two kinds of circumcisions rather then two parts of one and the same circumcision which are sometime ioyned together both the inward and outward as they were in Abraham sometime separate one from the other and this separation is of two sorts it is either salutaris healthfull or not for when the inward circumcision is without the outward it is profitable as in Noah but when the outward is and not the inward it is vnprofitable as in Iudas Iscariot 6. Origens obseruation seemeth here to be somewhat curious thus distinguishing the circumcision of the flesh that because there is some part of the flesh cut off and lost some part remaineth still the lost and cut off part saith he hath a resemblance of that flesh whereof it is said all flesh is grasse the other part which remaineth is a figure of that flesh whereof the Scripture speaketh all flesh shall see the saluation of God But thus Origen confoundeth the circumcision of the flesh and the spirit making them all one Further to shewe these two circumcisions of the heart and spirit he alleadgeth how the Israelites were circumcised againe by Iosuah who was a type of Christ that circumciseth the heart who were circumcised before by Moses in the desert wherein Origen is greatly deceiued for it is euident by the text Iosuah 5.5 that they which were circumcised by Iosuah had not beene circumcised before 4. Places of doctrine 1. Doct. v. 1. In that thou iudgest another thou condemnest thy selfe he which doth giue sentence vpon another for that wherein he is guilty therein is a iudge against himselfe so Iuda did iudge Thamar for her incontinencie beeing in greater fault himselfe and Dauid pronouncing sentence of death against him that had taken away his poore neighbours sheepe did by his owne mouth condemne himselfe Piscator see further addition 1. following 2. Doct. v. 11. There is no respect of persons with God c. In that God freely without respect vnto any workes electeth some vnto eternall life it is done without respect of persons for though God decree vnequall things vnto those that are in equall case for all by nature are the children of wrath yet it followeth not that God hath respect of persons for he doth it not either against any law for God is not tied vnto any lawe nor yet vpon any finiâ—ter cause either for feare for there is none greater than God to be feared of him or sauour for there are no merits or deserts which God respecteth in his election And when God commeth to giue the reward then he distributeth vnto euerie man according to their workes see further addit 3. following 3. Doct. v. 16. At the day when God shall iudge here the certaintie of the day of iudgement is expressed with the manner thereof 1. who shall iudge God 2. whom men and what not their open and manifest workes onely but their secret things 3. by whome in Iesus Christ in his humane shape 4. According to what rule namely the Gospell is be saith Ioh. 12. that his word shall iudge them Gualter 4. Doct. v. 21. Thou which teachest another c. the carnall Iewe though he did not himselfe as he taught yet was not his teaching and doctrine therefore to be refused so our Sauiour saith Matth. 23.3 Whatsoeuer they bid you obserue and doe but after their workes doe ye not Mart. 5. Doct. v. 25. Circumcision is profitable c. Baptisme succeedeth in the place of circumcision as the Apostle sheweth Coloss. 2.11 In whom ye are circumcised c. thorough the circumcision of Christ in that yee are bound in him thorough baptisme c. then like as infants were circumcised so are they now to be baptised but baptisme is not now tied vnto the eight day as it was then for by the libertie of the Gospell are we deliuered from the obseruation of the circumstances of the time and place 6. Doct. v. 28. Neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh as these were not two diuerse circumcisions but two acts of the one and same circumcision the internal and externall so there are two acts in one and the same baptisme there is the baptisme of the spirit and the baptisme of water which both are ioyned together in the lawfull vse they haue the baptisme of the spirit to whom the Sacrament is vpon vrgent necessitie denied but infidels vnbeleeuers and euill liuers haue onely the baptisme of water for he that beleeueth not shall be condemned Pareus 7. So likewise in the Eucharist there is an externall act of eating and an internall the vnworthie receiuers haue onely the latter the faithfull when they communicate haue both and in case the Sacrament be denied they may spiritually eat Christ without the Sacrament our Sauiour saith Ioh. 6.54 Whosoeuer eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternall life And though they doe spiritually eate Christ before they receiue the Sacrament for otherwise they would not desire it yet the Sacrament also must be celebrated for their further comfort and strengthening and the testifying of their faith Gryneus Certaine additions to the former doctrines Addit 1. Concerning the iudgement which a man giueth against himselfe which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thus much may further be obserued out of the 1. verse 1. What it is namely the testimonie of ones conscience of his owne guiltinesse before God 2. Whence it is partly by the prouidence of God which striketh into a mans conscience this sense of sinne partly by the force of the conscience it selfe conuincing one of sinne 3. Of whom it is namely of all men 4. It is necessarie and profitable to diuerse ends 1. to humble vs in respect of Gods iudgement for if our conscience condemne vs God can much more who is greater then our conscience 1. Ioh. 3.20 2. It is for our comfort working in vs bouldnesse if our hearts condemne vs not 1. Ioh. 3.21 3. it will make vs not to be too seuere in iudging of others our owne heart condemning vs. Addit 2. Out of the 5. v. concerning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the hardnesse of the heart we are to consider 1. What it is namely the contumacie and rebellion of the heart against the lawe of God 2. Whence it is originally by the corruption of mans nature Sathan concurreth as the efficient the occasion are the externall obiects and God by his secret iudgement yet most iust hath an ouerruling hand herein 3. the effect is the treasuring vp of the wrath of God 4. it is curable not by mans free will for it is not subiect to the lawe of God neither can be Rom. 8.8 but by the grace of Gods spirit as Dauid prayeth Psal. 51.12 Create in me a newe heart Addit 3. The accepting or respect of persons called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is when things equal are giuen to them which are vnequall or contrariwise things vnequall to them which are equall onely
the perfection of the parts because regeneration is both in the bodie and soule but not perfectione graduum by the perfection of degree for so it is onely begunne here and shall be perfited in the next life 2. and sanctification followeth after iustification and so is no part of it for first we are iustified then sanctified Controv. 7. That not the carnall eating of Christs flesh is the cause of the resurrection but the spirituall v. 11. 1. The Apostle sheweth the cause of the resurrection of the Saints to be the inhabiting and dwelling of the spirit of God in them so that the spirituall communicating with the flesh and blood of Christ by faith is that by the vertue and power whereof our bodies shall be raised againe at the last day it is not the carnall eating of Christs flesh in the sacrament as the Romanists hold wherwith to the same end they housle the sicke that is in our bodies the seede of the resurrection for there may be a spirituall eating and drinking of Christs flesh and blood euen without the sacrament which is both necessarie and sufficient vnto life whereof our Blessed Sauiour treateth Ioh. 5.4 Whosoeuer eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternall life and I will raise him vp at the last day Christ speaketh not here of the sacramentall eating and drinking but of his spirituall for the sacrament was not yet instituted 2. And that the carnall and corporall receiuing of Christs flesh is not possible neither yet requisite or necessarie to the resurrction of our bodies doth euidently appeare by these two reasons 1. because the Fathers that died before Christ was incarnate could not in that manner eate and drinke Christ and yet they died in the hope of the resurrection 2. infants are not admitted to the sacramentall eating and yet they shall rise againe at the latter day Martyr Controv. 8. Against merites v. 12. We are detters not to the flesh c. hence it followeth that we are detters to the spirit which part the Apostle suppresseth as beeing euident enough of it selfe out of the other 1. It is manifest then that whosoeuer seruice we doe performe vnto God it is ex debito a due debt we are endebted to God 1. by reason of our creation that he hath giuen vs these bodies and soules to the end that we should set forth his praise in the world 2. we are bound vnto God for our redemption by Christ our regeneration and sanctification by his spirit all which the Lord hath wrought for vs that we should performe him faithfull seruice 3. and likewise we are bound vnto God for the hope of our resurrection and glorification promised in his kingdome which the Apostle touched in the former verse 2. If then whatsoeuer seruice we doe vnto God we doe but our bounden dutie then there is no place for merits for our selues much lesse for works and merites of supererogation for others as the Romanists hold and teach for debitum meritum debt and merite doe one take away another as the Apostle sheweth Rom. 4.5 And whatsoeuer workes we do they are either according to the flesh or the spirit if after the flesh they are sinfull if according to the spirit they are of dutie 3. But they will thinke here to helpe themselues by a distinction that though our works merite not in the rigour of Gods iustice yet they merite ex acceptatione diuina through the diuine acceptance c. God indeed accepteth of our good workes in Christ yet not as merits but of grace and so in mercie rewardeth them Controv. 9. Whether in this life one by faith may be sure of salvation v. 16. The same spirit beareth witnesse with our spirit that we are the children of God Though this be an euident place to prooue the certaintie of saluation in the perswasion of the faithfull because the testimonie of the spirit is vnfallible yet the Romanists are not ashamed to denie that any such certaintie may be gathered from hence they say this testimonie of the spirit is nothing else but the inward good motions comfort and contentment of spirit which the children of God doe daily feels more and more c. Rhemist annot And Pererius it is but gustus quidum spiritualis praesentiae a kind of tast of the spirituall presence of grace and he consenteth vnto Thomas who thus interpreteth this testimonie of the spirit to be câ—â—iecturalem perswasioneÌ„ a coniecturall perswasion but infallibilis certitudo an infallible certaintie cannot be had citra specialem Dei reuelationem without the speciall reuelation of God their reasons are these 1. Thomas thus argueth a thing may be knowne either by speciall reuelation from God and so it may be reuealed vnto some that they are saued or a man may know somewhat in himselfe and that two waies certainely or coniecturally a thing is certainely knowne by the principles thereof as God is the beginning of grace but because God cannot perfitely be knowne none can attaine vnto this certaintie the coniecturall knowledge is by signes and effects as when a man doth perswade himselfe that because he feareth God and contemneth the world he is in Gods fauour but this knowledge is imperfect as S. Paul saith I know nothing by my selfe yet am I not thereby iustified 2. Pererius addeth this reason fowre waies may a thing certainely be knowen per lumen naturale c. by the naturall light of the vnderstandingâ— by the light of the Catholike faith by speciall reuelation per lumen fidei infusa by the light of faith infused but by none of these can one be assured of his saluation not by the first for it is a supernaturall light nor by the second for then all that beleeue the Catholike faith should haue this assurance neither hath euery Christian the third which is by special reuelatioÌ„ neither by the fourth can it be attained vnto for that perswasion riseth of two propositions the one apprehended by faith the other collected out of that by some naturall euidence and experience as faith reacheth vs that all which are truely contrite and penitent shall be saued then one out of his owne experience inferreth but I am contrite and penitent Ergo But this experience is vncertaine because that many actions proceeding from a man himselfe may carrie some semblance of those which are wrought by the spirit and a man may haue many sinnes which he knoweth not and so cannot repent him of them Contra. 1. To Thomas argument we answer 1. that two waies is a faithfull man perswaded and made certaine of his saluation both by the efficient cause the spirit of God which giueth such testimonie and assurance vnto them and by the signes and effects which are wrought in them 2. though God cannot here be perfitely knowne yet so much is knowne of God as may make a man sure of his saluation as we know by the Scriptures the great loue and mercie of God towards vs in
in iudgement making difference of meates yet God in his good time may establish him and make him to stand 6. Where he saith to his owne master this is not to be taken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by way of distinction as though he were their proper and peculiar Master onely and not of others also as the Iewes accused Christ because he made God his father that is proper and peculiar vnto him Iohn 5.18 but it is spoken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by way of emphasis God is their Master who hath receiued them though God be the Master of other faithfull also yet they are servants to none other but vnto God and to be discerned by his iudgement Quest. 9. Of the meaning of these words God is able to make him stand v. 4. 1. This may seeme to be no good argument taken from the power of God he is able to make them stand therefore they shall stand vnto this obiection 1. one answear is that the Apostle speaketh onely of a possibilitie he may stand or fall he may stand because God may make him stand for dubia sunt in meliorem partem interpretandā things doubtfull must be interpreted in the better part Gorrhan but the Apostle speaketh definitely and certainly he shall stand 2. Some are readie to take advantage of this argument God can therefore he will as the Papists which so reason for the carnall presence of Christs bodie in the Sacrament but it alwaies followeth not for God can doe many things which he doth not nor will doe 3. Some thinke that this is added least sibi stare arroget one might arrogate his standing to himselfe gloss interlin and to shewe a difference betweene this master and other worldly masters who may command their seruants many things but can giue them no power to doe them as this Master can Tolet but yet this doubt is not to be so remooued 4. Chrysostome thinketh no more to be signified then this ante iustam temporis maturitatem c. that the weake should not be sharply dealt withall till we haue wayed a iust time wherein they may be confirmed for God is able to doe it but more is signified then so the Apostle pronounceth they shall stand 5. Wherefore the best answear of all is that Gods power is here to be considered as ioyned with his will Calvin thinketh this to be more scripturae by the manner and custome of Scripture which ioyneth Gods will and power together Gryneus giueth this reason because the Apostle speaketh of such as were weake and sinned not of ignorance but were willing to be instructed and such God would not cast off But not onely in this generall meaning doth will and power of God concurre together but directly so much is insinuated by the Apostles owne words for concerning the readines of Gods will he had said before v. 3. God hath receiued him therefore his will was not to be doubted of so then as God was willing he was also able the like see c. 11.23 where the Apostle also prooueth the calling of the Iewes by an argument taken from the power of God God was able to graffe them in againe for it was not to be doubted that God was willing seeing the Iewes were of the fathers to whom God made so ample promises and in the same chapter v. 29. he saith The gifts and calling of God are without repentance 6. But it followeth not because God is able to make them stand that therefore they shall stand to the ende 1. it is one thing to be established in some one particular and an other to stand vnto the ende Par. 2. and here the Apostle onely sheweth that in charitie bene speremus we should hope well of our brethren that they shall continue Calv. we cannot pronounce certainely that they shall so continue indeede Quest. 10. What it is to esteeme one day aboue an other v. 5. 1. Some doe apply this difference of dayes vnto abstinence from certaine kind of meats vpon one day rather then an other some make choice of dayes to fast in an other omnem diem i. continuum vitae tempus exigit in abstinentta doth thinke rather to spend euerie day that is all the time of his life in fasting Origen so also Chrysostome Ambrose Anselme the ordinar interlin gloss as Haymo giueth a particular instance how some abstained from eating of flesh the 2.4.6 day and did eate flesh the 3.5 and 7. day some abstained all their life as Monkes and Heremites But it is not like neither doe we finde that any in those times did bind themselues to a continuall abstinence all their life 2. Theodoret retaining the same sense applyeth it onely to the Iewes conuerted to the faith who did some of them abstaine from the eating of swines flesh and other meats forbidden by the lawe onely at certaine times some did refraine altogether But it is not like that they which made conscience of eating such meats would at any time eate thereof seeing they did it in respect of the lawe which generally forbad the vse of such meates 3. Haymo maketh mention of an other interpretation by the day vnderstanding the Scripture which illuminateth the soule as the day bringeth light so he esteemeth one day aboue an other who is able to penetrate and search into some places of Scripture and not into other but he esteemeth euerie day alike who is conversant indifferently in euery place of Scripture But this allegorizing of Scripture is not euery where to be admitted and in this place it is very impertinent 4. Augustine in his exposition of this epistle hath a strange interpretation he esteemeth one day before an other that discerneth of men according to the time as if a man to day bring forth good fruites he iudgeth him a good man but if he change and the next day do euill workes he taketh him to be so according to the day or time as he findeth him but he that iudgeth euerie day alike is God who knoweth qualis quisque omni die futurus sit what euerie one is like to be at all times euery day But the words following are against this sense v. 6. He which obserueth the day obserueth it to the Lord it is not then the Lord himselfe that obserueth the day for he obserueth it to the Lord. 5. Neither can this be vnderstood of the observation of the festiualls which were kept by the heathen for they were Satanicall and to be abhorred they therefore which were converted from gentilisme were vtterly to relinquish them 6. Tolet and Faius will haue it vnderstood of the abstinence from certaine meates and drinkes which the Iewes were bound vnto vpon certaine dayes as they did eate no vnleauened bread for 7. dayes together in the time of the Pasch and they which had taken vpon them the vowe of Nazarites for a time for some were Nazarites during their whole life did abstaine from wine and strong drinke but this is not
Some giue this solution that there is no acception of persons in donis gratuitis in gifts of gratuitie and freely bestowed as election vocation are of the free gift of God he calleth and electeth whome he will but a person may be accepted in the distribution of that which doth of right appertaine vnto one and so the Lord accepteth no ma◠person but rewardeth euery one according to his worke Peter disput 6. numer 42. 2. Beza thus answereth that in the decree of election there can be no acception of persons when God electeth some before they haue any beeing and so are yet no person at all 3. But this answer is more full and sufficient there are three things to be considered in the accepting of persons 1. when some externall condition is respected beside the merit of the cause 2. and this is done contrarie to the law of equitie 3. and not without iniur◠done vnto an other when of partiall affection that is taken from one which is his right and adiudged to an other But none of these are seene in Gods election 1. he respecteth not any condition or qualitie in them which are elected but he maketh choice of them of his owne good pleasure 2. he is not tied to any law and so transgresseth no law 3. he doth not wrong vnto any in exempting some from destruction which in the rigour of his iustice is due vnto all like as Augustine putteth the case of two debters if the Creditour doe forgiue his debt vnto one and exact it of an other he doth no wrong it is free for him to doe what he will with his owne Matt. 20.15 Pareus Faius so as Augustine well determineth ibi acceptio personarum recte dicitur vbi ille qui iudicat relinquens causae meritum c. there acception of persons is rightly saide to be when he that iudgeth leauing the merit of the cause doth finde somewhat in the person for the which he giueth sentence with one against an other c. lib. 2. ad 2. epist. Pelagian c. 7. But to doth not God for he findeth no difference in the persons but all beeing in the same cause of damnation he of his owne free will forgiueth his debt vnto some and requireth it of others 4. Obiect But it is an accepting of persons as well cum aequalibus in aequalia tribnuntur c. when vnequall things are giuen to those which are equall in cause as when all are guiltie and yet one is saued an other condemned as when the persons are vnequall as the innocent condenmed and the guiltie freed God seemeth in the first kind to haue respect vnto persons freeing some from condemnation which belongeth in the rioour of Gods iustice to all Answ. 1. It is not simply an accepting of persons to giue vnequally where the cause is equall but when this is done with respect vnto some qualitie in the person as because he is rich or honourable or such like and the other is not But God doth not so he electeth some before other not for any respect to their persons but of his meere grace and fauour 2. betweene the decree of Gods election and the execution thereof there commeth the faith and pietie of the elect which maketh a manifest difference betweene them and the reprobate which freeth God from all partialitie who iudgeth men according to the qualitie of their workes See more afterward 3. addition to the places of doctrine 24. Quest. Of the meaning of these words v. 12. As many as haue sinned without the law shall perish without the law 1. Ambrose exposition here seemeth somewhat strange who vnderstandeth this not of the law of nature but of the law of Moses to the which the Gentiles were bound to giue assent and therefore duplici nomine sunt rei they are guiltie two waies because they did not giue assent vnto the law giuen by Moses nor receiued Christ c. Pererius refelleth this interpretation because the law of Moses did onely bind the Hebrewes neither were any of the Prophets commanded to publish the law of Moses to the Gentiles as afterward the Apostles were commanded to preach it to the Gentiles But Tolet somewhat qualifieth and excuseth Ambrose making this his meaning that he speaketh onely of the Gentiles who liued after the publishing and preaching of the Gospel who then were bound to beleeue and to receiue the writings of Moses and the Prophets which prophesied of Christ yet in this sense he thinketh that Ambrose expresseth not the Apostles full meaning who speaketh generally of the Gentiles both before and at the comming of Christ. 2. Chrysostome whome Anselme followeth doth interpret this to be iudged without a law levius puniri to be more easily punished for the Gentile hauing not the law as the Iew had is thereby somewhat excused But the Apostles purpose is not to shew any inequalitie of punishment betweene the Iew and Gentile but onely howsoeuer they are vnequall in knowledge yet because they are equall in sinne they shall both indifferently be punished 3. Some contrariwise doe make the case of the Gentiles more grieuous they shall perish without the law meaning the written law but the Iewes shall be iudged onely that is not punished eternally but for a time who afterward shall be saued this opinion is imputed to Origen hom 3. in Levit. and he insinuateth as much in his commentarie vpon this place Augustine reselleth this opinion concion 25. in Psal. 118. And it is euidently confuted by the saying of our Sauiour Matth. 11. that it shall be more easie for the Sodomites in the day of iudgement then for the vnbeleeuing Iewes Perer and they that haue done euill whether Iew or Gentile shall goe into euerlasting fire Matth. 25.46 Here then iudgement is taken for condemnation as it is vsuall in the Scripture as Ioh. 5.29 They that haue done euill shall come forth to the resurrection 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of iudgement that is condemnation Tolet. 4. Pererius here maketh mention of the like opinion of certaine of their Catholikes who by iudging here vnderstand certaine transitorie paines in purgatorie which such shall endure but they shall not finally perish because they hold the foundation namely faith in Christ But Pererius confuseth them because the Apostle speaketh of such Iewes as beleeued not in Christ and therefore did not hold the foundation 5. Gregorie hath this obseruation vpon those words he maketh two degrees of those which shall be saued in the day of iudgement and two likewise of them which shall be condemned first alij iudicantur regnant some shall be examined first for their life and afterwards enter into Gods kingdome such as repented them of their former sinnes and did good workes such Christ shall say vnto for I was hungrie and ye gaue me meate c. alij electorum non iudicantur reginant others of the elect should not be iudged at all but presently reigne with Christ such are they
signifie non deinceps vivendum esse peccatis sed iustitiae that we should not liue afterward vnto sinne but vnto righteousnes for it were a signe of great vnthankfulnes hauing receiued so great a benefit in the forgiuenes of sinnes past if we should estsoone fall into the same againe 3. Pererius giueth two other reasons first that because it seemed an hard and impossible thing that sinnes before done should be remitted by the Redemption of Christ following many yeares after for the cause must be secundum existentiam haue a beeing before the effect therefore the Apostle to take away this scruple and difficultie maketh expresse mention of precedent sinnes to the which the vertue of Christs death was applied by faith 4. But Pererius other reason is false and friuolous that those former sinnes are mentioned to shew that there was no full remission of them for though they were remitted quanâ—â—â— ad culpam poenam aeternam in respect of the fault and euerlasting punishment yet the fathers vntill Christs comming were kept in Limbo and had no entrance into heauen â—at seeing by the blood of Iesus their sinnes were remitted they also by the vertue of the same blood had power to enter into heauen as the Apostle saith Hebr. 10.19 By the blood of Iesus we may be bold to enter into the holy place And againe v. 14. he saith With one offering hath he consecrated for euer them that are sanctified if then the beleeuing fathers of the old Testament were sanctified by Christs blood they were consecrated for euer that is perfectly but more followeth afterward of this matter among the Controversies 5. The true reason therefore why the Apostle giueth instance in sinnes which were past is to shew that from the beginning of the world there was no remission of sinnes from Adam vnto Moses and from Moses vnto Christ but onely by faith in his blood And therfore Iohn Baptist pointeth at Christ and saith Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sinnes of the world Some doe alleadge that place Apoc. 13.4 whose names are not written in the booke of life of the Lamb which was slaine from the beginning of the world Pareus Faius but this place seemeth not to be so fitly alleadged to that purpose for these words from the beginning of the world are rather to be ioyned with the former words whose names are not written in the booke of life c. from the beginning of the world so Aretus distinguisheth whome Beza and Pererius follow And so are the words ioyned c. 17.8 6. And further as hereby is expressed that all the sinnes of such as beleeued were remitted in Christ which were done before so much more the sinnes of the age then present and which should be committed afterward are forgiuen by no other way as the Apostle saith Heb. 13.8 Iesus Christ yesterday and to day and the same also is for euer Pareus 36. Quest. How God is said to be iust and a iustifier of him which is of the faith c. v. 26. 1. Some vnderstand this iustice of God generally of his holines vprightnes integritie which appeared in the worke of our redemption throughout Pareus wherein most of all shined forth the power of God his wisdome and benignitie vnto man his power in iustifying the wicked which was no lesse worke then in first creating him his wisdome in iustifying him by the death of Christ so fit and conuenient a meane for the reparation of man his benignitie appeared in beeing so mindfull of man as to appoint a way for his redemption Hugo 2. Ambrose doth vnderstand God to be iust that is faithfull in keeping his promises so also Beza 3. Some thus interpret iust that is benignus bonus good and gracious Osiand but Gods iustice is one thing his clemencie an other 4. Tolet vnderstandeth God to be iust in that he would not be satisfied for the sinne of man non accepto pretio sanguinis vnlesse he had first receiued the price of Christs blood so also Pareus 5. Oecumenius applieth it to Gods iustice which should be shewed in the iust punishment of those which should refuse grace offered but the Apostle speaketh of the time present not to come 6. The meaning then is this that he might be iust that is appeare and be acknowledged onely to be iust and all men lyars that is sinners and vniust as he saide before and as he is iust in himselfe so this iustice is communicated vnto vs by faith in Christ to this purpose Calvin Bucer Pellican so also the interlin glosse that he might be iust aliter non posse ipsoâ—vare otherwise he could not helpe to iustifie others if he were not most iust in himselfe God then is onely iust in himselfe and as he is the fountaine of all iustice so he doth iustifie others by that way which he hath appointed namely by faith in Christ. 37. Qu. How reioycing is excluded not by the law of works but by the law of faith 1. There are two kinds of reioycing one is in our redemption purchased by Christ whereof the Apostle speaketh 1. Cor. 1.31 He that reioyceth let him reioyce in the Lord there is an other reioycing in man as the Apostle saith in the same place v. 29. that no flesh should reioyce in his presence of the latter kind of reioycing which is in mens works speaketh the Apostle here 2. But the ordin glosse vnderstandeth this de laudabili gloriatione of the commendable reioycing and by excluded he vnderstandeth manifested or expressed as goldsmiths doe exclude and set out the stones set in siluer but this is a very vnfit interpretation the reioycing which the Apostle will haue here excluded is the reioycing before men as he sheweth afterward c. 4.2 3. By the law of works he vnderstandeth not onely the ceremonials iudicials of the law which are abolished vnder the Gospel as Lyranus but the morall also for the Apostle shewes c. 4.2 that Abraham might reioyce in works before men but not with God where he meaneth works of the morall law for the ceremonies were not yet instituted 4. Neither by the law of works doth the Apostle vnderstand such workes as are done without faith and by the law of faith the law of workes with faith but he excludeth all works whatsoeuer for seeing that such works they say proceede partly of freewill then this reioycing should not be taken away for where the freewill of man worketh there is merit and where there is merit there is reioycing Pareus 5. By the law of workes and the law of faith is vnderstood the rule and doctrine of works and the rule and doctrine of faith for in the Hebrew phrase the law is taken for the strength of a thing for doctrine or direction as afterward c. 7. he saith the law of the spirit the law of the members the law of the minde Mart. Faius 6. And Moses law is called the law of works not because it
hath receiued saith if he liue we should call him iust if he liue euill c. lib. 83. quest quest 76. Controv. 21. How S. Paul and S. Iames are reconciled together Whereas S. Paul here saith v. 28. We conclude that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the lawe but S. Iames affirmeth c. 2.24 You see then how that of workes a man is iustified and not of faith onely c. they may seeme at the first sight to be contrarie they are then thus reconciled 1. Not as Erasmus and Caietanus who doubt of the authoritie of the epistle of S. Iames for though it were a while doubted of yet was it at length receiued by a generall consent of the Church to be of Apostolik authoritie as it is acknowledged to be by Origen hom iâ— Ios. Cyprian in symbol Epiphan haeres 76. Augustine lib. 2. de doctrin Christ. c. 8. Daâ—â—as lib. 4. c. 8. and others 2. Not yet is the solution of the Romanists false and friuolous that S. Paul speaketh of workes going before iustification which are without faith and grace and S. Iames of the workes of grace which followe the first iustification for S. Paul euen excludeth the workes of Abraham which were workes of grace Rom. 4.2 3. The best solution then is this that the Apostles neither speake of the same kind of faith not yet of the same manner of iustifiying 1. S. Paul speaketh of the true liuely faith which iustifieth before God but S. Iames derogateth not from the true faith but from the faith which was in shewe onely which he calleth a dead faith and consequently no faith and such a faith as deuils may haue S. Paul then saying that a liuely faith iustifieth before God and S. Iames that a dead faith iustifieth not no not before men much lesse before God are not contrarie the one to the other 2. Neither doe the Apostles take the word iustifying in the same sense S. Paul speaketh of iustification before God but S. Iames of the declaration and shewing forth of our iustification by our workes before men as is euident thus the Apostle saith euidently v. 18. shewe thou me thy faith out of thy workes c. Againe he saith that Abraham was iustified by workes when he offred his sonne Izaak which must be vnderstood that his iustification was thereby testified manifested and declared for by faith before God he had beene iustified before as the Apostle alleadgeth in the same place v. 23. Abraham beleeued God and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse which testimonie is giuen of Abrahams faith before he offred vp his sonne So then S. Paul saying workes doe not iustifie before God and S. Iames that workes doe iustifie before men that is declare and testifie their iustification do not contradict the one the other 22. Controv. Against Socinus that Christ properly redeemed vs by paying the ransome for vs and not metaphorically 1. Argum. Impious Socinus as Pareus rehearseth his wicked opinion and confuseth it denieth that Christ died for vs or paied any ransome at all for our redemption but he is said to redeeme that is to deliuer vs without paying any price at all as Exod. 15.13 and in other places the Lord is saide to haue redeemed that is deliuered his people from the Egyptian seruitude Ans. 1. It followeth not because to redeeme is sometime taken in that sense that it should be so euery where 2. there is great difference betweene corporall and spirituall deliuerance the first was and might be done onely by the power of God without paying any price at all the other could not be compassed without paying of a price both because of Gods iustice that they which sinne should die Rom. 1.32 and the truth of his word because he had said to man that if he sinned he should die the death 2. Argum. Psal. 31.5 Dauid speaking of Christ saith Thou hast redeemed me O Lord God of truth here Christ is saide to haue beene redeemed but he was not redeemed with the paying of any price Ergo neither did he redeeme vs in that manner Ans. 1. If this Psalme be vnderstood of Christ we confesse that to redeeme is taken improperly in that sense but then it followeth not because it is vsed improperly in one place therefore it should be so in all 2. But if the Psalme be vnderstood of Dauid who was the type of Christ the word is taken properly for euen Dauid was no otherwise freed from his sinne then by the price of Christs death 3. Argum. The deliuerance of the Israelites by Moses from the bondage of Egypt was a type and figure of our spirituall deliuerance by Christ but that was done onely by the power of God without any price payed therefore so was the other Answ. 1. The argument followeth not for the figure and the thing figured agree not in all things there is more in the substance then in the type 2. There is great difference betweene Moses Christs deliuerance Moses was a meere man and a seruant of the house Christ was God and man the Lord of all Moses deliuered onely from corporall bondage and seruitude Christ from spirituall bondage vnder sinne from the wrath and curse of God Moses redeemed the Israelites without his own death or shedding of his blood but Christ our redeemer gaue his life and shed his blood for vs Moses gaue them the inheritance of the earthly Canaan Christ hath purchased for vs an euerlasting inheritance 4. Argum. Redemption is properly said to be from him of whom the captiues are holden but we are said to be redeemed either from our iniquities Tit. 2.14 or from our vaine conuersation 1. Pet. 1.18 or from the curse of the lawe Galat. 3.13 of the which we were not held captiue but no where are we said to be redeemed from God or from his iustice c. Answ. 1. Touching the proposition or first part of the argument 1. it is false that redeÌ„ption is onely from him that keepeth vs in bondage for although principally captiues are freed from him whose captiues they are yet they are deliuered also from their verie bands imprisonment and other such like instruments of their captiuitie such are our sinnes as the bands and fetters that kept vs in thraldome vnder the deuill 2. there is a difference betweene corporall and spirituall bondage for there the price is paid to the enemie as to the great Turke to get the captiues out of his hand but here the price is paied to God not to deliuer vs from him but to reconcile vs vnto him like as when a subiect rebelling against his Prince is imprisoned and condemned to die till some mediation and satisfaction be made for him then his sinne is pardoned and he is reconciled to his prince 4. Concerning the second part of the reason 1. it is false that we were not detained captiues by our sinnes for they are as the snare of the deuil 2. Tim. 2.26 2.
truely redeemed vs by his blood which first appeareth both by euidēt testimonies of Scripture as Mark. 10.45 The Sonne of man came to giue his life a ransome for many Coloss. 1.14 In whom we haue redemption thorough his blood 1. Tim. 2.6 Who gaue himselfe a ransome for all men Apocal. 5.9 Thou hast redeemed vs vnto God by thy blood secondly all the parts requisite in redemption doe here concurre together 1. there must be captiues that are we 2. one to redeeme which is Christ. 3. a ransome must be paid that is Christs blood 4. and one to whom it must be paied that is God see further hereof in Pareus 〈◊〉 10. Controv. 23. That Christ truely reconciled vs by his blood against an other blasphemous assertion of Socinus v. 25. To be a reconciliation thorough faith in his blood against this Socinus obiecteth that Christ was no otherwise a reconciliation then the couer of the Arke in the old testament was called the propitiatorie not that thereby God was reconciled but that God shewed himselfe therein reconciled and appeased toward his people So also the sacrifices of the lawe are said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a reconciliation yet there was no satisfaction made vnto God by them to this purpose that impious Socinus part 2. c. 2. pag. 81.82 as he is cited by Pareus dub 11. Contra. 1. It is false that the Arke and sacrifices of the old Testament did reconcile as Christ hath reconciled vs for there is great difference betweene dumbe and senselesse ceremonies the blood of beasts and the most holy and liuely blood of Christ. 2. the Arke and the sacrifices though in themselues and their owne vertue they did not reconcile vnto God yet typically and sacramentally they did reconcile as beeing types and figures of the true reconciliation by Christ. 3. And that Christ was verily and properly our reconciler vnto God appeareth in that the Apostle addeth in his blood which he offred vp to God his father which to what ende was it so offred vp but to be a reconciliation thus much of the controversall questions out of this chapter 6. Morall observations v. 3. Shall their vnbeleefe make the faith of God of none effect c. Origen hereupon hath this note infidelitas eorum qui vel non accedunt ad fidem c. their vnbeleefe which either come not to the faith or fall away from it when they laugh vs to scorne in our fasting almes deeds and other workes of faith fidem quae in nobis est non evacuant doe not euacuate or make voide the faith in vs our faith and pietie is not hindred by other mans incredulitie and prophanenesse And in that the Apostle doth here preuent the cauills and obiections of the Iewes it teacheth that the minister of Gods word should so set forth the doctrine of the truth whether in Church or Schooles as that he may meet with all contrarie obiections made against the truth both to satisfie the mindes of them that are desirous to learne to deliver them from all scruple and doubting and to stoppe the mouth of gainesayers Pareus in v. 1. v. 4. Yea let God be true Seeing God is alwaies found true of his promise but men are liars and deceitfull we are taught that in all our trialls and tentations we should certainly ground vpon the promises of God and not be carried away or swayed by the promises or threats of men to let goe our confidence in Gods promises as Dauid in all his afflictions when he was chased vp and downe and persecuted of Saul staied himselfe vpon the truth of Gods promises v. 4. That thou mightest be iustified When as God doth correct vs his children for our sinnes or otherwise exerciseth his iudgements in the world we should not seeme to accuse God or murmure against him but confesse God in all his works and iudgements to be iust and our selues to be sinners as Dan. 9.8 to vs appertaineth open shame c. yet compassion and forgiuenesse is in the Lord. v. 3. What though some did not beleeue As the Oracles of God committed to the Iewes yet were not in vaine though some beleeued not so the Minister of Gods word must not be discouraged and giue ouer his calling because he seeth in some his labour to take small effect Martyr for euen our Blessed Sauiour in that his most heauenly sermon of the eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood was forsaken and left of many of his hearers yet many of his disciples went away in so much that he said vnto the twelue Will ye also goe away Ioh. 6.67 v. 9. Are we more excellent The Apostle that his reprehension might appeare more easie and tolerable ioyneth himselfe in the companie and maketh himselfe one of the number and indeed he was a part and member of Israel So the Prophets doe often ioyne thereselues with the rest of the people as partaking with their sinnes as Dan. 9.5 We haue sinned and committed iniquitie for like as the praise and commendation of the good and vertuous extendeth it selfe vnto all the congregation wherein there are notwithstanding some carnall men and hypocrites so the sinnes of the congregation doe euen touch and some way defile the godly because that they liuing among the wicked might offend in their connivence in not reproouing the sinnes of others as they ought or in not giuing themselues such good example of life as they should or some other kind of way might be touched v. 21. By the Lawe commeth the knowledge of sinne Then is the lawe first to be preached to make men to knowe themselues and to acknowledge their sinnes this was the course that Iohn Baptist tooke to preach repentance to the people and to bring them to confesse their sinnes and so to prepare a way for the Gospell of Christ for like as a wound cannot well be cured vnlesse first it be searched to the bottome so the heart must first be humbled before it can be truely capable of the comforts of the Gospel v. 31. Doe we then make the Lawe of God of none effect c. As the adversaries in S. Pauls time blamed his doctrine concerning iustification by faith onely as an enemie to the Lawe and good workes whereas the Apostle alwaies ioyneth sanctification with iustification workes with faith though he exclude workes in the act it selfe of our iustification So the aduersaries of the grace of God in these dayes the Papists and Romanists doe slaunder the doctrine of the Gospel which vrgeth iustification by faith onely as though it should beate downe and hinder the exercise of good workes But we say with the Apostle that by this doctrine of onely faith we doe not destroy the law but indeed establish it in as much as we hold faith without workes to be a dead and fruitlesse faith we do not separate work from faith though we exclude them from iustification faith which
sinnes for we hold also with S. Paul the imputation of Christs righteousnesse by faith as S. Paul saith Philip. 3.9 That I may be found in him not hauing mine owne righteousnesse which is by the lawe but that which is of the faith of Christ c. 2. But though we graunt as well an imputation of righteousnes as a not imputation of sinne concurring vnto iustification yet we denie that any inherent iustice or renouation of life is any part of this iustification neither doth the Apostle meane any such iustification here Christ rose for our iustification not thereby onely to giue vs an example of newenesse of life as Bellarmine and Pererius expound it wherein Tolet his owne fellowe Iesuite and Cardinall is against him as is before shewed qu. 42. but Christs resurrection is the cause and ground of our iustification which is imputed by faith as Ambrose expoundeth resurrexit c. vt nos gratia iustificationis donaret he rose againe to endue vs with the grace of iustification vt iustitiam credentium confirmaret to confirme the iustice of those which beleeue saith Hierome ista resurrectio credita nos iustificat this resurrection beeing beleeued doth iustifie vs saith Augustine 3. an inherent iustice we confesse which is our sanctification the fruit and effect of our iustification by faith but because it is imperfect in vs and not able to satisfie the iustice of God we denie that we are thereby iustified in his sight Controv. 19. Against Socinus corrupt interpretation of these words v. 25. Was deliuered vp for our sinnes Socinus will not haue this phrase to signifie any satisfactioÌ„ made by Christ for our sinnes but onely to betoken the cause or occasion of Christs death as the Lord is said to giue Israâ—l vp for the sinnes of Ieroboam who sinned and caused Israel to sinne 1. king 14.16 thus â—icked Socinus de Seruat part 2. p. 108. Contra. 1. Though sometime this phrase signifie the cause yet it is false that it so onely signifieth for the Scripture speaketh euidently that Christ was our reconciliation and that we haue redemption in him Rom. 3.24 25. our sinnes then onely were not the cause or occasion of his death but he so died for our sinnes as that he by his blood satisfied for them 2. It was the Pelagian blasphemie that Christ died for our sinnes to be an example onely vnto vs to die vnto sinne for thus the power and force of Christs death is extenuated which indeede causeth vs to die vnto sinne it doth not teach vs onely and shew vs the way this were to extoll the power of mans corrupt will against the grace of God 3. The instance of Ieroboam is altogether impertinent Israel was deliuered vp for Ieroboams sinnes which they imitated and followed if Christ were so deliuered vp for our sinnes then they must make him also to be a sinner with vs and to be polluted with our sinnes ex Perer dub 8. 20. Controv. Piscators opinion examined that our sinnes are remitted onely by Christs death not for the obedience and merit of his life These are Piscators words in his annotation vpon the 25. v. Omnia nostra pectata expiatâ— sunt per solam mortem Christi all our sinnes are expiated onely by the death of Christ and therefore neither originall sinne is purged by his holy conception nor the sinnes of omission by his holy life but by Christs death onely to this purpose many places of Scripture are cited and alleadged by him as Matth. 20.28 The Sonne of man came to giue his life a ransome for many Matth. 26.28 Which namely blood is shed for many for the remission of sinnes Act. 20.28 Christ hath purchased his Church by his blood Likewise he affirmeth that by Christs obedience in his death and vpon the crosse partâ—â— esse nobis vitam aeâ—ernam euerlasting life is obtained for vs as Hebr. 10.19 By the blood of Iesus we may be hold to enter into the holy place and other places are cited to the same effect Contra. 1. It is true that Christ onely by his death and other his holy sufferings paied the ransome and bare the punishment due vnto our sinne but seeing Christs blood had beene of no value if he had not beene most perfectly righteous his obedience and righteousnes must as well concurre vnto the remission of sinnes as his death and this is that which S. Peter saith 1. Pet. 1.19 We are redeemed with the pretious blood of Christ as of a Lâ—â—â—e vndefiled and without spot and c. 3.18 Christ hath once suffered for sinnes the iust for the vniust the innocencie then and integritie of Christ must be ioyned with Christs blood to make it an acceptable sacrifice 2. Whereas there are two parts of our iustification the remission and not imputing of sinnes and the imputation of Christs righteousness which two are not separated neither can the one stand without the other neither can there be any remission of sinnes vnlesse Christs righteousnes be imputed as S. Paul saith 1. Cor. 5.21 He hath made him to be sinne 〈◊〉 that knew no sinne that we should be made the righteousnes of God in him the merit of Christs obedience and righteousnes must needes concurre in the remission of sinnes yea Piscator in his annotation vpon the 4. v. confesseth that these words blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen idem valere to be as much in effect as to say blessed are they to whom iustice is imputed 3. But that seemeth to be a more straunge assertion to denie that possessio vitae eternat tanquam effectum adscribitur obedientiae Christi the possession of eternall life is ascribed as an effect to Christs obedience which is directly affirmed by the Apostle Hebr. 7.26 Such an high Priest it became vs to haue which is holy harmelesse vndefiled separate from sinners and made higher then the heauens what hath made Christ higher then the heauens but his holines perfection integritie and therefore he is able perfectly to saue them that come vnto God v. 25. 4. And further that we are iustified by Christs obedience the Apostle sheweth Rom. 5.13 As by one mans disobedience many were made sinners so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous here the Apostle saith directly that we are made righteous by the obedience of Christ. Piscator here answereth that by Christs obedience here is vnderstood his obedience in submitting himselfe willingly vnto death in which it was his fathers will he should suffer for vs. Contra. Our iustification consisteth of two parts of the remission of our sinnes and the making of vs iust before God the one is procured by Christs death the other is purchased by his obedience and righteousnes and that the Apostle speaketh not onely of Christs obedience vnto death but generally of his whole course of righteousnes both in life and death is euident because he calleth it the gift of righteousnes v. 17. and the raigning of grace
vngodly L. it is not put interrogatiuely but passiuely in the originall 7 Doubtlesse one will scarce die for a righteous man but yet for a good man for one which is profitable to him Be. he readeth the sense not the words it may be one dare die 8 But God setteth out his loue toward vs seeing that while not seeing if that while S. we were yet sinners Christ died for vs. 9 Beeing iustified therefore by his blood much more shall we be saued thorough him from wrath 10 For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God God was reconciled to vs S. by the death of his Sonne much more beeing reconciled we shall be saued liue S. by his life 11 And not onely so but we also reioyce in God thorough our Lord Iesus Christ by whome we haue obtained V. Be. receiued Gr. reconciliation atonement B.G. 12 Wherefore as by one man sinne entred into the world and death by sinne and so euen so B. death went ouer all men in whome namely Adam Be. not in as much as S.V.B. all men haue sinned 13 For vnto the time of the law was sinne in the world but sinne is not imputed while there is no law 14 But death raigned from Adam vnto Moses euen ouer them that sinned after the like manner after the similitude Gr. of the transgression of Adam which was the figure of him that was to come 15 But yet not as the offence so is also the gift for if by the offence of that one many be dead much more the grace of God and the gift by grace which is of one man by one man B.G. hath abounded vnto many 16 And not as that which entred by one which sinned not as the sinne of one S.L. for the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sinning or that sinned or as by one that sinned death entred V. for that followeth in the next verse so is the gift for the fault sinne B. not iudgement S.L.V. because of the words following to condemnation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. came of one offence which must be supplied out of the next clause vnto condemnation but the gift is of many offences to iustification 17 For if by one offence Be. better then by the offence of one B.G.S.V.L. for so much is expressed in the words following death raigned thorough one much more shall they which receiue the abundance of grace that abundance of grace G. and of the gift of righteousnes raigne in life thorough one that is Iesus Christ 18 Likewise then as by one offence Be. not the offence of one cater see the former vers the fault came vpon all men to condemnation so by one iustification Be. not the iustification of one B.G. cum caeter for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put in the first place otherwise it should be put after as in the next verse the benefit redounded vnto all men to the iustification of life 19 For as by the disobedience of one many were made sinners so by the obedience of one many shall be made righteous 20 Moreouer the Law entred thereupon by the way V. in the meane time B. that the offence should encrease B. Be. abound V. G. but where sinne increased grace abounded much more 21 That as sinne had raigned vnto death in death V. S. L. so is the word in the originall is in but he meaneth vnto death as appeareth by the other opposite part vnto eternall death so might grace also raigne by righteousnes vnto eternall life thorough Iesus Christ our Lord. 2. The Argument Methode and Parts In this chapter the Apostle pursueth the former proposition wherewith he concluded the fourth chapter that Christ died for our sinnes and now he sheweth the manifold benefits which we haue by the death of Christ with an ample proofe and demonstration of the same So then this chapter is deuided into two parts the first containing a rehersall of the benefits which we haue by Christs death to v. 6. the second a proofe and demonstration thereof to the ende of the chapter 1. In the first part there is 1. set forth the foundation of all other benefits which we obtaine by Christ namely iustification by faith v. 1. 2. then the benefits and graces either internall which are these sowre peace of conscience bold accesse to Gods presence perseuerance hope of glorie v. 2. or externall which is constancie and reioycing in tribulation which is amplyfied both by the effects patience experience hope which is described by the effect it maketh vs not ashamed v. 5. and by the efficient cause thereof the loue of God shed in our hearts by the holy Ghost v. 5. 2. Then followeth the probation hereof which consisteth of two arguments the one taken from the state and condition of such as were reconciled by Christ they were enimies this argument is handled from v. 6. to 12. the other argument standeth vpon a comparison and collation betweene Adam and Christ the losse which we had by the one and the benefit which we are made partakers of by the other from v. 12 to the ende In the first argument there is 1. the proposition that Christ died for the vngodly v. 6. ◠the illustration thereof à dissimili by an vnlike comparison betweene man and God the first part is expressed v. 7. that a man will not die for an vnrighteous man and an enemie which is shewed by the contrarie because hardly for a righteous man will one die vnlesse he be also a friend much lesse for an vnrighteous man and an enemie the other part of the comparison followeth 1. shewing that Christ died both for vs beeing vnrighteous v. 8. and enemies also v. 10. 2. then he inferreth two conclusions 1. the certaintie of our saluation beeing now iustified and made friends v. 9.10 2. the ioy and consolation which springeth and ariseth hereof v. 11. The second argument consisting of a comparison betweene Adam and Christ is thus handled there is the proposition concerning Adam shewing wherein he was like wherein vnlike vnto Christ to v. 18. then the reddition or second part concerning Christ v. 18. to the ende First Adam is like in three things 1. in his person he was but one and yet the author of sinne to all 2. in the obiect his sinne was communicated to all though himselfe but one 3. in the effect and issue this sinne brought forth death all this is propounded v. 12. that sinne entred by one man into all the world then it is prooued by 3. arguments 1. by the office of the lawe which is not to bring in sinne but to impute sinne v. 13. therefore though sinne were not so much imputed before the lawe as after yet was it in the world before 2. by the effects death was in the world before the lawe and it raigned also vpon infants that had not sinned actually as Adam had done and therefore sinne much more which brought forth death v. 14. 3. Adam was
Mart. there might haue beene an other way in respect of Gods power to whome all things are possible sed nullus humanae miseriae convenientoir but none more conuenient in regard of mans miserie for what can more comfort vs deliuer vs from despaire then that it pleased God that a man like our selues should die for vs gloss ord and though there must haue been an other way found out Liberandi to deliuer man tamen non redimendi yet not of redeeming man Gorrhan for man could not properly be saide to be redeemed vnlesse the ransome had beene paied and the punishment due vnto man satisfied which was by the death of Christ. 15. Quest. Wherein the force of the Apostles reason consisteth saying Much more beeing reconciled we shall be saued by his life v. 9. 1. The ordinarie glosse thus collecteth because it is more to take away sinne then iustos cooperantes salvare to saue those that are iust and fellow workers as though this were the Apostles argument it was an harder matter to worke our iustification which was done without vs then now to purchase saluation whereunto man himselfe worketh But this is farre from the Apostles meaning to make man a ioynt worker with Christ in the matter of iustification for he ascribeth all here vnto the death and life of Christ. 2. Wherefore the force of this comparison beeing from the greater to the lesse consisteth in these three points 1. for whome Christ hath done this 2. how he hath wrought it 3. and what 1. The first is obserued by Chrysostome he iustified vs by faith in his blood when we were enemies now amici facti sumus we are made his friends and therefore he will much more saue vs. 2. The next is obserued by Oecumenius and Chrysostome also toucheth it it is not necessarie 〈◊〉 post hac silius moriatur that afterward the Sonne should die any more if then iustification be alreadie wrought for vs which required Christs death much more now shall we obtaine the perfecting of saluation to the which Christs death againe is not required Pareus and before him Gorrhan doe place the comparison in the opposition betweene life and death if he could iustifie vs by dying multo magis vivens c. much more beeing aliue can he saue vs. 3 It is more to iustifie and reconcile sinners then to saue them beeing iustified Christ hath done the first much lesse need we doubt of the second Pet. Mart. But Lyranus hath here a corrupt glosse giuing this reason why it is a greater worke to iustifie a sinner then to glorifie him beeing iustified because one can not merit his iustification but he that is iustified may per gratiam mereri de condigno vitam beatam c. may by grace deserue of condignitie a blessed life c. This is contrarie to the Apostle who saith Rom. 6.23 that the gift of God is eternall life c. it can not then be any wise merited 3. Now saluation is ascribed to the life of Christ not as though the life of Christ rising from the dead were the price of our redemption but because Christ by his resurrection and life did perfect our saluation and he now euer liueth to be an intercessor for vs vnto his father and to bring vs vnto glorie wherefore to finish and make perfect our iustification the life of Christ and his resurrection must be ioyned with his death and suffering as the Apostle concluded before in the verie last words of the former chapter Pareus 16. Quest. Why the Apostle saith not onely so but we also reioyce in God c. v. 11. 1. Some doe make this connexion that we onely shall not be saued by Christ in the life to come but now also reioyce in the hope thereof Lyran. Gorrhan and before them Theoâ—â—et likewise Anselme we glorie in this quia consider amus nos futuros cum illo in gloria we consider we shall be with him in glorie 2. Oecumenius giueth this sence least any might thinke it a shame vnto vs that we could not be otherwise redeemed then by the death of Christ the Apostle addeth that we â—â—eede not be ashamed thereof but rather glorie therein because it was a signe of the great loue of God that he spared not his owne Sonne for vs. 3. Some referre it to our glorying in tribulations Sa but it is more to glorie in God â—â—en to reioyce in tribulation 4. But the Apostle setteth downe here the highest degree of the reioycing of Christians they doe not onely reioyce vnder the hope of glorie nor in tribulation which two degrees the Apostle mentioned before ver 2. but they reioyce in God which is to reioyce quod Deum propitium habeas that thou hast God thy mercifull father Pareus â—â—â—â—care Deum habere patrem c. to boast that we haue God our father protector and â—â—â—ender Tolet. gloriamur Deum esse nostrum we reioyce that God is ours Calvin gloriaâ—â—â— de ipsius in nos clementia we glorie of his clemencie and loue toward vs Osiander And â—â—s the Apostle here amplifieth three effects of iustification before propounded v. 1 2. to â—â—â—e peace with God to stand in the state of grace and to reioyce so here he saith we are reconciled by his blood then we are saued by his life and so haue a perpetuitie and certentie in our state and we dare also glorie in God Pareus 17. Quest. Whether any thing neede to be supplied in the Apostles speach v. 12. to make the sense perfect v. 12. As by one sinne entred into the world c. 1. Some doe thinke that the redditiue of this similitude is wanting for vnto this as by one c. should answer the other part so c. Origen giueth this reason thereof that S. Paul omitted the other part so by one mans obedience came righteousnes propter negligentiores least the negligent and carelesse sort should haue presumed too much but this can be no reason because the Apostle both before and after had expressed as much that we obtaine life and righteousnes by Christ. 2. Bullinger consenteth with Origen that there is in this speach of the Apostle an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some inconsequence and that he omitted the other part through vehemencie 3. Erasmus thinketh that here is an anantapodoton a comparison without a reddition which he would haue vnderstood by supplying the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so in the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and death by sinne that is so death came by sinne as by one man sinne entred but all this belongeth to the proposition or first part of the comparison As sinne came in by one and death by sinne the reddition must be that so righteousnes came in by Christ and life thereby for otherwise there should be small coherence in the words 4. Tolet thinketh that the reddition is included in those words in the ende of the 14.1 where Adam is saide to be the figure
without any merit of ours but we are not giuen vnto Christ freely he hath purchased vs with his blood Quest. 52. How nothing can be laid to the charge of the elect 1. Lyranus referreth this to the finall iudgement when none shall dare to say any thing to the charge of Gods chosen but the consolation is more generall euen in this life is the comfort of Gods children that no accusation laid in against them can doe them hurt though Sathan accuse them the lawe condemne them yet God is greater that doth iustifie them 2. Augustine lib. 3. de doctrin Christian. c. 3. whom Haymo followeth doth reade all with an interogation Who can lay any thing to the charge c. God which iustifieth and then the answear must be supplyed no so also the next clause who shall condemne shall Christ but the better reading is in both clauses onely to read the first part interrogatiuely and then the answear followeth containing the reason why none can accuse the Lords elect because God doth iustifie them nor any can condemne them because Christ died for them so Chrysostome and Hilarie lib. 10. de Trinitat 3. Two reasons are giuen why no accusation can take place against the elect because they are elected and so Gods purpose cannot alter or change toward them and Christs redemption is sufficient to deliuer them which is set forth in fowre degrees he died for the expiation of our sinnes rose againe for our righteousnes is ascended and sitteth at the right hand of God from whence he sent his spirit and he maketh intercession for vs whereby his merits are effectually applyed vnto vs. 4. But Origen giueth here a corrupt glosse vpon this word elect nisi electus fueris nisiâ— omnibus te probabilem exhibueris c. vnlesse thou be an elect and choise one and approoue thy selfe in all things thou shalt haue thine accuser and Chrysostome likewise interpreteth this election of the present state of integritie which euerie one is found in and he vseth this similitude like as a breaker of horse pullos eligit c. maketh choise of the best colts which he seeth to be meetest and fittest to runne so God maketh choice of soules true it is that God electeth none but holinesse and integritie of life doth follow and accompanie them yet is it not their owne integritie but the righteousnesse of Christ which doth free them from accusation in this world and from condemnation in the next as the Apostle sheweth v. 34. that none can condemne vs seeing Christ hath died for vs. Quest. 53. How Christ is said to make request for vs. 1. Chrysostome vnderstandeth this interpellation and making of request of the loue of Christ toward vs and the care of his Church which he still hath and otherwise he thinketh he maketh not intercession so also Theophylact the Apostle hereby sheweth nothing els quà m summam eius in nos charitatem then his exceeding great loue toward vs. 2. Theodoret and Oecumenius interpret it of the representation of Christs humanitie and the exhibiting of his glorious bodie in the sight of his father so also gloss interlin he maketh intercession representatione humana by the representing of his humane nature the sight whereof is a continuall postulation or request for vs. 3. Rupertus lib. 9. de dinin offic c. 3. referreth this intercession to the sacrifice of Christ vpon the crosse the efficacie and vertue whereof still remaineth and cryeth vnto God for mercie for vs to this purpose also Haymo Lyranus addeth further yet speaking therein without any good warrant that Christ doth make request for vs ostendendo latus vulnera by shewing his side and wounds Calvin saith that Christ is not to be imagined to be â—â— a suppliant petitioner for vs but he appeareth by the vertue of his death and resurrection quae vivae orationis efficaciam habent which haue the efficacie of a liuely prayer 4. Ambrose thinketh that Christ doth still preces fundere powre out prayers vnto God as he is man euen in the proper signification of the word so also Gregor Nazian â—rat 4. Theolog. and Origen he thinketh further that Christ still offereth prayers cum luctu lachryma with wayling and teares hom 7. in Lev. which are not seemely for that place of glorie And that Christ still offereth vp vocall prayers Tolet is of opinion annot 35. whose reason is because euen the Saints beeing in glorie doe now offer vp prayers Pet. Martyr also thinketh that Christ doth now fundere preces powre out his prayers for vs because he still is our high Priest for euer 5. Cyril cited by Oecumenius taketh this making of request for vs to be that vehement and earnest prayer which our Blessed Sauiour made in the daies of his flesh the force effect and efficacie whereof remaineth still 6. Now then out of all these to take somewhat this interpellation or request which our Sauiour maketh is performed 1. both by appearing now in the sight of God for vs Heb. 9.24 2. by the euer enduring force and efficacie of his blessed sacrifice once offred vpon the crosse Heb. 10.19 with one offring hath he consecrated for euer them that are sanctified 3. by his will and desire that the elect should be alwayes acceptable to his father in him Heb. 10.10 by which will we are sanctified 4. by the vnchangeable loue of God toward Christ beeing well pleased alwayes in his Sonne and assenting vnto his holy will and desire This is my beloued Sonne in whom I am well pleased Matth. 3.17 Pareus 7. But that it is not necessarie that Christ should make any vocall or formall prayers it may be thus shewed 1. Chrysostome thus reasoneth si cadem cum patre potestate c. if he by one and the same power with the father doth raise and quicken the dead and doe all other things quomodo precatione opus habet c. how hath he neede of praying to helpe vs 2. an other reason he taketh from the greater to the lesse that seeing Christ hath propriâ— potestate c. by his owne power deliuered vs from condemnation made vs the Sonnes of God and performed all other necessarie things for our redemption naturamque nostram iâ— regali throne constitutam ostentat c. and now sheweth in heauen our nature placed in a Princely throne ad facilia illa minuta hath he now neede of prayer to finish those small things which are behind 3. As the Sonne is said to make request for vs so God is said to â—â—create and beseech vs 2. Cor. 5.10 and the holy Spirit also maketh request for the Saints Rom. 8.27 yet neither God the Father nor the holy Spirit do these things otherwise then by their instruments and effects we must not imagine any formall prayers to be made we must not conceiue any thing to be done quod maiestate illa sit indignum which is vnmeete and not beseeming the diuine maiestie so Christ is said
such labour and care and others to pay tribute and other duties willingly vnto their Magistrates as a recompence in part of their paines 6. Observ. Of the commendation of Christian loue v. 10. Loue doth none euill c. it is the fulfilling of the law c. Chrysostome here hath a good morall of loue vtramque virtutem habet dilectio loue hath a double vertue it both maketh vs abstaine from euill and it bringeth honorum operationem the working of good things it is the fulfilling of the law nay further it doth not onely shew vs what we should doe but helpeth vs also to doe our duties prescribed in the law more easily and beside this loue toward our neighbour doth also shew our loue toward God and assureth vs of his loue againe in loue among men it is otherwise for loue is impatient of fellowship it is full of iealousie if one loue the partie whome an other loueth repugnabit amator the louer will be against it but God dignatur te amoris sui communione vouchsafeth thee to be partaker of his loue c. he loueth those that loue them whome he loueth 7. Observ. Against backesliders v. 11. Now is saluation nearer c. S. Paul vseth this as a reason to stirre vs vp to zeale and carefulnes because still we come nearer vnto the worke like as they which runne in a race the nearer they approach vnto the goale the faster they runne therefore they are very preposterous carelesse and disordered which in the end of their race doe slacke their pace for while they stay and rest themselues an other outstrippeth them and winneth the price therefore as the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 9.14 So runne that ye may obtaine we must then hold out vnto the ende and not giue ouer our running if we will obtaine the crowne 8. Observ. Against carelesse hearers of Gods word v. 11. It is now time that we should arise from sleepe c. Chrysostome applieth this against carelesse hearers who though they are awake in bodie yet are a sleepe in their soules and all things which they heare are as a dreame vnto them tell me saith he what Prophet what Apostle deque quibus rebus lectus fit and of what matters was he read sed non potes but thou canst not tell me wherefore to such be this spoken it is time to arise from sleepe c. 9. Observ. Against riotous feasts v. 13. Not in banketting and drunkennes c. Here Chrysostome also taketh occasion to enueigh against symposia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 companions feasts when men feasted by turnes or euery one sent his cost and when they met together and did glut themselues with meates and drinks and carnall pleasures if this be a pleasure and delight ostende mihi voluptatem illam vesperi shew me thy pleasure at night but thou canst not I forbid not saith he thus speaking all kind of meetings sed ne quid praeter decorum agatur that nothing be done vncomely but vse to sing psalmes pro illiberalibus canticis in stead of dishonest songs sic Christus mensae vestrae aderit c. so Christ will be at your table and shall blesse your meeting and your banket and so shall you follow the rule of the Apostle 1. Cor. 10.31 Whether ye eate or drinke or whatsoeuer you doe els doe all to the glorie of God 10. Observ. Against chambring and fornication v. 13. Not in chambering and wantonnes from these riotous feasts and bankets proceede vagrant and filthie lusts and so men leauing as it were the pure and cleare fountaine doe runne ad immundi cani cloucam to a filthie puddle and sinke caenum namque scorti corpus esse c. that the bodie of a strumpet is a very puddle and sinke I appeale vnto thy selfe after that thou hast wallowed thy selfe in this mire dost thou not thinke thy selfe impure and vncleane 2. Chrysostome proceedeth further to shew the loathsomnes of this sinne quid seminas quod metere non licet c. why dost thou sow where thou wouldest not reape for the very fruit and offspring would make thee ashamed 3. puero magnam facis iniuriam c. thou doest great wrong vnto the child that shall be borne who by thy meanes is counted a bastard and base borne 4. and thou thy selfe shall be ignominious non solum in vita not onely in thy life but after they death sive ex scorto sit sive ex ancilla whether thou hast a child by an harlot or by thy maide 5. beside thou makest her not onely an harlot but after a murtherer nam non solum quod natum est occidit sed ne nascatur prohibet for shee onely killeth not that which is borne but hindereth it that it be not borne sic generationis promptuarium promptuarium facis occisionis and so thou makest the receptacle of generation the shoppe and forge of occision and murther 6. hinc sunt idololatriae c. hence also proceeded idolatries for many procure enchantments and drinkes and other sorceries that they may be beleeued 7. Many other euills also spring from hence venena parantur c. often poison is prepared for the wise that hath the wrong and other lyings in wait or at the least quotidiana bella continuall warre and strife and the legitimate children are hardly vsed and much wronged to this purpose Chrysostome excellently 11. Observ. How we ought to imitate Christ in the not satisfying of the flesh v. 14. Put on the Lord Iesus c. and take no care for the flesh to fulfill the lusts thereof for if a man should giue himselfe to satisfie the desire of his flesh he should but procure his owne further torment and neuer be at rest ipsae quippe concupiscentiae alias graviores pariâ—â—t for concupiscence doth still beget concupiscence as he that is alwaies thirstie as they which haue the dropsie though they haue whole riuers by them can neuer quench their thirst so is it with them that follow the lust of the flesh it will neuer be satisfied Thus farre Chrysostome proceedeth well but he seemeth in the rest to be somewhat too strict and austere for he would haue a man onely to vse things for necessitie as to eate onely to satisfie hunger and to seeke garments onely to couer the flesh non est vestibus ornanâ—â— câ—râ— ne ornatu illam perdas c. the flesh is not to be adorned and set forth with rayment least thou destroy it by those ornaments c. and to this purpose he sheweth how we should put on Christ by imitating his austere life and to doe as he did he had not a place wherein to put his head do thou likewise if he were at any time to take meat panibus hordeacis vsus est he vsed barly bread if he were to trauell he did not ride on horsebacke sed venerbus pedestris c. but tooke his iourney on foote if he were to
be in effect the same for the death of sinne is the life of righteousnesse whereas the Apostle maketh a distribution of these two whether we liue or die c. and both of the dead and the quicke 2. Chrysostome vnderstandeth the Apostle to speake of euerlasting life and death vitam nostram divitias mortem damnum existimat he counteth our life riches and our death losse vnto himselfe But seeing that Chrysostome confesseth that in the next words whether we liue or die we are the Lords that à morte fidei ad mortem naturalem periransit he paseth from the death of faith to speake of the naturall death the Apostle must be so vnderstood to speake of the naturall life before for this argument thus hangeth together either we liue and die vnto God or vnto our selues not vnto our selues therefore vnto God 3. There is also a ciuill life and that of two kinds either it is taken in the good part as a man is said to liue vnto himselfe that is sui iuris is a freeman not at the command of an other or in the euill as they are said to liue vnto themselues which liue priuately and separated from the societie of others as single men solitarie persons the couetous which both liue vnto themselues not seeking the profit of any and die vnto themselues none haue any losse by their death they haue neither wiues nor children to care for but the Apostle meaneth not any such ciuill kind of life he speaketh of the naturall life and death taken after an Evangelicall sense to liue and die vnto the glorie of God 4. Haymo in one sense would haue this especially to be vnderstood of Martyrs which doe liue and die vnto God who is glorified by their life and death but the Apostle speaketh generally of all the faithfull and not of Martyrs onely as Reuel 13.14 they are said to die in the Lord which die in the faith of Christ. 5. Wherefore first it is agreed that the Apostle speaketh of the naturall life and death and then in this sense to liue vnto God comprehendeth these fowre things 1. to acknowledge God to be our Lord and that we are not our owne 2. and therefore we must seeke to doe Gods will and not our owne 3. as we beginne with Gods will so must we ende with his glorie making it the scope of our whole life and the actions thereof 4. and in all our troubles and afflictions we must put our trust in God and relie vpon his care as one that care 〈◊〉 vs likewise to die vnto the Lord is 1. to acknowledge that as we receiued our life from him so death commeth not without his sending 2. to take therefore patiently diseases and death it selfe as sent of God 3. as in our life so in our death to glorifie God and not to doe any thing whereby he might be dishonoured 4. to haue good hope and confidence in our death that God will raise vs vp to life againe Quest. 18. How Christ by his dying and rising againe is said to be Lord both of the dead and quicke 1. The Apostle maketh mention of the death of Christ his resurrection and life by the first acquisivit dominium he purchased this dominion by the second occupavit he tooke possession of this dominion 2. And although Christ had purchased this dominion in his death yet he had not the exercise of this dominion vntill he was risen againe for it is one thing Dominium esse to be a Lord an other dominari to hane rule the one is per potestatem by his power the other per potestatis exercitionem by the exercising of this power for by death was Christs soule separated from his bodie which till they were vnited againe he could not exercise his dominion perfectly as man Tolet and then a thing is said to be when it is made manifest by his resurrection his power and conquest ouer death was made knowne and so the interlinear gloss well interpreteth vt dominari intelligatur that he might be knowne to beare rule 3. And the Apostle speaketh not here 1. of that dominion which Christ hath as God for that he had before and should haue exercised still though he had not died 2. nor yet as Origen here resolueth is mention made of his death and life because Christ was an example of obedience vnto vs how to liue vnto righteousnesse and die vnto sinne and therefore he is Lord of both for this sauoureth too much of Pelagianisme to make Christ an example onely by the imitation whereof we should learne to be mortified 3. neither yet is his death mentioned to shewe this dominion to be merited for Christ merited not at all for himselfe as shall be shewed among the controversies contr 8. 4. but onely that dominion is signified which Christ purchased in redeeming vs by death as man As God he had an vniuersall dominion but as man he hath a particular dominion and right ouer vs as his inheritance purchased by his blood 4. Ouer the dead and the quicke 1. Origen vnderstandeth the spirituall life and death but the Apostle speaketh of the naturall as Christ truely died and rose againe 2. the dead are set beâ—ore the quicke to shewe Christs vniuersall dominion not onely ouer the then liuing but euen ouer the dead also that had beene liuing before Pareus 3. and he mentioneth the liuing least it might be thought that the iudgement onely in the world to come of the dead was committed vnto Christ and not of the liuing here Gorrhan Hugo 4. and whereas our Blessed Sauiour saith Matth. 22. That he is not the God of the dead and the Apostle here saith that he might be Lord of the dead and quicke they are not contrarie the one to the other for in the one place they are said to be dead according to the Sadduces sense that had no beeing at all but were vtterly perished and extinct both in bodie and soule of such the Lord is not God for he is not a God of that which is not Martyr as he is not their God as they are dead but as he purposeth to raise them to life againe but here by the dead the Apostle vnderstandeth them that are aliue in soule though dead in bodie 5. Chrysostome addeth that the Apostle here Iudaizantem pudefacit doth shame him that did Iudaize that seeing Christ had done so great things in dying and rising again for them they should not be so vnthankfull vt ad legem recurrerent as to runne vnto the law againe Quest. 13. Of the tribunall seate of Christ what it is and of other circumstances of the day of iudgement Here Origen hath a wittie discourse of the day of iudgement and the manner thereof wherein some things he saith well and he misseth as his manner is in other the summe is this which shall be reduced to these three heads which are confusedly there handled and shuffled together 1. who shall iudge
ipsum by him that is Christ and two senses are made of it either post adventum after his comming for he tooke away the legall difference of meates and other ceremonies Tolet Perer. or by him in the creation because all things which were created seemed good Lyran. Gorrhan but although Ambrose doe follow this sense that by the benefit of Christ no meate is now vncleane yet this reading is not agreeable to the originall the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by it selfe with an aspiration not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 himselfe 2. wherefore the Greeke interpreters doe better read per se by it selfe as Chrysostome Theophylact and Origen giueth this sense by it selfe that is natura sui by it nature the Apostles meaning is that no kind of meate by it selfe was vncleane in the nature thereof against the opinion of the Manichees that simply condemned meats as euill by their nature and creation 25. Quest. How nothing is said to be vncleane of it selfe v. 14. 1. Nothing of it selfe in the nature thereof as it was created of God is vncleane which was the wicked heresie of the Manichees who abstained from eating of flesh egges milke wine because they saide it was fel principis tenebrorum the gall of the Prince of darknes August lib. de haeres and their wicked assertion further was quod carnes diabolus operetur faeculenta materia mali that the deuill made flesh of the stinking matter of euill and so they blasphemed the Creator himselfe to whom euery thing seemed good which he made see Aug. lib. 30. cont Manich. c. 5.6 2. Neither are meates vncleane as wicked Marcion held that they which did eat things that had life were guiltie tanquam qui comedunt animas as if they did eate and deuoure soules haeres 42. those heretikes two waies did thinke flesh in it selfe vncleane because they were made of an euill matter by the deuill and in respect of the life and soule which was in them which they imagined likewise to be deuoured 3. Neither yet is it to be denied but that some meates are vncleane and hurtfull physice naturally as vnfit for the nourishment of the bodie as are all kind of venemous things but not ethice morally as though it were sinne to eate meate as a thing vncleane of it selfe 4. Yet though meate be not thus vncleane of it selfe and in it owne nature yet it may be said to be vncleane in respect of man 1. generally by reason of mans fall which brought a curse vpon the creatures from the which vncleanenes it is purified and sanctified by the word of God and praier as the Apostle saith 1. Tim. 4.8 2. there is beside a particular vncleannes in respect of him who abuseth meates to riot and excesse in which sense the Apostle saith To the defiled and vnbeleeuing nothing is pure Tit. 1.15 so Origen saith videndum est non solum quali sed quanto cibo quo in tempore c. we must see not onely what manner of meate but how much and in what time we doe eate for by this meanes those things which were cleane in themselues were vncleane vnto the defiled and vnbeleeuers 3. some meates were counted vncleane by the law which difference continued as long as Moses law as in force but now it is taken away by the libertie of the Gospel 4. and a thing is counted vncleane in respect of the opinion of the vse that to him that thinketh any thing vncleane to him it is vncleane as here the Apostle saith which must be vnderstood as long as he remaineth in that opinion 26. Quest. Of the legall difference of meates why it was commanded There were diuers ends of that legall prohibition and restraint 1. it was partly civill that by this meanes God might invre his people to obedience Ambros. 2. and partly morall to teach them temperance who otherwise were a stiffnecked people and too much addicted to their appetite Chrysost. 3. it was also physicall and naturall that for the auoiding of diseases whereunto they were much subiect in that climate which might proceed of the varietie of vnholesome meates and for the better preseruation of their health they were commanded to make this difference 4. there was a ceremoniall ende that the Iewes by this their abstinence and choice of meates might be discerned from the profane Gentiles who made no such difference 5. and beside there was a mysticall vse that by this legall difference of cleane meates and vncleane they might be put in mind of their spirituall cleannes in bodie and soule so Augustine saith that the Iewes abstained from some meates non cibos damnandi sed significandi gratia not for the condemning of meates but for signification sake 6. now after that the law was abrogated there was still retained some difference of meates as the Apostle enioyned the newly conuerted Gentiles to abstaine from strangled and blood to retaine concord and peace betweene the conuerted Gentiles and Iewes which abhorred such meates as were forbidden by the law but this prohibition continued onely for a time vntill the Gospel was more publikely receiued and the beleeuing Iewes better confirmed 7. but meates are not refrained but onely propter corporis castigationem for the chastising and taming of the flesh 27. Quest. Of the manner how meates are sanctified and made cleane Because the Apostle here speaketh of meates how they are cleane how vncleane Origen doth parallel this place with that 1. Tim. 4.5 It is sanctified by the word of God and prayer 1. The Rhemists thinke that this is not vnderstood of the vulgar and common benediction of meates and drinkes but of sanctifying and applying them to an higher vse euen for spirituall benefits annot 11. as they haue their hallowed bread water salt and such things which they vse in the seruice of God But 1. it is euident that the Apostle speaketh there of the sanctifying of meates for our ordinarie vse and receiuing of them 2. and seeing the word of God is requisite vnto sanctification such hallowing of creatures hauing no warrant in the word is but a superstitious inuention 2. Neither is it to be thought that the meates thus sanctified haue a kind of inherent holines infused into them which seemeth to haue beene the opinion of Origen who compareth the sanctifying of them vnto the napkins and partlets which were taken from Saint Pauls bodie tantum sanctificationis acceperunt c. they receiued such sanctification as that beeing applied to the sicke they healed their diseases But 1. there is great difference to be made betweene an ordinarie sanctifying of a thing to a continuall and perpetuall vse as of meates and drinkes and of an extraordinarie sanctifying by miracle as was in these partlets it was an extraordinarie worke at that time for the confirmation of their faith 2. neither was this vertue in these napkins but in S. Paul who had that gift to worke miracles both present and absent as when Elisha
ruinae the occasion of the ruine of his brother Lyranus Tolet he doth destroy him dando occasionem by giuing occasion that he be scandalized Haymo so Hugo doe not destroy ne sis occasio perditionis be not an occasion of his perdition so simply he doth not cause him to perish but as much as in him lieth this sense is not to be misliked 4. But yet to make it more full this may be added further that the Apostle speaketh not exactly and precisely of those whome in deede Christ died for but of such as in our charitable opinion are held to be of that number omnes fidem Christi profitentes pro redemptis habet charitas Christiana all that professe the faith of Christ Christian charitie holdeth to be in the number of those which are redeemed Pareus who ioyneth both these last solutions together so likewise Piscator so also is that other place of the Apostle to be vnderstood 1. Cor. 8.11 And thorough thy knowledge shall the weake brother perish for whome Christ died which in the same place the Apostle calleth sinning against Christ and they which offend their brethren doe two waies sinne against Christ directly in making frustrate as much as in them lieth the death of Christ opus quod morte eius absolvit destruunt they ouerthrow the worke which Christ finished by his death and indirectly quia corpus eius membra percutiunt they wound and smite the bodie and members of Christ which redoundeth vnto Christ himselfe Chrysost. 5. Let this further be noted that Ambrose taketh this to be spoken vnto the weake that he should not scrupulum inijcere cast a scruple in the minde of him that eateth all things and cause him to doubt But Chrysostome and Theodoret doe better vnderstand it as spoken to the strong that he by his eating should not cause the weake to stumble and so fall and perish and this is more agreeable to the Apostles words destroy not by thy meate now he which eateth destroieth with his meate not he which eateth not and againe the weake were more in daunger to be offended and so to fall away from the faith then the strong 31. Quest. What is meant by the good or commoditie which they must not cause to be blasphemed vers 16. 1. Cause not your commoditie your good c. This is diuersly skanned 1. Chrysostome vnderstandeth either the Christian faith and hope of eternall reward or charitas bonum vestrum dilectio c. this good of yours is loue brotherly charitie c. 2. Origen interpreteth bonum nomen your good name or fame so also Lyranus and Origen hath beside an other exposition bonum est spiritualiter legem intelligere it is a good thing to vnderstand the law spiritually to decline the wicked opinions of heretikes as vncleane meates 3. Ambrose vnderstandeth opera bona good works quae obfuscantur c. which are obscured by one small slippe or error 4. Anselme taketh this good or commoditie to be ipsam manducationem the eating it selfe which is good and lawfull so Gorrhan Hugo 5. Some vnderstand the doctrine of the Gospel in generall and God himselfe who is called the good of his people as Hosh. 8.3 Israel hath forsaken the good that is God himselfe Pare so Osiander doth interpret this good to be the Gospel 6. But it is better vnderstood of Christian libertie which they haue receiued by Christ from the bondage and ceremonies of the law whereby they know it to be lawfull to eate any kind of meate thus the Greeke Scholiast Haymo Thomas Martyr Vatablus Calvin Tolet Gualter Piscator Faius and most of our new writers and this is so expounded by S. Paul himselfe 1. Cor. 10.29 Why should my libertie be condemned for an other mans conscience and this Euangelicall libertie is called our good for these two reasons both because it is peculiar to Christians and thereby the dignitie and excellencie of their calling appeareth that are freed from the ceremonies of the law 2. To be blasphemed 1. Chrysostome vnderstandeth this onely of those which are without when thou contendest about meates and makest a schisme in the Church facis vt qui foris sunt blasphement thou causest them which are without to blaspheme P. Martyr specially vnderstandeth maledicta infirmorum the rayling of those which are weake so also Beza but it is better referred to them both the weake are occasioned to condemne this libertie as contumelious to God himselfe and they which are without speake euill of the Christian faith as beeing the occasion of contentions 2. Now for the manner of this blasphemie 1. Origen vnderstandeth it of the doctrine it selfe for they which are offended will thinke that Christians are of this faith and beleefe that they thinke none can be saued nisi qui suillis vescitur carnibus but him that eateth swines flesh 2. the Greeke Sholiast referreth it to their persons the weake will thinke eos ventri inservire that they doe eate of things to serue the bellie 3. Haymo thinketh that the weake blaspheme cum rogamus eos comedere c. when we compell them to eate that which they abhorre 4. But this rather is the blasphemie the weake hold such to be transgressores transgressors of the law Lyran and crie out by the Gospel rescindi voluntatem Dei that Gods will and law is violated Beza augent licentiā vulgi and they make the common sort more licentious Melanct. 32. 32. Quest. How the kingdome of God is not said to be meate and drinke v. 17. 1. Origen by this kingdome vnderstandeth the life to come haec aliena sunt ab illa conversatione futura these things meate and drinke shall be of no vse in our conversation in heauen so also Anselme so he thinketh that the Apostle speaketh both of the kingdome of glorie to come and of those things whereof that kingdome shall consist righteousnes and peace ipse erunt nobis cibus they shall be our meate there so also Haymo it is a follie to contend or dispute about those things quae in regno coelorum non erunt necessaria which shall not be necessarie in the kingdome of heauen 2. Chrysostome by the kingdome vnderstandeth also regnum coelorum the kingdome of heauen but the other he referreth to this life meate and drinke non sunt in regnum caelorum introducentia are not the things that must bring vs to heauen they are not causa regnandi the cause of our raigning Hugo Gorrhan But Peter Martyr saith this is aliena interpretatio an interpretation not agreeable to the Apostles minde for he maketh not those things which follow righteousnes peace ioy the causes of saluation for Christ onely is the cause 3. Some by the kingdome vnderstand the Christians themselues in whome the spirit of God raigneth not by the vse of meates and drinks but in that they follow righteousnes and peace Vatablus 4. But here better we vnderstand regnum gratiae the kingdome of grace
this insinuation to qualifie his former asperitie least they might thinke that he thought them all to be very rude and simple an other is as the ordinarie glosse supplieth out of Ambrose per hanc laudem provocat ad meliora by this praising of them he prouoketh and stirreth them vp more vnto goodnes 2. he is perswaded himselfe he saith not audivi I haue heard it of others but he himselfe knew these things to be in them by their fruits there are two kinds of perswasion one is an infallible perswasion which the faithfull haue of themselues the other is a probable perswasion which they haue of others 3. and he saith I my selfe as it were making them equall vnto himselfe that he had not all knowledge but that they also therein abounded 4. and thus the Apostle wisely as he beganne with their commendation that their faith was published thoroughout the world c. 1.8 so he endeth with the same and so like a wise Orator as he first insinuated himselfe into their affection so he leaueth with their good will and liking 2. The things which he commendeth them for are 1. goodnes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Latine translation readeth dilection loue as though he had read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Erasmus obserueth but as Beza acknowledgeth no such Greeke word is to be found so they which follow the Latine interpreter as Lyran. Gorrhan Tolet vnderstand it of goodnes gentlenes a good charitable opinion which one hath of an other but it rather signifieth as Chrysostome noteth vniversalem virtutem an vniuersall vertue a generall goodnes including the other also 2. The next gift wherein they abounded was all knowledge which must be restrained to matters of faith as Lyranus noteth for other curious and vnnecessarie knowledge the Apostle would not commend them this the Apostle addeth because their good inclination in themselues was not sufficient if they had not knowledge to vse it 3. then followeth the third that they were able one to admonish an other he acknowledgeth them to be todidem Magistros so many Masters that had not need to be taught but were able to instruct and admonish one an other so these two things are required in him that should admonish an other knowledge that he be not ignorant what and whereof to admonish them and goodnes that he be not culpable in himselfe in that wherein he would admonish an other for he that is the instructer of an other must edifie him verbo exemplo by the word of knowledge and example of life Quest. 19. Whether Saint Paul doe truely giue this commendation vnto the Romans This doubt is mooued both because the Apostle in the former chapter had found fault with the Romans that some of them were weake in faith and iudged the rest in the eating of meates and they which were stronger in iudgement despised them which were weake as also because none in this life can attaine vnto such perfection to be filled with all knowledge and goodnes as he saith also of the Corinthians that they were made rich in him in all kind of speach and all kind of knowledge 1. Cor. 1.5 seeing the Apostle confesseth of himselfe 1. Cor. 13.9 We know in part and prophecie in part Ans. 1. To the first part of this obiection the answer is that although there were some weake and ignorant among the Romans and not sufficiently instructed concerning the vse of Christian libertie yet there were others which indeed were well grounded in knowledge and excelled in goodnesse and of these the Apostle giueth this testimonie as the ordinarie glosse well obserueth in that the Apostle saith that yee are able to admonish an other where admonet perfectiores de correctione minorum he admonisheth those which are perfect of the correcting and instructing of the weaker sort 2. To the second part Origen maketh this answer that Saint Paul and others like vnto him ad comparationem caeterorum perfecti dicuntur are said to be perfect in comparison of others ad illam vero perfectionem quae in coelestibus est ordinibus c. but in respect of that perfection which is among the heauenly orders no man can be said here to be perfect So where Saint Paul saith Phil. 3. 12. Not as though I were atteined vnto it or were alreadie perfect ad illam apicem caelestis perfectionis c. he writeth thus looking vnto that high point of celestiall perfection but where afterward in the same place vers 15. he saith let vs therefore as many as are perfect be thus minded ad humanae tantum perfectionis respicit gradum he hath respect onely to the degree of humane perfection Origen further doth illustrate this thing in this manner sicut in puerilibus studijs c. like as in the learning of children in respect of those which are newly entred Magister ipse literarius appellatur perfectus the Master that teacheth the letters and to read is called perfect yet he is not so perfect as he which teacheth grammer nor the Grammarian so perfect as the Rhetorician nor he as the Philosopher so there are degrees of perfection in humane knowledge yet there is no comparison to the celestiall And that the Apostle speaketh of such perfection of knowledge as may be attained vnto among men not of an absolute perfection is euident by his owne words speaking of admonishing one an other he meaneth then such a perfection as yet hath need of mutuall admonition Par. dub 4. 20. Quest. Why the Apostle saith I haue written boldly after a sort v. 15. I haue written somewhat boldly 1. Chrysostome here obserueth the wisdome of the Apostle that doth thus qualifie and temper his speach by this humane and courteous concession both in regard of the condition of the Romanes who were more famous by reason of the Imperiall seate at Rome then other Christians and therefore he doth thus pacifie them and beside it is the Apostles vse in other of his Epistles to allay his sharpe reprehensions with mild and hopefull words as to the Hebrews 6.9 We are perswaded better things of you beloved though we thus speake so to the Galatians after he had sharply rebuked them c. 3. O ye foolist Galatians who hath bewitched you c. he saith c. 5.10 I haue trust in you through the Lord that ye will be none otherwise minded 2. This libertie and boldnes which the Apostle vseth the Greeke Scholiast referreth to the calling of the Apostle that he made bold with his office in sparing and forbearing them as if he should haue said maiora plura vt cui doctrina concredita sit scribere debeo I ought to write more things and greater as vnto whome the doctrine is committed but I spare you but Chrysostome better referreth it to the Apostles former admonition that therein he made bold with the Romanes rather then with his office 3. This boldnes Erasmus vnderstandeth of the Apostles round admonitions discovering the idolatrie of
reprobation in this place as of Election 10. contr Whether as well the decree of reprobation as of election be without the foresight of workes 11. contr Of the difference betweene the decree of election and reprobation and of the agreement betweene them 12. contr Whether mercie be a naturall propertie in God or an effect onely of his will against Socinus 13. contr Whether the mercie of God in the forgiuenesse of sinne be an effect of Gods free and absolute will onely and be not grounded vpon Christ against the heresie of Socinus and Ostorodius 15. contr Of the sufficiencie of Scripture 16. contr Of the certaintie of saluation 17. contr Against the works of preparation Controversies vpon the 10. Chapter 1. contr Against inherent iustice 2. contr Against the workes of preparation which are done without faith 3. contr That it is impossible for any in this life to keepe the lawe 4. contr Against the doubting of salvation 5. contr Against vnwritten traditions 6. contr Against freewill 7. contr Against Limbu Patrum that Christ went not downe thither to deliuer the Patriarkes 8. contr Whether the righteousnesse of faith and the righteousnes of the law be one and the same or contrarie the one to the other 9. contr Whether the righteousnesse of the lawe and that which is by the law doe differ 10. contr That Baptisme doth not giue or conferre grace 11. contr Against the dissembling of our faith and profession 12. contr That faith is not onely in the vnderstanding 13. contr The Scriptures the onely sufficient rule of faith 14. contr How the Apostle saith there is no difference between the Iew and the Grecian v. 12. 15. contr Against the maintainers of vniversall grace 16. contr That faith iustifieth not by the act thereof but onely as it apprehendeth Christ. 17. contr That faith onely iustifieth not invocation 18. contr Against the invocation of Saints 19. contr That we must pray with confidence and assurance 20. contr Against the vaine pompe of the Pope of Rome in offering his feete to be kissed 21. contr Against humane traditions 22. contr That the Ministers and Preachers of the Gospel haue a lawfull calling against Stapleton 23. contr That the Hebrew text is more authenticall then the vulgar Latin translation 24. contr Against the works of preparation 25. contr Against the Iewes that will not haue the Prophet to speake of them in these words I haue stretched out my hands c. Controversies out of the 11. Chapter 1. contr That none which are elected can finally fall away 2. contr Whether the complaint of Elias of the paucitie of true worshippers be well applied to the decay of religion vnder the Pope at the time of the first reformation 3. contr That works are excluded both from election and iustification 4. contr Against free-will 5. contr That vniversalitie and multitude is not alwaies a note of the true Church 6. contr Of the sufficiencie of Scripture and of the right way to interpret the same 7. contr Against the Iewes 8. contr Whether any of the true branches may be broken off 9. contr Against the heresie of Valentinus and Basilides that held some things to be euill some good by nature 10. contr That there was the same spirit of faith and the same spirituall substance of the Sacraments vnder the old Testament and in the New 11. contr That the Scriptures are the iudge of euery one in particular 12. contr Against the Popish vncertentie and doubtfulnes of saluation 13. contr Against the Manichees and Marcionites 14. contr Against the works of preparation 15. contr Against the erroneous opinion of Origen concerning the purgatorie of hell Controversies vpon the 12. Chapter 1. contr Concerning the power of free-will 2. contr Whether the Masse be a sacrifice properly so called 3. contr Of the difference betweene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worship and seruice whether they signifie two kinds of religious worships the one peculiar to God the other to the creatures 4. contr Of the comparison betweene virginitie and mariage 5. contr The minde it selfe and not the sensuall part onely hath neede of renovation 6. contr Of the perfections of the Scripture against traditions 7. contr Against free-will 8. contr Against the arrogancie of the Pope 9. contr Against the superstitious orders of the Popish Clergie 10. controv The Pope not the head of the Church 11. contr That to loue our enemie is a precept and commanded not counselled as indifferent Controversies vpon the 13. Chapter 1. contr Whether the Pope and other Ecclesiasticall persons ought to be subiect to the Ciuill power 2. contr Whether the Pope haue a spirituall power ouer Kings and Princes 3. contr That the tyrannie and idolatrie of the Pope may be gain said and resisted 4. contr Whether the Ciuill magistrate haue any power or authoritie in matters of religion 5. contr Whether Ecclesiasticall persons as Bishops and others may haue the temporall sword committed vnto them 6. contr Whether it be lawfull for a Christian to be a Magistrate and to vse the sword in the time of peace and warre 7. contr Whether lawes Ciuill and Ecclesiasticall doe bind simply in conscience 8. contr Whether Ecclesiasticall persons are exempted from tribute 9. contr Whether the fulfilling of the law be possible in this life 10. contr Against the Marcionites which denied the morall precepts to be now in force but to be ceased 11. contr Against iustification by the works of the law Controversies vpon the 14. Chapter 1. contr Whether to abstaine from certaine meates be an act of religion and a part of Gods worship or a thing in it selfe indifferent 2. contr That faith is not onely an assenting of the wil but an act also of the vnderstanding and it is ioyned with knowledge 3. contr That it is necessarie that festivall daies should be obserued among Christians 4. contr That festiuall daies ought not to be consecrated to the honour of Saints 6. contr Whether all the festivalls of Christians are alike arbitrarie to be altered and chaunged as shall seeme good to the Church 7. contr Against Purgatorie 8. contr Whether Christ by his obedience and suffering merited for himselfe eternall glorie and dominion 9. contr Of bowing the knee to the name of Iesus whether it be necessarily inferred out of this place v. 11. and Phil. 2.10 10. contr That Christ is prooued to be God by this saying of the Prophet cited v. 11. as I liue euery knee shall bow vnto me against the blasphemie of Georg. Eniedinus 11. contr That morall works which are done without faith are sin howsoeuer outwardly they appeare good Controversies out of the 15. Chapter 1. contr Whether S. Peter were iustly reprehended of S. Paul for refusing to eate with the Gentiles 2. contr That Christ is not set forth onely as an example for vs to imitate but as our Sauiour to redeeme vs. 3. contr Against the enemies and adversaries to the Scriptures the
the meaning of the Apostle for he speaketh not here of preferring one meate before an other but one day before an other 7. Wherefore I preferre Hieromes interpretation lib. 2. contra Iovinian who thinketh that the Apostle speaketh of the observation of the Iudaicall feasts which they which were newely converted to the Christian faith could not at the first neglect such were the Iudaicall Sabbath the feast of the newe moone of the Pasch Pentecost feast of tabernacles thus also Pet. Martyr Calvin Beza Osiander Gryneus Gualter vnderstand the Apostle to speake de ferijs Iudaeorum of the feasts of the Iewes who in that they were addicted yet to the legall rites infirmitatis erat it was their infirmitie but in that they would not doe any thing which they iudged in their conscience vnlawfull pietatis erat it was their pietie Herein the Apostle beareth with their weakenes for a time but afterward when the Gospel was published they which did retaine still the Iudaicall feasts as necessarie were counted schismatikes if not among the heretikes such were the Ebionites who kept both the Lords day with the Christians and the old Sabbath with the Iewes and so doe the Ethiopians to this day Quest. 11. Of the meaning of those words Let euerie one be fully perswaded in his mind v. 5. 1. The vulgar Latine readeth Let euery one abound in his owne sense which the Libertines so vnderstand as that euerie man should be left vnto himselfe for the choice of his religion and Hierome is somewhat bold defending by this place the superstition of some women which did offer waxe candles at the graves of the Martyrs quicunque accendunt ceras c. whosoeuer light waxe candles they shall receiue a reward according to their faith as the Apostle saith Let euery one abound in their owne sense But Chrysostome directly affirmeth non erit ad quaevis rapiendum that this saying of the Apostle must not be wrested to euerie thing quando enim de dogmatis illi sermo est c. for when he speaketh of points of doctrine he saith If any preach vnto you otherwise then ye haue receiued though he be an Angel let him be accursed and beside the word which the Apostle vseth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth not to abound but to be fully perswaded 2. Others following the same reading will haue it vnderstood of things indifferent that euerie one should be left to himselfe Gorrhan and Ambrose to the same purpose readeth consilio suo remittatur let him be left to his owne counsell But no not in indifferent things should a man be left to himselfe for that is directly forbidden For euerie man to doe that which seemeth good in his owne eyes Deut. 12.8 Beza and all will-worship and voluntarie seruice is forbidden by the Apostle Coloss. 2.23 Gualter and this would bring in an horrible confusion for euerie man euen in things indifferent to followe his owne minde not respecting the scandall and offence of others nor publike order and decencie 3. Haymo giueth this sense those things which one vnderstandeth adimpleat abundando bonis operibus let him fulfill by abounding in good workes as Cyprian though he had some seuerall opinions yet abounded in charitie and to this purpose Hugo explaneth this similitude like as water when it aboundeth exit extra alveum suum doth runne out of the chanel so the vnderstanding and inward sense aboundeth quando egreditur ad dirigendum operationes when it goeth forth to direct the workes But as is shewed before that the originall word signifieth not to abound 4. Augustine thus interpreteth let euerie one iudge quantum humano intellectui concessum est so farre as humane iudgement can reach and not exceede further But here the question is not how men should behaue themselues toward God but toward their brethren 5. Hugo referreth it to the intention no man knoweth with what intention his brother doth this or that euerie man aboundeth in his owne sense quando bona intentione facit c. when he doth that which he doth with a good intention But it is not a good intention that maketh a good action 6. Not much vnlike is Lyranus sense dimittatur propriae conscientiae let him be left to his owne conscience and so Chrysostome vnicuique sua mens satisfaciat let euerie one satisfie his owne minde that no man doe any thing with a doubtfull conscience as Beza well obserueth it is not enough for a man not to do against his conscience but his conscience must be informed by the word of God 7. Wherefore the meaning is that euerie one should be fully perswaded in his owne mind that that which he doth non pugnet cum verbo Dei be not against the word of God Pareus per obedientiam fidei in solius Dei verbum respiciant and by the obedience of faith let them onely looke vnto the word of God Gualter so also Calvin Beza 1. Ob. But how can contrarie acts be pleasing vnto God that both he which obserueth the day and he which obserueth it not should be certainely perswaded Answ. In things which are directly forbidden to doe or not to do a thing cannot both please God yet in things indifferent both the doing and the omitting of a thing may both be acceptable to God so it be with a full perswasion 2. Obiect But how can one haue a full perswasion of his act in things indifferent which are neither forbidden nor yet commanded in the word Ans. It sufficeth in generall that he be perswaded and assured both of his person that thorough Christ he is accepted of God and of the act it selfe that it is not displeasing vnto God while he followeth the generall rules seeking the edifying of his brethren hauing respect vnto order and decencie 3. Obiect But it seemeth vnfit that the Apostle should require a firme resolution and perswasion of those which were weake Answ. The Apostle saying Let euerie one be fully perswaded in his mind both speaketh to the strong that thereby they should be further stirred vp to proceede in their firme resolution and to the weake that they should growe vnto such a firme perswasion and so of weake become strong Pareus so also Gorrhan verie well in melius continuo proficiendo by profiting daily and growing toward perfection 8. Tolet hath an other interpretation let euerie one abound in his owne sense persuasinis suae terminos non transgrediatur let him not exceede the bounds of his owne perswasion let euery one be contented with own his perswasion and not prie into an others doings but the Apostle as is before shewed rather giueth a rule how a man should informe his owne conscience as the Syrian interpreter well giueth the sense in cognitione animae suae certus esto let him be certaine in the knowledge of his owne mind Quest. 12. What it is to obserue or to take care of the day vnto the Lord first of the words and order 1.