state is now made firme and sure in Christ. Controv. 9. Against the sacrifice of the Masse v. 10. For in that he died he died once This place is verie pregnant against the Popish sacrifice of the Masse wherein they say they doe dayly offer vp Christs bodie in sacrifice vnto God for there is no oblation of Christ in sacrifice but by death he died but once and therfore one sacrifice of him in his death sufficeth for all and the Apostle saith Heb. 10.14 that he hath with one offring made perfect for euer them that are sanctified This then is a blasphemous derogation to make iteratiue sacrifices as though that one sacrifice had beene imperfect and whereas they alleadge that their Masse is a sacrifice applicatorie of Christs death such applications are superfluous seeing the death of Christ is effectually applyed by faith which is reviued strengthened and increased by the commemoration of Christs death in the Sacraments See more hereof Synops. Centur. 3. err 31. Controv. 10. Concerning freewill v. 12. Let not sinne raigne c. This place may be vrged by the adversaries of the grace of God to prooue that man hath some power in himselfe to resist sinne seeing otherwise the Apostles exhortation should be in vaine to exhort men vnto that which is not in their power Contra. 1. The Apostle elswhere euidently teacheth that man hath no power or inclination of himselfe to any thing that is good as 2. Corinth 3.5 Wee are not sufficient to thinke any thing of our selues but our sufficiencie is of God Philip. 2.23 it is God that worketh in you both the will and the deed of his good pleasure we must not then make the Apostle contrarie to himselfe as though in this place he should ascribe any thing to mans freewill 2. the Apostle speaketh here to men iustified and regenerate by the spirit of God by the which they are enabled to performe this whereunto they are exhorted so that this abilitie is not in themselues but from God 3. the Apostle sheweth a difference by thus exhorting betweene these actions which the Lord maketh in other creatures which either haue no sense at all or sense onely which creatures God vseth without any stirring at all feeling and inclination in them and those which he worketh in man whose reason will and vnderstanding he vseth by incicing and stirring it vp 4. So then these exhortations are not superfluous for thereby we are admonished rather what we ought to doe then what we are able to doe and by these exhortations of Gods word grace is wrought in vs to enable vs to doe that which of our selues we haue no power to doe See further Controv. 15. following Controv. 11. That concupiscence remaining in the regenerate is properly sinne v. 12. Let not sinne raigne The Apostle here speaketh of concupiscence which is sinne though it raigne not in vs the verie suggestions and carnall thoughts that arise in the regenerate haue the nature of sinne though they yeeld not consent vnto them Bellarmine with other of that side doe expound these and such like places wherein concupiscence is called sinne de causa vel effectu peccati of the cause or effect of sinne so concupiscence is improperly called sinne in their opinion either because it is the effect and fruit of Adams sinne as a writing is called ones hand because the hand writ it or because it bringeth forth sinne as we say frigus pigrum flouthfull cold because cold maketh one full of flouth Contra. 1. Concupiscence is sinne properly because it is contrarie to the lawe of God it striueth and rebelleth against it and continually stirreth vs vp to doe that which is contrarie to the Lawe sinne properly is the transgression of the lawe as the Apostle defineth it 1. Iohn 3.4 therefore concupiscence beeing contrarie to the lawe of God is properly sinne S. Paul also calleth it sinne dwelling in him Rom. 7.17 2. Whereas it may be obiected that all sinne is voluntarie but the motions and suggestions of the flesh are involuntarie we answear that all sinne is not voluntarie for then originall corruption should not be sinne which is euen in children which can giue no consent and yet in respect of the beginning and roote of this sinne which was Adams transgression it was voluntarie See more of this controversie Synops. Papism Centur. 4. err 16. Controv. 12. Whether a righteous man may fall into any mortall or deadly sinne v. 12. Let not sinne raigne there is then peccatum regnans sinne raigning as when one sinneth against his conscience and setteth his delight vpon it and followeth it with greedinesse and so for the time looseth the hope of forgiuenesse of sinne and maketh him subiect to euerlasting death without the mercie of God peccatum non regnans sinne not raigning is originall concupiscence suggestions motions of the flesh infirmities and such like Now the Romanists simply denie that a righteous man can commit any mortall sinne neither can any continuing the Sonne of God fall into it Rhemist 1. Ioh. 3. sect 3. Among the Protestant writers some thinke that the righteous may haue sinne for the time raigning in them as Aarons idolatrie and Dauids adulterie sheweth so Vrsinus vol. 1. pag. 107. but Zanchius denieth it miscellan p. 139. Contra. 1. Touching the assertion of the Romanists it is manifestly conuinced of error by the example of Dauid for it is absurd to thinke that in his fall he ceased to be the child of God for he that is once the sonne of God shall so continue to the ende Dauid was a righteous and faithfull man and yet fell into great and dangerous offences which they call deadly and mortall sinnes 2. The other may be reconciled by the diuerse taking and vnderstanding of raigning sinne for if that be vnderstood to be a raigning sinne which is committed of an obstinate minde with contempt of God without any feeling or remorse of conscience so we denie that any of the elect can fall into any such sinne but if that be taken for a raigning sinne when for a time the conscience is blinded and a man is ouercome and falleth yet rather of infirmitie then obstinacie yet afterward such vpon their repentance are restored in this sense sinne may raigne in the righteous as in Aaron Dauid but it is said improperly to raigne because this kingdome of sinne continueth not it is but for a time Controv. 13. Against the Manichees v. 22. In your mortall bodie Theophylact hence reprooueth the error of the Manichees who affirmed that the bodie of man is wicked and euill but seeing the Apostle compareth it to armour or weapons which the souldier vseth for his countrey the theife and rebell against it so the bodie is an indifferent thing it may either be abused as an instrument of sinne or by the grace of God it may be applyed to the seruice of the spirit as the Apostle sheweth v. 19. Giue your members as seruants vnto
and of the Apostles by Christ excepting Paul whereas for the former the text saith that Ionas fled from the presence of the Lord that called him who were called extraordinarily if the Apostles were not both in respect of the caller which was Christ God in the flesh and of their extraordinarie and miraculous gifts Now the ordinarie calling is in a Church alreadie setled and constituted the extraordinarie when a Church is to be setled and it is of two sorts either when there is no Church at all as the Apostles were sent vnto the Gentiles who were altogether straungers from God or when the Church is wholly corrupted with false doctrine and corrupt manners as the Prophets were raised vp in Israel when they were fallen to idolatrie and noâ—â— in this last age when Christians vnder Antichrist were becom idolaters God hath stirred vp many zealous preachers as Hus Hierome Luther Calvin with other excellent instruments Doct. 7. Of the peace which the Gospel bringeth v. 15. How beautifull are the feete of them which bring glad tidings of peace Whereas without Christ God was offended with the world and there was no peace but the earth was full of tribulation 2. Chron. 15.4 God by Christ reconciled the world to himselfe and sent peace according to the song of the Angels at the birth of Christ glorie to God in heauen and in the earth peace which peace is threefold first toward God in the assurance of the remission of sinnes Rom. 5.1 peace of conscience in that sinne hath no more power ouer vs to perplex and trouble our mindes and peace with our brethren of these two our Sauiour speaketh Matth. 9.57 Haue salt in your selues haue peace one with an other But whereas Christ saith he came not to send peace but debate Luk. 12.51 that is to be vnderstood of the peace of the world which hateth the light and with it the children of light can haue no peace 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. Against inherent iustice v. 3. They beeing ignorant of the righteousnesse of God c. Stapleton Antidot p. 601. contendeth this place to be vnderstood of inherent not of iustice imputed for that which is imputed saith he is not giuen neither receiueth he any iustice to whom it is imputed onely but remaineth still wicked in himselfe Contra. 1. The righteousnesse which is inherent in a man is the righteousnesse of works which the Apostle calleth their owne righteousnesse but the righteousnesse of God is not the righteousnesse of workes but that which is of faith as the Apostle sheweth v. 6. there he calleth that the righteousnesse of faith which here he nameth the righteousnesse of God but this is no other then righteousnesse imputed now faith is imputed for righteousnesse without workes Rom. 4.5 6. thus then the argument is framed the righteousnesse of God is the righteousnesse of faith this is prooued both out of this place v. 4. and c. 3.22 the righteousnesse of God by faith but the righteousnesse of faith is by imputation c. 4.5 6. therfore the righteousnes of God is righteousnes imputed 2. That iustice is not onely giuen which is actually conferred but that also which is accounted and imputed as the debt which is freely pardoned is as fully discharged as if the debt were paied and they which are iustified by righteousnesse imputed remaine not wicked because they are counted righteous in Christ beeing iustified by faith and are sanctified in some measure and so are regenerate and become new beeing mortified vnto sinne by which their mortification and dying vnto sinne they are not iustified before God but onely by faith in Christ. Controv. 2. Against the workes of preparation which are done without faith v. 4. Christ is the ende of the law Here Chrysostome well noteth that if Christ be the end of the lawe it followeth that qui Christum non habet etsi legis iustitiam habere videatur eam tamen non habeat he which hath not Christ though he seeme to haue the righteousnesse of the lawe yet he hath it not c. without Christ then and faith in him there is no true righteousnesse before God for without faith it is impossible to please God Heb. 11.6 what is become then of the Popish workes of preparation which should goe before iustification as though a man hauing not faith yet by his workes might prepare and make himselfe fit for iustification following for all such workes which come before faith and so are not sanctified in Christ are before God no better then sinnes Controv. 3. That it is impossible for any in this life to keepe the lawe v. 5. The man that doth these things shall liue thereby 1. Hence it is euident that no man can performe the lawe in euerie point for the lawe requireth perfect obedience in all things and as he that keepeth it shall liue thereby so he that fayleth in any part thereof is vnder the curse of the lawe as S. Paul sheweth Galat. 3.10 2. If it be answeared that it is impossible to keepe the lawe by the power onely of free-will but by grace it is possible to be kept S. Iohn sheweth that euen the regenerate by grace are not without sinne 1. Ioh. 1.8 and consequently they transgresse the lawe 〈◊〉 sinne is the transgression of the lawe 1. Ioh. 3.4 3. And whereas Stapleton obiecteth antid p. 637. that then this should be a ridiculous deceitfull and idle promise He that doth these things shall liue thereby if none were able to doe them and it were like as a father should promise his sonne an inheritance if he could get a kingdome which were impossible for him to doe Contra. 1. Though the condition be impossible to vs to be fulfilled yet is it possible in Christ who hath performed the perfect obedience of the lawe 2. and though it be not possible to keepe the lawe perfectly yet by grace we are made able in some measure to keep the lawe and the rest where we faile is supplied by the perfect obedience of Christ. 3. neither is the example like for the sonne is not bound by any dutie to fulfill that condition but we are debters vnto God for the keeping of the lawe which if it be now impossible it is mans owne fault who in his creation was made righteous and endued with sufficient strength to keepe the law See further hereof Synops. Centur. 4. err 63. Contr. 4. Against the doubting of saluation v. 6. Say not in thine heart who shall ascend c. 1. The Apostle sheweth the contrarie effects of the lawe and Gospell they which depend vpon the righteousnesse of the law are continually in doubt how they shall come to heauen and how they shall escape hell but the righteousnesse of faith remooueth all these doubts because their faith is grounded vpon the word of God which teacheth them that Christ ascended into heauen for them and that he died for them they neede none other to ascend to prepare
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
acception of the word hath no place here for this declaration of one to be iust by works is before men before God there neede no such declaration for he knoweth what is in man but this iustification is before God which the Apostle here speaketh of it is therefore iustification in deede and not the declaration of it onely 6. Some thinke that the Apostle speaketh of the legall iustification which is by works which if any could doe they should be iustified thereby but it is impossible for any to keepe the law Calv. Pareus Beza annotat But it is euident that the Apostle speaketh not here of a thing impossible to be done and of iustification vpon that supposall if any could be doers of the law but he setteth this downe affirmatiuely and positiuely that they which liued according to the law should be iustified as he said before v. 6. that God will reward euery one according to his workes And as the hearers of the law onely are not iustified so the hearers and doers are iustified but some heare the law in fact verily and in deede therefore some also were verily and in deede doers of the law 7. The meaning then of this sentence is the same with that v. 6. God will approoue iustifie reward them that doe the works of the law whether Iew or Gentile yet it followeth not that a man is therefore iustified by the workes of the law But God approoueth and rewardeth the workers not the hearers or professors so here the Apostle entreareth not of the cause of iustification which is faith without the works of the law but of the difference betweene such as shall be iustified and such as are not Faius they onely which haue a liuely faith which worketh and keepeth the law in part and supplieth the rest which is wanting in themselues by the perfect obedience of Christ they shall be iustified not those which onely professe the law and keepe it not the Apostle then here sheweth who shall be iustified not for what 8. But this place maketh nothing at all for iustification by works 1. if a man is iustified by doing the works of the law either he is iust before he doe the works or nor iust if he be iust then he is iustified before he doe those workes then is he not iustified by those workes if he be not iust then can he doe no good workes whereby he is made iust for the workes done before faith as Tolet himselfe confesseth non possunt iustum afficere can not make one iust Here the Romanists haue no better answer then to confesse fidem sine operibuâ— primaâ— efficere iustificationem that faith without workes doth effect the first iustification which is encreased by workes which they call the second iustification Tolet. ibid. And thus they are driuen to consent with Protestants that iustification is by faith without works as for that distinction of the first and second iustification the vanitie of it is shewed before 2. If workes did iustifie then it would followe that the iustice whereby we are made iust should be an actuall iustice not habituall because that is actuall which worketh the contrarie whereof is maintained by Bellarmine who prooueth by sundrie reasons that one is formally made iust not by an actuall but an habituall iustice wherewith the minde is endued lib. 2. de iustific c. 15. Controv. 8. That it is not possible in this life to keepe the lawe 1. Pererius disput 7. numer 55. taketh vpon him to prooue against Calviu legem divinam impleri posse that the lawe of God may be kept in this life he meaneth by a man in the state of grace 1. Otherwise Dauid had not said true Psal. 18.21 I kept the wayes of the Lord and did not wickedly against my God 2. S. Paul saith he that loueth his brother hath fulfilled the Lawe Rom. 13. 3. What wisedome were there in God to command things impossible vnto man or what iustice to punish him for not keeping of that which was not in his power 2. Contra. 1. Dauids keeping of the wayes of God must be vnderstood either of some particular act of his obedience wherein he behaued himselfe vprightly as Psal. 7.3 If I haue done this thing or if there be any wickednesse in mine hands or els it must be vnderstood of his faithfull endeauour as farre as he was enabled by grace for Dauids sinnes which are mentioned in the Scripture doe euidently shewe that he did not keepe all the wayes of God 2. If a man could perfectly loue his brother as he ought he might fulfill the lawe but so can no man doe and there is as Hierome distinguisheth 2. kinds of iustice or fulfilling the lawe there is a perfect iustice which was onely in Christ and an other iustice quae nostrae competit fragilitati which agreeth vnto our frailtie dialog 1. cont Pelagian and thus may the lawe be fulfilled 3. The commandements are not simply impossible for man in his creation had power to keepe them if he would Gods wisedome is seene in giuing his lawe vnto man beeing vnable in himselfe to keepe it that it might be a schoolemaster to bring him vnto Christ Galat. 3.19 and his iustice appeareth in punishing man for transgressing that lawe which sometime he was able as he was created of God to keepe and now may perfectly performe it by faith in the obedience of Christ who hath deliuered vs from the curse of the lawe 3. Now that it is not possible for a man no not in the state of grace to keepe the lawe of God it is thus shewed out of the the Scripture 1. S. Paul saith Rom. 7.19 To will is present with me but I finde no meanes to performe that which is good a man regenerate now can doe no more then S. Paul could who confesseth that he was vnable to doe that which was good and agreeable to the lawe 2. If a man by grace could keepe the law by grace he hath power to redeeme himselfe from the curse of the lawe for as he which keepeth not euerie thing contained in the law is vnder the curse so he that keepeth all things which the lawe commandeth is free from the curse but no man can redeeme himselfe from the curse of the lawe for Christ hath redeemed vs from the curse of the lawe Galat. 3.13 3. Further The lawe is not of faith Galat. 3.12 but if the lawe might be kept by grace and faith then should it be of faith 4. And if a man regenerate were able to keepe the lawe then it were possible for a man in this life to be without sinne for where no transgression of the lawe is there should be no faâ—e for sinne is the transgression of the law 1. Ioh. 3.4 see more hereof Synops. Centur. 4. â—rr 63. pag. 916. Controv. 9. Whether by the light of nature onely a man may doe any thing morally good Bellarmine hath this position that a man if no tentation doe vrge
inward circumcision of the heart which is by faith 2. Anselmus thinketh that the Apostle reporteth here that which he said before that Abraham is the father of them which beleeue though they be vncircumcised but he toucheth here rather the other part that Abraham is the father of the circumcision also which he further explaineth that he meaneth not such as onely haue the carnall circumcision but such as walke in the steppes of Abraham 3. By walking in the steppes the Apostle vnderstandeth not here the fruites and effects of faith but rather faith it selfe in which respect Abraham is said to be the father of the faithfull Beza annot And herein they must followe the steppes of Abraham 1. he was not counted iust not by any merits or workes of his but by faith 2. this faith was ioyned with a constant and full assurance herein they must be like vnto Abraham 4. Origen here obserueth that though at this time he were called Abram not Abraham when he was pronounced iust by faith Gen. 15. yet the Apostle retaineth that name which was afterward imposed by the Lord quod enim divinitus sumitur obseruari in posterum convenit for that which is once appointed of God it is fit afterward to be observed Quest. 23. How and where Abraham was promised to be heire of the world v. 13. 1. Gryneus by the world vnderstandeth by a Synecdoche of the whole taken for a part the land of Canaan which was promised to Abraham and his seede but the Apostle speaketh here not of a temporall but of a spirituall promise 2. Faius Osiander with others doe apply it vnto Canaan also but mystically as it was a type and figure of the kingdome of heauen 3. Lyranus will haue this fulfilled in Christ to whom was giuen all power in heauen and earth so also Peter Martyr and Caluin who alleadgeth that place Heb. 1.2 Whom he hath made heire of all things 4. Pareus by the world vnderstandeth the world of the faithfull and beleeuers dispersed ouer the world and so in effect it is the same which he said before that Abraham should be the father of all which beleeue whether of the circumcision or vncircumcision So also Origen here referreth vs vnto that promise Gen. 15. that in Abraham all the kinreds of the earth should be blessed likewise Beza 5. As this last seemeth to be the fittest interpretation so I thinke it best to ioyne both these last together that Abraham was made heire of the world that is the father of all beleeuers in the world yet so as this was chiefely performed in Christ as it is said Psalme â—â— I will giue the heathen for thine inheritance and the vttermost parts of the earth for thy possession And so S. Paul also Galath 3. vnderstandeth the seede of Abraham vnto whom the promise was made of Christ to this purpose the ordinarie glosse that Abraham was heres mundi secundum propositum exemplum heire of the world in respect of his example of beleeuing but Christ secundum potestatem in regard of his power Quest. 24. Wherein Abraham was made heire of the world and wherein this inheritance consisted 1. This inheriting of the world is not meant of any temporall dominion which snoâ—â— fall vnto the posteritie of Abraham as the Iewes dreamed for the obiect of faith is spirituall not temporall as it is defined by the Apostle to be the euidence of things that are not seene Heb. 11.1 2. It must therefore be referred vnto Christ. 1. Abraham in Christs right is promiseâ—â— the inheritance of the world which should be chiefely accomplished in the celestiall inheritance 2. and now in the earth this spirituall inheriting of the world is vnderstood of the Church of Christ which is dispersed thorough the world 3. and beside the faithfull onely haue true tight and interest vnto the temporall things of this life which the wicked 〈◊〉 bold as vsurpers as the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 3.21 all things are yours and ye Christs and Christ Gods Pareus Quest. 25. How faith is said to be made voide if they which are of the lawe be heires 1. Haymo by the promise here vnderstandeth the blessing which was promised to Abraham should in his seede come vpon all nations so that if they which were of the lawe and circumcision should onely be heires vnto Abraham that promise should not be accomplished that all nations should in his feede be blessed 2. Origen thus expoundeth evacuabitur id that should be evacuated and made voide that Abraham was iustified by faith his meaning is that the word of God should not be found true so also Osiander taketh here faith for the constancie of Gods promises it would follow that God did not stand to his promise seeing the promise was made to the faith of Abraham but faith is not taken in that sense in this chapter but thereby is meant beleefe in God and the relying vpon his promises 3. Bucer and Calvin giue this sense that seeing faith is ioyned with an assured confidence and trust if the promise were made to the keeping of the law which beeing a thing impossible would make doubtfulnesse and distrust in the minde this were contrarie vnto the nature of faith and so in this respect faith should be made voide 4. Tolet here referreth vs to that place Galat. 3.17 where the Apostle reasoneth from the time that the lawe which came 400. yeares after the promise could not make voide the promise which was made before but if the inheritance came by the lawe then should the promise which was made first be of no effect which were verie absurd and inconuenient 5. But the Apostle rather reasoneth here from the contrarie and diuerse nature of the lawe and promise for the lawe requireth workes and so the reward is of due debt the promise is of faith and so the reward is of grace and fauour these then doe one destroy an other for that which is of fauour cannot be of desert and due debt if the inheritance then come by the lawe of workes the lawe of faith is made voide and so Gods promise should be frustrate which is impossible Pareus in ver 14. Quest. 26. How the lawe is said to cause wrath 1. This is not brought in as an argument and proofe of the former speach that the promise is of no effect if the inheritance were by the lawe but it is a new argument to prooue that inheritance is not by the lawe by the contrarie effect because the promise procureth a blessing but the lawe wrath and so malediction therefore the inheritance is not by the law 2. Origen by the lawe vnderstandeth the lawe of the members which maketh vs captiue vnto sinne and indeede causeth wrath and where this law is not there is no transgression Haymo thinketh it may be of the lawe of nature but it is euident that the Apostle speaketh of the written lawe of Moses as he calleth the Iewes Abrahams seede of the lawe v.
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
promised but that he had also a particular confidence of his acceptance with God and remission of his sinnes in the Messiah promised doth euidently appeare by these two arguments 1. The Apostle saith that Abraham was partaker by faith of that blessednesse which the Prophet Dauid speaketh of v. 7. Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen then it followeth ver 9. Came the blessednesse vpon the circumcision or vpon the vncircumcision 2. the like faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousnesse which is imputed to vs v. 23. but our faith is to beleeue that Christ was put to death for our sinnes and rose for our iustification v. 25. therefore Abrahams faith was an assurance of remission of his sinnes in Christ. Controv. 15. That faith doth not iustifie by the merit or act thereof but onely instrumentally as it applyeth and apprehendeth the righteousnesse of Christ. Bellarmine hath an other sophisticall collection vpon these words v. 22. therefore it was imputed to him for righteousnesse here saith at the Apostle rendreth the reason why faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousnesse because he in beleeuing gaue glorie vnto god therefore he was iustified merito fidei by the merit or worthinesse of faith which notwithstanding was his grace and gift Bellar. lib. 1. de iustif c. 17. Contra. 1. Abraham was not iustified because he in beleeuing gaue glorie vnto God that indeede was an act and fruit of his faith but it was his faith onely for the which he was iustified as the Apostle saith afterward v. 24. it shall be likewise imputed to vs for righteousnes which beleeue c. 2. the Apostle saith to him that worketh not but beleeueth c. faith is counted for righteousnesse then it will followe that where faith is counted or imputed for righteousnesse there is no worke faith then iustifieth not as a worke by the act of beleeuing for then faith should not iustifie without works which is the scope of all the Apostles discourse that by faith righteousnes is imputed without workes v. 6. faith then doth not iustifie actiuely as it is a worke but passiuely as it apprehendeth the righteousnesse of Christ. 3. If faith be the gift of God as Bellarmine confesseth then can it not merit for he that meriteth must merit of his owne where there is grace and fauour as in the bestowing of gifts freely there is no merit v. 4. 4. I will here oppose against Bellarmine the iudgement of Tolet and so set one Iesuite against an other and a Cardinall against his fellowe he thus ingeniously writeth vpon these words non existimes Paulum merito fiderascribere iustitium c. thinke not that Paul ascribeth righteousnesse to the merit of faith as though because he beleeued he was worthie of the righteousnesse of God but he signifieth Deum ex gratia acceptare fidem nostram in iustitiam that God of grace and fauour accepteth our faith for righteousnesse Controv. 16. The people are not to be denied the reading of the Scriptures v. 23. Now it is not written for him onely but for vs c. Hence it is euident that the Romanists offer great wrong vnto the people of God in barring them from the reading of the Scriptures for they are to be admitted to the reading of the Scriptures for whom they are written but they are written for all that beleeue in Christ the reading then of the Scripture serueth to coÌ„firme our faith therfore they belong generally vnto the faithfull Par. But it will be obiected that the vnlearned doe not vnderstand the Scriptures and therefore they are to depend vpon the fathers of the Church for the vnderstanding of them and not to venture vpon them themselues Answ. 1. Nay the sense of the Scripture is most safely taken from the Scripture which is the best interpreter of it selfe 2. the Fathers and expossitors are to be heard and consulted with so farre forth as they agree with the Scriptures but the sense of the Scripture 〈◊〉 not depend vpon their fancies which haue no warrant by Scripture as Hierome vpon theâ— 23. chap. of Mathew giueth instance of a certaine interpretation of one of the Fatherâ— that Zacharias the sonne of Barachias mentioned there v. 35. to haue beene slaine betweene the Temple and the Altar was Zacharie the father of Iohn Baptist And Hierome searching out which of the Fathers had made this interpretation found that it was Basil and then he concludeth this seeing it hath no warrant out of the Scriptures eadem facilitate contemnitur qua probatur is as easily reiected as it is affirmed See further of the vulgar reading of Scripture and of the manner of interpreting the same Synops. Centur. 1. err 3. and err 9. Controv. 17. Against the heretikes which condemned the old Testament and God the author thereof v. 24. Which beleeued in him that raised vp Iesus c. Origen very well inferreth vpon these wordes that seeing the God whom Abraham beleeued was able to quicken the dead was the same that raised Iesus from the dead non erat alius Deus legis alius Domini nostri Iesu Christ. c. there was not then one God of the law and another of our Lord Iesus Christ c. But there was the same God of the old and new Testament which is obserued by Origen against the wicked Marcionites and Manichies who condemned the old Testament and the author thereof So also whereas the same heretickes vrged these wordes of the Apostle v. 15. where no law is there is no transgression and thereupon inferring the contrarie where there is a law there is transgression would thereby conclude that the law is the cause of transgression and so condemne the law Origen doth thus returne this their collection vpon themselues that as where the law is there is transgression of the law so where faith is there is transgression against faith but as faith is not the cause vt quis praeuaricetur à fide that one transgresse against faith neither shall the law be the cause of transgression against the law Controv. 18. Whether iustification consist onely in the remission of sinnes v. 25. Who was deliuered to death for our sinnes and is risen againe for our iustification Pererius taketh occasion here to inuergh against Protestants thus affirming of vs qui â—â—â—â—em vim iustificationis ponunt in sola remissione peccatorum donationem vero iustitiae c. which doe place all the force of iustification onely in the remission of sinnes but the donation of iustice whereby the minde is rectified and newenesse of life wrought in vs they do reiect and abandon Perer. disput 10. err 49. and to the same purpose Bellar. lib. 2. de iustif c. 6. and the Rhemists take vpon them to confute the Protestants because they hold iustification to be onely remission of sinnes and no grace inherent in vs annot in 4. ad Rom. Sect. 6. Contra. 1. It is a false imputation that we place iustification onely in the remission of
vngodly L. it is not put interrogatiuely but passiuely in the originall 7 Doubtlesse one will scarce die for a righteous man but yet for a good man for one which is profitable to him Be. he readeth the sense not the words it may be one dare die 8 But God setteth out his loue toward vs seeing that while not seeing if that while S. we were yet sinners Christ died for vs. 9 Beeing iustified therefore by his blood much more shall we be saued thorough him from wrath 10 For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God God was reconciled to vs S. by the death of his Sonne much more beeing reconciled we shall be saued liue S. by his life 11 And not onely so but we also reioyce in God thorough our Lord Iesus Christ by whome we haue obtained V. Be. receiued Gr. reconciliation atonement B.G. 12 Wherefore as by one man sinne entred into the world and death by sinne and so euen so B. death went ouer all men in whome namely Adam Be. not in as much as S.V.B. all men haue sinned 13 For vnto the time of the law was sinne in the world but sinne is not imputed while there is no law 14 But death raigned from Adam vnto Moses euen ouer them that sinned after the like manner after the similitude Gr. of the transgression of Adam which was the figure of him that was to come 15 But yet not as the offence so is also the gift for if by the offence of that one many be dead much more the grace of God and the gift by grace which is of one man by one man B.G. hath abounded vnto many 16 And not as that which entred by one which sinned not as the sinne of one S.L. for the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sinning or that sinned or as by one that sinned death entred V. for that followeth in the next verse so is the gift for the fault sinne B. not iudgement S.L.V. because of the words following to condemnation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. came of one offence which must be supplied out of the next clause vnto condemnation but the gift is of many offences to iustification 17 For if by one offence Be. better then by the offence of one B.G.S.V.L. for so much is expressed in the words following death raigned thorough one much more shall they which receiue the abundance of grace that abundance of grace G. and of the gift of righteousnes raigne in life thorough one that is Iesus Christ 18 Likewise then as by one offence Be. not the offence of one cater see the former vers the fault came vpon all men to condemnation so by one iustification Be. not the iustification of one B.G. cum caeter for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put in the first place otherwise it should be put after as in the next verse the benefit redounded vnto all men to the iustification of life 19 For as by the disobedience of one many were made sinners so by the obedience of one many shall be made righteous 20 Moreouer the Law entred thereupon by the way V. in the meane time B. that the offence should encrease B. Be. abound V. G. but where sinne increased grace abounded much more 21 That as sinne had raigned vnto death in death V. S. L. so is the word in the originall is in but he meaneth vnto death as appeareth by the other opposite part vnto eternall death so might grace also raigne by righteousnes vnto eternall life thorough Iesus Christ our Lord. 2. The Argument Methode and Parts In this chapter the Apostle pursueth the former proposition wherewith he concluded the fourth chapter that Christ died for our sinnes and now he sheweth the manifold benefits which we haue by the death of Christ with an ample proofe and demonstration of the same So then this chapter is deuided into two parts the first containing a rehersall of the benefits which we haue by Christs death to v. 6. the second a proofe and demonstration thereof to the ende of the chapter 1. In the first part there is 1. set forth the foundation of all other benefits which we obtaine by Christ namely iustification by faith v. 1. 2. then the benefits and graces either internall which are these sowre peace of conscience bold accesse to Gods presence perseuerance hope of glorie v. 2. or externall which is constancie and reioycing in tribulation which is amplyfied both by the effects patience experience hope which is described by the effect it maketh vs not ashamed v. 5. and by the efficient cause thereof the loue of God shed in our hearts by the holy Ghost v. 5. 2. Then followeth the probation hereof which consisteth of two arguments the one taken from the state and condition of such as were reconciled by Christ they were enimies this argument is handled from v. 6. to 12. the other argument standeth vpon a comparison and collation betweene Adam and Christ the losse which we had by the one and the benefit which we are made partakers of by the other from v. 12 to the ende In the first argument there is 1. the proposition that Christ died for the vngodly v. 6. ◠the illustration thereof à dissimili by an vnlike comparison betweene man and God the first part is expressed v. 7. that a man will not die for an vnrighteous man and an enemie which is shewed by the contrarie because hardly for a righteous man will one die vnlesse he be also a friend much lesse for an vnrighteous man and an enemie the other part of the comparison followeth 1. shewing that Christ died both for vs beeing vnrighteous v. 8. and enemies also v. 10. 2. then he inferreth two conclusions 1. the certaintie of our saluation beeing now iustified and made friends v. 9.10 2. the ioy and consolation which springeth and ariseth hereof v. 11. The second argument consisting of a comparison betweene Adam and Christ is thus handled there is the proposition concerning Adam shewing wherein he was like wherein vnlike vnto Christ to v. 18. then the reddition or second part concerning Christ v. 18. to the ende First Adam is like in three things 1. in his person he was but one and yet the author of sinne to all 2. in the obiect his sinne was communicated to all though himselfe but one 3. in the effect and issue this sinne brought forth death all this is propounded v. 12. that sinne entred by one man into all the world then it is prooued by 3. arguments 1. by the office of the lawe which is not to bring in sinne but to impute sinne v. 13. therefore though sinne were not so much imputed before the lawe as after yet was it in the world before 2. by the effects death was in the world before the lawe and it raigned also vpon infants that had not sinned actually as Adam had done and therefore sinne much more which brought forth death v. 14. 3. Adam was
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
not imputed vnto them that is that God doe not punish them for it so to Philemon 18. if he haue hurt thee any thing at all impute it vnto me that is let me satisfie for it Faius Tolet in this sense the Apostle saith Rom. 4.8 Blessed is he to whom the Lord imputeth not his sinne his sinne shall not be laid to his charge in iudgement And so the Apostle saith here where no lawe is sinne is not imputted that is there is no punishment inflicted for sinne but by the prescript of a lawe seeing then that the punishment of death was inflicted vpon those which liued before the lawe it could not be for sinnes which they actually cōmitted which had no law to punish them therefore it was originall sinne which was punished by death and least it might be said that though there were no written lawe whereby sinne was imputed yet there was a naturall law which men transgressed and therefore were punished the Apostle sheweth in the next raise that euen death raigned ouer them which had committed no actuall sinne as Adam had done and therefore death was inflicted as a punishment not onely of actuall but originall sinne Beza 29. Quest. How death is said to haue raigned from Adam to Moses 1. Origen distinguisheth betweene the word pertransijt entred or passed which the Apostle vsed before v. 12. and regnavit raigned death entred ouer all both the iust and vniust but it raigned onely in those qui se peccato tota mento subiecerunt which did giue themselues wholly vnto sinne But the Apostle speaketh generally of all not onely of some that death raigned vpon by the generallitie of death he prooueth the generallitie of some and by this word regno he sheweth potentiam mortis the power of death tha◠none could resist it Martyr instar tyranni saeuijt it raged like a Tyrant Pareus 2. By death some vnderstand mons anima the death of the soule that is sinne which raigned from Adam vnto Moses Haymo Hug. but it is euident that the Apostle in this discourse distinguisheth death from sinne and prooueth by the effect the vniuersalitie of death brought in by sinne the generalitie of sinne also Origen seemeth to vnderstand mortem gehennae the death of hell vnto which all descended and therefore Christ went to hell to deliuer them this sense followeth also the ordinarie glosse and Gorrhan But in this sense it appeareth not why the Apostle should say vnto Moses for they hold that all the iust men euen vnder the law also went to hell But in truth the death of hell raigned not ouer the righteous either before the law or after from the which they were deliuered by Christ therefore the death of the bodie is here vnderstood which entred vpon all euen ouer infants which sinned not as Adam did 3. Vnto Moses 1. Origen by Moses vnderstandeth the Law and by the law the whole time of the law vsque ad adventum Christi vnto the comming of Christ who destroied the kingdome of sinne so also Haymo but in that the Apostle setteth Moses against Adam it is euident that he vnderstandeth the time when the law was giuen and what law he speaketh of is further shewed v. 20. The Law entred that offence should abound the dominion then of sinne and death there ended not 2. Some thinke this limitation is set because men were more afraid of death before Christs comming then after because they had not such hope of the resurrection Gorrhan but it is an hard and forced exposition to interpret vnto Moses vnto the comming of Christ as is shewed before 3. Some thinke it is said vnto Moses because then a remedie was giuen by the law in restraining of sinne and then first in Iudas capit destrui regnum mortis the kingdome of sinne beganne to be destroied and now euery where gloss ordinar but the law gaue no remedie against sinne for sinne then abounded much more v. 20. and the Apostle said before c. 4.15 That where no law is there is no transgression there is no such knowledge of sinne 4. Therefore vnto Moses noteth the time of the giuing of the law vsque ad legem per Mosen promulgatam vnto the law published by Moses gloss ordin not that death raigned not after Moses also but this is added to shew that death was in the world euen before the law Lyran. and so consequently sinne for of those greatest doubt might be made which liued before the law whether death entred vpon them as a punishment of their sinne 30. Quest. Of the meaning of these words which sinne not after the similitude of the transgression of Adam This verse hath diuers readings 1. some doe referre the last words after the similitude of the transgression of Adam vnto the first part of the sentence death raigned 2. some doe ioyne it with the next words before which sinned and of either of these there are seuerall opinions 1. They which distinguish the sentence and ioyne the first and last words together some as Chrysostome giue this sense that as death raigned vpon Adam so likewise it raigned ouer his posteritie but others doe make this the cause of death and mortalitie because they are borne like vnto Adam that is destitute of originall iustice Lyranus Tolet. annot 19. Tolet further would confirme this interpretation by diuers reasons 1. the preposition is 〈◊〉 which with a dative case sheweth the cause whereas an other word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is vsed to signifie in as Philip. 2.7 He was found in shape as a man and Rom. 8.3 In the similitats of sinneful flesh 2. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 similitude sheweth the similitude and likenes of nature 3. and this is most agreeable to the Apostles purpose to shew the cause why death raigned ouer all because they are borne sinners like vnto Adam Contra. 1. The Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is sometime taken for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in as before in the 12. vers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in whome and Tolet himselfe in that place sheweth that it is so vsed in other places of Scripture annot 15. 2. The word of similitude is better referred to the qualitie of Adams sinne then to the conformitie in nature 3. Neither needed the Apostle here shew the cause why death raigned ouer all but he bringeth in this as a proofe of that which he saide vers 12. that all sinned in Adam because all are subiect to death euen they which commit not actuall sinnes as infants it was therefore impertinent to repeat that which he intendeth to prooue 4. Now further this distinction of the verse is ouerthrowne by these two reasons 1. if the Apostle had saide ouer those which 〈…〉 and should haue put to no other addition he had contraried himselfe hauing set it downe vers 12. that in Adam all sinned and death therefore went ouer all how the◠could he say that death raigned ouer those that sinned not
2. there is not in infants the similitude of Adams transgression for his sinne was actuall so is not theirs if he had said onely after the similitude of Adam and not added transgression there had beene more probabilitie in it thus to diuide the sentence but in that he addeth after the similitude of the transgression it is more fitly ioyned to the former words which sinned not 2. Now of those which ioyne the last clause with the former words some read them affirmatiuely thus death raigned c. ouer them which sinned after the similitude c. and Origen receiuing this reading expoundeth it of those which committed mortall and great sinnes as Adam did and so distinguisheth betweene the entring of death which went ouer the righteous and the raigning of death onely ouer those which gaue themselues wholly ouer vnto sinne Ambrose vnderstandeth this clause of Idolaters for they sinne like vnto Adam who was not free from idolatrie in forsaking the Creator Some vnderstand it of children that they are saide to sinne after the similitude of Adam quia ex peccatore nascuntur peccatores because they are borne sinners of a sinners Gorrhan But all these goe against the receiued reading which hath a negative ouer them which sinned not as also the Syrian interpreter readeth 3. Of those which read with a negative ouer them which sinned not Hier. l. cont Pelag. expoundeth it of the particular sinne of Adam in eating of the forbidden fruit that death raigned euen ouer those which had not committed that sinne so also Theodor. and Chrysost. though he otherwise diuide the sentence as is shewed before But none beside Adam did commit that sinne whereas the Apostle in saying euen ouer them also which sinned not insinuateth that there were some ouer whome death raigned that sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression and some which did not 4. Athan. ser. 4. cont Arr. saith that they sinned like to Adam which committed mortall and great sinnes they sinned not like to Adam that sinned not mortally and yet died as Ieremie and Iohn Baptist that were sanctified in their mothers wombe But in this sense the Apostle onely should shew that death raigned onely ouer those which had committed actuall sinnes and so he should not prooue that which he said before that in Adam all sinned not onely those which commit actuall but are guiltie onely of originall sinne 5. Oecumenius doth interpret this place of those which were before the Law which did not transgresse in legem datam against any law giuen vnto them as Adam did but onely against the law of nature and so he seemeth to vnderstand it onely of those which committed actuall sinnes but then the Apostles reason should not be generall enough if he concluded not all as well Infants as others to be sinners in Adam 6. Most of our new writers vnderstand this not to sinne after the similitude of the transgression of Adam to be sine lege peccare to sinne without a law as all they did which were from Adam to Moses as well infants as men of yeares so Mart. Bulling Melanct. Calv. But this had beene then a needlesse addition seeing all without exception from Adam to Moses sinned in that manner without a law but the Apostle in saying euen ouer them also sheweth that there were some beside those which sinned after the transgression of Adam 7. Wherefore I preferre Augustines exposition who taketh those to sinne after the similitude of Adams transgression that committed actuall sinnes and those not to sinne after that similitude which had no actuall but onely originall sinnes so also Ansel. Lyran. Gorrh. glosse inter Haymo and of our new writers Beza Parâ— Ofianà Pisc. with other so also Per. 31. Qu. How Adam is said to be the figure of him that was to come v. 14. 1. Origen by him which is to come vnderstandeth the next world that as by Adam we all in this life become mortall so in the next world vita reguabit per Christum life shall raigne thorough Christ. 2. Some vnderstand this according to that place 1. Cor. 10.11 all those things happened vnto them in tâ—pes so whatsoeuer was before or vnder the law were figures of those things which should be accomplished in the times of the Messiah Faius and Origen also to the same purpose But it is euident that the Apostle compareth the person of Adam and Christ together and touching those things which were wrought and accomplished in this life not deferred till the next 3. Augustine sometime referreth that which is to come not vnto Christ but vnto Adams posteritie that such as he was after he had sinned such was his posteritie lib. 1. de peccat mort c. 11. so also Haymo bringeth this in for one exposition sicut Adam peccator extitit as Adam was a sinner so all his posteritie are borne sinners but the word beeing put in the singular number and with one article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of him or one to come sheweth that it must be vnderstood of some speciall one not of all Adams posteritie 4. The commentarie vnder S. Hieromes name but falsly here bewraieth it selfe to haue beene written by some Pelagian whose heresie was that Adams sinne is deriued to his posteritie by imitation not by propagation these are the words Adam hauing first transgressed the commandement of God exemplum est legem praevaricari volentibus is an example to those which will transgresse the law of God as Christ is an example to those which will imitate him in fulfilling his fathers wil But wherein Adam is a type of Christ the Apostle sheweth in the rest of this chap. following where no mention is made of any such exemplarie imitation 5. Some referre this to such things as happened to Adams person as Eve was formed out of Adams side beeing asleepe so out of Christs side hanging on the crosse issued water and blood the Sacraments of regeneration by the which the Church is sanctified and saued Gorrhan Lyranus Pererius And as Adam was made ex terra virgine of the earth a virgin so Christ was borne of Marie the Virgin Haymo But Bellarmine presseth this further that as Adam was made out of the earth beeing yet not accursed so Christ of Marie qua omnis maledictionis ac per hoc omnis peccati expers fuit which was free from all malediction and so from all sinne c. But beside that none of the rest which vrge this similitude doe straine it thus farre but onely thus that as Adam was made out of the earth divina virtutes by the diuine vertue Lyran. sine humano opere without mans helpe Gorrhan so Christ was borne of a Virgin this strained and forced collection should be contrarie to the Apostle for if Marie were without sinne how is it true which the Apostle said before in whome all euer haue sinned 6. Herein then Adam was a type of Christ not in respect of such things as were personall
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
baptisme both originall sinne and the corrupt motions springing from thence therefore such motions in the baptized are not sinne Contra. 1. As originall sinne is taken away in baptisme so all other sinnes are for baptisme serueth for the remission of all sinnes Act. 2.38 euen then sinnes are wholly remooued in baptisme it would follow that they which are baptized should haue no sinnes at all 2. Wherefore in baptisme reatus tollitur the guilt of sinne is taken away yet sinne it selfe remaineth but it is not imputed neither doth sinne remaine in the full strength but the power thereof is subdued and the kingdome of sinne in the regenerate vanquished but yet there remaine some reliques of sinne still as long as we are in this flesh and this daily experience sheweth how they which are regenerate are not altogether freed from the inhabitation and in-dwelling of sinne though it raigne not in them 3. And whereas Pererius obiecteth Augustine who confuting that slander of the Pelagians who affirmed that the Catholiks should hold baptismum non auferre sed radere peccata that baptisme doth not take away sinne but as it were shaue it because concupiscence remaineth the roote of sinne denieth that the Catholikes teach any such thing but that baptisme indeede doth auferre crimina take away sinnes lib. 13. cont 2. epist. Pelag. Augustine must be vnderstood to speake of the guilt of concupiscence which is remooued in baptisme as he saith lib. 6. c. 8. cont Iulian. quamvis eius reatus qui fuerat generatione contractus sit regeneratione transactus though the guilt thereof contracted in the generation be transacted and done away in regeneration yet it remaineth still in homine secum confligente in man hauing a conflict with himselfe c. 4. Argum. The laâ—â— commandeth not things impossible which can not be auoided but these first motions of concupiscence no man can shunne or auoide Augustine saith nec impossibile Deus hominis imperare potuit quia iustus c. neither could God command any impossible thing to man because he is iust nec damnaturus est hominem pro eo c. neither will he condemne a man for that which he that is godly can not auoid serm 61. de tempor Perer. ibid. Contra. 1. The law simply is not impossible to man considered as he was at the first created of God in that it is now impossible it is by reason of the weaknes and frailtie of mans flesh Rom. 8.3 which imbecillitie of nature came in by mans voluntarie transgression 2. The Law though impossible to be kept by a naturall man was giuen vnto other ends then that he should or could perfectly keepe it and in keeping thereof be iustified but it was giuen as a schoolemaster to bring vs vnto Christ Gal. 3.19 that finding themselues weake they might seeke to be cloathed with the righteousnes of Christ. 3. Augustine speaketh of a possibilitie by grace not in nature Nemo quantum possumus melius novis quam qui ipsum posse donavit no man can better tell what we can doe then he which gaue vs power c. which Augustine affirmeth not as though any man had power by grace to keepe all which is commanded but onely to shewe against the Manichees hominem posse vitare peccata that a man by grace may decline some sinnes which they denied 5. Argum. S. Iames saith c. 1.16 When lust hath conceiued it bringeth forth sinne and when sinne is perfected it bringeth forth death hence it followeth that either concupiscence is not sinne it onely bringeth forth sinne or if it be it is no mortall sinne for sinne onely when it is perfited bringeth forth death Contra. 1. It followeth not concupiscence bringeth forth sinne therefore it is no sinne it followeth that it is not that sinne which it begetteth or bringeth forth but yet one sinne may beget an other this is like as if a man should thus reason a man begetteth a man therefore he is not a man he is not indeede that man which he begetteth yet a man therefore because he begetteth a man and so one sinne may bring forth an other 2. neither doth it followe sinne which is perfited bringeth forth death Ergo sinne not perfited bringeth forth death which is as if one should thus reason the father begetteth a mortall man therefore the grandfather doth not sinne perfited is said to bring forth death as the nearest cause but yet sinne not perfected or produced as the remote cause also bringeth forth death for otherwise neither originall sinne not yet the second motions of concupiscence which haue the consent of the will should be worthie of death before they doe breake forth into act Now our contrarie arguments that euen concupiscence it selfe without the consent of the will either of things vnlawfull or of things lawfull vnlawfully is sinne are these and such like as followe Argum. 1. Whatsoeuer is forbidden by the lawe is sinne for sinne is defined to be the transgression of the lawe 1. Iob. 3.4 but the verie first motions of concupiscence are forbidden by the lawe and are a transgression thereof Ergo. So Augustine multum honi facit c. he performeth a great good that doth as it is written thou shalt not goe after thy desires Eccles. 18. sed non perfectum bonum facit c. but he doth not that which is perfectly good who fulfilleth not that which is written thou shalt not lust c. lib. de mixt concupiscent c. 23. c. 29. Answ. Pererius answeareth 1. that the motions of concupiscence hauing not the consent of the will are not forbidden by the commandement 2. and S. Augustine meaneth not that the precept thou shalt not lust cannot be fulfilled here so farre as it bindeth a man but as it excludeth concupiscence altogether which cannot be till the next life disputat 9. numer 50. Contra. 1. The Apostle meaneth the verie lusts and vnlawfull desire of the heart without consent of the will as he saith v. 15. what I hate that doe I his concupiscence tempted him euen against his will and whereas he saith he had not knowne lust without the law he meaneth the verie first motions for the second motions which haue the will concurring as enuie hatred and such like many of the heathen which knewe not the lawe condemned by the light of nature as euill 2. it is true that to be without concupiscence is not incident to this life yet is it a breach of the commandement for the precept so farre bindeth as it is commanded if then we be commanded not to couet at all and yet we doe couet we are bound to keepe it and in not keeping of it we sinne 3. further if the last commandement as not of coueting a mans wife restraine not the verie first rising deâ—â—â—es it should not differ from the 7. precept which restraineth the lusts of the heart that haue the will consenting Matth. 5.28 Argum. 2. That which hindereth vs from doing our
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
according to the possibilitie onely of our owne strength 4. neither is the instance brought in to the purpose for when a man is bidde to run perfectly the meaning is he should runne as fast as a perfect man may runne not one that is lame or halting so man in the state of his perfection might haue fulfilled the lawe though now he cannot since his nature hath beene lamed by sinne therefore by his owne example such charitie is commanded as man before his fall might haue performed 2. Now to the argument we answer 1. that he indeede that can loue his neighbour as he ought may fulfill the lawe but so none can loue Martyr and so to the same purpose Calvin that the Apostle sub conditione loquitur speaketh as it were vnder condition that is if a man can so loue his neighbour which condition no man can fulfill 2. But because the Apostle vseth this as an argument to perswade vnto loue because it is the fulfilling of the lawe we will graunt that the Apostle speaketh here of such a fulfilling as is possible but that is not a perfect keeping of the lawe which none can attaine vnto but as Beza saith non vnum praeceptum obijt he that loueth his brother is not readie to keepe one precept onely but all so as Pareus well distinguisheth he speaketh of fulfilling the lawe partibus non gradibus in the parts not in the degrees as he which loueth his brother will shewe it in all the parts of the lawe he will neither steale nor commit adulterie nor doe any other hurt vnto him but perfectly in the highest decree of charitie no man can keepe the lawe for the Apostle saith In many things we offend all Iam. 3.11 then no man can perfectly fulfill the lawe in this life 3. Gualter here hath an other answear that the Apostle speaketh not of the fulfilling of the whole lawe but onely de externis officijs of the externall duties yet he insisteth not vpon this answear for the Apostle speaketh of coueting which is no externall thing but acted in the heart the best answear then is that the Apostle speaketh not of an absolute or plenarie fulfilling of the lawe which is not in mans power but of a totall and generall fulfilling and keeping of euery commandement that loue will not content it selfe with doing of our dutie in one or two commandements but in the rest also 10. Controv. Against the Marcionites which denied the morall precepts to be now in force but to be ceased The Marcionites as Origen sheweth dialog 2. against them would prooue from hence that the old law euen in respect of the morall precepts was ceased because it is here saide loue is the fulfilling of the law Contra. But Origen answeareth well that charitie is an epitome or summe of the law but the epitome or summe taketh not away the things which are therein contained nay rather the contrarie followeth because charitie is the fulfilling of the morall law and charitie alwaies remaineth therefore also the morall law continueth still is not abrogated though the ceremonies be ceased neither are the iudicialls necessarily now enforced 11. Controv. Against iustification by the workes of the law v. 10. Loue is the fulfilling of the law From this place Stapleton inferreth that the keeping of the law is our iustice and that by the works of charitie we are iustified and thus he reasoneth The keeping of the law is iustice but he that loueth his brother keepeth the law Ergo to this purpose Stapl. Antidot p. 973. Contr. 1. The proposition is true if it be vnderstood of the perfect keeping of the law for if any in all points could keepe the law he should thereby be iustified as S. Paul alleadgeth out of the law Rom. 10.5 He that doth these things shall liue thereby 2. but so no man is able to fulfill the law in some measure the faithfull guided by grace doe performe the precepts of the law but perfectly in all points they can not keepe it for then they might be without sinne for sinne is the transgression of the law 1. Ioh. 3.4 and whosoeuer transgresseth the law sinneth but no man is in this world without sinne as the same Apostle saith If we say we haue no sinne we deceiue our selues 1. Ioh. 1.8 6. Morall obseruations 1. Observ. Of the office of the Magistrate in encouraging the good and punishing the euill v. 3. Princes are not to be feared for good works but for euill c. This ought to teach Magistrates that they should not abuse their authoritie in afflicting the good and sparing the euill as Iezabel did who maintained idolatrie sorcerie and adulterie in Israel 2. king 4.22 but persecuted the true Prophets but they must vse their authoritie to feare the euill and to be patrons to the good as the Apostle here saith they must be feared for euill works and not for good 2. Observ. That Magistrates should procure the common good and exercise true iudgement v. 4. He is the minister of God for thy wealth or good Here are two excellent parts of the Magistrates office described first because he is Gods minister he must consider that the iudgement is the Lords and therefore they ought to deale vprightly as Iehosaphac charged his iudges and officers 2. Chron. 19.6 Take heede what ye doe for ye execute not the iudgements of man but of the Lord c. and further the magistrate must propound to himselfe the good of the people not seeke his priuate gaine for he is ordained for their wealth for this is the difference betweene a good gouernor and an oppressor that the one studieth to profit the Commonwealth the other seeketh by laying heauie burthens vpon the people to enrich himselfe 3. Observ. How the Magistrate may comfort himselfe in his gouernment Whereas many cares and troubles are incident into the office of the Magistrate many dangers imminent and conspiracies intended he is herein to comfort himselfe that he is Gods minister and therefore he neede not to doubt but that God will assist his owne ordinance for it were impossible if the Lord did not guard and defend them that Princes could escape such perills as they are subiect vnto that saying then must animate and comfort them Touch not mine Annointed c. 1. Chron. 16.22 4. Observ. Of the vigilant care and painfull office of the Magistrate v. 6. Applying themselues to the same ende this sheweth that the Magistrate is called not to a place of pleasure and ease but of labour and care they must endeauour and applie themselues to this ende that is to seeke and procure the good of their subiects they watch when others sleepe and take care when their subiects are secure this well perceiued the King that said if one knew the cares that belong vnto the crowne and diademe they would not take it vp though it lay in the durt before them This should teach men not ambitiously to aspire to places of
qu. Why the Apostle onely maketh mention of sinnes past 36. qu. How God is said to be iust and a iustifier of him which is of the faith c. v. 26. 37. qu. How reioycing is excluded not by the law of works but by the law of faith 38. qu. Of the difference betweene these two phrases of faith through faith v. 30. 39. qu. How the Law is established by the doctrine of faith Questions vpon the fourth Chapter 1. qu. Vpon what occasion S. Paul bringeth in the example of Abraham 2. qu. Of the meaning of the first verse 3. qu. Of the meaning of the 2. verse 4. qu. How the Apostle alleadgeth that testimonie concerning the imputation of Abrahams faith for righteousnes v. 4. 5. qu. Of the meaning of the words who counted this for righteousnes vnto Abraham 6. qu. What it was that Abraham beleeued 7. qu. Why Abrahams faith was imputed to him at this time and not before 8. qu. What imputation is and what to be imputed 9. qu. How Abrahams faith was imputed to him for righteousnes 10. qu. Whether Abraham were iustified by any thing beside his faith 11. qu. How S. Paul and S. Iames are reconciled about the manner of Abrahams iustifying 12. qu. Of the explication of the 4. and 5. verses 13. qu. Of the diuers kinds of rewards 14. qu. How it standeth with Gods iustice to iustifie the wicked v. 5. 15. qu. How our sinnes are said to be forgiuen and couered v. 7. 16. qu. In what sense circumcision is said to be a signe and wherefore it was instituted 17. qu. In what sense circumcision is called a seale of the righteousnes of faith v. 11. 18. qu. Whether the mysterie of faith in the Messiah to come were generally known vnder the Law 19. qu. Certaine questions of circumcision and first of the externall signe why it was placed in the generative part 20. qu. Certaine doubts remooued and obiections answered concerning circumcision 21. qu. How Abraham is saide to be the father of them which beleeue v. 11 12. 22. qu. How Abraham is saide to be the father of circumcision v. 12. 23. qu. How and where Abraham was promised to be heire of the world v. 13. 24. qu. Wherein Abraham was made heire of the world and wherein this inheritance consisted 25. qu. How faith is said to be made voide if they which are of the law be heires 26. qu. How they law is said to cause wrath 27. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 15. where no law is there is no transgression 27. qu. Who are meant by Abrahams seede which is of the law v. 16. 28. qu. Of the meaning of these words I haue made thee a father of many nations before God 29. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 17. who quickneth the dead and calleth those things which be not c. 30. qu. How God is said to call those things which be not as though they were 31. qu. Whether it be peculiar to God onely to quicken and raise the dead 32. qu. How Abraham is said against hope to haue beleeued vnder hope 33. qu. How Abrahams bodie is said to be dead v. 19. 34. qu. What promise of God made to Abraham it was whereof he is saide not to haue doubted v. 20. 35. qu. Whether Abraham doubted of Gods promise 36. qu. How Abraham is said to haue giuen glorie vnto God v. 20. 37. qu. What was imputed to Abraham for righteousnes 38. qu. Of these words Now it is not written for him onely c. v. 23. 39. qu. How Abrahams faith is to be imitated by vs. 40. qu. Wherein Abrahams faith and ours differ and wherein they agree 41. qu. How Christ is said to haue bin deliuered vp for our sinnes v. 25. 42. qu. Why the Apostle thus distinguisheth the benefits of our redemption ascribing remission of sinnes to Christs death and iustification to his resurrection v. 25. Questions vpon the fifth Chapter 1. qu. What peace the Apostle meaneth v. 1. 2. qu. Of the second benefit proceeding of our iustification which is to stand and persevere in the state of grace 3. qu. Of the benefit of our iustification the hope of euerlasting glorie 4. qu. How we are said to reioyce in tribulation 5. qu. How S. Paul and S. Iames are reconciled together the one making patience the cause of trialls or probation the other the effect 6. qu. Of the coherence of these words with the former because the loue of God is shed abroad in our hearts v. 5. 7. qu. What kind of loue the Apostle speaketh of saying the loue of God is shed abroad c. 8. qu. Why the loue of God is said to be shed abroad in our hearts 9. qu. Why it is added by the holy Ghost which is giuen vs. 10. qu. How Christ is said to haue died according to the time v. 6. 11. qu. Of the meaning of the 7. v. One will scarce die for a righteous man c. 12. qu. Of the difference betweene Christs dying for vs and those which died for their countrey 13. qu. Of the greatnes of the loue of God toward man in sending Christ to die for vs v. 8. 14. qu. Whether mans redemption could not otherwise haue beene wrought but by the death of Christ. 15. qu. Wherein the force of the Apostles reason consisteth saying Much more beeing reconciled we shall be saued by his life v. 9. 16. qu. Why the Apostle saith not onely so but we also reioyce in God c. v. 11. 17. qu. Whether any thing neede to be supplied in the Apostles speach v. 12. to make the sense perfect 18. qu. Who was that one by whome sinne entred into the world v. 12. 19. qu. What sinne the Apostle speaketh of here originall or actuall by one man sinne entred 20. qu. How sinne is said to haue entred into the world 21. qu. And death by sinne what kind of death the Apostle speaketh of 22. qu. Whether the death of the bodie be naturall or inflicted by reason of sinne 23. qu. Of the meaning of the Apostle in these words in whome all haue sinned and of the best reading thereof v. 12. 24. qu. Whether the Apostle meaneth originall or actuall sinnes saying in whome all haue sinned 25. qu. Of the coherence of these words Vnto the time of the Law was sinne in the world 26. qu. How sinne is said to haue beene vnto the time of the Law 27. qu. What sinne the Apostle meaneth which was in the world vnto the time of the law 28. qu. How sinne is said not to be imputed where there is no law 29. qu. How death is saide to haue raigned from Adam to Moses 30. qu. Of the meaning of these words which sinne not after the transgression of Adam 31. qu. How Adam is said to be the figure of him that was to come v. 14. 32. qu. Of the names and tearmes which the Apostle vseth in this comparison 33. qu. Of the comparison betweene Adam
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
oppressors of the people of God and therefore the vision which the Prophet receiued c. 2. was to Minister comfort againe the present afflictions of Gods Church Ans. It is the manner which the Lord obserueth in the visions and prophesies by occasion of temporall deliuerances to raise vp the mindes of his people to looke for their euerlasting deliuerer as Psal. 72. vnder the type of Salomon the kingdome of the Messiah is properly described and Dan. 9. the Prophet prayeth for the deliuerance of his people out of the captiuitie of Babel and he receiueth that prophesie of the 70. weekes concerning the Messiah who should deliuer them from their sinnes And so in this place the Prophet praying for the deliuerance of the people from their oppressors receiueth a vision concerning the Messiah in whom whosoeuer beleeueth shall liue for euer Pererius 5. Theodoret thinketh that this saying of the Prophet concerned not those times then present but was a prophesie of the times of Christ that then the iust by faith should liue so also Ireneus lib. 4. c. 67. But the Apostle otherwise applyeth it Galat. 3.11 that neither vnder the lawe nor vnder the Gospel any were iustified by the lawe but by saith for his words there are generall And that no man is iustified by the lawe in the sight of God it is euident for the iust shall liue by faith 6. Ambrose and so likewise Chrysostome because the word is put in the future tense shall liue doe vnderstand this not of this present life but of eternall life to come But it is euident that S. Paul Galat. 3.11 vnderstandeth this life of iustification and so the Apostle calleth iustification by faith the life of the soule Galat. 2.20 I liue by faith of the Sonne of God and the future tense with the Hebrewes indifferently is oftentimes put for the present yet the Apostle so vnderstandeth the present life of the soule by faith and grace as that he excludeth not the other sense concerning eternall life as he applyeth this sentence of the Prophet to the second comming of Christ Heb. 10.37 Tolet. 7. Now whereas Moses saith as S. Paul citeth him Rom. 10.5 The man that doth these things shall liue the Prophet may seeme to be contrarie vnto him saying the iust by faith shall liue but they are easily reconciled Moses speaketh of the iustice of the lawe which none could attaine vnto the Prophet of the iustice of the Gospel which the faithfull obtaine by faith in Christ Mart. 8. Thus the Apostle setteth downe the chiefe benefits which we haue by faith saluation v. 16. it is the power of God to saluation iustice or righteousnesse the iust by faith life shall liue Matyr Quest. 47. How the wrath of God is said to be reuealed from heauen against all vnrighteousnesse ver 18. 1. This clause is a probation of the former that there is no way whereby one is iustified before God but by faith which the Apostle prooueth by the contrarie because either by workes or faith must men he iustified but not by workes as he prooueth first in this chapter by particular induction in the Gentiles that their workes deserued nothing but Gods wrath and in the Iewes c. 2. This is the reason of the connexion of this verse with the former Beza Aretius Mart. And the causes why the Apostle thus beginneth to reprooue the Gentiles are these 1. S. Paul was the Apostle of the Gentiles and therefore he first dealeth with them 2. because the qualitie and nature of faith and of the grace of God can not be well vnderstood vnlesse we first looke into our selues and consider the vilenesse of our owne workes 2. And because such is mans pride by nature vt opera sua maximifaciat that he setteth much by his owne workes therefore the Apostle doth first beginne to beat downe the pride of man 3. It is the manner of the Prophets and of our Blessed Sauiour in their prophesies and sermons to beginne with the Lawe and then to proceede to the promises of the Gospel Hyper. 2. By the wrath of God is signified declaratio irae Dei the declaration of the wrath of God Aretius there is in God no motion or perturbation as in man wrath according to the Hebrewe phrase is taken for reuenge or punishment Erasmus 3. Reuealed 1. three waies is the wrath of God reuealed against sinne 1. by the light of nature for euery mans conscience accuseth or excuseth him 2. by the Gospel which threateneth euerlasting punishment to the wicked and vnbeleeuers 3. and by daily experience which sheweth that God is angrie with the sinnes of the world Pareus 2. God doth by daily experience testifie his wrath against the vngodly of the world and euen at this time when the Apostle thus wrote the world was plagued with warre famine and other grieuous calamities for the contempt of the Gospel Gualter 3. but this revelation also may be applyed to the Gospel wherein is reuealed the wrath of God against sinners as Mat. 3. Iohn Baptist preached Now is the axe laid to the root of the tree and our Blessed Sauiour saith Luk. 13.3 vnlesse ye repent yee shall likewise perish 4. vnder the lawe also the wrath of God was declared against the vngodly as in the destruction of Sodome and of the Egyptians in the red Sea but the wrath of God did then onely shew it selfe in such externall and temporarie punishments But the gospel doth threaten euerlasting condemnation as Matth. 10.28 feare not them which kill the bodie but rather feare him who is able to destroy both bodie and soule in hell Perer. And the Law did onely in theft generally condemne all infidelitie but the Gospel in hypothesi in particular condemneth incredulitie and vnbeleefe in Christ Pareus And then it beeing a time of ignorance the iudgements of God though they were in the world yet were not marked and obserued but now they are euident to all men Aretius 4. From heauen 1. Ambrose expoundeth ipsos coelos demonstrare c. that the heauens doe declare the wrath of God against sinners and shall be their accusers who refused to worship God which made the heauens so sometime the Lord calleth the heauens and earth to be witnesses against men Isa. 2.1 Gryneus 2. Origen giueth this sense quia spirituales nequitiae in coelestibus sunt because the spirituall wickednesses that is the euill spirits are aboue in the celestiall places who are ministers of Gods iudgements vpon the wicked 3. Chrysostome Theophylact Oecumenius referre it to the reuelation of the last and finall iudgement from heauen at the second comming of Christ. 4. Caietan and gloss ordinar thus vnderstand it quia Euangelium de toelo est because the Gospel is from heauen wherein this wrath of God is reuealed 5. Some hereby vnderstand the vniuersalitie of Gods iudgements that they shall be vpon all men vnder heauen wheresoeuer they are Per. 6. Some referre it to the manifest appearance of Gods
of his goodnes L.V. A.B. or benignitie gentlenes T. Be. rather then bountifulnes G. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and patience and long sufferance or long animitie not knowing that the goodnes or benignitie of God leadeth thee or bringeth thee R. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to repentance not to penance R. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth rather repentance and change of the minde then outward penance 5 But thou after thine hardnes and heart that cannot repent dost treasure vp vnto thy selfe heapest vp L.B.G. gatherest to thy selfe V. but the word properly signifieth to stoare or treasure vp wrath in the day of wrath V.A.L. that is against the day of wrath Be. T.G. B. but in the originall it is in the day and of the reuelation T.A.L. declaration G. B. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reuelation of the iust iudgement of God 6 Who will render to euery man reward euery man B.G. but it is put in the originall in the datiue according to his workes 7 That is to them which by continuance in good workes or in well doing B.G.V. but the word in the originall is good workes not according to patience in good workes L.R. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth as well perseuerance and continuance as patience nor which by perseuerance seeke the glorie of good workes Be. good workes is better referred to continuance seeke glorie honour and immortalitie eternall life 8 But vnto them that are contentious verbat of contention L R. and disobey the truth and obey vnrighteousnes not giue credit to vnrighteousnes L. R. for both the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 disobeying and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 obeying are of the same deriuation shall be indignation and wrath V. A.B.G.Be wrath and indignation L. T. but the first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 excandescentis commotion or indignation is lesse then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wrath rage 9 Tribulation and anguish shall be against the soule Be. V.A. vpon the soule B.G.L. to euery soule T. the first rather see before v. 2. of euery man that doth euill of the Iew first and of the Grecian not to the Iewes first and to the Gentiles T. 10 But glorie honour and peace to euery one euery man B. that doth good to euery one that doth good glorie honour c. G. but here the words are transposed to the Iew first and also to the Grecian not to the Gentiles T. 11 For there is no respect of persons V.B.G. acception of persons Be. L. R. with God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acception of persons 12 For as many as haue sinned without the law not whosoeuer hath sinned L. B. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whosoeuer is put in the plural shall perish also without the law and as many as haue sinned in the law shall be iudged by the law 13 For not the hearers of the law are iust with God before God G.T. in the sight of God B. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apud with but the doers of the law shall be iustified 14 For when the Gentiles which haue not the Law doe by nature not naturally L. R. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by nature the things of the Law contained in the law G. B. which are of the law but in the original it is the things of the law they hauing not the law are a law vnto themselues 15 Which shew the worke of the Law written in their hearts the effect of the law G. but the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worke their conscience also bearing witnes not bearing them witnes L.T.B. for them is not in the original and their thoughts not of their thoughts L. for in the original it is put absolutely in the genitiue accusing one an other mutually or excusing 16 In the day at the day G.B. but in the original it is in the day when God shall iudge the secrets of men according to my Gospel by Iesus Christ. by Iesus Christ according to my Gospel B.G. but the words are here transposed 17 Behold thou art surnamed a Iew V.B.G.Be. not but if thou art surnamed L.R.T. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 behold not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as though it were two words and restest in the law and gloriest in God makest thy beast of God B. but the preposition is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 18 And knowest his will and triest the things that differ A. B. approouest the most profitable things L.T. approouest the more excellent things G.B. but the phrase is vsed in the first sense Philip. 1.10 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly signifieth things differing beeing instructed by the Law 19 And art perswaded or confident V. Be A.G. beleeuest B. presumest L. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which S. Paul vseth of himselfe Rom. 8.38 that thou art a guide of the blind a light of them which are in darknes 20 An instructer of them which lacke discretion B. G. T. of the foolish L. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without wit or discretion a teacher of the vnlearned V. B. G. of infants verbal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L.B.T. he meaneth such as were infants in knowledge hauing the forme of knowledge and of truth in the Law 21 Thou therefore which teachest an other teachest thou not thy selfe thou that preachest a man should not steale doest thou steale 22 Thou which saiest a man should not commit adulterie doest thou commit adulterie thou that abhortest idols committest thou sacriledge A. B.G.Be read these two verses with an interrogation V.T.L. read without and so the next verse also 23 Thou that gloriest in the Law thorough transgression of the law B.V. prevarication L. breaking of the law B. G 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 transgression dishonourest thou God 24 For the Name of God thorough you is blasphemed among the Gentiles as it is written 25 For circumcision verily profiteth Be. V.G. auaileth B. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 profiteth if thou doe the law but if thou be a transgressor of the law thy circumcision is made vncircumcision 26 Therefore if the vncircumcision prepuce R. the word is praeputium in Latin but it can not be made an English word keepe the rites of the law Be. ordinances B. G. iustices L. A. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rites shall not his vncircumcision be counted for circumcision 27 And shall not vncircumcision by nature keeping the law not by nature keeping the law T. these words by nature are euidently ioyned with the first clause in the original iudge thee that by the letter and circumcision art a transgressor of the law 28 For not he that is in open shew outward B. G. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in manifest in open shew is a Iew not that which is in open shew in the flesh is circumcision 29 But he that is in secret is a Iew he is a Iew which is one within B. G. but the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the
that are perfect as namely the Apostles who are promised to fit vpon twelue feares and iudge the twelue tribes of Israel So likewise for them that shall be condemned some sine iudicij examine condemnabuntur shall be iudged without any examination or iudgement such are the infidels which shall rise againe non ad iudicium sed ad tormentum not vnto iudgement but vnto torment as it is saide in Psal. 1. The wicked shall not stand vp in iudgement and here the Apostle saith of such they shall perish without the law But they which professed the faith and yet liued not thereafter redarguentur vt pereant shall first be iudged and reprooued and then perish like as in a commonwealth the Prince aliter punit civem delinquentem aliter hostem rebellantem punisheth a citizen offending one way examining his offence according to the law and an enemie rebelling an other way he vseth martiall law against such giuing sentence presently to condemne them But this obseruation of Gregorie seemeth somewhat curious the Apostle intendeth not here any such thing to shew any difference in the processe of iudgement betweene the Iewes and Gentiles but that they both beeing in the same cause of transgression shall be partakers of the same punishment And that there shall be but one manner of proceeding in iudgement both in rewarding the righteous and in condemning the wicked it is euident by that description of Christs comming to iudgement Matth. 25.31 6. Augustine here propoundeth this doubt that whereas the Apostle saith Rom. 4.15 Where there is no law there is no transgression how then can the Gentiles be found to be transgressors without the law for answer hereunto he maketh three kind of lawes one is the written law which is giuen vnto the Iewes not to the Gentiles and of this law speaketh the Apostle here that they sinned without the law and so shall perish without the law that is the written law of Moses there is beside the law of nature whereof the Apostle speaketh afterward v. 14. They hauing not the law are a law vnto themselues against this law the Gentiles sinned and by this law they shall be iudged the third law is that which was giuen vnto Adam in Paradise by which not onely he but all his posteritie are found to be transgressors and in respect of this law euen infants are found trespassers because of originall sinne to this purpose Augustine in the place before cited 25. Quest. Of the occasion of these words v. 13. The hearers of the law are not righteous before God but the doers shall be iustified 1. Some take this to be a new argument to conuince the Iewes that they could not be iustified by the law because the keeping and fulfilling of the law is required to make one iust which no man can doe and so consequently beeing not iustified by the law they must seeke to be iustified by faith Calv. Pareus But as yet the Apostle is not entred into that matter to prooue iustification by faith and not by the law he hetherto laboureth to conuince both Iewes and Gentiles that they are vnder sinne 2. Some take this to be the order that the Apostle prooueth both Iewes and Gentiles to be equall both quo ad naturam in nature for God hath no respect of persons v. 11. they are all alike by nature and quoad poenam in their punishment they are equall the one shall perish without the law the other shall be iudged by the law v. 12. then quoad culpam they are equall in the fault because neither of them are doers of the law Gorrhaen 3. Some thinke that here the Apostle meeteth with an obiection of the Iewes who seeing the Apostle to equalize them with the Gentiles might haue obiected that they had the law and so had not the Gentiles the Apostle then answereth that this did not helpe them because they were hearers onely of the law and not doers Martyr Gryneus 4. Tolet thinketh that this sentence is brought in as a probation of the 10. verse the glorie shall be to euery one that doth good otherwise that part should be passed ouer without proofe and so he thinketh this clause not specially to be meant of the Iewes but of the Gentiles also because it is said the doers shall be iustified which was common both to the Iewes and Gentiles not the hearers and doers which was proper to the Iewes who had the law written which was read vnto them and they heard it Faius also thinketh this to be a proofe of the tenth verse Contra. 1. But if S. Paul should prooue here that glorie shall be to euerie one that doth good and he immediately inferreth that the Gentiles doe by nature the things of the lawe it would follow that by nature they might doe good and so by their naturall workes obtaine glorie which is not to be admitted 2. that part concerning glorie to them which did good had not so much neede of proofe as the other because there were verie fewe found among the Gentiles that did such good workes as should be recompensed with glorie and honour and the Apostles principall intendment is to conclude both Iewes and Gentiles to be vnder sinne 3. and further that the Apostle speaketh of the written lawe here it is euident because that onely was heard neither needed he againe to repeate hearers of the lawe and doers it beeing mentioned before 5. Wherefore this rather is the coherence of this verse that whereas S. Paul in the former verse had shewed first the Gentiles without the lawe and the Iewes vnder the lawe to be sinners he prooueth the latter part first that the Iewes should be iudged by the law because as long as they were hearers and not doers it could not helpe them they should not thereby be approoued and iustified and in the next verses following he sheweth how the Gentiles should perish without the law because although they had not the written law yet they had the lawe of nature imprinted in them which guided them to doe some things agreeable to the lawe and so made them inexcusable And thus this whole disputation of the Apostle hangeth well together Bucer Aretius Quest. 26. Of the meaning of these words Not the hearers of the Lawe c. but the doers shall be iustified ver 13. 1. There are two kind of hearers some onely heare with the eare but vnderstand not Matth. 13.13 they hearing heare not neither doe vnderstand and there is an hearing ioyned with vnderstanding v. 15. least they should heare with their eares and vnderstand with their hearts of the first kind of hearing speaketh the Apostle here 2. Doers of the lawe the lawe is fulfilled two wayes one is in supposition that if a man could by his owne strength keepe the lawe he should thereby be iustified there is another fulfilling which is by the perfect obedience of Christ imputed to vs by faith whereof the Apostle speaketh Philip. 3.9 Not hauing mine
iustifieth cannot be without workes yet it iustifieth without workes it alone iustifieth yet it must not be alone The fourth Chapter 1. The text with the diuers readings v. 1. What shall we say then that Abraham our father hath found concerning the flesh 2 For if Abraham were iustified by works he hath wherein to glorie Be. to reioyce â—â— to boast he hath glorie L.T. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he hath matter of reioycing but with God 3 For what saith the Scripture but Abraham beleeued God Be. V.T. Abraham beleeued God L.B.G. but here the Greeke particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is omitted and it was counted or repâ—ted L. to him for righteousnes 4 Now to him that worketh the wages reward B.R. but a reward may be of fauour so is not wages is not counted by fauour or of grace Be. but of debt dutie Be. but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth debt 5 But to him that worketh not but beleeueth in him that iustifieth the vngodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse according to the purpose of God L. this is not in the originall nor yet translated in the Syriake 6 Euen as Dauid declareth G. or pronounceth Be. or expresseth V. rather then teâ—â—meth R. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith calleth the blessednesse of the man vnto whom God imputeth righteousnesse without workes 7. Blessed are they whose iniquires are forgiuen and whose sinnes are couered 8. Blessed is the man to whome the Lord not our Lord L. R. imputeth not sinne G. hath not imputed L.R. will not impute T. B. the word is in the future tense but according to the phrase of the Hebrew it is taken for the present 9 Came this blessednes G. Be. or belongeth it V. or befalleth B. better then abideth remaineth L. R. there is no word expressed in the originall it must be supplied and vnderstood vpon the circumcision onely or vpon the vncircumcision also the prepuce R. but that is no English word For we say that faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousnes 10 How was it then imputed when he was in circumcision when he was circumcised G. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in circumcision or in vncircumcision not in the circumcision but in vncircumcision 11 And or after G. he receiued the signe of circumcision as the seale of the righteousnes of faith which he had in vncircumcision that he should be father of all them which beleeue in vncircumcision that is beeing not yet circumcised not by vncircumcision V. L. R. the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is better here translated in for by vncircumcision they did not beleeue that were to giue more vertue to vncircumcision then to circumcision that righteousnes might be imputed to them also 12 And the father of circumcision not vnto them onely which are of the circumcision but vnto them also which walke in the steppes of the faith which was euen in vncircumcision of our father Abraham 13 For not by the law was the promise giuen to Abraham or his seede that he should be the heire of the world but thorough the righteousnes of faith 14 For if they which are of the law be heires faith is in vaine B. or made void G. and the promise is made of none effect 15 For the law procureth or causeth G. worketh L. wrath for where no law is there is no transgression 16 Therefore the inheritance is of faith that it might be by grace that the promise might be sure to all the seede not to that onely which is of the law but also to that which is of the faith of Abraham who is the father of vs all 17 As it is written a father of many nations haue I appointed thee euen before God not according to the example of God V. whome he beleeued not whome thou didst beleeue T. L. or whome ye beleeued B. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he beleeued who quickneth the dead and calleth those things which be not as though they were not as those things which are L. for the speaketh of the same things still which God causeth to be whereas they were yet nothing 18 Who contrarie to hope B.Be. L. aboue hope G. beside hope V. without hope the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is here taken in the first sense for Abrahams hope was in deede beyond all expectation beleeued vnder hope that he should be the father of many nations according to that which was spoken to him So shall thy seede be as the starres of heauen and the sand of the Sea L.R. but these words are not in the originall 19 And he not weake in faith considered not his owne bodie he was not weake in faith when he considered his bodie T. but in the originall it is put negatiuely he considered not which was now dead beeing almost an hundred yeares old neither the deadnes of Saras tombe 20 Neither did he stagger or stirke L.V.T. doubt G. dispute B. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is better taken here in the first sense at the promise of God thorough vnbeleefe but was strengthened in the faith and gaue glorie vnto God 21 Beeing fully assured G. or perswaded V. Be. certified B. rather then fully knowing L.R. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth not onely knowledge in the vnderstanding but assurance also in the heart that he which had promised was also able to doe it 22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousnes 23 Now it is not written onely for him that it was imputed vnto him for rightesounes L.G.T. but these words are not in the originall 24 But also for vs to whome it shall be imputed beleeuing in him which raised our Lord Iesus from the dead 25 Who was deliuered vp for our sinnes and was raised againe for our iustification 2. The Argument Method and parts THis Chapter hath three parts 1. the first is a proofe of the former proposition that we are iustified by faith without the workes of the lawe by the example of Abraham the testimonie of Dauid with some other arguments vnto the 17. verse 2. A commendation and description of the excellencie of Abrahams faith to â—â— 2. The third is the vse and explication of Abrahams imputatiue iustice In the first part the Apostle vrgeth 4. principall arguments to prooue that we are iustified by faith without workes 1. Argum. If any were iustified by workes most like Abraham But he was not iustified by workes but by faith Ergo the assumption is diuersely prooued 1. from the effects then Abraham should haue had wherein to glorie with God but he had not v. 2. from a testimonie of Scripture propounded v. 3. faith was counted to Abraham for righteousnesse then dilated and implyed by the contrarie that which is counted is of fauour and debtâ— 4. but Abrahams faith was counted his righteousnesse by fauour v. 5. therefore not by debts 2. Argum. From the testimonie of Dauid there is
the same way of iustification which is of blessednesse and happinesse but we are counted happie by the not imputing and forgiuing of sinne v. 7 8. therefore so also are we iustified and consequently not by any of our owne workes 3. Argum. The father of those which beleeue and the children must be iustified after the same manner but Abraham the father of those which beleeue was iustified by faith and not by the workes of the lawe Ergo the proposition is insinuated v. 11. from the end why Abraham receiued circumcision as the seale of the righteousnesse of faith that he should be the father c. the father then and children must be iustified by one and the same way the assumption is thus prooued the first part thereof that he was the father of all the faithfull is prooued by a distributiō he was the father both of the vncircumcised which is shewed by the time v. 10. he was iustified by faith beeing yet vncircumcised and of the circumcised because he receiued circumcisiō v. 12. the other part that he was iustified by faith is proued by the effects because he receiued the promise not through the law but faith v. 13. 〈◊〉 otherwise the promise had bin of no effect if it had bin by the law which were absurd v. 14. 4. Argum. From the contrarie effects of the lawe and of faith the promise ought to be firme and sure vnto Abraham and his seede v. 16. but the lawe cannot worke any 〈◊〉 assurance but it rather causeth wrath because it discouereth transgression v. 15. 2. Then followeth a description of Abrahams faith 1. by the foundation thereof Go◠omnipotencie shewed by the effects v. 17. 2. the obiect of his faith to beleeue to be the father of many nations euen as the starres or sand in multitude v. 18. 3. the strength is his faith in ouercomming all impediments v. 19. 4. the qualitie it was without doubting v. 20. which wrought in him assurance v. 23. 5. by the effects it was imputed to him for righteousnesse v. 23. 3. The application of this example followeth 1. from the ende of the Scripture which was not written onely for Abraham but for vs. 2. from the description of faith 1. the foundation God 2. the obiect Christ Iesus crucified and raised vp 3. the end remission of sinnes and our iustification v. 25. 3. The questions and doubts discussed Quest. 1. Vpon what occasion Saint Paul bringeth in the example of Abraham 1. Chrisostome taketh this to be the occasion that now the Apostle intending to set forth how glorious and excellent iustification by faith is would shew it by the example of Abraham whose righteousnesse was most glorious But the Apostle insisteth yet in the proofe of his former conclusion that a man is iustified by faith not by works it had been yet vnseasonable for the Apostle to set forth the praise and commendation of iustification by faith and to stand vpon the glorie and excellencie of it the truth whereof the Iewes addicted to the works of the law were not yet thoroughly perswaded of 2. Anselme thinketh that whereas a double question was mooued in the beginning of the former chap. v. 1. concerning the preferment of the Iew touching circumcision as the Apostle answered to the former question in the third chapter so he commeth to the other here to treat of circumcision But both the Apostle had alreadie said much concerning circumcision c. 2. so that he needed not againe to fall into any speciall treatise thereof and beside if he should haue singled out the example of Abraham to that purpose the doctrine of iustification without all kind of workes as well ceremoniall as morall should not haue beene sufficiently prooued 3. Some thinke that whereas the Apostle had said c. 3.21 that the righteousnesse of faith had testimonie of the lawe and the Prophets that now the Apostle prooueth the same by the example of Abraham But that assertion of the Apostle went not immediately before many other things which concerne the principall argument of iustification by faith came betweene with the which this chapter rather must haue coherence 4. And therefore it is the opinion of others as of Origen Oecumen to whome consent Tolet Pererius that the Apostle directly by this example of Abraham goeth about to proue the generall argument that we are iustified by faith without works because Abraham was so iustified 5. But as we denie not but that the example of Abraham is very pertinent to that purpose to prooue iustification by faith without works yet beside this generall scope of the example of Abraham here produced there is this particular reason of the connexion and coherence that after the Apostle had concluded generally without exception that euery man must be iustified without works the Iewes might straitway haue obiected the example of Abraham whose memorie was honourable among them that at the least he and Dauid should seeme to be excepted out of this generall rule their works were renowned and glorious and somewhat must be yeelded vnto them The Apostle therefore here preuenteth this obiection and confesseth that Abraham was very glorious by his works among men yet before God he did not glorie by his works but it was his faith whereby he was approoued iust in Gods sight Thus Pareus Pellican Gryneus Quest. 2. Of the meaning of the first verse v. 1. What shall we say then that Abraham our father 1. The Apostle vseth an interogation both for the more full declaration of the thing in question and for more vehemencie sake ad struendam dictis fiduciam to win the more credit to his sayings as c. 3.1 6.1 2. The Apostle speaketh in the first person what shall we say and Abraham our father that he might the better insinuate himselfe Pareus 3. He vseth the name of Abraham not Abram because now it was the vsuall name whereby he was called though as yet his name was not changed when he was counted iust by faith for the which purpose S. Paul bringeth in his example Mart. 4. Concerning that addition after the flesh 1. Some doe ioyne vnto Abraham our father after the flesh to distinguish the carnall children of Abraham from the spirituall for he was the father of the Gentiles not according to the flesh but the spirit Chrysost. Theophy Oecumen Tolet But then the Apostle would haue said rather your father if he had spoken onely of the carnall generation Beza neither doth the Apostle seeme to derogate vnto the Iewes as hauing onely a carnall prerogatiue he would not therefore vse any such limitation as excluding them from beeing his spirituall children 2. Some doe ioyne it with the word hath found after the flesh as indeede the order of the words sheweth but then by flesh they vnderstand circumcision as Ambrose and the interlin glosse but the Apostle disputeth generally against all works of the law not the ceremonialls onely 3. Lyranus thinketh that according to the flesh is added
God who is like me that shall call and declare it c. and what is at hand and what things are to come c. Doct. 8. Of the nature condition and properties of faith v. 13. Who aboue hope beleeued vnder hope faith then is a grace and gift of God whereby we giue a firme and sure assent vnto his promises in Christ euen aboue and against naturall reason in faith then these things are considered 1. the author thereof God faith of Gods gift Ephes. 2.8 2. the obiect or matter of faith in generall is the word of God but the particular and proper obiect which is called obiectum adaequatum is the promise of saluation in Christ. 3. the qualitie and property which maketh the forme of faith is to be firme and sure without wauering and to beleeue euen beyond and against the apprehension of naturall reason Pet. Martyr 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. That the Apostle excludeth all kind of workes from iustification v. 2. If Abraham be iustified by workes The Romanists are here of opinion that the Apostle onely excludeth such workes as were done onely by the strength of nature without faith in the Mediator so Staplet Antid pag. 46. who vrgeth this reason among other to confirme his opinion the Apostle onely excludeth such workes which expect not an eternall reward with God but the workes done in faith doe expect an eternall reward therefore such workes he excludeth not Contra. 1. But the contrarie is euident that the Apostle shutteth out all workes whatsoeuer from the matter of iustification 1. he speaketh of the workes of Abraham now a faithfull man not an vnbeleeuer 2. he mentioneth workes in generall without any distinction denying iustification vnto them and ascribing it vnto faith 3. euerie thing which is rewarded ex debito of due debt is excluded from iustification but to euerie worke is the wages due of debt as vers 4. To him that worketh the wages is counted by debt therefore euerie worke is excluded 2. Concerning his reason if he vnderstand the reward which is due of debt and not giuen by fauour then euen the workes of faithfull men cannot expect such a reward if he meane a reward giuen by fauour then as well the workes which are so rewarded as those which shall not are excluded 3. And as the workes of faith are excluded together with workes done before and without faith so also not onely doth the Apostle speaking of workes meane the rewardes onely but euen the workes of the morall law also for the Apostle nameth workes in generall and he directly afterward speaketh of the morall law v. 15. The law causeth wrath and where no law is there is no transgression which though it be true of euery law in generall yet this generally is seene in the morall law Controv. 2. Whether blessednesse consist onely in the conuersion of sinners v. 7. The Romanists here obiect that as the Apostle out of the Psalmes ascribeth beatitude to the remission and forgiuenesse of sinnes so elswhere in Scripture it is giuen vnto innocencie of life and to other vertues as Psal. 119. Blessed are the vndefiled in heart and Matth. 5. Blessed are the mercifull blessed are the pure in heart c. 1. Peter Martyr answeareth here by a distinction of beatitude which is either inchoata begunne onely and that is in our iustification or perfecta it is perfect and absolute in the kingdome of God so he will haue the Apostle here to speake of the blessednesse which is begunne in our iustification but in the other places the blessednesse in the next life is promised 2. Calvin saith that all these beatitudes which are pronounced doe presuppose the happinesse which is in beeing iustified by faith without the which all the other promises are in vaine 3. But the more full answear is that the Apostle here sheweth the cause and manner of our iustification which is by faith in Christ but in the other places it is onely declared to whom this iustification belongeth and who they are that shall be blessed namely the mercifull and vndefiled in heart but the Apostle sheweth why they are blessed because they beleeue in Christ Pareus dub 5. Controv. 3. Whether sinne is wholly purged and taken away in the iustification of the faithfull The Romanists are of opinion that not onely the guilt of sinne is taken away in iustification but sinne it selfe is altogether purged and so for sinnes to be couered idem plane valet atque esse sublata nulla prorsus relicta is all one as to be taken away and not to remaine at all Perer. disput 3. numer 11. Tolet. annot 10. and they impute this opinion to the Protestants peccata non auferri c. that sinnes are not taken away in iustification but remaine the same they were onely they are not imputed after iustification their reasons are these 1. It was the opinion of the Pelagians confuted by Augustine that in baptisme there is not giuen remission of all sinnes nec auferre crimina sed radere and that it doth not take away sinne but onely prone it as it were and pare it the roote remaineth still August lib. 1. contra 2. epist. Pelagian c. 13. like vnto this error they make the opinion of Protestants Perer. ibid. 2. It were no iustice in God if sinne remained still not to impute it not to impute sinne vnto the sinner seemeth not to stand with the rule of equitie Tolet. ibid. 3. The Scripture so speaketh of the remission of sinnes as though they were wholly remooued as Isaiah 44. I haue taken away thine iniquitie as a cloud 1. Cor. 6. but ye are washed ye are sanctified Iob. 1. Behold the lambe of God that taketh away the sinnes of the world Isaiah 1. If your sinnes were as redde as scarlet they should be made white as snowe Hes. 14.3 Take away all iniquitie and receiue vs graciously Coloss. 2.14 Putting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against vs these and the like places are produced by Tolet and Pererius in the foresaid places to prooue the full remoouing and abolishing of all sinne in our iustification 4. Otherwise Christs merit should be of lesse force and efficacie then the sinne of Adam if it should not wholly remooue and take away sinne brought in by Adam Tolet. 5. Pererius inferreth as much out of the Apostles words here if our sinnes be hid and couered then are they not seene of God si non videntur à Deo nulla vtique sunt if they are not seene then are they none at all for if sinne still remained in the faithfull which God hateth then he should finde somewhat in them worthie of hatred and so what he hateth consequently he punisheth Perer. numer 11. Contra. 1. Our aduersaries doe not truely propound the state of this question betweene them and the Protestants for we affirme not that the same sinnes remaine before iustification and after there is great difference between peccatum
deuill 2. Neither yet is it taken for fomes peccati the matter or occasion of sinne as Pererius which is the appetite or desire that stirreth vp to sinne Tolet misliketh this because sinne must be taken here in the same sense as it was vsed before in the ende of the former chapter where it is taken for sinne it selfe and Pet. Martyr addeth this reason because insulâ—â—â— peccati the assaults of sinne remaine still in the regenerate 3. but sinne is here taken for the corruption and depravation of our nature in the former chapter thereby was specially signified reatus the guilt of originall sinne deriued from Adam Beza for there are these two things in sinne the guilt deriued from Adam and the corruption of our nature which is the effect thereof Pareus Quest. 2. What it is to die vnto sinne v. 2. 1. The Apostle answeareth the former obiection negatiuely denying the consequent that it followeth not that because where sinne abounded grace abounded more that therefore we should sinne that grace may more abound and of this his answear the Apostle in this chapter giueth two reasons the one from the contraries that seeing we are dead vnto sinne we cannot still liue vnto it the other from the condition and propertie of seruants who must be wholly addicted to their seruice whose seruants they are then seeing we are the seruants of Christ we must no longer serue sinne v. 16. to the ende of the chapters 2. They are said to be dead vnto sinne that obey not the lusts thereof that are as dead men not to be mooued vnto sinne not to doe the workes thereof but this death of sinne is inchoatae onely begunne in this life it shall not be perfected till all corruption and mortalitie be taken away 3. There is great difference betweene these two phrases to die vnto sinne which the Apostle vseth here and to be dead in sinne Ephes. 2.1 the first is taken actiuely for the mortifying of sinne the other passiuely to be mortified in or by sinne and in this phrase the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in must be supplied as Coloss. 2.13 in the Latine tongue mori peccato to die to sinne is put in the datiue but mori peccato in the ablative signifieth to die with or by sinne Tolet And in this latter sense they are said to be dead absolutely without any other addition as v. 13. of this chapter and in other places Beza 4. Chrysostome here giueth this note that whereas sometime the Apostle saith sinne is dead here he saith we are dead to sinne quoniam auditorem excitare studet in illum transfert mortem because he could quicken the desire of the hearer he transferreth death to him that he beeing dead in sinne should abstaine therefrom Quest. 3. What it is to be baptized into Iesus Christ v. 3. 1. Origen thinketh that this is so said to make a difference betweene the baptisme of Christ wherewith we are baptized and the baptisme of Iohn which is not of Christ but of the lawe But seeing Iohn baptized in his name that was to come how was it not of Christ and if Iohns baptisme were of the lawe then Christ should haue beene baptized with an other kind of baptisme then his members which is not to be admitted 2. Some thinke as Ambrose in this place that the Apostles altered the forme of baptisme which was at the first prescribed to be done in the name of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost But it is not like that the Apostles would change that prescript forme which was appointed by Christ himselfe the Apostle maketh mention of Christ though he intend the whole Trinitie because as Origen saith whom Haymo followeth it was not convenient that the Apostle speaking of death vt nominaret vel patrem vel spiritum c. should name either the Father or the holy Ghost because the Sonne of God onely died for vs c. or rather mention is made onely of Christ because baptisme was of his institution and the benefits represented in baptisme were procured and purchased by Christ. 3. Some giue this sense to be baptized into Christ is to be baptized with that baptisme which hath the vertue and efficacie from Christ ex Tolet. Chrysostome vnderstandeth according to the similitude and example of Christ for that which the crosse and the grave were to Christ baptismus est factus nobis baptisme is become to vs. 4. Erasmus thus we are baptised into Christ that is in corpus eius mysticum into his mysticall bodie c. but the Apostle speaketh of Christ himselfe though it be true that they which are graft into Christ are also members of his mysticall bodie 5. The vulgar Latine readeth in Christo to be baptized in Christ not into Christ that is in fide Christi in the faith of Christ Lyran. or in institutione eius by his institution gloss interlin some also which followe the Greeke text and read into Christ doe thus interpret in nomine Christi in the name of Christ Mart. Pareus Faius But it is one thing to be baptized in Christ an other into Christ. 6. Wherefore by this phrase better is signified that we are by baptisme incorporated into Christ in Christo coalescentes we growe vp together with Christ Beza Genevens inâ—â—â—â—us Christum we put on Christ Calvin inserimur Christo we are graft into Christ Tolet. vt implantaremur that by baptisme we should be planted in Christ Osiander which phrase the Apostle vseth afterward v. 5. if we be grafted with him c. Quest. 4. Of the diuerse significations of the word baptisme and to be baptized 1. Haymo here maketh 4. kinds of baptisme 1. one with water onely such was the baptisme of Iohn that gaue not remission of sinnes 2. the baptisme of the spirit such was the baptisme of the Apostles in the day of Pentecost 3. the baptisme both with the spirit and water such as is now in vse in the Church 4. the baptisme of blood such as Martyrs are baptized with But 1. it is vntrue that Iohn onely baptized with water not with the spirit for he baptized for the remission of sinnes and when Christ was baptized the spirit descended in the likenesse of a doue 2. the other two baptismes of the spirit and the baptisme of blood are not properly baptismes but onely in a metaphoricall speach 2. This word baptisme is taken two waies either properly for the washing with water in the sacrament or figuratiuely as either for the receiuing of the gifts of the spirit as Acts 1.5 our Sauiour promiseth that his Apostles should be baptized with the holy Ghosts or as for the doctrine which accompanied Iohns Baptisme as Acts. 18.25 Apollos is said to haue knowne nothing but Iohns baptisme that is his doctrine Beza Acts 19.5 3. And as baptisme is diuersely taken so there are diuerse things in baptisme to be considered three visible three invisible the three visible the Minister that baptiseth
haue no other Gods c. and thou shalt make to thy selfe no grauen image c. but one 2. Contra. 1. The Apostle calleth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a commandement in the singular number not commandements 2. if they were two commandements it should not be knowne in what order they should be set which before the other for Exod. 20. it is first said thou shalt not couet thy neighbours house but Deuter. 5.21 thou shalt not couet thy neighbours wife is put in the first place 3. beside if euery particular act of coueting should make a diuerse commandement the number of them should be infinite Pareus 3. Pet. Martyr herein concurreth that the precept thou shalt not lust is but one but he hath here a singular opinion by himselfe that the two first commandements thou shalt haue no other Gods c. and thou shalt not make to thy selfe c. are but one and the first commandement he would haue that to be which is set as a preface before the rest I am the Lord thy God which brought c. for here it is enacted that the Lord onely is the true God and in this first commandement the Gospel is offred vnto vs for in that mention is made of their deliuerance out of Egypt there the promise concerning Christ is contained But this is onely a priuate opinion and a singular conceit of so learned a man by himselfe which may be thus reasoned against 1. all the commandements are propounded imparatively thou shalt not doe this or thou shalt not doe that but those words are vttered enuntiative they are propounded onely not spoken by way of commanding 2. and if he will haue the temporall deliuerance out of Egypt to containe a promise of Christ it is so much the rather no part of the morall commandements for the law and faith are opposite one containeth not nor includeth an other as the Apostle saith the law is not of faith Gal. 3.12 no more is faith of the law 10. Controv. Against free will v. 19. The euill that I would not that doe I. The Rhemists note here that this maketh nothing against free will but plainely prooueth it because to consent or not consent is alwaies free though the operation may be hindred by some externall force Contra. 1. The will of the vnregenerate is free from coaction and compulsion but not from a necessitie alwaies of willing that is euill 2. and in the regenerate of which state the Apostle speaketh in his owne person the will is reformed by grace to will that which is good as our blessed Sauiour saith Ioh. 8.33 If the Sonne make you free then you are free in deede this place then euidently maketh against the naturall strength of free will vnto that which is good 6. Morall obseruations 1. Observ. Euery one must descend into himselfe v. 7. I knew not sinne but by the law As Paul here giueth instance in himselfe and examineth his sinnes by the law so euery one is taught by his example to enter into himselfe and call his life and acts to account as Dauid saith Psal. 32.5 I acknowledged my sinne vnto thee c. 2. Observ. Against phanaticall spirits that excuse sinne v. 17. It is no more I that doe it men that are giuen ouer to all carnall lusts must not thinke to excuse themselues thus that it is sinne that doth it and not themselues for they must also say with the Apostle v. 16. I doe that which I would not they cannot then apply this to themselues qui non pugnant which doe not fight or striue against sinne 3. Observ. Of delighting in the lawe of God v. 22. I delight c. Hypocrites may seeme to conforme themselues often to the obedience of the lawe as Herod that a while heard Iohn gladly but it is not in loue or with delight which is onely in them that are regenerate as the Prophet Dauid saith that the lawe of God was sweeter vnto him then the honie or honie combe Psal. 19. Observ. 4. Of the fight and combate betweene the spirit and the flesh v. 23. I see an other lawe c. Onely the righteous doe feele this strife in themselues the spirit drawing them one way and the flesh an other as the Apostle here sheweth in himselfe and so as Gregorie saith fit certo moderamine c. this is done in such moderation that the Saints while they are in spirit carried one way and hindered by the flesh nec desperationis lapsum nec elationis incurrunt they neither fall into despaire nor yet are lifted vp in mind the like combate betweene the spirit and flesh we may finde to haue been in Dauid Psal. 73. 2.17 in Elias 1. King 19.4 in Ieremie c. 20.7 the like temptations Hierome felt in himselfe pallebant or a iciunijs mens desiderijs ardebat in frigido corpore my face was pale with fasting and yet my minde burned with desire euen in a chill bodie epist. 22. this is much to the comfort of Gods children not to despaire when they are likewise tempted CHAP. VIII 1. The text with the diuerse readings v. 1. Now then there is no condemnation to them which are in Christ Iesus which walke walking Gr. not after the flesh but after the spirit which walke not after the flesh L. S. detr 2 For the law of the spirit of life which is in Christ Iesus hath freed me thee S. from the law of sinne and of death 3 For that which was impossible to the law in as much as it was weake because of the flesh God sending his owne Sonne in the similitude of sinnefull flesh flesh of sinne Gr. in a forme like vnto flesh subiect to sinne Be. this is the sense but not the meaning of the words and for sinne not of sinne L.V. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for condemned sinne in the flesh in his flesh S. ad 4 That the righteousnes the iustification L.T.S. the right Be. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the law might be fulfilled in vs which walke not after the flesh but after the spirit 5 For they which are after the flesh which are in the flesh S. which are carnall V.B. doe sauour the things of the flesh Be. G. doe thinke the things of the flesh S. are carnally minded B. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. but they that are after the spirit the things of the spirit 6 For the wisdome of the flesh is death but the wisdome of the Spirit is life and peace 7 Because the wisdome of the flesh the affection of the flesh V. the fleshly mind B. the vnderstanding of the flesh S. is enmitie against God for it is not subiect to the law of God neither in deede can be 8 So then they that are in the flesh can not please God 9 Now ye are not in the flesh but in the Spirit seeing the Spirit of God not if so be the spirit of God L.S.B. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
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
in fulfilling and performing it he hath perfited the ceremoniall law beeing the substance whereof the ceremonies were but shadowes he hath performed the morall law both in his actiue obedience in fulfilling euery part thereof by his holy life and by his passiue obedience in bearing the curse and punishment due by the law for vs and in this sense Augustine saith Christus sinis legis perficiens non interficiens Christ is the perfiting not the destroying end of the law tract 55. in Iohn Of all these the second and last interpretation are most agreeable to the scope of the Apostle who in these words bringeth a proofe of that which he said before that the Iewes were ignorant of the righteousnesse of God because they were ignorant of Christ the true end of the law both directly in respect of Christ who fulfilled the law and was in all things obedient vnto it which thing the law intended and indirectly in respect of vs whose weakenesse it discouereth in not beeing able to keepe the law and so directeth vs to Christ beeing therein a schoolemaster to vs as the Apostle saith Gal. 3. â—â— Quest. 7. How Christ is said to be the end of the law seeing the law requireth nothing but the iustice of workes The law is taken two wayes 1. more largely for the whole doctrine contained in Moses and the Prophets and in this sense the law directly maketh mention of Christ as in this place Saint Paul doth prooue the righteousnesse of faith by the testimonie of Moses as our Sauiour himselfe also saith had you beleeued Moses you would haue beleeued me he wrote of â—â— Ioh. 5.46 2. The law is taken more strictly for the precepts onely of the morall law wherein although faith in Christ be not directly commanded yet it is implied and intended in which sense Christ is said to be the end of the law in these three respects 1. in respect of his personall obedience and righteousnesse which the law required 2. in regard of the satisfaction by Christs death for the punishment due by the law 3. and in iustifying vs by faith in him that is our righteousnesse whereunto the law bringeth vs as a schoolemaster leading vs vp by the hand as the glasse shewing the spottes doth admonish the beholder to mend them so the law discouering our sinnes sendeth vs to seeke out the onely true Physitian to heale them Quest. 8. That Christ is not the end of the law that we by grace in him should be iustified in keeping of the law 1. Pererius saith that Christ is said to be the end that is the perfection and consummatioÌ„ of the law quia fide in Christo impetratur gratia c. because that by faith in Christ grace is obtained to fulfill and keepe the law disput 1. numer 2. and Stapleton Antidot p. 617. insisteth vpon the same point that by this fulfilling of the law which we obtaine by faith in Christ we are iustified Contra. 1. We denie not but this also is one of the ends of our comming to Christ to shew our obedience in keeping Gods commandements as Zacharie saith in his song Luk. 2.75 That we beeing deliuered out of the hand of our enemies should serue him c. in holines and righteousnesse all the daies of our life yet this is neither required as the principall end which is to be iustified by faith in Christ as here the Apostle saith neither is this our obedience enioyned to that end that we should be iustified thereby for we are iustified by faith before we can bring forth any fruits of obedience and therefore by such workes as follow our iustification we are not iustified and beside our obedience is imperfect and can not iustifie vs in the sight of God but this our obedience is necessarie to shew our conformitie vnto Christ and to iustifie our thankfulnes for the benefit receiued by Christ and to be a pledge and an assurance of our perfect regeneration in the next life 2. Herein then Christ is the end of the law that we by faith in him which hath fulfilled the law perfitly should be iustified without the fulfilling of the law in our selues 1. for the Apostle saith not Christ is the end of the law to euery one fulfilling the law but to euery one that beleeueth 2. this end would take away the force of Christs death for to giue vs grace to fulfill the law our selues it was not necessarie that Christ should haue died for he might by his diuine power without his death haue conferred that grace vpon vs. 3. and againe if Christ gaue vs power to keepe the law our selues this were to establish our owne righteousnesse for that is our owne righteousnesse which is performed by vs though not by our owne strength but the doctrine of faith doth not establish our owne righteousnesse Quest. 9. What life temporall or spirituall is promised to the keepers of the law v. 5. 1. Origen vpon this place thinketh that the law onely promised to the obseruers thereof temporall not eternall life so likewise Theodoret Ambrose Anselme Lyranus Tolet annot 5. Pererius disput 1. numer 3. doe vnderstand it of escaping onely corporall death which was inflicted vpon the transgressors of the law as idolaters adulterers murtherers But this were no great benefit seeing many vngodly men might be free from these offences which by the law were punished by death and yet in other points might be offenders against the law 2. Augustine lib. de spirit lit c. vnderstandeth it of the spirituall life of faith and iustification thereby per fidem concilians iustificationem facet legis iustitiam vivat in ea c. he that hath obtained iustification by faith doth the righteousnesse of the law and may liue thereby But this were to confound the law and the Gospel whereas the Apostle here speaketh onely of the righteousnesse which the law requireth 3. The law then promised eternall life vnto the obseruers thereof but that it was impossible for any perfitly to keepe the law so Chrysostome well interpreteth that men should haue beene iustified in keeping of the law if it had beene possible but because it was not possible iustitia illa intercidit that iustice falleth to ground our Sauiour also saith If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandements Matth. 19.16 meaning eternall life as the young man had asked the question what he should doe to haue eternall life Pererius answeareth that this must be vnderstood of a iust man which out of a liuely charitie keepeth the commandements But Christ there speaketh not of the iustice of faith working by loue but of such keeping and obseruing of the commandements as the law required if any could haue attained vnto it for as the question was not of beleeuing but of doing what shall I doe so Christ maketh his answer of such iustice as was required by the law 4. But if the law doe promise and propound eternall life to the obseruers
voluntarie connivence or negligence of the keeper or some other way as it were made by God for so we reade that Peter escaped out of prison the doores beeing opened by the Angel before him Act. 12. but this is not rashly to be done for the aforesaid reasons but vpon good warrant when God shall as it were make a way for a man to set him free Quest. 8. What kind of iudgement they procure to themselues which resist the magistrate 1. Whereas the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth both condemnation as Beza damnation as the vulgar Latine iudgement as the Syrian interpreter punishment as Piscator some take this to be vnderstood not of eternall punishment but of the temporall inflicted by the Magistrate when as the powers beeing offended doe either punish rebells with death or cast them into prison Haymo so also Vatablus 2. Lyranus contrariwise interpreteth it de aeterna morte of euerlasting death not excluding also temporall punishment so also Martyr 3. Some vnderstand poenam punishment generally without limitation Olevian Piscator Iunius annot 4. Some will haue the punishment in this life vnderstood whether inflicted by the Magistrate or by God himselfe who will take reuenge for the transgression of his owne ordinance as is euident in the fearefull punishment of rebellious Cote Dathan and Abiram Numb 16. Pareus Gualter and so before them Chrysostome and Theophylact cum à Deo tum ab hominibus poenas daturum he shall endure punishment both from God and men 5. But all these are better ioyned together that such as resist the Magistrate are punished by the publike lawes and God often taketh reuenge also beside they make themselues guiltie of euerlasting damnation which is due vnto the transgression of Gods commandement and the violating of his ordinance Faius 6. Tolet hath here this conceite by himselfe it is said they shall receiue iudgement because beeing not restrained by the Magistrate whom they stand not in awe of they cast themselues into those sinnes for the which damnationem incurrunt they incurre damnation but here the Apostle speaketh of that punishment which is due for the resisting of Gods ordinance 7. Pareus here obserueth well these two things that the purposes and endeauours of such are frustrate and beside they shew their madnes and foolishnes in beeing accessarie to their owne punishment for it is an vnwise part for one to procure his owne hurt Quest. 9. How the Prince is not to be feared for good workes but for euill 1. Concerning the words in the originall they stand thus Princes are not a feare of good workes and so the vulgar Latine that is for good workes as the Syrian interpreter putteth it in the datiue bonis operibus to good workes so also Tertullian readeth in scorpian and Beza followeth this sense and the meaning is that they are not a terror or to be feared ratione boni operis by reason of the good worke Lyran. or his qui sunt boni operis to them which are of good workes Gorrhan so before him Chrysostome bene agentibus to those which doe well good workes are here to be vnderstood not as Diuines take them for morall workes but for ciuill workes agreeable to the publike lawes which are either against the diuine lawe whereof the Magistrate ought to haue speciall care or against the positiue constitution Pareus 2. Touching the occasion of these words Tolet will haue them to depend of the former sentence and to shewe the cause why they which resist the powers doe receiue iudgement to themselues because they contemne the Magistrate who is ordained to restraine euill workes and so they without restraint fall into euill and so incurre punishment but the better coherence is to make this an other argument to mooue obedience to the higher powers from the vtilitie thereof as Chrysostome or à duplici sine from the twofold ende of magistracie which is for the punishment of the euill and praise of the good 3. They which doe good workes must feare the Magistrate still but timore reverentiae non seruili c. with a reuerent not a seruile feare as the malefactors doe which hauing a guiltie conscience are afraide of punishment to be inflicted by the Magistrate Gorrhan Quest. 10. What it is to haue praise of the power v. 3. 1. Whereas often it falleth out that the Magistrate doth punish the good and encourage the wicked how then is this true which the Apostle saith doe well and thou shalt haue the praise of the same the answear is that first we must distinguish betweene the power it selfe and authoritie which is ordained of God to these ends for the reward of the good and punishment of the euill and the abuse of this power secondly although gouernours abusing their power do offend in some particulars yet in generall more good commeth by their gouernement then hurt as vnder cruell Nero there was some execution of iustice for Paul was preserued by the Romane captaine from the conspiracie of the Iewes and appealed vnto Caesar which was then Nero and his appeale was receiued 2. It will be obiected that euen vnder good Princes where there is punishment for offenders yet the righteous receiue not their reward 1. Origen thus vnderstandeth these words thou shalt haue praise of the same c. that is in the day of iudgement ex istis legibus landem habebis apud Deum by these lawes thou shalt haue praise with God for keeping them c. but the Apostle speaketh not of hauing praise by the lawes but of the power that is the Magistrate 2. Augustine thinketh it is one thing to be praised of the power that is to be commended and rewarded by it an other laudem habere ex illa to haue praise of it that is exhibit se laude dignum he sheweth himselfe worthie of praise whether he be actually praised or not of the power Tolet alloweth this sense though he take the distinction betweene these phrases to be somewhat curious so also Haymo but the Apostle speaketh not simply of hauing praise and commendation but of hauing it from the Prince 3. the ordinar glosse thus thou shalt haue praise of the power si iusta est ipso laudante if it be iust it will praise thee si iniusta occasionem prebente if vniust it will giue thee occasion of praise so also Gorrhan it shall praise thee either causaliter by beeing the cause of thy praise or occasionaliter by beeing the occasion c. causa erit maigris coronae it shall be the cause of thy greater crowne gloss interlin laudaberis apud Deum thou shalt be praised with God Haymo but the Apostle speaketh of receiuing praise from the power as Chrysostome and Theophylact well obserue erit laudum tuarum praeco futurus he shall be a setter forth of thy praise 4. Bucer thinketh that the Apostle alludeth vnto the custome of the Grecians and Romanes among whom they which had done any