4. c. 8. and others 2. Not yet is the solution of the Romanists false and friuolous that S. Paul speaketh of workes going before iustification which are without faith and grace and S. Iames of the workes of grace which followe the first iustification for S. Paul euen excludeth the workes of Abraham which were workes of grace Rom. 4.2 3. The best solution then is this that the Apostles neither speake of the same kind of faith not yet of the same manner of iustifiying 1. S. Paul speaketh of the true liuely faith which iustifieth before God but S. Iames derogateth not from the true faith but from the faith which was in shewe onely which he calleth a dead faith and consequently no faith and such a faith as deuils may haue S. Paul then saying that a liuely faith iustifieth before God and S. Iames that a dead faith iustifieth not no not before men much lesse before God are not contrarie the one to the other 2. Neither doe the Apostles take the word iustifying in the same sense S. Paul speaketh of iustification before God but S. Iames of the declaration and shewing forth of our iustification by our workes before men as is euident thus the Apostle saith euidently v. 18. shewe thou me thy faith out of thy workes c. Againe he saith that Abraham was iustified by workes when he offred his sonne Izaak which must be vnderstood that his iustification was thereby testified manifested and declared for by faith before God he had beene iustified before as the Apostle alleadgeth in the same place v. 23. Abraham beleeued God and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse which testimonie is giuen of Abrahams faith before he offred vp his sonne So then S. Paul saying workes doe not iustifie before God and S. Iames that workes doe iustifie before men that is declare and testifie their iustification do not contradict the one the other 22. Controv. Against Socinus that Christ properly redeemed vs by paying the ransome for vs and not metaphorically 1. Argum. Impious Socinus as Pareus rehearseth his wicked opinion and confuseth it denieth that Christ died for vs or paied any ransome at all for our redemption but he is said to redeeme that is to deliuer vs without paying any price at all as Exod. 15.13 and in other places the Lord is saide to haue redeemed that is deliuered his people from the Egyptian seruitude Ans. 1. It followeth not because to redeeme is sometime taken in that sense that it should be so euery where 2. there is great difference betweene corporall and spirituall deliuerance the first was and might be done onely by the power of God without paying any price at all the other could not be compassed without paying of a price both because of Gods iustice that they which sinne should die Rom. 1.32 and the truth of his word because he had said to man that if he sinned he should die the death 2. Argum. Psal. 31.5 Dauid speaking of Christ saith Thou hast redeemed me O Lord God of truth here Christ is saide to haue beene redeemed but he was not redeemed with the paying of any price Ergo neither did he redeeme vs in that manner Ans. 1. If this Psalme be vnderstood of Christ we confesse that to redeeme is taken improperly in that sense but then it followeth not because it is vsed improperly in one place therefore it should be so in all 2. But if the Psalme be vnderstood of Dauid who was the type of Christ the word is taken properly for euen Dauid was no otherwise freed from his sinne then by the price of Christs death 3. Argum. The deliuerance of the Israelites by Moses from the bondage of Egypt was a type and figure of our spirituall deliuerance by Christ but that was done onely by the power of God without any price payed therefore so was the other Answ. 1. The argument followeth not for the figure and the thing figured agree not in all things there is more in the substance then in the type 2. There is great difference betweene Moses Christs deliuerance Moses was a meere man and a seruant of the house Christ was God and man the Lord of all Moses deliuered onely from corporall bondage and seruitude Christ from spirituall bondage vnder sinne from the wrath and curse of God Moses redeemed the Israelites without his own death or shedding of his blood but Christ our redeemer gaue his life and shed his blood for vs Moses gaue them the inheritance of the earthly Canaan Christ hath purchased for vs an euerlasting inheritance 4. Argum. Redemption is properly said to be from him of whom the captiues are holden but we are said to be redeemed either from our iniquities Tit. 2.14 or from our vaine conuersation 1. Pet. 1.18 or from the curse of the lawe Galat. 3.13 of the which we were not held captiue but no where are we said to be redeemed from God or from his iustice c. Answ. 1. Touching the proposition or first part of the argument 1. it is false that redeÌ„ption is onely from him that keepeth vs in bondage for although principally captiues are freed from him whose captiues they are yet they are deliuered also from their verie bands imprisonment and other such like instruments of their captiuitie such are our sinnes as the bands and fetters that kept vs in thraldome vnder the deuill 2. there is a difference betweene corporall and spirituall bondage for there the price is paid to the enemie as to the great Turke to get the captiues out of his hand but here the price is paied to God not to deliuer vs from him but to reconcile vs vnto him like as when a subiect rebelling against his Prince is imprisoned and condemned to die till some mediation and satisfaction be made for him then his sinne is pardoned and he is reconciled to his prince 4. Concerning the second part of the reason 1. it is false that we were not detained captiues by our sinnes for they are as the snare of the deuil 2. Tim. 2.26 2.
And although by our redemption we are not deliuered or taken from God but reconciled vnto him yet are we deliuered from his wrath Rom. 5.9 and so from his punishing iustice 5. Argum. We are improperly said to be redeemed from that to the which the price was not paied but to the curse of the lawe and wrath that is the punishment of sinne the price was not paied for the bearing of the curse and the sustaining of the wrath of God for vs was the price it selfe therefore we are improperly said to be redeemed from the curse and wrath Answ. 1. The proposition is false for the captiue may be said to be redeemed from that to the which the price is not payed as from the gives fetters prison sword death though principally the redemption is from the hands of him which holdeth any in captiuitie so we may be redeemed from the curse of the lawe though the price were not payed vnto it 2. the curse of the lawe and wrath may be taken two wayes passiuely for the effect of the curse and wrath which is the punishment of sinne and in this sense the price is not paid to the curse or actiuely for the wrath of God and his irefull iudgement pronouncing the sentence of the curse and in this sense the price may be said to be paied vnto the curse that is the iustice and wrath of God inflicting the curse 6. Argum. The operation or curse of the lawe is euerlasting death but Christ did not vndergoe euerlasting death for vs therefore he was not made a curse for vs but onely for our cause he fell into some kind of curse for vs. Answ. 1. The proposition is generally true for the curse or operation doth not onely signifie the punishment due vnto the breach of the lawe but the sentence also pronounced against the transgressors of the lawe as it is said Deut. 21.23 cursed is euerie one that hangeth vpon a tree but euerie one that so hanged was not euerlastingly condemned as the theife that was converted vpon the crosse 2. yet it is most true that Christ in some sense suffred eternall death for vs for in euerlasting death two things are to be considered the greatnesse and infinitnes of the infernall agonies and dolors with the abiection and forsaking of God the other is the perpetuall continuance of such euerlasting horror and abiection the second Christ must needs be freed from both because of his omnipotencie it was impossible for him to be for euer kept vnder the thraldome of death and his innocencie that hauing satisfied for sinne beeing himselfe without sinne he could not be held in death and in respect of his office which was to be our deliuerer yet the verie infernall paines and sorrowe Christ did suffer for vs because our Redeemer was to suffer that which was due vnto vs and why els was our Sauiour so much perplexed before his passion which in respect of the outward tormēt of the body was exceeded by many Martyrs in their sufferings if he feared not some greater thing then the death of the bodie 3. And although sometime in Scripture the preposition for signifieth onely the ende or cause as Christ is said to haue died for our sinnes 1. Ioh. 3.16 yet it signifieth also for and in ones stead to doe any thing as Rom. 5.7 for a good man one dare die that is in his stead that he should not die and so Christ died for vs that is in our place and stead that we should not die eternally ex Pareo 7. Argum. As we are said to be sold vnder sinne so we are bought and redeemed by Christ but we were sold vnder sinne without any price payed therefore so also are we redeemed without the paying of any price Answ. The proposition is not true for it is a metaphoricall speach that we are sold vnder sinne thereby is signified the alienation and abiection from God by our sinnes but we are said to be redeemed properly wherein it was necessarie that a price should be paied for vs both to satisfie the iust wrath and indignation of God against sinne as also because of Gods immutable sentence thou shalt die the death which sentence must take place let the Lord should be found a lier and his word not to be true Christ therefore in redeeming vs by his death payed that price and ransome for vs which we otherwise should haue payed 8. Argum. Where there is a true and proper redemption the price is paied to him which holdeth the captiues in bondage but in this redemption purchased by Christ the price was not so paied for then the deuill should haue had it whose captiues we were therefore it is not properly a redemption Answ. 1. It is not true that we are principally and originally the deuills captiues first we are the Lords captiues as of an angrie and offended Iudge by our sinnes but secondarily we were captiued vnto Sathan because the Iudge deliuereth ouer sinners vnto him as the tormentor that power therefore which Sathan hath ouer sinners is a secondarie power receiued from God this is manifested in the parable Matth. 18.34 where the king deliuereth ouer the wicked seruant vnto the tormentor 2. The price then of our redemption was paied vnto God who had deliuered vs ouer as captiues for our sinnes and so the Apostle saith that Christ offred himselfe by his eternall spirit vnto God Heb. 9.14 not that God thirsted for the blood of his sonne but after 〈◊〉 salvation quia salus erat in sanguine because there was health in his blood as Bernard saith for thereby Gods iustice was satisfied and the veritie of his sentence established thou shalt die the death 3. But whereas it is further obiected that the price could not be payed vnto God 1. because God procured his owne sonne to pay the price of our redemption but be that detaineth captiues doth not procure their deliuerance 2. in paying the price of redemption there is some vantage accruing and growing to him to whom the price is paied but in our redemption there was no gaine or advantage vnto God we further answear thus 1. that in such a redemption wherein the Iudge desireth the life and safetie of the prisoner the Iudge himselfe may procure him to be redeemed and that out of his owne treasure 2. neither in such a kind of redemption doth the iudge seeke for any advantage to himselfe but onely the preservation of the lawes and common iustice as Zaleucus the gouernor of the Loerensians hauing made a lawe that he which was taken in adulterie should loose both his eyes did cause one of his sonnes eyes to be put out for the offence and one of his owne eyes by this he gained nothing but the commendation of iustice and so in our redemption the iustice of God is set forth otherwise there can be no lucre or advantage growing properly vnto God 4. Wherefore notwithstanding all these cauills and sophistications Christ properly and
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
Mart. there might haue beene an other way in respect of Gods power to whome all things are possible sed nullus humanae miseriae convenientoir but none more conuenient in regard of mans miserie for what can more comfort vs deliuer vs from despaire then that it pleased God that a man like our selues should die for vs gloss ord and though there must haue been an other way found out Liberandi to deliuer man tamen non redimendi yet not of redeeming man Gorrhan for man could not properly be saide to be redeemed vnlesse the ransome had beene paied and the punishment due vnto man satisfied which was by the death of Christ. 15. Quest. Wherein the force of the Apostles reason consisteth saying Much more beeing reconciled we shall be saued by his life v. 9. 1. The ordinarie glosse thus collecteth because it is more to take away sinne then iustos cooperantes salvare to saue those that are iust and fellow workers as though this were the Apostles argument it was an harder matter to worke our iustification which was done without vs then now to purchase saluation whereunto man himselfe worketh But this is farre from the Apostles meaning to make man a ioynt worker with Christ in the matter of iustification for he ascribeth all here vnto the death and life of Christ. 2. Wherefore the force of this comparison beeing from the greater to the lesse consisteth in these three points 1. for whome Christ hath done this 2. how he hath wrought it 3. and what 1. The first is obserued by Chrysostome he iustified vs by faith in his blood when we were enemies now amici facti sumus we are made his friends and therefore he will much more saue vs. 2. The next is obserued by Oecumenius and Chrysostome also toucheth it it is not necessarie 〈◊〉 post hac silius moriatur that afterward the Sonne should die any more if then iustification be alreadie wrought for vs which required Christs death much more now shall we obtaine the perfecting of saluation to the which Christs death againe is not required Pareus and before him Gorrhan doe place the comparison in the opposition betweene life and death if he could iustifie vs by dying multo magis vivens c. much more beeing aliue can he saue vs. 3 It is more to iustifie and reconcile sinners then to saue them beeing iustified Christ hath done the first much lesse need we doubt of the second Pet. Mart. But Lyranus hath here a corrupt glosse giuing this reason why it is a greater worke to iustifie a sinner then to glorifie him beeing iustified because one can not merit his iustification but he that is iustified may per gratiam mereri de condigno vitam beatam c. may by grace deserue of condignitie a blessed life c. This is contrarie to the Apostle who saith Rom. 6.23 that the gift of God is eternall life c. it can not then be any wise merited 3. Now saluation is ascribed to the life of Christ not as though the life of Christ rising from the dead were the price of our redemption but because Christ by his resurrection and life did perfect our saluation and he now euer liueth to be an intercessor for vs vnto his father and to bring vs vnto glorie wherefore to finish and make perfect our iustification the life of Christ and his resurrection must be ioyned with his death and suffering as the Apostle concluded before in the verie last words of the former chapter Pareus 16. Quest. Why the Apostle saith not onely so but we also reioyce in God c. v. 11. 1. Some doe make this connexion that we onely shall not be saued by Christ in the life to come but now also reioyce in the hope thereof Lyran. Gorrhan and before them Theoâ—â—et likewise Anselme we glorie in this quia consider amus nos futuros cum illo in gloria we consider we shall be with him in glorie 2. Oecumenius giueth this sence least any might thinke it a shame vnto vs that we could not be otherwise redeemed then by the death of Christ the Apostle addeth that we â—â—eede not be ashamed thereof but rather glorie therein because it was a signe of the great loue of God that he spared not his owne Sonne for vs. 3. Some referre it to our glorying in tribulations Sa but it is more to glorie in God â—â—en to reioyce in tribulation 4. But the Apostle setteth downe here the highest degree of the reioycing of Christians they doe not onely reioyce vnder the hope of glorie nor in tribulation which two degrees the Apostle mentioned before ver 2. but they reioyce in God which is to reioyce quod Deum propitium habeas that thou hast God thy mercifull father Pareus â—â—â—â—care Deum habere patrem c. to boast that we haue God our father protector and â—â—â—ender Tolet. gloriamur Deum esse nostrum we reioyce that God is ours Calvin gloriaâ—â—â— de ipsius in nos clementia we glorie of his clemencie and loue toward vs Osiander And â—â—s the Apostle here amplifieth three effects of iustification before propounded v. 1 2. to â—â—â—e peace with God to stand in the state of grace and to reioyce so here he saith we are reconciled by his blood then we are saued by his life and so haue a perpetuitie and certentie in our state and we dare also glorie in God Pareus 17. Quest. Whether any thing neede to be supplied in the Apostles speach v. 12. to make the sense perfect v. 12. As by one sinne entred into the world c. 1. Some doe thinke that the redditiue of this similitude is wanting for vnto this as by one c. should answer the other part so c. Origen giueth this reason thereof that S. Paul omitted the other part so by one mans obedience came righteousnes propter negligentiores least the negligent and carelesse sort should haue presumed too much but this can be no reason because the Apostle both before and after had expressed as much that we obtaine life and righteousnes by Christ. 2. Bullinger consenteth with Origen that there is in this speach of the Apostle an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some inconsequence and that he omitted the other part through vehemencie 3. Erasmus thinketh that here is an anantapodoton a comparison without a reddition which he would haue vnderstood by supplying the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so in the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and death by sinne that is so death came by sinne as by one man sinne entred but all this belongeth to the proposition or first part of the comparison As sinne came in by one and death by sinne the reddition must be that so righteousnes came in by Christ and life thereby for otherwise there should be small coherence in the words 4. Tolet thinketh that the reddition is included in those words in the ende of the 14.1 where Adam is saide to be the figure
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
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
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
against him such were the Angelâ— but it is not true of those whom God was offended with for their transgression and yet he loued them not onely as his creatures but as his children whom he purposed to redeeme in Christ 2. So then in a diuerse respect God both was angrie with them as sinners and yet he loued them vnder this condition that they should be saued by the redemption of Christ in him they were elected and beloued before the foundation of the world the argument then followeth not God loued them in sending his sonne to die for them and so reconcile them therefore it was needelesse that Christ should die for them which were beloued of God alreadie for God loued them in Christ whom he had ordained before to be their Mediator and Redeemer 2. Obiect As herein God shewed his loue toward vs so it would seeme a cruell part in God so to be delighted in the death of his sonne Answ. 2. God had no delight in his sonnes death in respect of his suffering and torments but as it was a satisfaction for the sinne of the world and the price of our redemption 2. and Christ the sonne of God was not forced hereunto but offred himselfe willingly of his infinite loue to die for man 3. Obiect It had beene a greater loue if the father himselfe had died for vs then in sending his Sonne thus Pareus reporteth how a Iewe obiected vnto him as he tooke his Iourney toward Silesia ann 78. Answ. First we must not curiously search into Gods secrets to knowe the reason of his will why the sonne of God rather then the father tooke our flesh and died for vs Secondly yet these reasons may be alleadged hereof 1. the father and sonne beeing but one God the father as God did worke with his sonne in finishing our redemption 2. because God was offended and it was God that must satisfie for none else could doe it therefore there must be one person in the Godhead that must satisfie namely the Sonne and one that must be satisfied namely the father 3. what greater loue could God the father shewe then in giuing his owne Sonne the most deare thing vnto him 4. It was the Redeemers and Sauiours part to restore vs vnto the dignitie of the sonnes of God vnto whom did this more properly belong then vnto the Sonne of God Controv. 8. That Christs death was a full satisfaction for our sinnes against Socinus his cauills Obiect If Christs death were a satisfaction vnto the iustice of God for the sinnes of the worldâ— then 1. it must haue beene performed by the same person that had offended 2. the iustice of God required a punishment equivalent to the offence namely euerlasting destruction and malediction which Christ sustained not 3. the Scripture no where speaketh of any such satisfaction for vs by the death of Christ. Answ. 1. As in humane Courts there is a double kind of iustice either strict or rigorous iustice or iustice moderated and tempered with equitie and clemencie as if a king inflict vpon a traytor either the punishment of death or the muâ—ct of ten thousand talents in the rigor of iustice he may exact either but if he shall in his clemencie accept an 100. talents of an other that shall vndertake for the offender here now is iustice tempered with mercie So is it with God he dealeth with some in strict iustice as with the reprobate Angels and reprobate men that doe despise Christ and his redemption but with his elect by dealeth in the other kind of tempered iustice accepting the satisfaction of Christ for them not a stranger from them but made man like vnto them 2. Though Christ suffred not eternall paines yet in respect both of the excellencie of his person that suffered and the bitternesse of that agonie which he endured did beare that punishment which in Gods gracious acceptance was equiualent vnto euerlasting paine 3. And though the Scripture vse not the verie tearme of satisfaction yet there are words of like fâ—â—ree and efficacie applyed to the death of Christ as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ransome redemption and such like as Matth. 20.28 to giue his life for the ransome of many Rom. 2.14 are iustified c. by the redemption that is in Christ Iesus and in many such places thâ—â— like phrases are found Controv. 9. That Christs death was not onely satisfactorie but meditarious against Socinus Obiect 1. No satisfaction of a due debt hath merit in it for no more is paid then is due Christ then by his death merited not because he payed our due debt neither doth the Scripture ascribe any merit to Christs death Answ. 1. It is true that he which satisfieth for his owne debt therein doth not merit for he paieth but that he oweth but he that satisfieth for an others debt meriteth two waies first in respect of the debter in paying that he oweth not then in respect of the Creditor who by an agreement couenanteth to accept the satisfaction of the vndertaker not as a recompence onely for the debt but as a merit to deserue further grace and fauour for the debter So Christ hath truely merited in respect of vs in paying our debt for vs and in respect of God who accepteth the death of his sonne as truely meritorious of his grace and fauour for vs. 2. And further herein appeareth the merit of Christs death 1. in respect of the excellencie of the person that died 2. of the perfect obedience and fulfilling of the law 3. his great loue and willingnesse in suffring 4. and beside his satisfaction he was a faithfull martyr and witnesse of the truth Reuel 3.14 3. The Scripture though in direct tearmes it ascribeth not merit vnto the death of Christ yet it vseth words equivalent as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acquisitio purchasing includeth merit as Act. 20.28 Christ is said to haue purchased his Church by his blood and Ephes 1.14 It is called the redemption of the possession purchased c. which is all one as if he had said merited See more in Pareus dub 7. Here followe certaine questions and controversies of waight touching originall sinne Controv. 10. That there is originall sinne in men by the corruption of nature against the opinion of the Hebrewes The Hebrewes doe reiect this saying of the Apostle that sinne entred into the world and death by sinne and they vrge vs to shewe some authorities out of the old Testament to prooue the propagation of Adams sinne to his posteritie Paulus Burgensis addit 2. thus consureth their opinion 1. That death which was inflicted vpon Adam for his transgression remaineth quoad 〈◊〉 as it is a punishment is euident by that place Genes 3.3 Dust thou art and to dust 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 returne which sentence of mortalitie is executed as we see by experience vpon all Adâ—â—s posteritie 2. Then he prooueth quod illud peccatum transijt ad posteras quoad culpam that 〈◊〉 sinne did
an enemie to God for if it were so that this enemie were natura non voluntatis in nature not in the will of man there would be no reconciliation for things in nature contrarie and enemies one to the other cannot be reconciled 2. The Manichees also are here confuted who did hold that sinne was of God as the anchor and beginner thereof for they did make two beginnings one of good the other of euill and two Princes one of light the other of darkenes this wicked fansie is here confuted for the Apostle sheweth that sinne entred by Adam and so descended to his posteritie Faius Controv. 17. That all sinnes are mortall and worthie of death by nature v. 12. And death by sinne if then death came in by sinne yea children hauing onely originall sinne are subiect to death hence it is euident that all sinnes are in themselues worthie of death so that it is a vaine distinction which the Romanists make betweene veniall and mortall sinnes as though some sinnes were pardonable in their owne nature In that some sinnes are pardonable it is of grace and mercie in God not in the qualitie and propertie of the sinne Martyr Indeede there is some sinne remissible some irremissible as sinne against the holy Ghost but this difference ariseth not so much from the nature of the sinne as from the qualitie of the offender whose heart is so hardened that he cannot repent him of the blasphemie against the spirit Neither yet doth it followe if all sinnes are mortall in their owne nature that therefore all sinnes are equall for as there are degrees in the punishment of death so there are degrees in the sinnes themselues and though euen great offences are pardonable in the mercie of God yet pardon in such sinnes is more hardly obtained Controv. 18. That Henoch and Elias are not yet aliue in their bodies v. 12. And so death went ouer all men Hence then it is concluded that Elias and Heâ—â—â— doe not yet liue in their bodies whom the Romanists hold shall come in the ende of the world to preach against Antichrist Gorrhan would thus helpe the matter that deâ—h entred vpon them reatis non actu not in act but in the guilt their death is deferred it is not taken away c. for they hold that they shall be killed by Antichrist in the ende of the word Contra. 1. That it is appointed vnto men to die the Apostle testifieth Heb. 9.27 none are exempted from the common law of death as it is said 2. Sam. 14.14 We must needes die and we are as water spilt vpon the ground that cannot be gathered vp againe and the Psalmist saith Psal. 88.48 What man liueth and shall not see death Therefore Henoch and Elias are subiect to this generall law of death 2. And if they were yet aliue they must be either in the celestiall or terrestiall Paradise but the terrestiall was destroied in the flood and there they could not be preserued and from the celestiall Paradise none can returne to die againe that is no place or habitation for mortall creatures See further hereof Synops. Centur. 5. er 32. Controv. 19. The Virgin Marie conceiued in originall sinne The Romanists in their annotations vpon the 14. v. doe affirme that whereas all other are conceiued and borne in originall sinne Christ onely is excepted and his mother for his honour and by his speciall protection as many godly men iudge preserued from the some c. Contra. 1. But this error is euidently confuted by the Apostles words who saith that in him that is in Adam all haue sinned therefore euen the Virgin Marie also for onely Christ was conceiued by the holy Ghost without the seed of man of a virgin and therefore he onely was conceiued without sinne 2. and it was more for Christs honour to be borne of a sinner himselfe no sinner to shewe his puritie and perfection then come cleane and vndefiled euen out a vessel not naturally cleansed from sinne 3. If the holy Virgin must be conceiued without sinne because of her Sonne that was borne without sinne then by the same reason the mother of Marie must haue the same priuiledge because she brought forth Marie without sinne and so her mother before her and thus this priuiledge must runne vp still vnto Christs progenitors 4. Why are they afraid to determine this point absolutely that Marie was conceiued without sinne but set it downe onely as a priuate opinion of some godly men whereas Sixtus the 4. hath decreed it was so and thereupon for the strengthening of his opinion instituted the feast of the conception of the Virgin Marie and added these words to the salutation of Marie benedicta sit Anna mater tua de qua sine macula tua processit caro virginea and blessed be Anna thy mother from whom thy virgins flesh proceeded without spot 5. they will not denie but that Bernard the Master of sentences Thomas Aquin. and before them Augustine were godly and deuout men all which held the contrarie that the Virgin Marie was not conceiued without sinne August de Genes ad liter lib. 10. c. 18. Bernard epist. 174. Magister lib. 3. distinct â— Thom. Aquin. vpon that place Controv. 20. Against merits v. 16. The gift is of many offences hence is inferred that seeing our iustification by Christ is called a grace and gift that it proceedeth from the free loue grace and fauour of God Pareus here well inferreth facessant ergo merita congrus c. away with all merits either of congruitie as preparations vnto grace or of condignitie vnto saluation for if our iustification and saluation were of merit or worke it were not of grace as the Apostle concludeth Rom. 11.6 If it be of grace it is no more of workes for then worke were no more worke c. 21. Controv. That the punishment of originall sinne is euerlasting death v. 18. By the offence of one the fault came of all vnto condemnation c. Here are two opinions to be refuted the first is of those which either promised vnto Infants dying without baptisme in originall sinne the kingdome of heauen as one Vincentius did hold whome Augustine confuseth lib. 1. de origin animae c. 9. or els did assure vnto them an happie estate in some middle place betweene heauen and hell as the Pelagians August haeres 88. vnto which opinion Pighius and Cathariâ—us two Popish champions come very neere who thinke that Infants dying in their infancie and so in originall sinne should enioy an happie and blessed estate here in earth after the generall resurrection The other opinion is generally of the Romanists which hold that Infants dying without baptisme shall haue poenam damni the punishment onely of losse in beeing depriued of the vision of God but they shall not haue poenata sensus the punishment or torment of sense or feeling and here some doe exempt them from all torment both inward and outward as Thomas
the grace working together is that wherewith the will of man worketh for the effecting of that which it willeth This distinction must be qualified for to make the will of man a ioynt worker with grace is against the Apostle who saith that it is God which worketh in vs both the will and the deede Philip. 2.13 But thus it may be admitted that mans will beeing once mooued and regenerate by grace is not idle but then worketh with grace not of it owne strength but as it is still mooued and stirred by grace see further hereof Synops. Centur. 4. err 30. 3. Of this sort is that distinction of grace praeveniens subsequens grace preuenting and going before and following grace which are not indeede two diuerse or seuerall graces but diuerse effects of one and the same grace Gods grace preuenteth mans will and changeth it of vnwilling making it willing and then it followeth to make the will of man fruitful and effectuall and this we acknowledge but the grace subsequent or following is not merited or procured by the well vsing of the first preventing grace in which sense this distinction is to be reiected 6. Morall obseruations Observ. 1. To followe the workes of the flesh is enmitie against God v. 10. When we were yet enimies c. They which delight in such workes as God hateth are enimies to God whereupon Origen giueth this note quomodo reconciliat us est qui causam mimici secum gerit c. how can he be said to be reconciled to God which yet retaineth the cause of enmitie c. he then which continueth in such workes as are hatefull vnto God cannot be said to be reconciled by the blood of Christ as the Apostle further sheweth That no vnrighteous person shall inherite the kingdome of God 1. Cor. 6.9 Observ. 2. Of the reconciling of enemies v. 10. When we were enemies we were reconciled c. As God did reconcile vs to himselfe beeing yet his enemies so we are taught herein to be like vnto our heauenly father to be willing to be reconciled and to be at atonement with our enemies as Abraham made a league with Abimelech and as Iacob did the like with Laban who pursued him to haue wrought him some mischiefe Observ. 3. Wherein we ought to reioyce v. 11. We reioyce in God through our Lord Iesus c. The Apostle here sheweth wherein the ioy of a Christian consisteth that whereas the world reioyceth some in riches some in honour some in pleasure some in their strength humane wisedome and the like the Christian man is taught to reioyce in his redemption and saluation in Christ as our Blessed Sauiour would haue his Apostles to reioyce because their names were written in heauen Luk. 10.20 Obser. 4. Of the two kingdomes of grace and sinne life and death v. 17. If by one offence death raigned c. The Apostle here pointeth our two kingdomes the one of sinne and death the other of righteousnesse and life there are node in the world but belong vnto one of these kingdomes Therefore it must be our great care to examine our selues vnto which kingdome we are subiects by nature all are vnder the kingdome of darkenesse and from thence we cannot be deliuered but by Christ as the Apostle saith Coloss. 1.13 who hath deliuered vs from the Prince of darkenesse and hath translated vs to the kingdome of his deare Sonne we must therefore examine our selues whether we haue faith in Christ 2. Cor. 13.5 Observ. 5. Why the Lord suffereth his sometime to fall and to be plunged in sinne v. 20. Where sinne abounded there grace abounded much more c. God then sometime seemeth to leaue his children to themselues that they afterward beeing recouered and restored by grace may haue more experience of the goodnesse and mercie of God and of the excellencie of grace as Dauid after his fall repenting of his sinne celebrateth the multitude of Gods mercies Psal. 51.1 and Peter after he was converted was bid to strengtheâ— his brethren Luk. 22.32 as then beeing more able to comfort others by the experience of Gods mercie which he had himselfe receiued Observ. 6. None ought to despaire of forgiuenesse of sinne v 20. Grace abounded much more Grace is more predominant then sinne and the Apostle in the comparison set forth betweene Christ and Adam sheweth before that grace in Christ is more able to saue vs then sinne was in Adam to condemne vs let no man then despare of mercie and say with Cain his sinne is greater then can be forgiuen but rather with S. Paul Iesus Christ came into the world to saue sinners of whom I am chiefe 1. Tim. 1.15 CHAP. VI. 3. The text with the diuerse readings WHat shall we say then shall we continue in sinne that grace may abound or be encreased Be. 2. God forbid let it not be Gr. we that are dead to sinne how yet shall we liue therein 3. Knowe ye not brethren L. addit that as many of vs as haue beene baptized all we which haue beene baptized B. G. but the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into Iesus Christ haue beene baptized into his death 4 We are buried together with him by baptisme into his death that like as Christ was raised did rise vp S. L. but the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was raised vp to the glorie Be. S.G. by the glorie L. B. V. but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by is here taken for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in of the father so we also should walke in newenesse of life 5 For if we be graft together with him G. Be. ad by the similitude of his death Be. S. B. rather then to the similitude G.L. for we are graft into Christ not into thâ—â— similitude so shall we be by the similtude which must be supplied out of the former clause some insert be partakers B. V. but the other word graft is better vnderstood of his resurrection 6 Knowing this that our old man is crucified with him that the bodie of sinne might be destroyed or abolished S.V. that henceforth we should not serue sinne 7 For he that is dead is iustified L.V. S.B. freed G.S. Be. but the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly signifieth is iustified from sinne 8 Wherefore if we be dead with Christ we beleeue that we shall also liue with him 9 Knowing that Christ beeing raised not rising S. L. see ver 4. from the dead dieth no more death hath no more dominion ouer him 10 For in that he died he died once to sinne but in that he liueth he liueth vnto God 11 Likewise thinke yee also that yee are dead to sinne but are aliue to God in Iesus Christ our Lord. 12 Let not sinne therefore raigne in your mortall bodie that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof obey the lusts thereof S. L. but here the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is omitted 13 Neither yeeld your
members as weapons of vnrighteousnesse vnto sinne but yeeld giue G. B. exhibite L. apply V. S. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your selues vnto God as aliue vnto God from the dead and yeelde your members as weapons of righteousnesse vnto God 14 For sinne shall not haue dominion let it not raigne S. but the word is in the future tense for ye are not vnder the lawe but vnder grace 15 What then shall we sinne because we are not vnder the lawe but vnder grace God forbid let it not be Gr. as v. 1. 16 Knowe ye not that to whom ye yeeld your selues as seruants to obey his seruants ye are to whom ye obey whether it be of sinne vnto death or of obedience of the hearing of the eare S. vnto righteousnes 17 But God be thanked that ye haue beene the seruants of sinne but ye haue obeyed from the heart that forme of doctrine whereunto ye were deliuered 18 Beeing then made free from sinne ye are become the seruants of righteousnes 19 I speake after the manner of men I speake 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some humane thing Gr. L.V. because of the infirmitie of your flesh for as ye haue yeelded your members seruants to serue L. to the seruice S. but the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seruants to vncleanes and iniquitie to commit iniquitie so now yeeld your members seruants to righteousnes and holines vnto sanctification L. V. S. 20 For when ye were the seruants of sinne ye were free vnto righteousnes from righteousnesse G. B. that is the meaning but the word in the originall is put in the datiue 21 What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed for the end of those things is death 22 But now beeing freed from sinne and made the seruants of God ye haue your fruit vnto holines in holines G. holy fruits S. and the ende euerlasting life 23 For the stipend stipends Gr. wages G. reward B. of sinne is death but the gift of God the grace of God L. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a grace a gift is eternall life through Iesus Christ our Lord. 2. The Argument Method and Parts In this Chapter the Apostle sheweth the necessarie coniunction betweene iustification and holines and newenes of life and there are two parts thereof in the first to ver 12. he layeth downe the doctrine then he exhorteth v. 12. to the end In the doctrine he prooueth the necessitie 1. of mortification and dying to sinne propounded v. 1.2 from the efficacie of baptisme which signifieth that we are dead and buried with Christ v. 3.4 and from the ende of Christs crucifying v. 6.2 of sanctification propounded v. 8. prooued from the mysterie of baptisme v. 4.5 from the vertue of Christs resurrection who is risen and dieth no more ver 9.10 and then he concludeth ver 11. 1. The exhortation followeth which hath two parts 1. one dehorting from sinne which is propounded and explaned v. 12.13 then amplified by three arguments 1. from their present state and condition beeing vnder grace v. 14. with the preuenting of an obiection v. 15.2 from the inconveniencie of the seruice of sinne which is vnto death set forth by the contrarie v. 16.3 from the efficacie of the doctrine which they obeyed v. 17.2 the other part stirreth vp to newenesse of life propounded v. 18. amplified 1. à pari v. 19.20 as when they serued sinne they were free from righteousnesse so beeing freed from sinne they must be the seruants of righteousnesse ab effectis from the effects of sinne shame and death v. 21. which are amplified by the contrarie effects of sanctification holinesse v. 22. and eternall life set forth by the contrarie on the diuerse manner sinne deserueth death as the iust stipend but life eternall is not deserued it is Gods free gift v. 23. 3. The questions and doubts discussed Quest. 1. Of the meaning of these words shall we continue in sinne v. 1. 1. The Apostle preuenteth here an obiection which might be occasioned by the former words in the end of the fift chapter where the Apostle said where sinne abounded grace abounded much more by occasion of which words the Apostle might feare least two sorts of men might take advantage the false teachers which did continually picke quarrells with the Apostles doctrine as some affirmed that he said we might doe euill that good might come thereof c. 3.8 He might feare also least the weake might receiue encouragement hereby to nourish theâ— infirmities still 2. But either of these so inferring did misconster the Apostles words and in this kind of reasoning there are three Paralogismes or fallacies committed 1. they take non causam pro causa that which is not the cause for the cause for the abounding of sinne is not the cause of the abounding of grace Augustine saith non peccantis merito sed gratiae supervenient â—â—â—uxilio c. where sinne abounded grace abounded more not by the merit of the sinne 〈◊〉 by the meanes of helpe by grace c. the Apostles speach is to be vnderstood occasionaliter by way of occasion and they take it causaliter by way of a cause Hugo sinne in it owne nature is no more the cause of grace then the disease is of medicine Maâ—â— qui laudat beneficium medecinae non prodesse dicit morbos c. he that praiseth the benefit 〈◊〉 Phisicke doth not commend the disease Augustin so then mans vnrighteousnesse doth not in it selfe set forth the iustice of God but ex accidente by an accident Pareus proveniter bonitate Dei qui bona elicit ex malis it commeth of the goodnesse of God who decreeâ—â— good out of euill Lyran. 2. the second fallacie is in that they thus obiecting make the Apostles words more generall then he meant or intended them for the abounding of sinne is not the occasion of the abounding of grace in all but onely in those which acknowledge and confesse their sinnes Martyr as it is euident in damnatione malorum in the condemnation of the wicked Lyran. there Gods iustice rather then his grace and mercie sheweth it selfe 3. a third fallacie is they apply that to the time to come which the Apostle onely vttered of time past the abounding of sinne in men before their conuersion and repentance setteth forth the aboundance of the grace and mercie of God in the forgiuenesse of their sinnes past but not so if sinne abounded after their conuersion and calling Mart. 3. The Apostle propoundeth this obiection in the person of the aduersarie by way of interrogation thereby expressing both affectum indignantis the affection of one angrie and displeased that his doctrine should be thus perverted and he sheweth also securitatem conscientiae the securitie of his conscience that he was free from any such thought 4. By sinne neither doth the Apostle vnderstand the author of sinne namely the deuill as Origen for then one should be said improperly to remaine in sinne that is in the
in the first the reason is not shewed why we are said to be graft into Christ but onely the similitude explained how he is said to be graft and we also 5. Erasmus because the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 planted together referreth it to the planting of the Iewes and Gentiles together into one bodie But Tolet well obserueth annot 5. that the Apostle speaketh of our planting into Christ not of one into an other 6. The meaning then of this phrase is this that Christ is the vine and we the branches as our Sauiour sheweth Iob. 15. and so we are by faith whereof baptisme is the Sacrament and seale planted and graft into Christ and doe receiue of his grace and spirit as the branches receiue the iuyce of the tree and as the tree and branches die together and growe together so Christs death causeth vs to die to sinne and his resurrection maketh vs to rise vnto newnesse of life Pareus But as similitudes must not be vrged in euerie point so must not this for betweene the naturall grafting of plants and our supernaturall and spirituall planting into Christ there is great difference for in the one the stocke for the most part is the worst but the science or plant is of a better kind and correcteth the euilnes of the stocke but here it is farre otherwise for we are of our selues wild plants and the stocke into the which we are planted is good and full of sappe Martyr Quest. 8. What resurrection the Apostle speaketh of v. 5. 1. There is some difference in the reading of the words Chrysostome who thinketh that the Apostle speaketh here de futura resurrectione of the resurrection to come will not haue the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 similitude supplyed non subiunxit similitudini resurrectionis the Apostle added not and to the similitude of the resurrection But then the Greeke construction cannot hang together if for of the resurrection beeing in the genitiue case 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cannot agree with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 graft in which before is ioyned with a datiue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the similitude Haymo will haue it put in the datiue to the resurrection but in the originall it is in the genetive Therefore the word similitude must be supplied that as he said before we are graft into the similitude of his death so we shall be to the similitude of his resurrection and so Origen also readeth 2. Concerning the meaning of these words Chrysostome Origen Tertullian Haymo with others vnderstand them of the second resurrection and they vrge this reason because the Apostle putteth the word in the future erimus we shall be Chrysostome and whereas else where the Apostle speaketh in the time past hath raised vs vp together Ephes. 2.5 but here in the future Origen thereupon inferreth that there are two resurrections one of the mind in this life the other of the bodie in the next But this is no argument taken from the time for the Apostle speaketh in the future tense because our renouation is not perfect in this life but we must daily rise from the dead workes of sinne to the newnes of life Beza 3. The Apostle then here specially intendeth the first resurrection vnto newenesse of life as he said before as Christ was raised vp from the dead by the glorie of the father not to the glorie of the father as Beza and the Syrian interpreter for the praeposition is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 per thorough yet it signifieth that Christ beeing raised vp by the glorious power of the Godhead for he hath one power with his father was raised vp to liue in glorie as the Apostle faith afterward v. 10. he liueth vnto God so we should walke in newenesse of life 4. Yet from hence also we haue an assurance of the resurrection of our bodies Calvin that by Christs resurrection we now are raised vp to the life of righteousnesse and afterward to the life of glorie as the Apostle ioyneth them both together Coloss. 2.3 for yee are dead and your life is hid with Christ in God when Christ which is our life shall appeare then shall yee also appeare with him in glorie Mart. Quest. 9. What is vnderstood by the old man v. 6. 1. The old man some take for the bodie the newe for the soule as Haymo alleadgeth out of Augustine but euen the prauitie of the affections and mind are part of this old man and therefore the Apostle saith Ephes. 4.23 be renewed in the spirit of your minde 2. Neither is the old man here taken for mans nature but the corruption thereof as Theodoret veterem hominem non naturam appellat sed pravam mentem the old man he calleth not our nature but the depraued minde and in that he saith our old man he distinguisheth the old man from our selues then we our selues are not this old man but it is aliqâ—â—d nostrum something of ours Pareus 3. Now it is called the old man in two respects first as Adam the old man is compared with the latter Adam and from Adam is deriued originall sinne which bringeth forth such euill fruites in vs before we are regenerate secondly in respect of our selues because our former conuersation is old beeing compared with our renovation and regeneration Beza the first both is according to the first Adam in sinne our second and new birth is according to the latter Adam in holines and righteousnesse 4. To this our state in the old man belong these three things 1. the guiltines of sinne 2. the custome and continuance in sinne 3. fomes peccati the occasion procurement enrising vnto sinne which proceedeth from the sinne of our parents ex Thom. 5. But whereas the ordinar gloss giueth this note that whereas the oldnes of our nature consisteth in two things in culpa poena in the fault and punishment Christus sus simpla vetustaie duplicem nostram consumpsit Christ by his single oldnes that is his death hath taken away both ours c. this can no way agree with the scope of the Apostle for if the old man be of Adam and we are made newe in Christ then cannot the old man be said to be in Christ. Quest. 10. What is meant by the bodie of sinne v. 6. that the bodie of sinne might be destroyed 1. Haymo propoundeth this interpretation among others that as Christ is the head of the elect and they with all their vertuous actions are his bodie so the deuill is as the head of sinne and the vngodly with all their sinnes are his bodie so that this bodie of sinne should haue relation vnto the deuill as the head but this bodie of sinne the Apostle called before our old man it hath relation to our selues not vnto the deuill 2. Some do take this bodie for our flesh in qua peccatum haeret whereto sinne cleaueth Beza Genevens and before them Theodoret but this cannot agree with the phrase which the Apostle
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
harder to say that the deuill had dominion then death ouer Christ. 3. Origen hath an other exposition that Christ dominatum pertulerit mortis quia formam servi susceperat did beare the dominion of death because he tooke vpon him the forme of a seruant and vpon all such death hath dominion but it was not necessarie that Christ should haue died though he had taken vpon him our nature seeing he was without sinne which causeth death 4. Wherefore death is said to haue had dominion quia sponte volens se subiecit mâ—rti because he willingly submitted himselfe to death for our sinne Mart. Calvin Quest. 14. How Christ is said to haue died to sinne v. 10. 1. Hilarie lib. 9. de Trinitat thus readeth that which died died once to sinne and vnderstandeth it of Christs bodie making the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a relatiue of the neuter gender so also Laurentius Valla and Iacobus Stapulens but this would seeme to fauour the Nestorian heresie that diuideth Christs person to say that Christ died not but his bodie died and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be taken for the coniunction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that he died as Galath 2.20 in that now I liue to this purpose Erasmus Beza 2. For the meaning Hilarie thus expoundeth Christ died to sinne quia mortuus corpore because he died in the bodie wherein was the similitude of sinne lib. 9. de Trinit so also Augustine in Enchirid. 3. Haymo thus mortuus est semel peccato id est semper he died once to sinne that is alwaies because he neuer had sinne at all 4. Some vnderstand sinne as the cause wherefore Christ died that the sinnes of the world were the cause why Christ died so Ambrose he died for sinne that is for or because of sinners serm 18. in Psal. 18. 5. But the better sense is that Christ died to sinne that is tollendo to take away sinne so Chrysostome mortuus est vt illud tollerat he died for sinne to take it away Christ died otherwise to sinne then we doe ille expiando nos amitiendo he to expiate and purge our sinnes we to leaue it Pareus Quest. 15. How Christ is said now to liue vnto God ver 10. 1. Oecumenius thus vnderstandeth he liueth to God eo quod sit Deus because he is God that is by his diuine vertue 2. Pareus thus ad gloriam Dei patris he liueth to the glorie of God his father that by his life the Church should be glorified but thus Christ liued in the dayes of his flesh both by the power of God and to the glorie of his father as our Blessed Sauiour himselfe saith Ioh. 6.57 As the liuing father hath sent me so liue I by the father 3. Neither is Christ said so to liue vnto God as we are said in the next verse to be aliue vnto God that is by the spirit of grace for so Christ liued vnto God all the dayes of his flesh 4. Chrysostome thus expoundeth it to liue to God sine fine vinere is to liue without ende that is eternally neuer any more to die 5. But not onely the eternitie of Christs life is hereby expressed but the glorie and maiestie also as Haymo interpreteth he liueth in gloriam paternae maiestatis in the glorie of the maiestie of his father as Reuel 18. And am aliue but was dead and behold I am aliue for euermore c. 6. And by this phrase is expressed the indissoluble vnion which Christ hath with God the father the Apostle hereby doth not onely signifie that he now liueth in eternall happines sed indivulse Deo haerere but is inseparably ioyned vnto God Martyr Quest. 16. Of these words v. 11. likewise thinke yee c. 1. Likewise thinke ye 1. Origen saith the Apostle vseth this word because this death which he speaketh of namely dying to sinne in cogitatione consistit non in effectu consisteth in the cogitation not in any externall effect 2. Chrysostome because that which he speaketh of non potest ad oculum repraesentari cannot be represented to the eye but is apprehended by faith 3. Haymo giueth this sense they must in memoriam reducere often bring to remembrance and bethinke themselues that they are dead to sinne so also Tolet annot 15. and Faius 4. but the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth rather collect yee gather ye it is the inference of the conclusion from the head to the members that we are certainely dead by the commemoration of his death so is the word vsed c. 3.28 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we conclude Beza Pareus 2. Dead to sinne but aliue to God Some doe interpret this of the life of the Saints in the resurrection when they shall liue to God for euer neuer to die any more but the Apostle speaketh of the life of grace as the next verse sheweth 3. In Iesus Christ c. 1. Origen maketh this the sense to liue in righteousnesse holines peace is to liue in Christ because Christ is all these and to the same purpose Chrysostome he that hath obtained Christ hath receiued euery vertue and grace with him 2. Gorrhan referreth it to the imitation of Christ making the seuere parts of Christs life an example of so many degrees of our spirituall life to his conception answeareth propositum the purpose of newe life to his natiuitie our regeneration to his death our labour in dying to sinne to his sepulture cessatio vitiorum the ceasâ—ing of sinne to his resurrection answeareth nova vita iustorum the newe life of the righteous to his asscention processus virtâ—tum our proceeding in vertue to his sitting at the right hand of God gloria beatorum the glorie of the Blessed Saints 3. But here is more signified then a similitude or conformitie to and an imitation of Christ the Apostle expresseth the author and efficient cause of our dying vnto sinne and liuing vnto God namely Christ Iesus Christo auxiliante Christ helping vs Oecumen Christi opere by the worke of Christ gloss interlin per Christum mediatorem by Christ our Mediator Lyran. as the Apostle saith Galath 2.20 I liue by faith in the Sonne of God Bucer Pareus with others Quest. 17. How sinne is said not to raigne c. ver 12. 1. Chrysostome and Theodorets obseruation seemeth here to be somewhat curious that the Apostle speaketh of the raigning not of the tyrannizing of sinne the difference betweene which two is this the one is of necessitie the other is voluntarie he would not haue them willingly to submit themselues in obedience vnto sinne although it doe play the tyrant in suggesting euill thoughts and desires yet they should resist them and not suffer sinne to haue a peaceable kingdome to this purpose Theodoret But this distinction is not necessarie for the kingdome of sinne in man is a meere tyrannie the kingdome properly in man is peculiar to the spirit because sinne vsurpeth vpon them that by right are
an others subiects euen Gods and though the wicked doe obey sinne willingly yet it is of necessitie also because it is not in their power to resist sinne 2. Gregorie better observeth vpon this place that the Apostle saith not let not sinne be but let it not raigne quia non esse non potest it cannot but be in our members but it may not raigne 3. Pererius here confuteth Beza for giuing this note vpon this place the Apostle sheweth how farre we are dead to sinne while we are in this life vt reluctetur spiritus non tamen vincat that the spirit alway resisteth but ouercommeth not c. whereupon he thus cauilleth that if the spirit ouercome not the flesh then is it ouercome of the flesh But Beza his meaning onely is that our sanctification is not perfect in this life but that there remaineth some relique of sinne which alwayes resisteth the spirit as the Apostle sheweth in his owne example c. 7. so the spirit ouercommeth in part because sinne raigneth not in the regenerate but there is not a perfect victorie in this life because sinne hath a dwelling still and beeing in vs in this mortall flesh though the kingdome thereof be subdued Quest. 18. What the Apostle meaneth by mortall bodie ver 12. Let not sinne raigne in your mortall bodie c. 1. Chrysostome thinketh this is added by way of encouragement to signifie certamina in hac re temporaria esse that the strife and combate herein is but temporarie so also Photius he sheweth quod temporaria sit contra peccatum lucta that the fight against sinne is but temporall because the bodie is mortall and for a time 2. Origen hath two interpretations first the Apostle speaketh of the dead bodie to shewe that sinne neede not raigne in vs for he that is dead is free from sinne but the Apostle saith not in mortuo sed mortali corpore in the dead but in the mortall bodie there is great difference betweene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dead v. 7. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mortall which is the word vsed here 3. Further he saith that the Apostle calleth this bodie mortall ad distinctionem alterius corporis quod immortale est to distinguish it from that other bodie which is immortall when sinne shall haue no dominion or command at all ouer vs this sense Tolet also followeth 4. The ordinarie glosse further addeth that here is a secret promise of immortalitie si non regnet peccatum if sinne raigne not the bodie nowe mortall shall be afterward immortall 5. Theophylact thinketh that mention is made of the mortall bodie to signifie that all the pleasures of the bodie are but momentanie minus sunt stabiles corporis voluptates and therefore they are not much to be desired to the same purpose Bucer ne innitamur rei fallacissima that beeing admonished by our owne frailtie we should not trust to so vncertaine and deceitfull a thing 6. Theophylact noteth beside that hereby the Apostle insinuateth mortalitatem hanc fuisse corpori à delicto inditam that this mortalitie was inflicted vpon the bodie by reason of sinne and so we should by the meditation of death and mortalitie be terrified from sinne 7. But as these notes and collections may safely be receiued so this further may be added that the Apostle maketh mention specially of the mortall bodie because the partes and members thereof are the instruments of sinne that although the minde are inward faculties be tempted yet that we should resist and not bring the euill motions and suggestions into execution and this may appeare to be the Apostles meaning by the next words v. 13. neither giue your members as weapons of vnrighteousnesse c. Beza 8. Some thinke that the Apostle insinuateth the daunger of eternall death that if sinne doe raigne corpus moriturum est in aeternum the bodie shall die eternally gloss interlin but the bodie is said to be mortall in respect of the present mortall state because it is subiect to death 9. P. Martyr thinketh the meaning to be this because the concupiscence which the Apostle would not haue here to raigne in vs is per corpus derivatum deriued from Adam to vs by the bodie But I preferre the former interpretations but especially the 7. yet so as that with Ambrose by mortall bodie we vnderstand the whole state of man both the powers of soule and bodie by the figure synecdoche when one part is taken for the whole So also Pareus Faius Quest. 19. Of those words that yee should obey it in the lustes c. v. 12. 1. The Syrian interpreter readeth that yee should obey the lusts thereof but here the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is omitted which is referred to the first antecedent sinne that ye should not obey it that is sinne which is put in the feminine gender in the lusts thereof that is of the bodie and therefore Beza to take away the anbiguitie explaineth it thus that yee should obey sinne in the lusts thereof 2. The Apostle putteth it in the plurall lusts because from the prauitie and corruption of our nature doe arise many and diuerse lusts and concupiscences Martyr 3. Thus sinne is compared to a tyrant raigning and raging the lusts are as the edicts and precepts of sinne whereby it raigneth and ruleth men yeelding to their corrupt concupiscence as are the vassals and slaues of sinne Calvin 4. The Apostle expoundeth himselfe what he meant before by the raigning of sinne that is to obey it no man in this mortall bodie can be void of concupiscence and vnlawfull desires but the faithfull must striue against them and not become subiect vnto them Pellican 5. This obedience consisteth in two things the one to be at command to obey and yeeld subiection vnto sinne the other to take vp armes in the defence of sinne which is touched in the verse following Pareus 6. Concupiscence is taken two waies sometime it is the name fomitis innati of that inborne occasion and originall of sinne sometime actus interioris of the inward act of the minde whereof there are three degrees there is propassio the propassion or first motion then delectatio the delight thirdly consensus the consent the Apostle here speaketh not of the first motion which no man can helpe but of the second and third which by Gods grace may be staied that a man neither delight in or consent vnto those euill motions which arise in his mind gloss ordinar 7. Neither is this a superfluous exhortation vnto them whom he said before v. 11. to be dead to sinne that sinne should not raigne in them because our mortification is not here perfect but euery day more and more we must proceed therein and by such exhortations is our mortification still perfited Pareus 8. And here by lusts we must vnderstand not the naturall desire and lust of the bodie as after meate drinke sleepe and such like but the vnnaturall vnnecessarie and
inordinate lasts as specially after these things which concerne the tast feeling and such like Faius Quest. 20. How we are not to giue our members as weapons vnto sinne v. 13. 1. Chrysostome here noteth that the bodie as a middle and indifferent thing betweene sinne and righteousnesse it may be both vsed as weapons for sinne and as an instrument of righteousnesse as both the souldier vseth armour of defence for his countrie and the theefe against it and he maketh mention here of two Kings God and sinne shewing what great difference and oddes there is betweene them that it should be a shame for vs to leaue the seruice of God and to betake vs to the vile seruitude of sinne 2. Origen here also ascribeth a difference in the Apostles phraise he speaking of iniquitie maketh mention onely of our members which must not be giuen as weapons vnto it but he willeth vs to giue our selues vnto God because when first we haue deuoted our selues our inward minde and desire to Gods seruice so we shall make also our members instruments of holines 3. Theophylact noteth that sinne is called by the name of iniquitie because he that sinneth in scipsum vel in proximum iniurius est is iniurious and vniust against himselfe or his neighbour 4. By members we must not vnderstand onely the externall partes of the bodie as the eyes eares hands but the inward also as will affection heart that none of these must become the instruments of vnrighteousnesse Pareus 5. The Apostle setteth downe two partes of our seruice vnto God as he did before of seruice to sinne the first is obedience and subiection giue your selues vnto God the other is to striue and fight for the kingdome of righteousnesse as before he forbad them to vse their members as weapons for sinne Pareus 6. The Apostle inserting these words as aliue from the dead giueth a reason why we should not serue sinne but bequeath our selues to the seruice of God because we hauing receiued so great a benefit as to be raised in Christ from the death of sinne should now as no more dead but as liuing serue God and therefore in this regard iustum est it is iust as Chrysostome inferreth so the Apostle saith are aliue and therefore potestis yea may and ye were dead and therefore debetis ye ought to giue your selues vnto God gloss interline Origen maketh it as an effect and consequent of the former that in giuing your selues to God yea by this meanes shall die vnto sinne and liue vnto righteousnesse but it is rather a reason taken from the ende of our spirituall mortification as is obserued before out of Chrysostome Quest. 21. What it is not to be vnder the law but vnder grace v. 14. There are two things which doe encourage men to fight bonitas causa facilitas victoriae the goodnes of the cause and the facilitie of the victorie both these arguments the Apostle vseth here the goodnesse of the cause he shewed before which was to take part with God and to fight his battels against sinne the easines of the victorie he now setteth forth because we are not vnder the law but vnder grace which doth helpe vs and giue vs strength to resist sinne But these words are diuersely expounded 1. Origen vnderstandeth here the law of the members which continually resisteth against the law of the minde But as Beza well noteth the law of the members is not put absolutely without any other addition as it is here but alwaies something is added by way of explanation 2. Neither doth the Apostle speake here of the ceremoniall or iudiciall law from both which we are free from the first wholly both from the obligation but not from the substance in obseruing the equitie of these lawes the Apostle speaketh of neither of these but of the morall law against the which the concupiscence of the flesh continually inciteth and stirreth men vp 3. The Apostle then speaketh here of the morall law in the which three things are to be considered the substance in the obseruation thereof and the consequents either iustification in obseruing it or malediction if it be not obserued the question is in which of these respects we are said to be free from the law and not vnder it in this place it is confessed of of all that we are free from the iustification by the workes of the law the question is here of the other two the malediction of the law and the obseruation or obedience of it some take the first to be here meant that not to be vnder the law but vnder grace is not to be vnder the curse of the law but to haue remission of sinnes in Christ so Haymo ye are not vnder the law quae punit damnat peccatores which punisheth and condemneth sinners but vnder the grace of Christ that is the remission of sinnes to the same purpose Vatablus to be vnder grace is to haue the conscience assured omne peccatum nobis remissum esse c. that all sinne is remitted vs by the mercie of God so also Calvin they are not vnder the law that is opera eorum non exiguntur ad severum legis examen their workes are not now exacted according to the seuere censure and examination of the law thus also Melancthor Piscator likewise legi satisfecistis in Christo yea haue satisfied the law in Christ But Beza refuteth this interpretation vpon this reason because the Apostle speaketh not here of the remission of sinnes but of mortification and of the fruites of righteousnesse begunne in vs by the spirit 4. Some doe vnderstand it of the obseruation of the law in respect of the manner not of the substance for we are still vnder the obedience of the law to performe the holy workes and duties which are therein prescribed but we are not now vnder the law for the manner of our obedience to be forced thereunto by feare and terrour but the grace of God maketh vs willing and able in some measure to keepe the law which prescribed what was to be done but helped not toward the doing thereof thus Augustine Lex reos faciebat iubendo non adiuvando gratia adiuvat vt quisqne sit legis factor the law made men guiltie in commanding not in helping but grace helpeth euery one to be a doer of the law And to this purpose he maketh sowre degrees of men ante legem sub lege sub gratia in pace before the law vnder the law vnder grace in peace ante legem non pugnamus before the law we do not so much as fight or striue against sinne at all vnder the law pugnamus sed vincimur we fight but are ouercome vnder grace pugnamus vincimus we fight and by grace ouercome sinne in pace ne pugnamus quidem but in the state of peace which is in the kingdome of heauen we shall not so much as fight because then all our spirituall enemies shall be
Cor. 15.32 S. Paul had fought with beasts at Ephesus after the manner of men as others vsed to doe 4. sometime it is referred to the humane and ordinarie phrase of speaking as in this place 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doct. That baptisme is not to be iterated v. 3. Haue beene baptised into his death c. Hence it is inferred that baptisme is not to be iterated or more then once to be administred because as men are but once naturally borne and are once to die so because in baptisme our spirituall birth and death are represented it sufficeth once to be baptised this maketh against the Hemerobaptistae which thinke it necessarie daily and often to be baptised but as man hath but one naturall birth so our supernaturall birth in baptisme is sufficient 2. Doct. That infants haue sinne In that the Apostle saith of all that they are baptised into the death of Christ that is to die vnto sinne that the bodie of sinne might be destroied as he saith v. 6. hence Augustine concludeth lib. 6. cont Iulian. c. 1. that children haue sinne for to what end else should they be baptised to die vnto sinne 3. Doct. Of the comparing and conferring of Scriptures together v. 3. All we which haue beene baptised vnto Iesus Christ c. Hence Origen noteth because the Apostle addeth not all we that are baptised in the name of the Father the Sonne and holy Ghost that it is his manner when he citeth any Scripture not to alleadg the whole text but those things onely quae praesentis causae requirit assertio which the state of the present cause requireth Pareus further addeth that what is breefely touched in some place of Scripture is more at large handled in another as here the misterie of baptisme is opened which is but breefely set forth in the first institution of baptisme where Christ onely biddeth to preach and baptise in the name of the Trinitie 4. Doct. Of the misteries set forth in baptisme v. 3. Here are three misticall points expressed in baptisme 1. in that we are said to be baptised into Christ whereby is signified our implanting and grafting into Christ which word the Apostle vseth v. 5.2 there is a communicating of the death and resurrection of Christ his death with all the fruites thereof is applied vnto vs 3. our renouation and newnes of life with our spirituall dying vnto sinne is also shadowed forth in baptisme Pareus 5. Doct. Of the distinction of sinne raigning and not raigning v. 12. Let not sinne raigne c. All sinne in the wicked and vnregenerate is peccation regnans raigning sinne whether it be originall or actuall because they giue the reine vnto sinne and obey the lusts thereof In the regenerate though to speake properly there be no absolute kingdome of sinne because it cannot possesse them totally and finally but at length they wrestle forth yet euery sinne in the regenerate committed against their conscience and depriuing them for the time of the hope of remission of sinnes is a raigning sinne when they doe not resist it but obey the lusts thereof such was Dauids adulterie sinne not raigning in them is their originall concupiscence their infirmities sinnes of ignorance omission and such like which they doe daiely mourne for and striue against 6. Doct. What manner of seruice must be performed to righteousnesse v. 19. As you haue giuen your members servants to vncleannes c. so c. We must serue righteousnesse as before we serued sinne 1. libenter willingly and cheerefully 2. vigilanter 3. celeriter speedely not putting off our seruice 4. potenter mightily with all our strength and power 5. ardenter earnestly zealously not coldly or slackely 6. indesinenter constantly without ceasing intermission or giuing ouer Gorrhan 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. Against the administring of the sacraments in an vnknowne tongue v. 3. Know ye not c. Hayma taketh this to be a reprehension of the Apostle reproouing them for their ignorance as if he should haue said certe id puto ignoratis I verily thinke ye are ignorant and if ye be I will shew it vnto you c. But Origen better inferreth that the Apostle speaketh taquam scientibus edoctis as to men of knowledge c wel taught hereupon he sheweth that in the Apostles time the vse was otherwise then in his daies non et numie fieri videmus typus tantum modo mysteriorum bis qui baptizantur sed virtus corum ratio tradebatur then not onely the type it selfe and misterie of the sacrament was deliuered to those which were baptized as now is vsed to be done but the efficacie and reason thereof c. the meaning of the sacrament explaned so that none were ignorant what was signified thereby as the Apostle speaking here of baptisme and of the spirituall vse and signification therof appealeth vpon their knowledge which sheweth the superstition of the Romanists who cause the sacraments to be administred vnto their people in the latine tongue and so they are kept in ignorance not knowing the right vse of the sacraments but resting onely in the outward ceremonies superstitious vsages which they haue brought in and added to the sacraments Controv. 2. Concerning inherent iustice Stapleton a notable champion for the Romanists Antidot p. 312. thus reasoneth out of the Apostles words v. 2. for inherent iustice they which are dead to sinne are wholly renewed in the inward man and so by their renouation are acceptable vnto God and thereby iustified but by the grace of Christ we die vnto sinne not to liue vnto the same any more Ergo thereby we are accepted of God and reconciled to him Contra. The proposition diuersely fayleth 1. this renouation of the inward man is not totall or perfect but onely in part though sinne doe no longer raigne in them that are iustified yet the reliques thereof remaine still the vnderstanding will and affections are but reformed in part for the Apostle faith we know in part 1. Cor. 13.9 and as our knowledge is such is our charitiâ— indeede in the next world when we are glorified all imperfection shall be done away and we shall be perfect as God is perfect but while we dwell in these houses of clay we are compassed with many imperfections 2. This our renovation though it be not perfect yet is accepted thorough the perfect obedience of Christ but it is not accepted as our iustification whereby we are reconciled vnto God for that which instifieth vs must be perfect which is onely the righteousnesse of Christ applyed vnto vs by faith See further touching inherent iustice Synops. Centur. 4. exr 56. and Contr. 14. following Controv. 3. That the Sacrament of baptisme doth not conferre grace by the outward worke v. 3. Knowe yee not that all we which haue beene baptized into Iesus Christ haue beene baptized into his death c. Hence the Romanists would inferre that baptisme doth worke in all regeneration for
all that are baptized into the death of Christ are regenerate but all that are baptized into Christ are baptized into his death therefore all that are baptised are regenerate and so the verie sacrament doth by the externall act conferre grace to this purpose the Romanists Contra. 1. The conclusion should be all that are baptized into Christ are regenerate and that we grant all they which receiue baptisme aright that is by faith apprehend the promise of remission of sinnes either then as they which are of yeeres or after as infants when they come to yeeres of discretion they are regenerate so the conclusion is true of all the faithfull that are baptized for the Apostle speaketh here onely of such including himselfe in the number so also he saith Galat. 3.27 All yee that are baptized into Christ haue put on Christ but they onely are baptized into him that by faith are graft into him and made liuely members of his mysticall bodie And thus much Lombard lib. 4. distinct 4. affirmeth out of Hierome in Ecclesia qui plena fide non accipiunt baptisma c. in the Church they which with a full faith doe not receiue baptisme doe take the water not the spirit c. 2. And these reasons may be alleadged hereof 1. iustification doth often goe before baptisme as Abraham first beleeued and then was circumcised and Cornelius after he had shewed his faith was baptized by S. Peter Act. 10. 2. Origen doth inferre as much out of the Apostles words here because the Apostle saith we are buried with him by baptisme into his death docens per hoc quia si quis prius mortuus est peccato is necessariò in baptisme consepultus est Christo he teacheth hereby that if one be dead before vnto sinne then of necessitie he is buried with Christ in baptisme but if any before doe not die vnto sinne he cannot be buried with Christ nemo enim aliquando vivus sepelitur c. for no man is at any time buried aliue c. thus Origen and before him Tertullian lib. de poenitent Dieu baptized non vt delinquere desinamus sed qua desivimus c. he bid to be baptized not that we should leaue off to sinne but because we had left alreadie c. Tolet here answeareth that his meaning is that they which are to be baptized must come with a purpose amplius non peccaâ—â—i not to sinne any more and further to Origen though he name him not he maketh this answear that we are said to be buried in baptisme not because we first die vnto sinne before we are baptized but for that baptisme signifieth that we are dead to sinne as the graue sheweth that they which are buried are dead non solum id significat sed efficit and it doth not onely signifie it but effecteth what it signifieth c. Tolet. annot 3. Contra. 1. Tertullian saith more then so they which come to be baptized corde iam lati sunt c. are alreadie washed in heart but their hearts cannot be washed and cleansed without remission of their sinnes 2. The graue signifieth in deed that they which are buried are dead but they were dead before neither doth the grave make them dead it receiueth them first beeing dead so then if we be buried in baptisme it sheweth that a spirituall death must goe before as the people which came vnto Iohns baptisme confessed and repented of their sinnes Matth. 3. yet this death to sinne is encreased ratified and confirmed in baptisme 3. But if iustification and remission of sinnes goe often before baptisme it will be demanded to what ende we are then baptised We answear 1. because God hath so commanded and therfore it were great contempt not to obey the Lords commandement 2. the benefits receiued before by those visible signes are enlarged and encreased 3. and although they are iustified before God yet it is not knowne vnto the Church into the fellowship whereof they are receiued by that outward Sacrament 4. baptisme also sealeth the assurance of the kingdome of God which they receiue in their iustification but it is sealed confirmed and ratified by the sacrament of baptisme like as Princes gifts after they are granted doe passe vnder the great seale Martyr See more of this controversie Synops. Centur. 2. err 96. Controv. 4. That baptisme serveth as well for the remission of sinnes to come as of sinnes past v. 3. We haue beene baptized into Iesus Christ Baptisme then is a seale of our vniting graffing and incorporating into Christ by faith by whom we haue remission of all our sinnes past present and to come and therefore the vse of baptisme extendeth it selfe vnto the whole life of man that by the effectual and liuely remembrance thereof he is confirmed and strengthened in the hope of the remission of all his sinnes in Christ so Chrysostome well saith vpon the 5. verse non ad hoc tantum valet baptismus quod prior a delicta deles sed quod ad futura cauenda monet baptisme onely avayleth not hereto that it blotteth out our sinnes past but armeth vs to take heede of sinnes to come c. Contrarie vnto this truth is the Popish doctrine that baptisme is prima tabula post â—â—fragium c. the first table as they call it after shipwrack and penance is the second table so that they will haue baptisme serue onely for the remission of sinnes past This conceit of baptisme beganne to be taken vp long agoe this made Constantius deferre his baptisme til he was old and the like is reported of Nazianzen in his life and hereupon grewe that common error that before baptisme men tooke vnto themselues a greater libertie to sâ—â—â— as in Augustines time they vsed to say sine illum facere nondum est baptizatus let him alone he is not yet baptized See also further of this point Synops. Centur. 3. error 11. Controv. 5. Whether in baptisme our sinnes be cleane taken away v. 6. Knowing that our old man is crucified with him c. Hence Pererius with other Romanists would inferre in baptismo tolli deleri penitus peccata c. that in baptisme our sinnes are wholly remooued and blotted out that those sinnes which were before baptisme are after baptisme none at all and not as the heretikes say so the Romanistes blaspheme the Protestants that sinnes remaine after baptisme but they are not imputed to this purpose Pere disput 2. annot 9. Contra. 1. Pererius with the rest of that sect doe misreport our opinion for we doe not say that in baptisme our sinnes are onely hid and not imputed and yet remaine still but we hold that our sinnes are blotted out and remooued for euer quoad culpam reatum poenam in respect of the fault guilt and punishment but there remaineth macula a blot still and staine of sinne the corruption and imperfection of our nature with some reliques and remainder of sinne doe still remaine
and this is euident both in that originall sinne remaineth after baptisme which the Apostle calleth peccatum inhabitans sinne dwelling in him Rom. 7.10 euen after he had beene baptised 2. whereas Pererius obiecteth that saying of Beza to confirme his opinion that in those which are truely sanctified in Christ sinne once dyeth â—â—â—is is so weakned vt pristinas vires nunquam accipiat c. that it shall neuer receiue the former strength but daily as the bodie in the graue rotteth away donec penitus intereat c. â—â—till it altogether perish c. In these words Beza affirmeth not that in baptisme there is a persue death of sinne but that sinne beginning to die is weakned more and more and neuer returneth to the former strength which is most true that the regenerate doe more and more die vnto sinne and euery day the power of sinne is decayed in them till at length together with morralitie they put of all corruption See further Synops. Centur. 3. er 10. Controv. 6. Of the baptisme of infants 1. The Anabaptists doe thus inferre out of this place of the Apostle v. 5. we are buried by baptisme into his death c. they which are baptised must professe their mortification and dying vnto sinne which infants cannot doe and therefore they are not to be baptised And Christ bid his Apostles to goe teach all nations and baptize them infants are not capable of doctrine and fit to be taught therefore they are not to be baptized Contra. 1. They which neither in baptisme nor after make profession of their mortification are not to be baptized they which are of yeeres must so professe in their baptisme it is sufficient for infants to doe it afterward for the vse of baptisme is not for the time present onely but for afterward otherwise we should neede often to be baptized 2. Infants are within the couenant for God promised to be the God of the faithfull and of their seede and therefore the signe of the couenant is not to be denied vnto them and seeing infants were circumcised vnder the lawe in stead whereof baptisme is succeeded infants by the same warrant are to be baptized vnlesse we will make the state of infants vnder the Gospell inferiour vnto the condition of infants vnder the lawe 3. When the Apostles were bidden to preach and baptize a course was prescribed them and that or those times to beginne with preaching and then to baptize for first they which were of yeares must beleeue which was wrought in them by preaching the word for faith commeth by hearing before they could be admitted to baptisme 4. But it will be obiected that this vse of baptizing infants is not Apostolicall it was brought in by Hyginus Bishop of Rome and Tertullian lib. de baptism misliketh that vse Contra. 1. Hyginus onely made a decree concerning Godfathers and Godmothers as they are called that vndertake for infants in baptisme which sheweth that the baptizing of infants was in practise before 2. Tertullian in his old age fell into the heresie of Montanus and therefore much is not to be ascribed to his iudgement concerning this matter Martyr Controv. 7. Of the confidence and assurance of saluation v. 8. Wee beleeue that we shall also liue with him c. Hence it is well inferred that the faithfull are assured by faith both of their perseuerance in the state of grace in this life and of euerlasting life in the next for we beleeue saith the Apostle that we shall liue c. we nothing doubt of it and in the same sense the Apostle said before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 knowing ver 6. and againe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 knowing v. 11 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gather ye or conclude ye as the word is taken Rom. 3.28 and here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we beleeue all which words implie a certaintie without doubting Contrarie hereunto is the doctrine of the Romanists which hold it to be a point of presumption to haue assurance of saluation and whereas we vrge S. Pauls example that was sure nothing could separate him from the loue of God in Christ they answear that S. Paul and other holy men had it by speciall reuelation Contra. S. Paul maketh it not his speciall case to be assured of saluation but here he speaketh generally of all the faithfull we knowe Tolet also one of their owne writers thus expoundeth this place we beleeue credimus intellectus c. we beleeue in the vnderstanding that spirituall life is giuen vs with the death of sinne confidimus etiam nos in ea per seueraturos and we are confident that we shall perseuere therein See further hereof Synop. Centur. 4. err 25. Controv. 8. That Christ shall not die in the next world againe for those which were not healed here v. 9. Death hath no more dominion ouer him c. Origen by this text confuteth their error who hold that Christ should suffer in the next world the like things as he did here for them quos dispensationis eius medicina sanara non poserat whom the medicine of his dispensation could not heale in this present world and they vsed this reason because in the next world they shall either doe well still or euill non erunt profundo silentia there shall not be silence altogether then as Lucifer fell in the beginning so may they be apt to fall then having the vse of freewill for virtus est mutabilis vertue is changeable Origen thus refuteth this error 1. because it is contrarie directly to the Apostles words here that Christ died once for all death shall haue no more dominion ouer him such vs the force and efficacie of the crosse of Christ vt sufficiat ad sanitatem remedium non solum praesentis futuri seculi sed etiam praeteritorum c. that it sufficeth not onely for the health and remedie of the present and world to come but of the ages past non solum humano ordini c. and not onely for the order and condition of men but euen for the celestiall orders also c. Christ by his death redeemed the one from their sinnes and setled and established the other 2. and though the nature of man be mutable here yet so shall it not be there vbi ad culmen virtutis ascenderit when it is come to the height and perfection of vertue for there shall be charitie which as the Apostle saith nunquam excidit neuer falleth away 3. The Apostle could say that neither life nor death things present nor to come nor any thing else could separate him from the loue of God in Christ how much lesse shall the libertie of freewill be able then to separate vs. 4. And Lucifer did fall antequam ad beneficia filij Dei charitatis vinculis stringeretur when as yet the bond of charitie had not fastened him to the benefits of the Sonne of God But it is now otherwise with those celestiall spirits whose
his delight and ioying in good in his inner man but he is captiued by the lawe of his members vnto sinne v. 22.23 The issue is this first he desireth and expecteth to be deliuered from this spirituall bondage and captiuitie ver 24. secondly he giueth thanks for this freedome in Christ that he is not yet wholly captiued vnto sinne but in his spirit he serueth the lawe of God 3. The questions and doubts discussed Quest. 1. How the law is said to haue dominion ouer a man as long as he liueth 1. We must here distinguish betweene these two cessare legem the law to cease and dominionem legis cessare the dominion of the law to cease Theodoret thinketh that the Apostle treateth of the ceasing of the law so also Gorrhan but that the law is not ceased the Apostle sheweth afterward giuing an instance in one of the commandements Thou shalt not lust but the dominion of the law is ceased which serued to condemne but we are vnder grace which hath deliuered vs from the bondage of the law Tolet. annot 1. 2. By the lawe 1. neither with Sedulius doe we vnderstand the lawe of nature for he speaketh vnto the Iewes that knewe the lawe whereas the lawe of nature was knowne also vnto the Gentiles 2. neither with Ambrose by the lawe doe we meane the Gospel for we are not dead vnto this lawe as the Apostle saith v. 4. we are dead to the law 3. neither is the lawe of the members here vnderstood as Origen which is alwaies euill rebelling against the lawe of the word but the lawe which the Apostle here speaketh of is holy and good ver 12. 4. nor yet doe we vnderstand the ciuill lawe of the Romanes to whom the Apostle doth write as knowing their owne lawes as Haymo and Lyranus indifferently vnderstandeth Lex Mosaica vel Civilis the Mosaicall or Ciuill lawe 5. The Apostle then maketh mention of the morall law of Moses as is euident by that instance which afterward he bringeth in of that commandement Thou shalt not couet Tolet. Mart. Pareus 3. These words while he liveth are diuersly interpreted 1. some referre it to the law as long as the lawe liveth or remaineth so Origen Ambrose Erasmus and Origen addeth this reason because the man is afterward resembled to the lawe who beeing dead the woman is free but this reason sheweth that it must be referred rather to the man then the law 2. and so indeede it is more fitly said of the man while he liueth then of the lawe and in grammaticall construction it is better referred to the nearer word then the further off Beza 3. some doe ioyne it vnto man which word because in the Greeke signifieth both sexes Chrysostome thinketh that the death of both is insinuated for if the woman be free when her husband is dead much more when she is dead also but then this verse should be confounded in sense with that which followeth whereas the Apostle speaketh first in generall of the lawe which onely beareth rule ouer a man while he liueth and then of the particular lawe of matrimonie 4. some thinke that these words while he or it liueth are indifferently referred either to the lawe or man for both we are said to be dead to the lawe v. 4. and the lawe also is said to be dead v. 6. Mart. but it is better ioyned with man as the nearest word 4. Tolet thinketh that the Apostle speaketh not here generally of the law of Moses but of the particular law of matrimonie annot 4. but as is before shewed it is better to vnderstand the Apostle to speake generally here of the law which bindeth a man onely while he liueth and so we are dead in Christ and no longer bound to the law and then he doth illustrate the same by the particular law of marriage the law was as the man or rather sinne that receiued strength by the law we as the wife the law beeing dead in Christ in respect of the bondage thereof we are free Pareus 2. Quest. Whether the woman be simply free if the man be once dead v. 3. If the man be dead she is free Lyranus giueth this note that if the man should chance to die and yet be raised againe as some were the woman were not bound in that case to receiue the man as her husband nisi de condecentia but in decencie onely and supervenienti novo consensu by a new consent and contract Pererius affirmeth the same and giueth instance of Lazarus that if any should rise againe as he did non futuram vxorem eius quae ante fuerat she should not be his wife that was before but vpon a new contract Contra. Though this be but a curious and vnnecessarie question yet because the occasion is ministred by them it shall not be amisse herein to examine the truth Indeede when we shall rise againe to an immortall state as in the generall resurrection neither the man shall be bound to the wife nor the wife to the husband because they shall neither marrie nor be giuen in marriage but when any is miraculously raised againe to the mortall state and condition of this life the case is otherwise as may appeare by these reasons 1. Other coniunctions which are not so neare as betweene the father or mother and the children doe not cease neither are extinct by such a temporall death as it is saide Heb. 11.35 The women receiued their dead raised to life that is the mothers acknowledged their children raised againe as the widow of Sarepta and the Shunamite had their sonnes restored vnto them againe beeing dead the one by the Prophet Elias the other by the Prophet Elisha the question is whether those children so raised were freed from the obedience of their parents I thinke not no more is the wife in that case freed from her husband because the coniunction is nearer betweene the man and wife as Gen. 2.24 Therefore shall a man leaue his father and mother and cleaue to his wife 2. When the Sadduces put the question to Christ of a woman that was married to seuen brethren whose wife she should be in the resurrection our Sauiour answered them not that the woman was free from them all by death but because that in the resurrection they neither marrie not are married but are as the Angels in heauen Matth. 22.30 So then the reason why they are free after death is not simply because they are dead but because they shall rise to an incorruptible state and not returne from death againe to their former mortall condition 3. Pererius himselfe confesseth that if one that is baptized or hath receiued orders should be raised from death he should not neede to be baptized or consecrated againe because those Sacraments do imprint in the soule an indeleble character so doth not matrimonie But this may serue as an argument against his conceit that matrimonie in this case shall no more be iterated
tooke away the handwriting of the lawe which was against vs Calvin so Oecumen by the bodie of Christ pro nobis interemptum slaine for vs so also Ambrose tradens corpus suum Servator mortem vicit peccatum damnavit our Sauiour deliuering vp his bodie ouercame death and condemned sinne c. So we are dead vnto the lawe in the bodie of Christ because he in his body was made a curse for vs to redeeme vs from the curse of the law Par. Quest. 7. Of the meaning of these words v. 6. beeing dead vnto it There are 3. readings of these words 1. some reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we are deliuered from the law of death so the vulgar Latine and Ambrose with Anselme Haymo and Origen also maketh mention hereof though he approoue an other reading But the morall lawe is not properly called the law of death which title better agreath vnto sinne which indeed is the law of death Beza obserueth that no Greek copie but one which he had seen so readeth 2. Some read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being dead in the nominative which some expound thus in the which we were held as dead Origen but here is a traiection or transposing of the words which stand thus in the originall dead wherein c. not wherein we were dead some vse a harder kind of traiection we which are dead are deliuered whereas the order of the words is this we are deliuered from the lawe beeing dead c. some vse no traiection at all but supply the pronounc it or that dead vnto it wherein c. and they vnderstand the lawe Theophylact Erasmus Bucer Calvin P. Mart. 3. But the better reading is in the genetive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and some ioyne it with the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lawe the lawe beeing dead wherein c. but it is rather put absolutely and the pronoune that or it must be supplyed that beeing dead wherein we were holden not in Oecumenius sense who vnderstandeth it actiuely we are dead by sinne but passiuely with Chrysostome that beeing dead namely sinne wherein we were holden id quod detinebat peccatum c. that which did hold vs namely sinne hath now nothing to hold vs with Quest. 8. What is meant by the newenesse of the spirit and the oldnesse of the letter 1. Origen vnderstandeth by the oldnes of the letter the ceremonies of the lawe as circumcision the Iewish Sabbaths by the newenesse of the letter the spirituall and allegoticall sense so also Haymo saith he serueth God in the newenes of the spirit that spiritually practiseth the circumcision of the heart not the carnall obseruation of the ceremonies But S. Paul treateth here of the morall not the ceremoniall lawe as Tolet well obserueth annot 18. 2. Chrysostome and Theophylact following him vnderstand the oldnes of the letter of the externall obedience which was practised vnder the law the newenesse of the spirit they expound to be the inward obedience of the heart wrought in vs by the spirit of Christ But we must here take heede that we doe not so thinke that the literall sense of the lawe onely concerned outward obedience for it required the perfect loue of God and our neighbour and restrained the verie inward concupiscence Neither must we imagine that all they which liued vnder the lawe onely serued God in the oldnes of the letter yeelding onely externall obedience as Chrysostome seemeth to insinuate that they were commanded onely to abstaine from murther adulterie and such like but we are restrained from anger wantonnes the inward motions for many of the holy men vnder the lawe had the newenesse of spirit in the renovation of their inward desires as the faithfull haue vnder the Gospell 3. Some by the oldnesse of the letter vnderstand sinne which was not reformed by the letter of the lawe by the newenesse of the spirit the fruits of righteousnesse as Hierome epist. ad Hedib quest 8. vivamus sub pracepto qui prius in modum brutorum c. let vs liue vnder the precept which before as bruite beasts said let vs eate and drinke c. so also Tolet annot 8. but if by the oldnes of the letter we vnderstand sinne how can any be said to serue God in sinne 4. Ambrose by the newenesse of the spirit doth vnderstand legem fidei the lawe of faith by the oldnes of the letter the law of works but the Apostle here speaketh of our obedience and sanctifie which is the fruits indeede of iustification rather then iustification it selfe 5. Wherefore the Apostle rather by the oldnes of the letter vnderstandeth the outward and externall obedience onely ot iosam legis notitiam the idle and fruitlesse knowledge of the lawe without the true conuersion of the heart the newenes of the spirit is the true sanctitie both of bodie and soule wrought in vs by the spirit of God which is called newe compared with our former state and condition vnder the old man and in respect of our newe mariage with Christ Pareus so Calvin non habemus in lege nisi externam literam c. we haue not in the lawe but onely the externall letter which doth bridle our outward actions but doth not restraine our concupiscence so Pet. Martyr vnderstandeth quoddam obedientia genus a certaine kind of outward obedience but not such as God requireth to the same purpose Osrander the newenes of the spirit is when we serue God move spontaneo spiritu with a readie and willing spirit they serued God in the oldnes of the letter that is indignabundo spiritus with an vnwilling mind And the law as Beza well noteth is called the letter quia surdis canit because it speaketh as vnto deafe men till they be regenerate and renewed by the spirit of grace 6. So here are three things set one against the other solutio contra detentionem libertie or freedome against detayning or holding the newenesse against the oldnes the spirit against the letter Gorrhan Quest. 9. How S. Paul beeing brought vp in the knowledge of the law could say I knew not lust 7. and I was aliue without the law v. 9. 1. The occasion of this question is because elswhere the Apostle professeth his integrity as Philip. 3.6 touching the righteousnesse which is in the law I was vnreproouable and Act. 23.1 he saith I haue in all good conscience serued God vnto this day how then could he be ignorant of the law or be without the law Ans. 1. It may be answered that either S. Paul spake of his first age in the time of his childhood when he knew not the law or he speaketh figuratiuely in the person of an other But neither of these is likely not the first for the things which the Apostle here toucheth show the law wrought in him all manner of concupiscence are not incident into the age of children or vnexperienced young men nor the other for thoroughout this whole chapter the
statutes that were not good Gorrhan here answereth that they were good in themselues but became euill ipsorum vitio by their fault Iunius vnderstandeth that place of the hard iudiciall laws and sentences of death both ordinarie and extraordinarie But rather it is referred to the ceremoniall laws which were as a yoke and burthen laid vpon the people which they were not able to beare as S. Peter expoundeth Act. 15.10 Quest. 23. How the lawe is said to be spirituall 1. Origen thinketh it is called spirituall because it must be vnderstood not literally but spiritually But the Apostle treateth here of the morall lawe where was no place for allegories 2. Theodoret because it was giuen of God who is a spirit 3. Ambrose because the lawe directed vs to the worship of God who is a most pure spirit 4. Augustine because it cannot be fulfilled nisi à viris spiritualibus but of spirituall men but no man in this life is so spirituall that he can keep the law 5. Thomas because concordat cum spiritu hominis it agreeth with the spirit of man that is reason so also Lyranus because it directeth man to followe the instinct of the spirit or reason so also Gorrhan spiritum hominis aleus it nourisheth the spirit of man But the verie spirit of man is corrupt and contrarie to the law by nature and therefore the Apostle saith Ephes. 4.23 be renewed in the spirit of your mind 6. Pet. Martyr giueth this reason why it is called spirituall because it requireth not onely the externall obedience in the outward workes but the spirituall in the heart and affections 7. But hereunto it may be added that it is spirituall because it requireth a spirituall that is a perfect obedience both in bodie and soule and an angelicall and diuine obedience to followe vertue and shunne vice so Chrysostome and Theophylact and Calvin Pareus Osiand following them 8. that seemeth to be somewhat curious which the ordinar gloss here obserueth that the Lawe is onely called spirituall because therein are those things quae Dit sunt which are Gods but the Gospel is called lex spiritus the lawe of the spirit because there Deus ipse est God himselfe is Quest. 24. How the Apostle saith he is carnall and sold vnder sinne v. 17. 1. Pererius well obserueth here that one may be said to be carnall two waies quia serâ—â— carni because he serueth the flesh or he which by reason of his corrupt nature procliuis est is prone vnto concupiscence to this purpose Pareus that in the first sense the vnregenerate are said to be carnall in the other the regenerate because they are yet infirmitatibus abnoxque subiect to infirmities quia nondums habent spirituale corpus because they haue not yet a spirituall bodie freed from all infirmities such as they shall haue in the resurrection August lib. ad Bonifac. c. 10. so we haue inchoatam non plenam liberationem a deliuerance begunne in Christ but not yet perfect till our last enemie death shall be destroied 2. Likewise where the Apostle saith he was sold 1. Some take the word properly for such a selling wherein there is a buyer a thing sold and a price which they referre either vnto Adams selling himselfe to the deuill for an apple Lyran. gloss ordinar or to a mans selling of himselfe by his actuall sinnes for the sweetnesse of pleasure which is as the price which men sell themselues to the deuill for Tolet. annot 16. Gorrhan But in this sense S. Paul beeing a spirituall and regenerate man cannot be said to be sold. 2. wherefore this metaphor is not largely to be taken as when Ahab is said to haue sold himselfe to worke wickednes 1. King 21.25 for there are two kinds of slaues one that selleth himselfe into captiuitie and willingly obeyeth a tyrant or one which against his will is brought into servitude as Ioseph was sold by his brethren into captiuitie and this is S. Pauls case here Pareus And Augustine noteth that sometime selling in Scripture is taken for a simple tradition or deliuering ouer without any price lib. 7. in Iudic. c. 17. and so indeed the Hebrew word machar signifieth as well to deliuer as to sell as Isay 52.3 the Israelites are said to be sold for naught and the Lord will redeeme them for naught But these two are said in a diuerse sense Men are said to be sold for naught in respect of God he receiueth no honour but rather dishonour by their selling ouer vnto sinne they are redeemed for naught in Christ in respect of themselues because they gaue nothing for their redemption but yet in respect of Christ and his price they were not redeemed for naught but by the most pretious blood of Christ Mart. Pererius thinketh they are said to be redeemed for naught comparatively because that momentarie pleasure for the which a sinner selleth himselfe is nothing to the price and dignitie of his soule numer 72. but rather selling is here taken for a plaine deliuering ouer as is before shewed out of Augustine Now two waies are the regenerate sold ouer to sinne in respect of their originall corruption and of their carnall infirmities which remaine still in their corrupt nature to the which they are subiect still Pareus but the vnregenerate are said to be sold ouer as Ahab was because they giue themselues wholly ouer vnto sinne Beza doth well expresse these two kinds of seruitude or selling ouer by the like difference in humane servitude for some are slaves because they are borne of serâ—ile and bond parents others make themselues bond like vnto the first are the regenerate and the vnregenerate as the second Quest. 25. Of these words v. 15. I allow not what I doe what I would that doe I not 1. Chrysostome thinking that the Apostle speaketh this in the person of an vnregenerate man referreth this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I know not or vnderstand nor to the vnderstanding not that a sinner knoweth not when he sinneth sed tenebrosa quadaÌ„ vertigine obvoluor but I am ouertaken with a kind of dizines that I know not how I was ouertaken so also Origen non rem ipsam sed causam rei dicitur ignorare he is said not to know not the thing but the cause thereof that is how and by what means he came to sinne But it is euident by the words following what I would c. that the Apostle speaketh of his will rather then vnderstanding 2. Pererius likewise inclining to thinke that this is spoken in the person of a carnall man will haue this vnderstood of a generall and vniversall knowledge will and hatred that men in generall knowe and will vertue and hate vice but not in particular But the Apostle here speaketh of doing and not doing which must be referred to particular actions 3. Augustine verie well interpreteth non agnosco I know not that is non approbo non consentio I approoue not consent not
he be called a man of desires that is beloued and excepted of God yet had his sinnes which he confessed in his owne name and person as Dauid is said to be a man after Gods owne heart yet he had his sinnes and imperfections Arguments for the affirmatiue part that S. Paul speaketh in his owne person as of a man regenerate First these two points must be premised that the Apostle speaketh of himselfe not of another still continuing his speach in the first person I am carnall I will I consent I delight and so throughout that it should be a great forcing of the Apostles speach to make him to speake of another and not of himselfe secondly the Apostle from the 14. v. to the end speaketh of his present state who was then regenerate as may appeare because while he was yet vnder the law he speaketh as of the time past v. 9. I was aliue and v. 10. sinne seduced me but from the 14. v. he speaketh of the time present I am carnall and so throughout to the end of the chapter Argum. 1. Hence then is framed our first reason the Apostle speaketh of himselfe as he then was because he speaketh in the present tence but then he was a man regenerate Ergo. Theophylact answereth the Apostle saith I serue v. 15. that is serviebam I did serue Contra. As the Apostle saith I serue so he saith I delight in the law of God v. 22. and in this verse 25. I thanke God c. which immediately goe before the other I serue but those words must be vnderstood as they are vttered of the time present therefore the other also Argum. 2. Gregorie vrgeth these words v. 18. to will is present with me he that saith he will per infusionem gratiae quae in se iam lateant semina ostendit doth shew what seede lyeth hid in him by the infusion of grace lib. 29. moral c. 15. Ans. Euen the vnregenerate by nature doe will that is good they may imperfecte velle 〈◊〉 siue gratia in peccato imperfectly will that is good without grace euen in the state of sinne Tolet. in tractat c. 9. Contra. There is bonum naturale morale spirituale that which is naturally good morally good spiritually good the first one by nature may desire as bâ—ute beasts doe the same and therein they doe neither good nor euill the second also in some sort as the heathen followed after morall vertues but they did it not without sinne because they had no faith but that which is spiritually good the carnall haue no mind at all vnto for it is God which worketh both the will and the deed Phil. 2.13 Argum. 3. Augustine presseth these words v. 17. It is not I that doe it but sinne that dwelleth in mee this is not vox peccatoris sed iusti the voice of a sinner but of a righteous man lib. 1. cont 2. epist. Pelag. c. 10. Ans. A sinner may be said not to doe euill not because he doth not consent vnto it but because he is not onely mooued of himselfe but drawen by his concupiscence Tolet. ibid. Contra. There is nothing in a man to giue consent vnto any action but either his spirituall or carnall part but in the vnregenerate there is nothing spirituall but all is naturall therfore whatsoeuer such an one doth he wholly consenteth he himselfe is not one thing and his sinne another to giue consent but he is wholly mooued and lead of sinne Argum. 4. Augustine addeth further the Apostle thus beginneth the 8. chapter there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus which words follow as inferred vpon the other which sheweth that the Apostle spake before of those which were in Christ Iesus Ans. Nay rather those words following vpon the other who shall deliuer me c. which the Apostle vttereth of a man not yet deliuered or freed from his sinne and maketh answer the grace of God c. shew that he spake before as of our not beeing in the state of grace Tolet. ibid. Contra. 1. It is the bondage of corruption which the Apostle desireth to be deliuered from as is shewed before qu. 33. neither doth the Apostle answer the grace of God c. but I giue thankes to God as likewise hath beene declared qu. 34. before but one not in the state of grace cannot giue thanks vnto God therefore the immediate connexion of these words c. 8. sheweth that he spake before of those which are in Christ. Argum. 5. Further Augustine thus reasoneth a carnall man cannot delight in the law of God in the inner man as Saint Paul doth neither indeed is there any inner man that it regenerate and renewed in those which are carnall Pareus Ans. 1. The vnregenerate may delight in the law as Herod did and it is nothing else but velle bonum to will that which is good Tolet. ibid. and they haue also the inner man which is the mind as the outward man is the bodie Contra. 1. The carnall cannot delight in the law but they hate it as Psal. 50.17 this hatest to be reformed and hast cast my words behind thee Herod gaue care to Iohn Baptist not of loue but for feare for afterward he put him to death Hypocrits and carnall men may stand in some awe and feare a while but it is not of loue nor in truth or from the heart 2. the inner part is that with spirituall and renewed but in the wicked their verie mind is defiled Tit. 1.15 therefore in them there is no inner man see before qu. 26. Argum. 6. The Apostle desireth to be deliuered from his corruptible and sinfull bodie hoping then for perfect libertie but in the resurrection the carnall shall haue no such libertie they shall rise to greater miserie Augustine Ans. The deliuerance there spoken of is by iustification from sinne not in the resurrection Tolet. ibid. Contra. The Apostle euidently speaketh of beeing deliuered from this bodie of death that is his mortall bodie which shall not be till the resurrection Argu. 7. The children of God that are regenerate do onely find in themselues the fight combate betweene the spirit and flesh Gala. 5.17 as the Apostle doth here v. 22. Pareus Argum. 8. The vnregenerate doe not vse to giue thanks vnto God but they sacrifice to their owne net as the Prophet saith Hab. 1.16 they giue the praise to themselues But S. Paul here giueth thankes Faius Argum. 9. No man but by the spirit of God can hate and disalow that which is committed against the law of God as the Apostle doth here v. 15. Hyperius Argum. 10. To what end should the Apostle thus at large shew the effects and end of the law for their cause qui prorsus sunt à Deo alieni which are altogether straungers from God and care not for his law Faius by these and such like reasons it is concluded that S. Paul speaketh in the person of a man regenerate Quest. 37.
If it be decent for a Bishop to be the husband of one wife as Christ is of one Church why will they not then allow them to haue any wife at all 4. Christ indeede is the husband but of one Church at one time yet the Church of the old Testament and the Church of the new did one succeede an other so then this resemblance may hold very well if likewise a Bishop be the husband of one wife after an other Controv. 3. Whether the marriage bond be indissoluable before the one partie be dead 1. Pererius would prooue the negatiue that marrying cannot be dissolued quoad viâ—culum in respect of the bond if it be lawfully contracted but onely quoad torum in respect of their bedding and conuersing together no not for fornication but after death by this place of the Apostle v. 3. If while she liueth she take an other man she shall be called an adulteresse the Apostles words are generall that till death part them neither of them is free Contra. 1. The Apostle speaketh of marriage as it was instituted of God which by Gods ordinance was to continue as long as life lasteth for God appointed in the beginning that the man should cleaue vnto his wife here then the Apostle had no cause to speake of the cases wherein diuorce is admitted either civilly as the law of Moses permitted the men to giue a bill of diuorce to the women or by Christian libertie or immunitie as in the cases of fornication or desertion for when there happeneth any other separation of mariage then by death it falleth not out nisi per vitium but by the fault of the one as Chrysostome here obserueth for the Iewes were permitted to giue their wiues a bill of diuorce for the hardnes of their heart as our Sauiour saith Matth. 15. and either their wiues were in fault for the which cause they dismissed them or they were in fault in seeking to be rid of their wiues likewise in diuorce vpon fornication the partie diuorced was in fault but in the case of desertion the partie forsaking was in fault so none of these separations was without the fault of the partie but the Apostle speaketh of the institution of marriage according to Gods ordinance as it is found and entire without any such impediment or let comming betweene in which sense it is not dissolued but by death 2. Erasmus further answereth that the Apostle onely taketh his similitude from marriage and in a similitude it is not necessarie that euery thing should agree neither is it to be pressed in euery point 3. But that in two cases the mariage bond may be dissolued beside death by the fault of either partie delinquent namely for fornication and vpon wilfull desertion it is euident the first by the words of our Sauiour Matth. 19.9 Whosoeuer shall put away his wife vnlesse it be for whordome and marrie another c. committeth adulterie the other by that place of the Apostle 1. Cor. 7.15 if the vnbeleeuing depart let him depart a brother or sister is not in subiection in such things Pareus dub 1. see further else where Synops. p. 685. 687. Controv. 4. That the disparitie of profession is no cause of the dissolution of marriage v. 4. If the man be dead Gorrhan here putteth in a distinction of ciuill death which is by profession ante carnaletu copulam before carnall knowledge or naturall which is by death properly for it is the common opinion of that side that the man or woman hauing contracted matrimonie may either of them forsake the other before the consummation of marriage to take vpon them the profession of single life The Romanists also haue another opinion that marriage contracted in the time of infidelitie before baptisme is dissolued and made void if either of the parties afterward be conuerted to the Christian faith Bellar. de matrimon c. 12. But these two exceptions for the disparitie of religion or profession to dissolue matrimonie are contrarie to the rule of our Sauiour Matth. 19.9 who alloweth no marriage to be dissolued but for fornication and Saint Paul directly prescribeth that the woman should not forsake her vnbeleeuing husband if he be content to dwell with her 1. Cor. 7.13 See further hereof Synops. Centur. 3. er 82. er 95. Controv. 5. Whether the bill of diuorce permitted to the Iewes did lawfully dissolue matrimonie vnder the law This question ariseth by reason of the Apostles generall words here that if the woman take another man as long as the first liueth she is called an adulterer hence then this doubt is mooued what was to be thought of the men which dismissed their wiues vnder the law and married others and the woman likewise so dismissed married againe whether it were adulterie in them 1. Some are of opinion that by the bill of diuorcement giuen the verie bond of matrimonie was dissolued and that then it was lawful for either partie to marrie againe as Scotus Dorandus Poludanus in 4. Sententiar distinct 33. Caietanus in 24. Deuter. Abulens in c. 19. Matth. qu. 49. and Burgens against Lyranus in 24. Deuter. But the words of our Sauiour Christ make against them who saith that Moses permitted them so to doe for the hardnes of their heart Matth. 19.8 it was therefore tolerated onely and suffered because of their infirmitie it was not made lawfull and our Sauiour Christ addeth from the beginning it was not so this their instance then of distinguishing their wiues was a departing from the first institution 2. Wherefore their opinion is more sound which thinke that although because of the hardnes of their heart to auoid a greater mischeefe namely vxoricidium the murthering of their wiues they were permitted to send them away yet the marriage was not in truth dissolued they married againe sine poena legali without any legall punishment but yet non sine peccato not without sinne Thus Pererius shewing the same to be the opinion of Thomas Bonaventure Lyranus with others and before them Augustine lib. 19. cont Faustum c. 26. and Hierome in c. 2. Malach. And further Augustine sheweth that Moses intendment in graunting a dismission of the wife vpon a bill of diuorcement was to haue them reconciled that whereas onely the Scribes were to write the bills of diuorcement of purpose henc interposuit moram he put in this caution to delay the matter that while the man went vnto the Scribe while his bill was in writing his minde might be altered especially by the perswasion of the Scribe who in his discretion was not to write any such bill if reconciliation might otherwise be had So then of this libertie of the Iewes the like iudgement is to be giuen as of the polygamie or marriage of many wiues that neither was void of infirmitie which God did beare within those times but neither was euer simply lawfull the first institution beeing violated Controv. 5. Against the workes of propitiation v. 4. That we
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for as much as 2. Thess. 1.6 dwelleth in you but if any haue not the Spirit of Christ the same is not his 10 And if Christ be in you the bodie is dead because of sinne but the Spirit is life because of righteousnes for righteousnes sake B.G. 11 But if the Spirit of him that raised vp Iesus from the dead dwell in you he that raised Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortall bodies by his spirit because of his Spirit V.L.S.B. but the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 put to a genitiue case rather signifieth by that dwelleth in you 12 Therefore brethren we are debters not to the flesh to liue after the flesh 13 For if ye liue after the flesh ye shall die but if ye mortifie the deedes of the bodie flesh L. by the Spirit ye shall liue 14 For as many as are led driuen V. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Spirit they are the sonnes of God 15 For ye haue not receiued the spirit of bondage againe vnto feare but ye haue receiued the spirit of adoption of Sonnes S. of the Sonnes of God L. add whereby wherein L. we crie Abba father 16 The same spirit beareth witnesse with our spirit that we are the sonnes of God 17 If we be sonnes children G. we are also heires euen the heires of God and ioynt heires heires annexed G. partakers of the inheritance of S. coheires Be. V. with Christ if so be we suffer together with him that we may be also glorified together with him 18 For I count that the afflictions of this present time are not answerable or meete V. Be. S. worthie L. B. G. but the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worthie beeing construed with the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rather taken in the first sense to the glorie which shall be reuealed vnto vs. 19 For the earnest expectation B. fervent desire G. expecting with lifting vp the head Be. or fastening of the eyes S. as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth of the creature the created world Be. waiteth when the sonnes of God should be reuealed 20 Because the creature the created world Be. is subiect to vanitie not of it owne will but by reason of him which hath made it subiect subdued it vnder hope G.B. but these words vnder hope are better referred to the next verse B. S. 21 Vnder hope that the creature also shall be deliuered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious libertie of the sonnes of God 22 For we knowe that euerie creature the world created Be. all the creatures S. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 groaneth together or sigheth and trauaileth in paine together with vs vnto this present 23 And not onely the creature but we also which haue the first fruits of the spirit euen we doe sigh groane L. V. mourne B. in our selues waiting for the adoption of the sonnes of God L. ad euen the redemption of the bodie 24 For we are saued by hope but hope that is seene is not hope for that which one seeth why not how G. B. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should he hope for 25 But if we hope for that we see not we doe with patience abide it expect it Be. 26 Likewise the spirit also helpeth our infirmities for this what we should pray for as we ought we knowe not but the spirit it selfe maketh intercession maketh request L.G. with sighes groanes B.S.V. which cannot be expressed 27 But he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the meaning sense Be. vnderstanding S. desire L. affection V. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sense meaning of the spirit for he maketh intercession for the Saints according to God that is according to his will S. G. according to his pleasure B. 28 Also we knowe that to those which loue God all things work together God helpeth them in euerie thing S. ad for the best vnto good Gr. euen vnto them which are called of his purpose predestinate to be called S. called to be Saints ad of his purpose L. 29 For those whom he knewe before he also predestinate to be like fashioned or conformable to the image of his sonne that he might be the first borne among many brethren 30 Moreouer whom he predestinate them also he called and whom he called them also he iustified and whom he iustified them also he glorified 31 What shall we then say to these things if God be for vs on our side B. G. who can be against vs 32 Who spared not his owne Sonne but gaue him vp for vs all how shall he not also with him giue vs all things 33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge or put in any accusation against Be. of Gods chosen it is God that iustifieth 34 Who is he that condemneth who shall condemne det G. it is Christ which is dead or rather which is risen againe who is at the right hand of God and maketh intercession B. Be. L. maketh request G. for vs. 35 Who shall separate vs from the loue of Christ shall tribulation or anguish or persecution or famine or nakednes or perill or the sword 36 As it is written For thy sake are we killed all day long we are counted as sheepe for the slaughter 37 Neuerthelesse in all these things we are more then conquerors we doe ouercome L. S.V.B. but the compound word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth more then simply to ouercome thorough him that loued vs. 38. For I am perswaded am certaine V. B. that neither death nor life nor Angels nor principalities nor powers not things present nor things to come nor strength ad L. 39. Nor height nor depth nor any other creature shall be able to separate vs from the loue of God which is in Christ Iesus our Lord. 2. The Argument Method and Parts In this Chapter the Apostle concluding the doctrine of iustification remooueth and taketh away the impediments 1. the reliques remainder of sinne in the sonnes of God doe not hinder their iustification to v. 17.2 neither are their afflictions an impediment which he exhorteth them by diuerse reasons patiently to suffer to v. 31.3 then he concludeth with the certaintie of saluation in the elect v. 31. to the end 1. The first impediment that the reliques of sinne which remaine in the seruants of Christ whereof the Apostle gaue instance in himselfe in the former Chapter doe not hinder their saluation he taketh away but with a double limitation if they be in Christ and doe not walke after the flesh both which are propounded v. 1. and afterward amplified and handled more at large The first limitation he setteth forth 1. by the fruites and effects of the spirit in the faithfull in freeing them from sinne and so from death and condemnation whereof he giueth instance in himselfe v. 2. from the end of Christs incarnation and death which was to destroie sinne and fulfill righteousnesse which the law could
of death Pareus so also Osiander doctrina euangelij side apprehensa the doctrine of the Gospel apprehended by faith doth deliuer me likewise Rolloc liberatio hac non est regeneratio sed peccatorum remissio this dedeliuerance is not regeneration but remission of sinnes and his reason is because the Apostle speaketh of a full and absolute deliuerance from sinne and death which is in remission of sinnes not in regeneration which is but in part 5. But I rather ioyne both these together regeneration and remission of sinnes from the which we are deliuered by the grace of Christ as Augustine comprehendeth both for sometime he expoundeth the Apostles words of the remission of sinnes lib. 1. de mixt concupis c. 32. how hath he deliuered vs nisi quia concupiscentiae reatum peccatorum omnium facta remissione c. but that the spirit of life hath dissolued the guilt of concupiscence remission of all sinnes beeing made sometime he applieth them to this worke of regeneration the law of the spirit of life hath deliuered thee from the law of sinne and death ne scilicet concupiscentia c. re in peccatum mortem pertrahat c. lest concupiscence challenging thy consent should draw thee into sinne and death lib. 1. cont 2. epist. Pelagian c. 10. And Calvin also though he cheefely insist vpon the second as he is alleadged before yet he omitteth not the first by the spirit of life vnderstanding the spirit of God which hath besprinkled our soules with the blood of Christ not onely to cleanse them à labe peccati quoad reatum from the staine of sinne in respect of the guilt sed in veram puritatem sanctificat but to sanctifie vs with true puritie c. And the ioyning of these two together doth best fit the occasion of these words and most agreeth vnto the words themselues for the Apostle hauing before spoken both of our iustification in Christ and our sanctification in not walking after the flesh now bringeth in this as a reason of both which is the spirit of life in Christ applied vnto vs by faith and concerning the words the spirit of regeneration answereth to the law that is the force of sinne and the life of grace to the law of death from the first we are deliuered by the spirit of sanctification from the other by the life of righteousnesse in our iustification 6. But Origens exposition is farre wide who by the spirit of life vnderstandeth the spirituall sense of the law and so he will haue in the law both literam occidentem spiritum viâ—ificantem the killing letter and the quickning spirit for the Apostle here directly against the law opposeth the spirit of grace and life in Christ. Quest. 3. What is vnderstood by the law of sinne and death 1. Some by the law of sinne vnderstand the morall law which was the ministrie of death and by it came the knowledge of sinne So Ambrose who propoundeth this obiection that seeing the Gospell and law of faith is likewise vnto sinne the sauour of death vnto death vnto some the sauour of life vnto life as the Apostle saith 2. Cor. 2. why faith if it worke the same thing which the law doth may not be said also to be lex mortis the law of death maketh this answer qui non obediunt fidei non occiduntur à fide sed à lege c. they which obey not faith are not killed by faith but by the law because they which came not vnto the faith are condemned by the law as guiltie of sinne and death c. But this were to confound the law and faith as though the law commanded and prescribed the Euangelicall faith for the law punisheth onely the breach and transgression thereof but the law commandeth one thing namely doe this and thou shalt liue saith onely in the Gospel requireth of vs to beleeue Rom. 4. 10.9 Pet. Martyr giueth this answer that the Gospel quamdiu fâ—ris sovat c. so long as it onely foundeth outwardly and the spirit worketh not within doth differ nothing from the law but when the spirit worketh inwardly together with the preaching of the Gospel then it hath the effect to saluation which the law cannot haue because it requireth other things then the Gospel the Gospel then is not the ministrie of death as the law not for that it doth not punish vnbeleeuers as the law doth the disobedient but in respect of the doctrine of saluation by faith which men are capable of by grace whereas the doctrine of workes by the law can bring no saluation vnto any no not beeing in the state of grace Together with Ambrose Vatablus and Pareus by the law of death will haue the law of Moses to be vnderstood quia peccatum deteget occidit because it discouereth sinne and killeth it iudging it worthie of death so also Bellarmine lib. 4. de iustificat c. 13. ration 5. and gloss interlin But if the law doe condemne sinne and sentence it with death it is not the law of sinne beeing against it it is called the ministerie of condemnation 2. Cor. 3.9 but so it is nostro vitio by our fault not of it selfe but that is said to be the law of a thing which it properly prescribeth and aymeth at 2. Origen seemeth to vnderstand the ceremoniall law which was impossible to be obserued as he giueth instance of the law of the Sabboth and of sacrifices as before by the spirit he interpreteth the spirituall sense of the law But the Apostles intent is not here to compare the literall and spirituall sense of the law together but to shew what libertie we haue obtained by Christ from sinne and condemnation 3. Some by the law of sinne and death vnderstand carnis imperium the dominion or power of the flesh or of sinne raigning in the flesh and the tyrannie of death which followeth Calvin the law of sinne is the law of the members which the Apostle spake of before Chrysostome Pet. Martyr the accusing of sinne and power of death Osiander or ab obligatione from the bond and obligation of sinne and death Lyranus à iure peccati c. from the right or power of sinne and death as Erasmus we are deliuered both from the power and guilt of sinne for Moses law the Apostle no where calleth the law of sinne Chrysostome So here there is mention made of three lawes two good the law of grace which taketh away sinne the law of Moses which is mentioned in the next v. which sheweth sinne but taketh it not away and one euill law namely of sinne which maketh vs guiltie gloss ordin Quest. 4. Of the best reading of the 3. verse 1. Erasmus and Vatablus doe supplie the word effecit or praestitit did or performed in this sense that which was impossible to the law c. God sending his Sonne c. did c. This reading also follow the Ecclesiasticall expositors collected by Marlorat
to make request by the merit and efficacie of his death and the continuall demostration of his loue to this purpose Chrysostome though it must be confessed that Christ beeing God and man otherwise maketh intercession for vs then either God the father or the holy spirit which tooke not our â—â—ure vpon them 4. that Christ vseth no formall or interstinct prayers it is euident by that place Ioh. 11.41 Howbeit thou hearest me alwayes but because of the people that stood by I said it that they may beleeue that thou hast sent me hence two reasons may be gathered that if Christ pray he alwayes prayeth he alwaies is heard his intercession then is his continuall will and desire which is heard Christ spake in his prayer that others hearing might beleeue but now there is no such cause in heauen therefore nowe no such occasion is of formall and distinct prayers 5. Tolets argument is nothing for the Saints now make no formall prayers in heauen but by their voices and desires Reuel 6.9 the soules vnder the altar crie vnto God and Christ is a Priest for euer after the order of Milchisedech in that the fruits of his passion and mediation continue for euer though such distinct and and formall prayers be 〈◊〉 powred out Quest. 54. Whether Christs intercession and interpellation for vs do extenuate the merit of his death 1. Obiect This doubt may be mooued because that seemeth not to be of sufficient merit which needeth a further supply now if Christs mediation for vs be a supply vnto his death and passion then was not that alone sufficient Answ. 1. The intercession of Christ is not to merit our redemption which is purchased by his death but to apply vnto vs ratifie and confirme our saluation merited by Christs death so that the worke of our redemption is perfited by Christs death and in respect of the worke it selfe nothing can be added but on our part because we are weake and doe often fall into sinne our saluation had neede continually to be confirmed and applyed vnto vs to which ende Christs mediation helpeth 2. like as other meanes as the hearing of the word prayer the receiuing of the Sacraments doe not argue any imperfection and insufficiencie in the worke of our redemption but in vs that haue neede of such helpes and supplyes whereby Christs death is applyed 3. And whereas Christs mediation is grounded vpon the merit of his death and passion it is so farre from detracting to the merit thereof that it rather amplyfieth and setteth forth the dignitie of it Quest. 55. What charitie the Apostle speaketh of from which nothing can separate vs. 1. Chrysostome Oecumen Theophyl Origen and most of the Greeke and Latine exposition as Augustine Aâ—b do vnderstand this of the actiue loue which we beare toward God but it is better referred vnto the passiue loue wherewith we are beloued of God for 1. this is more agreeable to the Apostles scope who hitherto hath vrged the loue and mercie of God toward vs in our predestination vocation iustification in giuing his owne Sonne for vs Mat. 2. the Apostle so expoundeth himselfe v. 39. the loue of God which is in Christ Iesus Gryn so also is it taken c. 5.5 the loue of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost 〈◊〉 3. and our loue toward God sepenumero fluctuas doth oftentimes waver and sadeth in it as in Dauid 2. Sam. 11.4 and so it were a verie vnstable foundation for vs to stay vpon 〈◊〉 The Apostles meaning then is that no kind of trouble or affliction which the world taketh to be signes of Gods anger can yet separate vs from the loue of God and make vs lesse beloued of him 2. Then the Apostle rehearseth sixe seuerall kinds of affliction which are incident to the children of God the vulgar Latine numbreth seuen adding one more namely persecution which is not in the originall Lyranus sorteth them into this order these passions and sufferings of the Saints are either death it selfe signified by the sword or dispositions to death either nearer or more remote and further off the nearer are either in respect of the thing â—â— danger or in the apprehension thereof anguish the more remote are either in substractione necessarij in the subtracting of necessarie things as of food in famine of rayment in nakednesse or in illatione nocumenti in the offring and bringing in of some hurt as in tribulation But the sorting out of these into their seuerall places doth invert the order wherein the Apostle hath placed them which it is safest to followe 3. The Syrian translator readeth for vs who shall separate me which reading Beza seemeth to approoue because thereby the Apostle sheweth how euerie one should make particular application of his faith to himselfe and the Apostle was not so secure of other mens faith as so to pronounce of them But the Greeke text is more authenticall which readeth vs and Osiander verie well obserueth thereupon that the Apostle speaketh not of his owne person alone but of all the faithfull in generall to shewe this certaintie of saluation to belong vnto all that beleeue Quest. 56. Of these words v. 36. For thy sake are we killed all the day long 1. Calvin observeth and P. Martyr noteth the same that the 44. Psalme from whence this testimonie is alleadged describeth rather the persecution of the Church of God vnder Antiochus then vnder the Chaldeans for they were carried into captiuitie and afflicted by the Chaldeans for their idolatrie but vnder Antiochus they suffred for giuing testimonie to the lawe and therefore it is said for thy sake are we killed c. 2. For thy sake Simply to be killed or put to death is not commendable but it is the cause which maketh the suffrings of the Martyrs glorious and honourable and there are three things requisite in true Martyrdome first the cause they must suffer for Christs sake Matth. 5.11 then their person that they be righteous and innocent men of integritie not offenders and euill liuers for then they cannot suffer for righteousnesse sake Matth. 5.10 lastly the ende must be considered that they doe it not for vaine glorie but in loue to God and his Church as the Apostle saith If I giue my bodie to be burned and haue no loue it profiteth me nothing Martyr 3. All the day 1. Chrysostome referreth it to the minde which is alwayes readie and prepared to suffer for Christ. 2. Origen omni vitae tempore all the time of the life so also Haymo iugiter continually Pellican sine intermissione without intermission Pareus 3. Pet. Martyr vnderstandeth it of the continuall expectation of death in the time of persecution so also M. Calvin 4. Osiander applyeth it to the number of those which are persecuted to death the tyrants are not content with the death of some few sed grassantur in quam plurimos they rage against many 5. Gryneus vnderstandeth by all the day
and iustice are contrarie therefore they are not both naturally in God 4. Naturall properties are not vnequally in God but his iustice and mercie are vnequall for his mercie exceedeth his iustice 5. Mercie is nothing els but a griefe conceived vpon an others miserie but there is no such thing in God Contra. Before these arguments be answeared these considerations must be premised 1. that mercie is otherwise in God then in man in man indeede it is a griefe or compassion conceiued vpon an others miserie but in God it is onely a propension and readinesse of the diuine will to helpe those which are in miserie 2. Mercie in God either signifieth the inclination power facultie and propertie to shewe mercie and this is naturall in God or the act and exercising of that propertie toward the creature and this is so naturall in God as yet it is directed by his will 3. a thing is said to be naturall two wayes either that which onely proceedeth from the instinct of nature as the fire naturally burneth or that whereunto nature inclineth yet not without direction of the will as thus a man is said to speake to vnderstand naturally So God is both wayes naturally mercifull in himselfe the first way toward his creatures the second now to the arguments we answear 1. The Apostle speaketh not of the naturall propertie but of the act of mercie which is directed by the will of God 2. all the naturall properties which are in God he alwaies vseth not nor towards all as his iustice power long animitie mercie they are alwaies in God but he exerciseth them as it pleaseth him 3. iustice and mercie are not contrarie but crueltie is opposed to mercie neither is there any contrarietie in God but in the effects in diuerse subiects as the Sunne with the same heat mollifieth the waxe and hardeneth the clay 4. neither are these properties vnequall in God but the effects and acts onely are vnequall as it pleaseth God to dispose in his freewill 5. humane mercie is such as is described but the diuine mercie is of an other nature as hath beene shewed now the contrarie arguments that mercie is a naturall propertie in God are these 1. The Scripture describeth God by his mercie Exod. 34. he is called the father of mercie rich in mercie God is described by his naturall properties 2. all vertues in God are essentiall and naturall but mercie is one of Gods vertues 3. iustice is naturall in God but mercie is a part of Gods vniuersall iustice 4. mercie and compassion is naturall in men they which haue it not are called inhumane they are beasts rather then men therefore much more is it naturall in God for euery good thing in the creature proceedeth from the fountaine of goodnes in the Creator See more hereof in Pareus dub 12. Controv. 13. Whether the mercie of God in the forgiuenesse of sinne be an effect of Gods free and absolute will onely and be not grounded vpon Christ against the heresie of Socinus and Ostorodius v. 18. He hath mercie on whom he will Blasphemous Socinus and Ostorodius a Samosatenian heretike directly impugning the eternall dietie of Christ by occasion of these words doe affirme that God of his free mercie without any satisfaction purchased by Christs death forgiueth sinnes vnto the penitent Socinus first maketh these and such like obiections 1. The Apostle here saith he hath mercie on whom he will therefore of his owne will be remitteth sinnes without Christ. 2. He doth forgiue sinnes for his owne sake Isai. 43.25 therefore not for Christ. 3. If God should forgiue sinnes for Christs satisfaction then both mercie and iustice should be seene at once in the worke of our saluation by Christ. 4. God may remit sinnes without satisfaction for he may depart from his right and remit of his owne as it pleaseth him 5. God requireth onely repentance and innocencie of life in them whose sinnes are pardoned and he forgiueth onely for that which he requireth 6. Many examples are extant in the old Testament of sinnes pardoned and mercie shewed without Christ as in Abel Henoch and others that pleased God by faith beleeuing onely that God is that he is a rewarder of the righteous Heb. 11.6 therefore without Christ. 7. God promiseth Ierem. 31. to be mercifull vnto their iniquites and to remember them no more but where he requireth satisfaction for sinne he remembreth it and is not mercifull vnto it 8. We are commanded one to forgiue an other as God in Christ forgaue vs but we must forgiue without any satisfaction Ergo so God forgaue vs. 9. The remission of the debt excludeth all payment and satisfaction for it to this purpose Socinus lib. de Servator The other impious heretike thus also obiecteth 1. Gods loue is set forth to vs in Scripture before Christ died for vs Ioh. 3.16 Ephe. 1.4 but Christs satisfaction sheweth that God was offended with vs before 2. God did remit our sinnes freely by grace Rom. 3.24 but grace and satisfaction are contrarie 3. This doctrine of satisfaction by Christs death maketh God cruell that would not receiue mankind vnto his fauour but by the most cruell death of his Sonne 4. It maketh God a Tyrant in punishing the innocent for offenders 5. The Sonne should be more mercifull then his Father for he forgiueth without satisfaction so doth not his Father 6. If Christ had truely satisfied for vs he should haue suffered eternall death and so neuer haue risen againe which had beene impossible these and other such obiections this wicked Ostorodius hath in a booke written in the Germane tongue against Tradelius cited by Pareus dub 13. Contra. Before we come to answear these obiections the state of the question must first be opened 1. the question here is not of the power propertie and facultie of shewing mercie which is naturall in God and absolute in him without any condition 2. but of the act and exercising of this propertie which is either generall toward all creatures and toward all men both good and bad vpon whom he suffereth the sunne to shine and the raine to fall Matth. 5.45 or speciall toward the elect in giuing them his grace and forgiuing their sinnes whereof the Apostle speaketh Tit. 3.4 When the bountifulnes and loue of God our Sauiour toward men appeared c. according to his mercie be saued vs. 3. this speciall act of Gods mercie must be considered two wayes according to the causes foregoing which are none other but onely the good pleasure of God no merit of any creature no not of Christ himselfe was the cause of his mercie toward the elect but as the Apostle saith he hath mercie on whom he will but there are certaine conditions which doe accompanie or followe this free act of Gods loue and mercie for the effecting of the worke thereof in the sanctification and glorification of the elect which are these three the ransome made by Christ faith in the
with his lot the potter hath made his vessell so and there is no reasoning against our maker let vs say and be resolued with S. Paul Philipp 4.11 I haue learned in whatsoeuer state I am therewith to bee content Observ. 5. Against securitie v. 24. Euen vs whom he hath called S. Paul hauing sufficiently declared the doctrine of election and reprobation doth descend vnto our vocation and calling teaching vs that we should not insist in Gods secret decree and so be secure but seeke to make it sure by our calling as S. Peter saith 1. ep c. 1.10 Giue diligence to make your calling and election sure Observ. 6. Christ must be preached though the world be offended v. 32. They haue stumbled at the stumbling stone c. Though the Iewes were offended at the Gospell of Christ yet did not the Apostles forbeare to preach him so now many are offended at the preaching of the word as the superstitious Papists and carnall liuers yet the truth must still be vrged for as the Apostles so now the faithfull ministers are vnto some the fauour of life vnto life and to others of death vnto death 2. Cor. 2.16 CHAP. X. 1. The text with the diuerse readings 1. v. Brethren mine hearts desire the goodwill of my heart Gr. and prayer to God for Israel is for their saluation that they might be saued G. 2. For I beare them record that they haue the zeale emulation L. of God but not according to knowledge 3. For they beeing ignorant of the righteousnesse of God and seeking to establish their owne righteousnesse haue not submitted themselues G. S. haue not beene subiect G. to the righteousnes of God 4. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousnesse vnto euery one that beleeueth 5. For Moses thus describeth the righteousnesse Be. G. S. writeth of the righteousnes B.V. but the preposition is wanting in the originall which is of the law that the man that doth these things shall liue thereby 6. But the righteousnesse which is of faith speaketh on this wife Say not in thine heart who shall ascend into heauen that is to bring Christ from aboue 7. Or who shall descend into the deepe of the graue S. ad that is to bring Christ againe from the dead 8. But what saith it the Scripture L. ad the word is neere thee euen in thy mouth and in thine heart This is the word of faith which we preach 9. For if thou shalt confesse with thy mouth the Lord Iesus and shalt beleeue in thine heart that God raised him from the dead thou shalt be saued 10. For with the heart man beleeueth it is beleeued Gr. vnto righteousnes and with the mouth confession is made to saluation 11. For the Scripture saith Whosoeuer beleeueth in him shal not be ashamed confounded L. B. 12. For there is no difference betweene the Iew and the Grecian of the Iew and Grecian for the same Lord ouer all is rich vnto all that call vpon him 13. For euery one that calleth vpon the name of the Lord shall be saued 14. But how shall they call on him in whom they haue not beleeued and how shall they beleeue in him of whom they haue not hard and how shall they here without a Preacher 15. And how shall they preach except they be sent as it is written How bewtifull are the feete of those which bring glad tidings of peace and bring glad tidings of good things 16. But they haue not all harkened obeyed L. S. V. to the Gospel for Esaias â—â—ith who hath beleeued our sayings our report G. 17. So then faith is of hearing by hearing B. G. but the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth of and â—earing by the word of God 18. But I demaund I say Gr. haue they not heard no doubt their sound went out into all the earth and their words into the ends of the world 19. But I demaund say Gr. did not Israel know God first Moses saith I will provoke you to enâ—ie emulation L. V. Be. by them that are no nation not I will bring you to be no nation L. and by a foolish nation will I anger you 20. And Esaias is bold and saith I was found of them that sought me not and haue bin made manifest to them that asked not after me 21. And vnto against Be. Israel he saith all the day long haue I stretched forth mine â—â—nd to a disobedient not beleeuing L. V. B. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth both but the first rather here and gaine saying people 2. The Argument Method and Parts The Apostle hauing concluded in the former chapter how the Gentiles had receiued the righteousnes of faith but the Iewes through their stubbornes had reiected it in this chapter doth at large handle the same matter both setting forth the difference betweene the righteousnesse of the law and of the Gospel to v. 14. and then the entertainement thereof in the world accepted of the Gentiles v. 18. and reiected of the Iewes v. 19. to the ende But first the Apostle vseth a preamble somewhat to qualifie his former â—peach touching the Iewes by shewing his desire toward then saluation v. 1. and his testimonie concerning their zeale v. 2. which he correcteth shewing a threefold defect and want in their zeale ignorance pride in establishing their own righteousnes and disobedience in not submitting themselues to Gods righteousnesse v. 3. Then followeth the doctrine concerning righteousnesse by faith set forth by diuerse arguments 1. because Christ is the end of the law therefore righteousnesse is not in the law but by Christ. 2. by the diuerse effects and properties of the law which requireth workes and of the Gospel which exacteth not of a man by his owne workes to ascend to heauen or to be deliuered from hell but onely the word of faith which is afterward set forth by the partes beleeuing with the heart confessing with the mouth gathered into this syllogisme Whosoeuer beleeueth with the heart and confesseth with the mouth shall be saued v. 10. but thou doest beleeue with the heart and confesse c. Ergo. v. 9. 3. Then he prooueth righteousnesse by faith by a testimonie of Scripture v. 11.4 then from the communitie of saluation both of Iew and Gentile which could not be by the law v. 12.5 by the effects of faith inuocation All that invocate the name of God shall be saued Ergo all are iustified by faith The entertainement of this doctrine in the world was 1. by acceptation among the Gentiles which he sheweth by the meanes of faith and saluation the preaching of the Gospel which was offered to the Gentiles which he prooueth 1. by the effects set forth by a gradation If there had beene no preaching their could haue beene no hearing if no hearing no faith if no faith no invocation v. 14.15 2. by a dissimilitude though preaching was not profitable among the Iewes generally v. 16. yet the ordinarie meanes of faith is the
doe by their imprecation inflict that punishment which is appointed of God 3. The things must be considered which are wished vnto any by these imprecations they are either temporall which may tend vnto their amendment as Ps. 89.16 fil their faces with shame that they may seek thy name these imprecations are more tollerable which a man sometime wisheth against himselfe that he may be afflicted with some crosse or other rather then to fall into sinne or they are eternall but euerlasting destruction cannot be denounced against any without Gods speciall warrant 4. The persons are to be distinguished which are cursed they are such of whom there is hope of amendment or such as are in a desperate state and professed enemies to God and godlines against whom such imprecations doe lie as S. Iohn will not haue vs to pray for those whom we see to sinne vnto death 1. epist. c. 5. 5. The manner and kind of imprecations must also be looked into some are extraordinarie whereunto men were directed by a propheticall and extraordinarie spirit of the lawfulnesse of such imprecations there is no question or ordinarie wherein these circumstances must be considered 1. the persons that curse they must thereunto be called as the publike Magistrate or minister and parents in their families 2. the persons that are cursed must be intractable and incorrigible and refuse all wholesome admonition 3. the manner must be this they must not curse absolutely but with a condition that such may be converted or confounded 4. with what affection not hating their persons but detesting their vices against the which they open their mouthes to curse Now in Dauids imprecation all the things before requited concurred it was Gods cause he had a propheticall spirit they were professed enemies to God the reasons before alleadged doe conclude only against priuate curses in our owne cause against persons not desperately euill and without any speciall direction Quest. 13. Of the ende of the stumbling of the Iewes v. 11. v. 11. Haue they stumbled that they should fall c. 1. Chrysostome here obserueth well the Apostles wisedome that when he speaketh of the execation and reiection of the Iewes he alleadgeth Scripture least he might be thought to speake of euil will consolationem à seipso ponit but the consolation he bringeth in his owne name that his loue toward them might appeare as here ye sheweth a double ende of their stumbling one that thereby saluation might come vnto the Gentiles the other that by the calling of the Gentiles the Iewes againe might be provoked and stirred vp to beleeue in Christ the first end serueth to beat downe the pride and insolencie of the Gentiles the other to comfort the Iewes that they should not thinke their fall to be irrecouerable 2. Haue they stumbled c. 1. The Latine translator addeth haue they so stumbled that they should fall which Tolet iustifieth and would haue the meaning to be this nor that the ende of the falling of the Iewes should be the calling of the Gentiles but that their fall was not without recouerie and Origen hath the like obseruation shewing here the diuerse kinds of falling some fall and neuer rise againe as Lucifer who shall neuer no not in the end of the world be restoared the fall of others is recouerable as here the Iewes did not so stumble vt ab omni legis observantia declinarent to decline from the whole obseruation of the law 2. But Erasmus well obserueth that here the Apostle speaketh not de magnitudine lapsus sed de eventu of the greatnes of their fal but of the euent for the Apostle throughout this whole epistle doth exaggerate the sinne of their incredulitie neither is this particle so in the originall neither doe the Greek expositors Chrysost. Theoph. Oecumen insert it 3. yet this must be added further to Erasmus observation that the calling of the Gentiles was not onely the euent which followed the incredulitie of the Iewes but it was the ende and scope for the which God suffered the Iewes to fall for this event must not be seuered from the providence of God Beza annot 4. nor yet is this question so propounded as though the Iewes did stumble and fall with any such intention to profit the Gentiles as Gryneus seemeth to note no man that is in his right minde will hurt himselfe which the Iewes should haue done if they of purpose had stumbled to fall But Photius obserueth that the Iewes as much as in them lay did so stumble vt corruerent to fall altogether nec sic affecti sunt c. neither were they so affected that any good should come thereby to themselues or others sed Deus illorum casu c. but God vsed their fall both for the saluation of the Gentiles and their owne emendation 5. Theophylact must here also be warily and aduisedly read the Iewes are not so fallen vt se nequeant quando velint attollere that they can not raise vp themselues againe when they will c. for this were as though the Iewes of purpose had fallen that the Gentiles might come in and then they would returne againe neither is it in any mans power to returne when he will for ones conuersion is as life from the dead v. 13. as one can not raise himselfe from the dead so neither can he conuert and turne vnto God 6. Haymo and Augustine before him put in the word solum onely that is they haue not stumble onely to fall as though no good should come thereby but God did not suffer them to stumble at all to fall God propounded not to himselfe their fall as an end of their stumble for God delighteth not in the destruction of any but God respected two singular good ends in the fall of the Iewes the vocation of the Gentiles and their owne conuersion Pareus Quest. 14. How the stumbling and falling of the Iewes brought salvation to the Gentiles v. 11. Through their fall salvation commeth to the Gentiles 1. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not well here translated delictum as the Latin interpreter which Anselme interpreteth peccatum sinne and vnderstandeth it of that speciall sinne of the Iewes in putting Christ to death so also Gorrhan but it here signifieth rather lapsum their fall as Erasmus well noteth to answear vnto the former question haue they stumbled that they should fall so also Tolet annot 9. 2. But we must not thinke that the fall of the Iewes was properly the cause of the calling of the Gentiles but it was the occasion rather for euill is not of it selfe the cause of that which is good but God by his power draweth good out of euill for otherwise as Lyranus alledgeth out of Augustine in his Euchiridion Deus non permitteret mala sieri nisi inde eliceret maior a bona God would neuer suffer euill to be vnlesse he did thereout draw greater good This is like as Pet. Martyr resembleth it
also is the proper signification of the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Erasmus â—ere obserueth S. Paul in the 9. to the Hebrewes calleth it a Testament where is required the death of the Testator which was shadowed forth by the type of shedding and sprinkling of blood but here in the Prophet there beeing no such circumstance expressed which belongeth to a Testament it is better interpreted fadus a couenant 2. For the other point whence these testimonies are alleaged there are diuerse opinions 1. All agree that the former place is taken out of the 59. of Isay v. 20. and for the next this shall be my couenant with them when I take away their sinne Calvin thinketh it is taken from Ieremie 31.33 This shall be the couenant that I will make with the house of Israel c. I will forgiue their iniquities 2. Iunius saith these words when I take away their sinne are repeated out of the former verse to confirme the Gentiles in the assured expectation of the conuersion of the Iewes 3. Tolet following Origen thinketh that these words are added by the Apostle by way of declaration 4. But the more probable opinion is that the Apostle ioyneth two prophesies of Isay together as he did before v. 8. and that the last words when I take away their sinne are cited out of the 27. c. of Isay v. 9. where the Septuagint haue these verie words cited by the Prophet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when I shall take away their sinnes the other words are found with some small alteration in the 59. c. of Isay v. 20. and in the beginning of the 21. v. Pareus Quest. 29. Of these words v. 28. As touching the Gospel they are enemies for your sakes c. 1. Chrysostome noteth that the Apostle doth but verbis consolari comfort the Iewes in word onely in saying they are beloued for the fathers because the vertue of their Progenitors doth not profit them vnlesse they beleeue themselues but the Apostle doth both in word and deed minister consolation vnto them and though they cannot be saued but by faith yet this benefit they haue by the fathers that they are within the couenant of grace which was made with their fathers and their seed Tolet obserueth well how Saint Paul speaking of the enmitie and casting off of the Iewes doth mollifie his speach saying they are enemies for your sakes that ye might be called not otherwise and againe he qualifieth it with reference vnto their election and Progenitors in which respect they are beloued 2. As touching the Gospel they are enemies c. 1. Some doe vnderstand this enmitie to be against Paul and the Church as if he should haue said they are mine and your enemies considering their hatred to the Gospel but they are beloued of mee their election considered thus Theodoret Chrysostome Luther Osiander 2. Origen referreth this enmitie vnto God Israel in respect of the Gospel factus est inimicus Deo is become an enemie vnto God so Origen whom Beza and Pareus follow 3. Pet. Martyr doth well ioyne both together though principally they are vnderstood to be enemies to God and in an other respect beloued of him yet consequently they must be enemies to vs for Gods enemies are our enemies and as they are beloued of God so also we should wish well vnto them 3. They are enemies c. they are beloued c. 1. Chrysostome Theodoret seeme to expound this of the same Iewes who while they continue in vnbeleefe are enemies but when they shall be conuerted to the faith they shall be beloued but they which according to election are beloued of God are neuer enemies 2. Origen much better interpreteth the Apostle thus to speake of diuerse sortes of the Iewes they are enemies among them which did spurne against the Gospel they beloued which were that remnant which belonged to election so also Calvin Martyr with others 3. But Beza better vnderstandeth the Apostle to speake not of particular men but of the whole nation which at that time seemed to be reiected because of their vnbeleefe but yet was not vtterly cast off in regard of their election and promise made to their fathers like as it is called the same riuer that runneth along though it be not of the same water because of the perpetuall succession so it is the same nation of the Iewes because of their lineal discent though consisting of diuerse generations of vnlike condition Faius So then these are not contraries the Israelites are enemies and so hated and they are beloued for contraries must be taken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 secundum idem according to the same subiect but here are diuerse subiects they are enemies in respect of those which beleeue not and beloued that is such as in time to come shall be conuerted to the faith againe contraries must be considered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad idem in one and the same respect and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the same time but the Iewes are said to be enemies and yet beloued both in diuerse respects for they are enemies for the Gospel sake which they spurne and kick against they are beloued in regard of their election and this must be vnderstood also at diuerse times for at that time present they were enemies but in time to come when they should be called they shall be beloued Gryneus 4. Beloued for the fathers sake 1. not propter merita patrum for the merite of the Fathers as Lyranus it is Christs merite onely for the which the Lord receiueth them to the faith 2. neither because when they are conuerted the Lord shall be put in remembrance of their fathers as Ambrose for God is not oblivious that he had neede of a remembrancer 3. not yet onely is it said for the fathers sakes because sequuntur patrum fidem they doe imitate and follow the faith of their fathers Origen Haymo for so the beleeuing Gentiles also did imitate the saith of Abraham 4. but the Apostles meaning is they are beloued propter promissiones patribus factas because of the promises made to the Fathers gloss â—dmar Tolet because they are descended of those fathers to whom the Lord promised to be their God and to their seed after them Bucer which promise of God the infidelitie of some cannot frustrate 5. There are two reasons giuen why they are enemies one from the occasion not giuen but taken namely the Gospel which they refused the other from the end for your sakes that the Gentiles by their vnbeleefe might enter in there are likewise two causes shewed of their receiuing to grace their election with God which is immutable and the couenant made with their Fathers Quest. 30. Of the meaning of these words The gifts and calling of God are without repentance v. 24. 1. Erasmus interpreteth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 impaenitibilia or as Augustine sometime rendreth the word impaenitendo things whereof he cannot repent him of that
4. I haue reserued vnto my selfe seuen thousand c. The faithfull then are separated from the world and reserued vnto God wherein appeareth both the loue of God toward the elect in sequestring them from the rest of the world and in his speciall protection of them as also what our dutie is againe toward God to deuote our selues wholly to his seruice seeing we are his and not our owne as the Apostle saith Rom. 14.7 none of vs liueth to himselfe neither doth any die to himselfe c. 3. Observ. Of our thankefulnes to be rendred to God for his election of grace both in our life and death especially in the charitable disposing of our last will and testament v. 5. There is a remnant thorough the election of grace Chrysostome by occasion of these words and the next which follow if it be of grace it is no more of works falleth into a vehement exhortation vnto thankfulnes to God againe because when we could not be saued by works dono Dei gratis salvati sumus we were saued by the franke gift of God and this our thankfulnes must first be shewed in our life temporis commoditate vt oportet vtere vse the opportunitie of thy life and time before death commeth when all opportunitie of working is taken away nondum solutum est theatrum sed adhuc in ipsa intrò stas cavea c. the stage or theatre is not yet dissolued but thou standest yet in the lists thou maist play thy prices at the last But if a man haue beene forgetfull of his dutie while he liued yet there is a way to make some part of amends at his death and how is that si Christum in testamento cum baredibus tuis conscripseris if thou in thy will appoint Christ among thine heires for what excuse canst thou haue if thou make not Christ coheire with thy sonnes seeing he maketh thee his coheire in heauen contribuâ—illi pecunias tibi iam deinceps inutiles c. commit thy money to him which is now like to be vnprofitable to thee neither canst thou any longer be master of it And if Christ be left coheire with thy sonnes orphaniam illorum alleviabit c. the will releeue their orphancie and keepe them from violence and wrong how miserable then are they which hauing no children parasitis potius adulatoribus sua distribuenda relinqunt c. do rather deuide their goods to parasites and flatterers then to Christ Consider how it is the mercie of God that giueth thee time to dispose of thy estate whereas many subitaneo raptu decesseriut are taken away by sodaine death Nay if thou wilt not make Christ coheire with thy children numera Dominum cum servis yet count thy Lord among thy seruants thou at thy death settest thy seruants free free then Christ in his members from famine hunger necessitie thus excellently Chrysostome handleth this matter of wills and testaments 4. Observ. Against rash iudgement v. 4. I haue reserued seuen thousand Calvin here obserueth well that like as there were many true worshippers in Elias time though he knew them not so ne temerè omnes adiudicemus diabolo we should not rashly send all to the deuill that are not knowne vnto vs neither yet appeare to be the seruants of God so the Apostle c. 14.4 who art thou which condemnest an other mans servant he standeth or falleth to his owne master 5. Observ. All things fall out for the best vnto the faithfull and to the wicked all things are accursed v. 9. Let their table he made a snare c. As vnto the wicked their prosperitie here vnderstood by the table becommeth a snare so ot the godly things which are in themselues heauie and hard are turned to be easie and pleasant the treacherie of Iosephs brethren turned to his aduancement the afflictions of the Israelites in Egypt hastened their deliuerance euen in the wildernes the Lord spread a table for them and so it falleth out as the Apostle saith c. 8.28 All things worke together for the best to those which loue God c. 6. Observ. Not to envie at the prosperitie of the wicked v. 9. Let their table be made a snare this teacheth vs not to be grieued when we see the wicked to flourish for their prosperitie will turne to their ruine as Pharaohs pride brought him to his destruction while he followed the Israelites in the red sea see to this purpose the 73. Psalme where the Prophet Dauid confesseth his infirmitie how he fretted at the prosperitie of the wicked 7. Observ. To take heede that the word of God be not a snare Origen further obserueth vpon this text how euen the table of Gods word which men fit to heare as at a table is turned to a snare to those which doe not heare it with vnderstanding and gather spirituall meate out of it to such it is as S. Paul saith the fauour of death vnto death 2. Cor. 2. 8. Observ. How we may profit by the fall of others v. 11. To prouoke them to follow them c. Like as by the fall of the Iewes saluation came vnto the Gentiles so by the sinne of others we are admonished to take heede vnto our selues to giue warning vnto others and to take occasion to reforme and amend such as haue offended see Galat. 6.1 9. Observ. How the Ministerie is truly honoured and magnified v. 13. I magnifie mine office The honour of the ministerie consisteth not in riches or pompe which are but accidentall things but in the conuerting of many vnto Christ as the Apostle saith in the next verse that I might saue some It is peculiar vnto God to saue but the Lord communicateth this excellencie to the Ministers which are the instruments to shew the necessitie of preaching and the reuerence thereunto belonging 10. Observ. How the faithfull comfort themselues in the power of God v. 23. God is able to graffe them in againe Thus the children of God in all their afflictions are taught to comfort themselues that God is able to deliuer them as our blessed Sauiour saith my Father is greater then all and none are able to take you out of my fathers hand Ioh. 10.29 11. Observ. How we should be affected toward the Iewes v. 28. Beloued for the fathers sake Beza well obserueth that Christians should not neglect or despise the Iewes but pray for their conuersion and prouoke them by their godly conuersation not by our superstitious vsages and corrupt manners to hinder their calling for the which the Papists and carnall professors haue much to answer to God 12. Observ. The comfort of the faithfull in the vnchangeable gifts of grace v. 29. The gifts and calling of God are without repentance This is much for our comfort that our faith can not faile for God repenteth him not of his gifts neither can the faithfull loose their faith which God by his spirit preserueth as S. Peter saith 1. epist. 1. c. 5. which are
be in effect the same for the death of sinne is the life of righteousnesse whereas the Apostle maketh a distribution of these two whether we liue or die c. and both of the dead and the quicke 2. Chrysostome vnderstandeth the Apostle to speake of euerlasting life and death vitam nostram divitias mortem damnum existimat he counteth our life riches and our death losse vnto himselfe But seeing that Chrysostome confesseth that in the next words whether we liue or die we are the Lords that à morte fidei ad mortem naturalem periransit he paseth from the death of faith to speake of the naturall death the Apostle must be so vnderstood to speake of the naturall life before for this argument thus hangeth together either we liue and die vnto God or vnto our selues not vnto our selues therefore vnto God 3. There is also a ciuill life and that of two kinds either it is taken in the good part as a man is said to liue vnto himselfe that is sui iuris is a freeman not at the command of an other or in the euill as they are said to liue vnto themselues which liue priuately and separated from the societie of others as single men solitarie persons the couetous which both liue vnto themselues not seeking the profit of any and die vnto themselues none haue any losse by their death they haue neither wiues nor children to care for but the Apostle meaneth not any such ciuill kind of life he speaketh of the naturall life and death taken after an Evangelicall sense to liue and die vnto the glorie of God 4. Haymo in one sense would haue this especially to be vnderstood of Martyrs which doe liue and die vnto God who is glorified by their life and death but the Apostle speaketh generally of all the faithfull and not of Martyrs onely as Reuel 13.14 they are said to die in the Lord which die in the faith of Christ. 5. Wherefore first it is agreed that the Apostle speaketh of the naturall life and death and then in this sense to liue vnto God comprehendeth these fowre things 1. to acknowledge God to be our Lord and that we are not our owne 2. and therefore we must seeke to doe Gods will and not our owne 3. as we beginne with Gods will so must we ende with his glorie making it the scope of our whole life and the actions thereof 4. and in all our troubles and afflictions we must put our trust in God and relie vpon his care as one that care 〈◊〉 vs likewise to die vnto the Lord is 1. to acknowledge that as we receiued our life from him so death commeth not without his sending 2. to take therefore patiently diseases and death it selfe as sent of God 3. as in our life so in our death to glorifie God and not to doe any thing whereby he might be dishonoured 4. to haue good hope and confidence in our death that God will raise vs vp to life againe Quest. 18. How Christ by his dying and rising againe is said to be Lord both of the dead and quicke 1. The Apostle maketh mention of the death of Christ his resurrection and life by the first acquisivit dominium he purchased this dominion by the second occupavit he tooke possession of this dominion 2. And although Christ had purchased this dominion in his death yet he had not the exercise of this dominion vntill he was risen againe for it is one thing Dominium esse to be a Lord an other dominari to hane rule the one is per potestatem by his power the other per potestatis exercitionem by the exercising of this power for by death was Christs soule separated from his bodie which till they were vnited againe he could not exercise his dominion perfectly as man Tolet and then a thing is said to be when it is made manifest by his resurrection his power and conquest ouer death was made knowne and so the interlinear gloss well interpreteth vt dominari intelligatur that he might be knowne to beare rule 3. And the Apostle speaketh not here 1. of that dominion which Christ hath as God for that he had before and should haue exercised still though he had not died 2. nor yet as Origen here resolueth is mention made of his death and life because Christ was an example of obedience vnto vs how to liue vnto righteousnesse and die vnto sinne and therefore he is Lord of both for this sauoureth too much of Pelagianisme to make Christ an example onely by the imitation whereof we should learne to be mortified 3. neither yet is his death mentioned to shewe this dominion to be merited for Christ merited not at all for himselfe as shall be shewed among the controversies contr 8. 4. but onely that dominion is signified which Christ purchased in redeeming vs by death as man As God he had an vniuersall dominion but as man he hath a particular dominion and right ouer vs as his inheritance purchased by his blood 4. Ouer the dead and the quicke 1. Origen vnderstandeth the spirituall life and death but the Apostle speaketh of the naturall as Christ truely died and rose againe 2. the dead are set beâ—ore the quicke to shewe Christs vniuersall dominion not onely ouer the then liuing but euen ouer the dead also that had beene liuing before Pareus 3. and he mentioneth the liuing least it might be thought that the iudgement onely in the world to come of the dead was committed vnto Christ and not of the liuing here Gorrhan Hugo 4. and whereas our Blessed Sauiour saith Matth. 22. That he is not the God of the dead and the Apostle here saith that he might be Lord of the dead and quicke they are not contrarie the one to the other for in the one place they are said to be dead according to the Sadduces sense that had no beeing at all but were vtterly perished and extinct both in bodie and soule of such the Lord is not God for he is not a God of that which is not Martyr as he is not their God as they are dead but as he purposeth to raise them to life againe but here by the dead the Apostle vnderstandeth them that are aliue in soule though dead in bodie 5. Chrysostome addeth that the Apostle here Iudaizantem pudefacit doth shame him that did Iudaize that seeing Christ had done so great things in dying and rising again for them they should not be so vnthankfull vt ad legem recurrerent as to runne vnto the law againe Quest. 13. Of the tribunall seate of Christ what it is and of other circumstances of the day of iudgement Here Origen hath a wittie discourse of the day of iudgement and the manner thereof wherein some things he saith well and he misseth as his manner is in other the summe is this which shall be reduced to these three heads which are confusedly there handled and shuffled together 1. who shall iudge
merited both to himselfe and his members the glorifying of his bodie and the manifestation of his Godhead to this purpose Lombard lib. 3. distinct 18. and some of our Protestant writers seeme to incline to this opinion as Pet. Martyr 1. Pet. Martyr would prooue so much out of this place v. 9. Christ therefore died and rose againe c. that he might be Lord of the quicke and dead whereupon he inferreth thus which dominion though God might haue conferred vpon him gratis freely yet meritis eius dare maluit he did choose to giue it rather for his merits Answ. Though I reverence the iudgement of this learned writer whose worthie commentaries vpon the Scriptures are not inferiour to any of our newe writers yet herein vpon better reason I must dissent from him The argument followeth not Christ therefore died c. therefore by his death he merited 1. like as this is no good reason the Martyrs die to the ende to set forth Gods glorie Ergo they merit the setting forth of his glorie that indeede is the ende and consequent the other is not the meriting cause but precedent onely 2. Christ died then to that ende because this was the way and order appointed of God whereby he should come to exercise his dominion 2. Lombard in the place before recited vrgeth that place Philip. 2.7.8 he became obedient to the death of the crosse c. wherefore God hath exalted him here the exaltation of Christ is the reward of his humiliation and this the meriting cause of the other Answ. 1. This word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore doth not alwaies signifie the cause or merit but the order also and sequele of a thing as Genes 22.16 Because thou hast done this thing c. I will exceedingly blesse thee c. and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in thee vnlesse any will thinke that Abraham by that one act of obedience in being readie to sacrifice his sonne merited to be the father of Christ according to the flesh in whom all the earth should be blessed see the like Heb. 1.9 Because thou hast loued righteousnesse c. God hath anointed thee with the oyle of gladnes aboue thy fellowes c. but the deitie or to be deified cannot be merited 2. The Apostle then in this place sheweth the order of the passion and glorification of Christ as Luk. 24. Ought not Christ to haue suffered these things and so to enter into his glorie likewise S. Peter 1. ep c. 1.11 ioyneth together the sufferings of Christ and the glorie which should followe 3. The Rhemists vrge that place Heb. 29. We see Iesus for the passion of of his death crowned with glorie and honour Answ. The words are displaced which in the originall stand in this order We see Iesus a little lower then the Angels by the passion of his death crowned with glorie and honour c. so that these words by the passion of his death must be ioyned with the former clause made a little lesse then the Angels not with the latter crowned with honour c. 2. An other opinion is that euerlasting glorie was gratuitum donum a free gift conferred vpon Christ not merited as Pareus collecteth by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he gaue him as of free gift a name aboue all names c. Phil. 2.9 Answ. 1. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not alwaies signifie to giue freely as the wife is said in profane authors 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to gratifie her husband in yeelding the vse of her bodie which yet is her dutie to performe 2. and it were better to say that Christ receiued his glorie of merit then by grace and favour to shew a difference betweene Christ and his members for we receiue all by grace Christ not by grace but as his due receiued his glorie 3. and for the further explanation of that place Philip. 1.9 1. some thinke that Christ onely merited the glorie of his bodie for his soule was glorified ab ipso instanti incarnationis from the verie instant of his incarnation Lyranus 2. some thinke that he merited onely manifestationem the manifestation of his glorie which he had before secundum rem indeede so also Lyranus 3. Augustine vnderstandeth this gift to be giuen per gratiam vniens non adoptans by the grace of vnion not of adoption 4. Ambrose interpreteth it de naturali donatione ab aeterno of the naturall donation from all beginning as Christ is the Sonne of God post crucem manifestatur quod à patre cum generatur accepit after his passion that is manifested which he receiued of his father in his generation I ioyne two of these expositions together that the glorie which was due vnto Christs humanitie in respect of his vnion was not now first conferred after his passion but then manifested which manifestation was not merited but did fall out in that order as God had appointed as due vnto Christs humanitie by reason of that vnion 3. This then is our opinion that Christ did not merit any thing for or to himselfe but all which he wrought and purchased was for vs as may appeare by these reasons 1. To what ende Christ was borne died and suffered to the same he rose againe and was glorified but he was borne and died not for himselfe but for vs Isay. 9.6 to vs a child is borne and he was not offered for his owne sinnes Heb. 7.27 which he had not therefore neither receiued he glorie for himselfe but for vs to this purpose Ambrose de fide resurrection c. 24. si nobis non resurrexit vtique non resurrexit qui cur sibi resurgeret non habebat if he did not rise for vs he did not rise at all for he had no cause to rise for himselfe But that saying of Ambrose will be obiected vpon that place to the Philipians 2. quid quantum humilitas mercatur hic ostenditur what and how much his humilitie merited here it is shewed Answ. The fathers doe vse this word merere to merit in a large sense it signifieth impetrare obtinere â—o obtaine a thing or posse contingere to be able to fall out as Ambrose saith epistola meruit pervenire in manus tuas the epistle merited to come to your hands that is might or obtained to come But he is otherwise absolutely of iudgment that no works can truely or properly merit at Gods hand as de vocat gent. lib. 1. c. 5. Ambrose or Prosper thus writeth nulla possunt tam praeclara opera existere quibus hoc quod gratis tribuitur per retributionis iudicium habeatur there can be no such excellent workes whereby that should be had by way of retribution and recompence which is freely giuen for so the redemption by Christs blood vilesceret should waxe vile and be of small worth 2. M. Calvin addeth this reason Christi gratiam obfuscat it would much obscure the grace of Christ if
and Christ in generall 34. qu. Of the disparitie and vnlikenes betweene Adam and Christ in this comparison 35. qu. Of the excellencie and superioritie which the benefit by grace in Christ hath beyond our fall and losse in Adam 36. qu. Some other opinions refused wherein this excellencie should consist 37. qu. In what sense the grace of God is said to haue abounded vnto more 38. qu. How all men are said to be iustified in Christ v. 18. 39. qu. Why the Apostle saith v. 19. By one mans disobedience many were made sinners and not all 40. qu. How many are said to be sinners in Adam 41. qu. How the law is said to haue entred thereupon v. 20. 42. qu. How the offence is saide to haue abounded by the entring of the law v. 20. 43. qu. How grace is said to haue abounded more 44. qu. Of the raigne of sinne vnto death and of grace vnto life Questions vpon the sixt Chapter 1. qu. Of the meaning of these words Shall we continue in sinne v. 1. 2. qu. What it is to die vnto sinne 3. qu. What it is to be baptized into Iesus Christ. 4. qu. Of the diuers significations of the word Baptisme and to be baptized 5. qu. What it is to be baptized into the death of Christ v. 3. 7. qu. Of the meaning of this phrase to be graft c. 8. qu. What resurrection the Apostle speaketh of v. 5. 9. qu. What is vnderstood by the old man v. 6. 10. qu. What is meant by the bodie of sinne v. 6. that the bodie of sinne might be destroied 11. qu. How the dead are said to be freed frō sinne v. 7. 12. qu. What life the Apostle speaketh of v. 8. We beleeue that we shall also liue with him 13. qu. How death is said to haue bad dominion ouer Christ v. 9. 14. qu. How Christ is said to haue died to sinne v. 10. 15. qu. How Christ is said now to liue vnto God v. 10. 16. qu. Of these words v. 11. Likewise think ye c. 17. qu. How sinne is said not to raigne c. v. 12. 18. qu. What the Apostle meaneth by mortall bodie v. 12. 19. qu. Of these words that we should obey it in the lusts c. v. 12. 20. qu. How we are not to giue our members as weapons vnto sinne v. 13. 21. qu. What it is not to be vnder the law but vnder grace v. 14. 23. qu. Whether the Fathers also that liued vnder the law were not vnder grace 24. qu. What the Apostle meaneth by the forme of doctrine whereunto they were deliuered 25. qu. How we are made seruants of righteousnes 26. qu. Of the meaning of these words I speake after the manner of men because of your infirmitie v. 19. Questions vpon the seauenth Chapter 1. qu. How the law is said to haue dominion ouer a man as long as he liueth 2. qu. Whether the woman be simply free if the man be once dead 3. qu. Whether the woman haue not the like libertie and freedome in respect of the bond of mariage as the man hath 4. qu. Why the Apostle saith we are dead to the law v. 4. and not rather the law is dead to vs. 5. qu. How we are said to be mortified to and freed from the law 6. qu. What is meant by the bodie of Christ. 7. qu. Of the meaning of these words beeing dead vnto it 8. qu. What is meant by the newnes of the spirit and oldnes of the letter 9. qu. How S. Paul beeing brought vp in the knowledge of the law could say I knew not lust v. 7. and I was aliue without the law v. 9. 10. qu. What law the Apostle speaketh of v. 7. is the law of sinne 11. qu. What lust or concupiscence the Apostle speaketh of I had not knowne lust c. except c. 12. qu. Why the Apostle giueth instance in the tenth Command Thou shalt not lust and alledgeth not all the words of the law 13. qu. What sinne the Apostle meaneth v. 8. sinne tooke an occasion c. 14. qu. How sinne tooke occasion by the Law 15. qu. Of what time S. Paul speaketh when he knew not the law and afterward sinne tooke occasion by the law c. 16. What the Apostle meaneth by all concupiscence 17. qu. In what sense the Apostle saith Sinne was dead and he aliue without the law v. 8. 18. qu. How sinne is said to haue revived 19. qu. How sinne is said to haue deceiued 20. qu. How sinne is said to haue slaine him 21. qu. How the law is said to be holy iust good and likewise the commandement 22. qu. How sinne is said to be out of measure sinnefull 23. qu. How the law is said to be spirituall 24. qu. How the Apostle saith he is carnall and sold vnder sinne v. 17. 25. qu. Of these words v. 15. I allow not what I doe what I would that doe I not 26. qu. What the Apostle vnderstandeth by flesh I know that in me that is my flesh dwelleth no good thing c. v. 18. 27. qu. How the Apostle saith To will is present with me c. but I find no meanes to performe c. v. 18. 28. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 21. I finde a law c. 29. qu. How the Apostle saith Euill is present with me v. 21. 30. qu. Of these words I delight in the law of God c. v. 22 23. of the number of these laws and what they are 31. qu. Why these are called Laws and why they are said the one to be in the inner man the other in the members 32. qu. Of the Apostles exclamation O wretched man that I am 33. qu. What the Apostle vnderstandeth by this bodie of death from the which he desireth to be deliuered 34. qu. Why the Apostle giueth thankes to God v. 25. 35. qu. Of these words I in my minde serue the law of God c. 36. qu. Of that famous question whether S. Paul doe speake in his owne person or of an other here in this chapter Questions vpon the eight Chapter 1. qu. Who are said to be in Christ. 2. qu. What is meant by the law of the spirit of life 3. qu. What is vnderstood by the law of sinne and death 4. qu. Of the best reading of the 3. v. 5. qu. What is meant by the similitude of sinfull flesh 6. qu. Of these words And for sinne condemned sinne in the flesh 7. qu. How Christ condemned sinne in the flesh 8. qu. Who are after the flesh and sauour the things of the flesh 9. qu. How the wisdome of the flesh is enmitie against God 10. qu. How they which are in the flesh cannot please God v. 8. 11. qu. Of the dwelling of the spirit of God in vs v. 9. 12. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 10. The bodie is dead because of sinne the spirit is life c. 13. qu. How the quickning of the dead is ascribed to the
of him that was to come insinuating thereby that life and righteousnes came in by the second Adam as sinne and death entred by the first 5. But their opinion seemeth to be the better which supplie the reddition of this comparison concerning Christ in the words following Origen referreth vs to those words v. 15. the gift is not so as the offence but I rather with Beza and Pareus thinke that the second part of the comparison is suspended by a long parenthesis in the words comming betweene vnto the 18. and 19. verses where the Apostle setteth downe both parts of the comparison 18. Quest. Who was that one by whome sinne entred into the world v. 12. 1. Ambrose and Hierome vpon this place by this one man would vnderstand the woman because the beginning of sinne came in by her as Ecclesiastic 25.26 it is saide of the woman came the beginning of sinne and through her we all die and S. Paul saith 1. Timoth. 2.14 Adam was not deceiued but the woman was deceiued and was in the transgression But the woman here is not vnderstood seeing the word is put in the masculine gender and true it is that from the woman came the beginning of sinne by the seducing of man but the Apostle here speaketh of the propagation of sinne which was by the man not by the woman Perer. 2. Some will haue both the man and woman here vnderstood which both made as it were but one as when the Lord said Let vs make man according to our owne likenes both the man and woman are vnderstood Pareus so also the ordinarie gloss quia mulier de viâ—â— vtriusque vna caro because the woman is of the man and both made but one flesh 3. But by this one we better vnderstand Adam though both our parents sinned and the man was seduced and deceiued by the woman yet the man onely is named 1. not because the man is the head of the woman and so the sinne of the woman is imputed to the man because he might haue corrected her Hugo 2. nor because the man perfected the sinne of the woman which if he had not consented had not beene finished so the woman was principium incompletum was the incomplete or imperfect beginning of sinne the man was the complete and perfect beginning Gorrhan 3. neither is this the reason because the Apostle consuetudinem tenens c. doth followe the custome which ascribeth the succession of posteritie to the man not to the woman gloss ordinar 4. But this indeede is the reason the Apostle here sheweth not the order how sinne entred simply into the world for the woman sinned first and before the woman the serpent but how sinne was propagated into mankind now posteritas ex viro non ex mâ—liere nominatur the posteritie is named of the man not of the woman as the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 11.8 the man is not of the woman but the woman of the man to this purpose Origen so also Pet. Mart. ex quo tanquam principio peccatum per propagationem traductum fuit c. by the man as the first beginning sinne was traduced by propagation the Apostle then here speaketh of the beginning of the propagation of sinne not of the beginning of seduction which was by the woman or of imitation which was by the deuill who was a liar from the beginning and the father thereof Iob. 8.44 not by propagation but by seduction and imitation Mart. Quest. 19. What sinne the Apostle speaketh of here originall or actuall by one man sinne entred 1. Some vnderstand here originall sinne whereby the nature of man is corrupted and not actuall actuale non per vnum sed per plures intrat because actuall sinne entreth by many and not by one Gorrhan 2. Some comprehend here sinne generally both actuall and originall this word sinne non solum complectitur vitium originia sed omnia mala quae eo ex sequuntur doth no onely comprehend the originall corruption but all other euills that come from thence c. Martyr but of the propagation of originall sinne the Apostle speaketh afterward in the ende of the verse in as much as all men haue sinned c. 3. Wherefore the Apostle here vnderstandeth the actuall sinne which Adam committed for the word is put in the singular number and hath the article prefixed before it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which sheweth some particular sinne afterward the Apostle calleth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 transgression and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 disobedience which must be vnderstood of Adams transgression which was in him actuall but originall in respect of vs because it was the fountaine of all sinne but it was not originall sinne passive passiuely as now we call that originall sinne which is in the corrupt nature of man issuing from Adams sinne Pareus this sinne of Adam in respect of him was peccatum personale a personall sinne but as thereby the whole nature of man was corrupted it was peccatum naturae the sinne of nature Faius 4. Neither are we here to vnderstand all the actuall sinnes which Adam committed but onely his first transgression in eating of the forbidden fruit for like as the sinnes of parents now are not transmitted to their children so neither were all Adams sinnes propagated to posteritie but onely the first betweene the which and his other sinnes there is this difference that by the first bonum naturae the goodnesse of nature was lost by the other bonum gratiae personalis the goodnesse and grace in Adam was taken away And though Adam repented of his sinne and so were deliuered from the guilt thereof yet because that was a personall act it extendeth not beyond his person the corruption of nature could not be healed by his repentance Perer. disput 6. numer 29. Quest. 20. How sinne is said to haue entred into the world 1. Origen by the world vnderstandeth terrenam corporalem vitam the terrene and carnall life to the which the Saints are crucified but P. Mart. reiecteth this interpretation vpon this reason that by this meanes the Saints should not haue originall sinne if they be not comprehended vnder the name of the world 2. Some doe take the world for the place continent and place of the world but this is reiected by Pererius numer 32. vpon this reason because sinne did not in that sense first enter into the world by Adam for before him sinned the Angels that fell and the woman that was first deceiued 3. Neither by the world can we well vnderstand paradise for the woman had first sinned in Paradise before the man had consented 4. Therefore by the world we better vnderstand by a figure the inhabitants of the world the thing containing is taken for that which is contained totum genus humanum all mankind is here signified Gorrhan Martyr with others as afterward the Apostle expoundeth himselfe by the world vnderstanding all men And thus sinne entred into the world
and of the Apostles by Christ excepting Paul whereas for the former the text saith that Ionas fled from the presence of the Lord that called him who were called extraordinarily if the Apostles were not both in respect of the caller which was Christ God in the flesh and of their extraordinarie and miraculous gifts Now the ordinarie calling is in a Church alreadie setled and constituted the extraordinarie when a Church is to be setled and it is of two sorts either when there is no Church at all as the Apostles were sent vnto the Gentiles who were altogether straungers from God or when the Church is wholly corrupted with false doctrine and corrupt manners as the Prophets were raised vp in Israel when they were fallen to idolatrie and noâ—â— in this last age when Christians vnder Antichrist were becom idolaters God hath stirred vp many zealous preachers as Hus Hierome Luther Calvin with other excellent instruments Doct. 7. Of the peace which the Gospel bringeth v. 15. How beautifull are the feete of them which bring glad tidings of peace Whereas without Christ God was offended with the world and there was no peace but the earth was full of tribulation 2. Chron. 15.4 God by Christ reconciled the world to himselfe and sent peace according to the song of the Angels at the birth of Christ glorie to God in heauen and in the earth peace which peace is threefold first toward God in the assurance of the remission of sinnes Rom. 5.1 peace of conscience in that sinne hath no more power ouer vs to perplex and trouble our mindes and peace with our brethren of these two our Sauiour speaketh Matth. 9.57 Haue salt in your selues haue peace one with an other But whereas Christ saith he came not to send peace but debate Luk. 12.51 that is to be vnderstood of the peace of the world which hateth the light and with it the children of light can haue no peace 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. Against inherent iustice v. 3. They beeing ignorant of the righteousnesse of God c. Stapleton Antidot p. 601. contendeth this place to be vnderstood of inherent not of iustice imputed for that which is imputed saith he is not giuen neither receiueth he any iustice to whom it is imputed onely but remaineth still wicked in himselfe Contra. 1. The righteousnesse which is inherent in a man is the righteousnesse of works which the Apostle calleth their owne righteousnesse but the righteousnesse of God is not the righteousnesse of workes but that which is of faith as the Apostle sheweth v. 6. there he calleth that the righteousnesse of faith which here he nameth the righteousnesse of God but this is no other then righteousnesse imputed now faith is imputed for righteousnesse without workes Rom. 4.5 6. thus then the argument is framed the righteousnesse of God is the righteousnesse of faith this is prooued both out of this place v. 4. and c. 3.22 the righteousnesse of God by faith but the righteousnesse of faith is by imputation c. 4.5 6. therfore the righteousnes of God is righteousnes imputed 2. That iustice is not onely giuen which is actually conferred but that also which is accounted and imputed as the debt which is freely pardoned is as fully discharged as if the debt were paied and they which are iustified by righteousnesse imputed remaine not wicked because they are counted righteous in Christ beeing iustified by faith and are sanctified in some measure and so are regenerate and become new beeing mortified vnto sinne by which their mortification and dying vnto sinne they are not iustified before God but onely by faith in Christ. Controv. 2. Against the workes of preparation which are done without faith v. 4. Christ is the ende of the law Here Chrysostome well noteth that if Christ be the end of the lawe it followeth that qui Christum non habet etsi legis iustitiam habere videatur eam tamen non habeat he which hath not Christ though he seeme to haue the righteousnesse of the lawe yet he hath it not c. without Christ then and faith in him there is no true righteousnesse before God for without faith it is impossible to please God Heb. 11.6 what is become then of the Popish workes of preparation which should goe before iustification as though a man hauing not faith yet by his workes might prepare and make himselfe fit for iustification following for all such workes which come before faith and so are not sanctified in Christ are before God no better then sinnes Controv. 3. That it is impossible for any in this life to keepe the lawe v. 5. The man that doth these things shall liue thereby 1. Hence it is euident that no man can performe the lawe in euerie point for the lawe requireth perfect obedience in all things and as he that keepeth it shall liue thereby so he that fayleth in any part thereof is vnder the curse of the lawe as S. Paul sheweth Galat. 3.10 2. If it be answeared that it is impossible to keepe the lawe by the power onely of free-will but by grace it is possible to be kept S. Iohn sheweth that euen the regenerate by grace are not without sinne 1. Ioh. 1.8 and consequently they transgresse the lawe 〈◊〉 sinne is the transgression of the lawe 1. Ioh. 3.4 3. And whereas Stapleton obiecteth antid p. 637. that then this should be a ridiculous deceitfull and idle promise He that doth these things shall liue thereby if none were able to doe them and it were like as a father should promise his sonne an inheritance if he could get a kingdome which were impossible for him to doe Contra. 1. Though the condition be impossible to vs to be fulfilled yet is it possible in Christ who hath performed the perfect obedience of the lawe 2. and though it be not possible to keepe the lawe perfectly yet by grace we are made able in some measure to keep the lawe and the rest where we faile is supplied by the perfect obedience of Christ. 3. neither is the example like for the sonne is not bound by any dutie to fulfill that condition but we are debters vnto God for the keeping of the lawe which if it be now impossible it is mans owne fault who in his creation was made righteous and endued with sufficient strength to keepe the law See further hereof Synops. Centur. 4. err 63. Contr. 4. Against the doubting of saluation v. 6. Say not in thine heart who shall ascend c. 1. The Apostle sheweth the contrarie effects of the lawe and Gospell they which depend vpon the righteousnesse of the law are continually in doubt how they shall come to heauen and how they shall escape hell but the righteousnesse of faith remooueth all these doubts because their faith is grounded vpon the word of God which teacheth them that Christ ascended into heauen for them and that he died for them they neede none other to ascend to prepare
them a way into heauen not to descend to suffer death and deliuer them from hell 2. There is not then any question remaining in the faithfull of their saluation either debitando by doubting how they shall goe to heauen or trepidando in beeing afraid of hellâ— but because our faith is not here perfect there may be some strife and wrastling in the soule betweene the assurance of faith and carnall infirmitie sometime the faithfull may aske question luctando in wrestling and striving against carnall distrust saying if God be with vs who can be against vs but at the length faith prevayleth and triumpheth resoluing that with the Apostle who shall separate vs 3. But here we must make a difference of feare faith expelleth not all feare but onely the slauish and seruile feare of hell and damnation ioyned with distrust and torment of conscience yet a filiall feare and reverent awe of God remaineth in the servants of God which is chiefely for the time past they feare to offend so gracious a God and mercifull a father they feare not for the sinnes alreadie committed which they are assured are forgiues â—â— Christ. 4. And this assurance and firme perswasion of saluation the Apostle insinuateth afterward where he speaketh in the second person to euerie faithfull person If thou shalt confesse with thy mouth c. thou shalt be saued signifying thus much that euerie one examining himselfe by the beleefe of his heart and confession of his mouth may vndoubtedly conclude that he is saued This maketh against the Popish vncertaintie and doubting of saluation Whereof see more Synops. Controv. 5. Against vnwritten traditions v. 8. This is the word of faith which we preach c. The Apostle here sheweth that the Gospel which he preached was agreeable to the Scriptures he preached no other thing then he here writeth and he writeth nothing but was consonant to the old Scriptures as Ireneâ— thus testifieth per Apostolos Evangelium pervenit ad nos c. by the Apostles the Gospell came vnto vs which they then preached but afterward by the will of God in the Scriptures they deliuered fundamentum columnam fidei nostra the foundation and piller of our faith c. lib. 3. c. 1. The Romanists then may be ashamed to flie vnto that vile and base refuge of the old Manichees to say that the Apostles preached some things and committed other to writing See Synops. Controv. 6. Against freewill v. 8. The word is neere thee c. Erasmus in his defense of freewill against Luther vrgeth this place to shew the power and strength of freewill in keeping the commandements and he presseth those other words of Moses non est suprate it is not aboue thee that is beyond thy strength Contra. 1. But the Latine translator there fayleth in the rendring of the right sense of the words which are is not hid from thee not which is not aboue thee 2. he speaketh of the facilitie of the commandements not by the power of freewill but by faith in Christ who hath fulfilled the law for vs and by whose grace we are enabled in some good measure to keepe the commandements of God which are not greeuous vnto vs which are iustified by faith and sanctified by the spirit 3. and if it be admitted that Moses there speaketh of the law his meaning onely is that the knowledge of the law was not hid from them neither was it farre off that they had neede fetch it from heauen or from the vtmost partes of the Sea it was present with them and continually in their mouth beeing rehearsed by the Priests and Levites so that nulla ignorantiae excusatio sit reliqua their remained no excuse of ignorance thus Luther answeareth Erasmus and Bellarmine also acknowledgeth that Moses there speaketh de facilitate non observandae sed cognoscendae legis of the facilitie of knowing not doing the law lib. 5. de grat c. 6. Controv. 7. Against Limbus Patrum that Christ went not downe thither to deliuer the Patriarkes v. 7. Say not who shall descend into the deepe that is to bring Christ againe from the dead the ordinarie glosse would inferre vpon these words that Christ descended into Limbus to fetch the Fathers from thence for he that saith who hath descended in a manner denieth that none descended thither and so not the Patriarks and consequently neither Christ who descended not nisi pro illis liberandis but to deliuer them Contra. 1. But Lyranus refuseth this interpretation vpon these two reasons because it is neither agreeable to that place of Moses Deuter. 30. which will beare no such sense nor yet vnto the words following where he expoundeth the descending into the deepe of the raysing of Christ from the dead v. 9. 2. Some of our owne expositors doe interpret this clause descending into the deepe thus that Christ subierit inferâ—â— dolores hath vndergone the verie dolours of hell for vs Calvin Martyr expoundeth it of the place of hell as if one of curiositie should aske who should goe downe to hell to certifie vs that Christ hath ouercome hell and damnation for vs. some vnderstand it of the graue as Lyranus Osiander to say who shall descend into the deepe is all one as to denie that Christ is risen from the dead but Moses for the deepe saith Sea which cannot properly be taken for the graue Some thinke that by going to heauen and descending to the deepe are meant things of great difficultie and impossible to shew that the Gospel requireth no such thing of vs to goe to heauen or hell Faius But beside this last it may be added further that by the confession of the death of Christ we are consequently deliuered from the feare of descending to hell that is of beeing condemned because by Christs death we are deliuered from the feare of hell so that he which remaineth stil fearefull of hell doubteth of the truth of Christs death and resurrection to this purpose Pareus See before qu. 12. Controv. 8. Whether the righteousnesse of faith and the righteousnesse of the law be one and the same or contrarie the one to the other 1. Stapleton affirmeth them to be the same Antidot p. 618. by these arguments 1. the law leadeth vs to no other righteousnesse but to the righteousnesse of the law but it leadeth also to faith in Christ therefore faith in Christ is that righteousnesse 2. the end of the law is the righteousnesse of the law and Christ is the end of the law therefore faith in Christ is the end of of the law 3. that which is perfect and imperfect doe not differ in kind as an infant and a man of perfect age the iustice of the law is imperfect the iustice of faith perfect they then differ no otherwise Contra. 1. The law directly intendeth the iustice of the law and indirectly it leadeth vnto Christ so it is false that it leadeth and directeth onely to the iustice of the law it
that this Epistle was written by Paul and is of diuine authoritie by the epistle it selfe 2. contr That S. Pauls epistles are not so obscure that any should be terrified from the reading thereof 3. contr Against the Ebionites which retained the rites and ceremonies of Moses 4. contr Against the Marcionites that reiected the lawe of Moses 5. contr Against the Romanists which depraue the doctrine taught by S. Paul in his Epistle 6. contr Against Socinus that blasphemously subverteth the doctrine of our redemption by Christ and iustification by faith 7. contr Whether Paul may be thought to haue beene married Controversies vpon the 1. Chapter 1. contr Against the Manichees which refuse Moses and the Prophets 2. contr Against Election by the foresight of workes 3. contr Against the Nestorians and Vbiquitaries 4. contr Against the heresie of one Georgius Eniedinus a Samosatenian heretike in Transilvania 5. cont Against the Marcionites that Christ had a true bodie 6. contr Against the Apollinaâ—â—sts that Christ had no humane soule 7. contr That the Romane faith is not the same now which was commended by the Apostle 8. contr That the Pope is not vniversall Bishop 9. contr Against the Popish distinction betweene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to worship and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to serue v. 9. whom I serue in my spirit 10. contr That God onely spiritually is to be serued and worshipped 11. contr Of the vaine vse of Popish pilgrimages 12. contr None to be barred from the knowledge of Gods word 13. contr Against diuerse hereticall assertions of Socinus touching the iustice of God 14. contr Against inherent iustice 15. contr That the Sacraments did not conferre grace 16. contr That faith onely iustifieth 17. contr How the Gospel is the power of God to salvation to euerie one that beleeueth 18. contr Of the difference between the law and the Gospel 19. contr Whether by naturall meanes the Gentiles might haue attained to the knowledge of the onely true God without the speciall assistance of Gods grace 20. contr Against some Philosophers that the world is not eternall 21. contr Against the adoration and setting vp of images in Churches and places of prayer v. 23. they turned the glorie of the incorruptible God to the similitude of an image 22. contr Of the corrupt reading of the vulgar Latine translation v. 32. 23. contr Against the Popish distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes Controversies out of the 2. Chapter 1. contr Against the power of freewill in good things 2. contr Of iustification by the imputatiue iustice of faith 3. contr Against the merit of workes 4. contr Which are to be counted good works 5. con Whether any good works of the faithfull be perfect 6. contr Whether men ought to doe well for hope of recompence or reward 7. contr Against iustification by workes vpon these words v. 13. Not the heares of the lawe but the doers shall be iustified 8. contr That it is not possible in this life to keepe the lawe 9. contr Whether by the light of nature onely a man may doe any thing morally good 10. contr Of the imperfection of the vulgar Latine translation 11. contr That the Sacraments do not conferre grace 12. contr That the Sacraments depend not vpon the worthines of the Minister or receiuer 13. contr Against the Marcionites and other which condemned the old Testament and the ceremonies thereof 14. contr Against the Anabaptists which reiect the Sacraments of the newe Testament 15. contr That the want of Baptisme condemneth not 16. contr That the wicked and vnbeleeuers eate not the bodie of Christ in the Sacrament Controversies vpon the 3. Chapter 1. contr That the Sacraments of the old Testament did not iustifie ex opere operato by the work wrought and so consequenly neither the newe 2. contr Of the Apochryphall Scriptures 3. contr That the wicked and vnbeleeuers doe not eate the bodie of Christ in the Eucharist 4. contr That the Romane Church hath not the promise of the perpetuall presence of Gods spirit 5. contr The Virgin Marie not exempted from sinne 6. contr The reading of the Scripture is not to be denied to any 7. contr Against the adversaries of the law the Marcionites and other heretikes 8. contr Against the counsels of perfection 9. contr Against the Pelagians which established free-will 10. contr That the vertue of Christs death is indifferently extended both to sinnes before baptisme and after 11. contr That the beleeuing fathers before Christ were not kept in Limbo 12. contr Against the Marcionite heretikes 13. contr Against the Novatian heretikes 14. contr Against inherent iustice 15. contr Against the Popish distinction of the first and second iustification 16. contr Against the works of preparation going before iustification 17. contr What iustifying faith is 18. contr What manner of faith it is that iustifieth 19. contr Of the manner how faith iustifieth 20. contr Whether faith alone iustifieth 21. contr How S. Paul and S. Iames are reconciled together 23. contr Against Socinus that Christ properly redeemed vs by paying the ransome for vs and not metaphorically 23. contr That Christ truely reconciled vs by his blood against an other blasphemous assertion of Socinus Controversies out of the 4. Chapter 1. contr That the Apostle excludeth all kind of workes from iustification 2. contr Whether blessednes consist onely in the conversion of sinners v. 7. 3. contr Whether sinne is wholly purged and taken away in the iustification of the faithfull 4. contr Against workes of satisfaction 5. contr Of imputatiue iustice against inherent righteousnes 6. contr That the Sacraments doe not conferre grace by the externall participation onely 7. contr That there is the same substance and efficacie of the Sacraments of the old and newe Testament 8. contr That circumcision was not onely a signe signifying or distinguishing but a seale confirming the promise of God 9. contr Whether circumcision were availeable for the remission of sinne 10. contr Of the presumptuous titles of the Pope calling himselfe the father and head of the faithfull 11. contr Against the Chiliasts or Millenaries that hold that Christ should raigne a 1000. yeares in the earth 12. contr Of the certaintie of faith v. 16. that the promise might be sure 13. contr Whether faith be an act of the vnderstanding onely 14. contr That iustifying faith is not a generall apprehension or beleeuing of the articles of the faith but an assurance of the remission and forgiuenesse of sinnes in Christ. 15. contr That faith doth not iustifie by the merit or act thereof but onely instrumentally as it applyeth and apprehendeth the righteousnesse of Christ. 16. contr The people are no to be denied the reading of the Scriptures 17. contr Against the heretikes which condemned the old Testament and the author thereof 18. contr Whether iustification consist onely in the remission of sinnes 19. contr Against Socinus corrupt interpretation of these words v. 25. was deliuered vp for our sinnes 20. contr Piscators
opinion examined that our sinnes are remitted onely by Christs death not for the the obedience and merit of his life Controversies vpon the 5. Chapter 1. contr Whether a good conscience and integritie of life be the cause of peace with God 2. contr Against invocation of Saints 3. contr Of the certaintie of salvation and of perseverance 4. contr That the tribulation of the Saints is not meritorius though it be said to worke patience 5. contr That we are not iustified by the inherent habite of charitie 6. contr Against the heresie of impious Socinus who denieth that Christ died for our sinnes and payed the ransome for them 7. contr Against other obiections of Socinus and other impugning the fruit and efficacie of Christs death in reconciling vs to God his Father 8. con That Christs death was a full satisfaction for our sins against Socinus his cauils 9. contr That Christs death was not onely satisfactorie but meritorious against Socinus Certaine controversies touching Originall sinne 10. cont That there is originall sinne in men by the corruption of nature against the opinion of the Hebrewes 11. contr That Adaws sinne is entred into his posteritie by propagation not imitation onely against the Pelagians 12. contr Of the manner how originall sinne is propagated against the Pelagians where it is disputed whether the soule be deriued from the Parents 13. contr Against the Pelagians and Papists that originall sinne is not quite taken away in Baptisme 14. contr What originall sinne is against the Romanists and some some others and specially against them which hold it to be Adams sinne imputed onely to his posteritie 15. contr That originall sinne is not onely the privation of originall iustice 16. contr Of the wicked heresie of Marcion and Valentinus with the blasphemous Manichees 17. cont That all sinnes are mortall and worthie of death by nature 18. contr That Henoch and Elias are not yet aliue in the bodie 19. contr The Virgin Marie conceiued in originall sinne 20. contr Againe meritts 21. contr That the punishment of originall sinne is euerlasting death 22. contr That Christs essentiall iustice is not infused into vs. 23. contr Against the Patrons of vniuersall grace 24. contr Against the Popish inherent iustice 25. contr That we are iustified both by the actiue and passiue obedience of Christ. 26. contr Against the Philosophers who placed righteousnes in their owne workes 27. contr Against the Manichees and Pelagians the one giuing too much the other too little to the lawe 28. contr Of the assurance of salvation 29. contr Of the diuerse kinds of grace against the Romanists Controversies out of the 6. Chapter 1. contr Against the administring of the Sacraments in an vnknowne tongue 2. contr Concerning inherent iustice 3. contr That the Sacrament of Baptisme doth not conferre grace by the outward worke 4. contr That Baptisme serueth as well for the remission of sinnes to come as of sinnes past 5. contr Whether in Baptisme our sinnes be cleane taken away 6. contr Of the baptisme of infants 7. contr Of the assurance of salvation 8. contr That Christ shall not die in the next world againe for those which were not healed here 9. contr Against the Sacrifice of the Masse 10. contr Concerning freewill 11. contr That concupiscence remaining in the regenerate is properly sinne 12. contr Whether a righteous man may fal into any mortall or deadly sinne 13. contr Against the Manichees 14. contr Concerning inherent iustice 15. contr Against the power of freewill in the fruits of righteousnesse 16. contr Whether all death is the wages of sinne 17. contr Against the distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes 18. contr That everlasting life cannot be merited by good workes Controversies vpon the 7. Chapter 1. contr Against Purgatorie 2. contr Of the lawfulnes of second marriage 3. contr Whether the marriage bond be indissoluable before the one partie be dead 4. contr That the disparitie of profession is no cause of the dissolution of marriage 5. contr Whether the bill of diuorce permitted to the Iewes did lawfully dissolue matrimonie vnder the Law 6. contr Against the workes of propitiation 7. contr Against the Heretikes which condemned the Lawe 8. contr That we are freed by grace from the strict and rigorous observation of the lawe 9. contr That concupiscence though it haue no deliberate consent of the will is sinne forbidden by the commandement 10. contr That the commandement thou shalt not lust is but one 11. contr Against freewill Controversies out of the 8. Chapter 1. contr That concupiscence remaining euen in the regenerate is sinne and in it selfe worthie of condemnation 2. controver That none are perfect in this life 3. controver That regeneration is not the cause that there is no condemnation to the faithfull 4. contr Against the Arrians and Eunomians concerning the dietie of the holy Ghost 5. contr Against the Pelagians that a man by nature cannot keepe and fulfill the lawe 6. contr The fulfilling of the lawe is not possible in this life no not to them which are in the state of grace 7. con That not the carnall eating of Christs flesh is the cause of the resurrection but the spirituall v. 11. 8. contr Against merits 9. contr Whether in this life one by faith may be sure of salvation 10. contr Against the invocation of Saints 11. contr That a strange tongue is not to be vsed in the seruice of God 12. contr That euerlasting glorie cannot be merited 13. contr That hope iustifieth not 14. contr Whether hope relie vpon the merit of our workes 15. contr Against the naturall power and integritie of mans will 16. contr That predestination dependeth not vpon the foresight of faith or good workes 17. contr Against the opinion of Ambrosius Catharinus concerning predestination 18. contr That election is certaine and infallible of grace without merit and of some selected not generally of all 19. contr That the elect cannot full away from the grace and fauour of God and be wholly giuen ouer vnto sinne 20. contr Whether a reprobate may haue the grace of God and true iustice 21. contr That the elect by faith may be assured of euerlasting salvation Controversies out of the 9. Chapter 1. contr That succession of Bishops is no sure note of the Church of Christ. 2. contr Against the old heretikes the Manichees Arrians Nestorians confuted out of the 5. ver 3. contr Against the prophane and impious collections of Eniedinus and Socinus late heretikes 4. contr That the water in baptisme doth not sanctifie or giue grace 5. contr Against the vaine observation of Astrologers in casting of nativities 6. contr That the soules had no beeing in a former life before they came into the body 7. contr Whether the foresight of faith or workes be the cause of election 8. contr That not onely election vnto grace but vnto glorie also is onely of the good will of God 9. contr That the Apostle treateth as well of