16. that is which had receiued the lawe 3. By wrath some would vnderstand the wrath and indignation in the transgressor his contumacie and rage against God who hath by lawe restrained him of his licentious libertie Origen and Haymo referre it to the penaltie of the law as an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth but it rather signifieth the wrath and indignation of God in iudging and punishing of sinne not onely temporally but eternally Calvin 4. Now the lawe worketh wrath not of it selfe for it is holy iust and good but in respect of the weakenes and corruption of man which taketh occasion by the lawe as contrarie vnto it to be the worse as we see that in nature one contrarie by the resistance of an other becommeth so much the more violent as expereince sheweth in the breaking out of lightening and thunder and in the terrible noise of gunshot where two contraries meete together the fierie hoat nature of the brimstone and the cold qualitie of the saltpeter both tempered together in the gunpowder Mart. 5. But although the lawe occasionaliter by way of occasion procureth wrath yet it hath an other ende and effect vnto the godly for vnto them it is a schoolemaster to bring them vnto Christ so that Christ is the ende of the lawe not onely because he hath abolished the ceremonies of the lawe and so is the ende and fulfilling thereof but because the law directeth vs vnto Christ who hath fulfilled the lawe for vs which it was impossible for vs to keepe 6. Now the holy Apostle doth of purpose thus speake of the law as saying that by it commeth the knowledge of sinne that it causeth wrath that it is the ministerie of death that by this meanes he might abate that great opinion and estimation of the law which the Iewes conceiued of it hoping thereby to be iustified but otherwise as the law is considered in it selfe he giueth it the due commendation as afterward is shewed in the 7. chapter like as now the Preachers of the Gospel doe giue vnto good works their due praise and commendation but yet they detract from them as not beeing able to iustifie vs. Mart. 26. Quest. Of the meaning of these words v. 15. Where no law is there is no transgression 1. Origen here obserueth that the Apostle saith not where is law there is transgression for then all those holy men which liued vnder the law should be held to be vnder transgression but he saith in the negatiue where there is no law there is no transgression But this collection is not good for the contrarie must be inferred out of the Apostles words where there is no law there is no transgression therefore where there is a law there is transgression or els there should be no coherence in the Apostles words whereas this is added as a proofe of the former clause that the law causeth wrath 2. Now touching the coherence Gorrhan maketh here two arguments why the inheritance can not be by the law because by it there is neither remissio poenae remission of the punishment the law causing wrath nor yet remissio culpae remission of the fault because by the law commeth transgression Gryneus maketh this the coherence because idem est index c. there is the same foreshowne both of the transgression and punishment namely the law But thus better doth the sentence hang together the Apostle prooueth that the law causeth wrath by the cause thereof for that it causeth transgression so then transgression is set in the middes betweene the law and wrath for the law bringeth forth transgression and transgression wrath Pareus 3. But this should seeme to be no good argument no law no transgression therefore where there is law there is transgression as it followeth not no creature no man Ergo a creature a man Ans. The Apostle here reasoneth not à genere-ad speciem from the genus to the species as in the instance proposed but from the contrarie by the like connexion of the causes and effects as this followeth well in the like where the Sunne is not risen there is â—â— day light therefore the Sunne beeing risen it is day Pareus 4. Now concerning the meaning of these words Haymo thinketh it may be vnderstood either of the lawe of nature and so infants not yet hauing vnderstanding of this lawe cannot be transgressors against it or of the Evangelicall lawe which the Pagans not hauing are not held to be so great offenders as they which haue reciued it or of the morall lawe of Moses where that lawe is not non est tanta praevaricatio neque sic imputatur there is not so great transgression neither is it so much imputed This latter sense is to be preferred for thoroughout this chapter the Apostle vnderstandeth the lawe of Moses 5. And further for the true vnderstanding of these words it must be obserued 1. that the Apostle saith not where is no lawe there is no iniquitie for the old world and the Sodomites committed iniquitie before the lawe was written but he saith there is no transgression which is referred to the lawe written gloss ordin 2. this is simply true of things indifferent as were the ceremonies before they were commanded by lawe for then it was no sinne to omit them but of things euill in their owne nature it must be vnderstood after a sort that there was not so great transgression before the law was giuen as after Lyran. 3. and hereof these two reasons may be giuen both quia homines nituntur in vetitum men are most bent vnto that which is forbidden and so by the prohibition of the lawe the stubbornenesse of mans heart was increased as also because by the lawe came the knowledge of sinne and so the seruant that knoweth his masters will and doth it not is worthie of more stripes Lyran. 4. So then the Apostle denieth not but that sinne which is committed against the conscience euen where there is no lawe is sinne non est reus tantae transgressionis c. he is not guiltie of so great transgression as he which knoweth the lawe and breaketh it Calvin Quest. 27. Who are meant by Abrahams seede which is of the Lawe v. 16. 1. The Apostle in this verse vrgeth two arguments to prooue that the inheritance is not of the law but of faith because it is of grace for to be iustified by faith and by grace with the Apostle are all one and because the promise is firme but if it were by the law it should be vncertaine and not firme because of mans weaknes who is not able to performe the law Calvin Chrysostome further saith that the Apostle here speaketh of two chiefe good things or benefits the one is quod quia data sunt firma sunt the things which are giuen are firme the other quod vniverso semini data sunt they are giuen to the whole seede of Abraham 2. By the seede which is of the law
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
the law wrought in him all manner of concupiscence supposeth some to haue beene before 3. Hierome epist. 121 and Origen following him do take this for the time of childhood for then sinne is dead because they haue no knowledge of it for if a child smite his father or mother it is counted no fault and when they come to yeares of discretion sinne reviveth But the reviuing of sinne sheweth that it liued before which cannot be said of children that sinne first liued and afterward died and then reviued againe 4. Augustine lib. 1. contr 2. epistol Pelag. thus vnderstandeth the Apostle that before the lawe of Moses was giuen man is said to haue liued as without lawe and sinne then to haue beene dead because it was not perfectly knowne before the lawe was giuen so also Chrysostome Haymo But if all this be referred to the time before the lawe was giuen Paul could not haue giuen instance in himselfe as he doth 5. Wherefore S. Pauls meaning is that he was aliue without the lawe that is vinere miâ—ividebar I seemed to be aliue vnto my selfe when as yet beeing a Pharisie he had not full vnderstanding of the lawe then sinne also seemed to be dead because as yet he did not feele the burthen of sinne nor his conscience did not pricke him while he contented himselfe with the outward obseruation of the lawe thus Pareus Osiander Beza Calvin And further it is here to be considered that there is a twofold death of sinne non vera a death not in truth when sinne lurketh onely and lyeth hid and sheweth not it selfe of this the Apostle speaketh here and there is mors vera a true death of sinne when we truely die vnto sinne in Christ which death the Apostle treated of before c. 6. Quest. 18. How sinne is said to haue reuiued 1. Origen here maketh mention of the error of the Pythagorian heretikes who imagine that the soules of men liued before in the bodies some of birds some of beasts when they liued as it were without a lawe and so sinne is said to reviue in the soule But this is a grosse error for in those creatures which haue no reason sinne cannot be said to liue or haue any beeing at all and therefore not to reviue 2. Bucer seemeth thus to vnderstand it that sinne liued before that is qualis coram Deâ— erat apparuit it appeared such as it was before God but now it is said to reuiue because it is made knowne to vs but the liuing and reliuing or reuiuing of sinne must be vnderstood in respect of the sinne 3. The most doe vnderstand it simply without any relation a former life of sinne capa apparere it beganne to appeare gloss ordinar interlin apparnit delictum esse it appeared to be sinne Theophylact incepit vires explicare Mart. it began to shewe the strength which sense is not much to be misliked 4. Some haue here reference vnto the first knowledge of sinne which Adam had after his transgression as Augustine vixerat aliquando in Paradiso quando contra datum praceptum satis apparebat admissum c. it liued sometime in Paradise when it sufficiently appeared by the transgression of the commandement c. but afterward it lieth as dead in children till they come to the knowledge of the law then peccatum in notitia 〈◊〉 hominis reviviscit quod in notitia primi hominis aliquando vixerat sin reviveth in the knowledge of man that is borne which sometime was aliue in the knowledge of the first man c. to this purpose August lib. 1. ad Bonifac. c. 9. which sense Pareus followeth likewise Tolet. Haymo addeth further that sinne liued not onely in Adam but in Cain who said his sinne was greater then could be forgiuen but it died in their posteritie which came vnto that error that they thought that to be no sinne which was sinne But seeing the Apostle speaketh of the reviving of sinne in himselfe we must not goe further then the Apostle to seeke out this first life of sinne 5. Wherefore as Beza well obserueth a threefold state and condition of the Apostles life is here to be considered when he liued sub ignorantiam legis vnder the ignorance of the law that sinne raigned afterward he liued sub cognitione legis vnder the knowledge of the law but onely of the outward letter obseruing the externall works onely of the law whereas he before made conscience of no sinne at this time sinne seemed to be dead he pleased himselfe in his outward obedience then he came to the sight of his sinne and so he died his conscience accused him that he was worthie of eternall death Quest. 19. How sinne is said to haue deciued v. 11. 1. The meaning is not as Methodius and Ambrose likewise Haymo that the deuill seduced Adam for not Adam but Eue was seduced as Saint Paul saith 1. Tim. 2.2 but the deceitfulnes of sinne consisteth herein 1. inducitur error practicus there is brought in a practicall error that the sinner is deceiued by the pleasantnes of the obiect thinking that to be good which is euill Tolet annot 14. as Eue was deceiued by the pleasantnes of the apple 2. operit laqueum peccati it hideth the poison and not the sinne Hugo it sheweth the baite and hideth the hooke 3. cogitationem auertit à supplicijs it turneth aside our cogitation from the punishment of sinne and perswadeth a man that either the sinne is not so great and shall haue either no punishment or but a small and so it bringeth a man to vnbeleefe not to giue credit to the word of God who threatneth sinners as the Deuill first perswaded Eva that she should not die at all Martyr 3. Some will haue this word expounded non de re ipsa sed de notitia not of the thing it selfe but of the knowledge that at length he perceiued how farre he had beene deceiued and lead out of the way Hyper. But it rather sheweth the proper effect of sinne taking occasion by the law which is to deceiue the other to acknowledge our error is the effect of the law and not of sinne as Pellican well vnderstandeth here sinne taking occasion by the law doth draw vs out of the way as a sicke man taketh occasion to act those things which are forbidden ex mandato medici by the charge giuen by the Physitian to the contrarie 4. Then the Apostle sheweth three effects of sinne taking occasion by the law first it deceiueth then it worketh all manner of concupiscence and then it killeth it bringeth death to the soule Mart. so impostura causa est concupiscentiae c. imposture or deceit is the cause of concupiscence and concupiscence of death Oecumen Thus euery man is tempted seduced and entised by his concupiscence as S. Iames saith 1.14 Quest. 20. How sinne is said to haue staine him 1. Not occisum me esse ostendit it sheweth that I was staiue and dead by the law
vnsound opinion 1. Bellarmine thus reasoneth that the Apostles did reach the Church at the first without Scriptures therefore they are not simply necessarie but onely for the greater profit of the Church like as an horse is necessarie for ones iourney for his more speedie trauaile but not simply necessarie because he may go a foot Bellar. l. 4. de verb. c. 4. Contra. 1. True it is that the writing of the Scriptures are not simply necessarie in respect of God for he by his absolute power could find a way to teach his Church otherwise but in respect of Gods ordinance which hath appointed the Scriptures for edifying of his Church they are necessarie as bread is necessarie for mans sustentation though God can nourish and maintaine life without bread 2. It is not true that the Apostles did teach without Scriptures for they had the prophetical writings first and afterward their owne and while the Apostles themselues were liuing and present the writing of the Gospel was not so necessarie as afterward 3. The writing then of the Gospel was necessarie 1. both in respect of that age present for the preuenting and stay of heresies which might be more strongely resisted and gainesayed by an euident and extant rule of faith 2. in regard of those Churches to whom the Apostles preached not by liuely voice it was necessarie that they should haue some perfect direction by writing 3. and that the ages also to come might haue a rule of their faith Arg. 2. The Church may as well now be instructed without the Scriptures as it was for the space of 2000. yeares before the lawe was written Bellar. ibid. Contra. 1. In the first age of the world the light of nature was not so much obscured as afterward when the law was written and therefore the argument followeth not the Scriptures were not necessarie then therefore not now 2. because the old world wanted the Scriptures to direct them that was the cause why they were giuen ouer generally to all kind of prophanenesse and therefore to preuent the like mischiefe afterward the Lord thought good to giue his written word to his Church Argum. 3. The Apostles did preach much more then they did write and many things they deliuered to the Church by tradition so that not the Scriptures by themselues are a totall rule and direction of the faith but partiall together with the traditions and ordinances of the Church Contra. 1. The Apostles did indeed speake more then they did or could write but yet they preached the same things and deliuered no other precepts concerning faith and manners but the same which they committed to writing 2. many things concerning orders and especially in particular Churches the Apostles left by tradition but no other precepts and rules of faith then they had written 3. The Scriptures are no partiall but a totall and perfect rule of faith for mensura adaequata esse debet mensurate the measure must be equall vnto that which is measured it must neither be longer nor shorter if then the Scripture should come short of faith it were no perfect rule nay it were no rule at all Pareus Now on the contrarie that the Scriptures are necessarie thus it is made plaine 1. From the author the Prophets and Apostles did write by the instinct of the spirit but the spirit mooueth not to any vnnecessarie or superfluous worke 2. from the office of the Apostles which was to teach all nations Matth 28.19 which seeing they could not doe in their owne persons it was necessarie that they should preach vnto them by their writings 3. from the ende and vse of the Scriptures 1. whether for instruction in doctrine for all Scriptures are written for our learning Rom. 15.4 or direction vnto vertuous liuing or decision of Questions and confuting of errors it was necessarie that the Scriptures should be writen to these vses as the Apostle sheweth 1. Timoth. 3.16 that the man of God may be perfect The Scriptures then were necessarie to be extant for the aforesaid purposes in so much that the Apostle saith if any Angel from heauen doe preach any other Gospel c. let him be accursed whereupon Chrysostome saith Paulus etiam Angelis de coelo descendentibus proponit Scripturas Paul euen propoundeth the Scriptures to the Angels descending from heauen in Galat. c. 1. 6. Morall observations 1. Observ. Of the happinesse of these times vnder the Gospel in comparison of the former times vnder the Lawe In that the Lord hath clearely manifested and opened vnto his Church by Iesus Christ the high mysteries which lay hid before therein appeareth the singular loue of God to his Church and the great preheminence which the faithfull now haue in comparison of the people of God vnder the Law as our Sauiour saith vnto his Apostles Blessed are your eyes for they see and your eares for they heare for verily I say vnto you that many Prophets and righteous men haue desired to see those things which you see and could not see them c. Matth. 13.16 17. the vse hereof is to stirre vs vp vnto thankefulnesse vnto God for this so great mercie shewed vnto his Church 2. Observ. The dangerous estate of those which are found to be contemners of the Gospel and Newe Lawe The greater light is reuealed and the more knowledge that men haue the greater obedience doth God looke for at their hand disobedience then now vnto the Gospel of truth is so much more greiuous then was transgression vnder the law as the times of light and knowledge in brightnesse exceede the dayes of ignorance and blindnesse thus the Apostle reasoneth the night is past and the day is at hand let vs therefore cast away the workes of darkenesse and put on the armour of light Rom. 13.12 So also Hebr. 2.2 the Apostle saith if the word spoken by Angels was stedfast and euerie transgression c. receiued a iust recompence of reward how much more if we neglect so great saluation c. More special obseruations vpon the whole Epistle 1. The Argument and Methode of S. Pauls epistles in generall and specially of this Epistle 1. Nicephorus lib. 2. c. 34. maketh the end and scope of Saint Paules Epistles to consist in these two things 1. that the Apostle what he preached beeing present he committed to writing to put them in memorie when he was absent 2. And that which he did more obscurely deliuer by word of mouth or passed ouer in silence he did in his writings handle and set forth more fully and plainely But the Apostle had diuerse other occasions offred him in his epistles then fell out in his sermons and therefore it is to be thought that although his sermons and writings agreed in the substance of doctrine yet he as occasion did mooue him in his epistles otherwise handleth matters then he did in his preaching 2. His Epistles then may be reduced to these fiue kinds 1. Some belong vnto doctrine wherein he layeth
law written Contra. 1. The Apostle inferreth not that euery mouth is stopped by the written testimonies but that generall word is vsed least the Iewes should thinke themselues excluded so then not that writing but the thing written that all men are sinners serueth to stoppe all mens mouthes and especially the Iewes it conuinceth both Iewes and Gentiles the Iewes both for the manner because the written law was giuen vnto them and for the matter also they were sinners the Gentiles it conuinceth for the matter they were guiltie of all these sinnes 2. Though law be there taken generally both for the naturall and written law by the which came the knowledge of sinne and yet both Cain and Iosephs brethren had beside the naturall law instructions receiued from their fathers yet in this place it is euident that the Apostle meaneth the written and speaking law whatsoeuer the law saith 2. Origen beside hath here an other strange conceit he thinketh that not onely men but Angels and spirits are here saide to be vnder the law because they also haue a law and rule giuen them to be ordered by but seeing the Angels are not saued by faith in Christ which the Apostle treateth of here he saith directly that by the works of the law no flesh shal be iustified in his sight the angels can not be said to be vnder the law for they are not in the flesh 3. Theodoret here hath this distinction that the law saith thus to them which are vnder the law seà non de ijs but not onely of them for the Prophets haue many comminations concerning the Egyptians Babylonians and other nations Pererius also hath this obseruation that wheÌ„ as any prophesie is directed against other nations they are touched by name but those things which are set downe in generall and absolutely without any such particular direction doe properly appertaine vnto those who are vnder the law c. And although the Scripture make mention of other nations yet the speciall intent thereof is to profit the Church of God Faius 4. Now the occasion of these words of the Apostle is this the Iewes hearing these generall sentences setting forth the iniquitie of the world might thinke that the Gentiles were specially meant and so shift them off from themselues Therefore the Apostle sheweth that these things were specially directed to the Iewes and that by these three arguments 1. from the relation which the law hath to them to whome it is giuen it seemeth specially to concerne them therefore because the Scriptures wherein these things were found written were giuen vnto the Iewes to them they were specially directed 2. from the end that euery mouth should be stopped if the Gentiles should be vnderstood and not the Iewes also then they might haue somewhat to glorie in and to exalt themselues against God therefore that all occasion of boasting should be taken away euen the Iewes are conuinced by these testimonies to be sinners 3. an other ende is that not onely all occasion of boasting should be taken away but that the whole world should be found 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 guiltie and culpable before God Chrysostome by this word vnderstandeth him qui sibi ipsi aâ— defensionem non sufficit who is not sufficient or able to defend himselfe but it signifieth more one that is guiltie and subiect to condemnation Pareus 5. Tolet thinketh not this to be the occasion to meete with such a secret obiection of the Iewes for they could not be ignorant saith he but that whatsoeuer was written in the Scriptures was spoken to them but rather to shew the reason why they could not be iustified by the law because the law which was giuen vnto them condemned them annot 11. Contra. The Iewes did know that the Scriptures did speake vnto them but not of them they might flatter themselues as though such things were vttered against the Gentiles and therefore as Augustine saith in Iudaeis confringenda erat superbia c. the Iewes pride was to be taken downe exposit epist. ad Galat. and both these may very well stand together that an obiection of the Iewes is met withall and a reason also shewed that the law which condemned them could not iustifie them 6. But the Psalme whence the Apostle alleadgeth his first words toucheth those which said there is no god Psal. 14.1 but so did not the Iewes Hierome answereth they did confesse God with their mouth sed factis negabant but denied him in their works 23. Quest. How no flesh is iustified by the workes of the law v. 20. 1. By the works of the law in that he decreeth iustification to the very workes not to the persons or workers onely it is euident that the places before alleadged as v. 10. there is none righteous no not one are to be vnderstood generally of all and not of the most although some should be excluded that did some good workes either among the Iewes or Gentiles for euen the workes of the law which they did were not able to iustifie them Melancthon 2. By the workes are not here vnderstood those quae praecipiuntur which are commanded and required by the law for if a man could performe those works he should finde life thereby but such quae praestantur which are performed of men Beza either before grace which can not iustifie because they can not be good or acceptable to God without faith or in the state of grace which can not iustifie neither because they are imperfect Pareus 3. By the law here he vnderstandeth both the natural whereby the Gentiles were conuinced and the written law giuen to the Hebrewes for the Apostle disputeth generally against both the Gentiles and Hebrewes proouing them both to be transgressors of the law and so not able to be iustified thereby Pareus and by the works of the law are vnderstood not onely the ceremonials and iudicials as the ordinarie gloss but the morall works which the Gentiles did by the light of nature for otherwise the Iewes onely should be excluded whereas the disputation of the Apostle is generall both against Iewes and Gentiles Pareusâ— Tolet. 4. The word flesh is diuersly taken in Scripture it signifieth the humane nature of man as Ioh. 1.6 the word was made flesh or the corruptible and mortall state of man as wheâ— the Apostle saith flesh and blood can not inherit the kingdome of God or the sinfull state and condition of man in which sense it is saide they that are in the flesh can not please God in which sense Origen would haue it taken here that they which are carnall not spirituall aâ—â— denied iustification by works but in this sense the meaning of the Apostle should be much peruerted who generally affirmeth that there is no iustification for any by the works of the law but by faith but yet the Apostle vseth this word flesh to put man in minde of his fresh condition and state beeing not apt of it selfe to bring forth
prepared for you for when I was hungred ye gaue me meate he sheweth not the cause of their saluation but the condition state qualitie of those which should be saued to this purpose Faius see further before c. 1. quest 26. and controv 7. Quest. 25. How by the lawe came the knowledge of sinne 1. The Apostle here confirmeth that which he said before that none are iustified by the workes of the lawe by the contrarie vse of the lawe because thereby commeth the knowledge of sinne therefore iustice and righteousnesse is not attained thereby 2. The lawe Origen vnderstandeth of the lawe of nature Augustine onely of the morall lawe lib. de spirit liter c. 8. but indeed the lawe is vnderstood here in generall both the naturall for euen before the lawe written by the lawe of nature Abimelech knew that adulterie was sinne Genes 20. but the morall more by the which came a more full knowledge of sinne likewise by the ceremoniall and iudiciall lawe sinne was manifested but after a diuerse manner ex accidente accidentally because the one was appointed in expiationem for the expiation the other in poenam for the punishment of sinne Tolet. annot 14. 3. Now diuerse wayes doth the written lawe whereof the Apostle specially speaketh reueale sinne 1. Ambrose sheweth that before the law written there was some knowledge of sinne as he giueth instance in Ioseph who detested the sinne of adulterie to the which his mistresse enticed him but it is so said quia lex ostendit peccata non impune futura because the lawe sheweth that sinnes shall not goe vnpunished so also Theodulus 2. and by the written lawe peccata clarius fuerunt cognita sinnes were more euidently knowne and some were knowne to be sinnes that were not so taken before leviora quaque non cognoscebantur esse peccata the smaller sinnes were not knowne as concupiscence Hierome as the Apostle saith he had not knowne lust vnlesse the law had said thou shalt not lust quaedam etiam grauiora c. and some things by the lawe were knowne to be greater then before gloss ordinar 3. Oecumenius thus expoundeth because sinne was encreased by the knowledge of the lawe for he that sinneth wittingly is so much the more a grieuous offender 4. And before the lawe written sinne was knowne as beeing against reason but by the law it is discerned as beeing against the will of God and so the nature and qualitie of sinne is more fully and perfectly knowne by the lawe Perer. 5. and euen the knowledge of sinne before the lawe written did issue out of the grounds and principles of the morall lawe which were imprinted by nature in the minde Faius 4. But whereas the lawe sheweth as well what things are honest and vertuous as it discouereth sinne the Apostle onely toucheth that vse of the lawe which is to reueale sinne both because it was more pertinent to his purpose which was to shewe that there is no iustification by the lawe because thereby we haue the knowledge of sinne and for that men are more prone vnto the things forbidden in the lawe then to the duties commanded so that the lawe doth not so much teach our dutie to God and our neighbour as that we doe not performe that which is our dutie Beza 5. Now further whereas the Apostle saith by the lawe commeth the knowledge of sinne we must supply the word onely not that the lawe doth nothing else but reueale sinne for it iudgeth and condemneth sinne likewise but here the opposition is between the knowledge of sinne and the remission thereof the lawe onely giueth the one the agnition or knowledge of sinne not the remission Perer. by the lawe is cognitio peccati non consumptio the knowledge of sinne not the consumption of sinne gloss 6. But it will be obiected that in Leuiticus there are oblations prescribed for sinne and the Priest was to pray for such as had sinned and it should be forgiuen them Gorrhan answeareth that it was onely a legall remission quoad poenam non quoad culpam onely concerning the punishment of the lawe not of the fault But Lyranus answeareth better that such sacrifice for sinne was protestatio Christi passuri a protestation or profession of Christ which was to suffer so that such remission of sinnes though it were vnder the lawe yet was not by vertue and force of the lawe but by faith in Christ for the sinnes of the offerers were forgiuen at the prayers of the Priests which could not be heard if they were not of faith 7. It will here be further obiected that the politike and ciuill lawes of Princes intend more then the shewing of sinne they also doe helpe to reforme sinne and reclaime men from it therefore Gods lawe should doe more then manifest sinne Answ. 1. Humane lawes doe onely require an externall ciuill iustice but the lawe of God discouereth the corruption of the heart so that herein there is great difference betweene them Melancth 2. Humane lawes may by proposing of rewards and punishments helpe to perswade and induce men but they cannot instill or infuse obedience into the heart 3. God also intendeth more then the reuealing of sinne by his lawe for if any could keepe it they should liue thereby which while none is able to doe yet the law beside the discouering of sinne ferueth as a Schoolmaster to bring vs to Christ so that it is thorough mans owne infirmitie that the lawe giueth not life and it sheweth Gods power and wisedome that turneth the lawe vnto our good namely to bring vs vnto Christ which by our infirmitie is become vnto vs the minister of death 8. So then there are two other speciall vses and benefits of the lawe beside the reuealing of sinne the one that concerning faith it is a Schoolmaster to bring vs to Christ and touching manners and life it sheweth vs the way wherein we should walke Mars 9. There is a double knowledge of sinne by the lawe there is one which is weake and vnprofitable which neither thoroughly terrifieth the conscience nor reformeth the life such was the knowledge which the heathen had of sinne as the poets in their satyricall verses did set forth the sinnes of their times but themselues followed them there is an other effectuall knowledge of the lawe whereby the soule is humbled and this is of two sorts when such as is ioyned onely with terror of conscience without any hope such was the knowledge of sinne which Cain and Iudas had that betrayed Christ or it hath beside some liuely hope and comfort such was Dauids agnition and confession of his sinne But this comfort is no worke of the lawe it is wrought in vs by the spirit of grace Martyr Quest. 26. Of the meaning of these words The righteousnesse of God is made manifests without the lawe 1. Ambrose by the iustice of God vnderstandeth that iustice wherewith God is iust â—estans promissa sua in keeping his promises Origen
taketh this iustice to be Christ rather it signifieth the iustice or righteousnesse which is by faith to Christ so called both because of the efficient cause thereof namely God who worketh it in vs and in regard of the effect because it onely is able to stand before God Calvin 2. Without the Lawe 1. Origen here vnderstandeth the lawe of nature and giueth thiâ— exposition ad iustitiam Dei cognoscendam nihil opitulabatur lex naturae the law of nature did helpe nothing at all to the knowledge of the iustice of God but it was manifested by the written lawe of Moses but the Apostle excludeth not here the written lawe for them it were no consequent speach vnto the former where the Apostle denied iustification vnto all workes of the lawe in generall the same lawe then must be here vnderstood which he treated before that is generally both the naturall and written law 2. Augustine ioyneth this word without the lawe not vnto manifested but vnto righteousnesse so the righteousnesse without the lawe he expoundeth sine adminiculo legis without the helpe of the law lib. de spirit liter c. 9. but this sense first Beza confuteth by the order and placing of the words which stand thus without the lawe is righteousnesse made manifest not righteousnes without the lawe as S. Iames saith faith without works is dead not without works faith is dead for in this transposing of the words the sense is much altered Tolet addeth this reason that righteousnesse without the lawe that is the workes of the lawe was knowne euen vnto the faithfull vnder the lawe therefore the words without the lawe must be ioyned rather vnto manifested then to righteousnesse 3. But yet Tolet is here deceiued for he thus interpreteth absque lege without the lawe that is cossante lege the lawe ceasing and beeing abrogate the Euangelicall faith was manifested for although the workes of the morall law are commanded in the Gospel yet they bind not by reason of the legall bond or obligation but by vertue and force of newe institution thereof by Christ But our Sauiour faith directly that he came not to destroy the lawe and the Prophets Matth. 5.17 but if the morall lawe were first abrogated though it were againe reuiued by Christ it must first be dissolued 4. Ambrose well referreth without the lawe to manifested but he seemeth to restraine it to the lawe of ceremonies sine lege apparuit sed sine lege sabbati circumcisionis it appeared without the lawe but without the lawe of the Sabboth and circumcision and newe Moone c. But in all this disputation the Apostle chiefely entreateth of the morall lawe by the which specially came the knowledge of sinne 5. some referre this to the manifestation of the Gospel by the preaching of the Apostles when the Gentiles were called which had no knowledge of the lawe Mart. and many also among the Iewes which though they had not the lawe yet cared not for it as they say Ioh. 7.48 Doth any of the rulers or Pharisies beleeue in him but this people which knoweth not the lawe Gorrhan â—â— they vnderstand without the lawe that is without the knowledge of the lawe But the Apostle speaketh of that iustice which was manifested both to the Gentiles and the Iewes which had yet the knowledge of the lawe 6. Gryneus whereas the Apostle saith first that righteousnesse is reuealed without the lawe and yet immediately after he saith hauing witnesse of the law and the Prophets would reconcile them thus vnderstanding lawe in the first place of the letter of the lawe which doth not set forth the iustice of God by faith and in the other place the spirituall sense of the lawe 7. But the meaning rather of the Apostle is this that it is not the office of the lawe to teach faith and that beside the lawe there is an other doctrine in the Church concerning faith which doctrine of saluation and iustice by faith neither the naturall nor morall lawe can teach and though in the time of the lawe this doctrine of faith was taught the faithfull yet the knowledge thereof came not by the lawe And for the full reconciling here of the Apostle to himselfe three things are to be considered 1. that in the first place the lawe is vnderstood strictly for the doctrine of the morall lawe whether written or naturall which doth not properly teach faith in Christ afterward the lawe is taken for the bookâ— of Moses wherein many Euangelicall promises are contained beside the legall precepâ—â— Beza annot â—2 The lawe doth properly vrge workes it doth not professedly teach faith and yet it excludeth it not Pareus but accidentally it bringeth vs to Christ as forcing vs when we see our disease to seeke for a remedie 3. this doctrine of faith was manifested without the lawe that is more clearely taught and preached at the comming of Christ yet it was knowne vnto Moses and the Prophets though more obscurely for in that it is said to be manifested nor made or created it sheweth that it was before though not so manifest Perer. disput â—0 Faius So then those words but now doe both note the diuersitie of time and they are aduersatiue particulars shewing that our iustice is not reuealed in the lawe but otherwise and els where Quest. 27. How the righteousnesse of faith had witnesse of the lawe and the Prophets Fowre wayes are the law and Prophets found to beare witnesse and testimonie vnto the Gospell of faith 1. by the euident prophesies of Christ as our blessed Sauiour saith Ioh. 5.46 Moses wrote of me and S. Paul said before c. 2. Which he had promised before by his Prophets in the holy Scriptures and S. Peter saith Act. 10.43 To him also giue all the Prophets witnesse such euident testimonies out of the lawe and Prophets are these which are cited by the Apostles as that Rom. 10.6 The righteousnesse of faith speaketh on this wise say not in thy heart who shall ascend into heauen that is to bring Christ from aboue c. so the Apostle citeth an euident testimonie out of the 31. of Ieremie Hebr. 8.8 how the Lord would make a newe testament with the house of Iuda and many such testimonies in the newe Testament are taken out of the old 2. A second kind of testimonie were the types and figures which went before in the old Testament as the Paschal lambe the Manna the rocke the cloud did shadow forth Christ likewise some acts of the Patriarkes and Prophets did prefigure out Christ as Abrahams sacrificing of Isaac Salomons building of the Temple Ionas beeing in the bellie of the whale with such like 3. The sacrifices and oblations and the blood of rammes and goates did signifie the vnspotted lambe of God that should be slaine for the sinnes of the world Mart. 4. The lawe also by the effect thereof did beare witnesse vnto Christ as Augustine saith lex hoc ipso quod iubendo minando
onely contained the precept of works but gaue no power or grace to doe them as Tolet. annot 27. for neither doth the Gospel giue power by fulfilling of the law to attaine vnto saluation but it is called the law of works because it required works and keeping of the law vnto saluation for the Gospel also commandeth works but not with condition thereby to be saued it is called the law of faith because it requireth onely the condition of faith vnto saluation it saith beleeue and thou shalt be saued Faius And whereas it will be obiected that diuers had faith vnder the law the answer is that they had it not by the law but by the spirit of grace giuen vnto them Faius 7. And whereas the Apostle had said before v. 20. by the law commeth the knowledge of sinne it seemeth that euen reioycing is excluded by the law of works also which the Apostle denieth seeing the law doth not helpe to iustifie but condemneth But we must consider that here the Apostle speaketh of the law of works not in respect of our weaknes that are not able to keepe it but in regard of the institution thereof which promiseth life and saluation to those that keepe and obserue it Calvin the next verse beeing the 28. see handled at large with the questions thereout arising among the controv contr 14. to contr 22. 38. Quest. Of the difference betweene these two phrases of faith through faith v. 30. Whereas the Apostle saith it is one God which shall iustifie the circumcision of faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the vncircumcision 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through faith this difference of phrase is diuersly scanned 1. Origen thinketh the Iewes here called the circumcision to be said to be iustified of faith because initio ex fide sumpto c. they beginning of faith are perfected by the fulfilling of workes and the vncircumcised Gentiles are saide to be iustified through faith quia a bonis operibus exorsi because beginning with good workes they are perfected by faith But Origen is herein both contrarie to the Apostle who concluded that a man is iustified by faith onely without the workes of the law and to himselfe who had said a little before fidem solam sufficere ad salutem that faith onely sufficeth to saluation 2. Gorrhan sheweth a more reasonable difference that the Iewes are said to be iustified of faith the Gentiles through faith because vnto the Iewes faith is both terminus à quo adquem the terme where they begun their iustification and where they ende but in the Gentiles it is onely terminus ad quem the terme vnto the which they tend and where they ende and Calvin seemeth to say as much in effect that the Iewes nascuntur gratia haeredes are borne as it were the heires of grace but to the Gentiles it is adventitium foedus a couenant happening vnto them otherwise But in this sense of faith should be ioyned to circumcision not to iustified and if the Iewes were of faith then they needed not to be iustified againe through faith 3. Faius hath the like conceit that by the circumcised of faith the Apostle meaneth the beleeuing Iewes which are said to be of the faith and so he would haue this particle againe repeated that the vncircumcision of faith are both iustified through faith but then the sentence should be very imperfect and of faith must be ioyned to iustifie as appeareth v. 28. 4. Tolet thinketh that although sometime these prepositions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of and through signifie the same thing yet here the Apostle giuing the one to the Iewes and the other to the Gentiles seemeth to make some difference betweene them least he should seeme to confound the Iewes and Gentiles together Tol. annot 28. But the Apostle in this matter of iustification maketh both Iewes and Gentiles equall how soeuer he otherwise denieth not vnto the Iewes their prerogatiues 5. Wherefore in this place it seemeth rather that the Apostle meaneth the same thing to iustifie of faith and through faith and by faith v. 28. as the Apostle saith c. 11.36 of him and through him are all things not insinuating by this diuersity of phrase any different thing in God and further as the circumcised Iewes are here said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the faith so are the Gentiles Gal. 4.7 Thus much therefore the Apostle signifieth that as there is no difference betweene these two to be iustified of faith and through faith so neither in this behalfe is there any difference betweene the iustification of the Iew and Gentiles Calvin 6. Peter Martyr noteth here how the Grecians standing vpon the curious and nice distinction of these two prepositions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if and per through dissented from the Latine Church about the proceeding of the holy Ghost they would haue the spirit to proceed ex patre per filium of the Father by and through the Sonne but the other to take away this difference affirmed that he proceeded ex patre ex filio both of the Father and of the Sonne 39. Quest. How the law is established by the doctrine of faith 1. Origen and Theodoret thinke that the law is established by faith because the law did write of Christ and commanded to beleeue in him as Deut. 18. A Prophet shall the Lord God raise from among your brethren like vnto me c. But the Euangelicall promises contained in the old Testament belong rather vnto the Gospel then the Law 2. Ambrose vnderstandeth it of the performing and fulfilling of the ceremonies mystica ceremoniala spiritualiter implentur the mysticall ceremonies of the law are spiritually fulfilled gloss ordinar to the same purpose Hierome the law is established when it appeareth that one Testament succeeded an other one circumcision an other and spirituall things succeed carnall c. But it is euident that the Apostle specially meaneth the morall law by the which commeth the knowledge of sinne v. 20. 3. Chrysostome giueth this sense quia fides voluntatem legis statuit because faith establisheth the will and intent of the law for the intendment of the law was to iustifie men by the works thereof now that which the law could not doe faith effecteth But in this point of iustification faith rather is contrarie to the law for the one requireth the condition of works the other onely of beleeuing 4. Beza and Pareus in these two points will haue the law established first because Christ satisfied the punishment of the law in dying for our sinnes according to the sentence of the law thou shalt die the death and in that Christ by his perfect obedience hath fulfiller the law But it seemeth that the Apostle speaketh in generall of the establishing of the law in all the members of Christ and not in Christ their head onely 5. Therefore in these two things rather is the law established because by it
those which beleeue vnto vnbeleeuers therefore they doe not appertaine Pareus But it will be further obiected that the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 11.27 that he which eateth and drinketh vnworthily shall be guilty of the bodie and blood of Christ but they could not be guilty vnlesse they were partakers Answ. It doth not followe one may be guiltie of a thing which he is not partaker of as many may be guilty of violating the princely maiestie which had no interest therein neither were partakers thereof so then the wicked and vnbeleeuers are guilty non manducati sed non dâ—â—dicati corporis c. not of the eating but of not discerning the Lords bodie Gryneus Controv. 4. That the Romane Church hath not the promise of the perpetuall presence of Gods spirit The Romanists alleadge this place for themselues that the vnbeleefe of some make not the promises of God of no effect and therefore seeing the Lord hath promised to be present with and to giue his spirit to his Church they cannot faile thereof notwithstanding their sinnes and corruptions Answ. Christ promised the presence of his spirit to his disciples they must then first prooue themselues to be the disciples of Christ in following his doctrine and keeping his word in adding nothing thereto nor decreeing any thing against it before they can haue any interest in this promise God indeede hath promised to be present with his Church but a companie of mitred Bishops following humane traditions and leauing the word of God doe not make the true Church of Christ Martyr Controv. 5. The Virgin Marie not exempted from sinne v. 10. There is none that is righteous no not one Chrysostome handling these words in his commentarie vpon the 13. Psalme giueth instance how that when Christ was crucified this saying was then most of all verified that there was not one that did good discipuli omnes fugerunt c. all the disciples fledde Iohn went away Peter denied Mariae animam gladius dubitationis incredulitatis pervasit and a sword of doubtfulnesse and vnbeleefe did pierce the soule of Marie c. the like is affirmed by Chrysostome hom 49. in Genes and by Origen hom 17. in Luc. and by Augustine lib. question veter nov Testam qu. 73. But Pererius refusing the iudgement of these fathers confidently affirmeth that the Virgin Marie fuisse expertem omnis peccati etiam minimi levissimi per omnem vitam was free from the least and lightest sinne all her life and of Chrysostome he is bold to say veritatis pietatis terminos excessisse that he exceeded the bounds of veritie and pietie Perer. 〈◊〉 6. numer 33. Contra. But Pererius in thus affirming will make not Chrysostome onely and other ancient writers liers but Christ himselfe and his blessed mother for if Mary were without the least sinne why did our Blessed Saviour reprooue her for taking so much vpon her saying Iohn 2.4 Woman what haue I to doe with thee would he checke her without any fault and againe Marie her selfe saith in her song Luk. 2.47 My spirit reioyceth in God my Sauiour what needed she a Sauiour if she were free from sinne see further hereof Synops. Centur. 2 â—â—â— 79. Controv. 6. The reading of Scripture is not to be denied vnto any v. 10. As it is written c. in that the Apostle alleadgeth testimonies of Scripture to prooue all men to be sinners thereupon appeareth the necessitie of the reading of Scripture 〈◊〉 of the generall vse for all both laymen and others for by the Scriptures commeth the knowledge of sinne which concerneth all Chrysostome in his homilie of Lazarus and the rich man exhorteth all men to reade the Scriptures euen such as did trade in the world and kept families further shewing that they could not attaine vnto saluation vnlesse both day and night they were conuersant in the Scriptures yea he affirmeth that such of the common sort had more neede to reade the Scriptures then men of more holy life quod perpetus versantur in maiori discrimine because they are conversant in greater danger Here then that corrupt vsage of the Romane Church is to be taxed who denie the generall vse of the Scriptures vnto the people neither doe permit them to reade them shutting the Scriptures vp in an vnknowne language Martyr Controv. 7. Against the adversaries of the Lawe the Marcionites and other heretikes v. 20. By the lawe commeth the knowledge of sinne hereupon those wicked heretikes tooke occasion to speake against the lawe malaradix lex c. the law then is an euill root and an euill tree by the which commeth the knowledge of sinne to this Origen vpon this place answeareth well non dexit ex lege agnitio peccati sed per legem vt scias non ex ipsa â—tum sed per ipsam cognitum he saith not of the lawe is the knowlede of sinne but by the lawe to knowe that sinne did not spring of it but is onely knowne by it As physicke by the which we come to haue the knowledge of our diseases is not therefore euill thus Origen Controv. 8. Against the Counsels of perfection v. 19. That euerie mouth may be stopped c. here the opinion of the Romanists is euidently conuinced that beside the precepts which are commanded there are Euangelicall counsels which are more then one is bound to doe notwithstanding he that doth them is worthie of a greater reward such are these counsels of perfection as they call them â—â— vowe single life to giue all to the poore and to take vpon them voluntarie pouertie and such like and Origen hath the like conceit who in his commentarie vpon this third chapter giueth this corrupt glosse vpon these words of our Sauiour Luk. 17.10 When ye haue done all these things which are commanded you say we are vnprofitable seruants as long as a man saith he doth that which he is bound to doe he is an vnprofitable seruant si aâ—â—m addas aliquid praeceptis iam non eris invtilis servus but if you adde any thing to the precepts then are you no longer an vnprofitable seruant Contra. 1. Concerning Origens glosse we haue as great libertie to refuse it as Pererius had before to reiect Chrysostomes opinion concerning the Virgin Marie and to accuse him of falshood and impietie especially seeing that his glosse corrupteth the text for if we cannot doe those things which are commanded much lesse beside the commandement can any doe more then is required 2. the Apostle here in saying That euerie mouth may be â—â—ped ouerthroweth this arrogant and presumptuous opinion of such counsels of perfection for then a man should haue wherein to reioyce if he could doe more then is commanded and his mouth would not be stopped Controv. 9. Against the Pelagians which established freewill Augustine c. 9. lib. de spirit liter handling these words confuseth that presumptuous error of the Pelagians who affirme that the lawe onely sheweth what should be
truely redeemed vs by his blood which first appeareth both by euidēt testimonies of Scripture as Mark. 10.45 The Sonne of man came to giue his life a ransome for many Coloss. 1.14 In whom we haue redemption thorough his blood 1. Tim. 2.6 Who gaue himselfe a ransome for all men Apocal. 5.9 Thou hast redeemed vs vnto God by thy blood secondly all the parts requisite in redemption doe here concurre together 1. there must be captiues that are we 2. one to redeeme which is Christ. 3. a ransome must be paid that is Christs blood 4. and one to whom it must be paied that is God see further hereof in Pareus 〈◊〉 10. Controv. 23. That Christ truely reconciled vs by his blood against an other blasphemous assertion of Socinus v. 25. To be a reconciliation thorough faith in his blood against this Socinus obiecteth that Christ was no otherwise a reconciliation then the couer of the Arke in the old testament was called the propitiatorie not that thereby God was reconciled but that God shewed himselfe therein reconciled and appeased toward his people So also the sacrifices of the lawe are said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a reconciliation yet there was no satisfaction made vnto God by them to this purpose that impious Socinus part 2. c. 2. pag. 81.82 as he is cited by Pareus dub 11. Contra. 1. It is false that the Arke and sacrifices of the old Testament did reconcile as Christ hath reconciled vs for there is great difference betweene dumbe and senselesse ceremonies the blood of beasts and the most holy and liuely blood of Christ. 2. the Arke and the sacrifices though in themselues and their owne vertue they did not reconcile vnto God yet typically and sacramentally they did reconcile as beeing types and figures of the true reconciliation by Christ. 3. And that Christ was verily and properly our reconciler vnto God appeareth in that the Apostle addeth in his blood which he offred vp to God his father which to what ende was it so offred vp but to be a reconciliation thus much of the controversall questions out of this chapter 6. Morall observations v. 3. Shall their vnbeleefe make the faith of God of none effect c. Origen hereupon hath this note infidelitas eorum qui vel non accedunt ad fidem c. their vnbeleefe which either come not to the faith or fall away from it when they laugh vs to scorne in our fasting almes deeds and other workes of faith fidem quae in nobis est non evacuant doe not euacuate or make voide the faith in vs our faith and pietie is not hindred by other mans incredulitie and prophanenesse And in that the Apostle doth here preuent the cauills and obiections of the Iewes it teacheth that the minister of Gods word should so set forth the doctrine of the truth whether in Church or Schooles as that he may meet with all contrarie obiections made against the truth both to satisfie the mindes of them that are desirous to learne to deliver them from all scruple and doubting and to stoppe the mouth of gainesayers Pareus in v. 1. v. 4. Yea let God be true Seeing God is alwaies found true of his promise but men are liars and deceitfull we are taught that in all our trialls and tentations we should certainly ground vpon the promises of God and not be carried away or swayed by the promises or threats of men to let goe our confidence in Gods promises as Dauid in all his afflictions when he was chased vp and downe and persecuted of Saul staied himselfe vpon the truth of Gods promises v. 4. That thou mightest be iustified When as God doth correct vs his children for our sinnes or otherwise exerciseth his iudgements in the world we should not seeme to accuse God or murmure against him but confesse God in all his works and iudgements to be iust and our selues to be sinners as Dan. 9.8 to vs appertaineth open shame c. yet compassion and forgiuenesse is in the Lord. v. 3. What though some did not beleeue As the Oracles of God committed to the Iewes yet were not in vaine though some beleeued not so the Minister of Gods word must not be discouraged and giue ouer his calling because he seeth in some his labour to take small effect Martyr for euen our Blessed Sauiour in that his most heauenly sermon of the eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood was forsaken and left of many of his hearers yet many of his disciples went away in so much that he said vnto the twelue Will ye also goe away Ioh. 6.67 v. 9. Are we more excellent The Apostle that his reprehension might appeare more easie and tolerable ioyneth himselfe in the companie and maketh himselfe one of the number and indeed he was a part and member of Israel So the Prophets doe often ioyne thereselues with the rest of the people as partaking with their sinnes as Dan. 9.5 We haue sinned and committed iniquitie for like as the praise and commendation of the good and vertuous extendeth it selfe vnto all the congregation wherein there are notwithstanding some carnall men and hypocrites so the sinnes of the congregation doe euen touch and some way defile the godly because that they liuing among the wicked might offend in their connivence in not reproouing the sinnes of others as they ought or in not giuing themselues such good example of life as they should or some other kind of way might be touched v. 21. By the Lawe commeth the knowledge of sinne Then is the lawe first to be preached to make men to knowe themselues and to acknowledge their sinnes this was the course that Iohn Baptist tooke to preach repentance to the people and to bring them to confesse their sinnes and so to prepare a way for the Gospell of Christ for like as a wound cannot well be cured vnlesse first it be searched to the bottome so the heart must first be humbled before it can be truely capable of the comforts of the Gospel v. 31. Doe we then make the Lawe of God of none effect c. As the adversaries in S. Pauls time blamed his doctrine concerning iustification by faith onely as an enemie to the Lawe and good workes whereas the Apostle alwaies ioyneth sanctification with iustification workes with faith though he exclude workes in the act it selfe of our iustification So the aduersaries of the grace of God in these dayes the Papists and Romanists doe slaunder the doctrine of the Gospel which vrgeth iustification by faith onely as though it should beate downe and hinder the exercise of good workes But we say with the Apostle that by this doctrine of onely faith we doe not destroy the law but indeed establish it in as much as we hold faith without workes to be a dead and fruitlesse faith we do not separate work from faith though we exclude them from iustification faith which
it followeth v. 14. and againe it is too great bouldnesse to insert the word dead for thus we may make any sense of the Scripture 3. Wherefore the Apostles meaning is that from Adam vntill the lawe was giuen for of the time after the lawe there could be no question there was sinne in the world for though they had not the written lawe yet they had the lawe of nature in transgressing the which they sinned Lyran. Beza Mart. Quest. 27. What sinne the Apostle meaneth which was in the world vnto the time of the lawe 1. Some doe vnderstand it onely of actuall sinne which was in the world in that the lawe of nature was transgressed though yet there were no written lawe giuen Tolet but it is euident in that the Apostle maketh direct mention of infants v. 14. which sinned not as Adam did that is actually that he meaneth originall sinne also 2. Pererius onely referreth it to originall sinne which though it were knowne vnto the Patriarkes yet it was not by the lawe of nature acknowledged for sinne so also Anselme Tolet replyeth that it cannot be so taken for neither vnder the law is originall sinne imputed vnto punishment But this reason is not sufficient for both before and after the lawe death raigned ouer all as brought in by originall sinne 3. But it is more agreeable to the Apostles minde to vnderstand sinne here generally both originall and actuall yet with speciall relation to originall sinne because the Apostles intendment is to shewe that all are sinners in Adam and so subiect vnto death and this appeareth to be the Apostles meaning v. 14. where he speaketh of the raigning of death ouer all as well those which committed actuall sinne as those which did not Thus Haymo interpreteth sinne was in the world originale actuale both originall and actuall Augustine likewise and Theodoret in the exposition of this place comprehend both so also Beza Pareus Quest. 28. How sinne is said to be imputed where there is no lawe ver 13. 1. Chrysostome here reporteth the opinion of some that make this a part of the obiection but he refuseth it and Tolet addeth this reason further because men doe not vse to obiect but that hath some shewe of probabilitie now none could doubt whether there were sinne in the world before the lawe for that was euident and apparant to all these words then the Apostle vttereth in his owne person 2. Oecumenius thinketh that the Apostle speaketh of the imputation of such sinnes as were against the ceremoniall lawe of Moses as touching circumcision sanctifying of the Sabboth and such like for other sinnes before the lawe of Moses were both knowne and imputed as is euident in the examples of Cain Lamech the Sodomites which were punished for their sinnes But the Apostle directly speaketh of such sinnes as were in the world before the lawe now the breach of ceremonies commanded by the lawe was counted no transgression before the lawe 3. Some by the imputation of sinne vnderstand the account made of sinne and take imputation for reputation as the Syrian interpreter and Beza in his last edition non putatur esse peccatum it is not thought to be sinne which is referred vnto the iudgement and opinion of men before the lawe came they had no perfect knowledge of sinne obscurum tum erat naturae lumen the light of nature was so obscure that men did not see their sinnes Mart. so also Osâ—ander non reputabatur it was not reputed sinne also Melancthon vbi non est lex non agnoscitur non accusatur c. where no lawe is sinne is not acknowledged accused to the same purpose M. Calvin though euen before the lawe their consciences accused them and there were diuerse examples of Gods iudgements vt plurimum tamen ad sua scelera connivebant yet for the most part they did winke at their sinnes c. Thus before them Augustine vnderstandeth it of the knowledge of sinne because per legem cognitio peccati by the lawe commeth the knowledge of sinne lib. 1. de peccat merit c. 10. and Oecumenius also to the same purpose taketh it comparatiuely magnitudo peccati non erat ita cognita c. the greatnesse of sinne was not knowne so before the lawe as afterward by the law and Haymo so expoundeth peccatum non agnoscebatur tam graue malum esse sinne was not knowne to be so great euill to the same purpose Lyranus Hug. Card. But these expositions seeme not to be agreeable to the scope of the Apostle for to what purpose should the Apostle vse this qualification sinne was in the world though it were not imputed and taken to be sinne before the law came for the Apostle doth not here intend to shew the effects or propertie of the law but his purpose is to prooue that men before the law came were punished with death euen because of their originall sinne 4. Origen taketh the imputation of sinne for the reputation but he followeth his former sense vnderstanding the law of nature that in children while yet they haue no vse of reason and so no knowledge of the law of nature that which they doe is not counted sinne But the Apostle euidently sheweth in the next verse speaking of Moses that he meaneth here the written law of Moses Origen fortifieth his opinion that the Apostle here meaneth the law of nature because if it be vnderstood of any other law diabolus angeli eius videdutur absolvi the Deuill and his angels may seeme to be absolved because they had no other law then the law of nature Contra. The Apostle speaketh not of the sinne of Angels but of men propagated from Adam whome he prooueth all to be sinners in Adam because they die in Adam but in the spirits there is neither propagation nor mortalitie 5. Ambrose referreth this imputation of sinne vnto the opinion which men had of God whom they thought not to regard nor punish the sinnes of men But the contrarie is euident in Pharaoh and Abimelech who knewe that they were punished for keeping Sarah Abrahams wife 6. Anselme and Pererius doe vnderstand this to be spoken onely of originall sinne that it was not acknowledged to be sinne before Moses lawe came by the light of nature though to the Patriarkes and holy men it were knowne But the contrarie is prooued by the Apostle that originall sinne was imputed to men euen before the law was giuen because death raigned ouer all euen ouer children so farre is he from saying that originall sinne was not imputed for where death was inflicted for sinne there sinne was imputed 7. This word of imputing of sinne is taken two wayes it signifieth either to haue the fault imputed or the punishment but here the latter rather to impute sinne is adiudicare 〈◊〉 reum to adiudge the guiltie person worthie of punishment in this sense is the word taken 2. Tim. 4.16 All haue forsaken me I pray God it be
it entred in by the way as though it had entred in secretly so also Erasmus and Gorrhan giueth the reason because it was giuen but vnto one people and secretly in the desert but the lawe beeing so publikely deliuered in such great power and signes could not be said secretly to enter 2. Origen giueth this sense that the lawe of the members entred sub obtentu legis naturalis vnder the pretext and colour of the lawe of nature it entred as it were by stealth but the Apostle speaketh not here of the lawe of nature as is shewed before 3. Chrysostome whom Tolet followeth thus interpreteth the lawe is said to haue entred by the way vt ostenderet vsum illius temporarium to shewe that the vse thereof was but for a time but this is a perpetuall vse of the lawe to manifest and reueale sinne though indeed the vse of the ceremoniall lawe were but to continue for a time 4. Some thinke the lawe is said to haue entred as vnder hand post effuscationem 〈◊〉 naturalis after the lawe of nature was obscured so Ambrose Lyran. but though the lawe of nature had not beene obscured yet the written lawe should haue beene giuen by 〈◊〉 which men should haue beene prepared to receiue the Gospell Tolet. annot 26. therefore it is said to haue entred thereto or thereupon that is beside that naturall corruption and depriuation of nature in Adam the lawe also was giuen accessit ad morbum illium it came vpon or was added vnto that naturall disease that sinne thereby beeing more encreased might more commend the riches of Gods mercie in Christ Beza Pareus Quest. 42. How the offence is said to haue abounded by the entring of the lawe ver 20. The lawe is to be considered three wayes in respect of the nature thereof in respect of man to whom it is giuen and of God the author and giuer of the lawe 1. The lawe beeing considered in it selfe it holy spirituall and good and so properly is not the cause of the encrease of sinne but onely in respect of the euent as Chrysostome Gennadius and most of the Greeke interpreters expound it the lawe then causeth sinne to encrease non causaliter sed consecutiue not as the cause but in regard of the euent or consequent and that not ex parte legis on the behalfe of the lawe but by the malice of mans heart Lyran non ex â—â—tura legis not by the nature of the lawe but by the slougth and carelesnesse of them which receiue the lawe Chrysost. and sinne is thus occasionally encreased sower wayes 1. because ruimur in vetitum c. we alwaies rush vpon that which is forbidden like as a riuer meeting with some stone or let in the way maketh the greater noise whereof these reasons may be giuen first because things forbidden are not in our power and therefore our desire is more toward them whereas we neglect things easie and such as we can do when we list secondly the nature of humane affections is the more they are suppressed and kept in the more to be inflamed as fide when it is kept in breaketh out more violently this is vsually seene in the passions of anger and griefe Perer. numer 78. Adde hereunto the peruersenesse of mans will which is opposite to the will of God and most of all is bent to follow those things which the Lord forbiddeth 2. Sinne is increased by the lawe because he sinneth more that knoweth the will of God and doth it not then he that is ignorant of it 3. by the lawe which containeth varietie of precepts the number of sinnes is multiplyed innumera praecepta lex dedit the law gaue a number of precepts Chrysostom 4. the lawe terrifieth the conscience and so accuseth and condemneth and sheweth punishment due vnto sinne and so exaggerateth it Mart. 2. If the lawe be considered in regard of the effect which it worketh in the hearts of men then this particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that may be taken causally because by the lawe properly sinne is manifested and reuealed as the Apostle sheweth Rom. 3.20 that by the lawe commeth the knowledge of sinne Perer. 3. If we turne our selues to God the author of the lawe then in respect of his counsell the lawe may be vnderstood causally to encrease sinne in regard of a further ende which God propoundeth to himselfe namely that by the abounding of sinne grace may yet more abound Martyr so the ordinarie glosse hath here this profitable note Magnum Deiconsilium fuit c. it was the great and deepe counsell of God that by the lawe sinne should abound that men in seueritie and austeritie of the lawe seeing their owne infirmitie infirmi ad â—â—dicum confugerent c. beeing weake should runne vnto the Physitian and seeke for the helpe of grace c. Quest. 43. How grace is said to haue abounded more 1. Athanasius referreth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vbi where to the nature of man that in the same nature grace abounded by the comming of Christ in the flesh where sinne abounded before tractas de salutar advent but this seemeth to be too curious 2. Lyranus hath reference to the lawe that whereas sinne abounded vnder the lawe grace also abounded vnder the lawe because Christ was made vnder the lawe as the Apostle sheweth Galat. 4.4 But here grace is opposed and set against the lawe therefore in both the opposite partes there cannot be reference to the same lawe 3. The ordinarie glosse hath two expositions grace is said to abound because it profiteth them whom the deuill could not ouercome grace worketh on them vpon whom the kingdome of sinne had no power but then the same thing should be compared with it selfe for in that the kingdome of sinne and Sathan preuailed not against them it was the worke of grace 4. Otherwise thus quia peccatum ad tempus regnavit because sinne raigned but for a time but grace for euer but vnlesse grace had destroyed the kingdome of sinne it should haue raigned for euer 5. Origen saith grace abounded more in that it doth not onely hominem absoluere à peccatis prateritis free a man from sinnes past but also strengthen him against sinnes to come 6. Chrysostome thus grace hath superabounded not onely in taking away the punishment and remitting our sinnes but in giuing vs life and making vs iust 7. Some giue this sense that grace hath abounded not onely in taking away originall sinne but all other actuall sinnes added beside Piscator Gorrhan 8. But it is better to vnderstand this superabounding of grace of all those priuiledges and excellencies which the benefit by Christ hath beyond our losse and fall in Adam as the Apostle shewed before Bez. Fai. So euery way grace exceedeth both in respect of the poteÌ„tis of God whose grace appeareth to be the greater by the greatnes of our sinne which non 〈◊〉 superat sed absorbet it doth not onely ouercome
but euen swallowe vp Calvin and in respect of our selues who the more we feele the burthen and ouerflowing of our sinne the more we haue occasion to extoll and magnifie the grace of God Osiander So here are two ends of the lawe expressed the neâ—â—â—â— ende is the manifestation and encrease of sinne the remote ende is the more abounding of grace but here is the difference the first ende is vniuersall for in all men both beleeuers and vnbeleeuers the law worketh the encrease insight and knowledge of sinne but the other ende is particular and peculiar 〈◊〉 to the faithfull that by the abounding of sinne grace may more abound toward them which is not properly caused by the encrease of sinne but thorough the mercie of God Pareus Quest. 44. Of the raigne of sinne vnto death and of grace vnto life 1. Before the Apostle had ascribed the kingdome vnto death v. 14. Death raigned from Adam c. but here vnto sinne because death indeede raigneth by sinne as the Apostle saith The sting of death is sinne 1. Cor. 15.56 death could haue no power ouer vs but thorough sinne Martyr 2. But to speake more distinctly where the Apostle giueth the kingdome vnto death he speaketh of the times before the law when as death did apparantly raigne in the world but sinne was not so apparant till the lawe came but sinne is said to haue raigned after the lawe was giuen because sinne then more abounded So that three estates of the world are here described the first from Adam to Moses when sinne was in the world but death raigned the third is from the comming of Christ who raigned by righteousnesse vnto life destroying both the kingdome of sinne and death Tolet. 3. By death Chrysostome seemeth to vnderstand the death of the bodie mors ex haec presenti vita eijcit death doth cast vs out of this life c. but eternall death is here also comprehended potestatem habuit deijciendi c. it had power to cast vs downe to eternall death Lyran. as may appeare by the other opposite part of eternall life Piscator 4. But whereas in the first clause mention is made onely of the raigning of sinne vnto death but in the other there are three mentioned grace righteousnesse and life Origen thinketh that the deuill must be vnderstood to be set against the grace of Christ ab inuentis rebus author inventi nominatur the author of the invention is named in the things invented c. for sinne came in by the deuill some thinke that the wrath of God must be supplied which raigned by sinne Piscator but I thinke rather with Calvin that beside the necessarie parts of the comparison the Apostle maketh mention of grace vt fortius in figuret memoria c. that it might better sticke in our memorie that all is of grace 5. The Apostle speaketh of the time past sinne had raigned because that although sinne doe still raigne in the children of disobedience yet in the faithfull it raigneth no more Par. 6. By righteousnesse some vnderstand iustitiam operum the righteousnesse of 〈◊〉 gloss interlin so also Bellarmine lib. 2. de iustificat c. 6. but the iustice of Christ is rather vnderstood as the Greeke interpreters well expound and as is euident by the clause in the ende By our Lord Iesus Christ who is notwithstanding both our iustification and sanctification 7. The ordinarie glosse here well obserueth that in the kingdome of sinne mention is not made of Adam from whom sinne came because the Apostle speaketh not onely of originall but of actuall sinnes both which are remitted in Christ. 8. Thorough Iesus Christ our Lord Iesus per gratiam Dominus per iustitiam nostre per gloriam Iesus by grace Lord by his iustice and ours because he bringeth vs to glorie Gorrhan 4. Places of Doctrine Doct. 1. Of the difference betweene Christian and worldly hope v. 5. Hope maketh not ashamed This is the propertie of the hope of Christians that is neuer confoundeth them or maketh ashamed because it is founded vpon Gods promises who both is immutable and changeth not and is also omnipotent able to performe whatsoeuer he promiseth But so it is not in humane or worldly hope for that often putteth man to rebuke because he is deceiued in his hope and faileth in the thing hoped for and the reason is for that he reposeth his confidence in man who is either deceitfull and hopeth not his promise or is not of power to performe it therefore the Prophet saith Cursed be the man that trusteth in man and maketh flesh his arme Ierem. 17.5 Doct. 2. Of the properties and effects of faith v. 2. Beeing iustified by faith 1. Vnto faith is ascribed iustification as in these words and remission of sinnes in purifying the heart Act. 15.9 2. faith is the foundation of thing hoped for Heb. 11.1 3. it is the cause of the producing and bringing forth of good fruit Iam. 2.8 Shewe me thy faith out of thy workes c. 4. it ouercommeth the tentations of Sathan for by the sheild of faith we quench all his fierie darts Ephes. 6.18 5. by faith we attaine vnto the vnderstanding of the word of God which otherwise is vnprofitable Isay. 7.9 Vnlesse yee beleeue ye shall not vnderstand as some translations doe reade and the Apostle saith that the word did not profit the Israelites because it was not mixed with faith Heb. 4.2 6. faith obtaineth our requests in prayer Iam. 2.16 the prayer of faith saueth the sicke 7. it worketh the saluation of the soule Luk. 7.50 Thy faith hath saued thee Doct. 3. Of the raigne and dominion of death v. 14. Death raigned from Adam to Moses Before sinne entred into the world death had no dominion but now it hath gotten a tyrannicall and generall dominion ouer men both of all sorts and conditions both young and old and in all ages as here it is said to raigne euen from Adam to Moses that age was not exempted from the dominion of death wherein sinne seemed least to abound but Christ hath ouercome death and destroyed the dominion thereof both in that he hath taken away the sting thereof which is sinne that death is not hurtfull vnto them that beleeue but bringeth their soules vnto euerlasting rest and in the generall resurrection our bodies which death had seazed on shall be restored vnto life as our Blessed Sauiour saith I am the resurrection and the life c. Ioh. 15.25 Doct. 4. Of the difference of sinnes v. 14. Euen ouer them that sinned not after the like manner c. Here the Apostle setteth downe this distinction of actuall and originall sinne some doe sinne in like manner as Adam did that is actually some not in like manner that is there is a secret and hid sinne in the corruption of nature which is not actuall but in time breaketh forth into act as the seede sheweth it selfe in the hearbe Doct. 5. There is no saluation
Apostle giueth instance in himselfe as v. 24. O wretched man that I am and 25. I thank my God and so he doth here the Apostle then speaketh here neither of his present state nor yet of his first age but of the middle part of his life when he liued a Pharisie 2. That commendation then which S. Paul giueth of his former life while he was a Pharisie did onely concerne his outward cariage which was to the iudgement of the world without reproofe and he kept a good conscience according to his knowledge yet was it farre from a pure conscience because he had no knowledge then of our faith in Christ whose way he persecuted whereby the heart is purified Act. 15.9 Notwithstanding then his outward shew of obedience his heart and affections were not right within and so he had not the true vse and vnderstanding of the law as Augustine saith lib. 1. ad Bonifac. c. 9. potuit intus esse in affectionibus pravus prauaricator legis c. he might inwardly in his peruerse affections be a transgressor of the law and yet outwardly fulfill the workes of the law c. So Saint Paul himselfe confesseth Tit. 3.3 We our selues were sometime vnwise c. seruing lusts c. Quest. 10. What law the Apostle speaketh of v. 7. is the law of sinne 1. Some thinke that the Apostle by the law here vnderstandeth the precept which was giuen to Adam in Paradise not to eate of the forbidden fruite of this opinion was Methobus in Epiphanius haeres 64. and Heirome maketh mention of it epist. ad Hedib qu. 8. but he reiecteth it Theodoret hath the like conceit that the law is here vnderstood to be the law of Moses mandatum vocat quod Adamo datum est but that he calleth the commandement which was giuen to Adam Theodoret in Commentar But 1. Photius in Oecummenius reiecteth this opinion because no where doth the Apostle call that particular commandement giuen vnto Adam the law 2. Tolet further addeth these reasons the Apostle speaketh of the verie inward desire and concupiscence but the act was forbidden Adam that he should not eate of the forbidden fruite and againe the Apostle in saying I knew not sinne but by the law insinuateth that sinne was before but he knew it 〈◊〉 but before that commandement was giuen vnto Adam it had beene no sinne in him to haue eaten and receiued the fruite of the tree 2. Some thinke that the Apostle speaketh not of the law of Moses but of the law of nature for before the witten law was giuen men had knowledge of sinne as Cain knew he had sinned and Abimelech was not ignorant that adulterie was sinne thus Heirome and before him Origen But 1. Photius in Oecumenius thus refelleth this opinion that the Apostle speaketh not of the law of nature because the Apostle had said before yee are dead to the law v. 4. in this sense then some should be found naturali lege priuati depriued of the naturall law and againe the Apostle saith I was aliue sometime without the law but neither Adam nor any other liuing were at any time without the law of nature 2. Tolet addeth that if the Apostle had meant the law of nature he would not haue said I knew not sinne but by the law but rather sinne was not but by the law 3. And concerning the obiection of Cain and Abimelechs knowledge of sinne Chrysostome answereth that the Apostle saith omnem concupistratuâ— vehementiam significans sinne wrought in me all manner of concupiscence signifying the vehemenencie of it c. that although these sinnes did raigne before yet they appeared not to be so great sinnes as afterward by the law and Theophylact addeth noscibatur peccatum sed nondum erat concupiscentia interdicta sinne was knowne before the law that is outward and notorious sinnes but yet the inward concupiscence was not restrained 3. Tolet thinketh that together with the morall law the Apostle meaneth the ceremoniall and iudiciall law because by them also were the knowledge of sinne But the Apostle giuing instance of the inward vnlawfull concupiscence which was not punished by the iudiciall nor ceremoniall law sheweth that he speaketh not of them 4. Wherefore it is euident that the Apostle meaneth none other but the written morall law of Moses because he giueth instance of the last commandement thou shalt not couet Martyr Pareus Quest. 11. What lust or concupiscence the Apostle speaketh of I had not knowne lust c. except c. 1. Some thinke that here by concupiscence the Apostle intendeth all sinne whatsoeuer as Anselme and the ordinarie glosse following Augustine bona est lex qua â—â—â—dum concupiscentiam prohibet omnia peccata prohibet c. the law is good which while it forbiddeth concupiscence forbiddeth all sinnes c. Heirome epist. 152. refuseth their opinion which take this for the commandement and by concupiscence he thinketh to be vnderstood omnes animi perturbationes all the preturbations and passions of the minde whatsoeuer as of feare greefe desire But it is euident in that the Apostle propoundeth the verie words of the line that he hath reference to that precept thou shalt not lust whereby indeed all corrupt concupiscence and desire whatsoeuer is forbidden 2. By this concupiscence is not vnderstood onely the act of concupiscence as Pererius holdeth with other Romanists we vnderstand not saith he ipsam concupiscendi facultatem sed actum ipsum concupiscendi the facultie of coueting but the act it selfe disput 8. numer 47. nor yet the second motions of concupiscence onely whereunto the will consenteth but euen the first vnlawfull desires and motions which haue not the consent of the wil. And that this may the better appeare it shall not be amisse further to shew what concupiscence is and the diuerse kinds thereof there is a threefold concupiscence naturalis sensitivus voluntarius the naturall which is euen in stirps and plants as to couet and draw vnto them their food and nourishment and this is properly called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 desire the sensitiue is in bruit beasts the voluntarie and sensitiue both in man and they are called by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concupiscence 2. further this concupiscence is deuided into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the facultie it selfe and the exercising or act thereof and both of them are considered either physice as they are naturall as to couet meate drinke and such like which are things indifferent or morally as they haue relation to the commandement 3. and herein there is to be considered both the maâ—ter and obiect of concupiscence and the manner as if either things vnlawfull be desired as the wife horse seruant of our neighbour which appertaine not to vs or if we exceed measure in desire of things vnlawfull as of meate drinke apparell riches and such like or desire them to an euill end 3. Now to apply this which hath beene said to our purpose 1.
were remooued as a rubbe or blocke out of our way Faius 2. Diuerse waies did sinne take occasion by the law 1. the corruption of mans nature turneth good things to the occasion of euill as the Pharisies by Christs comming and preaching had the more sinne and the Apostle saith Hebr. 10.29 Of how much more punishment suppose ye he is worthie which treadeth vnder foote the Sonne of God habet peius supplicium occasionem per exhibitum maius beneficium the greater punishment is occasioned by the greatnes of the benefit exhibited Chrysostome sinne then is encreased by the giuing of the law because of mens vnthankfulnes for so great benefite 2. And beside such is the corruption of mans nature vt ea quae prohibentur magis desiderentur which are forbidden are more desired Origen so was the commandement giuen to Adam an occasion that he coueted the more to eate of the forbidden fruite and like as there are foure diseases which are the worse for the applying of medecines vnto them as the gangrena and the leprosie called elephantiasis much like a restie horse that the more he is spurred kicked the more he giueth backe or as if a sicke man-beeing forbidden to drinke cold water should the more desire it Martyr 3. An other reason is because mans nature desireth libertie and therefore refuseth to be bridled by law and yet it is destructio libertatis the verie destruction and ouerthrow of libertie for a man to doe what he lift sine fraeno legis without the bridle of a law Lyranus 4. And further by the law commeth the knowledge of sinne and so mans corrupt nature hauing sinne shewed it doth then beginne to couet it as the Sunne light sheweth the beautie of a faire woman and then the lustfull eye is caried with a desire after her Gorrhan or like as Ambrose resembleth it as the art of Physicke sheweth the nature of persons to auoid them and yet one abuseth his knowledge in doing hurt by them lib. 1. de Iacob vita brat c. 4. And this was the reason why Solon would make no law against parricides least that men by that occasion might thinke of that sinne which they did not dreame of before 5. Adde hereunto that as a circumstance may accidentally stirre vp that which is a cause of it selfe of the action as Dauids walking vpon his house carried his eye to looke vpon the beautie of Bersheba and so to desire her the like occasion might sinne take by the law Pareus 6. And the Deuill tooke occasion by the law more strongly to tempt man to make his sinne the greater in transgressing of the law 7. And one contrarie accidentally is encreased by an other as hoat water is more strongly congealed Gorrhan 8. And euery nature adversantibus adversatur resisteth that which resisteth it as one stone breaketh an other Hugo so vice resisteth vertue 3. But it is further to be considered that the words are sinne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taking occasion for the law indeede gaue not occasion but sinne tooke it Beza Calvin 15. Quest. Of what time S. Paul speaketh when he knew not the law and afterward sinne tooke occasion by the law c. 1. Methodius vnderstandeth it of the time while yet Adam had not receiued the commandement of not eating the forbidden fruit but it hath beene shewed before that the Apostle speaketh here of the morall law giuen by Moses as appeareth by that particular instance of the tenth and last commandement 2. Origen will haue it vnderstood of the Apostles childhood and so also Hierome that then he knew not sinne but these things which the Apostle mentioneth as the working of concupiscence and the reviving of sinne are not incident into the age of children 3. Chrysostome vnderstandeth the time before the law when many sinnes were not knowne till the law came and so he thinketh that the Apostle in his owne person describeth the state of all those which liued before the law but in this sense the person of S. Paul should be excluded who liued not in those times 4. Wherefore he aimeth at that time when he was a Pharisie before he had the true knowledge of the law for the Pharisies contented themselues onely with the externall observation thereof as is euident Matth. 5. where our Sauiour deliuereth the law from their corrupt gloses Pareus Faius Quest. 16. What the Apostle meaneth by all concupisence v. 8. 1. Chrysostome vnderstandeth augmentum concupiscentiae the encrease of concupiscence which was more inflamed 2. Augustine summā consummatam concupiscence perfected which now after the law giuen did not onely couet euill things but lege prohibita forbidden by law 3. Ambrose because after the law came then all sinne came before there was sinne sed non omne quia crimen prauaricationis decrat but not all because the sinne of transgression and preuarication was not yet ex gloss 4. Martyr expoundeth it of all actuall sinnes but the Apostle speaketh onely of concupiscence 5. By all concupiscence then we may vnderstand with Hierome omnes perturbationes animae all the passions and perturbations of the mind epistol 151. and with Anselme cuiusque peccati contra quodcunque mandatum concupiscentiam the concupiscence of euerie sinne whatsoeuer against euery commandement with Faius euery kind of concupiscence not onely the concupiscence of the flesh but the concupiscence of the eyes which Saint Iohn speaketh of 1. epist. c. 2. with Gorrhan euery degree of concupiscence cogitationem consensum opus the thought the consent the action with Pareus all the vitious motions of the concupiscence primas secundas both the first and second with Oecumenius quas non noueram concupiscentias ex lege didici c. I learned by the law concupiscence which I knew not and those which I had learned I committed Quest. 17. In what sense the Apostle saith sinne was dead and he aliue without the law v. 8. 1. Methodius in Epiphan haeres 64. by sinne vnderstandeth the time of mans innocencie when the deuill lay as dead because yet there was no commandement giuen whereby man should be allured vnto sinne Ambrose by sinne likewise interpreteth the deuill but he referreth it to the time before the law when the deuill was secure hauing man sure enough in his possession But this opinion is reiected before for how could the Apostle say v. 20. that sinne dwelled in him if he meant the deuill by sinne and he saith that sinne reuiued when the law came then in this sense the deuill must be supposed to haue beene aliue before to haue beene busie in working before he tempted Adam 2. Theodoret and Caietane following him doe vnderstand this to be spoken of the time of mans innocencie when as sinne was dead there was no sinne at all before the law was giuen But beside that man could not be said to be aliue in Paradise without a law beeing created with the law of nature the Apostle saying that sinne by
in Oecumen 2. or I finde by the lawe that when I would doe good euill is present Vatab. Genevens Calvin but here the preposition per by is inserted which is not in the originall 3. Erasmus to the same purpose I finde the lawe this to worke in me that I vnderstand when I would doe well that evill is present c. but here many words are added not in the originall Of them that vnderstand the lawe of the members 1. Beza thus interpreteth I finde legem impositam this lawe to be imposed vpon me by reason of the corruption of my nature so also Mart. that when I would doe good euill is present 2. some directly vnderstand legem carnis the lawe of the flesh the concupiscence which hindreth him beeing willing to doe good so Tolet Osiand and these two last expositions are most agreeable to the text because it is added as a reason because euill is present with me in which words he sheweth what lawe he meaneth that which is opposite vnto him which is further explained in the verses following Quest. 29. How the Apostle saith v. 21. euill is present with me 1. Ambrose hath here a curious observation euill is said to be present adiacere to be readie at hand because it lutketh in the flesh as at the doore that when one is inclined and willing to do good sinne is at hand to hinder And he giueth this reason why sinne hath the habitation in the flesh rather then in the soule because the flesh onely is deriued ex traduce by propagation and not the soule which if it were propagated as well as the flesh sinne rather should haue the feare in the soule because it sinneth rather then the flesh which is but the organe or instrument of sinne likewise expoundeth Tolet adiacet mihi it is naturally resiant in my flesh as he said before that to will is present with me that is naturally in his minde annot 21. 2. But 1. Ambrose reason concludeth not for though the flesh haue the beginning by propagation and not the soule and so the first pollution is by the flesh yet sinne disperseth it selfe into the whole nature of man both soule and bodie as the Apostle sheweth Coloss. 2.18 that there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a mind of flesh or fleshly minde 2. neither naturally is the mind willing or apt vnto that which is good for why then should the Apostle exhort to be renewed in the spirit of the minde Ephes. 4.23 the aptnesse and inclination of the mind vnto good is by grace the meaning then of this phrase is nothing else but to shewe the readinesse and strength of our naturall concupiscence which lyeth in waite and is at hand to hinder euerie good worke and to stirre vs vp vnto euill Quest. 30. Of these words I delight in the law of God c. v. 22 23. of the number of these lawes and what they are 1. Concerning the number 1. some referre these laws vnto two the law of God and the law of the minde they make one and the same the law of the members and the law of sinne also they thinke to be one Pareus Martyr Tolet. annot 22. 2. Photius in Oecumenius maketh three lawes he distinguisheth the law of God and the law of the minde the law of the members and the law of sinne he confoundeth 3. But Hierom. epist. ad Hedib qu. 8. and Ambr. in Luc. 17. doe recite fowre lawes as they are here named by the Apostle the law of God the law of the minde the law of the members and the law of sinne so also Calvin Hyper. and the Apostle indeede setteth downe so many 2. The like difference is what these lawes should be 1. Oecumenius thus describeth these lawes two are without vs the law of God the knowledge whereof we haue by the preaching of the Gospel and the law of the members which commeth by the suggestion of Satan ministring euill cogitations two of them are within vs the law of the minde that is the law of nature which is imprinted in the minde and the law of sinne which is the euill custome of sinning 2. Pererius will haue the law of God to be the written law and the law of the mind the naturall law the law of the members the naturall concupiscence and inclination vnto the seuerall proper obiects of the desire the law of sinne is deordinatio earundem virium the disordering of the naturall faculties and abusing of them vnto euill But all these faile herein 1. the law of the minde is not naturall for naturally the minde is not apt vnto that which is good without the worke of grace 2. and the law of the members is internall and within vs. 3. neither is this the naturall facultie of desiring which is not euill but the disordered pravitie of nature 3. Pet. Mertyr as he maketh the law of God and the law of the minde to be the same yet in a diuers respect for it is called the law of God in respect of the author and of the minde in regard of the subiect so in his iudgement the same is called the law of sinne because concupiscence in it selfe is sinne as the efficient and the law of the members because they are as the instruments 4. But I rather consent vnto M. Calvin who vnderstandeth the law of God to be the morall law the rule of equitie and the law of the minde to be the obedience and conformitie which the mind regenerate hath with the law of God and by the law of the members the concupiscence which is in the members consenting to the law of sinne 5. And further the law of the members and the law of sinne are not severed in subiect they are both in the members but thus they differ Some thinke the law of the members to be the corruption and pravitie of our nature called before the bodie of sinne c. 6.6 and the law of sinne the euill concupiscence springing from thence so Vatablus the law of the members is vis in carne the strength of the flesh resisting the law of the minde and the law of sinne is affectus carnis the carnall affections so Haymo interpreteth the law of the members onus pondus mortalitatis the burthen of mortalitie and the law of sinne to be euill concupiscence custome and delight in sinne so Lyranus vnderstandeth by the law of the members fomitem peccati vel inclinationem pravam the food and matter of sinne or the corrupt inclination and the law of sinne consuetudinem pravam the euill custome of sinning 6. But I rather with Beza by the law of sinne vnderstand the corruption of nature by the law of the members the euill concupiscence springing from thence for otherwise the opposition betweene the law of God and the minde on the one side and the law of the members and of sinne on the other will not be correspondent and answerable together for the law of the members must be
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
there is here a traiection of the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that so whereas the words stand in this order in the originall by your mercie that they may obtaine mercie they must be placed thus that by your mercie they may obtaine mercie the verie like traiection of this verie word see 2. Cor. 2.4 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but my loue that ye may know for but that you may know my loue thus also Beza here and Tolet annot 23. addeth this reason why those words for your mercie should not be ioyned with the former clause so now haue they not beleeued but with the latter that they may also obtaine mercie that one part of this comparison may answear another as he said before you haue receiued mercie through their vnbeleefe so now it followeth that they also should receiue mercie through your mercie And Chrysostome sheweth the reason why it is said that you should receiue mercie through their mercie not through their vnbeleefe because ye the Gentiles shall not be so saued vt quemadmodum Iudaei exire debeatis that as the Iewes you should goe out or fall away again sed vt illos manendo per aemulationem attrahatis but that ye may draw them on by continuing in the faith 4. This then is the force of the Apostles argument 1. There are three things compared with three the vnbeleefe of the Gentiles with the vnbeleefe of the Iewes the mercie which the Gentiles receiued in time past with the mercie which the Iewes shall receiue and then the occasions of both are set one against the other the occasion of the mercie shewed to the Gentiles was the vnbeleefe of the Iewes and occasion of mercie shewed to the Iewes was mercie extended to the Gentiles by the which the Iewes were prouoked to emulation Par. 2. The argument is from the lesse to the greater if the infidelitie of the Iewes was the occasion of mercie to the Gentiles much more the mercie shewed to the Gentiles shall be an occasion of shewing mercie to the Iewes for there is a greater force in that which is good then in that which is euill Gryveus and if the Gentiles which neuer beleeued were called to the saith much more like is it that the Iewes which had bin sometime beleeuers should returne to their former saith Tolet. Quest. 31. How God hath concluded and shut vp all in vnbeleefe v. 32. 1. Not that God inijcerit ijs incredulitatem did cast vpon them incredulitie hoc explodendum est this conceite must he exploded of all Origen God is no way the author of euill Photius 2. Nor yet is the Lord said to shut them vp onely permittendo in suffering them to be incredulous Origen glosse ordinarie Tolet Gorrhan for God is to be considered here not as a patient onely and sufferer but as an agent in some sort and a iust iudge 3. Chrysostome thus interpreteth he shut vp all that is demonstrauit incredulos he hath shewed them to be incredulous in which sense the Apostle saith Gal. 3.22 The Scripture hath concluded all vnder sinne c. that is the law serueth to reueale sinne as Saint Paul saith Rom. 3.20 By the law commeth the knowledge of sinne But this is not all for the iudge doth not onely declare and giue sentence against the malefactor and bring his offence to light but he also condemneth him and seeth his sentence be executed vpon him 3. Hierome in the Commentarie vnder his name saith God hath shut vp all non vi sed ratione not by force but by good reason which reason is thus expressed by Oecumenius vt alios per aliorum seruaret contentionem that he might saue some by the prouocation of others the ordinarie glosse giueth this reason vt gratia numeris esset gratissima that the gift of grace might be most acceptable c. when they are brought as it were out of prison vnto libertie But although Gods iudgements proceed with great reason and equitie yet God doth not euill that good may come thereof the reason and way then yet appeareth not how God is said to conclude all vnder sinne 4. Wherefore it remaineth that God is said to shut vp men in vnbeleefe as in a prison in punishing them as a iust iudge with the fetters as it were and gives of their owne blindnes and hardenes of heart as it is said c. 1.26 God gaue them vp to vile affections and c. 11.8 God hath giuen them the spirit of slumber like as a iudge doth inflict imprisonment vpon offenders and restraint of libertie so men are kept in the prison of infidelitie by the iustice of God their sinnes so deseruing But here is the difference ciuill imprisonment is for sinne yet it is not sinne but spirituall imprisonment in blindnes and vnbeleefe is sinne and God after a wonderfull and secret manner yet most iustly doth punish sinne with sinne as Augustine saith Quis dicat Achabum non peccasse credendo spiritui mendaci c. who can say that Ahab sinnned not in beleeuing the false spirit and who will say that sinne was not the punishment of sinne venientem de iudicio Dei proceeding from the iudgement of God lib. 5. c. 3. contra Iulian. And further here is great difference betweene these two for God to be author of shutting vp vnder vnbeleefe and of the shutting vp of vnbeleefe the first God in his iustice causeth the other man is the cause of himselfe Quest. 32. Of the Apostles exclamation v. 33. The deepenesse of the riches c. 1. Touching the occasion of these words 1. Origen thinketh this to be it quia alterius malitiae opus alterum vertat in salutem because he turned the malice of one to the salvation of an other as the ruine of the Iewes was the occasion of calling the Gentiles so also Chrysostome the Apostle wondreth quod contraria contrarijs curaverit because the Lord healed one contrarie by an other the Gentiles became to be beleeuers by occasion of the vnbeleeuing Iewes but the generalitie of the Apostles words speaking of the wayes of God would not be restrained vnto one particular 2. Faius vnderstandeth the whole mysterie of the Gospel the which as S. Peter saith the Angels yet desire to behold but this is too generall 3. Augustine and Haymo restraine it to this particular of the mysterie in the vocation of the Gentiles and the reiection of the Iewes 4. But beside this it may be applyed to the whole mysterie of predestination how God resecteth some and electeth others wherein humane reason must be silent Gryneus Calvin Hyperius Mart. 2. For the reading of the words 1. Some doe thus read O the deepenesse of the riches of the wisedome and knowledge of God as the vulgar latine making wisedome and knowledge to depend of riches but in this reading the Greeke coniunction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and which is set betweene riches and wisedome is omitted Chrysostome inserting that word thinketh that these two
the foundation of faith and of Apostolicall instruction as in the Epistles to the Romanes Ephesians Philippians Colossians the first to the Thessalonians to the Hebrewes 2. Some doe confute and refell errors of doctrine and life as the 1. to the Corinthians the epistle to the Galatians to the Colossians in part the 2. to the Thessalonians 3. Some are apologeticall wherein the Apostle maketh Apologie and vseth defence for himselfe against the false Apostles as in the 2. to the Corinthians 4. Some specially concerne Ecclesiastical offices as the Epistles to Timothie and Titus 5. Some are written by way of mediation and intercession as the epistle to Philemon 3. The ende and scope of S. Pauls writings as of the rest of the Scriptures were these 1. to set forth the true and sincere doctrine of faith 2. to confute and conuince errors 3. to reclaime men from vice and corruption of life 4. to instruct them in the workes of righteousnesse these sower are touched by the Apostle 2. Timoth. 3.16 where he sheweth a fowrefold vse of the Scripture it is profitable to teach to improoue to correct and instruct in righteousnesse 5. the edifying of the weake is an other end that they fall not away from the faith 6. and the exhorting of those which are slacke that they may goe on in their Christian course 7. the comforting of the afflicted that in tribulation they despaire not or faint these three endes also the Apostle speaketh of 1. Cor. 14.3 He that prophesieth speaketh vnto men to edifying to exhortation and comfort Of the occasion argument and Methods of this Epistle of S. Paul to the Romanes 1. The occasion of the writing of this Epistle seemeth almost to haue beene the same that the Apostle tooke to write vnto the Galatians which was this the beleeuing Iewes dispersed among the Gentiles did thinke that the ceremonies and obseruations of Moses law were still to be retained whereupon did arise great stirres betweene the beleeuing Iewes and Gentiles the one despising the Gentiles thinking themselues to be priuiledged by the promises made to the seed and posteritie of Abraham and vrging the rites of Moses lawe as though they helped vnto iustification the other insulted against the Iewes as glorying too much in their Christian libertie and exemption from Moses lawe and taking the Iewes to be reiected of God the Apostle to compound this dissension among them writeth this Epistle this was the occasion 2. And accordingly the Apostle frameth this Epistle first generally shewing that neither the Gentiles by their naturall knowledge nor the Iewes by the workes of the Law could be iustified but that both the one the other were freely iustified by faith in Christ this generall tractate of iustification by faith is extended vnto the 9. Chapter Then particularly he commeth to suppresse the insolencie of the Iewes shewing that the promises were not made vnto all that were of Abrahams carnall seede but onely to the true Israel so many as were of the faith of Abraham c. 9.10 then he also turneth him to the Gentiles that they should not as it were insult in the reiection of the Iewes for it was not totall not finall God would haue mercie on them if they continued not in vnbeleefers 11. The rest of the Epistle is spent in Christian exhortation 1. to the mutuall offices of charitie among brethren c. 12. of dutie toward Magistrates c. 13. how they should behaue themselues toward the weake brethren c. 14 15. And then after diuers salutations he concludeth The Methode then and parts of the Epistle are these two the first is doctrinall vnto the 12. chapter the second exhortatorie in the 5. last chapters 12 13 14 15 16. In the first the two chiefe points of Christian religion are handled at large namely of iustification to c. 9. and of election and reprobation c. 9 10 11. In the doctrine of iustification 1. the manner and forme thereof is declared 2. the fruits in the first the false way vnto iustification by works is reiected and refused c. 1 2 3. to v. 21. then the true way which is by faith is affirmed and prooued c. 3.21 v. c. 4. the effects of iustification follow as the peace of conscience c. 5. the newnes of life c. 6. exemption and freedome from the law c. 7. constancie and perseuerance in affliction c. 8. In the doctrine of predestination and election 1. he treateth of the reiection of the Iewes c. 9. 2. of the vocation of the Gentiles c. 10. 3. of the restoring of the Iewes againe c. 11. 2. In the exhortatorie part there are first exhortations generall concerning all Christians c. 12. then particular as of duties toward Magistrates c. 13. toward the weake c. 14 15. secondly he concludeth with salutations both of himselfe wherein he professeth his loue toward them and purpose to come vnto them c. 15. v. 15. to the ende then of others c. 16. 2. Of the style and phrase which S. Paul vseth in this Epistle 1. S. Paul as he vseth not any affected eloquence or elegant style or entising speach whereof he giueth this reason that your faith should not be in the wisdome of men but in the power of God 1. Cor. 3.2 So neither yet is the Apostles style base or barbarous but ex vtroque temperatus of a mixt kind betwixt both who by a pithie and sententious kind of writing full of arguments and forcible perswasions in graue but plaine words deliuereth high mysteries There is a double kind of eloquâ—ce one which consisteth in the eloquence of speach and the curious choice of words such as the Oratours among the heathen excelled in this shall we not finde in Paul there is an other which is graue sober consisting rather in the force of perswasion then in the number of words and this kind of eloquence S. Paul vseth Martyr So that as Chrysostome saith lingua illius supra solem emicuit doctrinaeque sermone supra reliquos omnes exuberavit his tongue or speach was brighter then the Sunne and in the vtterance of doctrine he excelled all the rest c. and they all gaue place vnto him for speach vnde Mercurius ab infidelibus putabatur quod sermoni praesset whereupon he was of the Infidels called Mercurie because the office of speaking was committed to him c. Chrysost. argum in epist. ad Roman Augustine herein concurreth with Chrysostome that although he affected not eloquence ea tamen sapientiam eius comitata est yet it did follow and accompanie his wisdome lib. 4. de doctr Christ. 2. But there are which thinke otherwise of S. Pauls style 1. Origen saith that Paul hath many hyperbata and auantopedota many imperfect transitions and clauses of sentences not one answering an other but breaking off abruptly and M. Beza in his preface to Oleviaues commentarie maketh mention of a famous man nostrâ memoriâ magnus of great name in our memorie who therein concurred with Origen but he
fathers for these fiue reasons 1. for their comfort in the expectation of the Messiah to come as Isa. 40.2 Speake comfortly to Ierusalem and crie vnto her that her warfare is accomplished c. 2. to stirre vp their desire to long for the comming of the Messiah as Isa. 64.1 O that thou wouldest breake the heauens and come downe 3. to set forth the honour and glorie of the Messiah that sent his forerunners and messengers the holy Prophets before him to proclaime the comming of the great king as the Prophet saith Isa. 40.3 A voice crieth in the wildernes Prepare ye the way of the Lord c. 4. that none might be excused by their ignorance as touching the comming of the Messiah as Abacuck 2.2 Write the vision and make it plaine vpon tables that he may runne that readeth it 5. that the fathers should not rest in the figures but by them should be brought to the vnderstanding of these things which were shadowed forth by those figures as the Apostle saith Hebr. 10.1 That the law had the shadow of good things to come Hug. Card. 3. The ministers and instruments of these promises or the Gospel promised were the Prophets in the Scriptures Gryneus Aretius and here by Prophets we vnderstand not onely them which were writers of the prophesies but they also which preached to the people as Nathan to Dauid and to whome those promises were made concerning Christ and so Adam Abraham Isaack Iaakob and the rest of the Patriarks are here also comprehended Hyperius 4. The subiect and matter of the Gospel is Iesus Christ the Sonne of God who is described in his person the Sonne of God in his offices he is Iesus the Sauiour and Christ the annointed of God and his two natures his humanitie v. 3. his diuine nature v. 4. Now this Gospel is sometime called the Gospel of God as in this verse sometime the Gospel of Christ v. 16. the one in respect of the author of the Gospel the other of the matter and subiect Gryneus 12. Quest. Whether the Gospel be comprehended in the old Testament 1. This is euident by diuers reasons that the fathers vnder the old Testament enioyed the Gospel of Christ. 1. If they had not the Gospel they could not consequently haue faith for how could they beleeue in him of whome they had not heard and faith commeth of hearing Rom. 10.14 17. but the fathers had faith as the Apostle prooueth at large Heb. 11. 2. If they had not the Gospel then were they not saued by the grace of Christ which is by the Gospel for the law was giuen by Moses but faith and truth came by Iesus Christ now the fathers were saued by the grace of Christ Act. 15.11 3. The fathers had the knowledge of God but that commeth by the reuelation of Iesus Christ Ioh. 1.18 4. The fathers did eate and drinke Christ 1. Corinth 10.3 but he is onely eaten and drunke by faith therefore the fathers were not without the faith of the Gospel 2. But it will be thus obiected on the contrarie 1. the Gospel was onely promised to the fathers as here the Apostle saith which he had promised before by the Prophets but that which is promised a man hath not in deede 2. againe the Apostle saith that the mysterie of the Gospel was kept secret since the world beganne Rom. 16.25 therefore it seemeth to haue beene vnknowne to the fathers 3. S. Marke also thus beginneth his Gospel Mark 1.1 The beginning of the Gospel of Iesus Christ if the Gospel beganne but then it will follow that the Patriarks had it not before 3. For answer hereunto the Gospel must be distinguished for it either may be taken for the Gospel promised or the Gospel complete and exhibited the Gospel promised is the doctrine of grace by Christ to come the Gospel complete and exhibited is the doctrine of grace in Christ alreadie exhibited and performed to the world By this distinction the seuerall obiections propounded may be answered 1. That which is promised a man hath not in full complement and perfection but he may haue it in certen and assured hope so the fathers had not in deede the Gospel exhibited but they had it promised and so enioyed it in hope 2. Likewise the mysterie of the Gospel which lay hid from the beginning of the world must be vnderstood of the Gospel exhibited 3. And S. Marke also vnderstandeth the beginning of the Gospel not accomplished but onely exhibited and manifested Pareus 13. Quest. How Christ is said to be made of the seede of Dauid after the flesh v. 3. 1. Some doe read genitus begotten as Vatablus or natus borne Erasm. but the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly signifieth made which doth better set forth the admirable conception of Christ of a virgin without the helpe of man which is not so well expressed in the other reading to say he was borne or begotten Beza Tolet. 2. Chrysostome well noteth why it is added after the flesh significans quod iuxta spiritum generationem habeat signifying that he had a generation also after the spirit as he had one according to the flesh And this generation also after the flesh is first spoken of not because it was first in order but this infinite generation commodius auditorem subducit doth more fitly bring the hearer to the other diuine and first generation 3. By flesh is here vnderstood the substance of Christs humane nature as it was infirme and weake which weaknes notwithstanding continued but for a time not as it is corrupt as it is taken Ioh. 1.14 1. Tim. 3.17 And although mention be not made here of the soule of Christ it must neither be vnderstood to haue had the same beginning with the flesh of the seede of Dauid nor yet as Origen is it here vnderstood by the spirit of sanctification which sheweth the diuine nature of Christ Beza but Christs soule was infused of God and seeing he tooke our flesh and became very man it followeth consequently that hauing an humane and organicall bodie he was also endued with an humane soule Gryneus 4. Now he is said to be of the seede of Dauid that although he was not conceiued by any humane seede yet ex ea carne formatus est quae constat ex semine he was formed of that flesh which came of humane seed gloss ex August so that this word seede doth not onely note here the Virgin Marie which was of the posteritie of Dauid but ipsam carnem de Virgine assumptam the very flesh taken of the Virgin Beza 5. And though he came also of the seede of Abraham and of other the holy fathers yet mention is made of Dauid for these reasons 1. because the Messiah was promised to come of Dauid Hugo 2. vt ex rege natus oftendatur that it might appeare he was borne of a king 3. quia Dauid criminosus and because Dauid was a sinner that he was
reuealed against the will of God reuealed all desires and attempts cannot be without sinne against his secret will somewhat may be desired and yet without sinne so there beâ—â— subordination of our wills to the will of God as Augustine sheweth how sometime homo bona volutitate souls quod Deus non vult a man with a good mind willeth that which God willeth not as a good child desireth his fathers life whom the Lord will haue to die So Dauid prayed for his childs life of a fatherly affection when yet God purposed that the infant should die And againe saith Augustine it may be vt homo velit voluntate mala quod Deus vult bona that a man may wish and will that with an euill mind which God willeth well As an euill child may desire his fathers death which the Lord also purposeth August Enchirid. c. 101. So Paul in desiring here that which God willed not to come vnto the Romanes yet sinned not both because Gods will therein was not reuealed vnto him and beside he interposeth a condition if it were Gods will ex Pareo Quest. 36. How S. Paul was a debter vnto all v. 14. v. 14. I am a debter 1. The Apostle sheweth a thresold desire that he had to the Romanes first to come vnto them then to set them and now to preach vnto them which he amplyfieth by three reasons 1. from his owne office and calling 2. from the vertue and power of the Gospel v. 16. 3. on Gods behalfe the righteousnesse of God was reuealed c. Gorrham 2. This debt some take to be the gift of tongues which the Apostle had receiued in which behalfe he was a debter to all nations speaking with the tongues of them all Origen Theodoret But the other Apostles also had receiued the gift of tongues as well as Paul therefore in that sense they were debters as S. Paul was 3. Oleviane here maketh mention of a threefold debt 1. of nature as Esay 58.7 hide not thy selfe from thine owne flesh euery one is bound to succour his brother as beeing his owne flesh 2. the second bond of our debt is in regard of our redemption that we should willingly minister vnto them for whom Christ died 3. the third debt is in respect of our vocation and calling which the Apostle here hath relation vnto 4. So then Chrysostome and Ambrose doe well expound this debt of S. Pauls Apostolike calling so also Lyran. Pareus with others As he saith there was a necessitie laid vpon him and woe is vnto me if I preach not the Gospel 1. Cor. 9.17 5. But he is a debter first vnto God who is the creditor of whom he receiued all those graces which he had and therefore he was to dispose and employ them according to the will and Lawe of the Creator Faius who sent him vnto the Gentiles Act. 13.3 Separate me Paul and Barnabas c. which debt the Apostle is willing to discharge Hugo and because he could not yet come in person to preach vnto them he dischargeth his debt by writing Bucer 6. And he vseth this terme of debter least that he might be thought to be a busie bodie and noted of arrogancie for writing vnto the Romanes Mart. Quest. 37. Whom S. Paul vnderstandeth by the Grecians and Barbarians 1. Sometime the Apostle distinguisheth the nations into Iewes and Greekes v. 16. sometime into Iewes and Gentiles as Rom. 3.29 sometime he reckoneth vp altogether the Grecian the Iew Barbarian Scythian Coloss. 3.12 here he diuideth all other nations beside the Iewes into Greekes and Barbarians the Iewes he mentioneth not quia magister Gentium because he was the teacher or master of the Gentiles gloss 2. The Romanes are comprehended vnder the Grecians because from them they receiued their lawes and the knowledge of arts Martyr 3. Whereas he addeth both to the wise men and vnwise some take it for an exposition of the former by the Greekes vnderstanding the wise and by the Barbarians the vnwise Anselme Calvin Pareus But Chrysostome and Theodoret Gorrh. so also Beza annot Faius doe better referre it vnto particular men among the Greekes and Barbarians for there were among either of them some wise some vnwise 4. Anselme by the wise vnderstandeth righteous men by the vnwise sinners some beleeuers and vnbeleeuers But Chrysostome and Theodoret better interpret those to be wise men among the Gentiles which had humane wisdome and knowledge those to be vnwise which were ignorant and vnlearned 5. By this the Apostle sheweth that their humane wisdome was not sufficient to bring them to the knowledge of God And Chrysostome here well noteth how Plato a wise Philosopher thrice comming into Sicilia could not conuert one Tyrant but went away without any successe but Paul a tent-maker did not onely conuert Sicilia and Italie but runne thorough preaching almost the whole world 6. S. Paul here answereth a secret obiection it might haue beene said vnto him You may not spend so much time among the Grecians they are a people wise enough therefore he saith that not onely the vnwise but euen the most learned among them had neede to be instructed in the Gospel Tolet. 7. And Paul illud inculcat ob Iudeos doth vrge this because of the Iewes who thought that the preaching of the Gospel did onely belong vnto them Erasm. 8. Celsus against whome Origen did write did obiect this place to discredit the Gospel because it was offered to the vnlearned whereas he taketh that to be the most excellent doctrine that can be perceiued onely of the wise and learned But herein rather appeareth the dignitie and excellencie of the Gospel which propoundeth the way of saluation vnto all of what degree soeuer Faius And Gods wisdome herein sheweth it selfe that the Gospel beeing preached to the wise and vnwise both the one might be humbled when they see themselues to be fellow-schollers euen with the vnlearned whome they taught before and that the ignorant and simple should not despaire but that they also may come to the knowledge of saluation Calvin 9. And seeing the Apostle nameth the wise and vnwise not the rich or poore noble vnnoble because he speaketh of the knowledge of the Gospel which might seeme not so necessarie for them which were wise and learned Tolet. 10. And here is set forth a double commendation of the Gospel both from the excellencie thereof which was worthie the searching euen of the wise and learned Grecians and à facilitate from the facilitie thereof because the very vnlearned might be also capable of it Aretius 38. Quest. How Paul is not ashamed of the Gospel v. 16. 1. It might haue beene obiected vnto Paul The Gospel is euery where scorned and derided among the Gentiles and euery where it is spoken against therefore the Apostle professeth that he is not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ though it seeme neuer so contemptible vnto the world Olevian 2. And as he was not ashamed to preach the
the obseruation of ceremonies and externall worship the Gospel in interiori cultu fidei in the inward worship by faith so that the law was lex puerorum the law of children which were kept vnder it as a schoolemaster but the Gospel is lex virorum the law of men come to ripe age August lib. de spirit lit 6. They differ also in the manner that which was couertly and darkely shadowed in the law is manifestly and apertly set forth in the Gospel 7. In the time they differ the law promised things to come the Gospel presently performed that which was in the law promised is Ignatius epist. ad Philadelp quod supra legem pracipuum habet Euangelium nempe praeseâ—tiam adventus Salvatoris what hath the Gospel aboue the law euen the presence of Christs aduent and comming 42. Quest. Why the Iewes are named before the Grecians v. 16. To the Iew first and also to the Grecian c. 1. Here by the Grecians generally all the Gentiles are vnderstood because they of all other nations seemed to be the wisest and therefore speciall instance is giuen in them that they also haue neede of the preaching of the Gospel Tolet. and at that time almost all nations vsed the Greeke tongue and therfore they are called by the name of Grecians Gualter especially when they are set against the Iewes Beza 2. Chrysostome thinketh that the Iew is named first not for any other excellencie or prerogatiue sed in hoc solo honoratur quod primus illam accepit but he is honoured onely in this because he first had the Gospel preached so he giueth onely vnto the Iew the prioritie of other 3. Origen thinketh that the Iew is set first because that like as the Grecian preferred himselfe before the Barbarian because of their lawes and ciuill life whereas the Barbarians liued without law so the Iew hath preheminence before the Grecian because they receiued their lawes from God 4. Lyranus giueth this reason the Iewes had a better preparation vnto the Gospel by the knowledge of the law and the Prophets then the Grecians who onely had the light of nature and the knowledge of the creatures 5. But the Iew hath a preheminence before the Gentile in respect of the prerogatiue which was giuen them of God vnto their fathers were the promises made and of them was descended the Messiah according to the flesh so that this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 first doth not so much signifie ordinem temporis the order of time as ordinem dignitatis the order of dignitie as when Christ saith Seeke ye first the kingdome of God Matth. 6.33 that is chiefly and most of all Tolet. Pareus This order our blessed Sauiour obserued both in himselfe saying he was sent onely to the lost sheepe of Israel and gaue the like charge when he sent out his Apostles that they should not goe the way of the Gentiles Matth. 10.5 yea and at his ascension he appointed his Apostles to be his witnesses first in Iudea Ierusalem Samaria and then to the vttermost part of the earth Act. 1.8 This order the Apostles accordingly kept Act. 13.46 It was necessarie that the word of God should first haue him spoken vnto you 43. Quest. v. 17. The iustice or righteousnes of God is reuealed what iustice the Apostle meaneth 1. There is a iustice of God wherein he is righteous and iust in himselfe as Psal. 11.7 The righteous Lord loueth righteousnes but this the Apostle speaketh not of the essentiall iustice of God is not communicated to vs by faith 2. There is a iustice distributiue in God whereby he rendreth vnto euery man according to his works Origen vnderstandeth this iustice of God but this is not the iustice whereby a man is iustified to saluation for if the Lord should marke what is done amisse no man should be able to abide it Psal. 130.3 3. The iustice of God signifieth his veritie and truth in keeping his promises so Gorrham taketh it here true it is that God graciously performeth whatsoeuer is promised in Christ but yet his mercie must goe before in promising 4. Theodoret vnderstandeth the perfect iustice of Christ whereby he satisfied the wrath of God for our sinnes and accomplished our redemption and this perfect iustice of Christ is reuealed in the Gospel but the Apostle speaketh euidently of such iustice whereby a man is iustified before God which is not that perfect iustice inherent in Christ but the applying thereof vnto vs by faith 5. Therefore Chrysostomes exposition is the best who Homil. 3. taketh this for that iustice which is communicated and infused vnto vs by that iustice of Christ and so Augustine vnderstandeth that iustice not whereby God is iust in himselfe seâ qua hominem induit cum eum iustificat but wherewith he endueth man when he instifieth him lib. de spirit liter cap. 9. of this the Apostle speaketh chap. 3.28 We conclude that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the Lawe 6. But this iustice is not an habite infused into the mind whereby a man is made apt to exercise good workes as Pererius saith that this iustice comprehendeth two things remissionem peccatorum the remission of sinnes animi rectitudinem c. and the vprightnesse of the minde whereby it is now acceptable vnto God and is exercised in good workes for the Apostle saith of this iustice of God that it is Made manifest without the lawe by the faith of Iesus c. c. 3.21 But this infused habite which is charitie and the exercising of good workes is not reuealed without the lawe for the lawe requireth and commandeth charitie This iustice then consisteth onely in the remission of sinnes and in imputing vnto vs the righteousnesse of Christ by faith c. 4.5 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne Pareus 7. It is called the iustice of God both because it is giuen vs from God not procured by our owne workes and for that we thereby are made righteous not before men but in the sight of God Tolet. 8. And this iustice is sometime called the righteousnes of God Phil. 3.9 because he is the author thereof sometime of Christ he is our righteousnesse 1. Cor. 1.30 because by his obedience we are iustified sometime of faith Philip. 3.9 because faith is the instrument whereby Christs righteousnesse is applyed vnto vs Gryneus Quest. 44. Of the meaning of these words v. 17. is reuealed from faith to faith 1. Is reuealed 1. Which sheweth a double preheminence of the Gospel in respect of the matter it sheweth such things as cannot be otherwise knowne then by reuelation from God whereas the lawe of the Iewes and the Philosophie of the Gentiles treateth of common and knowne things and for the manner that which was obscurely set forth in the law is plainely declared in the Gospel Pareus 2. and it is so reuealed that it is not onely made knowne but indeede exhibited Beza 3. And
to euerie one that beleeueth then it followeth that euerie one that beleeueth is saued where els were the power of God to saluation if it were not effectuall to saue if then this power be in faith to saluation if it could not saue without the supply of other helpes this power should be turned into weakenesse that which is powerfull to saluation is sufficient to saluation Gods power worketh perfectly it hath no want nor requireth any helpe but in faith is the power of God to saluation Ergo c. Controv. 18. Of the difference between the Lawe and the Gospel v. 18. The wrath of God is reuealed from heauen against all vngodlines Bellarmine hence inferreth that comminations and terrors are as proper and peculiar to the Gospell as to the lawe lib. 4. de iustificat c. 2. Contra. True it is that the Gospel also hath many comminations against sinners and as by the Gospel the righteousnesse of God is reuealed from faith to faith v. 17. so the wrath of God is also reuealed thereby against all vnrighteousnesse but this is not the proper effect of the Gospel but accidentally for the Gospell by the vnthankfulnesse of them which beleeue it not beeing ordained for their saluation is turned vnto their condemnation And whereas the Lawe in generall condemneth all infidelitie and vnbeleefe the Gospell peculiarly condemneth vnbeleefe in Christ Pareus See further hereof Synops. Centur. 4. er 60. Controv. 19. Whether by naturall meanes the Gentiles might haue attained to the knowledge of the onely true God without the speciall assistance of Gods grace 1. Bellarmine affirmeth the contrarie Deum esse vnum esse cognosci posse lumine rationis absque speciali gratiae auxilio that it may be knowne that God is and that he is but one by the light of nature without the speciall helpe of grace and he insisteth vpon this place of the Apostle v. 20. thereout vrging these two arguments 1. because the Apostle saith the invisible things of the world are seene not by reuelation but by creation 2. and seeing the Gentiles are hereby made inexcusable because they notwithstanding this naturall knowledge of God committed idolatrie it sheweth that they knew God by the creatures or els they might haue excused themselues by pretense of their ignorance Bel. lib. 4. de grat c. 2. Contra. 1. Though we consent not to their opinion who hold that nothing at all can be knowen of God without his speciall assistance as Petrus ab Aliaco affirmeth in 1. sent qu. 3. which opinion see before confuted qu. 54. for many things touching the Godhead as his goodnesse wisedome power are seene in the creation 2. yet it cannot be prooued that the Gentiles did or could attaine vnto such a manifest knowledge of the onely true God onely by the light of nature without Gods further assistance And this is an euident argument hereof because neuer any of the Gentiles de facto in fact did attaine vnto such knowledge of God by the light of nature 3. And concerning the reasons vrged S. Paul sheweth that the invisible things of God were to be seene in the Creatures not that the Gentiles did therein see them but they might haue seene them if they had not bin wilfully blind and they were made inexcusable because they could not pleade simple ignorance but their owne wilfulnesse was the cause of their ignorance which tooke from them all excuse see hereof before qu. 52.54.57 So that Augustines resolution is good that the creatures doe indeede crie with a loud voice ipse fecit nos God made vs sed surdis canere c. but they thus speake vnto deafe men vnlesse God shew further mercie see further Synops Centur. 4. err 38. Controv. 20. Against some Philosophers that the world is not eternall v. 20. The invisible things of God to wit his eternall power and Godhead are seene c. If Gods eternitie is seene by the workes which he made then that which is made is not eternall 1. that which is made must haue one by whom it was made he then that made the world was before the world then as by the things made the maker is found to be eternall so the things made which had a beginning are concluded not to be eternall 2. beside where things are contrarie one vnto another there is no eternitie now in the world there are things contrarie as actions passions generation corruption seeing then the world consisteth of corruptible partes the whole must be also subiect to corruption Then is the opinion of Aristotle vaine and false that held the world to be eternall and of Plinie which calleth the world God and of Hermeas the Stoike that imagined a coeternitie of matter with God whereof he made the world ex Faio Controv. 21. Against the adoration and setting vp of images in Churches and places of prayer ver 23. they turned the glorie of the incorruptible God to the sâ—imilitude of an image Though the vse generally of all images be not condemned among Christians as the Turkes hold it vnlawfull to make the similitude of any thing for there may be a ciuill and historicall vse of pictures and images yet it is dangerous to set them vp in the publike places of Gods seruice either to fall downe and worship before them as the Romanists doe or to retaine them for a supposed ornament as the Lutherans The reasons against all such publike vse of imagerie are these 1. It is the direct commandement of God that he would haue no image made to represent him by Deut. 4.15 Take heede that ye corrupt not your selues or make you a grauen image or representation of any figure whether it be male or female the likenesse of any beast or the likenesse of any feathered foule c. the same prohibition is expressed in the second commandement of the Morall Law which is perpetuall and bindeth for euer Pare 2. Herein pseudo-Christians doe conforme themselues to the Gentiles by whom imagerie was brought in and herein they doe oppose themselues to the decision of the Turkes and Iewes for as the Gentiles did vse the pictures and images of beasts which they ioyned to their idols so is it among the Romanists as they make Iohn Baptist with a lambe in his lappe Vendeline with oxen Antonie with hogges Eustachius with buckes and dogs Gallus with a beare Gertrude with mise Martine and George vpon horsebacke These were the verie superstitious fashions of the heathen Gualter 3. Nay the verie Gentiles at the first did a long time forbeare the superstitious vse of images Plutarke writeth in the life of Numa Pompilius that he would suffer no images to be in Churches because he thought it not fit to make God like vnto man or any other thing who is an invisible spirit and so the Romanes continued without images for the space 170. yeares Varro also thus writeth hereof that they which first brought in images metum ciuitatibus ademerunt errorem addiderunt did take
secret or hid part and the circumcision is of the heart in the spirit not in the letter whose praise that is of the Iew as the relatiue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the masculine gender sheweth is not of men but of God 2. The parts Method and Argument THis Chapter hath two parts 1. the Apostle conuinceth all to be sinners and so to deserue condemnation much lesse to be iustified by their workes 2. he taketh away certaine pretexts and excuses which might be alleadged 1. As in the former chapter he conuinced the Gentiles of sinne and so to be subiect to Gods iust wrath because both they committed euill things themselues and fauoured those which did them so now he vrgeth an other argument from their owne conscience The reason standeth thus whosoeuer condemneth himselfe is inexcusable this is prooued in the second verse because the iudgement of God is according to truth to iudge euery man according to his owne conscience but all men doe condemne themselues because they iudge others for the same things which they doe themselues v. 1. therefore they are inexcusable v. 1. 2. The pretenses are 1. either generall of all men v. 3. to 11. or speciall first of the Gentiles v. 11. to 17. or of the Iewes v. 17. to the ende 1. The generall pretext or pretense 1. is propounded v. 3 4. that God beeing mercifull and long-suffering will not straightly punish and condemne euery one that is euill 2. the Apostles answer followeth 1. from the ende and cause of Gods long-suffering which is to call men to repentance v. 4. in the latter part 2. from the effect of impenitencie which is the heaping vp of wrath which is confirmed by the efficient cause the iustice of God v. 6. then by an anrithesis and opposition both of the rewards and punishments v. 7 8 9 10. which also is amplified and confirmed by the reason thereof that God is no accepter of persons v. 11. 2. The first speciall pretext is of the Gentiles which may be collected thus It is vniust for those which haue no law to be punished the Gentiles haue no law Ergo. The Apostle answereth to the maior or first part by a distinction that they which haue no law at all neither naturall nor written are not to be punished but if they haue either or both if they sinne against the law of nature or the written law they shall be iudged accordingly v. 12. the latter part of sinning against the written law is further illustrated by preuenting an obiection for the Iew might alleadge that he had the law and gaue eare vnto it therefore he should not be iudged thereby the Apostle answereth that not the hearers of the law but the doers should be iustified v. 13. The second part of the argument that the Gentiles had no lawe the Apostle denieth proouing that although they had not the written lawe yet they had the law of nature which he sheweth by two arguments taken from two effects the one because some of them by the light of nature did some things agreeable to the written law v. 14. and againe they had the testimonie of their owne conscience either accusing or excusing them v. 15. which is set forth by the circumstance of the time when this testimonie of their conscience shall most of all shew it selfe namely at the day of iudgement v. 16. Then follow the particular pretexts and excuses of the Iewes The first is that the Iewes had the knowledge of the law and therfore that they should not be damned together with the rest this defense of the Iewes is first propounded in their person in diuers particular points wherein the Iewes boasted as in the knowledge of the law in the teaching and instructing of others v. 17. to 20. then the Apostle adioyneth his answer denying the argument because although they had the Law yet they obserued it not which he prooueth by experience of their euill life v. 21 22 23. and by a testimonie of Scripture v. 24. The other pretext and defense of the Iewes was this circumcision is not vnprofitable the Iewes had circumcision therefore it was auaileable vnto them to this the Apostle maketh this answer to the proposition by this distinction that circumcision profited if it kept the law which is amplified by the contrarie that if it kept not the law it was no better then vncircumcision nay vncircumcision keeping the law should be preferred before circumcision not keeping the law v. 25 26 27. to the assumption he also answereth by a double distinction of a Iew outward and inward and of circumcision in the flesh and the spirit that a Iew outward should gaine nothing before God by his circumcision onely in the flesh and not in the heart v. 28 29. 3. The questions and doubts discussed 1. Quest. To whome the Apostle here speaketh Wherefore thou art inexcusable O man c. to the Gentiles or Iewes 1. Some thinke that the Apostle vseth here a transition and as he had hetherto discouered the sinnes of the Gentiles so now he turneth him vnto the Iewes to lay open their hypocrisie Lyran. And Tolet thinketh that the Apostle reasoneth from the lesse to the greater that if the Gentiles which had not the written law of God were not excusable much lesse the Iewes But the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherefore sheweth that this is inferred out of that which went before and so is a continuance of the same argument 2. Some here comprehend not the Gentiles onely but the Iewes also that both the Iewes in condemning the idolatrie of the Gentiles and the Gentiles censuring the Iewes for their euill life and yet did the same things themselues should be both without excuse Haymo gloss ordin Anselm Perer. But it can not be shewed how the Iewes condemning the Gentiles of idolatrie were guiltie of the same themselues 3. The third opinion is that the Apostle still treateth of the Gentiles and hereof there are two reasons both because those words haue a necessarie connexion and reference to and with the former chapter and afterward v. 17. the Apostle beginneth by name to deale with the Iewes But they which agree that this is spoken of the Gentiles yet doe differ therein 1. Origen will haue this verse to be the conclusion of the former chapter wherein he committeth two faults first in ioyning together things of diuers natures for the Apostle there touched those which both fauoured euill in others and did practise it in themselues but now he taxeth an other sort of men that seemed to mislike sinne in others and yet did it themselues and againe Origen in diuiding the first verse from the second for we know that the iudgement of God is according to the truth which is a reason of the former doth separate and distinguish those things which should be conioyned 2. Some referre this to such as were Iudges among the Gentiles who though they made lawes to iudge and punish by yet
Some giue this solution that there is no acception of persons in donis gratuitis in gifts of gratuitie and freely bestowed as election vocation are of the free gift of God he calleth and electeth whome he will but a person may be accepted in the distribution of that which doth of right appertaine vnto one and so the Lord accepteth no ma◠person but rewardeth euery one according to his worke Peter disput 6. numer 42. 2. Beza thus answereth that in the decree of election there can be no acception of persons when God electeth some before they haue any beeing and so are yet no person at all 3. But this answer is more full and sufficient there are three things to be considered in the accepting of persons 1. when some externall condition is respected beside the merit of the cause 2. and this is done contrarie to the law of equitie 3. and not without iniur◠done vnto an other when of partiall affection that is taken from one which is his right and adiudged to an other But none of these are seene in Gods election 1. he respecteth not any condition or qualitie in them which are elected but he maketh choice of them of his owne good pleasure 2. he is not tied to any law and so transgresseth no law 3. he doth not wrong vnto any in exempting some from destruction which in the rigour of his iustice is due vnto all like as Augustine putteth the case of two debters if the Creditour doe forgiue his debt vnto one and exact it of an other he doth no wrong it is free for him to doe what he will with his owne Matt. 20.15 Pareus Faius so as Augustine well determineth ibi acceptio personarum recte dicitur vbi ille qui iudicat relinquens causae meritum c. there acception of persons is rightly saide to be when he that iudgeth leauing the merit of the cause doth finde somewhat in the person for the which he giueth sentence with one against an other c. lib. 2. ad 2. epist. Pelagian c. 7. But to doth not God for he findeth no difference in the persons but all beeing in the same cause of damnation he of his owne free will forgiueth his debt vnto some and requireth it of others 4. Obiect But it is an accepting of persons as well cum aequalibus in aequalia tribnuntur c. when vnequall things are giuen to those which are equall in cause as when all are guiltie and yet one is saued an other condemned as when the persons are vnequall as the innocent condenmed and the guiltie freed God seemeth in the first kind to haue respect vnto persons freeing some from condemnation which belongeth in the rioour of Gods iustice to all Answ. 1. It is not simply an accepting of persons to giue vnequally where the cause is equall but when this is done with respect vnto some qualitie in the person as because he is rich or honourable or such like and the other is not But God doth not so he electeth some before other not for any respect to their persons but of his meere grace and fauour 2. betweene the decree of Gods election and the execution thereof there commeth the faith and pietie of the elect which maketh a manifest difference betweene them and the reprobate which freeth God from all partialitie who iudgeth men according to the qualitie of their workes See more afterward 3. addition to the places of doctrine 24. Quest. Of the meaning of these words v. 12. As many as haue sinned without the law shall perish without the law 1. Ambrose exposition here seemeth somewhat strange who vnderstandeth this not of the law of nature but of the law of Moses to the which the Gentiles were bound to giue assent and therefore duplici nomine sunt rei they are guiltie two waies because they did not giue assent vnto the law giuen by Moses nor receiued Christ c. Pererius refelleth this interpretation because the law of Moses did onely bind the Hebrewes neither were any of the Prophets commanded to publish the law of Moses to the Gentiles as afterward the Apostles were commanded to preach it to the Gentiles But Tolet somewhat qualifieth and excuseth Ambrose making this his meaning that he speaketh onely of the Gentiles who liued after the publishing and preaching of the Gospel who then were bound to beleeue and to receiue the writings of Moses and the Prophets which prophesied of Christ yet in this sense he thinketh that Ambrose expresseth not the Apostles full meaning who speaketh generally of the Gentiles both before and at the comming of Christ. 2. Chrysostome whome Anselme followeth doth interpret this to be iudged without a law levius puniri to be more easily punished for the Gentile hauing not the law as the Iew had is thereby somewhat excused But the Apostles purpose is not to shew any inequalitie of punishment betweene the Iew and Gentile but onely howsoeuer they are vnequall in knowledge yet because they are equall in sinne they shall both indifferently be punished 3. Some contrariwise doe make the case of the Gentiles more grieuous they shall perish without the law meaning the written law but the Iewes shall be iudged onely that is not punished eternally but for a time who afterward shall be saued this opinion is imputed to Origen hom 3. in Levit. and he insinuateth as much in his commentarie vpon this place Augustine reselleth this opinion concion 25. in Psal. 118. And it is euidently confuted by the saying of our Sauiour Matth. 11. that it shall be more easie for the Sodomites in the day of iudgement then for the vnbeleeuing Iewes Perer and they that haue done euill whether Iew or Gentile shall goe into euerlasting fire Matth. 25.46 Here then iudgement is taken for condemnation as it is vsuall in the Scripture as Ioh. 5.29 They that haue done euill shall come forth to the resurrection 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of iudgement that is condemnation Tolet. 4. Pererius here maketh mention of the like opinion of certaine of their Catholikes who by iudging here vnderstand certaine transitorie paines in purgatorie which such shall endure but they shall not finally perish because they hold the foundation namely faith in Christ But Pererius confuseth them because the Apostle speaketh of such Iewes as beleeued not in Christ and therefore did not hold the foundation 5. Gregorie hath this obseruation vpon those words he maketh two degrees of those which shall be saued in the day of iudgement and two likewise of them which shall be condemned first alij iudicantur regnant some shall be examined first for their life and afterwards enter into Gods kingdome such as repented them of their former sinnes and did good workes such Christ shall say vnto for I was hungrie and ye gaue me meate c. alij electorum non iudicantur reginant others of the elect should not be iudged at all but presently reigne with Christ such are they
owne righteousnesse which is of the lawe but that which is thorough the faith of Christ of these the Apostle speaketh here that in part doe themselues liue according to the lawe and shewe their faith by their fruits supplying that which is wanting in them by the obedience of Christ by faith 3. There are two kinds of iustification one is verily and indeede before God which is by faith in Christ Rom. 3.26 the other is in the opinion of men Luk. 16.15 Ye are they which iustifie your selues before men of the former the Apostle speaketh here Gryneus see further for the exposition of this place controv 7. following Quest. 27. How the Gentiles which had not the lawe did by nature the things contained in the lawe This place is diuersly expounded 1. Some doe here vnderstand the Gentiles converted to the faith of Christ which doe naturally the worke of the lawe that is to beleeue in Christ not that faith is naturall but because duce natura credunt they beleeue nature so guiding them and while they beleeue opus legis oftendunt they shewe the worke of the Lawe to this purpose Ambrose whose meaning seemeth to be this that the Gentiles which receiued the Gospel were mooued by the light of nature seeing the great miracles which Christ did to acknowledge him to be the Messiah But 1. this is an improper speech to say that to beleeue is to doe the things of the lawe neither is faith a worke of the lawe for then he that is iustified by faith might be said to be iustified by the lawe which the Apostle euerie where opposeth and setteth one against the other and faith is called the work of God not of the lawe as Ioh. 6.29 This is the worke of God that ye beleeue c. 2. Neither by the light of nature can any come to beleeue but he hath neede of speciall illumination Iohn 6.44 No man can come vnto me except my father drawe him 2. Augustine likewise lib. de spirit liter c. 26. vnderstandeth this place of the Gentiles conuerted to the faith of Christ and so also lib. 4. con Iuli. c. 3. And thus he seemeth to prooue it because afterward v. 26. he saith If circumcision keepe the ordinances of the lawe shall not his vncircumcision be counted for circumcision here the Apostle speaketh of a Gentile conuerted for otherwise how could he keepe the lawe and it is like that in all these places the Apostle speaketh of the same kind of Gentiles and they are said naturally to doe the things of the lawe quia vt crederint ipsa in eis per Christi gratiam sanata est natura because that they might beleeue their nature was healed by grace to this purpose Augustine But this exposition may be thus obiected against 1. though it be admitted that afterward the Apostle speaketh of a Gentile conuerted to the faith it followeth not that he should so meane here for in this place the Apostle maketh mention of such Gentiles as had no other direction but the lawe of nature and their conscience and so are said to sinne without the law but in the other place he compareth with the Iewes such vncircumcised Gentiles which kept the ordinances of the lawe and had the true circumcision of the heart which they could not attaine vnto by the light of nature And so Origen though before he vnderstand the vnbeleeuing Gentiles qu. 21. yet there he thinketh the Apostle to meane the Gentiles conuerted see qu. 43. following Some thinke that the Apostle is there to be vnderstood to speake by way of supposition if circumcision keepe the ordinances of the lawe not that it did but if it did Calvin but it is there better referred to the conuerted Gentile O siand see afterward question 43. 2. If to doe by nature the things of the law were to doe it by nature illuminated by grace and faith then were there no difference here betweene Iewe and Gentile for the Iewe also did so keepe the lawe 3. and whereas it is said they hauing not the law he sheweth that they haue no other helpe but the lawe of nature whereas the conuerted Gentiles did such things by the instinct of grace and faith rather then by the light of nature 4. And whereas Augustine thus obiecteth that if it be the lawe of nature which is written in their hearts the Gospel should haue no priuiledge more then the lawe which the Lord is said to write in their hearts Ierem. 31.33 It may be answeared that the one is written in the heart ratione luminis naturalis by the meanes of the naturall light the other is written ratione luminis fidei by the light of faith and by the first naturall onely and morall duties are imprinted in the heart by the other beside these all other mysticall points of religion which nature cannot bring one vnto without faith this is the priuiledge then of the Gospel more then the lawe of nature hath Tolet. And Ieremie speaketh there of a supernaturall inscription and writing in the heart by grace the Apostle here of the naturall Pareus dub 14. 3. Some doe take the Gentiles here to be vnderstood not conuerted to the Gospell but such as liued before the times of the Gospel but beside the light of nature had auxilium diuinae gratiae the helpe of Gods grace whereby they kept the morall precepts of the lawe Thus Thomas interpreteth and Vega lib. 6. super decret concil Tridentin c. 21. so also Tolet that they did the workes of the lawe non quidem sine fide gratia but not without faith and grace annot 25. But this opinion is confuted by Medina lib. 4. de certa fide c. 7. and Pererius disput 8. numer 61. and it may be further refelled thus 1. If that were S. Pauls meaning that the Gentiles by their naturall light helped by faith did keepe the lawe they should not in this behalfe differ from the Iewes who did keepe the lawe by the same meanes also the light of nature assisted by grace 2. the Apostle saith they hauing not the lawe are a lawe to themselues but they which are ayded by grace are not a lawe to themselues they are guided and directed by grace 4. Some here vnderstand such among the Gentiles as had the true knowledge of God such were Melchisedeck Iob the Niniuites Cornelius Chrysost. Faius But these were not many among the Gentiles the Apostle seemeth to speake more generally of a great number among the Gentiles 5. Some thinke that the Gentiles by the light of nature though they beleeued not in God might doe workes of the lawe worthie of reward to this purpose Origen whose opinion is before confuted qu. 21. Lyranus seemeth also to incline hereunto obseruatio legis naturalis cum fide cultu vnius Dei ad quod inducit ratio naturalis aliquo modo sufficit c. the naturall obseruation of the lawe with the faith and worship of one God to
the which naturall reason iuduceth was some way sufficient to the Gentiles vnto saluation c. But nothing can be acceptable to God without faith not that generall faith and knowledge of one God but the knowledge of God in Christ for he is the way and doore and without him is no entrace into life 6. Wherefore the Apostle here describeth the Gentiles in generall euen before the times of the Gospel and such as had no other direction then by the lawe of nature which they had as the Apostle sheweth by these two arguments both by the externall workes of the lawe and by the inward testimonie of their conscience But the Apostle faith not they fulfilled the lawe they onely did certaine things prescribed in the lawe Martyr And he speaketh rather de notitia naturali quam de implenda legis facultate of the naturall knowledge which they had not of any power or facultie to fulfill the lawe Calvin Beza And he meaneth not all the Gentiles in generall but the wiser sort among them as Solon Socrates Aristides the Sciptoes Catoes with other who outwardly did some externall workes which the lawe commanded though they wanted the inward obedience Pareus Quest. 27. How any thing can be said to be written in the heart by nature seeing the minde is commonly held to be as a bare and naked table v. 15. Which shewe the effect of the lawe written in their heart It is the opinion of the best Philosophers as of Plato in Philebo that the soule of man by nature is like vnto a booke wherein nothing is written or like vnto a bare naked table Aristot. lib. 3. de anima c. 4. how then doth the Apostle here say that the lawe is written in their heart Answ. 1. Plato was of opinion that all things were at the first written in the soule but when it commeth into the bodie is blotted out againe and forgotten and vpon this ground that opinion is mentioned by the Platonists that scire est reminisci to know is nothing els but to remember But this assertion presupposeth that the soule of man had a beeing without the bodie and that there is a certaine promptuarie or seminare of soules from whence the soules are deriued into the bodies But this opinion is contrarie to the Scripture which affirmeth that God formeth the spirit of man within him Zach. 12.1 the soule of man is created within him in his bodie infundendo creatur creando infunditur it is created by infusion into the bodie and iufused by creation 2. therefore a better answer is that whereas Aristole saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that nothing is written in the vnderstanding it must be vnderstood actually yet potentia in possibilitie euerie thing is written there because the vnderstanding is apt and hath a capacitie to receiue and apprehend euerie thing 3. neither is that axiome of Philosophie generally to be vnderstood but to be restrained to such principles as are not engendred in the mind without instruction experience and obseruation as is the knowledge of arts otherwise there are some principles which are by nature imprinted in the soule as first the naturall conclusions which the soule apprehendeth of it selfe without any other demonstration as that God is to be worshipped parents are to be honoured that good and honest things are to be desired secondly there are certaine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 generall notions which are at the first apprehended onely by the sense as that the fire burneth that the whole is greater then the part and such like ex Perer. Quest. 28. Of the Lawe of nature what it is It shall not be amisse by occasion of these words of the Apostle who speaketh here of the lawe of nature written in the heart a little to digresse and briefly touch certaine questions of this matter and first we will see what this lawe of nature is and of what precepts it consisteth 1. It is euident by the Apostle here that there is a lawe of nature which he prooueth by â—o effects the one externall in the performance of some things agreeable to the lawe the other internall in the testimonie of the conscience But in this inward testimonie there are two things to be considered there is first that which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the comprehension of certaine practicall principles and a naturall discerning betweene good and euill iust and vniust then there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the conscience which either accuseth one for doing euill or excuseth him in choosing of that which is good the synteresis doth frame the proposition the syneidesis or cosncience the assumption as thus the naturall lawe reacheth that parents must be honoured and that they which disobey parents are worthie of punishment thus the proposition is framed out of the principles of nature then the conscience of the guiltie person supplyeth the assumption But we Cham Esau Absolom haue disobeyed our parents therefore we deserue punishment and the like practicall syllogismes may be made in other commandements Gryneus 1. Melancthon thus defineth the lawe of nature it is a knowledge of certaine principles belonging to the practise of life and of the conclusions thence necessarily inferred agreeable with the eternall rule of truth which God hath planted in the mind of man to be a testimonie vnto man that there is a God which ruleth and iudgeth the actions of men c. In this description there are the former causes expressed of the law of nature 1. the materiall cause or the obiect thereof wherein it is occupied and whereof it consisteth namely of certaine practicall principles with the conclusions gathered thereupon for the speciall scope of this naturall direction is for the the practise of life and not for speculation and in this naturall knowledge are not onely contained the first principles as parents are to be honoured but the conclusions thence diducted as out of this principle in generall euery one is taught by the light of nature in particular to conclude that therefore he must honour his parents 2. the formall cause is the agreement with the rule of truth and the equitie of Gods written lawe for the lawe of nature is a summarie abridgement of the morall lawe 3. then the efficient cause and author is God who hath written and imprinted this law in the heart of man as Ambrose thus defineth this naturall law quam Deus omnium creator singulorum hominum pectoribus iufudit which God the Creator of all hath infused into euerie mans breast epist. 71.4 then the end is that it should be a testimonie of the diuine prouidence and iudgement whereby he ruleth all things and in the ende will iudge the actions of men This description of the lawe of nature agreeth with the Apostles definition here it is the effect of the lawe written in our hearts the effect or worke sheweth the matter of the lawe the forme written the efficient for it is Gods writing the ende
is expressed afterward their conscience accuseth or excuseth them Quest. 29. What precepts the lawe of nature containeth and prescribeth This may be shewed both generally in the diuerse kinds of those things whereof these precepts consist and in particular by a seuerall induction and instance in the precepts of the morall lawe 1. Man is bound to carrie himselfe vpright both toward God that is aboue him toward other men like himselfe and toward such things as are inferiour vnto him and vnder his rule and command as within him his bodie sense affections without him honour riches pleasure and such like In all these man receiueth some direction from the lawe of nature for the first he is taught to loue God and feare him aboue all as beeing the maker of all things for the second there are two naturall precepts one affirmatiue whatsoeuer you would that men should doe vnto you doe vnto them Matth. 7.12 the other negatiue quod tibi fieri non vis alteri ne feceris that which you would not haue done to you offer not to another for the third euen Cicero by the light of nature could say animus imperat corpori vt Rex ciuibus ratio libidimi vt seruis dominus the minde ruleth the bodie as the king his citizens reason the lust as the master gouerneth the seruants lib. 3. de repub which words are cited by Augustine lib. 4. cont Iulian. c. 12. euen by naturall reason man hath some direction to guide himselfe in the desiring and coueting of the temporall things of this life 2. Another generall demonstration there is of these naturall precepts for man hath some naturall inclinations common to all other things some incident onely to things that haue life and some peculiar to humane nature of the first kind is the desire which euerie thing hath for it owne preseruation and hence it is that a man naturally declineth all things which are hurtfull to his life and is inclined by nature to preserue his bodie and life as Tullie saith generi animantium omni est à natura tributum c. it is giuen by nature vnto euerie liuing thing to defend it owne bodie and life of the second sort is the procreation and education of children which is by nature giuen vnto vnreasonable creatures of the third kind are those things which specially belong vnto the nature of man as a desire to knowe the truth and to acknowledge God and liue sociably with other men so Tullie also saith eadem natura virationis hominem conciliat homini adorationis vitae societatem c. the same nature by the force of reason doth ioyne man to man both in the societie of speach and life lib. 1. de officijs 3. But more euidently shall it appeare what nature prescribeth by particular induction in the seuerall commandements of the morall lawe 1. Concerning the worship of the onely God the heathen by nature had some knowledge thereof as Cyrellus lib. 1 cont Iulian. citeth Pythagoras Deus vnus est c. God is one not without the gouernment of the world as some thinke sed in ipso est tot â—s en toto orbe but he is in it wholly in the whole he considereth all generations the beginning of all things the father of all c. the same father sheweth how Orpheus recanted his error of the multitude of Gods and in the end ackowledged one onely God 2. And as touching the adoration of images Strabo writeth that the Persians had neither altars nor images and when they warred against the Greecians they ouerthrewe and burned their temples with their images the like Cornelius Tacit. writeth of the Germanes quod coelesti maiestati parum convenire putauerunt c. that they thought it not agreeable to the celestiall maiestie to include the gods within walls or to resemble them to any humane shape Numa Pompilius thought it vnlawfull to ascribe any forme either of man or beast vnto God that was invisible 3. Touching the abusing and profaning of the name of God Tullus Hostilius was killed with lightening and his house burned because he attempted by certaine irreligious excorcismes to call vp Iupiter Elicius Theophrastus as Plutarke writeth noted Pericles that beeing sicke shewed vnto his friend certaine enchanted toyes hanging about his necke 4. And the Gentiles also obserued their Sabboths and dayes of rest wherein it was of their blind and corrupt nature that they added many superstitious obseruations of their owne yet nature taught them that some time was to be set apart for the worship of their gods 5. The Gentiles also commended the honouring of parents and condemned disobedience vnto them therefore Solon beeing asked why he appointed no punishment for such as killed their parents answered because he thought that none would be so wicked to attempt any such thing 6. Such was the hatred of the detestable sinne of murther among the Romanes that for the space of 620. yeares from the first building of Rome none was found to haue beene killed within the citie walles by any priuate mans hand as Dion Holicarnass obserueth 7. Adulterie was odious by the light of nature among the Gentiles as appeareth by the iudgement of Pharaoh and Abimelech concerning Sara Abrahams wife Gen. 22. 20. 8. Theft by Draco his lawe was punished with death Solon thought that too grieuous a punishment and enioyned double restitution for theft the Indians and Scythians because they had not houses to keepe their goods in counted theft among the most grieuous offences the like opinion they had of fraud and impostures Cato beeing asked quod faenerari what it was to be an vsurer answeared quid hominem occidere what is it to kill a man 9. The Indians most seuerely punished those which were taken in a lie and generally among the heathen they so detested falshood and were iealous and suspicious of false testimonies that as Cicero saith it was generally receiued vt vel amplissimi homines ne in miximis rebus c. that no not the most excellent men euen in the smallest matters should giue testimonie in their owne cause and for the same reason they would not suffer any to be a witnesse against his enemie for it was supposed he would make a lie to endanger him whom he hated 10. The Gentiles also were not ignorant that it was vnlawfull to couer the things of another as when Xerxes dealt with Leonides to haue revoulted and promised to make him Monarch of Greece he receiued this answer from him If you had knowne saith Leonides what things are honest in mans life abstinuisses à concupiscendis alienis you would haue abstained from coueting other mens things And thus by this particular induction it is euident how the effect of the morall law is naturally written in the heart of man and that the lawe of nature if it be not blinded commandeth the same things which the written lawe of God ex Gualtero Quest. 30. What the lawe of
nature none are ignorant of but when they come to draw out particular conclusions out of these generall rules there they faile either beeing blinded in their iudgement or corrupted by euill manners and custome whereupon it commeth that men take those things in their practise to be good and commendable which are euill as among the Germanes as Caesar writeth lib. 6. de bell Gall. robberie was counted no fault neither was the vnnaturall loue of boyes among the Grecians and Romanes held to be vnlawfull and infamous 2. An other proofe hereof that the light of nature is not vtterly extinguished is by the force and working of the conscience which is readie to accuse the offender and to prick and sting his soule as Cain by this light of his conscience was driuen to confesse that his sinne was greater then could be forgiuen 3. An other argument hereof which the Apostle also toucheth here is the practise of naturall men who did performe diuers commendable things by the light of nature agreeable to equitie as appeareth by diuers politike lawes and positiue constitutions of the Gentiles by the which these two assertions and conclusions of Plato are found to be true legem esse inventionem veritatis that the law is the inuention of truth that is the law of nature and legeÌ„ est imitationeÌ„ veritatis the law is the imitation of truth that is positiue laws grounded vpon the law of nature 32. Qu. Whether ignorance of the law of nature in man doth make any way excusable 1. First though the light of nature be now much darkned and obscured yet thereby a man notwithstanding this naturall darknes and ignorance is left without excuse as the Apostle saith c. 1.20 to the intent that they should be without excuse and the equitie thereof thus further appeareth the Prophet Dauid saith Psal. 79.6 Powre out thy wrath vpon the heathen that haue not knowne thee and S. Paul 2. Thess. 1.8 in flaming fire rendring vengeance vnto them that doe not know God But Gods iudgement is most iust he would not punish men without their fault seeing then that euen they which know not God shall be iudged it remaineth that their ignorance is not without their owne fault that is an excellent saying of Augustine inexcusabilis est omnis peccator vel reatu originis c. euery sinner is inexcusable either by originall guilt or by voluntarie additament whether we know or be ignorant for ignorance in them that would not vnderstand is sinne without doubt in them that could not it is the punishment of sinne and so in both non est iust a excusatio sed iust a damnatio there is no iust excuse but damnation is iust c. epistol 105. So both waies is the ignorant man left without excuse for that perfect light of nature which was giuen at the first to man was lost by his sinne so that this ignorance is the iust punishment of sinne and that light of nature which remaineth was by the Gentiles abused that they would not vnderstand that which nature reuealed 2. Yet although the ignorance of the law altogether excuse not as it serueth not the malefactors turne to say he knew not the law of the Prince against the which he hath offended yet it doth somewhat extenuate the offence for the faults committed by the ignorant are lesse then those which such fall into that haue knowledge according to that saying of our blessed Sauiour Luk. 12.47 The seruant that knew his masters well and prepared not himselfe neither did according to his will shall be beaten with many stripes but he that knew it not and did commit things worthie of stripes shall be beaten with few stripes for vnto him that is ignorant are wanting two things knowledge and a good will but he that sinneth wittingly hath but one want onely good will and inclination and the one hath both voluntatem facti peccati the will of the deede and the sinne but he that falleth of ignorance hath onely a will to the deed not to the sinne though the deede be sinne see further of this matter 4. chap. 1. quest 57. 33. Quest. That the light of nature is not sufficient of it selfe to direct a man to bring forth any vertuous act without the grace of Christ. It was the common opinion of the Philosophers that there were the seedes of all vertuâ— graft in the minde of man by nature which seedes growing to ripenes were able to bring forth right vertuous actions But the contrarie is euident that this naturall seede is imperfect and of it selfe vtterly vnable to bring forth any such fruit 1. The Apostle saith that he which soweth to the flesh shall of the flesh reape corruptioâ— but he that soweth to the spirit shall of the spirit reape life euerlasting it is then the seede oâ— the spirit that sanctifieth to life euerlasting he that is lead onely by the light of nature soâ—eth to the flesh and the fruit thereof is corruptible S. Iohn also saith he that is borne of Gâ—â— sinneth not for his seede remaineth in him 1. Ioh. 3.9 he then that is onely borne of natâ—â—e hath not this seede remaining in him and therefore can not chuse but sinne 2. If the morall law without the grace of Christ were of no efficacie to bring a man to righteousnes but rather serued to reueale sinne as the Apostle saith Rom. 4.13 Thâ— law causeth wrath and Rom. 7.11 Sinne tooke occasion by the commandement and deceâ—â—â— me and thereby slew me much lesse is the law of nature auaileable to direct one vnto yet â—â—ous acts but rather it is an occasion to the wicked that abuse it of further stumbling 〈◊〉 as a light suddenly flashing vpon ones eyes walking in darknes doth dazle them the moâ—â— and causeth him to stumble 3. This further appeareth how vnsufficient this naturall light is because in many thorough custome and continuance in sinne their very conscience is corrupt that they are nâ—â— touched with any remorse for euill but as the Prophet saith Ier. 3.3 Thou hadst a whoâ—â— forehead thou wouldest not be ashamed so they grew to be impudent and shameles in their euill doing and as their conscience was feared as with an hoat yron so their iudgement â—â—blinded taking good for euill and euill for good Isa. 5.20 4. If it be obiected that the Gentiles did many commendable things there are found â—mong them many worthie examples of iustice temperance fortitude yet these were sâ—â—â— from true vertues for both these semblable vertues were obscured with many other viâ—â— which raigned in them and they aimed at doing such things at a wrong ende they referrâ—â— all this their endeauour either to their owne profit or els to get praise thereby so that thâ—â— did ouercome other inferiour lusts desires with the predominant humour of couetousâ— and ambition like as in a bodie full of diseases and infirmities there may be one which not exceed the rest draw the
the vertue and faith of the parents But although the beleeuing parents may obtaine graces by their faith for others yet formally none are iustified before God but by their owne faith or some grace infused by the spirit of God for as the parents sinnes cannot condemne the child so the parents faith cannot saue the infant 2. Gorrhan thinketh that circumcision herein was avayleable quia peccatum originale delebat because it blotted out originall sinne But it is euident by this place that the circumcision of the flesh did not outwardly conferre grace for then circumcision could neuer be turned to vncircumcision that is to be of no more force without keeping of the law then if they had not beene circumcised at all 3. Augustine as Pet. Martyr alleadgeth him not citing the place reporteth the opinion of some which affirmed that a man beeing once baptized though he were an euill liuer yet in the ende should be saued but should suffer many things in this life the like opinion the Iewes might haue of their circumcision and so it might be profitable to infants but more profitable to those that also kept the law But the Apostle denieth circumcision to be profitable any thing at all without keeping the law because it is turned into vncircumcision it is no more availeable then if they were not circumcised at all 4. Wherefore the best solution is that the Apostle speaketh not here of infants sed de adultis but of those which were of yeares and discretion that circumcision did not profit them vnlesse they kept the law as baptisme now is not any helpe vnto saluation to Christians that lead an euill life As for infants they were then saued by the couenant of grace sealed in circumcision as now in baptisme 43. Quest. What vncircumcised the Apostle here speaketh of whether such of the Gentiles as were conuerted to the faith and what keeping of the law he meaneth 1. Calvin thinketh that the Apostle saying v. 26. if the vncircumcision keepe the ordinances of the law speaketh ex hypothesi by way of supposition if any such could be found that did keepe the law which no man could so also Pareus de obedientia plena loquitur ad quam obligabat circumcisio he speaketh of the full and perfect obedience of the law vnto the which circumcision did bind and he speaketh ex hypothesi by supposition if the vncircumcision keepe But it is euident that the Apostle speaketh not by way of supposition as of a thing impossible to be done but supposing if it were done for then it would follow that circumcision were not profitable at all because he saith circumcision is profitable if thou keepe the lawe if the Apostle should speake of the perfect keeping of the lawe which is impossible then all profitable vse is denied to circumcision but he â—ealed not so much detract from that holy institution of God circumcision indeede did bind them to keepe the whole law but it did profit them if there were an endeauour in them and care to keepe the lawe though they perfectly keepe it not 2. But Lyranus here hath a verie vnfound assertion that the Apostle should here speake of such vncircumcised Gentiles which did the workes of the Lawe ex rationis naturalis dictamine erant Deo accepti by the direction onely of naturall reason and were acceptable to God which cannot be that any not hauing faith by the light onely of nature should be accepted of God for without faith it is impossible to please him Heb. 11.6 3. The interlinearie glosse hath an other exposition by the ordinances of the law vnderstanding fidem Christi the faith of Christ whom the lawe did foretell should come for our iustification but faith in Christ is no worke or ordinance of the lawe for the Apostle concludeth that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the lawe Rom. 3.28 which were no good conclusion if faith in Christ were a worke of the lawe yet I denie not but the Apostle speaketh of such keeping of the lawe as proceeded from faith 4. Wherefore the Apostle here vnderstandeth such Gentiles as were conuerted to the faith as Origen expoundeth qui ex praeputio ad Christi fidem venerunt which came vnto the faith of Christ from vncircumcision for the idolaters among the Gentiles beeing not conuerted vnto Christ could not doe the workes of the lawe fayling in the first commandement which forbiddeth idolatrie such faithfull therefore among the Gentiles are vnderstood which had the knowledge of God Faius such as Iob was and to fulfill or keep the lawe here is taken pro legis seruandae studio for the studie and endeauour to keepe the law Faius so also Gryneus he saith in effect si Ethnicus aliquis fidei obedientiam praestaret if any Ethnicke or Gentile should performe the obedience of faith he should condemne a Christian that onely is baptized and performeth not such obedience But here it will be thus obiected on the contrarie 1. Obiect The Apostle saith v. 27. If vncircumcision by nature keepe the lawe shall it not iudge thee the Apostle then meaneth those which by the light of nature onely keepe the lawe Answ. 1. Some doe thus expound ex natura per gratiam reparata by nature repaired by grace gloss interlin so also Gorrhan saith that this keeping of the law is vnderstood to be by faith which is of nature preparative by way of preparation but of grace completive by way of perfection for the illumination of the soule is of grace the consent is of the will reformed by grace Contra. 1. It is an erroneous assertion that faith is partly of nature partly of grace it is wholly the worke of the spirit 1. Cor. 12.9 the will indeede consenteth yet not by it owne naturall power God as Augustine saith ex nolentibus volâ—tes facit of nilling maketh vs willing and the will concurreth not actively in any good worke or formally but passiuely and materially as not working but beeing wrought vpon 2. If nature should here be so taken restoared by grace there should be no difference in this behalfe betweene the Gentile and the Iewe for euen the Iewe also by grace illuminating his nature was enabled to keepe the Lawe though imperfectly but the Apostle seemeth here to speake of somewhat peculiar to the vncircumcised Gentiles 2. The Syriake interpreter in his annotations thinketh that by nature is here onely opposed to the lawe and the letter not excluding all other helpes beside nature but onely the helpe of the written law but then one that worketh by grace may be said to worke by nature which are opposite the one to the other c. 11.6 if by grace then not of workes that is naturally done without the helpe of grace 3. Wherefore the words are thus rather to be placed and that which is by nature vncircumcision keeping the Lawe as the words stand in the originall not thus vncircumcision which by nature keepeth the lawe as
the Syrian translatour placeth them so by nature must be ioyned to vncircumcision not to keeping the lawe and it is a description of the Gentiles which haue vncircumcision by nature Pareus 2. Obiect The words of the Apostle are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consummans as the Latine interpreter readeth perfecting the law which phrase Origen thus distinguisheth from the former word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to keepe the lawe which the Apostle vseth v. 26. he that liueth according to the letter of the lawe is said to keepe it but he that keepeth it according to the spirituall sense is said to perfect or accomplish it Contra. But Beza here well obserueth that both these are here taken for one that the perfect keeping of the lawe is not here opposed to the imperfect keeping but the keeping and obseruing of the lawe is set against the not hauing care to keepe it but to rest onely in the outward signe and ceremonie Quest. 44. Of the explanation of certaine termes here vsed by the Apostle and of the letter and the spirit 1. v. 26. Where the Apostle saith if vncircumcision keepe the lawe by a Metonimie he vnderstandeth the vncircumcised the signe is taken for the thing signified but afterward it is taken for the signe it selfe 2. His vncircumcision shall be counted for circumcision that is it shall be as no circumcision Chrysostome readeth it shall be turned into circumcision it shall be all one as if he were circumcised 3. By the ordinances of the lawe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some vnderstand the ceremonies and rites of the law But rather the morall duties of the lawe are thereby signified which the Gentiles performed hauing not the written lawe otherwise the rites and ceremonies of the lawe they could not obserue without the knowledge of the written lawe 4. Shall iudge thee To iudge is taken three wayes 1. Personally as it is said the Saints shall iudge the world 1. Cor. 6. shall personally stand against them in iudgement 2. actually as to iudge may be taken to accuse or testifie against as it is said v. 15. their thoughts accusing them 3. or by example as it is said the Ninevites and the Queene of the South shall iudge the Israelites so is it taken here the Gentiles going beyond the Iewes in example of life shall condemne them that is shewe them to be worthie of iudgement for their euill life Mart. Calvin Pareus 5. What is meant by the letter and spirit there are diuerse expositions 1. Sometime Augustine by the letter vnderstandeth the litterall sense of the lawe by the spirit the spirituall sense exposit in epist. ad Roman so also Origen he transgresseth the lawe qui spiritualem eius non tenet sensum who keepeth not the spirituall sense but euen the spirituall sense of the lawe if it were apprehended onely and the heart not thereby circumcised and reformed was in the Apostles sense but literall 2. some by the letter vnderstand legem scriptam the lawe written as separate from the grace of Christ as the Syrian interpreter readeth scripturam the Scripture which is so called because it was written in tables of stone gloss interlin 3. But it is better here more specially applyed to circumcision so that the letter and circumcision are here taken pro literali circumcisione for litterall circumcision Calvin Pareus that is the externall signe and ceremonie of circumcision onely according to the letter of the lawe which was made literalibus cultris with literall that is externall knifes Gorrhan and by the spirit is not vnderstood the soule as Tolet following Chrysostome but the efficacie of grace wrought in the soule by the spirit of God and so Augustine taketh it els where thus describing the circumcision of the heart quam facit non litera legis docent minans sed spiritus Dei sanans adiuvans which not the letter of the law teaching and threatning but the spirit of God worketh healing and helping lib. de spirit liter c. 8. so then there is no difference quoad rem in respect of the thing which is propounded betweene the spirit and the letter sed quoad animi affectum but in respect of the affection of the mind and the inward operation of the spirit Mart. for euen he that heareth the Gospell but beleeueth it not may be said to be a Gospeller according to the letter not after the spirit 6. By transgressing the lawe is meant the voluntarie breaking thereof not the fayling therein thorough ignorance or infirmitie Mart. as Origen noteth Paul himselfe did not alwaies keepe the lawe non tamen fuit praevaricator legis yet he was not a prevaricator or transgressor of the lawe 7. v. 28. He is not a Iewe which is a Iewe outward here must be vnderstood the word onely he was not a Iewe indeed that was onely so outwardly And in this sense the Apostle saith els where he was not sent to baptize that is onely Martyr Quest. 45. Of two kinds of Iewes and two kinds of circumcision v. 28. v. 28. He is not a Iewe which is one outwardly c. 1. The Apostle here maketh a double comparison both of the persons setting a circumcised Iewe not keeping the lawe against an vncircumcised Gentile keeping of the lawe and of the things betweene inward circumcision of the heart and outward in the flesh onely Mart. 2. And here there is a fowrefold antithesis or exposition 1. From the formes the one is within the other without in outward appearance onely 2. from the subiect one is in the heart the other in the flesh 3. from the efficient one is wrought by the spirit the other is in the letter it consisteth in literall and ceremoniall observations 4. from the ende the one hath praise of God the other is commended onely of men Gryneus 3. Hence the Apostle prooueth by three arguments that the spirituall circumcision is better then the carnall 1. That is best which is in secret and in truth then that which is openly and in shewe onely 2. and that which is wrought by the spirit is more excellent then that which is in the letter 3. and that hath the preheminence whose praise is of God 4. This distinction of spirituall and morall circumcision S. Paul hath out of Moses Deut. 10.16 Circumcise the foreskinne of your heart Deut. 30.6 The Lord thy God will circumcise thine heart which the Apostle further describeth thus Coloss. 2.11 In whom yee are also circumcised with circumcision made without hands by putting off the sinfull bodie of the flesh thorough the circumcision of Christ. And as there are two kinds of circumcision so there is also a twofold vncircumcision as Burgens noteth addition 1. out of the Prophet Ieremie c. 9.26 All the nations are vncircumcised and all the house of Israel are vncircumcised in the heart there is then an vncircumcision of the heart and an other of the flesh 5. Yet this must not be so vnderstood as though there were
for their person and the person is the state condition or qualitie of a thing now to knowe whether all accepting of the person be vnlawfull first the diuerse kinds of persons and qualities must be considered whereof there are 3. sorts 1. some personall conditions there are which are annexed to promises or comminations diuine and humane as faith obedience in the elect impenitencie impietie vnbeleefe in the wicked this accepting of persons is not vniust as Abraham was respected of God for his faith so also Dauid and Saul reiected for his hypocrisie 2. Some personall respects are so annexed to the cause as thereby it is aggravated or extenuated as he that striketh a magistrate is worthie of greater punishment then he that striketh an other and this respect of persons is also iust â—â— some personall respects are beside the cause as riches pouertie in the case of adulterie theft and such like and such accepting of the person is vniust Secondly the accepting â—â— persons is either in iudgement when it is in the two first senses lawfull but not in the thuâ—â— or extra iudicium out of iudgement and it is of three sorts 1. dilectionis of loue which in common duties is vnlawfull as when a rich man is preferred before a poore man for his riches which is condemned by S. Iames c. 2. v. 2.3 but in speciall and proper duties it is lawfull as in preferring the loue of our parents before others 2. electionis of election â—â— choice as when men of qualitie and gifts are advanced to places of office before them which are not so qualified this respect of persons is lawfull as beeing agreeable both vnto nature and to positiue lawes 3. donationis in matters of gift and donation as one for giueth his debt to one not to another this also is lawfull because here is no wrong done a man may dispose of his owne as it pleaseth him see more hereof before quest 23. 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. Against the power of free will in good things v. 5. Thou after thine hardnesse and heart that cannot repent heapest vnto thy selfe wrath c. Pererius out of this place inferreth that it is in potestate hominis bene vel male agere in the power of man to doe well or euill for it should otherwise be vniust to punish a man for doing euill and for want of repentance whereas he can doe no other disput 2. in c. 2. numer 23. Answ. 1. That man hath free will to doe euill without any compulsion violence or constraint it is confessed of all but this is a freedome à coactione from compulsion or enforcing not à necessitate from necessitie a man cannot now chuse but sinne because his nature is enthralled by the fall of man yet he sinneth willingly no man compelleth him But vnto that which is good man hath no will or inclination of himselfe but by the grace of God as the Prophet saith Ierem. 4.22 They are wise to doe euill but to doe well they haue no knowledge and our Blessed Sauiour saith Ioh. 15.5 Without me ye can doe nothing 2. yet though man cannot repent of himselfe nor yet doe any good thing he is worthily punished because man by his voluntarie transgression when it was in his power not to haue transgressed did abuse his free will giuen in the creation vnto sinne and so enthralled him selfe and his posteritie Once therefore man had free will if he could haue kept it but now that is become necessarie to doe euill which was before free man therefore is iustly punished notwithstanding this necessitie of sinning because he lost this libertie and freedome by his owne default 3. And let it here further be obserued how Pererius beside the falsitie of his assertion is become a falsarie in charging vs with vntrue opinions such as Protestants hold not as first that we should say hominem ad vtrumque impelli à Deo c. that man whether to doe good or euill is compelled and enforced of God whereas we abhorre and detest that as a most wicked heresie that God is the author of any euill or the moouer stirrer or prouoker thereunto Againe he obiecteth that we hold that mans free will is velut quoddam inanime c. is a certaine dead thing without life that it doth nothing of it selfe but is a bare title without any matter whereas we affirme that man is not as a stocke or stone but hath a naturall power to will to elect to desire but to will or doe that which is good it hath no power man willeth desireth chooseth but to doe these things well it is of grace in respect of the generall inclination of the will vnto the obiect it is actiue but in respect of the goodnesse of the will in beeing mooued vnto that which is good it is meerely passiue see Synop. pag. 858. Controv. 2. Of iustification by the imputatiue iustice of faith Whereas the Apostle saith v. 2. We know that the iudgement of God is according to truth Bellarmine hence thus reasoneth against imputatiue iustice Gods iudgement is according to truth but so is not imputed iustice it is not verily and in deede and according to truth but the habituall infused and inherent iustice is according to truth lib. 2. de iustificaton c. 3. Contra. 1. Bellarmine doth mistake the Apostles meaning for according to the truth is not secundum realem existentiam according to the reall existence of a thing but secundum equitatem according to equitie 2. So then the iustice of Christ imputed by faith is according to truth that is the rule of iustice because thereby full satisfaction is made for sinne by faith in Christ but that habituall and inherent iustice is not according to the rule of iustice because it is imperfect and thereby Gods iustice cannot be satisfied Pareus 3. Controv. Against the merit of workes v. 6. Who will reward euery man according to his works out of this place the Romanists contend for the merit of good works the Rhemists vpon this place affirme that life euerlasting is giuen for and according to their good workes there reasons and arguments are these 1. The Apostle vseth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall render which signifieth a iust retribution and so it is taken Matth. 20.8 Bellar. l. 5. de iustificat c. 2. 2. Tolet. annotat 6. vrgeth that place Matth. 25.34 Inherit ye the kingdome prepared for you c. for I was an hungred and ye gaue me meate c. 3. Likewise it is thus obiected God shall reward the wicked according to the merit of their euill workes Ergo the righteous shall be rewarded according to the merit of their good workes Ans. 1. Tolet. annot 6. rehearseth fiue seuerall answers which he supposeth to be vsed by the Protestants 1. some he saith by his workes vnderstand Christs workes according to the which God should reward the righteous 2. some thus he shall render vnto euery man according
punishment B. Par. immittit iram sendeth his wrath T. inducit iraâ—â— bringeth in his wrath that is punishment I speake according to man V.L. Or. as a man G. as the sonne of man T. after the manner of man B.Be. 6 God forbid farre be it or let it not be Or. els how shall God iudge the world Or. this world L.R. 7 For if the veritie of God hath more B. abounded thorough my lie in my lie L. so is the originall but the preposition in is taken for through why am I yet condemned as a sinner 8 And not rather as we are blasphemed orig as some speake euill of vs. Be. V. but the word in the orig is in the passive as we are slanderously reputed B. and some affirme that we say let vs doe euill that there may come good whose damnation is iust or whose damnation is reserued for iustice T. 9 What then are we more excellent no in no wise for we haue already or before prooued G. or pronounced T. not before accused Be. B. L shewed by rendring the cause V. the word properly so signifieth to giue a reason or shew the cause all both Iewes and Gentiles to be vnder sinne 10 As it is written There is none righteous no not one there is not any iust L.R. but the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one is here omitted 11 There is none that vnderstandeth there is none that seeketh after B. God 12 They haue all gone out of the way they are together become vnprofitable there is none that doth good no not one vnto one Or. 13 Their throat is in an open sepulchre with their tongues they haue deceiued B. Or. vsed their tongues to deceit Be. G. the poison of aspes is vnder their lippes 14 Whos 's mouth is full of cursing and bitternes 15 Their feete are swift to shed blood 16 Destruction not hearts griefe B. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contrition destruction and calamitie V.B.G. miserie B. vnhappines L. griefe T. are in their waies 17 And the way of peace they haue not knowne 18 The feare of God is not before their eyes Or. not there is no feare of God before their eyes for the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not is an adverb 19 Now we know that whatsoeuer the Law saith it saith to them which are vnder the Law in the law Or. that euery mouth may be stopped and all the world may be culpable G. obnoxious V. Be. subiect L. R. endamaged B. subiect to condemnation B. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth to be vnder the sentence that is guiltie vnto God 20 Therefore not because L.B. because that V. for it is a conclusion inferred out of the former words by the works of the Law shall no flesh be iustified in his sight or before him L. for by the Law commeth the knowledge of sinne by the law sinne is knowne T. 21 But now is the righteousnes of God made manifest without the Law hauing witnes of the Law and the Prophets 22 To wit the righteousnes of God by the faith of Iesus Christ toward all vnto all B.G. but the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in omnes toward all and vpon all that beleeue the righteousnes of God by faith c. L.V.T. but it is better to ioyne it by way of exposition to the former verse for this righteousnes by faith is the same which in the former verse he called the righteousnes of God for there is no difference these words some make part of the next verse the 23. Genev but in the original they ende the 22. verse 23 For all haue sinned and are depriued of the glorie of God G. Be. or come short as of the marke not haue neede of the glorie of God L. B. or are destitute V. T. for that doth not sufficiently expresse the meaning of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is to come short 24 But are iustified beeing iustified L. Or. but the participle must be resolued into the verbe freely by his grace thorough the redemption that is in Christ Iesus 25 Whome God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood for the shewing of his righteousnes by the forgiuenes of the sinnes which were past before 26 Through the patience of God by the space which God gaue vs by his long suffering T. but this is interpreted rather then translated for the shewing of his righteousnes in this present time at this time G.B.L.T. but in the originall there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nunc now that is this present that he might be iust and a iustifier of him which is of the faith of Iesus Or. of Iesus Christ. L. of our Lord Iesus Christ. T. 27 Where is then the boasting reioycing G. it is excluded by what law of works nay but by the law of faith 28 Therefore we conclude G. or collect or gather B.V. as by reason and argument so the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth not we thinke L. or hold B. that a man is iustified by faith without the works of the Law 29 Is he God of the Iewes onely and not of the Gentiles also yes euen of the Gentiles also 30 For it is one God which shall iustifie iustifieth L.T. but the word in the originall is in the future tense the circumcision of faith through faith T. but the preposition here is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of and the vncircumcision through faith 31 Doe we then make the Law of none effect through faith not destroy the law through faith L.B. for the same word was vsed before v. 3. shall their vnbeleefe make the faith of God without effect not destroy it God forbid yea we establish the Law 2. The Argument Method and parts IN this Chapter the Apostle proceedeth to prooue that the Iewes notwithstanding certaine priuiledges which they had yet because of their vnbeleefe were not better then the Gentiles and so he concludeth all vnder sinne and vnable to be iustified by their workes whereupon it followeth that they must be iustified by faith This chapter hath three parts The 1. from v. 1. to v. 9. wherein he remooueth certaine obiections which might be â—ooued by the Iewes which are three in number 1. Obiection is propounded v. 1. in making the case of the Iewes and Gentiles alike he should seeme to take away all priuiledge from the Iewes the answer followeth in graunâ—ing their priuiledge v. 2. and confirming the same by the constancie of Gods promises v. 3. which he prooueth by certaine testimonies out of the Psalmes v. 4. 2. Obiection is propounded v. 5. and it ariseth out of the testimonie before alleadged that if God be declared to be iust when he iudgeth and punisheth mens sinnes then he should not do well to punish that whereby his iustice is set forth v. 5. the answer followeth v. 6. taken froÌ„ the office of God he can not be but most iust seeing he shall iudge the
corrupt branches Pareus There is none that doth good no not one here none are excluded some thus giue the sense none sauing one namely Christ gloss interlin Gorrhan and so Augustine before them but the originall will not beare that sense the words are none vnto one that is no not one v. 13. Their throat is an open sepulchre 1. They are instar voraginis like vnto a gulph to destroy men and therefore are compared to a sepulchre 2. and an open sepulchre quod tetros spargit odores which sendeth forth stinking smells so they doe vtter filthie and vaine words 3. and they are likened to an open sepulchre quia vsus scelerum verecundiam sustulit their custome in sinne hath taken away all shamefastnes and modestie they are impudent in their sinne Origen 4. and as an open graue can neuer be satiate but it receiueth one bodie after an other so they doe still seeke to deuoure men and as it were eate them vp with their filthie and slanderous tongues They haue vsed their tongues to deceit where they can not openly deuoure they attempt to doe it by craft and deceit gloss interlin The poison of aspes is vnder their lippes The biting and venemous tongue is thus resembled 1. because this serpent doth morsu inficere infect and poison by biting Gryneus 2. it is insanabile a poison incurable gloss interlin Pellic. 3. and they are incorrigible and intractable like as the serpent stoppeth the eares and will not heare the voice of the charmer v. 14. Their mouth is full of cursing and bitternes 1. Their mouth is said to be full because ex pleno oris vasculo out of their mouth as a full vessell doe continually flow forth bitter and cruell words Origen 2. as they haue gall and bitternes in their heart Act. 8.23 so they doe vtter it with their mouth Gryneus 3. thus the Apostle sheweth how they abuse all the instruments of speaking their throat their tongues their lippes their mouth Tolet. 4. And as before they were giuen to flatterie and deceit so they sometime brake forth into open blasphemie both against God and man Calvin 5. Haymo specially refereth it to the bitter and blasphemous words which the Iewes vttered against Christ charging him to haue a deuill and crying out against him to be crucified v. 15. Their feete are swift to shed blood 1. The Apostle hetherto alleadged those testimonies out of the Psalmes now he citeth the Prophet Isa because in the mouth of two or three witnesses euery word shall be established Faius 2. by the feete are vnderstood their affections as Origen expoundeth consilium quo agimus iter vitae the counsell whereby we take in hand the trauell of this life and hereby their readines is signified vpon euery occasion to shed blood Tolet. 3. as Doeg by his false tongue caused many innocent Priests to be slaine Gryneus 4. and by this phrase of shedding is shewed how they doe vilipend the blood of the Saints powring it out as water Gorrhan v. 16. Destruction and calamitie are in their waies 1. Whereas the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contrition Origen vnderstandeth it of their sinne and disobedience whereby they doe â—â—â—rere iugum domini cast off and beat in pieces the Lords yoake so also the Greeke scholâ—â—â— as by the way he vnderstandeth life so by contrition sinne whereby the life is worne as the way is beaten with trampling 2. some vnderstand it passiuely of the destruction and â—â—lâ—mitie which was brought vpon them by the Romanes gloss interlin Haymo Gorrhaâ— 3. but it is better taken actiuely for the destruction and calamitie which they bring vpon others they are the authors and deuisers of nothing but mischiefe Gryn Calv. Pare as the Romane histories doe write of Hannibal who in his dreame following one that was sent of Iupiter to be his guide into Italie seemed to see behind him an huge serpent deuouring and destroying all as he went whereby was signified the horrible vastitie which he should bring vpon Italie v. 17. The way of peace they haue not knowne 1. Origen vnderstandeth Christ to be 〈◊〉 way of peace whome they acknowledged not so also Haymo Gorrhan gloss 3. but thereby is signified their turbulent nature who delighted in warre and filled the world with tumults and troubles Gryneus Pareus and although some among the heathen did seeke to preserue the peace and tranquilitie of the commonwealth yet it did not helpe them any thing toward their euerlasting peace Osiand v. 18. The feare of God is not before their eyes 1. As the feare of God is the beginning of true wisdome and pietie so the want of that feare giueth way vnto all impietie and therefore sine retinaculo currunt ad malum they runne into all kind of mischiefe without any stay Lyran. These doe not say there is no God yet they doe not feare God August ex Beda and so are giuen ouer to all impietie 20. Quest. v. 19. Whatsoeuer the Law saith what is here vnderstood by the law and how diuersly this word is taken Hierome epist. 151. noteth this word Law to haue sixe seuerall significations in the Scripture 1. it is taken precisely for the Law giuen by Moses which contained both morall precepts iudiciall and ceremoniall as Ioh. 1.17 The Law was giuen by Moses 2. the law signifieth not the precepts onely but the historie of the old Testament as S. Paul calleth Abrahams historie concerning his two sonnes the law Gal. 4.22 3. the book of the Psalmes is called the law Ioh. 15.25 It is written in the law they hated me without a cause 4. the prophesie of Isai is called the law 1. Cor. 14.21 In their law it is written by men of other tongues c. will I speake vnto this people which testimonie is taken out of Isa c. 28.21 5. the spirituall sense and meaning of the old Testament is called the law as the Apostle saith The Law is spirituall Rom. 7. 6. the law is taken for that naturall light which is imprinted in the minde by nature as S. Paul saith c. 2.14 The Gentiles which haue not the law are a law vnto themselues Here then by the Law the Apostle generally vnderstandeth the old Testament as the booke of the Psalmes and the Prophets 21. Quest. It saith to them which are vnder the law who are here vnderstood to be vnder the law 1. Origen taketh here the law for the naturall law vnder the which not onely the Iewes but the Gentiles also are vnder and this he would prooue by two reasons 1. because it followeth afterward that euery mouth may be stopped but the mouthes of the Gentiles could not be stopped by the written law which was not giuen vnto them 2. the Apostle also saith afterward that by the law commeth the knowledge of sinne which is not the written but the naturall law for both Cain and the brethren of Ioseph did confesse and acknowledge their sinne before yet there was any
any thing that is good Beza 5. To iustifie is taken three wayes first to make one actually and verily iust so if any man could perfectly keepe the lawe he should thereby get an habituall and inherent iustice secondly it signifieth to be counted and declared iust as wisedome is said to be iustified of her children and thirdly it signifieth to forgiue discharge and acquite sinnes and so is it taken here that no man is iustified by the workes of the lawe that is thereby findeth forgiuenesse of his sinnes and so is taken for iust before God but this iustification is by faith in Christ by whome we are acquited of our sinnes and cloathed with his righteousnesse Martyr 6. The Apostle addeth in his sight to shewe a difference betweene iustification and righteousnesse before men which may be attained vnto by workes and the perfect righteousnesse which God requireth sometime this phrase in Gods sight is vsed to shewe a difference betweene that righteousnesse which is but in shewe and hypocrisie and that which it in truth as in this sense Zacharie and Elizabeth are said to haue beene iust before God Luk. 1.6 sometime it distinguisheth betweene the righteousnesse euen of good men and the righteousnesse before God as the Apostle graunteth that Abraham had wherein to glorie before men in respect of his workes but not before God Rom. 4.1 and so the Apostle taketh it here It is Christ onely that maketh vs holy and vnblameable in the sight of God Coloss. 1.22 Beza And further these reasons may be yeelded hereof why none can be iustified by works in Gods sight though before men they may 1. in respect of the Maiestie of God and most perfect puritie of his nature before whom the verie Angels doe couer their faces and feete Isay 6. and the heauens are not cleane in his eyes how much more is man abhominable Iob. 15.15 2. God looketh not vnto the outward shew but to the inward disposition of the heart which is perfect in none 3. the lawe of God is spirituall and requireth exact obedience of Gods commandements so that he which offendeth in one is guilty of all Iam. 2.10 this perfection none can attaine vnto Pareus Quest. 24. How the Apostle here denieth iustification by workes seeing he said before c. 2. v. 13. that the doers of the Lawe are iustified 1. The ordinar gloss giueth this solution secundum ceremonialia intellige vnderstand this according to the ceremonials he thinketh that the Apostle speaketh here of the ceremoniall workes of the lawe whereby none are iustified but in the other place of the morall workes which doe instifie But the Apostle here euen excludeth morall workes for of the morall lawe the words following are specially vnderstood by the lawe commeth the knowledge of sinne 2. Caietan thinketh that the Apostle speaketh here of iustification before God there of the iustice of workes before men but the verie words of the text doe ouerthrowe this interpretation for euen in that place the Apostle speaketh of those which are righteous before God which are not the hearers but the doers of the lawe 3. Ambrose to this purpose lex temporalem habet iustitiam fides aeternam the law may giue a temporall kind of iustice but faith an euerlasting be thinketh that men are said here not to be iustified by workes that is without faith but yet a temporall kind of iustice they might haue by the lawe without faith But the Apostle in both places as hath beene said speaketh of true iustice and righteousnesse before God 4. The moderne Papists tell vs here of two iustifications the first which is by faith onely without workes the second which is by workes which proceede of faith and grace of the first speaketh the Apostle here as they thinke and of the other in the former place Rom. 2.13 Perer. disput 8. to the same purpose Tolet that the Apostle speaketh here of workes going before faith which doe not iustifie there of workes which followe faith the other doe iustifie in encreasing iustification which was begunne before by faith annot 13. Contra. 1. This is but a Popish fiction of the first and second iustification the Apostle is saying Rom. 8.30 whom he iustified he glorified maketh but one iustification after the which followeth glorification 2. euen the Apostle excludeth here the workes of the regenerate which may appeare by these reasons 1. because there neede no question to be made of the workes of carnall men which are euill because they are without faith there can be no shewe at all that such workes should iustifie 2. the workes of Abraham were the workes of grace which the Apostle excludeth from iustification c. 4.2 3. This is the reason why workes cannot iustifie that all occcasion of reioycing may be taken away from men and euerie mouth may be stopped but now if men might be iustified by their works after they are called and haue faith they might glorie in such works by the which they say they doe merit and which in their opinion proceede in part from mans owne free will 5. Some thinke that the Apostle Rom. 2.13 speaketh ex hypothesi by way of supposition that the doers of the lawe shall be iustified that is if any could keepe and performe the lawe they should thereby be iustified But here he simply denieth iustification to workes because no man is able to keepe the lawe Pareus This is a good distinction and in other places it may well be receiued where the Scriptures seeme to attribute much vnto the law as he that doth these things shall liue thereby But here it is not so fit for in that place Rom. 2.13 the Apostle encreateth not of the causes of iustification but onely sheweth who they are which shall be iustified not hearers and professors but doers and followers 6. Peter Martyr saith that when iustification seemeth to be ascribed vnto workes it must be vnderstood in respect of faith and grace wherewith they are ioyned as a man is said to be a reasonable creature yet in respect of his soule onely though he consist both of soule and bodie yet it is faith properly that iustifieth and not workes which followe faith But the Apostle doth not at all in that place or any other ascribe iustification before God vnto workes 7. Wherefore the best solution is this that here S. Paul disputeth indeede of the proper and true causes of iustification which he simply denieth vnto workes and giueth vnto faith but there he sheweth who and vpon what condition men are iustified and who are not iustified namely such as hauing a liuely faith doe bring sorth the fruits thereof and doe their endeauour to keepe the lawe are iustified as the Apostle in the same sense had said before c. 2.6 that God will reward euerie man according to his workes And in the like sense Christ shall say vnto the righteous in the day of iudgement Matth. 25.34 Come ye blessed of my father inherite the kingdome
commeth the knowledge of sinne and the law is a schoolemaster to bring vs vnto Christ it sheweth vs our disease and sendeth vs to the Physitian Faius Sasbout but because this is not the proper effect of the law otherwise then by reason of our infirmitie the Apostle is to be vnderstood to speake of the practise and obedience of the law which Christ requireth of the faithfull who though they doe not looke thereby to be iustified yet by the spirit of sanctification are enabled to walk according to the same as the law commandeth that we should loue the Lord with all our heart and our neighbour as our selfe these precepts euery Christian is bound to keepe And in this sense our Sauiour specially saith Matth. 5. I came not in dissolue the Law but to fulfill it so Origen omnis qui credens Christo bene agit c. viâ—enâ—â— legem confirmat c. euery one which beleeueth in Christ and doth well doth confirme the law by his life to the same purpose Augustine fides impetrat gratiam qua lex impletâ—â— c. faith obtaineth grace whereby the law is fulfilled c. the Gospel giueth grace whereby men are directed to liue and walke according to the law Adde hereunto that without faith it is impossible to keepe the law or any part thereof as the law commandeth vs to loue God with all our heart but no man can loue God vnlesâ— he first know him and beleeue in him Againe the law commandeth the worship of God whereof inuocation is a part but none can call vpon him vpon whome they haue not beleeued Rom. 10. Mart. 6. Other expositions there be of this place Caietane saith that faith doth establish the law because by faith we beleeue that God is the author of the law without which faith iâ— would be of no greater authoritie with men then the laws of Lycurgus and Solon 7. Catharinus a Popish writer herein would haue the lawe holpen by the Gospell because those things which were handled obscurely in the lawe are manifested openly in the Gospell the lawe was kept then thorough a seruile feare but now vnder the Gospell for the loue of iustice But leauing those and other like expositions I insist vpon the fift before alleadged as most agreeable vnto S. Paul 8. Now then whereas the Apostle in some places speaketh of the abrogating of the law as Heb. 7.12 If the Priesthood be changed there must of necessitie be a change of the lawe and v. 18. the commandement that was afore is disanulled because of the weakenesse thereof and vnprofitablenes c. he is not herein contrarie to himselfe for either the Apostle speaketh of the ceremoniall lawe as in the first place but it is the morall law which is established by faith or be meaneth that the vnprofitable ende of the morall lawe which was to iustifie men is abrogated but here he speaketh of an other ende and vse of the lawe which is to be a direction vnto good life in which sense the lawe is established 9. Thus the Apostle hath answeared this obiection least he might haue seemed to abrogate the lawe because he denieth vnto it power to iustifie vnto this obiection he maketh a double answear first in denying that he doth not take away the effect of the lawe for where one ende of a thing is denied all are not taken away secondly he answeareth by the contrarie he is so farre from abrogating or disanulling the lawe that contrariwise he doth establish and confirme it as is shewed before 4. Places of doctrine Doct. 1. Of the preheminence or prerogatiue of the Church v. 1. What is the preferment of the Iewe c. here occasion is offred to consider of the preheminence and excellencie of the Church which consisteth in the consideration of the dignitie state and blessings wherein it excelleth other humane conditions and states This excellencie and preheminence of the Church is either of nature or grace but by nature all men are the children of wrath one as well as an other Ephes. 2.3 therefore all the prerogatiue of the Church is of grace This prerogatiue is either common to the old Church of the Iewes and the newe of the Christians or proper and peculiar the common is either internall in their vocation iustification sanctification by the spirit or externall in their publike profession of religion and adoption to be the people of God with their externall directions by the word and sacraments vnto saluation The peculiar and proper prerogatiue of the old Church is considered 1. in their state that they were a people seuered from the rest of the world and ioyned vnto God by a solemne couenant 2. in the blessings wherewith they were endued which were partly spirituall as the Scriptures of the Prophets were committed vnto them they had the legall sacraments of circumcision and the Paschal lambe the Priesthood of Leui partly temporal as the inheritance of Canaan which was tied vnto Abrahams posteritie The prerogatiue peculiar vnto the Church of the newe Testament consisteth 1. in their state in beeing an holy people taken out from the rest of the world and consecrated to the worship of God 2. in their blessings partly perpetuall as the doctrine of the newe Testament the sacraments baptisme and the supper of the Lord partly temporall as the gift of tongues and miracles which the Church had for a time for the necessarie propagation of the faith but are now ceased ex Pareo Doct. 2. Of the vtilitie and profit of the diuine oracles v. 2. Vnto them were coÌ„mitted the oracles of God The Scriptures called here the diuine oracles are profitable to diuerse ends 1. illuminant intellectum they doe lighten the vnderstanding Psal. 19.8 It giueth light vnto the eyes 2. inflammant affectum they inflame the affection as Luke 24.32 the two disciples said betweene themselues did not our hearts burne within vs while he talked with vs by the way 3. mundant culpam they doe cleanse the fault as Ioh. 15.3 now are ye cleane thorough the word which I haue spoken vnto you 4. conseruant contra tristitiam they doe comfort against heauinesse 5. roborant ad pâ—tientiam they do strengthen vnto patience both these the Apostle sheweth saying Rom. 15.4 that we through patience and consolation of the Scriptures might have hope 6. franâ—â—â—t cordis duritiam they breake the hardnesse of heart Ierem. 23.29 is not my word like an hammer that breaketh the stone 7. protegunt contra tentationes they defend and protect against the tentations of the deuill Prou. 30.5 Euerie word of God is pure it is a sheild c. Ephes. 6.17 the sword of the spirit is the word of God Gorrhan Doct. 3. Of the combination betweene God and his Church v. 3. Shall their vnbeleefe make the faith of God without effect Here are to be considered tria ingorum paria three paire of yokes and bands as it were betweene God and vs. 1. the couenant and
it is the obedience and righteousnesse of Christ whereby both our sinnes are remitted and iustice imputed vnto vs As Luk. 18.13 the Publican saith O God be mercifull vnto me a sinner and it is said of him v. 14. that he went home iustified c. so then for God to shewe mercie in forgiuing sinne and for man to be iustified doe both concurre together and the one doth necessarily followe the other 2. Further the privatiue graces of the spirit as in the remitting of sinne the hiding of iniquitie and the not imputing of sinne are not seuered from the positiue graces as in the imputing of righteousnesse Gryneus 3. Now sometime sinne in Scripture is said to be remitted sometime to be hid and couered and further to be not imputed likewise to be washed away which are all the same in effect but yet in a diuerse respect for there are fowre things to be considered in sinne 1. the first is the inordinate act of sinne which beeing once done cannot be vndone this is said to be couered not as though it were not but because it is not imputed the Lord seeth it not to punish it 2. there is in sinne the offence committed against God which the Lord is said to forgiue and remit like as one man remitteth and forgiueth the iniurie and wrong done against him 3. there is the blot and staine of sinne whereby the soule is defiled and polluted and that is said to be washed away 4. there is the guilt of eternall death in respect whereof sinne is said not to be imputed Faius 4. Now the reason why these are all one to impute righteousnesse to remit sinne is this because these are immediately contrarie one to the other to be a sinner and to be iust he that is a sinner is not iust and so consequently he that is iust is reputed no sinner Par. dub 5. Quest. 16. In what sense circumcision is said to be a signe and wherefore it was instituted 1. It was signum memorativum a signe of remembrance or commemoration of the couenant which was made betweene God and Abraham and of the promises which he receiued namely these three 1. of the multiplying of his seede 2. of inheriting the land of Canaan 3. of the Messiah which should be borne of his seede 2. It was signum representativum a representing signe of the excellent faith of Abraham as it is afterward called a seale of the righteousnesse of faith 3. it was signum distinctivum a signe of the distinguishing the Hebrewes from all other people 4. it was signum demonstrativum a signe demonstrating or shewing the naturall disease of man euen originall sinne and the cure thereof by Christ. 5. it was signum praesigurativum a signe prefiguring baptisme and the spirituall circumcision of the heart Perer. Quest. 17. In what sense circumcision is called a seale of the righteousnesse of faith v. 11. 1. Origen thinketh that it is so called because in circumcision was sealed and lay hid and secret the righteousnesse of faith which should afterward be reuealed and vnfolded in Christ and that it was a signe in respect of the beleeuing Gentiles and a seale vnto the vnbeleeuing Iewes shutting them vp in vnbeleefe vntill they should be called in the ende of the world But 1. in this sense it was not a seale to shut vp and keepe secret seeing that Abraham was commended for his beleefe and the iustice of faith was not vnknowne or as aâ— hid and secret thing to the fathers 2. Neither doth S. Paul here speake of vnbeleeuers but of those which beleeue whose father Abraham was 2. Chrysostome and Theodoret expound circumcision to be a seale that is testimonium fidei acceptae a testimonie of faith receiued but a seale serueth more then for a witnesse or testimonie there are witnesses vsed beside 3. Thomas thinketh it was called a seale that is expressum signum an expresse signe hauing a similitude of the thing signified as because hs was promised to be a father of many nations he receiued this signe in the generatiue part But though a seale haue the marke or print of the stampe yet is it not called a seale for that but in respect of the thing sealed and â—â—â—ified 4. Neither doth it onely signifie signum distinctivum a distinguishing signe of the people of the Hebrewes from others for it had beene enough to say it was a signe 5. But because a seale is more then a bare signe it is for confirmation as kings letters paâ—â—â—ts are sealed for better assurance circumcision therefore serued as a seale vt obsignaret 〈◊〉 fidei to seale the righteousnesse of faith by the which seale the promises of God cordibus imprimuntur are imprinted in the hearts Calvin Quest. 18. Whether the mysterie of faith in the Mâ—ssiah to come were generally knowne vnder the lawe The occasion of this question here is because the Apostle saith that circumcision was the seale of the righteousnesse of faith seeing then that all the people were circumcised it may seeme that generally all of them had this knowledge of the Messiah to come 1. Augustine as P. Martyr citeth him seemeth to be of opinion lib. 3. de doctrin Christian that onely the Patriarkes and Prophets and more excellent men beeing illuminate by the spirit did apprehend this mysterie of faith in the Messiah to come and that the common people did onely knowe in generall that God was worshipped by those signes and ceremonies which were prescribed in the lawe but the ende and scope of them they did not knowe But by three aguments it may appeare that the knowledge of the Messiah was more generall 1. the Prophets did euerie where shewe the insufficiencie of the externall ceremonies and sacrifices that they were not those things which God required at their hands so that the people could not be ignorant by the continuall doctrine of the Prophets that some further thing was signified thereby 2. yea the Prophet Isay hath most direct prophesies of the Messiah that by his stripes we are healed and that God had laid vpon him the iniquities of vs all c. 53. 3. at the comming of Christ it is euident that there was a generall expectation of Christ as Philip said to Nathanael Ioh. 1.45 We haue found 〈◊〉 of whom Moses did write in the lawe and the Prophets and the woman of Samaria said Iob. 4.25 I knowe well that Messiah shall come 2. But though the knowledge of the Messiah were more generally reuealed then to the Patriarkes and Prophets onely yet is it not to be thought that the people did know in particular the meaning of euerie ceremonie but onely generally that they aimed at the Messiah neither yet had all the people this knowledge there were some carnall men among them which onely did adhere vnto the externall signes ex Mart. Quest. 19. Certaine questions of circumcision and first of the externall signe why it was placed in the generative part 1. Hereof these three
or life without Christ. v. 17. Much more shall they which receiue c. raigne in life c. As in Adam sinne and death entred and so raigned ouer all so life raigneth by Iesus Christ then they which are not graft by faith into Christ but remaine onely in Adam cannot be pertakers of life they are still vnder the kingdome of sinne and death wherefore the Turkes Iewes and all other that are without the knowledge and faith of Christ howsoeuer they dreame of a kind of Paradise and terrene happinesse after this life yet they can haue no assurance of life seeing they are strangers from Christ So S. Peter saith Act. 4.12 That there is no other name giuen vnder heauen whereby we must be saued Doct. 6. That life doth accompanie righteousnesse v. 17. The Apostle saith that they which receiue the gift of righteousnesse shall raigne in life then as sinne raigned vnto death so righteousnesse raigneth vnto life wheresoeuer then righteousnesse is found whether inherent as in the Angels or imputed as in the faithfull who haue the righteousnesse of Christ imputed vnto them by faith there is the kingdome of life then they which doe feele the kingdome of righteousnesse to be begunne in them who both by faith are iustified in Christ and their faith is effectuall working by loue they are assured to enter into life as S. Paul knewe after he had kept the faith and fought a good fight that there was a crowne of righteousnesse laid vp for him 2. Tim. 4.8 Doct. 7. Of the vse of the lawe v. 20. The lawe entred c. that the offence should abound c. This is the proper vse of the lawe to bring a man to the knowledge of his sinne and to shewe him in what state he standeth by nature a transgressor of the lawe and so subiect to the curse but we must not rest in this vse of the lawe there is a second and more principall ende that by the abounding of sinne grace may more abound and in this sense the Apostle calleth the lawe a schoolemaster to bring vs to Christ Galath 3.19 that we by the lawe seeing our owne weakenesse and vnsufficiencie should seeke vnto Christ Iesus to finde righteousnes in him which cannot be obtained by the lawe 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. Whether a good conscience and integritie of life be the cause of peace with God Pererius disput 1. in c. 5. numer 2. vrgeth that place of the Prophet Isay c. 32.17 s he worke of iustice shall be peace euen the worke of iustice and quietnesse and assurance for euer whereupon he inferreth that opera iustitiae c. the workes of iustice and the keeping of Gods commandements doe worke in vs this tranquilitie and peace of the minde Contra. It might be here answeared that peace of conscience is the worke of our true iustice that is Christ who is called the Lord our iustice or righteousnesse Ierem. 23.10 but that this interpretation agreeth not with the former words v. 16. Iudgement shall dwell in the desert and iustice in the fruitfull field where the Prophet speaketh of the externall practise and exercise of iustice 2. Iunius seemeth to vnderstand these disiunctiuely the fruites of the spirit which should be powred vpon them v. 15. should bring faith iustice peace as the Apostle sheweth these to be the fruites of the spirit Rom. 14.17 righteousnesse peace ioy in the holy Ghost so also Faius But this distinction here cannot be admitted because it is directly said the worke of iustice shall be peace tranquilitie 3. But the best answer is that righteousnesse procureth peace not effective because it worketh this inward peace which is wrought in vs by the grace of iustification but declarative it declareth confirmeth and assureth vnto vs our peace as S. Peter exhorteth that we make our election and calling sure by good workes 2. Pet. 1.9 not that our workes make our election sure in it selfe which dependeth on the purpose of God but it is made sure vnto vs so the peace of conscience wrought in vs by faith is confirmed and ratified vnto vs by a good life euen as good workes are testimonies of our faith and in that sense are said by S. Iames c. 2. to iustifie Controv. 2. Against invocation of Saints 1. By whome we haue accesse through faith this text is well vrged by Peter Martyr and Pareus against the invocation of Saints for if by Christ we haue accesse vnto God what neede we the helpe of other mediators and intercessours the Papists then doe much derogate vnto the glorie of Christ in bringing an other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to enter vs and cause vs to haue accesse vnto God And further two arguments may be vrged out of the Apostles words he saith we haue accesse by him through faith but Saints are not the obiect of our faith we must onely beleeue in God Ioh. 14.1 Ye beleeue in God beleeue also in me 2. we haue accesse vnto this grace namely whereby we are iustified but by the Saints we are not iustified therefore by them we haue not accesse and entrance Controv. 3. Of the certaintie of saluation and of finall perseuerance v. 5. We haue accesse vnto this grace wherein we stand Calvin out of this place refuteth two errors of Popish sophistrie the one that the faithfull for the present cannot be certaine of the grace of God and of the remission of their sinnes the other that they are not sure of finall perseuerance But to stand in grace signifieth to be sure of the grace and fauour of God one may attaine vnto the fauour of the Prince but he is not sure to continue in it But Gods fauour in Christ is most constant whom Christ loueth he loueth to the end Iob. 13.1 Tolet here foisteth in one of his Popish drugs that tranquilitie and peace of conscience and certaintie of remission of sinnes is not the fruit or worke of faith in the faithfull for the wicked that knowe not their sinnes haue also a quiet conscience Tolet. annot 1. Contra. There is great difference between a senslesse and a quiet cōscience the wicked feele not the pricke of conscience because their sinnes are concealed from them but the faithfull haue peace of conscience after the sight of their sinnes which they know to be remitted in Christ So Paul was aliue without the law but afterward when sinne reviued he died Rom. 7.9 where then the conscience is cast into a slumber of securitie sinne reviuing awaketh troubleth it but where sinne is remitted in Christ the conscience ceaseth to be troubled and perplexed as in the wicked Controv. 4. That the tribulation of the Saints is not meritorious though it be said to worke patience We must vnderstand that the Apostle diuersely vseth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worketh for it is sometime ascribed vnto the principall efficient cause as vnto God the author and worker of all good things in vs 2. Cor. 5.5 sometime
of death originall sinne then hath a kind of existence for how else could it be called a bodie of sinne or death see more hereof elsewhere Synops. Cen. 4. err 14. 2. Concerning the reasons obiected 1. God is the author of euerie substance and of euery naturall qualitie but not of vnnaturall dispositions or qualities as neither of diseases in the bodie nor of vices in the minde this euill qualitie was procured by mans voluntarie transgression 2. and though habites which are personall and obtained by vse and industrie are not transmitted to posteritie yet this euill habite was not personall in Adam as he is considered vt singularis persona as a singular person but by him it entred into the nature of man as he was totius humanae naturae principiū the beginning of the whole nature of man 3. Burgensis taketh another exception vnto Lyranus addition and he thinketh that Adams posteritie is not bound to haue the originall iustice which was giuen to Adam for they haue no such bond either by the law of nature for that originall iustice was supernaturally added or by any diuine precept for God gaue vnto Adam no other precept but that one not to eate of the forbidden fruite and therefore they were not bound at all to haue or reteine Adams originall iustice Thus Burgens Contra. 1. Herein I rather consent vnto Thoring the Replic vpon Burgens who thus argueth that this debt or bond to haue originall iustice was grounded vpon the law of nature which is the rule of right reason for by nature euery one is tied to seeke the perfection and conseruation of it kind and this originall iustice tended vnto the perfection of man which though it were supernaturally added vnto man yet it was not giuen him alone sed pro tota natura for the whole nature of man and so he concludeth well that man is culpable in not hauing this originall iustice though not culpâ actuali quae est suppositi by any actuall fault which belongeth to the person or subiect yet culpâ originali quae est natura by an originall fault which is in nature To this purpose the Replic And this may be added further that if Adams posteritie were not debters in respect of this originall iustice then were they not bound to keepe the law which requireth perfect righteousnesse and so it would follow that they are not transgressors against the law if they were not bound to keepe it the first exception then of Burgensis may be recieued but not the second 2. Pighius also who denieth originall sinne to be a privation or want of originall iustice holdeth it to be no sinne to want that iustice which is not enioyned by any law vnto mankind for no law can be produced which bindeth infantes to haue that originall iustice and therein he concurreth with Burgensis Contra. But this obiection is easily refuted for first man was created according to Gods image in righteousnesse and holines which image Adams posteritie is bound to retaine but he by his sinne defaced that image and in stead thereof begate children after his owne image Gen. 5.3 in the state of corruption And whereas Pighius replieth out of Augustine that the image of God in man consisteth in the three faculties of the soule the vnderstanding memorie and will Augustine must not be so vnderstood as though herein consisted onely the image of God but as therein is shadowed forth the misterie of the Trinitie for the Apostle expressely sheweth that this image of God is seene in righteousnes and holines Ephes. 4.24 An other lawe is the lawe of nature which is the rule which euery one is to followe Cicero could say that convenientur viuere c. to liue agreeably to this law is the chiefe ende of man to this lawe euen infants are also bound there is a third lawe which is the morall which saith thou shalt not lust which prohibiteth not onely actuall but originall concupiscence And whereas Pighius here obiecteth that a lawe is giuen in vaine of such things as cannot be avoided therein he sheweth his ignorance for it is not in mans power to keep the lawe for then it had not beene necessarie for Christ to haue died for vs who came to performe that which was impossible by the lawe Rom. 8.3 yet was not the lawe giuen so in vaine for there are two speciall vses thereof both to giue vs direction how to liue well and to bring vs to the knowledge of sinne xe Mart. 4. This then is originall sinne 1. it consisteth partly of a defect and want of originall iustice in that the image of God after the which man was created in righteousnesse and holines was blotted out by the fall of man partly in an euill habite disposition and qualitie and disorder of all the faculties and powers both of bodie and soule This was the start of man after his fall and the same is the condition of all his posteritie by nature Augustine also maketh originall sinne a positiue qualitie placing it in the concupiscence of the flesh not the actuall concupiscence but that naturall corruption which although it be more generall then to containe it selfe within the compasse of concupiscence onely yet he so describeth it by the most manifest effect because our naturall corruption doth most of all shew and manifest it selfe in the concupisence and lust of our members 2. The subiect then and matter of originall sinne are all the faculties and powers of soule and bodie the former is the pravitie and deformitie of them the efficient cause was the peruersnes of Adams will the instrument is the carnall propagation the end or effect is euerlasting damnation both of bodie and soule without the mercie of God Martyr 3. Originall sinne is taken either actiuely for the sinne of Adam which was the cause of sinne in his posteritie which is called originale origmans originall sinne giuing beginning or passiuely for the naturall corruption raised in Adams ofspring by his transgression which is tearmed originale originatum originall sinne taking beginning 4. Of this originall sinne taken both waies there are three misserable effects 1. participatio culpa the participating in the fault or offence for we were all in Adams loines when he transgressed and so we all sinned in him as here the Apostle saith 2. imputatio reatus the imputation of the guilt and punishment of sinne we are the children of wrath by nature subiect both to temporall and eternall death 3. there is naturae depratatio vel deformitas the depravation and deformitie of nature wherein there dwelleth no good thing Rom. 17.18 Controv. 16. Of the wicked heresie of Marcion and Valentinus with the blasphemous Manichees 1. Origen out of the words of the former verse where the Apostle speaketh of our attonement and reconciliation by Christ confureth the heresie of Marcion and Valentinus whose opinion was that there was some substance quae naturaliter Deo sit inimica which naturally is
his life whereby he merited the imputation of his righteousnesse for the merite of Christs passion depended vpon the holines and worthines of his person which was manifested in his life 2. There are two partes of our iustification remission of our sinnes and the making of vnrighteous the one was the proper worke of Christs death that paied the ransome due vnto our sinnes the other of his perfect holines and righteousnesse which was manifested in his rising from the dead and therefore the Apostle ioyneth them both together Rom. 4.28 Who was deliuered to death for our sinnes and is risen againe for our iustification see further of this matter Controv. 20. in c. 4. Controv. 26. Against the Philosophers who placed righteousnesse in their owne workes The heathen Philosophers and wise men were vtterly ignorant of this making of men righteous by an others obedience for they held them onely to be righteous which by continuall exercise and practise of vertue attained vnto an habite of well doing which they ascribed onely to their owne industrie and endeuour Contra. These wise heathen in many things bewrayed their grosse and palpable ignorance 1. they knew not what remission of sinnes was neither how sinne entred into the world or how it was taken away they thought that by their well doing onely afterward the former memorie of their sinnes was worne out whereas it is in God onely to blot out the remembrance of sinne 2. they ascribed their vertues such as they were to their owne free-will and endeuour whereas Christian religion teacheth vs that God is the author of all good things and that man of himselfe is not able to thinke or conceiue a good thought 3. they erred in seeking to be made righteous and iust by their owne workes which beeing imperfect and diuerse waies blemished are not able to iustifie vs before God who is absolutely perfect true it is that euery Christian must endeuour to liue well and aduance his faith with fruitfull workes but it is Christs perfect obedience and not our owne which is imperfect that maketh vs truly righteous before God Controv. 27. Against the Manichees and Pelagians the one giuing too much the other too little to the law v. 30. The law entred that the offence should abound c. the Manichees vrge these and such like places against the law as though it were euill not distinguishing betweene the proper effects of the law which it worketh of it selfe as the Prophet Dauid expresseth them Psal. 19. It conuerteth the soule giueth wisedome to the simple giueth light to the eyes c. and the effects of the law which it worketh by reason of the weaknesse of man as it serueth to reueale the knowledge of sinne and to make it more abound But the Apostle himselfe that here thus testifieth of the law confesseth that in it selfe the law is holy Rom. 7.12 for although we are not able to performe that which the law commandeth yet the things are holy iust and good which the law requireth and the desire of the godly longeth after them As the Manichees detracted from the law so the Pelagians ascribed too much vnto it for they held that the law was sufficient to saluation and that if a man did once vnderstand what was to be done by the strength of nature he could doe it the law then serued to reueale vnto them the will of God and there owne strength sufficed in their opinion to performe it They beeing further vrged that the grace of God was necessarie did in words acknowledge it but by grace they vnderstood first the nature of man which was first giuen him of God then the doctrine onely and knowledge of the law The Popish schoolemen differed not much from this opinion who hled that a man by the strength of nature may keepe the precepts of the law quoad substantiam operis in respect of the substance of the worke but not quoad intentionem praecipientis according to the intention of the lawegiuer But it is euident out of the Scripture that no not the regenerate much lesse naturall men are able to keepe the commandements of God perfitly as S. Paul sheweth by his owne example Rom. 7. And if it were as the Pelagians held that the lawe were sufficient to saluation then Christ died in vaine Controv. 28. Of the assurance of saluation v. 21. Grace might raigne by righteousnesse vnto eternall life c. Hence it is euident that life is a consequent of righteousnesse as death is of sinne and that the faithfull are as sure to obtaine life if they haue righteousnesse as Adam and Adams children were sure to die after they haue sinned So Chrysostome vpon this place collecteth well Noli itaque cum iustitiam habeas de vita dubitare vitam enim excellit iustitia mater quippe illius est do not therefore doubt of life and saluation if thou haue iustice for iustice excelleth life beeing the mother thereof This is contrarie to the erroneous and vncomfortable doctrine of the moderne Papists that it is presumption for any man to be assured of his saluation see further hereof elswhere Synops. Centur. 4. err 25. Controv. 29 Of the diuerse kinds of grace against the Romanists v. 21. So might grace also raigne c. The Popish Schoolemen haue certaine distinctions of grace which either are not at all to be admitted or else they must be first qualified before they can be receiued 1. Of the first kind is that distinction of grace that there is gratia gratis data gratia gratum faciens grace freely giuen and grace that maketh vs acceptable vnto God two exceptions may be taken hereunto 1. there is no grace but is freely giuē otherwise it were not of grace that is of fauour but they in making one kind of grace onely that is freely giuen they insinuate that there are other graces which are not freely giuen 2. the grace which maketh vs acceptable to God they hold to be a grace or habite infused for the which we are accepted wherein they erre in ascribing that to a created or infused grace which is onely the worke of the free grace and fauour of God toward vs this word grace is either taken actively for the loue grace and fauour of God or passiuely for those seuerall gifts and graces which are wrought in vs by the fauour of God the first grace is as the cause the other graces are the effects the first is without vs the other within vs the first is the originall grace in God the other are created graces Now we hold that we are made acceptable vnto God onely by the first grace of God toward vs which is grounded in Christ the Romanists ascribe our acceptance with God to the other see further hereof Synops. Centur. 4. err 27. 2. Of the other sort is the distinction of grace operans cooperans working and working together as the working grace is that which alone changeth the will and maketh it willing
synecdoche the principall part beeing taken for the whole the minde regenerate for all the regenerate part both in the minde and bodie because it chiefly sheweth it selfe there and the flesh for that part which is vnregenerate in the whole man both in the minde and bodie because it is chiefly exercised and executed by the bodie see before Quest. 26. 2. We are not to vnderstand here two distinct and seuerall parts the one working without the other as the Romanists which will haue the inner man to be the minde and the sensuall part the flesh for in this sense neither doth the minde alwaies serue God wherein there is ignorance infidelitie error nor yet doth the sensuall part alwaies serue sinne for many vertuous acts are exercised thereby see this opinion before confuted Quest. 31. But these two parts must be vnderstood as working together the flesh hindreth the spirit and blemisheth our best actions Faius 3. And whereas the Apostle saith that in my flesh I serue the law of sinne we must not imagine that the Apostle was giuen ouer vnto grosse carnall works as to commit murther adulterie but he sheweth the infirmitie of his flesh and specially he meaneth his naturall concupiscence and corruption of nature in the which he gaue instance before against the which pugnabat luctabatur he did striue and fight Martyr 4. Neither yet must we thinke that the Apostle seruing the spirit one way and the flesh an other was as a mutable or inconstant man or indifferent like as Ephraim is compared to a cake but turned and baked on the one side Hos. 7.8 or as they which Revel 3. are said to be luke warme neither hoat nor cold for these of a set purpose were such and willingly did dissemble but the Apostle setteth forth himselfe as a man neither perfectly sound nor yet sicke but in a state betweene both that although he laboured to attaine to perfection yet he was hindred by the infirmitie of his flesh like as an Israelite dwelling among the Iebusits Faius 5. And whereas the Apostle said before v. 15. it is not I that doe it but sinne that dwelleth in mee and yet here he saith I my selfe c. in my selfe serue the law of sinne the Apostle is not contrarie to himselfe for he speaketh here of his person that doth both there of of the cause Tolet. annot 25. and so he sheweth secundum repugnantia principia se repugnantia habere studia that according vnto the contrarie beginnings or causes he hath contrarie desires Pareus 36. Quest. Of that famous question whether S. Paul doe speake in his owne person or of an other here in this 7. chapter There are of this matter diuers opinions which yet may be sorted into these three orders 1. Some thinke that the Apostle speaketh in the person of a man not yet in the state of grace 2. Some of a man regenerate from v. 14. to the ende 3. Some that the Apostle indifferently assumeth the person of all mankind whether they be regenerate or not And in euery of these opinions there is great diuersitie 1. They which are of the first opinion 1. Some thinke that the Apostle speaketh in the person of a naturall man and sheweth what strength a mans free will hath by nature without grace so Iulianus the Pelagian with other of that sect whose epistles Augustine confuteth so Lyranus he speaketh in the person generis humani lapsi of humane kind after their fall 2. Some will haue the person of a man described sub lege ante legem degentis not liuing onely before the law but vnder it hauing some knowledge of sinne so Chrysostome Theophylact whome Tolet followeth annot 4. 3. Some thinke that the Apostle describeth a man not altogether vnder the law nor yet wholly vnder grace but of a man beginning to be conuerted quasi voluntate proposito ad meliora conversi as converted in minde and desire vnto better things Origen so also Basil. 〈◊〉 â—egal breviar and Haymo saith the Apostle speaketh ex persona hominis poenitentiam agentis in the person of a man penitent c. 2. They of the second sort doe thus differ 1. Augustine confesseth that sometime he was of opinion that the Apostle speaketh in the person of a carnall and vnregenerate man but afterward he changed his minde vpon better reasons thinking the Apostle to speake of a spirituall man in the state of grace lib. 1. Retract c. 23. lib. 6. cont Iulian. c. 11. but Augustine reteining this sense thinketh that the Apostle saying v. 15. I allow not that thing which I doe speaketh of the first motions onely of concupiscence quando illis non consenttatur when no consent is giuen vnto them lib. 3. cont Iulian. c. 26. which concupiscence the most perfect man in this life can not be void of so also Gregorie vnderstandeth simplices motus ceruis contra voluntatem the simple motions of the flesh against the will and hereunto agreeth Bellarm. lib. 5. de amission grat c. 10. Rhemist sect 6. vpon this chapter 2. Cassianus collat 23. c. 15. vnderstandeth a man regenerate but then by the inner man he would haue signified the contemplation of celestiall things by the flesh curam rerum temporalium the care of earthly things 3. Some thinke that the Apostle so describeth a regenerate man as yet that he may sometime become in a manner carnall we see in this example euen of Paul regenerate etiam regeneratum nonnunquam mancipium fieri peccati that a regenerate man may sometime become the slaue of sinne Rolloch 4. But the founder opinion is that the Apostle in his owne person speaketh of a regenerate man euen when he is at the best that he is troubled and exercised with sinnefull motions which the perfectest can not be ridde of till he be deliuered from his corruptible flesh of this opinion was Hilarie habemus nunc nobis admistam materiam quae mortis legi peccato obnoxia est c. we haue now mixed within vs a certaine matter which is subiect to the law of death and sinne c. and vntill our bodie be glorified non potest in nobis verae vita esse natura there can not be in vs the nature and condition of true life Hilar. in Psal. 118. Of the same opinion are all our foundest new writers Melancthon Martyr Calvin Beza Hyperius Pareus Faius with others 3. Of the third sort 1. some are indifferent whether we vnderstand the person of the regenerate or vnregenerate gloss ordinar and so Gorrhan sheweth how all this which the Apostle hath from v. 18. to the end may in one sense be vnderstood of the regenerate in an other of the vnregenerate 2. Some thinke that some things may be applied vnto the regenerate as I am carnall sold vnder sinne but some things onely can be applied to the regenerate as these words I delight in the law of God c. Perer. disput 21. num 38. and yet he
kind was the zeale of the false Apostles Gal. 4.17 They are ielous ouer you amisse they would exclude you that ye should altogether loue them they seemed to beare a great zeale and loue vnto the Galathians but it was onely for their owne aduantage and such was the zeale of Demetrius to Diana Act. 19. because his profit was hindered by the decay of Dianaes worship but a true and vnfained zeale is that when one seeketh onely the good of that which he loueth without respect to himselfe as Saint Paul was thus iealous ouer the Corinthians to seeke to ioyne them for their owne good vnto Christ. 2. Cor. 11.2 Now of this vnfained zeale there are two kinds one which hath knowledge the other is without and this is of two sorts for there is here a twofold knowledge required both of the thing which is desired and affected and of the wrong which is offered the Iewes wanted one of these for they had a knowledge of God though not perfect but they were ignorant of the other they thought the worship of God to â—â—nsist in the rites and ceremonies of the law and so Gods glorie to be hindered by the Preaching of the Gospel the Gentiles were ignorant of both for neither had they the knowledge of God at all neither did they know the way how to worship him and so were ignorant what hindered or furthered Gods glorie 3. Now in that the Apostle maketh this as a reason why he wished well vnto them and prayed for them because they had zeale though not according to knowledge this doth not iustifie their zeale or prooue that we may reioyce or take delight in any thing that is euill but because their zeale was a good thing in it selfe and they failed in the manner onely the Apostle so farre commendeth them as it is said that Christ loued the young man that professed his obedience and obseruance of the law though he were farre from perfection Mark 10.21 because he saw some good things in him So the Apostle commendeth the zeale of the Iewes here 4. Origen here obserueth that as the Apostle saith of zeale that they had a kind of zeale but not according to knowledge the like may be said of faith charitie and other graces that men may haue them after a sort but not according to knowledge as he hath faith without knowledge that is ignorant that faith without workes it dead and so he hath charitie without knowledge that beasteth of it before men Quest. 5. Why the Iewes are said to stablish their owne righteousnesse v. 3. 1. Theodoret thinketh it is called their owne righteousnesse because now the law was ceased and the obseruation of the rites and ceremonies thereof so also Gorrhan vnderstandeth it of the ceremonies of the law which now were abolished and of the traditions which themselues had invented but the Apostle meaneth principally the moral law and that workes thereof 2. Augustine thinketh it to be so called their owne righteousnesse that is an humanes and imperfect righteousnesse because they were not able to fulfill the law tract 26. in Iob. so also Anselme 3. Lyranus because the law was giuen them and so the righteousnesse thereof they tooke peculiarly to be theirs excluding the Gentiles 4. Chrysostome saith â—â— is tearmed theirs because it consisted in their owne labour whereas faith was the gift of God without their labour 5. Origen saith their owne righteousnes was that which so seemed vnto men but did not make them iust before God so also Tolet as the Apostle saith Rom. 4.2 If Abraham were iustified by workes he hath wherein to reioyce but not with God 6. But properly that is called man 's owne righteousnesse which is supposed to be inherent in him is wrought by his owne workes and labour that is Gods righteousnes which is without man and extrinsecally is applied vnto him by faith 3. This proper iustice of man signifieth not such righteousnesse as man seeketh to worke of himselfe but euen such as man worketh by grace for Gods righteousnesse and mans are opposed not onely in respect of the cause and beginning but in the forme and manner how it is applied the one by faith the other by workes and in the subiect the righteousnes of faith is inherent in Christ and applied to vs by faith the other hath man for the subiect thereof 4. The Iewes in refusing this righteousnesse of God commit three great faults 1. they are ignorant of true righteousnesse by faith 2. they ambitiously seeke to be iustified by their owne righteousnesse 3. they are contemners of Gods righteousnesse which is by faith and will by no meanes be subiect vnto it Quest. 6. How Christ is said to be the ende of the law The end of a thing is taken fowre waies 1. for the determination and extremitie and finall ending of it as Psal. 3.19 Whose end is damnation 2. it is also taken for that which first mooueth the agent and for the which all other things are intended 3. the end is the scope and marke which is aymed at as the end of faith is the saluation of our soules 1. Pet. 1. 4. the end also of a thing is the perfection thereof as loue is said to be the end of the commandements 1. Tim. 1.5 according to these diuerse acceptions is this place diuersely interpreted 1. Some take it in the first sense that Christ ended the ceremonies and legall rites in which it is said the law and the Prophets were vnto Iohn Matth. 11. but this is not the meaning here for thus Christ was an ende onely to the ceremoniall not to the morall law 2. The second way Christ is the end of the law but not directly for in generall the law was ordained to make man righteous and to iustifie him by the keeping thereof but seeing this righteousnesse could not be obtained by the law nor in the law the law bringeth vs vnto Christ and in him we obtaine righteousnesse which the law required but performed not so then the end of the law which was to iustifie a man is fulfilled in Christ thus Chrystsost quid vult lex hominem iustum facere c. what would the law make a man iust c. this the law could not effect but Christ hath effected it so Melancthon Christ is the perfection of the law donat id quod lex requirit he giueth that which the law requireth that is iustification by saith in Christ who hath fulfilled the law for vs so also Beza 3. Christ also is the end and scope aymed at in the old Testament all the Prophets gaue witnesse and testimonie vnto Christ as Lyranus citeth R. Selam and other learned Hebrewes that confessed that vniuersi Prophetae non sunt locuti nisi ad dies Messiae that all the Prophets did not otherwise speake but hauing relation to the Messiah as our Sauiour saith Ioh. 6.26 Moses wrote of mee 4. Christ also is the perfection and consummation of the law
and keepers thereof how doth the Prophet Ezech. c. 20.25 call them statutes that are not good the answer is that the law of it selfe promiseth life but in respect of mans weaknes that is not able to keepe the law it is not good because it bringeth death and so Moses saith Deut. 30.15 I haue set before you this day life and death c. the law was life to them that had power to keepe it which none haue in this life but death vnto the trangressors Faius Quest. 10. Whether Paul did of purpose alleadge that place of Moses Deuter. 30.12 or allude onely vnto it 1. Some thinke that Moses in that place directly speaketh of the law according to the literall sense and Saint Paul by a certaine allusion applieth that vnto faith which Moses vttereth of the law so Theodoret Chrysostome Oecumenius likewise Tostatus vpon that place Paul per quandam concordantiam transtulit ad fidem Paul by a certaine agreement hath translated this place and applyed it vnto faith Vatablus also saith that Paul followeth not Moses sense but some words But this would extenuate the force of S. Pauls argument if he should allude onely vnto this place of Scripture and not confirme that which he intended by the same and the Apostle himselfe saith that the iustice of faith thus speaketh that is as Origen expoundeth Christ who is our iustice by faith thus speaketh by the mouth of Moses wherefore Moses in that place speaketh of the iustice of faith 2. Some thinke that S. Paul followeth not the litterall but the mysticall sense of Moses thus Lyranus thinketh that the booke called Deuteronomie the second law was a figure of the Gospel which was indeede a newe and a second law and that this was figuratiuely spoken of the gospel that as they needed not goe to heauen or to the furthest parts of the Sea to fetch the Law because it was neere them as it were put into their mouth by Moses so neither neede they nowe seeke farre for the knowledge of Christ either to heauen or hell seeing he was euidently preached by the Apostles this sense also followeth Bellarmine de grat liber arbit lib. 5. c. 6. But that Moses speaketh not of the precepts of the law in that place is euident because he sheweth the facilitie of them it is in thy mouth and heart to do it c. but it was not so easie a thing to performe the Lawe Bellarmine answeareth with Tostatus that Moses speaketh not of the performing but of the knowledge of the lawe whereas the words are directly to do it Sotus in his commentarie thinketh that Moses speaketh of the externall obseruation of the law which was readie at hand but for the internall and spirituall obedience they were to expect further grace But Moses speaketh directly of the inward obedience it is in thy mouth and in thy heart c. 3. Some thinke that the Apostle applyeth that testimonie vttered by Moses of the lawe vnto the Gospel by an argument from the lesse to the greater that if Moses gaue such commendation of the lawe much more is it true of the Gospel But the Apostle sheweth the iustice of faith to be a farre different thing from the iustice and righteousnes of the law and therefore not to differ onely as the lesse and greater but as things of a diuerse nature 4. Wherefore it may be more safely affirmed that the Apostle citeth this verie place out of Moses as Origen thinketh haec à Deuteronomio assumpta sunt these words are taken out of Deuteronomie yet the Apostle as an interpreter alledgeth them omitting some things in Moses and inserting some other by way of exposition as that is to bring Christ againe from aboue and to bring Christ againe from the dead and some words he altereth as that which Moses calleth the Sea S. Paul nameth the deepe which in effect is the same to this purpose Iun. in parall 16. lib. 2. Faius and Pet. Martyr affirmeth that it is so euident a thing that Moses here speaketh of Christ that certaine great Rabbines among the Iewes confesse that Moses in all that 30. chapter of Deuteronomie hath reference to Christ yet Pareus inclineth to thinke S. Paul here vseth but an allusion to that place of Moses dub 6. Quest. 11. Whether Moses in that place directly speaketh of the righteousnesse of faith 1. Tolet annot 6. and likewise Caietan which take this place to be alleadged by Moses in the litterall sense doe thinke that Moses speaketh of the circumsion and conuersion of the heart vnto God which belongeth vnto the righteousnesse of faith that when God should conuert and turne their heartes they should then not find it an hard and difficult thing to keepe the commandements of God Pet. Martyr much dissenteth not that Moses then simply speaketh not of the precept of the law but vt iam per gratiam facile factu erat but as now made easie by grace and faith in Christ so also M. Calvin denieth not but that Moses in that place speaketh of the obseruation of the law but ex suo fonte diducit he fetcheth it from the fountaine and originall thereof namely the iustice of faith 2. Some thinke that Moses in that place speaketh not onely of the law sed de vniuerso doctrina but of the whole doctrine which he hath taught which was not onely legall but contained many euangelicall promises But the words of Saint Paul are against both these interpretations The righteousnesse which is of faith speaketh on this wise c. and this is the word of faith which we preach therefore Moses onely in that place speaketh of the word of faith 3. Wherefore their opinion is to be preferred who thinke that Moses in that place directly treateth of the doctrine of faith and not by way of consequent onely as Iunius well obserueth because Moses saith this commandement which I command thee this day but that day Moses deliuered not the precepts of the law which were giuen before but of faith and so the Apostle ex consilio Mosis by the counsell and according to the meaning of Moses himselfe applyeth this place vnto Christ Iun. lib. 2. parall 16. so also Faius est apposita loci applicatio c. it is a fit application of that place likewise Osiander it is no doubt but that S. Paul appositissime allegaverit most fitly aptly applied that place of Moses to his purpose Quest. 12. By what occasion Moses maketh mention in that place of the Gospel and of the meaning of the words 1. Origen thinketh that Moses and the Apostles intendment is this to shew that Christ is euerie where that he is not onely in heauen and in earth but in euerie place to the same purpose Haymo he instructeth vs by these words ne putemus Christum localem esse that we should not thinke that Christ is confined to a place But this is not to the Apostles purpose for of this
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
haec vera est c. this is the true renovation of the minde to preferre the will of God before our owne c. and Beza maketh it a part of the exhortation be ye transformed c. and doe your endeauour to prooue what Gods will is c. that like as they which fashion themselues to the world followe the will thereof so you should transforme your selues by the newenes of your minde to the will of God and this sense is most agreeable so this is added both as a principall part and cause of our renovation and it is a fruit also thereof a further degree of more perfect knowing the will of God as our Sauiour saith Ioh. 9.17 If any man doe his will he shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God 2. May prooue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. he neither meaneth a curious probation to trie whether a thing be so or not for this were to doubt of the will of God whether it were good and perfect 2. neither is it taken onely for to search and consider for a man cannot be renewed at all that hath not alreadie searched out the good will of God 3. not yet doe we vnderstand a bare knowledge of the will of God for many which are not regenerate doe knowe Gods will and yet doe it not as the Apostle c. 2. reprooued the Iewes for teaching the lawe to others and not knowing it themselues 4. nor yet doth it signifie onely an experimentall knowledge as the interlinearie gloss and Lyranus for he that is renewed cannot but haue experience of the will of God 5. but this probation signifieth a discerning with iudgmēt of those things which are good as S. Paul saith Phil. 1.10 that ye may discern things that are excellent as he that hath a perfect tast discerneth of the goodnes of meates 3. What is the good will of God and acceptable and perfect 1. Concerning the reading of these words some will not haue these epithets good perfect acceptable to be ioyned vnto the will of God but to be referred to all the cause before going as to the offring vp of their bodies a liuing seruice not to fashion themselues to this world and to be renewed in the mind all this is good acceptable and perfect so Augustine epist. 85. and Ambrose some doe make it an absolute sentence by it selfe adding the coniūction and and what is good acceptable perfect c. Bucer But the vsuall reading is the best which the vulgar Latine followeth to make these three epithets and attributes of the will of God thus also reade Clemens lib. 2. stromat Basil regul brev resp 276. Chrysost. serm 12. Cyprian epist. 77.2 by the will of God we vnderstand not here that facultie and power in God whereby he willeth but the thing which he willeth in which sense we say in the Lords prayer thy will be done Matth. 6. and Matth 12.50 Whosoeuer doth the will of my father c. 4. The good will c. 1. Origen here distinguisheth betweene the will of God simply so called and his good and acceptable will for it is the will of God when he inflicteth punishment but that is his good and acceptable will when he doth any thing in mercie 2. Chrysostome also will haue the old lawe to be the good will of God but the acceptable and perfect will of God is his will reuealed in the new testament 3. Basil regul brev 276. make three degrees of things agreeable to Gods will some good some are better some best of all which are called perfect as Tolet giueth this instance to loue our friend is a good thing to doe well vnto him is better to loue our enemie is the best and most perfect 4. Anselme referreth it to the three states incipientium proficientium perfectorum of beginners of those that goe forward and of such as are perfect or to three conditions of life of the married the continent and virgins 5. Lyranus vnderstandeth the first of bona natura the good things of nature the second of the good things of grace the third of the good things appertaning to glorie But all these observations are curious neither to the Apostles minde who doth here commend vnto vs the will of God reuealed in the old and newe testament as a perfect rule of all our actions which is called good because the word of God prescribeth nothing but that which is good and it is acceptable because nothing is pleasing vnto God but that which he himselfe prescribeth and is agreeable to his will this rule also is perfect because the word of God containeth all things which tend to the perfection of the creature so that all other helpes are vaine idle and superfluous Quest. 9. What the Apostle vnderstandeth by grace I say by grace c. 1. Origen by grace vnderstandeth virtutem sermonis the vertue and power of speach which was giuen to the Apostle one may speake eloquently and learnedly and yet not with grace to edifie the hearers 2. Ambrose interpreteth grace of the gift of wisedome giuen to the Apostle this sense Haymo also followeth as S. Peter giueth this testimonie of S. Paul how he wrote according to the wisedome of God giuen vnto him but Chrysostome refuseth this the Apostle saith not I say by the wisedome giuen vnto me 3. he therefore as also Theodoret vnderstandeth the grace of the spirit 4. but more particularly the Apostle vnderstandeth the speciall grace of his Apostleship which was committed vnto him in which sense the Apostle saith Rom. 11.16 Thorough the grace that is giuen me of God that I should be the minister of Iesus Christ so here is a metonymie the cause is put for the effect and that the Apostle ascribeth his calling vnto grace he thereby both freeth himselfe from all ambition that he intrudeth not himselfe as also presseth his Apostolike authoritie that they might more readily obey Mart. Calv. I say which some thinke to be an exposition of the former words that now the Apostle beginneth to shew what the good and perfect will of God is Tolet but the Apostle rather entreth into a newe matter that as hitherto he had generally exhorted to common duties so now he descendeth to speciall Mart. and here dicere to say is taken for iubere to command Calvin Gorrhan taketh it for prohibeo I forbid but there followe many precepts as well as prohibitions to the which this preface of the Apostle hath reference To everie one among you the Latine translator readeth to all but not so fitly for now the Apostle in saying to euerie one speaketh to all in generall and to euerie one in particular Origens obseruation here is somewhat curious all among you that is they which are in God that is the faithfull for they onely are said to be the Apostle noteth all indifferently noble vnnoble high or lowe which were among them Chrysostome Quest. 10. What it is to vnderstand aboue that which is meete
Sathan 2. they are called armour rather then garments for we are not thereby couered in Gods sight as iustified by our own righteousnes yet we are thereby defended from Satans assaults 6. They are called the armour of light because they proceede from the knowledge of God the true light of the soule and they doe shine and giue light before men who seeing them doe glorifie God Par. and they defend vs against the workes of darkenes illuminate the soule and bring vs ad lucem aeternam to euerlasting light Lyranus Quest. 24. What time is vnderstood by the day and night 1. Chrysostome by the night seemeth to vnderstand the time of this life and by the day the resurrection prope est resurrectio the resurrection is at hand but as Tolet wel obserueth that the day cannot be vnderstood here of the day of iudgement as beside Chrysostome other of the Fathers interpret this place as Athanas. 44. ad Antioch qu. 90. August epist. 80. ad Isich for then the Apostles exhortation would be of small force who mooueth to cast off the workes of darkenes in respect of the time because the day was come but if the day were not yet come then the ground of this exhortation faileth 2. Anselme by the day vnderstandeth the time after this life which is so much the nearer as death approacheth so also the ordin glosse but when death commeth it is no time to worke here the Apostle exhorteth to walke honestly which is in the day therefore this day must be in this life present 3. Some doe expound this night to be the time before the comming of Christ and the day the time of preaching the Gospell when Christ the Sunne of righteousnes did shine vnto the world so Lyranus the night is past obscuritas figurarum legis the darkenes of the figures of the lawe likewise Erasmus vnder the lawe vmbra fuit magis quà m res there was a shadow rather then the thing Osiander also vnderstandeth that time quando nondum fuit exhibitus Christus when Christ was not yet exhibited to the world so also Faius But as Beza noteth the Apostle in this sense should haue had reference onely to the Iewes whereas he writeth to the beleeuing Gentiles among the Romanes which were not acquainted with the figures of the lawe 4. Wherefore with Pet. Martyr Pareus Beza by night rather we vnderstand tempus ignorantiae caecitatis the time of blindnes and ignorance which goeth before regeneration for till they were called to the knowledge of Christ they were in darkenes as the Apostle saith Ephes. 5.8 Ye were sometime darkenes but now are ye light in the Lord walke as children of light this day light as Martyr obserueth if it be compared with our darkenes ignorance in times past it may be called the day but in respect of the life to come it is but as the twilight or breake of the day Martyr so whereas the Apostle saith not the night is past but processit it is well nie spent thereby he signifieth the imperfection of the state present because yet there remaineth some darkenes euen in the regenerate like as whē we see noctem properae ad diluculum the night hasten to the dawning and the swallowes beginne to chatter we one call vp an other and say it is day Chrysostome and Theophylact yet maketh the matter more plaine as allowing 12. houres to the night and tenne of them be spent we say the night is wearing away and it is toward day c. so the grosse darkenes is past when the light of faith and knowledge riseth vp in vs but yet it is but as the dawning of the day in this life Thus Origen followeth this sense as is alleadged before si Christus in corde sit c. if Christ be in our hearts he maketh it day Quest. 25. How we should walke honestly v. 13. So that we walke honestly 1. Chrysost. obserueth wel whom Theophyl followeth that whereas the Romanes were much affected with the opinion of glorie he perswadeth them decoro honesto by that which was comly and honest 2. and further he saith that we walke not walk ye putting himselfe in the number that he might exhort thē without envie 3. that which he saith here in one word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 honestly he elswher Tit. 2.12 thus distinguisheth to these three to liue soberly righteously and godly 4. and he addeth as in the day like as a man wil be ashamed to go naked or cladde with tottered and ragged garments in the day so this time of the light of faith requireth vs to walke honestly Not in riot and drunkennesse 1. Some by these two vnderstand by the first excesse in meat by the other excesse in drinke Gorrhan but Origen better distinguisheth them by the first vnderstanding in honesta luxuriosa convivia vnhonest and riotous feasts by the other drunkennes which is a companion of such feasts such excessiue feasts were vsed among the Egyptians where the manner was to haue a dead mans scull brought in in the middes of their feasts that they beeing put in minde of mortalitie might more freely spend the short time which they had in following of their pleasure 2. Chrysostome here noteth also bibere non prohibet sed praeter mensuram bibere he forbiddeth not to drinke but to drinke beside measure Chambering and wantonnes 1. Gorrhan and so Hugo by the first vnderstandeth the sinne of slouth by the other fornication and vncleanes 2. But Origen taketh these to be cubilia impuditiae the chambers of wantonnes and thinketh here some reference to be made to the dennes of beasts because these filthie sinnes are more agreeable to beasts then men 3. Chrysostome noteth that the Apostle forbiddeth not all kind of bedding and chambering for the marriage bed is vndefiled Heb. 13.4 non mulieribus commisceri sed scortari he forbiddeth not to companie with women but to followe whoredome Not in strife and envying 1. As before he touched the sinnes of the flesh so now he forbiddeth the vices of the minde contention emulation Origen 2. these are ioyned to the other as beeing the perpetuall companions of banqueting and drunkennesse as the wise man sheweth that to such is woe sorrowe and strife that followe wine Prou. 23.29 3. these two are the fruits and effects of drunkennesse concupiscence and wrath so that the Apostle taketh away the verie occasions of these euill affections Chrys. for excesse in meat and drinke is the cause of wantonnesse and of the sinne of vncleanes and of strife and contention 4. Haymo thinketh that by strife is here vnderstood the contention about questions of faith rather such brawles and contentions are here restrained which followe vpon excessiue rioting and drunkennesse Quest. 28. How we must put on Christ. 1. The Apostle altereth his phrase of speach for whereas before he spake of the armour of light now he vseth an other metaphor of putting on a garment for our
wrought by our Sauiour and his Apostles and yet require now signes still 3. Augustine giueth these two reasons why it pleased not God that the power of miracles should continue still ne animus semper visibilia quaereret least the minde should alwayes seeke and looke after visible things eorum confuetudine frigesceret genus humanum quorum novitate flagravit and least that those things by continuall custome and vse should growe cold which by their strangenes at the first enflamed mankind de ver religion c. 25. 4. But it will be obiected that the gift of miracles is yet to be seene in the Popish Church I answer with Augustine that the miracles which they boast to be done at the tombes reliques and images of their Saints are either portenta mendacium spirituum vel mendacia falacium hominum prodigious workes of lying spirits or the fables and lies of deceitfull men they are either cousening and deceitfull trickes or wrought by the operation of Sathan as the Apostle describeth Antichrist 2. Thess. 2.9 whose comming is by the working of Sathan withall powers and signes and lying wonders And such wonders as are wrought for the confirmation of a false worship as to maintaine idolatrie we are not to regard Deut. 13.2.3 Controv. 13. Against the vaine pompe of the Popish Pontificall ornaments v. 19. With the power of signes and wonders c. Chrysostome hereupon well obserueth sacerdotij met symbola ostendere possum non tunicas talares mitram cidarim c. I can shewe the signes of my preisthood not long garments a miter a priestly bonet such as the Priests of the Lawe were adorned with but signes and wonders and the power of the spirit in word and deede both in life and doctrine c. like as then the Priests of the Iewes had no other signes but their Priestly garments their miters phylacteries and such like but knowledge they had none nor sanctitie of life so the Popish prelacie is descerned at this day by their palles crozier flaues miters rings and such like but to preach the word and to adorne the same with holy religious and pious acts is a rare thing in that Pontificall order Controv. 14. Of the idle boastings and vaine glorious excursions of the Iesuites v. 20. I enforced my selfe to preach the Gospel not where Christ was named c. As S. Paul beeing called to be an Apostle preached the Gospel where it had not beene so much as heard of so the Popish Iesuites or rather Iudasites doe boast of their conuersion of the Indians and preaching vnto people that neuer heard before of Christ but there is great difference betweene S. Pauls preaching and theirs 1. he was an Apostle sent to preach the Gospel with the rest to the whole world they are no Apostles 2. he was sent by Christ they came from Antichrist 3. S. Paul preached the truth of the Gospell they publish their owne doctrines and superstitious errors 4. the Apostles conuerted nations and made them the servants of God but they make their conuerts by their superstitious doctrines the children of hell more then before as the Pharisies did their Profelytes Matth. 23. Controv. 15. Against the pompous processions and Persian like traine of the Popes Legates and Cardinals v. 24. And to be brought on my way thitherward by you Pet. Martyr here by the way toucheth the vaine pompe and ostentation of the Cardinals in their viages and embassages much vnlike the companie which S. Paul here required of the Romanes 1. he desireth no pompous traine with haukes hounds or sumpture horse and such like but such companions as he might conferre with in the way touching spirituall matters but the other ride rather like Princes then spirituall Pastors and the ende of their embassage is not to plant the faith but rather to supplant it and to stirre vp to warre and set one Prince against another 2. S. Paul went to Ierusalem to carrie almes and releefe but the Popes Legates come to pill and poll 3. S. Paul preached in his embassage but the Popes Legates and Cardinalls preach not 4. he converted many to the knowledge of Christ but they pervert many and drawe them from Christ. Controv. 16. Against the Anabaptisticall communitie v. 27. Their debters are they S. Paul sheweth what great equitie there was that the Gentiles should communicate vnto the beleeuing Iewes of their carnall things seeing they were made partakers of their spirituall so by the same reason the poore members of Christ which enioy the same spirituall things with vs should also haue their part with vs in our temporall possessions but this maketh not at all for the confused communitie which the Anabaptists would bring in there is great difference betweene the propertie and possession and the fruit and vse thereof the propertie may be seuerall and yet the vse common as occasion shall serue and neede require The tribes of Israel had their proper and peculiar possessions yet they were to extend the vse of their goods vnto their poore brethren And if the right and interest in lands and goods should be common it would breede an horrible confusion and disorder But God is not the author of confusion 1. Cor. 14.33 and he would haue all things done in order v. 20. Controv. 17. Against the invocation of Saints v. 30. That you would striue with me by prayer c. The Romanists hence would picke out an argument for the invocation of Saints If S. Paul doth invocate and call vpon the Romanes to pray for him much more may we call vpon and vnto Saints to pray for vs But there is great difference betweene S. Pauls request made here to the Romanes and the superstitious invocation of Saints 1. he doth not with any religious devotion or adoration entreat this but onely with a charitable affection as one Christian may mooue an other 2. he speaketh not to the dead but to the living 3. he doth not cast himselfe wholly vpon their prayers but desireth them onely to ioyne with him in prayer but the Papists will not say that they ioyne with the Saints in prayer whom they make their mediators 4. this mutuall prayer of one for an other is agreeable to the will and commandement of God but the invocation of the dead is against it as the Prophet Isay saith 8.19 should not a people enquire of their God should they for the liuing consult with the dead Controv. 18. Against the merit of prayers v. 30. That you would striue with me by prayers c. Origen noteth that the Apostle entreateth the Romanes to pray for him qui erant inferiores meritis which were farre inferiour in merit whereupon Pet. Martyr inferreth well vim precum non constare meritis that the force of prayers depend not vpon mens merits for S. Paul was as Origen saith apostolocis praeditus meritis endued with Apostolike merits that is with Apostolike graces and yet he desireth to be holpen by their prayers
Whether a Iudge be bound herein to be like vnto God to iudge according to the truth which he knoweth 5. qu. Of the reasons why the Lord vseth patience and forbearance towards sinners 6. qu. Whether the leading of men to repentance by Gods long suffrance argueth that they are not reprobate 7. qu. How the bountifulnes of God in leading men to repentance and the reuelation of his wrath spoken of ch 1.18 may stand together 8. qu. How God is said to harden the heart seeing the wicked doe harden their owne hearts 9. qu. Whether hardnes of heart and finall impenitencie be a speciall kind of sinne 10. qu. Whether it stand with Gods iustice to punish twice for the same sinnes 11. qu. Whether euery one shall be rewarded according to his works 12. qu. How it standeth with Gods goodnes to punish euill with euill 13. qu. Of the true reading of the 7. vers 14. qu. What the Apostle meaneth by patience of good works 15. qu. What glorie honour and immortalitie the Apostle speaketh of v. 7. 16. qu. How it standeth with Gods iustice to punish eternally sinne temporally committed 17. qu. How eternall life is to be sought 18. qu. Whome the Apostle meaneth by contentious and such as disobey the truth 19. qu. Of the punishment due vnto the wicked indignation wrath tribulation anguish c. v. 8. 20. qu. Why the Iewe is set before the Grecian 21. qu. What Iewes and Gentiles the Apostle here meaneth 22. qu. Of the diuers acception of the word person v. 11. 23. qu. How God is said not to accept the persons of men 24. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 22. As many as haue sinned without the law shall perish without the Law 25. qu. Of the occasion of these words v. 13. The hearers of the Law are not righteous before God but the doers shall be iustified 26. qu. Of the meaning of these words Not the hearers of the Law c. but the doers shall be iustified v. 13. 27. qu. How the Gentiles which had not the Law did by nature the things contained in the Law 28. qu. How any thing can be said to be written in the heart by nature seeing the mind is commonly held to be as a bare and naked table 29. qu. Of the Law of nature what it is 30. qu. What precepts the law of nature containeth and prescribeth 31. qu. What the law of nature was before and after mans fall and wherein they differ 32. qu. Whether the light of nature though much obscured can altogether be blotted out of the mind of man 33. qu. Whether ignorance of the law of nature in man doth make any way excusable 34. qu. That the light of nature is not sufficient of it selfe to direct a man to bring forth any vertuous act without the grace of Christ. 35. qu. Of the testimonie of the conscience the accusing or excusing of the thoughts 36. qu. Why the Apostle maketh mention of the day of iudgement v. 16. 37. qu. Why it is called the day and of the application of other words v. 16. 38. qu. Whence the Iewes were so called v. 17. Behold thou art called a Iewe. 39. qu. Of the priuiledges of the Iewes here recited by the Apostle 40. qu. How the Iewes are said to commit sasacriledge v. 22. 41. qu. How the name of God was blasphemed by the Iewes and whether this testimonie be rightly alleadged by the Apostle 42. qu. In what sense the Apostle saith Circumcision is profitable v. 25. 43. qu. How circumcision was availeable for infants 44. qu. What vncircumcised the Apostle here speaketh of whether such of the Gentiles as were conuerted to the faith and what keeping of the lawe he meaneth 45. qu. Of the explanation of certaine terms here vsed by the Apostle and of the letter and spirit 46. qu. Of two kinds of Iewes and two kinds of circumcision v. 28. Questions vpon the third Chapter 1. qu. Of the priviledges of the Iewes and of their preheminence before the Gentiles 2. qu. How mens vnbeleefe cannot make the faith of God without effect 3. qu. How God is said to be true 4. qu. How euery man is said to be a liar 5. qu. Whether euery man can be said to be a liar 6. qu. How the Prophet Dauid is to be vnderstood saying euery man is a liar Psal. 116.11 7. qu. Of the occasion of these words cited our of the 51. Psalme that thou mightest be iustified c. against thee onely haue I sinned 8. qu. Of the diuers acceptions of this word iustified 9. qu. Of the meaning of these words That thou mightest be iustified in thy words and ouercome when thou iudgest 10. qu. Whether a man may doe euill and commit sinne to that end to set forth Gods iustice 11. qu. Of the meaning of the 5 6 7 8 verses 12. qu. Whether none euill is to be done at all that good may come thereof 13. qu. Whether God doe not euill that good may come thereof in reprobating the vessels of wrath to shew his power 14. qu. In what sense the Apostle denieth the Iewes to be more excellent then the Gentiles v. 9. 15. qu. Of the meaning of certaine phrases which the Apostle vseth v. 9. We haue alreadie prooued and Vnder sinne 16. qu. Whence the Apostle alleadgeth those testimonies v. 10. to 18. 17. qu. Of the matter and order obserued by the Apostle in citing those testimonies 18. qu. How none are said to be iust seeing Noah and other holy men are reported to haue bin iust in their time 19. qu. Of the particular explication of the sinnes wherewith the Apostle here chargeth both Iewes and Gentiles 20. qu. v. 19. Whatsoeuer the Law saith what is here vnderstood by the Law and how diuersly this word is taken 21. qu. It saith to them which are vnder the Law who are here vnderstood to be vnder the law 23. qu. How no flesh is iustified by the works of the law v. 20. 24. qu. How the Apostle here denieth iustification by works seeing he said before c. 2. v. 13. that the doers of the Law are iustified 25. qu. How by the Law came the knowledge of sinne 26. qu. Of the meaning of these words The righteousnesse of God is made manifest without the law 27. qu. How the righteousnes of faith had witnes of the Law and Prophets 28. qu. Of these words v. 22. The righteousnes of God by the faith of Iesus Christ vnto all and vpon all 29. qu. What it is to be depriued of the glorie of God v. 23. 30. qu. Of iustification freely by grace v. 24. 31. qu. How God is said to haue purposed or set forth Christ to be our reconciliation 32. qu. How we are said to be iustified freely seeing faith is required which is an act in the beleeuer 33. qu. v. 25. To declare his iustice or righteousnes what iustice the Apostle vnderstandeth here 34. qu. What is meant by sinnes that are past v. 25. 35.
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
Gorrhan is here somewhat curious it is called the day propter occultarum manifestationem for the manifesting of things secret and the night propter improvisionem for the suddennes of his comming as Matth. 25.6 At midnight there was a crie made it is called the euen Matth. 20.8 propter terminum temporis for the ending of time and the morning propter initium aeternitatis for the beginning of eternitie Zeph. 3.5 In the morning doth he bring his iudgement But here day is vnderstood generally for time as it is taken in other places of Scripture Faius 2. Shall iudge In this world the Lord sheweth sometime speciall iudgements as he did vpon the old world vpon Sodom and Gomorrha but this shall be a day of generall iudgement Faius and he shall iudge the secrets of men non daemonum not of deuills they haue their iudgement alreadie Gorrhan 3. According to my Gospel S. Paul calleth it his Gospel in respect of his ministerie it was the Gospel of Christ tanquaÌ„ authoris as the author and Apostoli vt praediratoris the Apostles as the preacher Lyr. my gospel quod annuntio which I preach Haym so Ioh. 17.20 our Sauiour calleth his word their word that is the Apostles because they were preachers of it 4. According 1. which some vnderstand of the manner of iudgement that Christ shall giue sentence according to the doctrine of the Gospel as he that beleeueth in the Sonne of God hath eternall life he that beleeueth not is damned Pareus Gryneus referreth it to thâ—t doctrine of the Apostle Gal. 5.20 They that doe such things c. as idolatrie witchcraft and the like shall not inherit the kingdome of God so he shall iudge beleeuers both according to the Gospel of faith and the wicked according to their works Pareus dub 15. 2. some giue this sense according to my Gospel because the day of iudgement calleth men to repentance and so belongeth to the Gospel Mart. 3. but it is better applied to the certentie of the day of iudgement that it shall certenly come as Paul had preached and that the world shall be iudged by Iesus Christ for this is portio Evangelij a portion of the Gospel to beleeue that the world shall be iudged by Iesus Christ Calvin see more afterward of other things belonging to the day of iudgement among the places of doctrine 37. Quest. Whence the Iewes were so called v. 17. Behold thou art called a Iew. 1. Iustinus imagineth that the Iewes were so called vpon this occasion he thus writeth that there was one Israel a certaine king that had two sonnes to whome he distributed ten kingdomes who after that diuision were all called Iewes by the name of one Iudas who died presently after that diuision was made lib. 36. 2. Cornelius Tacitus writeth that the Iewes came out of Creta where was the hill Ida or Idaeus as Viâ—g l. 3. mons Idaeus ibi there is the mountaine Idaeus whence he thinketh they were called Idaei and by some corruption of speach Iudaei Tacit. lib. 5. histor But the falsitie of both these fabulous reports euidently appeareth out of the Scriptures for they were thus named of Iudas one of the twelue Patriarks 3. Some Christian writers were of opinion that they were so called of Iudas Macchabeus Thomas maketh mention of this opinion but nameth not the author Catharinius ascribeth it to Iosephus but indeede Ambrose if he be the author of the commentarie vpon this epistle so affirmeth thir conceit is euidently controlled by the Scriptures for mention is made of the Iewes in the storie of Esther in diuers places and Nehemiah 4. which were long before the times of Iudas Macchabeus 4. But the originall of the name indeede was this first this people now called Iewes were called Hebrewes of Heber in whose time the languages were confounded and the Hebrew speach was continued in his familie after this they were called Israelites of Israel their father whose name was before called Iaakob Gen. 32. And after Salomons time the tribes were diuided into two kingdomes tenne were vnder Ieroboam and two with 〈◊〉 halfe vnder Rehoboam the tenne tribes went into captiuitie and neuer returned againe after that diuision all they which were vnder the kingdome of Rehoboam and his successors were called Iewes these also went into captiuitie into Babylon but after 70. yeares they returned after which returne not onely they which were of the tribe of Iudah but all other of that nation which returned with them were called Iewes because it was the more noble tribe and that part of Palestina which they inhabited did belong vnto Iudahs lot Iosephus thinketh that this name was giuen vnto them and to that region quando à Babylonia sunt reversi when they returned from Babylon lib. 11. antiquit c. 5. But indeede they were so called before but not so generally as afterward Thus they had three names they were called Hebrewes that is transeuntes passers propter susceptionem praeceptorum terrenorum for the receiuing of terrene precepts Israelites that is seeing God propter contâ—â—plationem coelestium for the contemplation of heauenly things and Iudaei that is confessing propter confessionem divinae laudis for the confession of the diuine praise Gorrhan 5. It was the opinion of some that the Iewes were the same people who were called Solymi whome Homer mentioneth in his verses of whome the citie Hierusalem should be so called Tacit. lib. 5. historiar and Iosephus citeth the ancient Poet Cherillus who saith that these Iewes called Solymi did serue Xerxes in his warres against Greece lib. 1. contr Apion Contra. But these are meere coniectures for these Solymi as Strabo writeth lib. 1. inhabited about the mountaine Taurus who were in times past called Mylies Herodotus lib. 1. thinketh they were a people of Asia called the Lysians Plinie lib. 5. c. 27. doth number them among other people in Asia that were long agoe extinguished whose countrey was â—ext vnto Isauria Pamphilia Lycania Pererius 6. Now whereas the name of a Iew was then a noble name as now is the name Christian let it be obserued that S. Paul saith not thou art a Iew but rather thou art called a Iew they were so in name rather then true Iewes in deede Chrysost. 38. Quest. Of the priuiledges of the Iewes here recited by the Apostle The Apostle reckoneth vp seuen seuerall priuiledges of the Iewes 1. their name and profession to be called Iewes 2. they tested in the Law placing all perfection therein and admitting of no other doctrine wherein they were deceiued for so long as they were bearers onely of the law and not doers they were vnder the curse 3. they gloried in God not truly as they doe which doe ascribe the glorie and praise of their saluation to God in Christ but their boasting was vain-glorious such as was that of the Pharisie Luk. 18. I thanke thee God c. 4. They knew the will of God reuealed in the law but they were so much
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