members as weapons of vnrighteousnesse vnto sinne but yeeld giue G. B. exhibite L. apply V. S. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 your selues vnto God as aliue vnto God from the dead and yeelde your members as weapons of righteousnesse vnto God 14 For sinne shall not haue dominion let it not raigne S. but the word is in the future tense for ye are not vnder the lawe but vnder grace 15 What then shall we sinne because we are not vnder the lawe but vnder grace God forbid let it not be Gr. as v. 1. 16 Knowe ye not that to whom ye yeeld your selues as seruants to obey his seruants ye are to whom ye obey whether it be of sinne vnto death or of obedience of the hearing of the eare S. vnto righteousnes 17 But God be thanked that ye haue beene the seruants of sinne but ye haue obeyed from the heart that forme of doctrine whereunto ye were deliuered 18 Beeing then made free from sinne ye are become the seruants of righteousnes 19 I speake after the manner of men I speake 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some humane thing Gr. L.V. because of the infirmitie of your flesh for as ye haue yeelded your members seruants to serue L. to the seruice S. but the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seruants to vncleanes and iniquitie to commit iniquitie so now yeeld your members seruants to righteousnes and holines vnto sanctification L. V. S. 20 For when ye were the seruants of sinne ye were free vnto righteousnes from righteousnesse G. B. that is the meaning but the word in the originall is put in the datiue 21 What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed for the end of those things is death 22 But now beeing freed from sinne and made the seruants of God ye haue your fruit vnto holines in holines G. holy fruits S. and the ende euerlasting life 23 For the stipend stipends Gr. wages G. reward B. of sinne is death but the gift of God the grace of God L. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a grace a gift is eternall life through Iesus Christ our Lord. 2. The Argument Method and Parts In this Chapter the Apostle sheweth the necessarie coniunction betweene iustification and holines and newenes of life and there are two parts thereof in the first to ver 12. he layeth downe the doctrine then he exhorteth v. 12. to the end In the doctrine he prooueth the necessitie 1. of mortification and dying to sinne propounded v. 1.2 from the efficacie of baptisme which signifieth that we are dead and buried with Christ v. 3.4 and from the ende of Christs crucifying v. 6.2 of sanctification propounded v. 8. prooued from the mysterie of baptisme v. 4.5 from the vertue of Christs resurrection who is risen and dieth no more ver 9.10 and then he concludeth ver 11. 1. The exhortation followeth which hath two parts 1. one dehorting from sinne which is propounded and explaned v. 12.13 then amplified by three arguments 1. from their present state and condition beeing vnder grace v. 14. with the preuenting of an obiection v. 15.2 from the inconveniencie of the seruice of sinne which is vnto death set forth by the contrarie v. 16.3 from the efficacie of the doctrine which they obeyed v. 17.2 the other part stirreth vp to newenesse of life propounded v. 18. amplified 1. à pari v. 19.20 as when they serued sinne they were free from righteousnesse so beeing freed from sinne they must be the seruants of righteousnesse ab effectis from the effects of sinne shame and death v. 21. which are amplified by the contrarie effects of sanctification holinesse v. 22. and eternall life set forth by the contrarie on the diuerse manner sinne deserueth death as the iust stipend but life eternall is not deserued it is Gods free gift v. 23. 3. The questions and doubts discussed Quest. 1. Of the meaning of these words shall we continue in sinne v. 1. 1. The Apostle preuenteth here an obiection which might be occasioned by the former words in the end of the fift chapter where the Apostle said where sinne abounded grace abounded much more by occasion of which words the Apostle might feare least two sorts of men might take advantage the false teachers which did continually picke quarrells with the Apostles doctrine as some affirmed that he said we might doe euill that good might come thereof c. 3.8 He might feare also least the weake might receiue encouragement hereby to nourish theâ— infirmities still 2. But either of these so inferring did misconster the Apostles words and in this kind of reasoning there are three Paralogismes or fallacies committed 1. they take non causam pro causa that which is not the cause for the cause for the abounding of sinne is not the cause of the abounding of grace Augustine saith non peccantis merito sed gratiae supervenient â—â—â—uxilio c. where sinne abounded grace abounded more not by the merit of the sinne 〈◊〉 by the meanes of helpe by grace c. the Apostles speach is to be vnderstood occasionaliter by way of occasion and they take it causaliter by way of a cause Hugo sinne in it owne nature is no more the cause of grace then the disease is of medicine Maâ—â— qui laudat beneficium medecinae non prodesse dicit morbos c. he that praiseth the benefit 〈◊〉 Phisicke doth not commend the disease Augustin so then mans vnrighteousnesse doth not in it selfe set forth the iustice of God but ex accidente by an accident Pareus proveniter bonitate Dei qui bona elicit ex malis it commeth of the goodnesse of God who decreeâ—â— good out of euill Lyran. 2. the second fallacie is in that they thus obiecting make the Apostles words more generall then he meant or intended them for the abounding of sinne is not the occasion of the abounding of grace in all but onely in those which acknowledge and confesse their sinnes Martyr as it is euident in damnatione malorum in the condemnation of the wicked Lyran. there Gods iustice rather then his grace and mercie sheweth it selfe 3. a third fallacie is they apply that to the time to come which the Apostle onely vttered of time past the abounding of sinne in men before their conuersion and repentance setteth forth the aboundance of the grace and mercie of God in the forgiuenesse of their sinnes past but not so if sinne abounded after their conuersion and calling Mart. 3. The Apostle propoundeth this obiection in the person of the aduersarie by way of interrogation thereby expressing both affectum indignantis the affection of one angrie and displeased that his doctrine should be thus perverted and he sheweth also securitatem conscientiae the securitie of his conscience that he was free from any such thought 4. By sinne neither doth the Apostle vnderstand the author of sinne namely the deuill as Origen for then one should be said improperly to remaine in sinne that is in the
speaketh of such as are rewarded for their worke before God and not seeing quod vllum opus ex debitâ— remunerationem Dei poscat that any worke by due debt can require reward at Gods hand he turneth the Apostles meaning an other way and by debts vnderstandeth sinnes as they are called in the Lords prayer and so he also thinketh he speaketh of the wages of sinne as S. Paul saith Rom. 6. That the wages or stipend of sinne is death But the Apostle here speaketh euidently of the wages due vnto good workes not to euill the wages is not counted by fauour but in rendring the wages of sinne there is no fauour but iustice 4. The Schoolemen likewise are grossely deceiued who thinking the Apostle doth set downe this as a positiue rule before God haue here deuised two interpretations 1. they vnderstand this working and not working of the works following iustification and so he that worketh is rewarded uot of fauour onely because of his faith but for the debt also of his workes gloss interlin but he that worketh not that is hath no time to worke is rewarded onely of grace But this glosse is conuinced of many errors 1. in ioyning faith and workes together whereas the Apostle before c. 3.28 ascribed iustification to faith without workes 2. to say that our workes are rewarded by debt is to make God endebted vnto man for the worke which is not farre from blasphemie 3. he that hath true iustifying faith can neuer be without some workes or fruits thereof be his time neuer so short as appeareth in the theife vpon the crosse 5. Gorrhan beside this exposition hath an other to vnderstand the Apostle to speake of workes going before iustification and then he giueth this sense that to him which doth some good workes before faith if he should be rewarded the reward should be of debt which is false for then it should not be of grace but to him that worketh not any such worke before faith righteousnesse is imputed by faith c. Here also are diuerse errors 1. â—o imagine that there can be any good workes at all before faith 2. he imagineth the Apostles speach to be conditionalll if any reward be giuen wheras the Apostle setteth it down â—â—sitiuely the wages is counted not if it be 3. the Apostle speaketh in all that discourse of all workes whether going before iustification or following after for all workes of the lawe are excluded c. 3.28 now all good workes are such as the lawe requireth therefore euen such good workes are shut out from iustifying as well such as followe iustification as goe before 4. all these errors arise out of the misvnderstanding of this place where the Apostle speaketh by way of supposition from the ciuill vse of rewards among men that if there were any such meritorious working before God the wages should in like manner be due by debt Quest. 13. Of the diuerse kinds of rewards 1. Wages or reward is either due by debt per proportionem operae cum re by the proportion of the worke with the reward after a Geometricall kind of proportion as when a labourer is couenanted with to haue so much for his worke as in a due estimation it is valued at there is a wages which is of fauour by promise and not by debt and then it signifieth the same thing that fructus a kind of fruit or commoditie that followeth ones labour as Psal. 127. the fruit of the wombe is called a reward and so life eternall is called a reward because the Lord hath promised to giue it as a fruit following the labour of his Saints Fai. 2. And further life eternall is called a reward by a certaine similitude because that as in ciuill workes the reward commeth after the worke is done so life eternall followeth after mens fruitfull labour in this life Mart. and againe it is called a reward in respect of the thing done not for the manner of the doing because that as the wages is giuen to the worker of debt so is saluation rendred to him which beleeueth of grace Pareus 3. But properly eternall life is not a wages or reward for these reasons 1. because the things are not equall which are giuen and receiued the eternall reward farre exceedeth the worth of our temporarie and imperfect obedience 2. he that meriteth the wages most doe it ex proprio of his owne but we haue nothing which we haue not receiued it is not our owne 3. he that meriteth must be no way bound vnto him that payeth the wages for his seruice but all that we doe or can doe it is our dutie to doe Quest. 14. How it standeth with Gods iustice to iustifie the wicked v. 5. v. 5. But beleeueth in him that iustifieth the vngodly this may seeme to be contrarie to that Exod. 34.7 where the Lord saith he will not hold the wicked innocent and Prou. 17. it is called an abhomination to iustifie the wicked 1. Bucer hereunto answeareth that S. Paul here speaketh of the first iustification which if it should not be of the wicked none at all should be iustified for we are all the children of wrath and the Lord findeth vs all wicked before we are iustified But Moses speaketh of him which continueth in his sinne and disobedience afterward 2. Gryneus thus answereth that although it be not lawfull for a man to iustifie the wicked yet God may doe it that is omni lege superior aboue all lawe and the reason of this difference is because God onely hath right and power to forgiue sinnes because they are committed chiefly against him Faius 3. Pareus addeth further that then it is vniust to iustifie the wicked when as it is done without cause and against the rule of iustice there beeing no satisfaction made by the offender himselfe or some other for him but with God it is so for he iustifieth the wicked hauing receiued a sufficient satisfaction by the death of Christ who hath payed the price of our redemption 4. To this also may be adioyned that this must be vnderstood in sen su diuiso in a diuided sense that God iustifieth the wicked not him that remaineth wicked but was so before he was iustified Faius Anselmus vnderstandeth him to be wicked that beleeueth not he then which beleeueth is no longer to be counted wicked so then whom God iustifieth be also sanctifieth and of an vnrighteous man he is made righteous which righteousnesse is imperfect here in this life and therefore it cannot iustifie Par. dub 4. Quest. 15. How our sinnes are said to be forgiuen and couered v. 7. 1. First it is here to be observed that whereas S. Paul bringeth in this testimonie out of the Psalmes Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen and whose sinnes are couered to prooue the former proposition that God imputeth righteousnesse without workes that these two to remit and couer sinnes and to impute righteousnesse are taken for one and the same thing for
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
a figure of Christ therefore as Christs righteousnesse is extended euen vnto those before the lawe so also was Adams sinne v. 14. Then the Apostle sheweth wherein Adam is vnlike vnto Christ namely in these three things 1. in the efficacie and power the grace of God in Christ is much more able to saue vs then Adams fall was to condemne vs v. 15. 2. in the obiect Adams one offence was sufficient to condemne but by Christ we are deliuered from many offences v. 16. 3. in the ende Adams sinne brought forth death but Christs righteousnesse doth not onely deliuer vs from sinne and death but bringeth vs vnto righteousnesse and life yea and causeth vs to raigne in life it restoareth vs to a more glorious kingdome and inheritance then we lost in Adam v. 17. The reddition or second part of this comparison sheweth wherein Christ of whom Adam was a type and figure is answearable vnto Adam namely in these three things propounded v. 12. first in the singularitie of his person one mans iustification saueth vs as one mans offence condemned vs v. 18. 2. in the obiect as Adams sinne was communicated to many so is Christs obedience v. 19. And here the Apostle by the way preuenteth an obiection that if sinne came in by Adam why entred the lawe he answeareth to the ende that sinne might the more appeare and be increased not simply but that thereby the grace of God might abound the more 3. in the ende as sinne had raigned vnto death so grace might raigne vnto eternall life 3. The questions and doubts discussed Quest. 1. What peace the Apostle meaneth ver 1. v. 1. Beeing iustified by faith we haue peace toward God 1. Oecumenius whom Harme and Anselme Lyranus Hugo followe doe reade here in the imperatiue habeamus let vs haue not habemus we haue and they vnderstand peace with men that the Iewes should no longer contend with the Gentiles about their lawe as though iustification came thereby seeing the Apostle had sufficiently prooued alreadie that we are iustified by faith But this exposition cannot stand 1. because the Apostle speaketh of such peace as we haue with God not with man 2. he speaketh in the first person we haue but S. Paul was none of these which did contend about the Lawe 2. Origen Chrysostome Theodoret vnderstand it of peace with God but in this sense let vs beeing iustified by faith take heede that we offend not God by our sinnes and so make him our enemie mihi videtur saith Chrysostome de vita conuersatione disserere the Apostle seemeth vnto me now to reason of our life and conuersation so Origen let vs haue peace vt vltra non adversetur caro spiritus that our flesh no longer rebell against the spirit But the Apostle here exhorteth not sed gratulatur eorum faelicitati he doth rather set forth with ioy the happines of those which are iustified Erasmus and it is not an exhortation but a continuation rather of the former doctrine of iustification Tolet annot 1. and here he sheweth the benefits of our iustification whereof the first is peace of conscience Pareus and this is further euident by the words following By whom we haue accesse which words beeing not vttered by way of exhortation but of declaration shewe that the former words should so likewise be taken Erasmus 3. Ambrose reading in the Indicatiue habemus we haue expoundeth this peace of the tranquilitie and peace of conscience which we haue with God beeing once iustified by faith in Christ thus the Apostle himselfe expoundeth this peace v. 10. When we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Sonne for they are our sinnes which make a separation betweene God and vs this sense followe Tolet annot 1. and in his commentarie Pareus Gryneus Faius with others 4. This then is resolued vpon that the Apostle speaketh here not of externall but internall peace there is pax temporis and pax pecteris a temporall and a pectorall or inward peace the other Christ giueth but through the malice of Sathan and the corruption of mans heart it may be interrupted and therefore Christ saith Matth. 10.34 That he came not to send peace but the sword but the other which is the inward peace of conscience Satan himselfe can not depriue vs of no man can take it from vs. But whereas there is a threefold combate within vs the fight betweene reason and affection betweene the flesh and the spirit and a wrestling with the terrors of Gods iudgements in the two first we cannot haue peace here but in part for still in the seruants of God there remaineth a combat betweene reason and affection the flesh and the spirit as S. Paul sheweth that it was so with him Rom. 7.23 he sawe another lawe in his members rebelling against the lawe of his minde and therefore we are not to hope to haue such peace vt non vltra caro adversetur spiritui that the flesh should no more rebell against the spirit as Origen thinketh but this inward peace is in respect of the terrors which are caused in vs by the feare of Gods iudgement against sinne from this terror we are deliuered by Christ Beza yet so as sometimes there may arise some feare doubts and perplexitie in the minde of the faithfull as it is written of Hilarion that beeing 70. yeare old and now neere vnto death he was somewhat perplexed and troubled in minde yet faith in the end ouercommeth all these dangers that we fall not vpon the rockes to make shipwracke of our faith and a good conscience 5. And we must here distinguish betweene pax conscientiae stupor conscienciae the peace of conscience and a carnall stupiditie for the one neuer felt the terror of Gods iudgments and therefore can haue no true peace the other hath felt them and is nowe by faith deliuered from them Calvin 6. Now whereas it is added We haue peace with God or toward God these things are here to be obserued 1. all the causes are here expressed of our iustification the materiall which is remission of our sinnes included in iustification the formall by faith the finall to haue peace with God the efficient through our Lord Iesus Christ Gorrhan 2. and in that he saith toward God Origen noteth that this is added to shewe that they haue neither peace in themselues because of the continuall combate betweene the flesh and the spirit not yet with Sathan and the world which continually tempt vs but with God we haue peace who is reconciled vnto vs in Christ and he saith toward God or with God to signifie that reconciliation is not onely made with God but that it is pleasing and acceptable vnto him that such a reconciliation is made Tolet. and further hereby is signified that this is a perpetuall peace because it is toward God with whom there is no change nor mutabilitie Faius Thorough Iesus Christ 1. Chrysostome seemeth thus to vnderstand
first Adam sinned beeing in and a part of the world and in him all mankind sinned beeing then in his ioynes 21. Quest. And death by sinne what kind of death the Apostle speaketh of 1. Ambrose here vnderstandeth onely the death of the bodie when the soule is separated from the bodie There is an other death saith he which is called the second death in hell quam non peccato Adae patimur sed eius occasione proprijs peccatis acquiritur which we suffer not by reason of Adams sinne but by occasion thereof it is procured by our sinnes so Ambrose is herein deceiued for Adam was threatned to die the same day he should eate of the forbidden fruit Gen. 2.17 but he died not then the bodily death Augustine who seemeth to be of the same minde with Ambrose that the death of the bodie onely was threatened not the second death quod eam Deus occultam esse volait propter dispositionem novi Testamenti c. which God would haue kept secret because of the newe Testament wherein it should be manifestly declared Augustine I say thus answereth this reason that although Adam and Eue did not that day die the corporall death yet because from that time forward mutata in deterius vitiata natura their nature decayed and was corrupted and the necessitie of death was brought in they then beganne to die c. and Ambrose to the same purpose saith that there was after that no day not houre wherein they were not merit obnoxij subiect to death But the words of the text moriendo morieris in dying thou shalt die doe seeme to imply an actuall death which then they should die not a potentiall onely Pererius is of the same opinion numer 38. that S. Paul here speaketh of the death of the bodie because after our Parents had eaten of the forbidden fruit the Lord said to Adam Dust thou art and to dust thou shalt returne But this is no good argument they were subiect to the death of the bodie Ergo to no other death 2. Some were of opinion that the spirituall death is here onely meant because they did not the same day die the death of the bodie but liued 900. yeares after so Philo lib de â—legor leg Mosaic and Eucherius lib. 1. in Genes Gregor epistol 31. ad Eulog the Pelagians to whom consenteth impious Socinus were also of the same opinion that the spirituall death onely must be here vnderstood but vpon an other reason because they thought the death of the bodie to be naturall But neither of thâ—â— reasons conclude not the first for the same day they became mortall though actually they died not nor the second for Adam being created according to Gods image was made immortall he was not then mortall by nature 3. Pererius hath here an other conceit by himselfe that the death of the soule was also a companion of originall sinne if it be taken onely for the separation of the soule from God and the privation of eternall life but not as it signifieth beside the euerlasting torments of hell numer 39. But 1. this assertion includeth a contradiction for if the death of the soule depriue sinners of eternall life it consequently casteth them downe to hell 2. seeing Christ the second Adam deliuered vs from that thraldome whereunto we were brought by the sinne of the first Adam and he hath redeemed vs from the torments of hell it followeth that by Adams transgression we were made guiltie of hell 4. Wherefore the founder opinion is that sinne brought into the world the death both of bodie and soule as Haymo well interpreteth mors animae corporis in omnes homines pertransijt the death both of the bodie and soule went ouer all men c. Origen giueth this reason these two kinds of death are here signified quia corporalem mortem vmbram illiaâ— dixeris c. because you may call the corporall death a shadow of the other namely the the death of the soule that wheresoeuer that invadeth the other doth necessarily followe c. he thinketh the death of the soule to be here specially meant as in that place of Ezechiel The soule that sinneth shall die but so as the corporall death must necessarily followe Theophylacts reason concludeth as much who saith by the sinne of one sinne and death invaded the world abcessisseque hominis vnius id est Christi virtute and both are remooued and taken away by the vertue and strength of one that is Christ c. Thus then the argument is framed what is recouered in Christ was lost in Adam but Christ restoareth vs both to the eternall life of the soule and the life of the bodie in the resurrection therefore by Adams transgression we died both in bodie and soule Pareus Pet. Martyr addeth further that as there is a double life of the soule whereby we seeke such things at are heauenly and spirituall and of the bodie which seeketh those things that concerne the preseruation of the bodie so vtramque hanc vitam mors inflicta propter peccatum sustulit so both these liues death inflicted by sinne hath taken away Faius giueth this reason in Adam we are the children of wrath now the wrath of God invadeth not the bodie onely but the soule also By death then here we must vnderstand first the spirituall and eternall death of the soule which is to be cast out of Gods presence into hell whereunto all are subiect without the mercie of God in Christ secondly the death of the bodie which is the separation of the soule from the bodie thirdly all the forerunners and consequents of both these deaths as sickenesse weakenes corruption in the bodie griefe horror despaire and such like in the soule Pareus Quest. 22. Whether the death of the bodie be naturall or inflicted by reason of sinne 1. Seneca hath this saying mors hominis non poena est sed natura death is the nature of man not a punishment and of the same opinion seemeth Iosephus to be who writeth lib. 1. antiquit that Adam if he had not sinned futurum fuisse longissima vita tardissimaque senectute should haue had a long life and a slow old age c. he thinketh then that he should haue died though it had beene long first The Pelagians also were in the same error that Adam was by reason of his nature subiect to death not because of sinne as Agustine reporteth their opinion lib. 1. de peccat merit c. 9. and wicked Socinus agreeth with them that death is naturally incident to men as to briut beasts and that Adams posteritie is subiect to death propter propagationem generis non imputationem peccati because of the propagation of their kind and nature not for the imputation of sinne 2. But this opinion is diuersly confuted by the Scriptures 1. Man was at the first created according to Gods image then as God is immortal so man if he had not sinned should also haue
Sathans worke the strong man could not be bound but by a stronger then he Mart. And more particularly this excellencie appeareth in the author and efficient cause Adams sinne was vnius puri hominis of one and the same a meere man but the gift was Christi hominis Dei of Christ God and man Lyran. that was of our but this non solum patris sed filij gratia was not onely the grace of God the father but of his sonne Chrysost. 2. An other point of excellencie is generally in the worke it selfe and the manner of it 1. if sinne beeing a privative were so forcible vnto condemnation much more the iustice and grace of Christ beeing a thing positive is auaileable fortior vita quam mors iustitia quà m peccatum life is stronger then death and righteousnes then sinne Origen 2. fortius est mortuum resuscitare c. it is a more powerfull thing to raise one beeing dead then to kill one that is aliue Osiand 3. Chrysostome addeth further magis videtur rationi consonum c. it seemeth more agreeable to reason that one man should purchase saluation and redemption then condemnation to and for an other if then that were done which was more against reason for one to worke an others condemnation much more the other 3. As our redemption and iustification by Christ is more excellent then our condemnation by Adam in respect of the more excellent and powerfull cause as the Apostle sheweth v. 15. as is before expressed so it excelleth in regard of the more excellent fruits and effects whereof one is declared v. 16. that whereas one offence of Adam entred vnto the condemnation of many in Christ not onely that sinne is pardoned but all other our actuall sinnes non solum illud peccatum per gratiam est oblatum sed reliqua omnia not onely that fault is taken away by grace but all the rest also Chrysost. 4. An other effect is that in Christ we receiue abundance of grace v. 17. non tantum peccata sublata sed iustitia prastita our sinnes are not onely taken away but righteousnes also is giuen vs Chrysost. which he further thus setteth forth by this similitude like as if a Prince should deliuer a man that is enthralled with his wife and children and not onely restoare him to libertie but set him in a princely throne or as if a medecine should be giuen not onely to heale the disease but whereby the bodie should be made much stronger Lyrau so Christ non solum iustificat à peccatis sed etiam inducit ad gloriam doth not onely iustifie vs from our sinnes but also bringeth vs to glorie Lyran. 5. Chrysostome addeth one excellent priuiledge further which we obtaine in Christ that whereas death came by Adam in Christ we obtaine that by death we receiue no hurt sed plurimi luchri tulerimus but much good as 1. death perswadeth vs and the remembrance thereof to liue soberly and honestly 2. hic sunt Martyrum coronae death was the occasion of the crowne of martyrdome 3. and thereby we are made fitte for immortalitie 6. Origen herein placeth the excellencie of this effect that not onely death no longer raigneth sed duo conferuntur bona two good things are conferred life is giuen in stead of death Christ our life raigneth in vs and we also shall raigne in life with him This then is the abundance of grace that we receiue in Christ. 1. in that we are not onely purged from our sinnes but iustified in Christ. 2. and sanctified in him 3. made fellow heires with Christ and restored to be the sonnes of God 4. and brought to euerlasting glorie 36. Quest. Some other opinions refused wherein this excellencie should consist 1. Some thinke that herein consisteth the excellencie of grace because the sinne of Adam was deriued onely vnto men the grace of Christ is reuealed to Angels Perer. disput 12. This is true that euen the Angels doe stand by Christ but it is not the meaning of Saint Paul here for he speaketh expressely of the abounding of this gift of iustification vnto men v. 18. 2. Pererius further saith that by originall sinne which we haue from Adam we are onely made subiect poenae damni to the penaltie of losse which is the privation of the grace and glorie of God but in Christ we are deliuered from the penaltie not onely damni of the losse but sensus of feeling and suffering the torments of hell But the Apostle is contrarie who saith that by the offence of one sinne came vpon all to condemnation v. 18. the euerlasting condemnation then of bodie and soule is due vnto men by nature in respect of originall sinne without the mercie of God in Christ and elswhere the Apostle saith we are all the children of wrath by nature Eph. 2.2 to the children of wrath belongeth all kind of punishment not onely in the priuation of life and glorie but in the actuall feeling and suffering of eternall torments 3. The ordinarie glosse saith that death in Adam raigned onely temporaliter temporally but grace and life in Christ eternally but death in Adam should haue raigned eternally if Christ had not redeemed vs not onely temporall but eternall death is the reward of 〈◊〉 then seeing all sinned in Adam all by nature are subiect euen to eternall death 4. Pet. Martyr obserueth out of Oecumenius an other point of excellencie in Christ aboue Adam for Adams sinne cooperans habuit omne nostrum peccatum had euerie one of our sinnes to helpe and worke together with it but the grace of Christ came vpon all sine nostra cooperatione without our ioynt working for not onely the faithfull and beleeuers but infidels also and vnbeleeuers shall rise againe from death But Pet. Martyr taketh these exceptions to this obseruation 1. Adams sinne without our actuall sinnes was sufficient to condemne his posteritie 2. though the vnbeleeuers shall rise againe it shall be to their further condemnation it shall be no benefit vnto them 3. though Gods grace doe worke without vs yet there is somewhat required in the faithfull that they should beleeue though that also be the gift and worke of God in vs. 5. Wherefore the true excellencie of the grace of Christ aboue the sinne and condemnation by Adam consisteth in those points declared in the former question because in Christ we are restored to a more excellent state then we lost in Adam 1. by Adam we are depriued of a temporall paradise in Christ we are restored to an heauenly 2. in Adam we are excluded from the eating of the materiall tree of life but in Christ we feede of the bread of heauen which giueth eternall life 3. in Adam it was giuen vs posse non mori non peccare a possibilitie not to sinne not to die but in Christ we shall obtaine non posse peccare mori that we cannot die nor sinne in the next life 4. by Adams sinne we are
but euen swallowe vp Calvin and in respect of our selues who the more we feele the burthen and ouerflowing of our sinne the more we haue occasion to extoll and magnifie the grace of God Osiander So here are two ends of the lawe expressed the neâ—â—â—â— ende is the manifestation and encrease of sinne the remote ende is the more abounding of grace but here is the difference the first ende is vniuersall for in all men both beleeuers and vnbeleeuers the law worketh the encrease insight and knowledge of sinne but the other ende is particular and peculiar 〈◊〉 to the faithfull that by the abounding of sinne grace may more abound toward them which is not properly caused by the encrease of sinne but thorough the mercie of God Pareus Quest. 44. Of the raigne of sinne vnto death and of grace vnto life 1. Before the Apostle had ascribed the kingdome vnto death v. 14. Death raigned from Adam c. but here vnto sinne because death indeede raigneth by sinne as the Apostle saith The sting of death is sinne 1. Cor. 15.56 death could haue no power ouer vs but thorough sinne Martyr 2. But to speake more distinctly where the Apostle giueth the kingdome vnto death he speaketh of the times before the law when as death did apparantly raigne in the world but sinne was not so apparant till the lawe came but sinne is said to haue raigned after the lawe was giuen because sinne then more abounded So that three estates of the world are here described the first from Adam to Moses when sinne was in the world but death raigned the third is from the comming of Christ who raigned by righteousnesse vnto life destroying both the kingdome of sinne and death Tolet. 3. By death Chrysostome seemeth to vnderstand the death of the bodie mors ex haec presenti vita eijcit death doth cast vs out of this life c. but eternall death is here also comprehended potestatem habuit deijciendi c. it had power to cast vs downe to eternall death Lyran. as may appeare by the other opposite part of eternall life Piscator 4. But whereas in the first clause mention is made onely of the raigning of sinne vnto death but in the other there are three mentioned grace righteousnesse and life Origen thinketh that the deuill must be vnderstood to be set against the grace of Christ ab inuentis rebus author inventi nominatur the author of the invention is named in the things invented c. for sinne came in by the deuill some thinke that the wrath of God must be supplied which raigned by sinne Piscator but I thinke rather with Calvin that beside the necessarie parts of the comparison the Apostle maketh mention of grace vt fortius in figuret memoria c. that it might better sticke in our memorie that all is of grace 5. The Apostle speaketh of the time past sinne had raigned because that although sinne doe still raigne in the children of disobedience yet in the faithfull it raigneth no more Par. 6. By righteousnesse some vnderstand iustitiam operum the righteousnesse of 〈◊〉 gloss interlin so also Bellarmine lib. 2. de iustificat c. 6. but the iustice of Christ is rather vnderstood as the Greeke interpreters well expound and as is euident by the clause in the ende By our Lord Iesus Christ who is notwithstanding both our iustification and sanctification 7. The ordinarie glosse here well obserueth that in the kingdome of sinne mention is not made of Adam from whom sinne came because the Apostle speaketh not onely of originall but of actuall sinnes both which are remitted in Christ. 8. Thorough Iesus Christ our Lord Iesus per gratiam Dominus per iustitiam nostre per gloriam Iesus by grace Lord by his iustice and ours because he bringeth vs to glorie Gorrhan 4. Places of Doctrine Doct. 1. Of the difference betweene Christian and worldly hope v. 5. Hope maketh not ashamed This is the propertie of the hope of Christians that is neuer confoundeth them or maketh ashamed because it is founded vpon Gods promises who both is immutable and changeth not and is also omnipotent able to performe whatsoeuer he promiseth But so it is not in humane or worldly hope for that often putteth man to rebuke because he is deceiued in his hope and faileth in the thing hoped for and the reason is for that he reposeth his confidence in man who is either deceitfull and hopeth not his promise or is not of power to performe it therefore the Prophet saith Cursed be the man that trusteth in man and maketh flesh his arme Ierem. 17.5 Doct. 2. Of the properties and effects of faith v. 2. Beeing iustified by faith 1. Vnto faith is ascribed iustification as in these words and remission of sinnes in purifying the heart Act. 15.9 2. faith is the foundation of thing hoped for Heb. 11.1 3. it is the cause of the producing and bringing forth of good fruit Iam. 2.8 Shewe me thy faith out of thy workes c. 4. it ouercommeth the tentations of Sathan for by the sheild of faith we quench all his fierie darts Ephes. 6.18 5. by faith we attaine vnto the vnderstanding of the word of God which otherwise is vnprofitable Isay. 7.9 Vnlesse yee beleeue ye shall not vnderstand as some translations doe reade and the Apostle saith that the word did not profit the Israelites because it was not mixed with faith Heb. 4.2 6. faith obtaineth our requests in prayer Iam. 2.16 the prayer of faith saueth the sicke 7. it worketh the saluation of the soule Luk. 7.50 Thy faith hath saued thee Doct. 3. Of the raigne and dominion of death v. 14. Death raigned from Adam to Moses Before sinne entred into the world death had no dominion but now it hath gotten a tyrannicall and generall dominion ouer men both of all sorts and conditions both young and old and in all ages as here it is said to raigne euen from Adam to Moses that age was not exempted from the dominion of death wherein sinne seemed least to abound but Christ hath ouercome death and destroyed the dominion thereof both in that he hath taken away the sting thereof which is sinne that death is not hurtfull vnto them that beleeue but bringeth their soules vnto euerlasting rest and in the generall resurrection our bodies which death had seazed on shall be restored vnto life as our Blessed Sauiour saith I am the resurrection and the life c. Ioh. 15.25 Doct. 4. Of the difference of sinnes v. 14. Euen ouer them that sinned not after the like manner c. Here the Apostle setteth downe this distinction of actuall and originall sinne some doe sinne in like manner as Adam did that is actually some not in like manner that is there is a secret and hid sinne in the corruption of nature which is not actuall but in time breaketh forth into act as the seede sheweth it selfe in the hearbe Doct. 5. There is no saluation
his life whereby he merited the imputation of his righteousnesse for the merite of Christs passion depended vpon the holines and worthines of his person which was manifested in his life 2. There are two partes of our iustification remission of our sinnes and the making of vnrighteous the one was the proper worke of Christs death that paied the ransome due vnto our sinnes the other of his perfect holines and righteousnesse which was manifested in his rising from the dead and therefore the Apostle ioyneth them both together Rom. 4.28 Who was deliuered to death for our sinnes and is risen againe for our iustification see further of this matter Controv. 20. in c. 4. Controv. 26. Against the Philosophers who placed righteousnesse in their owne workes The heathen Philosophers and wise men were vtterly ignorant of this making of men righteous by an others obedience for they held them onely to be righteous which by continuall exercise and practise of vertue attained vnto an habite of well doing which they ascribed onely to their owne industrie and endeuour Contra. These wise heathen in many things bewrayed their grosse and palpable ignorance 1. they knew not what remission of sinnes was neither how sinne entred into the world or how it was taken away they thought that by their well doing onely afterward the former memorie of their sinnes was worne out whereas it is in God onely to blot out the remembrance of sinne 2. they ascribed their vertues such as they were to their owne free-will and endeuour whereas Christian religion teacheth vs that God is the author of all good things and that man of himselfe is not able to thinke or conceiue a good thought 3. they erred in seeking to be made righteous and iust by their owne workes which beeing imperfect and diuerse waies blemished are not able to iustifie vs before God who is absolutely perfect true it is that euery Christian must endeuour to liue well and aduance his faith with fruitfull workes but it is Christs perfect obedience and not our owne which is imperfect that maketh vs truly righteous before God Controv. 27. Against the Manichees and Pelagians the one giuing too much the other too little to the law v. 30. The law entred that the offence should abound c. the Manichees vrge these and such like places against the law as though it were euill not distinguishing betweene the proper effects of the law which it worketh of it selfe as the Prophet Dauid expresseth them Psal. 19. It conuerteth the soule giueth wisedome to the simple giueth light to the eyes c. and the effects of the law which it worketh by reason of the weaknesse of man as it serueth to reueale the knowledge of sinne and to make it more abound But the Apostle himselfe that here thus testifieth of the law confesseth that in it selfe the law is holy Rom. 7.12 for although we are not able to performe that which the law commandeth yet the things are holy iust and good which the law requireth and the desire of the godly longeth after them As the Manichees detracted from the law so the Pelagians ascribed too much vnto it for they held that the law was sufficient to saluation and that if a man did once vnderstand what was to be done by the strength of nature he could doe it the law then serued to reueale vnto them the will of God and there owne strength sufficed in their opinion to performe it They beeing further vrged that the grace of God was necessarie did in words acknowledge it but by grace they vnderstood first the nature of man which was first giuen him of God then the doctrine onely and knowledge of the law The Popish schoolemen differed not much from this opinion who hled that a man by the strength of nature may keepe the precepts of the law quoad substantiam operis in respect of the substance of the worke but not quoad intentionem praecipientis according to the intention of the lawegiuer But it is euident out of the Scripture that no not the regenerate much lesse naturall men are able to keepe the commandements of God perfitly as S. Paul sheweth by his owne example Rom. 7. And if it were as the Pelagians held that the lawe were sufficient to saluation then Christ died in vaine Controv. 28. Of the assurance of saluation v. 21. Grace might raigne by righteousnesse vnto eternall life c. Hence it is euident that life is a consequent of righteousnesse as death is of sinne and that the faithfull are as sure to obtaine life if they haue righteousnesse as Adam and Adams children were sure to die after they haue sinned So Chrysostome vpon this place collecteth well Noli itaque cum iustitiam habeas de vita dubitare vitam enim excellit iustitia mater quippe illius est do not therefore doubt of life and saluation if thou haue iustice for iustice excelleth life beeing the mother thereof This is contrarie to the erroneous and vncomfortable doctrine of the moderne Papists that it is presumption for any man to be assured of his saluation see further hereof elswhere Synops. Centur. 4. err 25. Controv. 29 Of the diuerse kinds of grace against the Romanists v. 21. So might grace also raigne c. The Popish Schoolemen haue certaine distinctions of grace which either are not at all to be admitted or else they must be first qualified before they can be receiued 1. Of the first kind is that distinction of grace that there is gratia gratis data gratia gratum faciens grace freely giuen and grace that maketh vs acceptable vnto God two exceptions may be taken hereunto 1. there is no grace but is freely giuē otherwise it were not of grace that is of fauour but they in making one kind of grace onely that is freely giuen they insinuate that there are other graces which are not freely giuen 2. the grace which maketh vs acceptable to God they hold to be a grace or habite infused for the which we are accepted wherein they erre in ascribing that to a created or infused grace which is onely the worke of the free grace and fauour of God toward vs this word grace is either taken actively for the loue grace and fauour of God or passiuely for those seuerall gifts and graces which are wrought in vs by the fauour of God the first grace is as the cause the other graces are the effects the first is without vs the other within vs the first is the originall grace in God the other are created graces Now we hold that we are made acceptable vnto God onely by the first grace of God toward vs which is grounded in Christ the Romanists ascribe our acceptance with God to the other see further hereof Synops. Centur. 4. err 27. 2. Of the other sort is the distinction of grace operans cooperans working and working together as the working grace is that which alone changeth the will and maketh it willing
righteousnesse Controv. 14. Concerning inherent iustice v. 13. Neither giue your members as weapons of vnrighteousnesse c. Bellarmine inferreth out of this place that as sinne was a thing inherent and dwelling in vs before our conuersion so instead thereof must succeede righteousnes per iustitiam intelligit aliquid inherens by righteousnesse he vnderstandeth a thing inherent in vs from whence proceed good workes Contra. 1. We doe not denie but that there is in the regenerate a righteousnesse inherent and dwelling in them which is their state of sactification or regeneration but by this inherent iustice are we not iustified before God but by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed onely for here the Apostle treateth not of iustification but of our sanctification and mortification which are necessarie fruits of iustification and doe followe it but they are not causes of our iustification 2. Wherefore this is no good consequent There is in the righteous an inherent iustice Erg. by this iustice they are iustified before God See further hereof Synops. Centur. 4. err 56. Controv. 15. Against the power of freewill in the fruits of righteousnesse v 20. When ye were the seruants of sinne ye were freed from righteousnesse Beza doth vrge this place strongly against the popish freewill for in that they are said to be free from iustice that is as Anselme interpreteth alieni à iustitia estranged from iustice it sheweth that they haue no inclination at all vnto iustice it beareth no sway at all nullum erat eius imperium it had no command at all ouer you Pererius disput 5. numer 33. maketh an offer to confute this assertion of Beza but with bad successe for those verie authors whom he produceth make against him first he alleadgeth Anselme following Augustine liberum arbitrium saith Augustine vsque adeo iâ— peccatoribus non perijt vt per ipsum maximè peccent c. freewill is so farre from beeing lost in the wicked that thereby they doe sinne most of all c. But who denieth this the wicked haue freewill indeed free from compulsion it is voluntarie but inclined onely vnto euill which Anselme calleth libertatem culpabilem a culpable freedome and he therefore fitly distinguisheth betweene these two phrases of the Apostle he saith they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 free not freed from iustice least that sinne might be imputed vnto any other then to themselues but afterward v. 22. he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 liberati freed from sinne to shewe that this freedome is not of our selues but onely from God and so he concludeth haec voluntas quae libera est in malis c. ideo in bonis libera non est quia non liberatur ab eo qui eam solus c. this will which is free in euill because they delight in euill is not therefore free in good things because it is not freed by him who onely can make it free from sinne c. With like successe he citeth Thomas in his Commentarie here who thus writeth semper itaque homo sive in peccato fuerit sive in gratia liber est à coactione non tamen semper liber est ab omni inclinatione man therefore alwaies whether he be in sinne or in grace is free from coaction and compulsion but he is not alway free from an inclination c. where he affirmeth the same thing which we doe that the will of men is free alwaies from compulsion for it alwaies willeth freely without constraint that which it willeth but it is not free at any time from an euill inclination it is not free à necessitate from a necessitie of inclining vnto that which is euill of it owne naturall disposition Controv. 16. Whether all death be the wages or stipend of sinne v. 13. The stipend of sinne is death Socinus part 3. c. 8. pag. 294. graunteth that eternall death is the reward of sinne and the necessitie of mortalitie and dying but not â—â—â— corporall death it selfe for Adam before sinne entred was created in a mortall state and condition and Christ hath redeemed vs from all sinne and the punishment thereof therefore corporall death is no punishment of sinne because it remaineth still neither hath Christ redeemed vs from it Contra. 1. It is euident in that the Apostle speaketh of death here absolutely without any restraint or limitation that he meaneth death in generall of what kind soeuer and of the corporall death he speaketh directly c. 5.12 by one man sinne entred into the world and death by sinne which is specially vnderstood of the bondage of mortalitie which Adam by his transgression brought vpon his posteritie 2. It is friuolous distinction to make a difference betweene death and the necessitie of dying for what else is mortalitie then a necessitie of dying which if it be brought in by sinne then death also it selfe 3. Adam though he were created with a possibilitie of dying if he sinned yet this possibilitie should neuer haue come into act if he had not actually sinned 4. Christ hath indeed deliuered vs from all punishment of sinne both temporall and eternall as he hath deliuered vs from sinne for as our sinnes are remitted neuer to be laid vnto our iudgement and yet the reliques and remainder of sinne are not vtterly extinguished so the Lord hath effectually and actually deliuered vs from eternall death that it shall neuer come neare vs but from temporall death as it is a punishment onely for he hath made it an entrance to a better life and he hath taken away the power thereof that it shall not seaze vpon vs for euer because he shall raise vs vp at the last day and then perfectly triumph ouer death for euer 5. Origen here vnderstandeth neither eternall nor temporall death but that qua separatur anima per peccatum à Deo whereby the soule is separated from God by sinne But then the Apostle had made an iteration of the same thing for sinne it selfe is the spirituall death of the soule and therefore the death here spoken of is an other death beside that namely that which followeth as the stipend of sinne which is euerlasting death vnto the which is in the next clause opposed eternall death Controv. 17. Against the distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes v. 23. The stipend or wages of sinne is death Faius by this place doth well confute that Popish distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes they say that veniall sinnes are those which in their owne nature are not worthie of death but the Apostle here noteth in generall of all sinne whatsoeuer that the stipend and wages thereof is death because all sinne is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the transgression of the law 1. Ioh. 3.5 and death is the wages of them that transgresse the 〈◊〉 that glosse then of Haymo vpon this place may seeme somewhat straunge hoc non de omnibus peccatis intelligendum est sed de criminalibus c. this is not to be vnderstood of all sinnes
but onely of those which are criminall such as S. Iohn speaketh of c. 5. there is a sinne vnto death I say not that thou shouldest pray for it c. for the Apostle speaketh there of sinne against the holy Ghost which shall neuer be forgiuen for the which it is in vaine to pray If the Apostle there should meane all criminall sinnes then it would follow that we should not pray for the conuersion of heretikes adulterers murtherers and such like We confesse that there are some mortall sinnes some veniall but not in their nature to the faithfull and penitent all sinnes are veniall to the vnbeleeuers and impenitent sinnes are morttall it is the mercie of the forgiuer not the qualitie of the sinne that maketh it veniall yet this taketh not away the difference of sinnes as though they were equall for small sinnes are more easily pardoned and great sinnes where they are forgiuen are more hardly pardoned where they be not they are more or lesse punished according to the greatnes of the sinne see further of this point Synops. Centur. 4. er 6. Controv. 18. That euerlasting life cannot be merited by good workes Arg. 1. v. 23. But the gift of God is eternall life The Apostle in chaunging and inuerting the order of his speach whereas he had said the stipend of sinne is death faith not the stipend of righteousnes is eternall life but the gift of God c. euidently sheweth that euerlasting life is not due as a reward merited by our workes but as a gift of grace through Christ Iesus Thus Chrysostome expoundeth this place he saith not merces benefactorum vestrorum vna aeterna sed donum Dei life eternall is the reward of good workes but it is the gift of God Theodoret non dixit eam esse mercedem sed gratiam c. he saith not eternall life is a reward but grace or fauour Nam licet quis summam absolutam iustitiam praestiterit for although one could performe a perfect iustice yet temporall things are not correspondent to eternall Theophylact non quasi retributionem laborum dat eam Deus sed ex gratia per Christum qui hac omnia nobis promeruerit God giueth not eternal life as a recompence of our labour but by grace through Christ who hath merited all these things for vs. Answ. Our aduersaries-doe all here concur in this answer that euerlasting life is therfore called a grace quia bis meritis redditur quae gratia contulit because it is rendred for and vnto those workes which were wrought in vs by grace so Pererius eternall life though it be due vnto good workes yet it is giuen freely nam merita illa principaliter à Dei gratia profecta sunt for these merites to which it is due doe principally proceed from the grace of God c. Pere disput 7. numer 42. so also Tolet in his annotat and the Rhemistes vpon this place also Stapleton hath the same answer which they all would seeme to take from Augustine who saith the Apostle might haue said the stipend of our iustice is eternall life but he called it the grace of God that we should vnderstand ipsa bona opera quibus vita eterna redditur ad Dei gratiam pertinere that good workes themselues to the which eternall life is giuen doe belong vnto the grace of God August de grat liber 8.9 Contra. 1. Whereas Augustine saith recte potuisse dicere the Apostle might haue well said otherwise it is enough for vs that the Apostle did not in this place say otherwise and as Pet. Martyr saith by this meanes most euident places of Scripture might be auoided if we may say aliter potuisset dici it might otherwise thus or thus haue beene said 2. but for the thing it selfe Augustine is so farre from approouing the merite of workes to eternall life that he maketh the good workes themselues to belong vnto grace as he saith else where pro hac gratiam qua ex fide viuimus accepturi sumus aliam gratiam in qua sine fine in calis vinimus for this grace wherein we liue by faith we shall receiue an other grace and fauour wherein we shall liue without end in heauen in Psal. 14.4 3. for how can God be a debter to vs to bestow a second grace because he conferred an other grace before we are endebted to God for the former grace he is not a debter to vs to bestow a second grace as Bearnerd well saith merita omnia Dei dona sunt ita homo magis propter ipsa Deo debiter est quam Deus homini our merits are Gods gifts and so for them man is more debted to God then God to man de annunt Mar. serm 1. Argum. 2. Where the crowne is of mercie it is not of merite but the crowne of euerlasting life is in mercie Psal. 103.4 which crowneth thee with mercie and compassions Answ. Pererius hath here two answers 1. that either by mercie we may vnderstand Gods protection in this life whereby he compssaeth his children as with a crowne 2. or if we take it for the crowne of euerlasting life it is called a mercie because the merites for the which it is rendred promanant principaliter ex gratia per misericordiam data doe principally flow forth from grace giuen them in mercie Pere disput 9. Contra. 1. If Gods protection in this life be of mercie without our desert then much more euerlasting saluation is of mercie which is lesse merited 2. the other is a meere cauill for what graces soeuer any haue receiued in this life how perfect soeuer they be here they shall haue need of mercie in the day of iudgement as the Apostle saith 2. Tim. 1.18 the Lord graunt that he may finde mercie with the Lord at that day c. beside the mercies receiued in this life he wisheth he may also finde mercie then so Augustine collecteth vpon these words Iam. 2.13 there shall be iudgement mercilesse to him that sheweth no mercie that they which haue liued well shall haue iudgement cum misericordia with mercie they which haue liued euill shall haue iudgement without mercie where then there is need of mercie there is no standing vpon merite Argum. 3. That which is of grace cannot be also of works as the Apostle reasoneth Rom. 11.6 if it be of grace it is no more of workes or else grace were no more grace c. but eternall life is of grace Ergo not of workes Answer 1. The Apostle may either here speake of the naturall workes of men and so such workes do destroie grace not of the workes of grace which are indeed meritorious of eternall life 2. the Apostle speaketh of election which is of grace non propter hominum opera prvoisa not vpon the foresight of mans workes Thus Pererius disput 8. numer 48. Contra. 1. The Apostle excludeth euen the workes of grace for the question is of good workes not of
other Apostles which were iudged to be Apochryphall bookes and of no authoritie 1. because in the writings of those which succeeded the Apostles no mention is made of them 2. the stile is diuerse from the stile of the Apostles 3. and the doctrine contained in those bookes dissenting from the doctrine of the Apostles 3. Beside these two latter sorts of bookes all the rest are vndoubtedly held to be Canonicall and of equall authoritie and therefore that distinction of Sixtus Senensis is to be taken heede of who calleth some bookes of the New Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 canonicall of the first sort some 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 canonicall of the second sort which were sometime doubted of for by this meanes should they not be of equall and the like authoritie And beside he saith that these latter were held by some of the fathers to be Apochryphall bookes vnderstanding Apochryphal bookes for such as had an hid and vnknowne author But indeede the Apochrypha are so called not for that their author was vnknowne for then diuerse of the Canonicall bookes should be Apochrypha but because they were of an hid and obscure authoritie in which sense none of the fathers euer held any of the Canonical bookes of the New Testament to be Apochrypha 4. As the Heretikes brought in counterfeit bookes of their owne into the New Testament so they reiected diuerse parts of the Canonical bookes 1. Faustus the Manichie held diuerse things to be false in the New Testament Augustin lib. 33. cont Faust. c. 3. 2. The Ebionites receiued none but the Gospel according to Saint Matthew Iren. l. 1. c. 26. 3. the Marcionites onely allowed S. Lukes Gospel Epiphan haeres 42.4 the Acts of the Apostles and S. Pauls epistles the Tatiane and Seueriane heretikes reiected Euseb. l. 4. c. 29. 5. Marcion and Basilides the epistles to Timothie Titus and to the Hebrewes Hierom. praefat ad Titum 4. Places of doctrine in generall 1. Doct. Of the excellencie of the Newe Testament aboue and beyond the Old 1. It excelleth in the the matter and doctrine the law promiseth life onely to those that keep it the Gospel vnto those which beleeue in Christ Rom. 10.5 6. 2. In the subiect the lawe was written in tables of stone but the Gospel is written by the spirit of God in the fleshie tables of our hearts 2. Cor. 3.2 3. In the end the old Testament was the ministration of death and the killing letter the other is the ministration of the spirit which giueth life 2. Cor 3.6 7. 4. In the condition and qualitie the law imposed the hard yoke and seruitude of ceremonies which was impossible to be borne Act. 15.10 but Christs yoke is easie Math. 11. which of seruants adopteth vs to be the sonnes of God Rom. 8.15 5. In the minister Moses was the typical Mediator of the Olde Testament but Christ the Lord and builder of the house is the Mediator of the New Heb. 3.3 6. In the fruites and effects the Old Testament could not purge the conscience from sinne but the sprinkling of the blood of Christ purgeth the conscience from dead workes Heb. 9.13 14. 7. In the manner the old Testament was folded vp in types and figures as Moses vailed the glorie of his face but now we see the glorie of the Lord in the Gospell with open face 2. Cor. 3.18 8. In the ratification the old Testament was confirmed with the blood of beasts the New by the death of Christ quest 17.18 9. In the seales the old was attended vpon by bloodie sacrifices and other such like hard Sacraments as circumcision which was painefull to the flesh the New hath easie and vnbloodie sacraments as the seales neither so many in number namely Baptisme and the Eucharist 10. Another excellencie is in persons whom this New Testament concerneth which is not giuen onely to one people and nation as the old was but vnto the Catholike Church of God dispersed ouer the face of the earth as the Apostles are commanded to goe and teach all nations Matth. 28.19 In these respects the Apostle thus giueth preheminence to the New Testament before the old Heb. 8.6 he hath obtained a more excellent office in as much as he is the Mediator of a better Testament which is established vpon better promises Not that Christ was not Mediator also of the old Testament for without him neither can there be any Church nor couenant made with the Church but because Christ but shadowed forth in the old Testament is more fully reuealed and manifested in the New 5. Places of confutation 1. Controv. Against those which thinke it is against the nature of the New Testament to be committed to writing Of this opinion are certaine of a fantasticall spirit which to this purpose abuse that place of Ieremie 32.33 I will write my lawe in their hearts and that of S. Paul 2. Cor 3.3 You are our epistle written not with inke but with the spirit whence they would inferre that the Newe Testament is not to be written but that it consisteth in reuelation and the instinct of the Spirit Contra. 1. If the Newe Testament were not to be extant in writing then the Apostles had done a superfluous and vnnecessarie worke in writing the bookes of the Newe Testament whereunto they were directed by the spirit of God and S. Iohn is directly commanded to write Apocal. 14.13 and S. Paul saith that all Scripture is giuen by inspiration 2. Tim. 3.16 The spirit of God then mooued them to put in writing these holy bookes of the Newe Testament which are part of the Scripture 2. It followeth not because the Lord writeth the Gospel in our hearts by his spirit that therefore it is not to be written for by the writing thereof which is preached and read saith is wrought in the heart by the operation of the spirit as the Apostle saith Rom. 10.17 that faith commeth by hearing and hearing by the word And againe the Prophet there sheweth a difference betweene the lawe and the Gospell the law gaue Precepts but could not incline the heart to obedience but the Gospel doth not onely command faith but by the operation of the spirit worketh the same thing which it requireth 3. In the other place of the Apostle 1. they would make the Apostle contrarie to himselfe as though he should speak against the writing of Euangelical precepts whereas the Apostle did write that very epistle with inke 2. he speaketh not of the Gospel but of the Corinthians whom he calleth his Epistle 3. and by the latter in that place he vnderstandeth not the writing with inke or such like but the externall doctrine without the grace and life of the spirit such as the doctrine of the Law was 2. Controv. Against the Romanists which hold that the writing of the Gospel and other Scriptures is not simply necessarie to saluation First we will examine the arguments which are brought by them to confirme this their
Apostle setteth downe the sinnes of the Gentiles despitefull B. or contumelious L. doers of wrong G. proud boasters inuenters of euill things disobedient to parents without vnderstanding couenant breakers dissolute L.R. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not standing to composition without naturall affection such as can not be appeased without fidelitie L.R. truce breakers B.V. but that was said before mercilesse 31. Which knowing the iustice of God the righteousnes B. law G. right of God G.Be. iudgement of God the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iustice that they which doe such things are worthie of death Be. B.G.V. not did not vnderstand that they which doe such things are worthie of death L. for these words did not vnderstand are not in the originall nor that it condemneth to death those which doe such things T. for the word is in the plural are worthie of death but fauour G. or applaud Par. or haue pleasure in B. or patronize Be. not consent L. the word signifieth more then a bare consent those which doe them 2. The Argument and parts of the Chapter IN this Chapter the Apostle after the salutation and exordium of the Epistle falleth to prooue iustification by faith against the Gentiles first shewing their manifold sinnes and bad works whereby they were so farre from beeing iustified that thereby they incurred euerlasting damnation The parts are 1. the inscription to v. 8. 2. the exordium or introduction to the matter to v. 17. 3. the proposition and argument concerning iustification by faith v. 17.18.4 the confirmation or proofe tow 31. 1. The inscription or salutation sheweth 1. the person that saluteth and sendeth greeting which is Paul described by his office and calling in generall a seruant of Iesus Christ in speciall an Apostle to what ende to preach the Gospel v. 1. which is set forth 1. by the antiquitie v. 2.2 the excellencie of the subiect thereof Christ Iesus who is described by the singularitie of his person God and man v. 3.4 and by his office set forth in generall by the worke of our redemption which was finished by his sanctification and resurrection v. 4. and in speciall he was the author of the conuersion and calling of the Apostle v. 5.3 by the effect of the Gospel to winne obedience to the faith among the Gentiles 2. The persons saluted are the Romanes whom he setteth forth by their externall condition generall they were Gentiles speciall at Rome and spirituall what they were called by whom by Christ to what to be Saints v. 6.7 3. The salutation it selfe v. 7. he wisheth vnto them grace and peace 2. In the exordium or proeme 1. there is his gratulation or giuing of thanks for their faith v. 8.2 the testification of his loue toward them confirmed by an oath in which his loue is expressed by two effects 1. his earnest prayer to God to come vnto them v. 9.10 2. his longing desire in himselfe to see them v. 11. with the ende v. 12.3 a preoccupation of a question or purgation of himselfe that he yet came not vnto them where he sheweth 1. the lets of his purpose v. 13.2 his purpose which yet he continued to come vnto thē which is confirmed both by the end to haue some fruit among them v. 13.2 and by his calling in generall he was a debter to all the Gentiles who are set forth by distribution v. 14. in speciall and so consequently he was readie to preach the Gospel vnto them And by this mention made of the Gospel he taketh occasion to passe vnto the matter 3. The third part is the proposition that iustification is by faith where we haue first the occasion whereupon he bringeth it in I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ then the proposition it selfe that the Gospell is the power of God to saluation to euerie one that beleeueth v. 16. and the proofe thereof taken from the Prophet Habacuke v. 17. 4. The fourth part is the confirmation of this proposition that men are iustified by faith which he sheweth by this disiunction they are either iustified by faith or by workes but not by workes which he prooueth by this distribution first that the Gentiles cannot be iustified by workes in this chapter to the 17. v. of the next then that neither the Iewes can chalenge any thing by their workes thence to the ende of the 2. chapter the Gentiles cannot be iustified by their workes because by their workes beeing full of impietie and iniquitie they are made guiltie of eternall death and of the wrath of God the argument standeth thus they which are full of impietie and iniquitie are subiect to the wrath of God this proposition is expressed v. 18. But the Gentiles are such full of impietie and iniquitie Ergo the assumption or second part is prooued distributiuely first their impietie is shewed toward God to v. 28. then their iniquitie toward men v. 32. In the proofe of their impietie first the sinne is shewed then the punishment their sinne in that wittingly and against their knowledge they depraued the worship of God their knowledge is set forth both by the light of nature in them v. 19. and by the creatures v. 20. their deprauation of Gods worship is expressed in the causes their vnthankefulnesse which brought forth vanitie of minde and foolishnesse v. 21.22 the effect in worshipping corruptible things in stead of God v. 23. then the punishment followeth they were giuen vp to their hearts lusts v. 24. 2. As they depraued Gods worship wittingly against their knowledge so they did it willingly their sinne is shewed in their voluntarie forsaking of the Creator v. 25. their punishment in beeing giuen ouer both women and men to vile affections v. 26.27 Then followeth the demonstration of their iniquitie which consisted 1. both in doing things not comely which is declared both by shewing the cause thereof then beeing giuen ouer to a reprobate mind procured by their contempt and wilfull neglect of the knowledge of God v. 28. and by a particular enumeration of the diuerse sinnes which they committed the seuerall distribution whereof see afterwards qu. 72. 2. they did not onely commit such things themselues but they also fauoured and patronized such as did them v. 32. so then the conclusion must followe that the Gentiles made themselues by those their euill workes worthie of death and so consequently thereby depriued themselues of life and saluation 3. The questions and doubts discussed Quest. 1. Why Paul setteth his name before this epistle 1. Chrysostome giueth this reason why neither Moses prefixeth his name before his bookes not yet the Euangelists Mathew Marke Luke Iohn before their gospels ille quippe praesentibus scribentes c. for they writing vnto these which were present had no cause to set to their names But Paul quia longe remotis scribebat c. because he did write to those which were a farre off had reason to set to his name after the manner of epistles
the iust shall liue by faith haue no other meaning but this iustum secundum fidei norman vitam dirigere that the iust doth direct his life according to the rule of faith Contra. 1. He doth not place the words aright for thus are the words to be ioyned together the iust by faith shall liue so that by faith hath rather connexion with the first word the iust then with the last shall liue 2. the Apostle by life here vnderstandeth euerlasting saluation not our conuersion here as is said before v. 16. that the Gospell is the power of God to saluation to euerie one that beleeueth faith then bringeth to euerlasting saluation 2. The Rhemists haue this shift that faith together with workes must be here vnderstood to iustifie the Apostle saith not the iust shall liue by faith onely to this purpose also Bellarmine lib. 1. de iustificat c. 20. Contra. 1. If the whole life of the soule depended not vpon faith but partly vpon faith partly vpon workes then it might as well be said the iust shall liue by workes which were an absurd speach and not farre from blasphemie 2. the Apostle c. 3.28 excludeth works concluding that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the lawe then to liue by faith is to liue onely by faith as we are iustified onely by faith without workes 3. Nowe although the iust liue by faith and not by workes yet faith liueth by workes it must be a liuely and effectuall faith working by loue by the which the iust man liueth and not a dead faith 3. Pererius here slyeth to their old distinction of iustification the first which is by faith the second is perfited by workes so faith is said to iustifie a man because it is exordium fundamentum radix iustificationis the beginning foundation and roote of iustification Perer. dâ—sput 8. in 1. ad Roman sect 46. Contra. 1. That which he calleth the second iustification is properly satisfaction which is the fruit of iustification as the Apostle saith Rom. 6.22 beeing now freed from sinne and made seruants vnto God you haue your fruit in holines and the end euerlasting life where the whole state of the faithfull man is diuided into these three parts his iustification and freedome from sinne which is by faith the fruit of his iustification which is holynesse and the ende or reward which is euerlasting life 2. to liue by faith sheweth that not the beginning but the perfection of our life is by faith and by nothing but faith as the Apostle saith the iustice of God is reuealed from faith to faith faith is the beginning and end of this iustice there is no time wherein saluation is giuen vnto any but by faith as Thomas expoundeth see before quest 42. 4. Bellarmine hath an other deuise he maketh this the meaning the iust shall liue by faith that is ex fide patienter expectare quae Deus promisit by faith he doth patiently expect those things which God hath promised So he would haue it vnderstood rather of patient wayting and expecting then of iustifying lib. 2. de effect sacram c. 9. Contra. This patient expecting of Gods promises is indeede a fruit of iustifying faith for it is the ground of things hoped for and he that is iustified by faith hath this grace also of patient expectation but to liue by faith comprehendeth more 2. and that by this phrase to liue by faith the Apostle vnderstandeth to be iustified by faith is euident Gal. 2.20 Thus I liue not I now but Christ liueth in me and in that I now liue in the flesh I liue by the faith if the Sonne of God c. 3. And whereas Bellarmine further obiecteth that the Prophets meaning from whom the Apostle taketh this saying is none other but to note their patience that waited for the Lords promises it hath beene shewed before qu. 44. that the Apostle keepeth the Prophets sense and doth most fitly apply this sentence to iustification by faith 5. But the Romanists against iustification by faith onely thus obiect 1. It seemeth a verie absurd thing to make men beleeue that they shall be iustified by faith onely without either satisfaction for their sinnes or the workes of righteousnesse by this meanes nothing could be easier then by faith to be saued 2. And this doctrine will make men presumptuous that they will care for no good workes and so there should be no more vse either of precepts to exhort them vnto the workes of pietie nor of threatnings to terrifie them from sinne Contra. 1. Though that faith neede no satisfaction for sinne in our selues nor good workes as helping vnto iustification yet it apprehendeth the satisfaction made by Christs suffering for our sinnes and workes are also necessarie as testimonies of our faith though not as helpes of our iustification neither is such a faith liuely and effectuall so easie a thing seeing man hath no power of himselfe to attaine vnto it vnlesse God doe giue it and to beleeue in Christ as a Christian ought is found to be the hardest thing in the whole world 2. Neither is this a doctrine of presumption nor yet doth it make voide precepts and comminations for faith though it require not workes as causes and helpes to saluation yet it cannot be without them as fruits and effects so that the lawe of faith establisheth the lawe of workes as the Apostle sheweth c. 3.31 doe we then make the lawe of none effect through faith God forbid yea we establish the lawe Pareus Controv. 17. How the Gospel is the power of God to saluation to everie one that beleeueth v. 16. This and such like places which ascribe iustification and saluation to faith as Ioh. 3.16 that whosoeuer beleeueth in him should not perish Act. 13.39 by him euerie one that beleeueth is iustified Bellarmine would thus elude 1. he saith that these Scriptures must be vnderstood negatiuely that without faith none are iustified not that onely by faith they are iustified 2. then by all are vnderstood all nations that there is no difference between Iew and Gentile but that one common way to saluation is propounded to them all 3. And it beeing applyed to euerie particular man the meaning is that not faith of it selfe alone but with other things as hope charitie iustifieth Bellar. lib. 1. de iustifie c. 22. Contra. 1. Yes these sayings hold affirmatiuely that faith is sufficient vnto saluation for our Sauiour saith Iohn 5. he that beleeueth c. hath euerlasting life and is passed from death to life that which giueth a man a present assurance and reall possession of euerlasting life is alone availeable to saluation 2. True it is that none of what nation soeuer are excluded but euerie one that beleeueth wheresoeuer is iustified this confirmeth the doctrine of iustification by faith that there is no other way to saluation either for Iewe or Gentile 3. And if the Gospell be the power of God to saluation
shal rise incorruptible but not all vnto glorie 4. Vnto these the Apostle addeth a fourth v. 10. namely peace which is the verie complement and perfection of our happines this peace is honorum omnium secura tranâ—quiâ— possessio a secure and peaceable possession of all good things and as Prosper saith as Beda here citeth him pax Christi sinem non habet the peace of Christ hath no ende the Saints shall be at peace with God they shall enioy the tranquilitie and peace of conscience to theÌ„selues and peace they shall haue without from all enemies whatsoeuer which shall be subdued vnto them 5. But it will be obiected that glorie and honour are peculiar and essentiall vnto God which he will not giue to any other Isay. 42.8 And thine is the glorie Matth. 6.13 Answer That essentiall and infinite honour and glorie which is in God is not communicated vnto any other but yet there are certaine influences and bright beames of that glorie which in Christ are imparted to his members as S. Peter saith that by these precious promises which are made vnto vs in Christ we are made partakers of the diuine nature 2. Pet. 1.4 Quest. 16. How it standeth with Gods iustice to punish eternally sinne temporally committed Obiect As God giueth eternall life vnto his faithfull seruants so he punisheth the wicked and impenitent with euerlasting damnation but sinne is a temporall transgression and for one to be punished eternally for a momentanie delight may seeme to exceede the rule of iustice Answ. Three wayes doth it appeare to be most iust that God should punish eternally sinne but temporally committed both in respect of the minde and intention of the sinner of the matter wherein he sinneth and of the person against whom he is an offender 1. First though the act of sinne be but temporall yet the mind of the sinner is infinite if he could euer liue he would euer sinne and therefore as Gregorie saith quia mens in hac vita nunquam voluit carere peccato iustum est vt nunquam careat supplicio c. because the mind in this life would neuer be without sinne it is iust that it should neuer be without punishment 2. If the matter and subiect of sinne be considered it is of and in the soule like as then the wounding of the bodie bringeth the death of the bodie after the which there is no returning into this life againe so sinne beeing the death of the soule it followeth that it should be perpetuall and for euer Hugo like as then Magistrates doe punish some offences as murther theft with death which doth vtterly exclude them from the societie of the liuing and cut them off for euer so is it iust with God to punish the sinnes committed against him with euerlasting paine Perer. 3. Sinne because it is a transgression of the lawe of God is so much the more hainous as he that smiteth the Prince doth more grieuously offend then he which striketh a priuate person so that sinne is of an infinite nature because of the infinite dignitie of the diuine maiestie against whom it is committed and therefore it deserueth an infinite punishment which because it cannot be infinite secundum intensionem in the intention and greatnesse of it it remaineth that it should be infinite secundum à urationem in respect of the continuance and enduring thereof Perer. 4. Further the equitie of Gods iudgement in punishing the temporall act of sinne eternally Hugo doth thus very well illustrate by these comparisons Like as when mariage is contracted per verba de praesenti by words vttered in the present tense though the contract be sone done yet the mariage remaineth all the life long so when the soule and sinne are contracted together it is no maruell if this contract holding during the life of the soule deserue euerlasting punishment And like as where the fuell and matter of the fire continueth the flame burneth still so sinne leauing a blot in the soule beeing the matter of hell fire is eternally punished because there is still matter for that euerlasting fire to worke vpon Thus then it is euident how the Lord euen in punishing sinne eternally doth reward men according to their workes for though the action of sinne be temporall voluntas tamen peâ—candi qua per poenitentiam non mutatur est perpetua yet the will to sinne which is not changed by repentance is perpetuall Gorrhan 17. Quest. How eternall life is to be sought v. 7. To them which in well doing seeke glorie honour c. In seeking of God who is eternall life three things must be considered locus tempus modus the place the time the manner 1. The place must be mundus quietus securus cleane quiet secure then first God is not to be sought vpon the bed of idlenes or carnall delight and therefore it is said Cantic 3. 1. In my bed I sought him but found him not that is no cleane place to seeke God in But yet the bed vndefiled is honourable Heb. 13.4 and the faithfull doe seeke God euen in their beds as Dauid saith Psal. 6.6 That he watered his couch with his teares Neither is God to be sought in the courts and streetes and tumultuous assemblies as Cantic 3.2 I sought him in the streetes but found him not and Hos. 5.6 They shall goe with their bullocks and sâ—eepe to seeke the Lord but shall not finde him such are no quiet places but God must be praied vnto in secret and sought in the quiet hauen of the conscience Neither is God to be sought in pompa where there is ostentation of pompe and vanitie as Christs parents found him not among their kinted but in the Temple disputing with the Doctors God is to be sought not in pompous shewes but in the assemblies of the Saints 2. Concerning the time God must be sought dum dies est dum prope est dum nobis predest while it is day while he is neare and at hand and when it may auaile vs. 1. First God is not to be sought in the night Cantic 3.1 I sought him in my bed by night c. but found him not so the Apostle saith The night is past the day is come let vs cast away the works of darknes God then is to be sought not in the time of ignorance and darknes but in the time of light and knowledge 2. The Lord must be sought when he may be found and is at hand Isa. 55.6 Seeke ye the Lord while he may be found call vpon him while he is neare while the Lord offereth grace vnto vs and standeth knocking at the doore of our hearts we must open vnto him 3. And in this life must we seeke God while mercie is shewed while the bridegroome crieth in the streetes Matth. 25.6 but when the doores are shut and this life is ended it is then too late to seeke for mercie 3. Touching the manner God must be sought in the heart in
prepared for you for when I was hungred ye gaue me meate he sheweth not the cause of their saluation but the condition state qualitie of those which should be saued to this purpose Faius see further before c. 1. quest 26. and controv 7. Quest. 25. How by the lawe came the knowledge of sinne 1. The Apostle here confirmeth that which he said before that none are iustified by the workes of the lawe by the contrarie vse of the lawe because thereby commeth the knowledge of sinne therefore iustice and righteousnesse is not attained thereby 2. The lawe Origen vnderstandeth of the lawe of nature Augustine onely of the morall lawe lib. de spirit liter c. 8. but indeed the lawe is vnderstood here in generall both the naturall for euen before the lawe written by the lawe of nature Abimelech knew that adulterie was sinne Genes 20. but the morall more by the which came a more full knowledge of sinne likewise by the ceremoniall and iudiciall lawe sinne was manifested but after a diuerse manner ex accidente accidentally because the one was appointed in expiationem for the expiation the other in poenam for the punishment of sinne Tolet. annot 14. 3. Now diuerse wayes doth the written lawe whereof the Apostle specially speaketh reueale sinne 1. Ambrose sheweth that before the law written there was some knowledge of sinne as he giueth instance in Ioseph who detested the sinne of adulterie to the which his mistresse enticed him but it is so said quia lex ostendit peccata non impune futura because the lawe sheweth that sinnes shall not goe vnpunished so also Theodulus 2. and by the written lawe peccata clarius fuerunt cognita sinnes were more euidently knowne and some were knowne to be sinnes that were not so taken before leviora quaque non cognoscebantur esse peccata the smaller sinnes were not knowne as concupiscence Hierome as the Apostle saith he had not knowne lust vnlesse the law had said thou shalt not lust quaedam etiam grauiora c. and some things by the lawe were knowne to be greater then before gloss ordinar 3. Oecumenius thus expoundeth because sinne was encreased by the knowledge of the lawe for he that sinneth wittingly is so much the more a grieuous offender 4. And before the lawe written sinne was knowne as beeing against reason but by the law it is discerned as beeing against the will of God and so the nature and qualitie of sinne is more fully and perfectly knowne by the lawe Perer. 5. and euen the knowledge of sinne before the lawe written did issue out of the grounds and principles of the morall lawe which were imprinted by nature in the minde Faius 4. But whereas the lawe sheweth as well what things are honest and vertuous as it discouereth sinne the Apostle onely toucheth that vse of the lawe which is to reueale sinne both because it was more pertinent to his purpose which was to shewe that there is no iustification by the lawe because thereby we haue the knowledge of sinne and for that men are more prone vnto the things forbidden in the lawe then to the duties commanded so that the lawe doth not so much teach our dutie to God and our neighbour as that we doe not performe that which is our dutie Beza 5. Now further whereas the Apostle saith by the lawe commeth the knowledge of sinne we must supply the word onely not that the lawe doth nothing else but reueale sinne for it iudgeth and condemneth sinne likewise but here the opposition is between the knowledge of sinne and the remission thereof the lawe onely giueth the one the agnition or knowledge of sinne not the remission Perer. by the lawe is cognitio peccati non consumptio the knowledge of sinne not the consumption of sinne gloss 6. But it will be obiected that in Leuiticus there are oblations prescribed for sinne and the Priest was to pray for such as had sinned and it should be forgiuen them Gorrhan answeareth that it was onely a legall remission quoad poenam non quoad culpam onely concerning the punishment of the lawe not of the fault But Lyranus answeareth better that such sacrifice for sinne was protestatio Christi passuri a protestation or profession of Christ which was to suffer so that such remission of sinnes though it were vnder the lawe yet was not by vertue and force of the lawe but by faith in Christ for the sinnes of the offerers were forgiuen at the prayers of the Priests which could not be heard if they were not of faith 7. It will here be further obiected that the politike and ciuill lawes of Princes intend more then the shewing of sinne they also doe helpe to reforme sinne and reclaime men from it therefore Gods lawe should doe more then manifest sinne Answ. 1. Humane lawes doe onely require an externall ciuill iustice but the lawe of God discouereth the corruption of the heart so that herein there is great difference betweene them Melancth 2. Humane lawes may by proposing of rewards and punishments helpe to perswade and induce men but they cannot instill or infuse obedience into the heart 3. God also intendeth more then the reuealing of sinne by his lawe for if any could keepe it they should liue thereby which while none is able to doe yet the law beside the discouering of sinne ferueth as a Schoolmaster to bring vs to Christ so that it is thorough mans owne infirmitie that the lawe giueth not life and it sheweth Gods power and wisedome that turneth the lawe vnto our good namely to bring vs vnto Christ which by our infirmitie is become vnto vs the minister of death 8. So then there are two other speciall vses and benefits of the lawe beside the reuealing of sinne the one that concerning faith it is a Schoolmaster to bring vs to Christ and touching manners and life it sheweth vs the way wherein we should walke Mars 9. There is a double knowledge of sinne by the lawe there is one which is weake and vnprofitable which neither thoroughly terrifieth the conscience nor reformeth the life such was the knowledge which the heathen had of sinne as the poets in their satyricall verses did set forth the sinnes of their times but themselues followed them there is an other effectuall knowledge of the lawe whereby the soule is humbled and this is of two sorts when such as is ioyned onely with terror of conscience without any hope such was the knowledge of sinne which Cain and Iudas had that betrayed Christ or it hath beside some liuely hope and comfort such was Dauids agnition and confession of his sinne But this comfort is no worke of the lawe it is wrought in vs by the spirit of grace Martyr Quest. 26. Of the meaning of these words The righteousnesse of God is made manifests without the lawe 1. Ambrose by the iustice of God vnderstandeth that iustice wherewith God is iust â—estans promissa sua in keeping his promises Origen
men by their sinne are strangers and as banished men from God and his kingdom which is not recouerable by mans workes neither is there any way to come vnto God and euerlasting saluation but onely by faith in Christ So that all religions whatsoeuer are condemned beside the Christian faith as not beeing able to bring vs vnto God Pareus Quest. 30. Of iustification freely by grace v. 24. 1. Here the Apostle expresseth all the causes of our iustification 1. the efficient which is the grace of God that is not the doctrine of the Gospel freely reuealed as the Pelagians vnsterstand it nor the graces of the spirit infused as the Romanists but by the grace of God we vnderstand the free mercie and goodnesse of God toward mankind 2. the formall cause and manner is in that we are freely iustified without any merit of our owne the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 freely is sometime taken in an other sense as Galat. 2.22 if righteousnesse were by the law then Christ died 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without cause but here it signifieth firely 3. the meritorious and working cause is Christ Iesus who hath redeemed vs and the instrumentall cause is faith 4. the ende in respect of vs is our saluation and iustification in respect of God the manifestation of his righteousnes to his glorie 2. Thorough the redemption 1. This word is taken improperly for any deliuerance out of daunger as God is said to haue redeemed his people out of the thraldome and captiuitie of Egypt but properly it signifieth such deliuerance as when any thing beeing in an others occupying is freed and exempted by paying the price and such redemption is either corporall as when men are deliuered from externall and corporall bondage or spirituall such is our redemption by Christ whose death the price of our redemption was in respect of the deede corporall beeing historically done but in regard of the effect and fruit it was spirituall in redeeming vs from the spirituall bondage of sinne the deuill and hell 2. This redemption is taken two waies either properly for the very worke of our redemption purchased by the death of Christ or for the effect thereof the consummation of that worke of our redemption in euerlasting life as it is taken Rom. 8.22 Pareus 3. But it will be obiected that we are not freely iustified seeing that Christ hath paied the ransome for vs how then is that said to be freely done where a price is paied Answ. It is free ex parte hominū on mans behalfe because no price for their redemption is exacted of them but ex parte Christi on Christs part it was not free because he paied a most sufficient and exact price for our redemption So the Prophet saith Come buie without money Isa 55.1 they are saide to buie saluation because it is bought for them by Christ and yet without money because Christ paied the debt for them Tolet. So in the worke of our redemption are seene both the iustice and free mercie of God the first in that Gods wrath was so testified by the death of Christ the other toward vs in that God hath giuen his sinne freely to die for vs. 31. Quest. How God is said to haue proposed or set forth Christ to be our reconciliation 1. Whome God hath set forth or proposed Ambrose readeth disposed and some vnderstand it of the publike exhibiting and proposing of Christ in the preaching of the Gospel Tolet. but this word rather sheweth the euerlasting purpose and decree of God from the beginning of the world to giue his sonne for our redemption so is the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taken Rom. 8.28 euen to them that are called of his purpose Faius And hence may two obiections be answered 1. how it might stand with the iustice of God that his most innocent Sonne should die for others Answ. This was Gods purpose from the beginning of the world it was the decree of the whole Trinitie that the Sonne of God should be the Redeemer of the world yea and Christ also offered himselfe 1. Tim. 2.8 Faius 2. Some obiect how the death of Christ and whence it should haue vertue to reconcile vs vnto God what proportion is there betweene the infinite sea of mens sinnes and the short death of Christ that was not extended beyond three daies Answ. The vertue of Christs death dependeth of the purpose of God he so appointed decreed and purposed that by this meanes the world should be redeemed the Lord in his infinite power could haue appointed other meanes but he thought none fitter for the recouering of our decaied estate Pareus 2. Christ is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the reconciliation which some thinke may be taken in the masculine gender that he is our reconciliator Tolet. annot 21. where there is a manifest allusion vnto the propitiation of the Arke which was called cappareth the propitiatorie Christ was then signified by that golden propitiatorie which couered the Arke from whence the Lord deliuered his oracles Origen is here somewhat curious in his typicall applications by the gold vnderstanding the puritie of Christ by the length breadth his diuinitie and humanitie but I omit them as too curious obseruations Beza thinketh that the Apostle in saying whome God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath proposed alludeth vnto the propitiatorie which was then kept within the vaile but now is publikely proposed and exhibited that vaile beeing remooued but the Apostle in this word proposed hath reference rather to the purpose and counsell of God as is before shewed 3. Through faith in his blood 1. by blood is vnderstood by a synecdoche the whole sacrifice of Christ which was the consummation of his obedience And he saith in his blood that is by his blood as the instrument of our redemption for there are two instruments of our redemption one on Christs part his death and shedding of his blood the other on ours which is our faith Mart. these words in his blood some doe referre vnto the word reconciliation Theodoret Anselme Tolet some vnto the next words before through faith as the Syrian interpreter But it may very well be ioyned with both that our reconciliation was purchased by Christs blood and Christs blood can not profit vs vnlesse we beleeue it to haue beene shedde for vs. Pareus 32. Quest. How we are said to be iustified freely seeing faith is required which is an act in the beleeuer 1. This obiection may further be vrged thus that is freely bestowed which is conferred without any helpe or worke in the receiuer seeing then a man must bring faith which is a worke of the will how is he said to be iustified freely Ans. 1. Tolet first hath this answer that we are said to be iustified freely through faith because faith is the free gift of God and it is giuen vs freely to merit our saluation by faith But he himselfe misliketh this answer for to be iustified freely and by the merit
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.
to followe and he is made in that respect the father of the faithfull but the faithfull and beleeuers now are onely the children of faithfull Abraham 2. Now Abrahams faith and ours herein agree 1. in the generall obiect which is God that quickeneth and raiseth the dead 2. in the manner condition and qualitie for Abrahams faith was firme and certaine he was fully perswaded and such must our faith be 3. the end and scope of his faith and ours is the Messiah the promised seede 4. the effect is the same the imputation of righteousnesse Pareus Quest. 41. How Christ is said to haue beene deliuered vp for our sinnes v. 25. Christ was diuerse wayes and by diuerse deliuered vp 1. he was deliuered vp by the determinate counsell of God Rom. 8.31 he spared not his owne sonne but gaue him vp 〈◊〉 vs all vnto death 2. He was deliuered vp by himselfe Galath 2.20 Who hath loued me and giuen himselfe for me Ephes. 5.25 as Christ loued his Church and gaue himselfe for it 3. By Iudas Matth. 26.21 One of you shall betray me 4. He was deliuered vp by the Iewes as Pilate saith vnto Iesus Ioh. 18.35 thine owne nation and the high Priests haue deliuered thee vnto me 5. He was also deliuered vp by Pilate to be crucified Ioh. 19.16 6. And lastly he was deliuered vp by Sathan Ioh. 13.2 the deuill had put it into the heart of Iudas to betray him Gorrhan Tolet. So then Christ was deliuered vp à patre permittente of his father permitting à scipso sâ— lutem hominis procurante of himselfe procuring mans saluation à Iudae prodente of Iudaâ— betraying him à Iudao invidente of the Iewes enuying him à Pilato iudicante of Pilatâ— iudging him à diabolo suggerente of the deuill suggesting Gorrh. But the Apostle here speaketh of the first kind of deliuering vp by God his father â—â— that the ineffable counsell of Gods wisedome and mercie toward vs may appeare 2. that it might be knowne that Christ died not by chance or of any weakenesse or imbecilitie â—â— by the counsell of God wherein appeareth Christs great loue in willingly offring himselâ—â— for vs Pareus 3. that the same author may be knowen both of Christs deliuering to death and of his raising againe God raised him vp v. 24. Tolet. 42. Quest. Why the Apostle thus distinguisheth the benefits of our redemption ascribing remission of sinnes to Christs death and iustification to his resurrection v. 25. v. 25. Who was deliuered vp for our sinnes and is risen againe for our iustification here the Apostle seemeth to ascribe our iustification vnto the resurrection of Christ where he must not be so vnderstood as though Christs death onely merited for vs remission of sinnes and not iustification also for elswhere this our Apostle doth place our iustification in our redemption by the death of Christ Rom. 3.24 We are iustified freely by his grace thorough the redemption that is in Christ Iesus and S. Peter likewise faith 1. epist. 2.24 Who his owne selfe bare our sinnes in his bodie on the tree that we beeing deliuered from sinne might liue vnto righteousnes c. Diuers interpretations then are giuen of these words to remooue this doubt 1. Some doe giue this reason of this distinction that Christ is said to be risen for our iustification that is to be an example of newnesse of life as Augustine applieth this sentence super Psalm 101. ser. 2. pasch serm 2. Christus crucifixus est vt ostenderet veteris homiris occasum c. resurrexit vt in vita sua ostenderet vitae nostrae novitatem Christ was crucified to shew in vs the dying of the old man and he rose againe to shew in his liuing againe our newnes of life c. to the same purpose Origen and Anselme vpon this place and likewise Thomas 3. part quest 56. artic 2 that quantum ad efficientiam in respect of the efficacie both the passion and resurrection of Christ are the causes of both sed quantum ad exemplaritatem c. but in respect of the exemplarie vertue and force the passion of Christ is the cause of remission of sinnes and his resurrection the cause of newnes of life this interpretation is approoued by gloss ordinar Gorrhan Bellarm. lib. 2. de effect sacram c. 9. resp ad argum 5. Pererius disput 10. numer 49. and by Stapl. Antidot pag. 259. But Tolet annot 25. misliketh this sense vpon this reason because as the one clause of this sentence is to be taken so is the other but the Apostle saying who was deliuered to death for our sinnes insinuateth a satisfaction made by his death for our sinnes not an example shewed of mortification therefore in the other part he must be vnderstood likewise to speake of the cause of our iustification not of an example onely And further there is difference betweene iustification and newnesse of life the Apostle saith c. 6.4 As Christ was raised from the dead c. so we should walke in newnesse of life here the Apostle speaketh of the exemplarie imitation of Christs resurrection in newnes of life which is our sanctification and regeneration but iustification is a diuers thing from sanctification which is as the frait and the other the cause thereof 2. Caietane thus expoundeth we are said to be iustified by Christs resurrection because we are iustified by faith which is confirmed by Christs resurrection and so products sumus ad iustificationem per fidem resurrectionis we are brought vnto iustification by the faith of the resurrection And they adde further that our faith is specially directed vnto Christs resurrection for the Iewes and heathen did confesse that Christ died but not that he rose againe to this purpose Vatablus Christ rose for our iustification that we should beleeue him to be the Sonne of God and so by that faith be iustified to the same purpose Faius But Peter Martyr resureth this opinion because our faith must as well aime at the death of Christ as at his resurrection and although the Iewes knew that Christ died yet they did not acknowledge that he died for our sinnes Tolet addeth this reason further that like as the death of Christ was not an argument onely and confirmation of our faith but the very cause of the remission of our sinnes so his resurrection must be held to be not an argument and proofe of our faith but the very cause of our iustification 3. Tolet here bringeth in an other exposition which he doth father vpon Theodoret Christ rose for our iustification vt communem omnibus resurrectionem procuraret to procure the common resurrection of vs all for vnlesse Christ had risen againe we should not haue risen againe But 1. no where in Scripture is our resurrection called by the name of iustification 2. and our resurrection was as well merited by Christs death as by his resurrection 3. if Christ indeede had not risen at all neither should we haue
risen but his bodie might haue beene kept incorruptible in his graue vnto the ende of the world and then he might haue risen and we with him but then should we haue beene iustified he rose therefore for our iustification not for our resurrection 4. Some will haue these two benefits of remission and iustification to be indifferently referred as well to the death as to the resurrection of Christ as Theophylact mortuus est exe tatus à morte c. he died and was raised from death to free and exempt vs from our euill works and to make vs iust to the same purpose Haymo vt credentes eum passum c. that beleeuing him to haue suffered for our saluation and to haue risen from the dead per hanc fidem mereamur iustificari we may be counted worthie to be iustified by this faith So Emmanuel Sa. vtrunque factum propter vtrunque both of these were wrought by both these But if both these benefits were in like sort and manner wrought by both those actions of Christ there should appeare no reason of this distinction which the Apostle vseth 5. An other exposition is Christ rose for our iustification that is ad eam demonstradam for the manifestation and demonstration of it Piscator he had purchased indeede both our redemption from our sinnes and our iustification by his death and passion but resurrectione gloriosa testatus est he witnessed by his resurrection that he had ouercome hell and death for vs Osiand But the Apostle sheweth the very reall cause of our iustification not the testification onely thereof by Christs resurrection as his deliuering to death was the very cause of the remission of our sinnes 6. Some giue this sense he is said to haue risen for our iustification quia salutis predicatio redemptionis applicatio generalis c. because the preaching of saluation and the generall application of redemption was to followe after the resurrection Tolet. annot 25. to the same purpose Pet. Martyr our redemption was purchased by the death of Christ but that the same might be applyed vnto vs spiritu sancto opus fuit it was needefull the spirit of God should be sent These by iustification vnderstand the application publication and preaching of iustification But this seemeth not be so fit neither for as in the one part of the sentence the Apostle toucheth the true working and efficient cause of the remission of sinnes Christs deliuering vnto death and not the application or publication so must the other part of our iustification be vnderstood And Christ might if it had pleased him haue giuen his Apostle a commission to preach his death and passion before his resurrection yet had we not beene fully iustified vntill he had risen againe 7. But among the rest that exposition which goeth vnder the name of Ambrose in the commentarie vpon this place seemeth to be most vnreasonable that the Apostle thus deuideth these benefits to shewe that as many as were baptized before the passion of Christ solam remissionem peccatorum accepisse receiued onely remission of sinnes but after Christs resurrection as well they which were baptized before as after esse omnes vere iustification were all truely iustified This one place doth giue iust occasion of suspition that those commentaries were not composed by Ambrose for remission of sinnes cannot be separated from iustification whosouer hath the one hath likewise the other because they are pronounced blessed whose sinnes are remitted before ver 7. but there can be no blessednesse without iustification 8. Hugo is somewhat curious to shewe the reason why remission of sinnes is ascribed vnto Christs passion and iustification vnto his resurrection first he saith that Christs passion is both causa meritum figura the cause merit and figure or forme of remission but it is the cause and merit onely of iustification and newenesse of life not the forme it is the cause moouing that we should liue in sinne for which Christ hath died and Christ by his death merited forgiuenesse of our sinne and he hath giuen in his death a forme that as he died in respect of his bodily life so we should die vnto sinne now of newenesse of life Christs death is both the cause mouing and meriting of newenesse of life but not a figure so it agreeth in three points with the remission of sinnes and in two onely with iustification Likewise Christs resurrection was both the cause mouing vnto newenesse of life are the forme and figure that as Christ rose againe so we should rise vnto newenesse of life but of remission of sinnes it was onely the cause moouing not the forme but of neither was it any meritorious cause for Christ hauing put off his mortall bodie in the resurrection was not in statu merendi in the state of meriting so the resurrection of Christ agreeth with iustification in two points in beeing the cause and figure or forme but with remission of sinnes onely in one in beeing the cause therefore iustification is rather ascribed to Christs resurrection then vnto his passion to this purpose Hugo But he faileth in this his subtile and curious distinction 1. for seeing that the passion of Christ in two points as be himselfe obserueth agreeth with iustification namely in beeing the cause and merit thereof and the resurrection in two likewise in beeing the cause and figure or forme iustification should rather in this regard be ascribed vnto Christs passion because it was merited by it and not by the other and the rather because the Apostle hath nothing to doe with the exemplarie forme of the one or the other but to shewe the true causes and so the passion of Christ shall agree in two respects with iustification and the resurrection of Christ but in one 9. To drawe then this question to an ende there are two answers which I insist vpon as the best and so I will ioyne them both together 1. The Apostle doth put iustification vnto the resurrection of Christ because although it were merited by his death yet it had the complement and perfection by the resurrection of Christ for if Christ had not risen againe he had not shewed himselfe conquerour of death and so the worke of our redemption had beene vnperfect thus Calvin Beza Gualter and to this purpose Rollecus distinguisheth well betweene meritum efficacia the merit of iustification in respect of Christ and the efficacie thereof in respect of vs Christ did meritoriously worke our iustification and saluation by his death and passion but the efficacie thereof and perfection of the worke to vs-ward dependeth vpon his resurrection the like distinction the Apostle vseth saying Rom. 10.10 With the heart man beleeueth vnto righteousnes and with the mouth man confesseth to saluation not really distinguishing them in the causes one from the other but shewing that the complement and perfection of the worke consisteth in both 2. Hereunto adde that although these two benefits of our
redemption remission of sinnes and iustification are in themselues and in the vse of them common and vndeuided and are indifferently sometime ascribed to Christs death and passion Rom. 3.24 Ephes. 1.7 and sometime to his resurrection Rom. 10.9 yet in respect of their proper causes they are discerned rather then distinguished as the remission of sinnes is properly referred to Christs passion iustification to his resurrection Pareus and the reason is yeelded by Thomas effectus habet aliqualiter similitudinem causae the effect hath in some sort the similitude of the cause our mortification in the remission of sinne answeareth to Christs death our iustification and spirituall life to Christs rising againe to life Mart. Thus the workes of our creation redemption sanctification are indifferently ascribed to the whole Trinitie as works of their deitie and yet are discerned in respect of their seuerall persons And this shall suffice of this intricate and difficult question 4. Places of doctrine Doct. 1. Iustification by workes sheweth pride and vaine-glorie v. 2. If Abraham were iustified by workes he hath wherein to reioyce or glorie c. It is euident then that for one to stand vpon the iustice of his workes it commeth of pride and vaine boasting it maketh a man to extoll and advance himselfe against the grace of God but God resisteth the proude and giueth grace to the humble the proud Pharisie was not iustified but the humble Publican then let proud Pharisies and vaine-glorious Papists knowe that as long as they stand vpon the merit of their workes they shall neuer be truely iustified But yet whereas the Apostle addeth he hath wherein to reioyce but not with God we learne that all reioycing in good workes and in the keeping of a good conscience is not denyed we may modestly professe and protest before men what the grace of God hath wrought in vs but we must not glorie therein as thereby iustified before God as the Apostle else where saith 1. Cor. 4.4 I knowe nothing by my selfe yet am I not thereby iustified Pareus Doct. 2. Of the nature and substance of the Sacraments v. 11. Circumcision is called the seale of the righteousnes of faith this is not proper and peculiar to circumcision but it sheweth the vse and end of all sacraments which is to seale confirme vnto vs the promises of God in Christ So here are collected all the causes of the Sacraments 1. the efficient cause and author is God onely because he onely is able to giue efficacie and vertue vnto the sacraments as God was the author of circumcision so of all other the Sacraments both of the old and newe Testament 2. the materiall cause is the visible and externall signe 3. the forme is the rite and manner of institution 4. the ende to seale vnto vs the promises of God for remission of our sinnes in Christ Faius pag. 238. Doct. 3. Of the baptisme of infants From the circumcision of infants in the old Testament is inferred the baptisme also of infants vnder the newe for there is the same reason of both the Sacraments and S. Paul doubteth not to call baptisme circumcision Col. 2.11 And if circumcision beeing graunted to infants then baptisme should be denied nowe this were to make God more equall vnto the Iewes and their seede which were the carnall offspring of Abraham then vnto beleeuing Christians which are the spirituall sonnes of Abraham If it be obiected that we knowe not whether infants haue rem sacramenti the thing represented in the Sacrament neither should we put to the signe we answear 1. that this were to reason against God for the same question may be mooued concerning circumcision 2. no more doth the minister know the minde and intention of all those which communicate in the Lords Supper 3. infants are baptized though they haue no vnderstanding as yet of the Sacrament to shewe that they belong vnto the couenant of grace whence their saluation dependeth and not of the outward signe and both presently the Church receiueth edifying when they see infants baptized and the children themselues are admonished and stirred vp when they come to yeares of discretion to learne the true signification and vse of their baptisme which they receiued in their infancie Peter Martyr Doct. 4. Of the vnitie of the Church and the communion of Saints v. 11. That he should be the father of all them that beleeue In that Abraham is called the father of all that beleeue whether of the circumcision or vncircumcision hence it is euident that there is but one Church and one way of iustification for all whether circumcised or vncircumcised vnder the Lawe or the Gospel and that there is a communion and common fellowship of all beleeuers as beeing all brethren and children of faithfull Abraham So the Apostle saith Ephes. 4.4 There is one bodie one spirit c. one Lord one faith one baptisme Doct. 5. Faith requisite in those which are made partakers of the Sacraments v. 11. The seale of the righteousnesse of faith which he had Circumcision profited not Abraham without faith neither can any Sacrament to them which are of discretion and able to vnderstand and discerne be of any force without faith and therefore S. Pauls rule is 1. Cor. 11.28 That a man should examine himselfe when he commeth to the Lords table and to this examination it belongeth to prooue whether they be in faith 2. Cor. 13.5 Doct. 6. The faithfull are the true owners and heares of the world the wicked are vsurpers v. 13. The promise to be heire of the world was made to Abraham thorough faith to them then that beleeue who are the right seede of faithfull Abraham doe the promises belong both of this life and of the next as the Apostle saith 1. Tim. 4.8 That godlinesse haue both the promise of this life and of that which is to come the faithfull then may vse the blessings of this life with a good conscience as pledges of the life to come but the wicked are vsurpers and therefore defile themselues in abusing the things of this life Gryneus Doct. 7. The difference betweene the true God and the false v. 17. He beleeued God who quickeneth the dead Hence are gathered three arguments of the Godhead 1. his omnipotencie both in giuing a beeing vnto things which are not be calleth the things that are not as though they were and in restoring vnto things the beeing which they had 2. his eternitie he is the first and the last both at the first he created all things and shall in the last day raise them vp to life againe 3. his omniscience he can foretell things to come in calling them that is giuing them a beeing which yet are nothing These things cannot idols doe nor any strange gods by these arguments the Prophet Isa confoundeth the Idols of the heathens shewing that they are not like vnto the true God Isa. 44.6 I am the first and the last and without me there is no
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
by righteousnes thorough Iesus Christ v. 21. And further this is yet more euident where the Apostle saith Rom. 4.25 Christ was deliuered to death for our sinnes and is risen againe for our iustification whence it is gathered that iustification is more then remission of sinnes onely which as it was wrought by his death so the other was compassed by all other his holy actions Piscator answereth that iustification is here affirmed of the resurrection because it is an euident demonstration of our iustification which was obtained by the death of Christ. But I preferre rather Augustines interpretation lib. 10. cont Faust. c. 10. Ista resurrectio credita nos iustificat c. this resurrection of Christ beeing beleeued doth iustifie vs non quod reliqua opera merita Christi excluduntur c. not that the rest of his merits and works are excluded sed omnia consummantur c. but because all was perfected and finished in his death and resurrection here Augustine affirmeth two things both that all Christs merits and works concurre in our iustification as also that the beleeuing of Christs resurrection is as verily a cause of our iustification not a demonstration onely as his death was of the remission of our sinnes See before this place more fully expounded quest 42. and Piscators exposition refuted artic 5. So then to finish this matter if Christs death onely effected and wrought our iustification then should the rest of his workes and actions be superfluous whereas whatsoeuer he did in life or death was wrought for vs as Thomas in his commentarie vpon this place alleadgeth out of Damascen omnes passiones actiones illius humanitatis fuerunt nobis salutifera vtpote ex virtute divinitatis prouenientes all the passions and actions of his humanitie did tend vnto our saluation as proceeding from the vertue of his Diuinitie 6. Morall observations v. 7. Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen Peter Martyr here noteth well that our sinnes onely doe hinder our blessednes for iustificatio est inchoata beatitudo our iustification is an happines inchoate or begun so then when our sinnes shall be fully taken away then our beatitude and blessed estate shall no longer be deferred as our happines begunne bringeth with it the remission of sinne so when it is finished all our sinnes with the remainder of them shall be cleane purged v. 13. The promise that he should be heire of the world Although the faithfull haue the promises of this life so farre as the Lord seeth it to be expedient for them yet their peculiar inheritance is the kingdome of heauen the children of God therefore must comfort themselues in the hope and expectation of their proper inheritance though in the meane time they be stripped and dispossessed of the things of this life As Abraham had the land of Canaan promised him and yet he himselfe had no inheritance in it no not the breadth of a foote Act. 7.5 so we must be reuiued with the hope of our celestiall inheritance though we possesse little in this world as Abraham was promised to be heire of the world not so much of that present as of that to come v. 18. Abraham aboue hope beleeued vnder hope This teacheth vs that we should neuer despair or cast off our hope but comfort our selues in God though we see no meanes as Abraham beleeued Gods promise concerning the multiplying of his seede though he saw no reason thereof in nature such a godly resolution was in Iob cap. 13.15 Though he slay me yet will I trust in him Then God showeth himselfe strongest when we are weakest and his glorie most appeareth when he helpeth vs beeing forsaken of all other worldly meanes v. 20. And gaue glorie vnto God As Abraham praised and glorified God for his mercie and truth so we ought to magnifie God and set forth his praise for all his mercies toward vs the Lord is not so well pleased with any spirituall sacrifice and seruice as when he returne vnto the praise of euery good blessing as the Prophet Dauid saide Psal. 116.12 What shall I render vnto the Lord for all his benefits I will take the cuppe of sauing health and call vpon the name of the Lord this is all the recompence that either God expecteth at our hands or we are able to performe to giue him thanks for all his benefits v. 23. Now it was not written for him onely c. but for vs c. Seeing then that the Scriptures are written generally for all the faithfull we haue all interest in them and therefore euerie one of Gods children should hereby receiue encouragement diligently and carefully to search the Scriptures as appertaining and belonging euen vnto him as our Sauiour saith Ioh. 5.39 Search the Scriptures for in them you thinke to haue eternall life who would not search his ground verie deepe if he thought he should finde gold there so much more should we be diligent in searching the Scriptures which shewe vs the way to eternall life which is farre beyond all the treasures of the world v. 25. Who was deliuered to death for our sinnes Seeing then that Christ died not in vaine but brought that worke to perfection for the which he died this now maketh much for the comfort of Gods children that their sinnes are verily done away in Christ and blotted out in his death this was S. Pauls comfort that Christ came into the world to same sinners of whom he was the chiefe 1. Tim. 1.15 This also teacheth vs to die vnto sinne which was the cause that Christ was giuen vp vnto death as Origen well obserueth quomodo non alienum nobis inimicum omne ducitur peccatum c. how shall not euerie sinne seeme strange and as an enemie vnto vs for the which Christ was deliuered vp vnto death The fifth chapter 1. The text with the diuers readings v. 1. Then beeing iustified by faith we haue peace not let vs haue peace S. L. toward God thorough our Lord Iesus Christ 2 By whome also we haue had accesse thorough faith into this grace wherein we stand by the which we stand Be. and reioyce vnder the hope Be. G.V. in the hope L.S. of the glorie of God of the sonnes of God L. but this is added 3 Neither that onely but also we reioyce in tribulation knowing that tribulation of afflection V.S. oppression Be. bringeth forth patience worketh G. in vs S. but this is not in the originall 4 And patieâ—â—â—e proofe B.S.L.V. or experience Be. G. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. and proofe or experience hope 5 And hope maketh not ashamed because the loue of God is shedde abroad in our hearts by the holy Ghost which is giuen vnto vs 6 For Christ when we were yet weake at his time B.G. that is the appointed time S. according to the time Gr. died for the vngodly not to what ende when we were yet weake died Christ for the
vnto our soules that we are the sonnes of God Rom. 8.16 Osiand Pareus facit nos intelligere charitatem Dei c. the spirit of God maketh vs to vnderstand and feele the loue of God toward vs. 2. And this worke is ascribed to the spirit not excluding the Father and the Sonne to whome this loue toward mankind is common but the Apostle obserueth the propertie of their persons because as election is giuen vnto God the father and Redemption to the Son so loue is the proper worke of the spirit both to cause vs to feele the loue of God and to make vs to loue God againe 3. And here we are not to vnderstand onely the gifts of the spirit but the spirit it selfe which dwelleth in vs not in his essence which is infinite but by his power illuminating directing conuerting vs Faius so Tolet well saith that the spirit non solum dona sua nobis communicat sed per ea in nobis inhabitat c. doth not onely communicate his gifts vnto vs but also by them dwelleth in vs. 4. In that the holy Ghost is said to be giuen vs thereby is signified quod non proprijs viâ—tutibus c. that we haue obtained the spirit not by our owne vertue but by the free loue of God Oecumen and the person of the holy Ghost is noted in that he is said to be giuen and the giuers are the Father and the Sonne Hug. Card. 10. Quest. How Christ is said to haue died according to the time v. 6. 1. Some doe referre these words to the former clause and read thus when we were yet weake according to the time that is we were weake in the time of the law when grace yet appeared not so Chrysost. Theodor. and Erasmus thinketh this is added as a mitigation of their infirmity but it is against the Apostles vse to qualifie the corruption euilnes of mans nature and he speaketh to the Gentiles that had not the law as well as to the Iewes 2. The most doe applie it vnto the latter clause that Christ died in his time and here there are diuers opinions 1. Some vnderstand it of the short time which Christs death continued namely but three daies Ambrose so also Lyran. but that time beeing assigned see Christs resurrection is not fitly expounded of his death 2. Sedulius thus interpreteth quâ—â— in vltimo mundi tempore mortuus est because he died in the last time or age of the world 3. According to the time that is he died temporally in the flesh which is mortall for eternitie knoweth no time Haymo 4. Hierom. epist. ad Algas referreth it to the opportunitie of time Christ died in a fit time when the world stood most in neede of his redemption 5. But the best exposition is that Christ died in the fulnes of time as the Apostle speaketh Gal. 4.4 the time decreed and appointed of his father thus expoundeth Theodor. and Theophyl tempore decenti destinato in a meete time and appointed of God so also Beza Par. Tol. with others 11. Quest. Of the meaning of the 7. v. One will scarce die for a righteous man c. 1. The Syrian interpreter readeth in the first place scarce will any die for the wicked which reading Beza seemeth not to mislike but that all the Greeke copies are otherwise and Iunius thinketh that here one word by the writers was taken for an other because of the neere similitude in the Syrian tongue and thinketh it should rather be read according to the Greeke copie for the righteous not for the wicked 2. Some doe take here these two the righteous and the good to be one and the same and some confounding these two doe not vnderstand these words of the person of the iust and good man but of the cause Hier. epist. ad Alg. and so this should be the sense that although scarce and sieldome yet sometime one may be found to die for a iust and good cause some likewise taking these two for one applie it vnto the person of the righteous and good man Chrysost. Lyran. Tolet. Par. Faius But the Apostle first saying negatiuely one wilâ— scarce die c. and afterward vsing a kind of correction that one may die for a good man doth euidently distinguish these two clauses 3. The most then doe diuide these two and take the iust and righteous and the good to be diuersly taken by the Apostle 1. Wicked Marcion as Hierome reporteth by the iust did vnderstand the God of the old Testament for whome fewe offered themselues to death by the good the God of the new Testament that is Christ for whom many are found readie to die But this opinion beside the blasphemie thereof in making two diuers Gods and authors of the Old and new Testament containeth apparant absurditie and falshood for both many gaue their liues in the old Testament in defence of the law of God as the three children Dan. 3. and many in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes as the historie of the Macchabees testifieth and beside many thousand Martyrs are found to haue died for Christ whereas the Apostle speaketh of very few that will die for a good man 2. Arrius contrariwise by the iust vnderstandeth Christ and by the good the Father of whome Christ testifieth that none is good but God But if Christ be this iust one for whom so many thousand Martyrs willingly gaue their liues how saith the Apostle that scarse any will die for a iust man 3. Eucherius by the iust interpreteth the Law and old Testament by the good Christ and the new Testament for few Martyrs are found in the old Testament and many in the new But beside that it is against the scope and mind of the Apostle to vnderstand this of dying for Christ who by this comparison setteth forth the loue of Christ who died for euill men euen for his enemies whereas few are found readie to die for the righteous and good the words of the Apostle will not beare this sense who in saying for a good man it may be that one dare die noteth the paucitie and fewnes of them whereas many thousands haue died for Christ in the New Testament 4. Some by the iust vnderstand the vertuous by the good the innocent for whome one may die in commiseration and pitie toward him Haymo Thom. Aquin. Gorrhan or because innocencie is fauoured of men iustitia habet aliquid severitatis iustice hath some rigour and seueritie in it Hug. Cardinal But a man can not be iust but he must also be innocent these two then are not thus distinguished 5. Caietane vnderstandeth by the iust an ordinarie vertuous or righteous man by the good some excelling in the works of supererogation for such one perhaps dare die But such works of supererogation we acknowledge not all that a man hath is too little for himselfe he hath no superfluitie to supererogate to an other 6. Osiander and Emmanuel Sa doe vnderstand in both
those clauses the things not the persons and the first they expound of iust punishment which none willingly suffer in the second the good and honest cause for which one may be found readie to die But the phrase to die for the iust will not beare that sense a man is not saide to die for iust punishment but by it or with it and yet in this sense some haue beene found which willingly suffered their iust punishment as the theise conuerted vpon the crosse who said vnto his fellow Luk. 23.41 We are righteously here 7. The best interpretation then is that by the iust we vnderstand such an one as is in himselfe a righteous and vertuous man by the good such as haue deserued well of vs that are liberall and bountifull men from whome we haue receiued good so Beza interpreteth one that is profitable to him of whome he hath receiued good Genevens so also Catharinus a Popish writer and some by the good vnderstand such as are deare vnto them as their children parents friends countrey as some such were found among the Romans that gaue their liues for their friends and countrey P. Mart. And this exposition may be confirmed by the opposite part that Christ died for vs beeing sinners v. 8. yea his enemies v. 10. whereas men will not die for the righteous and hardly for their friends 12. Quest. Of the difference betweene Christs dying for vs and those which died for their countrey We read in the forren histories of the Gentiles that some haue giuen their liues for their countrey as Codrus for the Athenians Menoecius for the Thebanes who killed himselfe and fell among his enemies for the deliuerance of his countrey so Curtius threw himselfe into a gulph to preserue Rome from the pestilence But there was great difference betweene the death of these and of Christ. 1. They were not innocent as Christ was and therefore as their life was not so holy so could not their death be so pretious nor their person to honourable 2. They did not willingly offer themselues vnto any iudge to be condemned as Christ did but in other manner and sort aduentured their liues 3. They did it not of loue but of vain-glorie and desire of praise 4. They by the instigation of Sathan were mooued so to doe hauing no cogitation therein to please God but Christ gaue himselfe to death 〈◊〉 obedience to the will of his heauenly father 5. They at such time gaue their liues when as their case was desperate and so were impatient to abide the extreame haâ—â—d and they died beeing mortall men that could not liue long as Solon when he encouraged the citizens to take armes against Pisistratus the tyrant beeing asked what made him bold so to doe answered his old age he knew he could not liue long But Christ died for vs hauing no necessitie to die in himselfe 6. Their death was glorious and honourable vnto them but Christ offered himselfe to the ignominious and shamefull death of the crosse 7. They died for a temporall deliuerance but we by Christs death are eternally deliuered 8. And that which maketh the greatest honour of all they died for their countrey and friends but our blessed Sauiour for his enemies ex Martyr Pareus 9. Origen addeth further that although there may be found among the heathen that died for their countrey yet there is none of them which died for all the world as Christ onely did which by his death totius mundi peccata absolvit did absolue all the world of their sinnes 13. Quest. Of the greatnes of the loue of God toward man in sending Christ to die for vs v. 8. This exceeding great loue of God is set forth by three circumstances what they were for whome Christ died sinners and enemies to God what Christ was that suffered euen the Sonne of God and what he endured and suffered euen to die for them 1. The condition of them for whome Christ died is set forth by three names they are said to be weake as not able to helpe or deliuer themselues vngodly as they which had left the worship of the onely true God and had defiled themselues with idolatrie sinners which had euery way transgressed the law of God Tolet. annot 10. Origen here comprehendeth all kind of sinnes for either one of ignorance and infirmitie sinneth and he is called weake or he is an obstinate and malitious offender who is called the sinner Sinners in Scripture are said to be those not which commit any sinne but those in whome sinne dwelleth and raigneth as Ioh. 9.31 and such were we by nature Beza yea we were not onely sinners but enemies vnto God which setteth his loue forth so much the more that he sought our good not onely beeing euill but also aduersaries vnto him So that while we were sinners and so God hated vs in respect of our sinnes yet at the same instant amabat secundum quod opus eius he loued vs as his owne worke gloss ordin 2. Gods loue further appeareth in sending his owne Sonne into the world nothing is dearer to a man then his owne sonne and therefore Gods loue doth herein most shew it selfe in that he sent not either Angel or Arkangel or any other of his glorious creatures to die for vs but his owne sonne Martyr 3. And this Sonne of God was not onely made man for vs and liued in the flesh and suffered many things for our sake but he died for vs it had beene a sufficient demonstration of his loue to haue humbled himselfe to take vpon him the nature of man and to walke and conuerse among sinnefull men But in that he died and that for his enemies it sheweth an vnspeakable loue there is no greater loue among men then when one bestoweth his life for his friends Ioh. 15.13 But Christs loue here exceeded that he gaue his life for his enemies Gorrhan 14. Quest. Whether mans redemption could not otherwise haue beene wrought then by the death of Christ. 1. It was not necessarie that Christ should die for our redemption either by the necessitie of coaction as though God had beene by some vrgent occasion compelled thereunto set God is not forced he worketh most freely nor yet by necessitie of nature as it is impossible in the diuine nature that God should lie or be vntrue but no externall worke done by God proceedeth from the necessitie of his nature there was then no absolute necessitie that Christ should die for vs nor yet any hypotheticall or conditionall necessitie the end beeing considered namely the saluation of man for it had beene possible for God by other meanes then by the death of his Sonne to haue wrought the saluation of man 2. Yet was it necessarie that Christ should die for mankind the wisdome and counsell of God considered because there was no other way whereby the greatnes of the loue of God could be shewed vnto man then by giuing his owne Sonne to die for vs P.
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
beene immortall 2. the Apostle saith Rom. 6.23 the wages of sinne is death he speaketh of death in generall euerie kind of death both spirituall and corporall is the reward of sinne 3. the propagation of sinne doth indeede bring with it also propagation of death as the Apostle here saith sinne entred by Adam and death by sinne if sinne then had not entred neither should death haue entred 3. But thus it is obiected on the contrarie that death to mankind is naturall and not brought in by sinne 1. Obiect The bodie of man is compounded of dissonant and contrarie qualities and therefore naturally is apt to be dissolued and if there be a naturall aptnesse and power to die there should also haue followed a naturall act of dying Answ. 1. Pererius answeareth that indeede if man be considered secundum nudam natura conditionem according to the bare and naked condition of his nature he was by nature mortall as other creatures but beeing considered as he receiued a supernaturall grace from God death was not naturall but a punishment of sinne Perer. numer 34. But this answear is insufficient and vntrue for there should not haue beene so much as any possibilitie of death in the world if sinne had not entred he then answeareth onely concerning the act of dying which should be suspended by a supernaturall gift he taketh not away the possibilitie of dying and this supernaturall gift was no other then the dignitie and excellencie of mans nature made by creation immortall if he had not sinned 2. wherefore our more full answear is that mans bodie though consisting of diuerse elements yet was made of such an harmonaicall constitution and temper as no dissolution should haue followed if he had not sinned such as shall be the state and condition of our bodies in the resurrection 2. Obiect If death be the punishment of sinne God should be the author of death because he is the author of punishment Answ. 1. Pererius saith that God is not directly the cause of death but either consequenter by way of consequent because he made man of a dissoluble matter whereupon death ensueth or occasionaliter by way of occasion because he tooke away from man that supernaturall gift whereby he should haue beene preserued from mortallitie but God efficiciter is not the efficient cause of death which is a meere priuation But this answear also is insufficient for neither should death haue followed by reason of any such dissoluble matter if Adam had not sinned neither needed there any such supernaturall gift beside the priuiledge and dignitie of mans creation 2. wherefore we answer further that as God created light darkenes he created not but disposed of it so he made not death but as it is a punishment God as a disposer rather and a iust iudge then an author inflicteth it 3. Obiect Christ died and yet had no sinne therefore death is a naturall thing not imposed as a punishment for sinne Answ. 1. Origen here answeareth that as Christ knewe no sinne yet per assumptionem â—â— uis dicitur factus esse peccatum c. yet by the taking of our flesh he is said to be made sinne for vs so also he died for vs c. the death then which he vndertooke was not a punishment vpon him in respect of his owne sinne which he had not but of ours which was imputed vnto him 2. Origen saith further mortem quam nulli debuit sponte non necessitate suscepit the death which he ought to none he did willingly vndertake not of necessitie as Christ himselfe saith I haue power to lay down my life and power to take it againe 3. adde herevnto that mors in eo imperium non habuit c. death had no power or command ouer lum Mart. for he rose againe from death triumphantly which sheweth that he yeelded not vnto death of necessitie for then he could not haue shaken off so soone the bands of death againe Quest. 23. Of the meaning of the Apostle in these words in whom all haue sinned and of the best reading thereof ver 12. 1. Erasmus will haue the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be interpreted eo quod or quandoquidem in so much or because so also Calvin Martyr Osiander and our English translations and Erasmus reason is because the Scripture vseth an other phrase in that sense as 1. Cor. 15.22 as in Adam all die the words are not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But this reason may be easily taken away for sometime in Scripture the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Heb. 9.17 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the testament is confirmed in the dead Beza and Heb. 9.10 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in meates And this interpretation of Erasmus is the rather to be misliked because he would not haue this vnderstood of originall sinne but of euery ones proper and particular sinnes as Theodoret before him and so we should want a speciall place for the proofe of originall sinne 2. Wherefore the better reading is in whom that is in Adam all haue sinned so reade Origen Chrysostome Phatius in Oecumenius Theophylact whom Beza Pareus followe and there are three things which may serue for the antecedent to this relatiue in whom either sinne or death or that one man namely Adam before spoken of but not the first because sinne in the Greeke tongue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is of the feminine gender and so cannot answer vnto the Greeke relatiue which is of the masculine gender nor the second for it were an improper speech to say in the which death all haue sinned for as Augustine saith in peccato moriuntur homines non in morte peccant men die in sinne they are not said to sinne in death and so Augustine resolueth that in primo homine omnes peccasse intelliguntur all are vnderstood to haue sinned in the first man Adam c. and to this purpose Augustine in the same place alleadgeth Hilarius Quest. 24. Whether the Apostle meane originall or actuall sinnes saying in whom all haue sinned 1. Erasmus in his annotations vpon this place contending that it should be rather read for as much as all men haue sinned then in whom all men haue sinned thinketh that this place is not vnderstood of originall but of actuall sinnes who although he professe that he is an enemie to the heresie of the Pelagians which denie originall sinne yet contendeth both by the authoritie of the Fathers as Hierome and Origen and by the scope of the place that the Apostle must be vnderstood to speake of actuall sinnes But all this may easily be answered 1. those commentaries which passe vnder the name of Hierome are verily thought not to be his but Augustine coniectureth that they might be written by Pelagius that supposed author excepteth Abraham Isaac Iacob that they were free from this death namely the spiriturall death of the soule whereas euen
to either of them but of that which by them redounded to many and this similitude and correspondencie is ex contrarijs by the contrarie as Origen well obserueth and that in these three respects what they are in themselues considered what to their posteritie and wherein 1. They were both authors and beginners Adam was the beginning of mankind quoad esse naturae in respect of the naturall generation Christ is the beginning quoad esse gratiae in respect of the spirituall regeneration by grace Lyran. 2. as Adams sinne did not hurt himselfe onely but his posteritie so the grace of Christ is communicated to all his spirituall generation 3. as death and sinne came in by Adam so life and righteousnes by Iesus Christ as the Apostle followeth this comparison in the rest of this chapter and â—â— large 1. Cor. 2.15 Here follow certaine questions touching this comparison made by the Apostle betweene Adam and Christ. 31. Quest. Of the names and tearmes which the Apostle vseth in this comparison 1. In the transgression and fall of Adam the Apostle vseth diuers words and tearmes which either expresse the cause of Adams fall the ruine and fall it selfe and the fruits for iâ— these three are Adam and Christ compared together 1. the cause is set forth in generall tearmes as it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sinne v. 12. or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 transgression v. 14. or more speciall as it is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 disobedience v. 19. 2. the fall of man is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lapsus the fall or ruine of man v. 15. 3. the effect are either the guiltines of sinne called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 16 or the punishment which is either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 death v. 12. or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 condemnation euerlasting death v. 16. 2. In the iustification purchased by Christ are likewise expressed the causes the worke it selfe and the effects which follow 1. the causes the efficient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the grace of God v. 15. called also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the abundance or redounding of grace v. 17. the formall cause is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the obedience of Christ v. 19. 2. the worke of our iustification is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the gift v. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the gift by grace v. 15. and the gift of righteousnes v. 17. 3. then the fruit and effect thereof is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the iustification of life or vnto life v. 18. 3. But yet if we will more exactly distinguish these words this difference may be made betweene them these three words which the Apostle vseth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 15 16. the first signifying grace the other two beeing translated the gift doe thus differ the first sheweth the grace and fauour from the which the benefit proceedeth the second is the coâ—â—lation of the benefit the third betokeneth the benefit it self which is conferred as if a Prince should giue a great treasure to redeeme one out of captiuitie this fauour of the Prince is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the grace the free giuing of it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the donation the others enioying of it and receiuing of this libertie is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the benefit or gift Beza 4. So these other 3. words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iustifying iustification iustice doe thus differ the first signifieth the merit of Christs iustice whereby we are iustified the second the action it selfe of iustification whereby Christs iustice is communicated to vs the third the iustice it selfe which is imputed and communicated vnto vs Tolet. annotat 24. Quest. 33. Of the comparison betweene Adam and Christ in generall 1. Origen well obserueth that this comparison is per genus similis per speciem contraria it is alike in the generall resemblance but contrarie in the particular in two things there is a generall agreement and resemblance 1. that there is one that giueth beginning and is the author vnto the rest 2. in plures aliquid diffundtur on both sides as the beginning is from one so there is somewhat conueyed vnto many 2. The specificall difference consisteth in the contrarietie and disparitie and the excellencie the disparitie is that one was the author of sinne vnto condemnation the other of righteousnesse vnto life the excellencie is in that the gift is not so as the offence but much more powerfull and abundant of both these the disparitie and excellencie more followeth to be added in the two next questions So then here are three things to be considered in this comparison as Photius obserueth cited by Oecumenius similitudo contrarietas excellentia the similitude or likenes the contratietie and disparitie and the excellencie 3. Now whereas the Apostle from this verse vnto the 19. v. seemeth to vse diuerse iterations of the same thing we shall finde by a dilligent viewe and examination of the Apostles sentences that he doth not repeate the same things as Pellicane thinketh eadem repetit propter infirmas conscientias c. he repeateth the same things because of weake consciences which often thinke that sinne is more powerfull then grace c. But Oecumenius saith better nequaquam iterum atque iterum eadem repetit Apostolus c. the Apostle doth not againe and againe repeat the same things as one would thinke but diligentissime copulat he doth most dilligently couple and ioyne the principall heads together Quest. 34. Of the disparitie and vnlikenesse betweene Adam and Christ in this comparison The difference and disparitie betweene them is in these sixe seuerall points 1. In the persons compared Adam is considered as a meere man v. 12. but Christ was both God and man he is called Iesus Christ our Lord v. 21. 2. They differ in that which is conferred Adam propagateth to his posteritie sinne and death v. 12. Christ communicateth to his righteousnesse and life v. 15.16 3. The meanes are farre different Adams disobedience brought in sinne Christs obedience procureth life v. 18.19 4. The persons vpon whom these things are conferred differ for from Adam death and sinne are deriued vpon all in generall v. 12.18 but righteousnesse is communicated onely to those which receiue the abundance of grace by faith v. 17. 5. The manner how these things are conueyed are diuerse Adams sinne is transmitted by naturall propagation but life and righteousnesse by Christ are communicated by grace v. 15. the gift is by grace 6. The sequele and endes are contrary the offence is vnto condemnation v. 16. but iustification by Christ is vnto life eternall v. 18. Quest. 35. Of the excellencie and superioritie which the benefit by grace in Christ hath beyond our fall and losse in Adam 1. The first excellencie is generally in the power and efficacie of the worker for it was necessarie that he that should ouercom sinne and death should be superiour to both for if he had beene of equall power he could not haue dissolued
compared to the beasts that perish Psal. 49.12 but in Christ we are made like vnto the Angels In these and other points is our state more perfect in Christ then it should haue beene in Adam if he had not sinned Quest. 37. In what sense the grace of God is said to haue abounded vnto more v. 15. The vulgar Latine giueth occasion of this question which in the first clause readeth multi many be dead thorough the offence of one but in the second he saith grace in plures abundavit hath abounded vnto more and this reading seemeth Origen to follow Here then many doe busie themselues to shewe how grace in Christ hath abounded vnto more then sinne in Adam 1. Origen saith that they are said to be more because Adam himselfe from whom the death of sinne was deriued vnto others additur numero eorum c. is added to the number of them which haue receiued grace in Christ But this is too curious neither agreeable to the Apostles meaning for seeing the comparison is instituted betweene Adam and Christ though Adam indeede were saued by Christ yet each of these Adam and Christ with their ofspring must be considered here as in themselues neither can the adding of one to this number make them more which haue obtained grace in Christ then them which are lost in Adam 2. Some by those many which are dead in Adam vnderstand onely those which sinned by imitating of Adam that is commit actuall sinnes and so they reade the former verse affirmatiuely Death raigned ouer those which sinned after the like manner of the transgression of Adam and then the grace of Christ aboundeth vnto more euen vnto infants that sinned not in like manner as Adam did that is actually thus Ambros. gloss ordinar Gorrhan But in this sense infants should be out of the number of those that are dead in Adam whereas the Apostle saith in whom all haue sinned yea infants and all sinned in Adam 3. Pererius hath this quaint obseruation that there may be found of Adam carnally propagated and yet not infected with his sinne as the Blessed Virgin Marie yet none can be found spiritually regenerate but by the grace of Christ But this conceit of his is against the Apostle who saith that in Adam all sinned and Origen thus collecteth videsne vt à peccato nullum Paulus excuset see you not how the Apostle excuseth none from sinne If all haue sinned in Adam then cannot the Virgin Marie be exempted from originall sinne 4. Pererius hath an other conceit that the grace of Christ is said to haue abounded vnto more because that if God should create a newe kind of men not of Adam they should stand in neede of the grace of Christ and yet they not comming of Adam could not be infected with his sinne Perer. disput 10. But S. Paul speaketh not of a possibilitie of supposall how grace might abound vnto more but of the actuall and reall abounding of grace vnto many in Christ and if there were a newe creation of men they should be created in a perfect estate as Adam was before his fall and so should not keeping of that state haue neede of a redeemer in that behalfe 5. But this is a needelesse question seeing that in the originall in both places the Apostle vseth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 multi many not in the comparatiue plures more therefore this question is impertinent how the grace of Christ is said to haue abounded vnto more Neither doth the Apostle giue vnto the grace of Christ the preheminence in respect of the number but of the more powerfull effect as is shewed before quest 35. 6. Haymo in both places vnderstandeth the elect they are the many which are dead in Adam temporally and they are the many vnto whom grace hath much more abounded because in Adam onely they are infected with originall sinne in Christ both originall and actuall are pardoned But those whom the Apostle here calleth many ver 18. he expresseth to be all he meaneth then all mankind in generall which die in Adam Quest. 38. How all men are said to be iustified in Christ v. 18. 1. Huberus therein ioyning the right hand of fellowship with the old Pelagians hence would prooue the Vniuersalitie of grace that all in Christ are absolutely iustified as in Adam all die But then it would followe by the force of the Apostles comparison that all should verily be saued in Christ as they are by nature sinners in Adam see the confutation of this error at large among the controuersies 2. Some vnderstand this of the sufficiencie of iustification by Christ that it is sufficient for all if they had grace to receiue it Lyran. But the Apostle speaketh not of a possibilitie of iustification but of an actuall collation of this benefit as Adams sinne really and actually is transfused to his posteritie 3. Tolet vnderstandeth generally all men whosoeuer and by the iustification of life he would haue signified the resurrection which shall be of all men in generall both good and bad as all men are subiect to death in Adam both good and bad But the Apostle before v. 17. called that raigning in life which here he nameth the iustification of life but the wicked that rise againe shall not raigne in life therefore they are not partakers of the iustification of life 4. Haymo better vnderstandeth here the vniuersalitie of the elect omnes electos praedestinatos ad vitam all that are elect and predestinate vnto life that as Adam infected all his posteritie carnally descending of him so Christ iustifieth all which beleeue in him to the same purpose Augustine vnderstandeth omnes viuificandos all that are to be quickened and made aliue because none are iustified but in Christ lib. 6. cont Iulian. c. 12. so the interlinearie glosse vnderstandeth omnes sui all that are Christs all are iustified qui sunt Christi which are Christs Pareus Quest. 39. Why the Apostle saith v. 19. By one mans disobedience many were made sinners and not all 1. Origen by sinnes here vnderstandeth those which continue in a custome of sinne a righteous man may sinne but he therefore cannot be called a sinner and so not all borne of Adam but many are said to be sinners to the same purpose Tolet annot 25. But the Apostle speaketh here of Adams disobedience whereby many were sinners which is deriued by propagation and learned by imitation therefore he speaketh generally of all that sinned in Adam and not onely of some speciall sinners 2. Theodoret thinketh the Apostle nameth many because all did not continue in Adams sinne but some permanserunt in decretis naturae c. did remaine in the decree of nature and followed vertue as Abel Henoch Noe c. But euen those also were borne in sinne as the Apostle said before v. 12. that all sinned in Adam and they were sinners by nature though regenerate by Christ. 3. Tolet thinketh the Apostle hath
reference to the time before spoken of from Adam vnto Moses and therefore he saith many not all as he on the other side specially meaneth the times of the Gospell when likewise many and not all beleeued in Christ annot 22. so also Faius But then this comparison should be imperfect for as Adams sinne hath infected all his posteritie since the beginning of the world to the ende thereof so Christ is the Sauiour of the world both from Adam to Moses and since 4. Augustine taketh the Apostle to meane all but yet he saith many to shewe the multitude of those that are saued in Christ for there are aliqua omnia quae non sunt multa some things all that are not many as the fowre Gospels are all but not many and there be aliqua multa some things many that are not all as many beleeuers in Christ not all for all haue not faith 2. Thess. 3. c. It is true that the Apostle by many vnderstandeth all as he said in the former verse and sometime the scripture calleth them many which are all as in one place the Lord saith to Abraham I haue made thee a father of many nations Gen. 17. in an other in thy seede all the nations of the earth shall be blessed but yet the reason is not giuen why the Apostle saith many not all 5. Some thinke he so saith many because Christ is excluded that came of Adam Piscator But Christ though he descended of Adam yet not by ordinarie generation therefore in this generall speach he needed not to be excepted as he was not included when the Apostle saith in whom that is in Adam all haue sinned 6. The reason then is this multos apponit vni he opposeth many to one that Adam beeing one infected many beside himselfe with his sinne as Adams sinne rested not in his person but entred vpon many so Christs obedience and righteousnesse staied not in his person but was likewise communicated to many Beza Pareus Quest. 40. How many are said to be sinners in Adam 1. Chrysostome by sinners vnderstandeth morti obnoxiot those that are subiect to death by reason of Adams sinne and he addeth this reason ex illius inobedientia alium fieri peccatorem quam poterit habere consequentiam by his disobedience others to become sinners it hath no coherence or consequence Contra. 1. True it is that sometime the word peccatores sinners is taken in that sense for men subiect to death and punishment as Bathsheba saith to Dauid 1. King 1.21 else when my Lord the King shall sleepe with his fathers I and my sonne Salomon shall be sinners c. that is put to death as offenders But yet in this place the word is not so taken for as to be made iust in Christ signifieth not to haue the reward of iustice but to be iustified indeed so to be made sinners sheweth not the punishment but the guiltines of sinne deseruing punishment as then in the former verse the effects were compared together condemnation in Adam and iustification vnto life in Christ so here the causes are shewed sinne on the one side causing death and righteousnesse on the other which bringeth to life 2. though Chrysostome faile in the interpretation of this place yet he denieth not but that in Adams all sinned and in many places he testifieth euidently of originall sinne as he calleth to radicale peccatum the rooted sinne hom 40. in 1. epist. ad Corinth And therefore the Pelagians did him wrong to make him an author of their opinion who denied originall sinne from which imputation of the Pelagians Augustine cleareth Chrysostome writing against their heresie and this point is cleared in this place for if all are subiect to death in Adam which Chrysostome here confesseth then all haue sinned in Adam for death could not enter vpon all without sinne 2. As Chrysostome vnderstandeth here onely temporall death whereunto all are subiect in Adam so some by condemnation mentioned v. 17. doe likewise insinuate the sentence onely of mortalitie Tolet. Origen vnderstandeth the expulsion of Adam out of Paradise but by the contrarie seeing the Apostle by iustification vnto life vnderstandeth the raigning in life eternall by death and condemnation is signified animae corporis damnatio the damnation of bodie and soule so expoundeth gloss interlin Gorrhan with others 3. Origen by sinners vnderstandeth consuetudinem studium peccandi the custome and studie of sinning as though the Apostle had meant onely actuall sinne but that proceedeth not from Adams disobedience properly as originall sinne doth 4. Neither yet doth the Apostle onely meane originall sinne which is by Adams disobedience in ipsius posteros propagatum propagated vnto his posteritie Faius for it is more to be a sinner then to sinne in Adam which the Apostle said before v. 12. 5. Wherefore the Apostle by sinners vnderstandeth both such as sinne originally in Adam peccatum contrabendâ— by the contagion or contraction of sinne and peccatum inteâ—andâ— which sinne actually by imitation Gorrh. so that we are not onely naturally euill by sinful propagation as the Apostle said before v. 12. in whom all haue sinned and so are by nature guiltie of death and condemnation v. 18. but beside as an effect of our naturall corruption there is a generall pravitie of nature and an habite of euill engendred in vs whereby we can doe no other then sinne so Adams disobedience hath made vs not onely naturaliter pravos naturally euill sed habitualiter peccatores habitually sinners Pareus Quest. 41. How the lawe is said to haue entred thereupon ver 20. 1. The occasion of these words is not so much to shewe that sinne raigned in the world euen after the lawe as it was in the world before the lawe from Adam to Moses v. 14. but the Apostle hauing shewed at large how we are deliuered from sinne and death brought in by Adam onely by Christ he preuenteth the obiection of the Iewes for it might haue beene replyed wherefore then serued the lawe if there were no remedie against sinne thereby the Apostle then answeareth that the lawe was so farre from sauing men from their sinnes that they were thereby the more encreased thus Chrysostome and Pet. Martyr with others 2. But this is not to be vnderstood of the lawe of nature as Origen who to decline the imputation of the lawe laid vpon it by wicked Marcion that it was giuen to an euill ende to encrease sinne will haue the Apostle to speake of the lawe of nature for the Apostle making mention of the lawe before v. 13. vnderstandeth the written lawe as he expoundeth v. 14. where he expressely speaketh of Moses neither was the lawe of nature giuen to that ende to encrease sinne no more then the morall lawe was but sinne entred occasionaliter by occasion onely of the lawe as shall be shewed in the next question 3. The lawe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 entred thereupon 1. the Latine interpreter readeth subintravit
or life without Christ. v. 17. Much more shall they which receiue c. raigne in life c. As in Adam sinne and death entred and so raigned ouer all so life raigneth by Iesus Christ then they which are not graft by faith into Christ but remaine onely in Adam cannot be pertakers of life they are still vnder the kingdome of sinne and death wherefore the Turkes Iewes and all other that are without the knowledge and faith of Christ howsoeuer they dreame of a kind of Paradise and terrene happinesse after this life yet they can haue no assurance of life seeing they are strangers from Christ So S. Peter saith Act. 4.12 That there is no other name giuen vnder heauen whereby we must be saued Doct. 6. That life doth accompanie righteousnesse v. 17. The Apostle saith that they which receiue the gift of righteousnesse shall raigne in life then as sinne raigned vnto death so righteousnesse raigneth vnto life wheresoeuer then righteousnesse is found whether inherent as in the Angels or imputed as in the faithfull who haue the righteousnesse of Christ imputed vnto them by faith there is the kingdome of life then they which doe feele the kingdome of righteousnesse to be begunne in them who both by faith are iustified in Christ and their faith is effectuall working by loue they are assured to enter into life as S. Paul knewe after he had kept the faith and fought a good fight that there was a crowne of righteousnesse laid vp for him 2. Tim. 4.8 Doct. 7. Of the vse of the lawe v. 20. The lawe entred c. that the offence should abound c. This is the proper vse of the lawe to bring a man to the knowledge of his sinne and to shewe him in what state he standeth by nature a transgressor of the lawe and so subiect to the curse but we must not rest in this vse of the lawe there is a second and more principall ende that by the abounding of sinne grace may more abound and in this sense the Apostle calleth the lawe a schoolemaster to bring vs to Christ Galath 3.19 that we by the lawe seeing our owne weakenesse and vnsufficiencie should seeke vnto Christ Iesus to finde righteousnes in him which cannot be obtained by the lawe 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. Whether a good conscience and integritie of life be the cause of peace with God Pererius disput 1. in c. 5. numer 2. vrgeth that place of the Prophet Isay c. 32.17 s he worke of iustice shall be peace euen the worke of iustice and quietnesse and assurance for euer whereupon he inferreth that opera iustitiae c. the workes of iustice and the keeping of Gods commandements doe worke in vs this tranquilitie and peace of the minde Contra. It might be here answeared that peace of conscience is the worke of our true iustice that is Christ who is called the Lord our iustice or righteousnesse Ierem. 23.10 but that this interpretation agreeth not with the former words v. 16. Iudgement shall dwell in the desert and iustice in the fruitfull field where the Prophet speaketh of the externall practise and exercise of iustice 2. Iunius seemeth to vnderstand these disiunctiuely the fruites of the spirit which should be powred vpon them v. 15. should bring faith iustice peace as the Apostle sheweth these to be the fruites of the spirit Rom. 14.17 righteousnesse peace ioy in the holy Ghost so also Faius But this distinction here cannot be admitted because it is directly said the worke of iustice shall be peace tranquilitie 3. But the best answer is that righteousnesse procureth peace not effective because it worketh this inward peace which is wrought in vs by the grace of iustification but declarative it declareth confirmeth and assureth vnto vs our peace as S. Peter exhorteth that we make our election and calling sure by good workes 2. Pet. 1.9 not that our workes make our election sure in it selfe which dependeth on the purpose of God but it is made sure vnto vs so the peace of conscience wrought in vs by faith is confirmed and ratified vnto vs by a good life euen as good workes are testimonies of our faith and in that sense are said by S. Iames c. 2. to iustifie Controv. 2. Against invocation of Saints 1. By whome we haue accesse through faith this text is well vrged by Peter Martyr and Pareus against the invocation of Saints for if by Christ we haue accesse vnto God what neede we the helpe of other mediators and intercessours the Papists then doe much derogate vnto the glorie of Christ in bringing an other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to enter vs and cause vs to haue accesse vnto God And further two arguments may be vrged out of the Apostles words he saith we haue accesse by him through faith but Saints are not the obiect of our faith we must onely beleeue in God Ioh. 14.1 Ye beleeue in God beleeue also in me 2. we haue accesse vnto this grace namely whereby we are iustified but by the Saints we are not iustified therefore by them we haue not accesse and entrance Controv. 3. Of the certaintie of saluation and of finall perseuerance v. 5. We haue accesse vnto this grace wherein we stand Calvin out of this place refuteth two errors of Popish sophistrie the one that the faithfull for the present cannot be certaine of the grace of God and of the remission of their sinnes the other that they are not sure of finall perseuerance But to stand in grace signifieth to be sure of the grace and fauour of God one may attaine vnto the fauour of the Prince but he is not sure to continue in it But Gods fauour in Christ is most constant whom Christ loueth he loueth to the end Iob. 13.1 Tolet here foisteth in one of his Popish drugs that tranquilitie and peace of conscience and certaintie of remission of sinnes is not the fruit or worke of faith in the faithfull for the wicked that knowe not their sinnes haue also a quiet conscience Tolet. annot 1. Contra. There is great difference between a senslesse and a quiet cōscience the wicked feele not the pricke of conscience because their sinnes are concealed from them but the faithfull haue peace of conscience after the sight of their sinnes which they know to be remitted in Christ So Paul was aliue without the law but afterward when sinne reviued he died Rom. 7.9 where then the conscience is cast into a slumber of securitie sinne reviuing awaketh troubleth it but where sinne is remitted in Christ the conscience ceaseth to be troubled and perplexed as in the wicked Controv. 4. That the tribulation of the Saints is not meritorious though it be said to worke patience We must vnderstand that the Apostle diuersely vseth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worketh for it is sometime ascribed vnto the principall efficient cause as vnto God the author and worker of all good things in vs 2. Cor. 5.5 sometime
to the second or next vnderworking cause as the Apostle saith of beneficence or liberalitie that it worketh or causeth thanksgiuing vnto God sometime the effect is ascribed by this word vnto the instrumentall cause as Rom. 4.15 the lawe is said to worke or cause wrath and our light and momentanie afflictions are said to cause or worke vnto vs an exceeding weight of glorie 2. Cor. 4.17 because they are meanes to withdrawe our mindes from earthly things and to stirre vp faith in vs So tribulation worketh patience not as the efficient cause but as the organe and instrument whereby the spirit worketh patience in vs it procureth patience not sicut causa effectum c. as the cause the effect as Caietan but eam exercendo augendo ostendendo in exercising encreasing and shewing forth our patience Gorrh to the same purpose Pererius exercendae patientiae materia occasio est tribulation is the matter and occasion of exercising our patience This then is to be vnderstood according to the phrase of Scripture which doth vse to pronounce that of the signe and instrument which is proper vnto the thing as when it speaketh of the Sacraments for of it selfe tribulation worketh not patience as is seene in the wicked who thereby are driuen to impatience and despaire here then is no place to prooue any merit in the afflictions of the faithfull Controv. 5. That we are not iustified by the inherent habite of charitie Whereas the Apostle saith v. 5. The loue of God is shed abroad in our hearts c. Pererius vnderstanding the Apostle to speake here of that loue and charitie which is infused as an habite into the minde whereby we loue God setteth downe here certaine positions concerning this inherent charitie 1. he affirmeth that this charitie is that iustice whereby we are formally made iust and righteous before God disput 2. numer 10. 2. this charitie whereby we are iustified he affirmeth esse donum omnium donerum maximum to be a gift farre exceeding all other gifts 3. this charitie re non distingui à gratia gratum faciente is not indeede distinguished from grace making vs acceptable vnto God 4. Against the opinion of Caietane Scotus Gabriel he holdeth that there is in those which are iustified the habite of charitie permanent and remaining when the act ceaseth whereby they are formally made iust before God otherwise they should not be helde to be iust before God in their sleepe or when they cease to worke disput 3. numer 17.18 Contra. Although all these questions are here impertinent because the Apostle treateth not here of the charitie or loue which is in man toward God but of Gods loue toward vs as hath beene shewed at large before quest 7. yet it shall not be amisse briefly to counterpoise these erroneous assertions with the contrarie true and sound positions 1. An inherent righteousnesse and infused charitie in the faithfull we denie not but not such as whereby we are formally made righteous and iustified before God both because all our righteousnesse is as a stayned cloth Esay 64. it is imperfect and weake and therefore not able to iustifie vs and for that the Scripture testifieth that it is the righteousnesse of Christ which is applyed by faith whereby we are iustified before God as the Apostle calleth it The righteousnesse of God thorough the faith of Christ Rom. 3.22 Philip 3.9 2. Charitie is not simply the greatest of all other gifts and so absolutely preferred before faith but onely wherein they are compared together namely in respect of the continuance because faith and hope shall cease when we enioy those things which are beleeued and hoped for but loue shall remaine still so Chrysostome expoundeth the Apostle 1. Cor. 13.13 Thus Hugo saith well that charitie is said to be the greatest quia non excidit because it falleth not away but otherwise faith is the greater in quantum est cognitio generans omnes alias virtutes as it is a knowledge and engendreth all other vertues 3. The Thomists are herein contrarie to the Iesuite who affirme that gratia gratum faciens grace which maketh vs acceptable to God is in respect of charitie as the soule is to the powers and faculties which proceede from it And so indeede the grace that maketh vs acceptable vnto God is the loue and fauour of God in Christ which is as the efficient cause of that other loue and charitie which is infused into vs and wrought in vs by the holy Ghost And that our loue of God maketh vs not first acceptable vnto him the Apostle euidently testifieth 1. Iob. 4.10 Herein is loue not that we loued him but that he loued vs we were first then accepted and beloued of God before we could loue him againe 4. We graunt that faith hope and charitie are habits of the minde infused by the spirit and permanent in the soule for as the wicked doe attaine vnto euill habites of vice and sinne so the faithfull haue the habite of vertue but this is the difference that an euill habite is acquisitus gotten by euill custome but the good habites of the intellectuall vertues of faith loue hope are iufusi infused and wrought in vs by the spirit But we denie that by any such inherent habite we are made formally iust they are not causes of our iustification but rather the fruits and effects we haue the habite of faith because the spirit of God worketh in vs beleefe and we loue God because he loued vs first and gaue vs his spirit which worketh this loue in vs Faius So then the faithfull euen in their sleepe are iustified not by any inherent habit but because they are accepted of God in Christ as the Apostle saith Christ died for vs that whether we wake or sleepe we should liue together with him Controv. 6. Against the heresie of impious Socinus who denieth that Christ died for our sinnes and payed the ransome for them Whereas the Apostle here saith v. 8. that Christ died for vs we according to the Scriptures so vnderstand it that he offered a sacrifice for our sinnes Heb. 10.12 that he as our high Priest offred himselfe for our redemption Heb. 7.27 that he was our suretie and paied our ransome for vs Heb. 7.22 and saued vs from our sinnes in bearing the punishment due vnto the samâ—â—nd so he died for vs that is in our place and stead and so purchased our redemption 〈◊〉 wicked Socinus thus wresteth and misconstrueth these words that Christ died no 〈◊〉 wise for vs then for our profit and benefit in confirming by his death his doctrine and example of life by the which he saith he brought saluation vnto the world and not by dying for vs as in our stead or to pay by his death our ransome his wicked obiections are these 1. Obiect The Apostle saith 1. Ioh. 3.16 He laid downe his life for vs and we ought to lay downe our liues for the brethren Christ died for
against him such were the Angelâ— but it is not true of those whom God was offended with for their transgression and yet he loued them not onely as his creatures but as his children whom he purposed to redeeme in Christ 2. So then in a diuerse respect God both was angrie with them as sinners and yet he loued them vnder this condition that they should be saued by the redemption of Christ in him they were elected and beloued before the foundation of the world the argument then followeth not God loued them in sending his sonne to die for them and so reconcile them therefore it was needelesse that Christ should die for them which were beloued of God alreadie for God loued them in Christ whom he had ordained before to be their Mediator and Redeemer 2. Obiect As herein God shewed his loue toward vs so it would seeme a cruell part in God so to be delighted in the death of his sonne Answ. 2. God had no delight in his sonnes death in respect of his suffering and torments but as it was a satisfaction for the sinne of the world and the price of our redemption 2. and Christ the sonne of God was not forced hereunto but offred himselfe willingly of his infinite loue to die for man 3. Obiect It had beene a greater loue if the father himselfe had died for vs then in sending his Sonne thus Pareus reporteth how a Iewe obiected vnto him as he tooke his Iourney toward Silesia ann 78. Answ. First we must not curiously search into Gods secrets to knowe the reason of his will why the sonne of God rather then the father tooke our flesh and died for vs Secondly yet these reasons may be alleadged hereof 1. the father and sonne beeing but one God the father as God did worke with his sonne in finishing our redemption 2. because God was offended and it was God that must satisfie for none else could doe it therefore there must be one person in the Godhead that must satisfie namely the Sonne and one that must be satisfied namely the father 3. what greater loue could God the father shewe then in giuing his owne Sonne the most deare thing vnto him 4. It was the Redeemers and Sauiours part to restore vs vnto the dignitie of the sonnes of God vnto whom did this more properly belong then vnto the Sonne of God Controv. 8. That Christs death was a full satisfaction for our sinnes against Socinus his cauills Obiect If Christs death were a satisfaction vnto the iustice of God for the sinnes of the worldâ— then 1. it must haue beene performed by the same person that had offended 2. the iustice of God required a punishment equivalent to the offence namely euerlasting destruction and malediction which Christ sustained not 3. the Scripture no where speaketh of any such satisfaction for vs by the death of Christ. Answ. 1. As in humane Courts there is a double kind of iustice either strict or rigorous iustice or iustice moderated and tempered with equitie and clemencie as if a king inflict vpon a traytor either the punishment of death or the muâ—ct of ten thousand talents in the rigor of iustice he may exact either but if he shall in his clemencie accept an 100. talents of an other that shall vndertake for the offender here now is iustice tempered with mercie So is it with God he dealeth with some in strict iustice as with the reprobate Angels and reprobate men that doe despise Christ and his redemption but with his elect by dealeth in the other kind of tempered iustice accepting the satisfaction of Christ for them not a stranger from them but made man like vnto them 2. Though Christ suffred not eternall paines yet in respect both of the excellencie of his person that suffered and the bitternesse of that agonie which he endured did beare that punishment which in Gods gracious acceptance was equiualent vnto euerlasting paine 3. And though the Scripture vse not the verie tearme of satisfaction yet there are words of like fâ—â—ree and efficacie applyed to the death of Christ as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ransome redemption and such like as Matth. 20.28 to giue his life for the ransome of many Rom. 2.14 are iustified c. by the redemption that is in Christ Iesus and in many such places thâ—â— like phrases are found Controv. 9. That Christs death was not onely satisfactorie but meditarious against Socinus Obiect 1. No satisfaction of a due debt hath merit in it for no more is paid then is due Christ then by his death merited not because he payed our due debt neither doth the Scripture ascribe any merit to Christs death Answ. 1. It is true that he which satisfieth for his owne debt therein doth not merit for he paieth but that he oweth but he that satisfieth for an others debt meriteth two waies first in respect of the debter in paying that he oweth not then in respect of the Creditor who by an agreement couenanteth to accept the satisfaction of the vndertaker not as a recompence onely for the debt but as a merit to deserue further grace and fauour for the debter So Christ hath truely merited in respect of vs in paying our debt for vs and in respect of God who accepteth the death of his sonne as truely meritorious of his grace and fauour for vs. 2. And further herein appeareth the merit of Christs death 1. in respect of the excellencie of the person that died 2. of the perfect obedience and fulfilling of the law 3. his great loue and willingnesse in suffring 4. and beside his satisfaction he was a faithfull martyr and witnesse of the truth Reuel 3.14 3. The Scripture though in direct tearmes it ascribeth not merit vnto the death of Christ yet it vseth words equivalent as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acquisitio purchasing includeth merit as Act. 20.28 Christ is said to haue purchased his Church by his blood and Ephes 1.14 It is called the redemption of the possession purchased c. which is all one as if he had said merited See more in Pareus dub 7. Here followe certaine questions and controversies of waight touching originall sinne Controv. 10. That there is originall sinne in men by the corruption of nature against the opinion of the Hebrewes The Hebrewes doe reiect this saying of the Apostle that sinne entred into the world and death by sinne and they vrge vs to shewe some authorities out of the old Testament to prooue the propagation of Adams sinne to his posteritie Paulus Burgensis addit 2. thus consureth their opinion 1. That death which was inflicted vpon Adam for his transgression remaineth quoad 〈◊〉 as it is a punishment is euident by that place Genes 3.3 Dust thou art and to dust 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 returne which sentence of mortalitie is executed as we see by experience vpon all Adâ—â—s posteritie 2. Then he prooueth quod illud peccatum transijt ad posteras quoad culpam that 〈◊〉 sinne did
torments which had not sinned by their owne will in 9. c. Iob. so also Augustine but he saith mitissima omnium pana erit eorum their punishment shall be most gentle and easie of all other which beside originall sinne haue added none other sinnes c. and this may be safely affirmed with Augustine But that when followeth hath more doubt non audeo dicere quodijs vt nulli essent quà m vt ibi essent sotius expediret I dare not say that it were better for them not to be at all then to be there Augustine Enchirid. c. 93. Controv. 22. That Christs essentiall iustice is not infused into vs. v. 17. Much more shall they which receiue abundance of grace c. Osiander did hold not Lucas Osiander who hath written breefe annotations vpon the old and new Testament but another of that name before him that the iustice of Christ is some reall thing infused into the faithfull and that it was his essentiall iustice as he is God that is communicated to the faithfull ex Faio in v. 17. But the Apostle euidently refuteth this error c. 4.22 where he sheweth that it was imputed vnto Abraham for righteousnes because he beleeued in God if we are iustified by faith then not by the essentiall iustice of Christ which still remaineth in Christs person as the subiect thereof but the righteousnesse whereby we are iustified before God is the righteousnes of Christ as he is man which is apprehended by faith and this also is euident in this place where the Apostle ascribeth iustification to the abundance of grace receiued and how is it receiued but by faith Controv. 23. Against the patrones of vniuersall grace v. 18. By the iustifying of one the benefit abounded toward all men c. Hence of 〈◊〉 Huberus and before him the Pelagians would prooue that the benefit of iustification is as vniuersall toward all euen infidels and vnbeleeuers as the condemnation that came in by Adam for the Apostle on both sides nameth all for otherwise the benefite by Christ should be inferiour vnto the losse in Adam which redounded generally vpon all Contra. 1. This tearme of vniuersalitie all must be restrained according to the nature of the subiect as Adam transfused his sinne vnto all which were his ofspring so Christ also iustifieth all his that is all which beleeue in him so by all the Apostle vnderstandeth the vniuersall companie of the faithfull 2. the preheminence of the benefit consisteth not in the equalitie of the number that Christ should saue as many as are lost in Adam for then there should be onely an equalitie not a superioritie 3. But herein is the prerogatiue of grace seene 1. in the excellencie of the effect for life is a more excellent thing then death and righteousnesse then sinne 2. in the powerfulnesse of the worke it sheweth a greater power to saue then to destroie to iustifie then condemne for it is an easier matter to destroie then to saue to pull downe then to build vp to mortifie then to reviue and raise to life 3. the preheminence is in the amplitude and largnes of grace in that we are iustified not onely from one but all kind of sinnes as well actuall as originall whereas originall sinne is onely deriued from Adam See more hereof quest 15. Controv. 24. Against the Popish inherent iustice v. 9. So by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous c. The Romanists as Bellar. lib. 2. de iustificat c. 1. Pererius disputa 17. doe much vrge this argument against imputatiue iustice that we are not iustified by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed by faith but by an inherent righteousnesse wrought in vs by Christ whereby we are formally made iust because we are so made righteous and iust in Christ as we became sinners in Adam but that was not by imputation of Adams sinne but by sinne dwelling in them whereby they are formally made sinners therefore we are formally made righteous by an inherent iustice remayning in vs and not imputed onely Pererius further vrgeth the phrase iusti constituentur many shall be made iust which is not all one as to be reputed iust or to be iust by imputation but to be iust indeed Contra. 1. The comparison betweene Adams disobedience and Christs obedience doth hold verie well euen in this point of imputation for as there is in making of vs sinners both an imputation of Adams sinne to his posteritie as comming out of his loines as also an habituall prauitie and corruption of nature the effect thereof so their is a double operation of Christs obedience both it is imputed vnto vs by faith whereby we are iustified before God and thereby there is wrought in vs holines and righteousnesse which is our sanctification but by this because it is imperfect in this life we are not iustified before God 2. and whereas the Apostle vseth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 constituentur shall be made or constituted iust we confesse that he meaneth they shall be made iust indeede in Christ but therefore the word is put in the future tence because in this life our sanctification is but begun it shall not be absolutely perfect till the next life when all imperfection and impuritie of our nature shall be cleane taken away and then shall we be made perfectly iust indeed See a more full answer to this obiection Synops. Centur. 4. er 56. 3. But if they shall further replie that we are rather made sinners by the reall corruption of our nature then by the imputation of Adams sinne and so consequently we should rather be iustified by an inherent righteousnesse then imputed onely we answer that herein appeareth the preheminence of grace that Christs righteousnesse onely imputed is more able to iustifie vs then Adams sinne onely imputed was to condemne vs. Controv. 25. That we are iustified both by the actiue and passiue obedience of Christ. Piscator in his annotations vpon this verse vrgeth this point that we are not iustified by the obedience of Christ in his life which was his actiue obedience but by his passiue obedience in his death because if we be iustified by his righteousnesse acted in his life then should he not haue needed to haue died for vs for beeing iustified alreadie by the righteousnesse of his life there was no cause for Christ to be punished for vs beeing alreadie made iust by his righteous life Contra. 1. Though the Apostle doe principally meane the particular obedience of Christ in submitting himselfe to his fathers will in his death to giue his life for his sheepe as it is opposed to Adams particular disobedience in eating of the forbidden fruite which was in re facillima in a thing most easie to haue beene kept whereas Christs obedience was in re dissicillima in a most hard difficult thing to giue himselfe for vs euen vnto death yet this his particular obedience in his death depended vpon the generall obedience of
the grace working together is that wherewith the will of man worketh for the effecting of that which it willeth This distinction must be qualified for to make the will of man a ioynt worker with grace is against the Apostle who saith that it is God which worketh in vs both the will and the deede Philip. 2.13 But thus it may be admitted that mans will beeing once mooued and regenerate by grace is not idle but then worketh with grace not of it owne strength but as it is still mooued and stirred by grace see further hereof Synops. Centur. 4. err 30. 3. Of this sort is that distinction of grace praeveniens subsequens grace preuenting and going before and following grace which are not indeede two diuerse or seuerall graces but diuerse effects of one and the same grace Gods grace preuenteth mans will and changeth it of vnwilling making it willing and then it followeth to make the will of man fruitful and effectuall and this we acknowledge but the grace subsequent or following is not merited or procured by the well vsing of the first preventing grace in which sense this distinction is to be reiected 6. Morall obseruations Observ. 1. To followe the workes of the flesh is enmitie against God v. 10. When we were yet enimies c. They which delight in such workes as God hateth are enimies to God whereupon Origen giueth this note quomodo reconciliat us est qui causam mimici secum gerit c. how can he be said to be reconciled to God which yet retaineth the cause of enmitie c. he then which continueth in such workes as are hatefull vnto God cannot be said to be reconciled by the blood of Christ as the Apostle further sheweth That no vnrighteous person shall inherite the kingdome of God 1. Cor. 6.9 Observ. 2. Of the reconciling of enemies v. 10. When we were enemies we were reconciled c. As God did reconcile vs to himselfe beeing yet his enemies so we are taught herein to be like vnto our heauenly father to be willing to be reconciled and to be at atonement with our enemies as Abraham made a league with Abimelech and as Iacob did the like with Laban who pursued him to haue wrought him some mischiefe Observ. 3. Wherein we ought to reioyce v. 11. We reioyce in God through our Lord Iesus c. The Apostle here sheweth wherein the ioy of a Christian consisteth that whereas the world reioyceth some in riches some in honour some in pleasure some in their strength humane wisedome and the like the Christian man is taught to reioyce in his redemption and saluation in Christ as our Blessed Sauiour would haue his Apostles to reioyce because their names were written in heauen Luk. 10.20 Obser. 4. Of the two kingdomes of grace and sinne life and death v. 17. If by one offence death raigned c. The Apostle here pointeth our two kingdomes the one of sinne and death the other of righteousnesse and life there are node in the world but belong vnto one of these kingdomes Therefore it must be our great care to examine our selues vnto which kingdome we are subiects by nature all are vnder the kingdome of darkenesse and from thence we cannot be deliuered but by Christ as the Apostle saith Coloss. 1.13 who hath deliuered vs from the Prince of darkenesse and hath translated vs to the kingdome of his deare Sonne we must therefore examine our selues whether we haue faith in Christ 2. Cor. 13.5 Observ. 5. Why the Lord suffereth his sometime to fall and to be plunged in sinne v. 20. Where sinne abounded there grace abounded much more c. God then sometime seemeth to leaue his children to themselues that they afterward beeing recouered and restored by grace may haue more experience of the goodnesse and mercie of God and of the excellencie of grace as Dauid after his fall repenting of his sinne celebrateth the multitude of Gods mercies Psal. 51.1 and Peter after he was converted was bid to strengtheâ— his brethren Luk. 22.32 as then beeing more able to comfort others by the experience of Gods mercie which he had himselfe receiued Observ. 6. None ought to despaire of forgiuenesse of sinne v 20. Grace abounded much more Grace is more predominant then sinne and the Apostle in the comparison set forth betweene Christ and Adam sheweth before that grace in Christ is more able to saue vs then sinne was in Adam to condemne vs let no man then despare of mercie and say with Cain his sinne is greater then can be forgiuen but rather with S. Paul Iesus Christ came into the world to saue sinners of whom I am chiefe 1. Tim. 1.15 CHAP. VI. 3. The text with the diuerse readings WHat shall we say then shall we continue in sinne that grace may abound or be encreased Be. 2. God forbid let it not be Gr. we that are dead to sinne how yet shall we liue therein 3. Knowe ye not brethren L. addit that as many of vs as haue beene baptized all we which haue beene baptized B. G. but the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into Iesus Christ haue beene baptized into his death 4 We are buried together with him by baptisme into his death that like as Christ was raised did rise vp S. L. but the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was raised vp to the glorie Be. S.G. by the glorie L. B. V. but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by is here taken for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in of the father so we also should walke in newenesse of life 5 For if we be graft together with him G. Be. ad by the similitude of his death Be. S. B. rather then to the similitude G.L. for we are graft into Christ not into thâ—â— similitude so shall we be by the similtude which must be supplied out of the former clause some insert be partakers B. V. but the other word graft is better vnderstood of his resurrection 6 Knowing this that our old man is crucified with him that the bodie of sinne might be destroyed or abolished S.V. that henceforth we should not serue sinne 7 For he that is dead is iustified L.V. S.B. freed G.S. Be. but the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly signifieth is iustified from sinne 8 Wherefore if we be dead with Christ we beleeue that we shall also liue with him 9 Knowing that Christ beeing raised not rising S. L. see ver 4. from the dead dieth no more death hath no more dominion ouer him 10 For in that he died he died once to sinne but in that he liueth he liueth vnto God 11 Likewise thinke yee also that yee are dead to sinne but are aliue to God in Iesus Christ our Lord. 12 Let not sinne therefore raigne in your mortall bodie that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof obey the lusts thereof S. L. but here the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is omitted 13 Neither yeeld your
deuill 2. Neither yet is it taken for fomes peccati the matter or occasion of sinne as Pererius which is the appetite or desire that stirreth vp to sinne Tolet misliketh this because sinne must be taken here in the same sense as it was vsed before in the ende of the former chapter where it is taken for sinne it selfe and Pet. Martyr addeth this reason because insulâ—â—â— peccati the assaults of sinne remaine still in the regenerate 3. but sinne is here taken for the corruption and depravation of our nature in the former chapter thereby was specially signified reatus the guilt of originall sinne deriued from Adam Beza for there are these two things in sinne the guilt deriued from Adam and the corruption of our nature which is the effect thereof Pareus Quest. 2. What it is to die vnto sinne v. 2. 1. The Apostle answeareth the former obiection negatiuely denying the consequent that it followeth not that because where sinne abounded grace abounded more that therefore we should sinne that grace may more abound and of this his answear the Apostle in this chapter giueth two reasons the one from the contraries that seeing we are dead vnto sinne we cannot still liue vnto it the other from the condition and propertie of seruants who must be wholly addicted to their seruice whose seruants they are then seeing we are the seruants of Christ we must no longer serue sinne v. 16. to the ende of the chapters 2. They are said to be dead vnto sinne that obey not the lusts thereof that are as dead men not to be mooued vnto sinne not to doe the workes thereof but this death of sinne is inchoatae onely begunne in this life it shall not be perfected till all corruption and mortalitie be taken away 3. There is great difference betweene these two phrases to die vnto sinne which the Apostle vseth here and to be dead in sinne Ephes. 2.1 the first is taken actiuely for the mortifying of sinne the other passiuely to be mortified in or by sinne and in this phrase the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in must be supplied as Coloss. 2.13 in the Latine tongue mori peccato to die to sinne is put in the datiue but mori peccato in the ablative signifieth to die with or by sinne Tolet And in this latter sense they are said to be dead absolutely without any other addition as v. 13. of this chapter and in other places Beza 4. Chrysostome here giueth this note that whereas sometime the Apostle saith sinne is dead here he saith we are dead to sinne quoniam auditorem excitare studet in illum transfert mortem because he could quicken the desire of the hearer he transferreth death to him that he beeing dead in sinne should abstaine therefrom Quest. 3. What it is to be baptized into Iesus Christ v. 3. 1. Origen thinketh that this is so said to make a difference betweene the baptisme of Christ wherewith we are baptized and the baptisme of Iohn which is not of Christ but of the lawe But seeing Iohn baptized in his name that was to come how was it not of Christ and if Iohns baptisme were of the lawe then Christ should haue beene baptized with an other kind of baptisme then his members which is not to be admitted 2. Some thinke as Ambrose in this place that the Apostles altered the forme of baptisme which was at the first prescribed to be done in the name of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost But it is not like that the Apostles would change that prescript forme which was appointed by Christ himselfe the Apostle maketh mention of Christ though he intend the whole Trinitie because as Origen saith whom Haymo followeth it was not convenient that the Apostle speaking of death vt nominaret vel patrem vel spiritum c. should name either the Father or the holy Ghost because the Sonne of God onely died for vs c. or rather mention is made onely of Christ because baptisme was of his institution and the benefits represented in baptisme were procured and purchased by Christ. 3. Some giue this sense to be baptized into Christ is to be baptized with that baptisme which hath the vertue and efficacie from Christ ex Tolet. Chrysostome vnderstandeth according to the similitude and example of Christ for that which the crosse and the grave were to Christ baptismus est factus nobis baptisme is become to vs. 4. Erasmus thus we are baptised into Christ that is in corpus eius mysticum into his mysticall bodie c. but the Apostle speaketh of Christ himselfe though it be true that they which are graft into Christ are also members of his mysticall bodie 5. The vulgar Latine readeth in Christo to be baptized in Christ not into Christ that is in fide Christi in the faith of Christ Lyran. or in institutione eius by his institution gloss interlin some also which followe the Greeke text and read into Christ doe thus interpret in nomine Christi in the name of Christ Mart. Pareus Faius But it is one thing to be baptized in Christ an other into Christ. 6. Wherefore by this phrase better is signified that we are by baptisme incorporated into Christ in Christo coalescentes we growe vp together with Christ Beza Genevens inâ—â—â—â—us Christum we put on Christ Calvin inserimur Christo we are graft into Christ Tolet. vt implantaremur that by baptisme we should be planted in Christ Osiander which phrase the Apostle vseth afterward v. 5. if we be grafted with him c. Quest. 4. Of the diuerse significations of the word baptisme and to be baptized 1. Haymo here maketh 4. kinds of baptisme 1. one with water onely such was the baptisme of Iohn that gaue not remission of sinnes 2. the baptisme of the spirit such was the baptisme of the Apostles in the day of Pentecost 3. the baptisme both with the spirit and water such as is now in vse in the Church 4. the baptisme of blood such as Martyrs are baptized with But 1. it is vntrue that Iohn onely baptized with water not with the spirit for he baptized for the remission of sinnes and when Christ was baptized the spirit descended in the likenesse of a doue 2. the other two baptismes of the spirit and the baptisme of blood are not properly baptismes but onely in a metaphoricall speach 2. This word baptisme is taken two waies either properly for the washing with water in the sacrament or figuratiuely as either for the receiuing of the gifts of the spirit as Acts 1.5 our Sauiour promiseth that his Apostles should be baptized with the holy Ghosts or as for the doctrine which accompanied Iohns Baptisme as Acts. 18.25 Apollos is said to haue knowne nothing but Iohns baptisme that is his doctrine Beza Acts 19.5 3. And as baptisme is diuersely taken so there are diuerse things in baptisme to be considered three visible three invisible the three visible the Minister that baptiseth
the party that is baptized and the water the three inuisible are the soule of the partie baptized which is cleansed and faith in those that are of yeares and the holy Ghost which worketh the remission of sinnes Haymo Quest. 5. What it is to be baptized into the death of Christ. v. 3. The Apostle vseth to this purpose three phrases to be baptized into the death of Christ to be buried by baptisme into his death v. 4. and to be graft into the similitude of his death v. 5. all these shall be handled together 1. Cyrillus thinketh it is said the similitude of his death because Christ rose againe from death and so it was rather an image and shadowe of death then a death in deede but thus he should confound these two which the Apostle ioyneth together the similitude of his death and of his resurrection 2. Origen noteth certaine heretikes who gathered hereupon that Christ died not indeed but onely had a certaine similitude of death visus est magis mori quà m vere mortuâ— est he seemed rather to die then indeede died But if it were so then as Origen inferred nec vera erat resurrectio neither was Christs resurrection in truth nec vere saluati sâ—â—â—â— neither should we be truely saued 3. Therefore Origen giueth this sense it is called the similitude of death because Christ so died vnto sinne that yet there was no sinne found in him which cannot agree vnto vs for to be without sinne solius Christi est it onely belongeth to Christ But this is not the Apostles meaning for he said before we were baptized into the death of Christ which is the same as to be graft into the similitude of his death 4. Origen also hath an other exposition that Christ is exemplum nobis ad imitationem propositum an example set before vs to imitate but this is daungerous because of the error of the Pelagians who thinke that our conformitie with Christ ariseth of our imitation of him as they held that originall sinne is nothing else but a corrupt imitation of Adam whereas indeed on the contrarie our imitating of Christ proceedeth of our conformitie with him and the word is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 similitude or likenes but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is more then a bare likenesse it sheweth a conformitie vnto Christ Beza 5. Basil. lib. de baptis vnderstandeth it of baptisme which he saith is a similitude of the crosse and passion of Christ but the Apostle rather sheweth the effects and fruites of baptisme and baptisme representeth all the partes of regeneration both dying and beeing buried vnto sinne and rising vnto newnesse of life it is not a representation of his death onely 6. Chrysostome thus vnderstandeth the similitude of his death because Christs death was carnis of his flesh our death is peccati of sinne so also Haymo following Chrysostome in hoc est similitudo quod ille mortuus est corpore nos vitijs herein is the similitude he died in bodie and we to our sinne But here is more then a similitude onely vnto the death of Christ we receiue vertue and efficacie from his death to die vnto sinne 7. Some apply it vnto the manner of baptisme as Ambrose cum mergeris mortis suscipis sepulturae similitudinem when thou art drenched in the water then thou hast a certaine similitude of the death and resurrection of Christ lib. 2. de Sacram. c. 7. so Chrysostome nos quidem aqua ille tellure we are buried in the water he in the earth c. so also Lyranus baptizatus megitur in aqua he that is baptised is drenched in the water so also Gorrhan tertia immersio repraesentat triduum mortis the thrise dipping in the water representeth the three dayes of Christs death and the lifting vp out of the water his resurrection But if this were the meaning then of necessitie this ceremonie should be vsed in baptisme to goe into or to be drenched in the water 8. Wherefore to be baptized into Christs death and to be buried into his death and to be graft into the similitude of his death are applications in particular of that which the Apostle said before in generall that we are baptized into Christ for in baptisme all the fruits of Christs death buriall and resurrection are sealed vnto vs first on Gods behalfe the benefits procured by Christs death sepulture and resurrection are offred vnto vs in baptisme which is the Sacrament of faith whereby we are graft into Christ and we in baptisme doe for our parts professe to renounce the deuill the world and the flesh Pareus Our sinnes then are two waies mortified and buried first by the remission and not imputing of our sinnes purchased by the death of Christ which is our iustification then by our daily dying and beeing buried vnto sinne which is our sanctification Melancthon and both these are represented in baptisme and communicated vnto vs by faith in Christ by the vertue of whose death we die vnto sinne and by the power of his resurrection we rise vp to newenesse of life like as the branches receiue iuyce and sappe from the tree And though the death of Christ were in respect of the nature that died corporall yet in respect of the person which died beeing God and man the effects were spirituall in causing vs to die vnto sinne and to rise vp to newenesse of life Gorrhan Quest. 7. Of the meaning of this phrase to be graft c. 1. Chrysostome thus applyeth this similitude as the bodie of Christ beeing in the earth fructum edidit orbis salutem c. brought forth fruit the saluation of the world so ours being buried in baptisme fructum attulit iustitiam bringeth forth fruit namely righteousnes but in this application here onely is shewed a likenes betweene Christ and vs the efficacie is not mentioned which we receiue from Christ. 2. Haymo thus expoundeth it Christ as a tree pascit vmbram praestat both feedeth and giueth shadowe he feedeth the angels contemplatione by contemplation of him homines cognitione men he feedeth by the knowledge of him but here no reason is shewed why we are said to be graft into Christ. 3. Origen thus vrgeth the similitude omnis planta post hyemis mortem resurrectionem veris expectat euerie plant after the death as it were of winter expecteth the resurrection as it were of the spring so Christs death was as the winter and his resurrection as the spring and this world is vnto vs as winter but the spring shall be in the resurrection 4. Oecumenius vseth this allusion like as the plant that which is set into the ground quandam mortificationem sustinet c. vndergoeth a kind of mortifying and then sprouteth out againe so Christ as a plant was laid in the earth but rose againe and we also beeing as plants buried in water in baptisme doe come forth to bring forth fruit But in these two explications as
in the first the reason is not shewed why we are said to be graft into Christ but onely the similitude explained how he is said to be graft and we also 5. Erasmus because the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 planted together referreth it to the planting of the Iewes and Gentiles together into one bodie But Tolet well obserueth annot 5. that the Apostle speaketh of our planting into Christ not of one into an other 6. The meaning then of this phrase is this that Christ is the vine and we the branches as our Sauiour sheweth Iob. 15. and so we are by faith whereof baptisme is the Sacrament and seale planted and graft into Christ and doe receiue of his grace and spirit as the branches receiue the iuyce of the tree and as the tree and branches die together and growe together so Christs death causeth vs to die to sinne and his resurrection maketh vs to rise vnto newnesse of life Pareus But as similitudes must not be vrged in euerie point so must not this for betweene the naturall grafting of plants and our supernaturall and spirituall planting into Christ there is great difference for in the one the stocke for the most part is the worst but the science or plant is of a better kind and correcteth the euilnes of the stocke but here it is farre otherwise for we are of our selues wild plants and the stocke into the which we are planted is good and full of sappe Martyr Quest. 8. What resurrection the Apostle speaketh of v. 5. 1. There is some difference in the reading of the words Chrysostome who thinketh that the Apostle speaketh here de futura resurrectione of the resurrection to come will not haue the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 similitude supplyed non subiunxit similitudini resurrectionis the Apostle added not and to the similitude of the resurrection But then the Greeke construction cannot hang together if for of the resurrection beeing in the genitiue case 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cannot agree with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 graft in which before is ioyned with a datiue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the similitude Haymo will haue it put in the datiue to the resurrection but in the originall it is in the genetive Therefore the word similitude must be supplied that as he said before we are graft into the similitude of his death so we shall be to the similitude of his resurrection and so Origen also readeth 2. Concerning the meaning of these words Chrysostome Origen Tertullian Haymo with others vnderstand them of the second resurrection and they vrge this reason because the Apostle putteth the word in the future erimus we shall be Chrysostome and whereas else where the Apostle speaketh in the time past hath raised vs vp together Ephes. 2.5 but here in the future Origen thereupon inferreth that there are two resurrections one of the mind in this life the other of the bodie in the next But this is no argument taken from the time for the Apostle speaketh in the future tense because our renouation is not perfect in this life but we must daily rise from the dead workes of sinne to the newnes of life Beza 3. The Apostle then here specially intendeth the first resurrection vnto newenesse of life as he said before as Christ was raised vp from the dead by the glorie of the father not to the glorie of the father as Beza and the Syrian interpreter for the praeposition is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 per thorough yet it signifieth that Christ beeing raised vp by the glorious power of the Godhead for he hath one power with his father was raised vp to liue in glorie as the Apostle faith afterward v. 10. he liueth vnto God so we should walke in newenesse of life 4. Yet from hence also we haue an assurance of the resurrection of our bodies Calvin that by Christs resurrection we now are raised vp to the life of righteousnesse and afterward to the life of glorie as the Apostle ioyneth them both together Coloss. 2.3 for yee are dead and your life is hid with Christ in God when Christ which is our life shall appeare then shall yee also appeare with him in glorie Mart. Quest. 9. What is vnderstood by the old man v. 6. 1. The old man some take for the bodie the newe for the soule as Haymo alleadgeth out of Augustine but euen the prauitie of the affections and mind are part of this old man and therefore the Apostle saith Ephes. 4.23 be renewed in the spirit of your minde 2. Neither is the old man here taken for mans nature but the corruption thereof as Theodoret veterem hominem non naturam appellat sed pravam mentem the old man he calleth not our nature but the depraued minde and in that he saith our old man he distinguisheth the old man from our selues then we our selues are not this old man but it is aliqâ—â—d nostrum something of ours Pareus 3. Now it is called the old man in two respects first as Adam the old man is compared with the latter Adam and from Adam is deriued originall sinne which bringeth forth such euill fruites in vs before we are regenerate secondly in respect of our selues because our former conuersation is old beeing compared with our renovation and regeneration Beza the first both is according to the first Adam in sinne our second and new birth is according to the latter Adam in holines and righteousnesse 4. To this our state in the old man belong these three things 1. the guiltines of sinne 2. the custome and continuance in sinne 3. fomes peccati the occasion procurement enrising vnto sinne which proceedeth from the sinne of our parents ex Thom. 5. But whereas the ordinar gloss giueth this note that whereas the oldnes of our nature consisteth in two things in culpa poena in the fault and punishment Christus sus simpla vetustaie duplicem nostram consumpsit Christ by his single oldnes that is his death hath taken away both ours c. this can no way agree with the scope of the Apostle for if the old man be of Adam and we are made newe in Christ then cannot the old man be said to be in Christ. Quest. 10. What is meant by the bodie of sinne v. 6. that the bodie of sinne might be destroyed 1. Haymo propoundeth this interpretation among others that as Christ is the head of the elect and they with all their vertuous actions are his bodie so the deuill is as the head of sinne and the vngodly with all their sinnes are his bodie so that this bodie of sinne should haue relation vnto the deuill as the head but this bodie of sinne the Apostle called before our old man it hath relation to our selues not vnto the deuill 2. Some do take this bodie for our flesh in qua peccatum haeret whereto sinne cleaueth Beza Genevens and before them Theodoret but this cannot agree with the phrase which the Apostle
harder to say that the deuill had dominion then death ouer Christ. 3. Origen hath an other exposition that Christ dominatum pertulerit mortis quia formam servi susceperat did beare the dominion of death because he tooke vpon him the forme of a seruant and vpon all such death hath dominion but it was not necessarie that Christ should haue died though he had taken vpon him our nature seeing he was without sinne which causeth death 4. Wherefore death is said to haue had dominion quia sponte volens se subiecit mâ—rti because he willingly submitted himselfe to death for our sinne Mart. Calvin Quest. 14. How Christ is said to haue died to sinne v. 10. 1. Hilarie lib. 9. de Trinitat thus readeth that which died died once to sinne and vnderstandeth it of Christs bodie making the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a relatiue of the neuter gender so also Laurentius Valla and Iacobus Stapulens but this would seeme to fauour the Nestorian heresie that diuideth Christs person to say that Christ died not but his bodie died and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be taken for the coniunction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that he died as Galath 2.20 in that now I liue to this purpose Erasmus Beza 2. For the meaning Hilarie thus expoundeth Christ died to sinne quia mortuus corpore because he died in the bodie wherein was the similitude of sinne lib. 9. de Trinit so also Augustine in Enchirid. 3. Haymo thus mortuus est semel peccato id est semper he died once to sinne that is alwaies because he neuer had sinne at all 4. Some vnderstand sinne as the cause wherefore Christ died that the sinnes of the world were the cause why Christ died so Ambrose he died for sinne that is for or because of sinners serm 18. in Psal. 18. 5. But the better sense is that Christ died to sinne that is tollendo to take away sinne so Chrysostome mortuus est vt illud tollerat he died for sinne to take it away Christ died otherwise to sinne then we doe ille expiando nos amitiendo he to expiate and purge our sinnes we to leaue it Pareus Quest. 15. How Christ is said now to liue vnto God ver 10. 1. Oecumenius thus vnderstandeth he liueth to God eo quod sit Deus because he is God that is by his diuine vertue 2. Pareus thus ad gloriam Dei patris he liueth to the glorie of God his father that by his life the Church should be glorified but thus Christ liued in the dayes of his flesh both by the power of God and to the glorie of his father as our Blessed Sauiour himselfe saith Ioh. 6.57 As the liuing father hath sent me so liue I by the father 3. Neither is Christ said so to liue vnto God as we are said in the next verse to be aliue vnto God that is by the spirit of grace for so Christ liued vnto God all the dayes of his flesh 4. Chrysostome thus expoundeth it to liue to God sine fine vinere is to liue without ende that is eternally neuer any more to die 5. But not onely the eternitie of Christs life is hereby expressed but the glorie and maiestie also as Haymo interpreteth he liueth in gloriam paternae maiestatis in the glorie of the maiestie of his father as Reuel 18. And am aliue but was dead and behold I am aliue for euermore c. 6. And by this phrase is expressed the indissoluble vnion which Christ hath with God the father the Apostle hereby doth not onely signifie that he now liueth in eternall happines sed indivulse Deo haerere but is inseparably ioyned vnto God Martyr Quest. 16. Of these words v. 11. likewise thinke yee c. 1. Likewise thinke ye 1. Origen saith the Apostle vseth this word because this death which he speaketh of namely dying to sinne in cogitatione consistit non in effectu consisteth in the cogitation not in any externall effect 2. Chrysostome because that which he speaketh of non potest ad oculum repraesentari cannot be represented to the eye but is apprehended by faith 3. Haymo giueth this sense they must in memoriam reducere often bring to remembrance and bethinke themselues that they are dead to sinne so also Tolet annot 15. and Faius 4. but the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth rather collect yee gather ye it is the inference of the conclusion from the head to the members that we are certainely dead by the commemoration of his death so is the word vsed c. 3.28 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we conclude Beza Pareus 2. Dead to sinne but aliue to God Some doe interpret this of the life of the Saints in the resurrection when they shall liue to God for euer neuer to die any more but the Apostle speaketh of the life of grace as the next verse sheweth 3. In Iesus Christ c. 1. Origen maketh this the sense to liue in righteousnesse holines peace is to liue in Christ because Christ is all these and to the same purpose Chrysostome he that hath obtained Christ hath receiued euery vertue and grace with him 2. Gorrhan referreth it to the imitation of Christ making the seuere parts of Christs life an example of so many degrees of our spirituall life to his conception answeareth propositum the purpose of newe life to his natiuitie our regeneration to his death our labour in dying to sinne to his sepulture cessatio vitiorum the ceasâ—ing of sinne to his resurrection answeareth nova vita iustorum the newe life of the righteous to his asscention processus virtâ—tum our proceeding in vertue to his sitting at the right hand of God gloria beatorum the glorie of the Blessed Saints 3. But here is more signified then a similitude or conformitie to and an imitation of Christ the Apostle expresseth the author and efficient cause of our dying vnto sinne and liuing vnto God namely Christ Iesus Christo auxiliante Christ helping vs Oecumen Christi opere by the worke of Christ gloss interlin per Christum mediatorem by Christ our Mediator Lyran. as the Apostle saith Galath 2.20 I liue by faith in the Sonne of God Bucer Pareus with others Quest. 17. How sinne is said not to raigne c. ver 12. 1. Chrysostome and Theodorets obseruation seemeth here to be somewhat curious that the Apostle speaketh of the raigning not of the tyrannizing of sinne the difference betweene which two is this the one is of necessitie the other is voluntarie he would not haue them willingly to submit themselues in obedience vnto sinne although it doe play the tyrant in suggesting euill thoughts and desires yet they should resist them and not suffer sinne to haue a peaceable kingdome to this purpose Theodoret But this distinction is not necessarie for the kingdome of sinne in man is a meere tyrannie the kingdome properly in man is peculiar to the spirit because sinne vsurpeth vpon them that by right are
Cor. 15.32 S. Paul had fought with beasts at Ephesus after the manner of men as others vsed to doe 4. sometime it is referred to the humane and ordinarie phrase of speaking as in this place 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doct. That baptisme is not to be iterated v. 3. Haue beene baptised into his death c. Hence it is inferred that baptisme is not to be iterated or more then once to be administred because as men are but once naturally borne and are once to die so because in baptisme our spirituall birth and death are represented it sufficeth once to be baptised this maketh against the Hemerobaptistae which thinke it necessarie daily and often to be baptised but as man hath but one naturall birth so our supernaturall birth in baptisme is sufficient 2. Doct. That infants haue sinne In that the Apostle saith of all that they are baptised into the death of Christ that is to die vnto sinne that the bodie of sinne might be destroied as he saith v. 6. hence Augustine concludeth lib. 6. cont Iulian. c. 1. that children haue sinne for to what end else should they be baptised to die vnto sinne 3. Doct. Of the comparing and conferring of Scriptures together v. 3. All we which haue beene baptised vnto Iesus Christ c. Hence Origen noteth because the Apostle addeth not all we that are baptised in the name of the Father the Sonne and holy Ghost that it is his manner when he citeth any Scripture not to alleadg the whole text but those things onely quae praesentis causae requirit assertio which the state of the present cause requireth Pareus further addeth that what is breefely touched in some place of Scripture is more at large handled in another as here the misterie of baptisme is opened which is but breefely set forth in the first institution of baptisme where Christ onely biddeth to preach and baptise in the name of the Trinitie 4. Doct. Of the misteries set forth in baptisme v. 3. Here are three misticall points expressed in baptisme 1. in that we are said to be baptised into Christ whereby is signified our implanting and grafting into Christ which word the Apostle vseth v. 5.2 there is a communicating of the death and resurrection of Christ his death with all the fruites thereof is applied vnto vs 3. our renouation and newnes of life with our spirituall dying vnto sinne is also shadowed forth in baptisme Pareus 5. Doct. Of the distinction of sinne raigning and not raigning v. 12. Let not sinne raigne c. All sinne in the wicked and vnregenerate is peccation regnans raigning sinne whether it be originall or actuall because they giue the reine vnto sinne and obey the lusts thereof In the regenerate though to speake properly there be no absolute kingdome of sinne because it cannot possesse them totally and finally but at length they wrestle forth yet euery sinne in the regenerate committed against their conscience and depriuing them for the time of the hope of remission of sinnes is a raigning sinne when they doe not resist it but obey the lusts thereof such was Dauids adulterie sinne not raigning in them is their originall concupiscence their infirmities sinnes of ignorance omission and such like which they doe daiely mourne for and striue against 6. Doct. What manner of seruice must be performed to righteousnesse v. 19. As you haue giuen your members servants to vncleannes c. so c. We must serue righteousnesse as before we serued sinne 1. libenter willingly and cheerefully 2. vigilanter 3. celeriter speedely not putting off our seruice 4. potenter mightily with all our strength and power 5. ardenter earnestly zealously not coldly or slackely 6. indesinenter constantly without ceasing intermission or giuing ouer Gorrhan 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. Against the administring of the sacraments in an vnknowne tongue v. 3. Know ye not c. Hayma taketh this to be a reprehension of the Apostle reproouing them for their ignorance as if he should haue said certe id puto ignoratis I verily thinke ye are ignorant and if ye be I will shew it vnto you c. But Origen better inferreth that the Apostle speaketh taquam scientibus edoctis as to men of knowledge c wel taught hereupon he sheweth that in the Apostles time the vse was otherwise then in his daies non et numie fieri videmus typus tantum modo mysteriorum bis qui baptizantur sed virtus corum ratio tradebatur then not onely the type it selfe and misterie of the sacrament was deliuered to those which were baptized as now is vsed to be done but the efficacie and reason thereof c. the meaning of the sacrament explaned so that none were ignorant what was signified thereby as the Apostle speaking here of baptisme and of the spirituall vse and signification therof appealeth vpon their knowledge which sheweth the superstition of the Romanists who cause the sacraments to be administred vnto their people in the latine tongue and so they are kept in ignorance not knowing the right vse of the sacraments but resting onely in the outward ceremonies superstitious vsages which they haue brought in and added to the sacraments Controv. 2. Concerning inherent iustice Stapleton a notable champion for the Romanists Antidot p. 312. thus reasoneth out of the Apostles words v. 2. for inherent iustice they which are dead to sinne are wholly renewed in the inward man and so by their renouation are acceptable vnto God and thereby iustified but by the grace of Christ we die vnto sinne not to liue vnto the same any more Ergo thereby we are accepted of God and reconciled to him Contra. The proposition diuersely fayleth 1. this renouation of the inward man is not totall or perfect but onely in part though sinne doe no longer raigne in them that are iustified yet the reliques thereof remaine still the vnderstanding will and affections are but reformed in part for the Apostle faith we know in part 1. Cor. 13.9 and as our knowledge is such is our charitiâ— indeede in the next world when we are glorified all imperfection shall be done away and we shall be perfect as God is perfect but while we dwell in these houses of clay we are compassed with many imperfections 2. This our renovation though it be not perfect yet is accepted thorough the perfect obedience of Christ but it is not accepted as our iustification whereby we are reconciled vnto God for that which instifieth vs must be perfect which is onely the righteousnesse of Christ applyed vnto vs by faith See further touching inherent iustice Synops. Centur. 4. exr 56. and Contr. 14. following Controv. 3. That the Sacrament of baptisme doth not conferre grace by the outward worke v. 3. Knowe yee not that all we which haue beene baptized into Iesus Christ haue beene baptized into his death c. Hence the Romanists would inferre that baptisme doth worke in all regeneration for
euill but all good workes are of grace for God worketh in vs both the will and the deed Phil. 2.13 and that euen good workes which are of grace are excluded the Apostle sheweth elsewhere Ephes. 2.8 By grace are ye saued c. not of workes least any man should boast of himselfe for ye are his workemanship created in Christ Iesus vnto good workes c. 2. The Apostle indeed speaketh of the election of grace but yet the rule is generall that grace and workes in the matters of saluation cannot be matched together for he prooueth election to be of grace and not of workes by his generall axiome or proposition because that which is of grace cannot be of workes and if election be of grace and not of workes then euerlasting life also which dependeth of our election must of necessitie be of grace also Argum. 4. That which is of workes is by debt as the Apostle saith Rom. 4.4 To him that worketh the wages is not counted by fauour but by debt But God is endebted to no man therefore life eternall is not of workes because it is not by debt Answer Pererius here answereth by indistinction that there is a lawfull kind of meriting de condigno of worthines the one is perfect and absolute which presupposeth no gift of grace whereof it dependeth such were the workes of Christ which were absolutely meritorious ex rigore iustitiae euen according to the strict rule of iustice by the reason of the excellencie of his diuine nature beeing vnited in one person to his humanitie there is another kind of merit ex suppositione diuinae gratiae vpon the presupposall of diuine grace so the workes of men proceeding of grace and their free will working together are merita apud Deâ—â—â— merites with God like as naturall things though they haue that vertue and actiuitie from God are the true causes of their effects Pere disput 10. numer 53. Contra. 1. This answer ouerthroweth it selfe for if mens good workes proceed of the grace and gift of God then cannot God be any waies endebted for his owne as Dauid saith 1. Chron. 29.14 All things come of thee and of thine owne hand haue we giuen thee and the Apostle saith Rom. 11.35 Who hath giuen vnto him first and he shall be recompenced if then we might challenge any thing at Gods hands as a debt by way of recompence we must first giue vnto him 2. There is not the like reason of naturall and supernaturall things the naturall causes haue their vertue at once from God and then they afterward worke according vnto that nature and propertie wherewith they were once endued but in supernaturall the grace of God is necessarie ad omnes actus to euery act as the horse when he goeth of his owne accord is the naturall cause of his going but the order that directeth him is the cause of his going in the way and of his going to such a place so grace is the cause of our well doings we concurre indeed as naturall causes of the action but the goodnes of the action is onely from God 3. God then is not endebted vnto man for the merite of his worke neither in iustice in respect of vs is he bound to recompence vs but yet he is another way endebted in respect of his promise and so it is iust with him in regard of his word and promise to performe that which he hath promised which promise he made onely of his free grace and this point is touched also by Pererius praesertius vero adiuncta Dei promissione de remunerandis c. especially the promise of God being adioyned for the rewarding of the good workes of the righteous c. in regard of this promise we graunt which is meerely of grace not for the merite of the worke the Lord worketh himselfe a voluntarie debter of eternall life Argum. 5. The Apostle saith Rom. 8.18 That the afflictions of this present life are not worthie of the glorie which shall be shewed c. here he euidently sheweth that our workes are not meritorious or worthy of eternall life Answer Pererius here also thus distinguisheth that workes may three wayes be considered in respect of the naturall cause as they proceed from mans freewill in respect of the matter wherein they are expressed and the time of continuance which are but temporall and for a time and thirdly as they are wrought in vs by the grace of God in the two first respects they haue no cause of merit but in the third conuenientem habent proportionem equalitatis dignitatis c. they haue a fit proportion of equalitie and worthines with the reward of eternall life thus Pere disput 11. Contra. 1. The verie scope of the place taketh away this distinction for the Apostle v. 17. saith If we suffer with Christ c. he speaketh of such sufferings and afflictions as are endured for Christ which are the workes of grace for a man of himselfe without grace cannot suffer for Christ therefore euen good workes as they proceed in vs of grace are not meritorious or worthy of eternall life 2. Good workes are so farre from beeing meritorious causes of eternall life that they are not alwaies and in all causa sine qua non the cause without the which we cannot attaine vnto life as in infants and in them which are of yeares though without good workes they cannot be saued yet good workes are rather a beginning of eternall life then the cause thereof 3. To conclude this point therefore in a merit there must fowre things concurre 1. it must be a free seruice which we otherwise are not bound vnto 2. it must be of our owne 3. it must be perfect 4. it must be proportionable to the reward But our workes faile in all these 1. we can performe nothing vnto God but that we are alreadie bound to doe 2. neither haue we any good thing of our owne which we haue not receiued 3. and our best workes are imperfect 4. and betweene our temporall seruice and an euerlasting reward there is no proportion therefore we cannot merite See more hereof Synops. Centur. 4. er 79. 6. Morall obseruations Observ. 1. Of perseuerance v. 4. So we also walke in newnes of life Origen hence well collecteth that this newnes of life semel facta non sufficiat once done sufficeth not ipsa novitas innovanda est this newnes must still be renewed from day to day as the Apostle saith 2. Cor. 4.16 our inward man is renewed daily for as that which waxeth old is euery day oulder and oulder so that which is new must continually be renewed otherwise it ceaseth to be new so that we must walke on still perseuere and encrease in this newnes of life Observ. 2. Of the continuall strife with sinne v. 13. Neither giue your members weapons The Apostle vsing this phrase of weapons sheweth that there is a warre in vs some fight for sinne and make their members weapons
his delight and ioying in good in his inner man but he is captiued by the lawe of his members vnto sinne v. 22.23 The issue is this first he desireth and expecteth to be deliuered from this spirituall bondage and captiuitie ver 24. secondly he giueth thanks for this freedome in Christ that he is not yet wholly captiued vnto sinne but in his spirit he serueth the lawe of God 3. The questions and doubts discussed Quest. 1. How the law is said to haue dominion ouer a man as long as he liueth 1. We must here distinguish betweene these two cessare legem the law to cease and dominionem legis cessare the dominion of the law to cease Theodoret thinketh that the Apostle treateth of the ceasing of the law so also Gorrhan but that the law is not ceased the Apostle sheweth afterward giuing an instance in one of the commandements Thou shalt not lust but the dominion of the law is ceased which serued to condemne but we are vnder grace which hath deliuered vs from the bondage of the law Tolet. annot 1. 2. By the lawe 1. neither with Sedulius doe we vnderstand the lawe of nature for he speaketh vnto the Iewes that knewe the lawe whereas the lawe of nature was knowne also vnto the Gentiles 2. neither with Ambrose by the lawe doe we meane the Gospel for we are not dead vnto this lawe as the Apostle saith v. 4. we are dead to the law 3. neither is the lawe of the members here vnderstood as Origen which is alwaies euill rebelling against the lawe of the word but the lawe which the Apostle here speaketh of is holy and good ver 12. 4. nor yet doe we vnderstand the ciuill lawe of the Romanes to whom the Apostle doth write as knowing their owne lawes as Haymo and Lyranus indifferently vnderstandeth Lex Mosaica vel Civilis the Mosaicall or Ciuill lawe 5. The Apostle then maketh mention of the morall law of Moses as is euident by that instance which afterward he bringeth in of that commandement Thou shalt not couet Tolet. Mart. Pareus 3. These words while he liveth are diuersly interpreted 1. some referre it to the law as long as the lawe liveth or remaineth so Origen Ambrose Erasmus and Origen addeth this reason because the man is afterward resembled to the lawe who beeing dead the woman is free but this reason sheweth that it must be referred rather to the man then the law 2. and so indeede it is more fitly said of the man while he liueth then of the lawe and in grammaticall construction it is better referred to the nearer word then the further off Beza 3. some doe ioyne it vnto man which word because in the Greeke signifieth both sexes Chrysostome thinketh that the death of both is insinuated for if the woman be free when her husband is dead much more when she is dead also but then this verse should be confounded in sense with that which followeth whereas the Apostle speaketh first in generall of the lawe which onely beareth rule ouer a man while he liueth and then of the particular lawe of matrimonie 4. some thinke that these words while he or it liueth are indifferently referred either to the lawe or man for both we are said to be dead to the lawe v. 4. and the lawe also is said to be dead v. 6. Mart. but it is better ioyned with man as the nearest word 4. Tolet thinketh that the Apostle speaketh not here generally of the law of Moses but of the particular law of matrimonie annot 4. but as is before shewed it is better to vnderstand the Apostle to speake generally here of the law which bindeth a man onely while he liueth and so we are dead in Christ and no longer bound to the law and then he doth illustrate the same by the particular law of marriage the law was as the man or rather sinne that receiued strength by the law we as the wife the law beeing dead in Christ in respect of the bondage thereof we are free Pareus 2. Quest. Whether the woman be simply free if the man be once dead v. 3. If the man be dead she is free Lyranus giueth this note that if the man should chance to die and yet be raised againe as some were the woman were not bound in that case to receiue the man as her husband nisi de condecentia but in decencie onely and supervenienti novo consensu by a new consent and contract Pererius affirmeth the same and giueth instance of Lazarus that if any should rise againe as he did non futuram vxorem eius quae ante fuerat she should not be his wife that was before but vpon a new contract Contra. Though this be but a curious and vnnecessarie question yet because the occasion is ministred by them it shall not be amisse herein to examine the truth Indeede when we shall rise againe to an immortall state as in the generall resurrection neither the man shall be bound to the wife nor the wife to the husband because they shall neither marrie nor be giuen in marriage but when any is miraculously raised againe to the mortall state and condition of this life the case is otherwise as may appeare by these reasons 1. Other coniunctions which are not so neare as betweene the father or mother and the children doe not cease neither are extinct by such a temporall death as it is saide Heb. 11.35 The women receiued their dead raised to life that is the mothers acknowledged their children raised againe as the widow of Sarepta and the Shunamite had their sonnes restored vnto them againe beeing dead the one by the Prophet Elias the other by the Prophet Elisha the question is whether those children so raised were freed from the obedience of their parents I thinke not no more is the wife in that case freed from her husband because the coniunction is nearer betweene the man and wife as Gen. 2.24 Therefore shall a man leaue his father and mother and cleaue to his wife 2. When the Sadduces put the question to Christ of a woman that was married to seuen brethren whose wife she should be in the resurrection our Sauiour answered them not that the woman was free from them all by death but because that in the resurrection they neither marrie not are married but are as the Angels in heauen Matth. 22.30 So then the reason why they are free after death is not simply because they are dead but because they shall rise to an incorruptible state and not returne from death againe to their former mortall condition 3. Pererius himselfe confesseth that if one that is baptized or hath receiued orders should be raised from death he should not neede to be baptized or consecrated againe because those Sacraments do imprint in the soule an indeleble character so doth not matrimonie But this may serue as an argument against his conceit that matrimonie in this case shall no more be iterated
homines à coelestium meditatione retrahit which draweth spirituall men from the meditation of heauenly things but the Apostle spake before of the combate betweene the flesh and the spirit and they are not all carnall which are occupied in the necessarie affaires of this life 6. Tolet ioyning the pronoune this vnto death not vnto the bodie reading thus from the bodie of this death will haue reference to be made vnto the tyrannie of the lawe of concupiscence whereof he spake before but the pronoune is better ioyned to bodie as the Syrian interpreter Erasmus and Beza well obserue for of his flesh and members he spake before but of death he made no mention This demonstrative then this is better referred to bodie 7. Wherefore the Apostle calling his present state out of the which he desireth to be deliuered this bodie of death ioyneth both mortalitie and sinne together he meaneth his mortall bodie subiect to sinne as Hierome expoundeth quod morti perturbationibus est oppositum which is opposed to death and perturbations apolog advers Ruffin and so Beza the Apostle by the bodie designeth carneam corporis molem the fleshie masse of the bodie which is nothing else but mussa mortis peccati a lumpe of death and sinne so Origen it is called the bodie of death in quo habitat peccatum quod est mortis causa wherein sinne dwelleth which is the cause of death 8. And this deliuerance which the Apostle longeth for is not the spirituall deliuerance in this life from the captiuitie of sinne as Tolet but the finall deliuerance from the bondage of mortalitie and corruption which we looke for in the resurrection as Augustine expoundeth lib. 1. cont epist. Pelag. c. 11. and so the Apostles meaning is non finiri hoc confluctus c. that these conflicts cannot be ended as long as we carrie this mortall bodie about with vs Pareus And here we may consider a threefold state of mans bodie the one in Paradise cum non potuit mori when it was in mans power if he had not sinned not to die at all vnder the state and condition of sinne where non potest non mori he cannot but die a necessitie of death is laid vpon all Adams posteritie vnder the state of glorie non possumus mori we cannot die we shall be exempted from the condition of all mortalitie Pererius Quest. 25. Why the Apostle giueth thanks to God ver 25. 1. There is some difference in the reading of these words the Latine interpreter thus readeth the grace of God thorough Iesus Christ so also Origen before who maketh it an answear to the former words of the Apostle who shall deliuer 〈◊〉 likewise Augustine followeth this reading serm 45. de tempor but all the Greek copies haue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I giue thankes and the Apostle did not aske the question before who should deliuer him but suspirat potâ—â—s be sigheth and sheweth his desire to be deliuered Beza 2. For the meaning of the words 1. some thinke that the Apostle giueth thanks for his redemption in Christ Mart. that he is deliuered à reatu peccati from the guilt of sinne originall and actuall Roloch and that his sinnes are not imputed Osiander and before them Oecumenius quod me liberavit per mortem filij that he hath deliuered me by the death of his Sonne But this deliverance the Apostle had alreadie obtained he speaketh in the future sense who shall deliuer me 2. Theophylact referreth it to the former benefit quod viriliter adversatur peccato that he did manfully resist sinne which strength he had not either by the law of nature or by the law of Moses but by grace in Christ So also Pareus thinketh the Apostle doth giue thankes that he doth not succumbere in certamine sed vincere giue ouer in this combate but at the length ouercommeth But the Apostle wisheth yet a further deliuerance which as yet he had not because he speaketh of the time not to come who shall deliuer me and yet he giueth thankes for it as enioying the fame in hope 3. Tolet and Pererius thinke that the Apostle giueth thankes that he was deliuered from concupiscence quod non mentem trahit in consensum that it did not draw his mind to consent and so he was deliuered from it as it was malum culpae as there was sinne or fault in it that is to consent vnto it but not as it was malum poenae a punishment that is concupiscere to couet or desire simply without assent so also Lyranus But if the Apostle did not sometime thorough his infirmitie giue consent vnto his concupiscence how could he say it did lead him captiue vnto the law of sinne more it is prooued at large afterward that the commandement thou shalt not lust whereof the Apostle confesseth himselfe a transgressor v. 7.18 doth not onely restraine the first motions of concupiscence which haue not the consent of the will but the second also which haue controv 8.4 Vatablus will haue this thanksgiuing to be referred to the deliuerance which the Apostle expected in the life to come 5. But it is better to ioyne them together as Augustine doth serm 45. de tempor the grace of God nunc perfecte innovat hominem c. doth now perfectly renew a man by deliuering him from all his sinnes ad corporis immortalitatem perducit and bringeth him also to the immortalitie of the bodie Lyranus likewise comprehendeth both these deliuerances that both the regenerate are here deliuered from their sinnes and in the next life shall be freed from all corruption as the Apostle saith Philip. 3.21 Who shall change our vile bodie that it may be fashioned like vnto his glorious bodie so Chrysostome saith the Apostle giueth thanks quod non solum principibus malis liberamur sed eoruÌ„ quae futura sunt capaces facti sumus that we are not onely deliuered from the former euills namely our sinnes but are made capable of the good things to come thus also Pellican the Saints reioyce se primitijs spiritus donatos c. that they are endued with the first fruits of the spirit which giue them certaine hope of the inheritance to come and Beza the Apostle sheweth that he resteth in that hope quam habet in Christo fundatam which he hath grounded on Christ. 35. Quest. Of these words I in my minde serue the law of God c. 1. By the mind the Apostle vnderstandeth the inner man reformed by grace by the flesh the part vnregenerate so that in this speach of the Apostle a double figure is to be admitted first a metonymie in that the subiect is taken for the adiunct the minde for the sanctitie and holines wrought in the minde by grace as Vatablus well interpreteth secundum spiritum meum doctum à spiritu sancto in my spirit taught by the holy spirit and the flesh for the carnall sensualitie whereby it is lead there is also a
synecdoche the principall part beeing taken for the whole the minde regenerate for all the regenerate part both in the minde and bodie because it chiefly sheweth it selfe there and the flesh for that part which is vnregenerate in the whole man both in the minde and bodie because it is chiefly exercised and executed by the bodie see before Quest. 26. 2. We are not to vnderstand here two distinct and seuerall parts the one working without the other as the Romanists which will haue the inner man to be the minde and the sensuall part the flesh for in this sense neither doth the minde alwaies serue God wherein there is ignorance infidelitie error nor yet doth the sensuall part alwaies serue sinne for many vertuous acts are exercised thereby see this opinion before confuted Quest. 31. But these two parts must be vnderstood as working together the flesh hindreth the spirit and blemisheth our best actions Faius 3. And whereas the Apostle saith that in my flesh I serue the law of sinne we must not imagine that the Apostle was giuen ouer vnto grosse carnall works as to commit murther adulterie but he sheweth the infirmitie of his flesh and specially he meaneth his naturall concupiscence and corruption of nature in the which he gaue instance before against the which pugnabat luctabatur he did striue and fight Martyr 4. Neither yet must we thinke that the Apostle seruing the spirit one way and the flesh an other was as a mutable or inconstant man or indifferent like as Ephraim is compared to a cake but turned and baked on the one side Hos. 7.8 or as they which Revel 3. are said to be luke warme neither hoat nor cold for these of a set purpose were such and willingly did dissemble but the Apostle setteth forth himselfe as a man neither perfectly sound nor yet sicke but in a state betweene both that although he laboured to attaine to perfection yet he was hindred by the infirmitie of his flesh like as an Israelite dwelling among the Iebusits Faius 5. And whereas the Apostle said before v. 15. it is not I that doe it but sinne that dwelleth in mee and yet here he saith I my selfe c. in my selfe serue the law of sinne the Apostle is not contrarie to himselfe for he speaketh here of his person that doth both there of of the cause Tolet. annot 25. and so he sheweth secundum repugnantia principia se repugnantia habere studia that according vnto the contrarie beginnings or causes he hath contrarie desires Pareus 36. Quest. Of that famous question whether S. Paul doe speake in his owne person or of an other here in this 7. chapter There are of this matter diuers opinions which yet may be sorted into these three orders 1. Some thinke that the Apostle speaketh in the person of a man not yet in the state of grace 2. Some of a man regenerate from v. 14. to the ende 3. Some that the Apostle indifferently assumeth the person of all mankind whether they be regenerate or not And in euery of these opinions there is great diuersitie 1. They which are of the first opinion 1. Some thinke that the Apostle speaketh in the person of a naturall man and sheweth what strength a mans free will hath by nature without grace so Iulianus the Pelagian with other of that sect whose epistles Augustine confuteth so Lyranus he speaketh in the person generis humani lapsi of humane kind after their fall 2. Some will haue the person of a man described sub lege ante legem degentis not liuing onely before the law but vnder it hauing some knowledge of sinne so Chrysostome Theophylact whome Tolet followeth annot 4. 3. Some thinke that the Apostle describeth a man not altogether vnder the law nor yet wholly vnder grace but of a man beginning to be conuerted quasi voluntate proposito ad meliora conversi as converted in minde and desire vnto better things Origen so also Basil. 〈◊〉 â—egal breviar and Haymo saith the Apostle speaketh ex persona hominis poenitentiam agentis in the person of a man penitent c. 2. They of the second sort doe thus differ 1. Augustine confesseth that sometime he was of opinion that the Apostle speaketh in the person of a carnall and vnregenerate man but afterward he changed his minde vpon better reasons thinking the Apostle to speake of a spirituall man in the state of grace lib. 1. Retract c. 23. lib. 6. cont Iulian. c. 11. but Augustine reteining this sense thinketh that the Apostle saying v. 15. I allow not that thing which I doe speaketh of the first motions onely of concupiscence quando illis non consenttatur when no consent is giuen vnto them lib. 3. cont Iulian. c. 26. which concupiscence the most perfect man in this life can not be void of so also Gregorie vnderstandeth simplices motus ceruis contra voluntatem the simple motions of the flesh against the will and hereunto agreeth Bellarm. lib. 5. de amission grat c. 10. Rhemist sect 6. vpon this chapter 2. Cassianus collat 23. c. 15. vnderstandeth a man regenerate but then by the inner man he would haue signified the contemplation of celestiall things by the flesh curam rerum temporalium the care of earthly things 3. Some thinke that the Apostle so describeth a regenerate man as yet that he may sometime become in a manner carnall we see in this example euen of Paul regenerate etiam regeneratum nonnunquam mancipium fieri peccati that a regenerate man may sometime become the slaue of sinne Rolloch 4. But the founder opinion is that the Apostle in his owne person speaketh of a regenerate man euen when he is at the best that he is troubled and exercised with sinnefull motions which the perfectest can not be ridde of till he be deliuered from his corruptible flesh of this opinion was Hilarie habemus nunc nobis admistam materiam quae mortis legi peccato obnoxia est c. we haue now mixed within vs a certaine matter which is subiect to the law of death and sinne c. and vntill our bodie be glorified non potest in nobis verae vita esse natura there can not be in vs the nature and condition of true life Hilar. in Psal. 118. Of the same opinion are all our foundest new writers Melancthon Martyr Calvin Beza Hyperius Pareus Faius with others 3. Of the third sort 1. some are indifferent whether we vnderstand the person of the regenerate or vnregenerate gloss ordinar and so Gorrhan sheweth how all this which the Apostle hath from v. 18. to the end may in one sense be vnderstood of the regenerate in an other of the vnregenerate 2. Some thinke that some things may be applied vnto the regenerate as I am carnall sold vnder sinne but some things onely can be applied to the regenerate as these words I delight in the law of God c. Perer. disput 21. num 38. and yet he
Whether S. Paul was troubled with the tentations of the flesh and with what 1. S. Paul was before his calling tempted and carried away with diuerse lusts as he confesseth Tit. 3.3 then giuing consent vnto them following theÌ„ with delight after his calling he felt also the pricking and stirring of his flesh but it had not dominion ouer him as before as here the Apostle sheweth how he did finde the lawe of his members rebelling against the law of his minde and spirit and these temptations of the flesh the Lord suffered the Apostle to be troubled with least he should be extolled by reason of his other excellent gifts as he himselfe sheweth 2. Cor. 12.7 whereupon Gregory well saith custos virtutis infirmitas infirmitie is the gardian and keeper of vertue ad ima pertrahit caro ne extollat spiritus ad alta sustollit spiritus ne prosternat caro the flesh draweth vs downe that the spirit lift vs not vp and the spirit doth reare vs vp that the flesh should not altogether cast vs downe lib. 19. Moral c. 4. 2. But whereas the Apostle saith There was giuen vnto me the pricke of the flesh c. 2. Cor. 12.7 1. neither thereby is signified the afflictions and griefes which the persecutors put his bodie vnto as Chrysost. Theodoret. 2. or the paine of the head gloss ordinar or the cholike as Lyranus or some other such bodily infirmitie which would haue much hindered the Apostle in his ministerie 3. nor yet much lesse was this pricke the lust of his flesh as Hierome thinketh epist. 22. and Haymo so also Pererius disput 23. for it is not like that Pauls bodie beeing tamed and kept vnder with fastings watchings labour had any such fleshy desire 4. But hereby is better to vnderstand omne tentationum genus c. euery kind of carnall temptation wherewith S. Paul was exercised Calvin Beza 4. Places of Doctrine Doct. 1. All things fall out to the wicked for their hurt v. 8. Sinne tooke occasion by the commandement Pet. Mart. hereupon well observeth that all things to the vnregenerate fall out vnto euill for if the lawe doe giue advantage to sinne which is holy iust and good of it selfe how much are other things turned to their hurt as all things to them that loue God fall out to their good Rom. 8.28 Doct. 2. Of the necessarie vse of the lawe v. 8. Without the lawe sinne is dead That is it lyeth hid and is vnknowne hence both Pareus and Piscator note concionem legis in Ecclesia necessariam that the preaching of the lawe is necessarie in the Church that sinne may be knowne and come to light and thus the lawe by reuealing our sinne is a schoolmaster to lead vs to Christ Galat. 3.19 to finde righteousnesse in him which we haue not in our selues Doct. 3. Of the effects of the lawe v. 9. When the commandement came sinne reuived There are 3. effects of the lawe here expressed by the Apostle two it bringeth forth of it selfe the manifestation of sinne and thereupon the sentence of death the third it worketh not of it selfe but accidentally namely the encrease of sinne through the perversnes of mans nature which striueth against that which is forbidden Par. Doct. 4. Of a fiuefold state of man v. 23. I see an other law in my members c. 1. In Paradise man had naturall concupiscence but without disorder or rebellion against the mind 2. before the law concupiscence rebelled against reason and without resistance 3. vnder the law men resisted concupiscence but could not vanquish it 4. vnder grace they striue against it and preuaile 5. in heauen these shall be no concupiscence at all Perer. disput 17. Doct. 5. How death is to be desired v. 24. Who shall deliuer me S. Paul desireth to be dissolued to make an ende of sinne and thus death may be wished for as the onely remedie of our miserie the wicked doe oftentimes desire death but it is rather vitae fastidio quam impietatis taedio for that they are wearie of their life not of sinne Calvin 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. Against Purgatorie v. 1. The Law hath dominion ouer a man as long as he liueth This sheweth the presumption of the Pope who taketh vpon him to prescribe lawes and rules vnto those which are dead and their soules as they imagine in purgatorie for no lawe imposed vpon the liuing doth bind them when they are dead and concerning the authoritie of man it determineth in this life Matth. 10.28 Feare not them which kill the bodie and are not able to kill the soule the Pope then is no more able to free and absolue the soule after death then he is to kill and condemne it Controv. 2. Of the lawfulnes of second marriage v. 2. If the man be dead she is deliuered from the law of the man Hence the lawfulnes of second marriage is prooued for if the woman be free when the man is dead and so likewise the man then is it lawfull for them to marrie againe for now they are as though they neuer had beene bound Hierome then herein was deceiued who seemeth to speake hardly of second marriages though in words he will not condemne them for he saith that a woman marrying after the first marriage doth not differ much from an harlot lib. 1. cont Iovinian and they which are twice maried he compareth to the vncleane beasts in Noahs arke But Hierome is to be pardoned this ouersight who too much extolling virginitie which he confesseth he had lost himselfe ad Eduoch was caried away in heate and passion so to â—â—iâ—e of second marriages 2. The Romanists though they dare not condemne second marriages simply yet in that they denied such to be admitted to orders as haue beene twice married they shew what base conceit they haue thereof Pererius to helpe this matter saith that S. Paul would a Bishop to be the husband of one wife not because he condemned second marriages sed quod â—â— maximè ducebat dignitatem sacramentum Episcopi c. but because it best become the dignitie and sacrament Episcopall to be the husband of one wife as Christ is the spouse of one Church c. disput 1. num 2. Contra. 1. S. Paul meaneth such as had but one wife at one time not one after an other for there were many in those daies which were newly conuerted from Iudaisme that had more then one wife at once for among the Iewes it was tolerated and euen by their owne decrees he was counted infamous qui duas simul vxores habet which had two wiues at once decret Gregor lib. 1. tit 21. c. 4. not he which had two one after an other see 〈◊〉 elswhere Synops. Cent. 1. err 78. 2. A dignitie Episcopall we acknowledge but no Sacrament for Christ instituted onely two baptisme and the Eucharist which answer vnto the two principall Sacraments of the old Testament Circumcision and the Paschal lambe 3.
If it be decent for a Bishop to be the husband of one wife as Christ is of one Church why will they not then allow them to haue any wife at all 4. Christ indeede is the husband but of one Church at one time yet the Church of the old Testament and the Church of the new did one succeede an other so then this resemblance may hold very well if likewise a Bishop be the husband of one wife after an other Controv. 3. Whether the marriage bond be indissoluable before the one partie be dead 1. Pererius would prooue the negatiue that marrying cannot be dissolued quoad viâ—culum in respect of the bond if it be lawfully contracted but onely quoad torum in respect of their bedding and conuersing together no not for fornication but after death by this place of the Apostle v. 3. If while she liueth she take an other man she shall be called an adulteresse the Apostles words are generall that till death part them neither of them is free Contra. 1. The Apostle speaketh of marriage as it was instituted of God which by Gods ordinance was to continue as long as life lasteth for God appointed in the beginning that the man should cleaue vnto his wife here then the Apostle had no cause to speake of the cases wherein diuorce is admitted either civilly as the law of Moses permitted the men to giue a bill of diuorce to the women or by Christian libertie or immunitie as in the cases of fornication or desertion for when there happeneth any other separation of mariage then by death it falleth not out nisi per vitium but by the fault of the one as Chrysostome here obserueth for the Iewes were permitted to giue their wiues a bill of diuorce for the hardnes of their heart as our Sauiour saith Matth. 15. and either their wiues were in fault for the which cause they dismissed them or they were in fault in seeking to be rid of their wiues likewise in diuorce vpon fornication the partie diuorced was in fault but in the case of desertion the partie forsaking was in fault so none of these separations was without the fault of the partie but the Apostle speaketh of the institution of marriage according to Gods ordinance as it is found and entire without any such impediment or let comming betweene in which sense it is not dissolued but by death 2. Erasmus further answereth that the Apostle onely taketh his similitude from marriage and in a similitude it is not necessarie that euery thing should agree neither is it to be pressed in euery point 3. But that in two cases the mariage bond may be dissolued beside death by the fault of either partie delinquent namely for fornication and vpon wilfull desertion it is euident the first by the words of our Sauiour Matth. 19.9 Whosoeuer shall put away his wife vnlesse it be for whordome and marrie another c. committeth adulterie the other by that place of the Apostle 1. Cor. 7.15 if the vnbeleeuing depart let him depart a brother or sister is not in subiection in such things Pareus dub 1. see further else where Synops. p. 685. 687. Controv. 4. That the disparitie of profession is no cause of the dissolution of marriage v. 4. If the man be dead Gorrhan here putteth in a distinction of ciuill death which is by profession ante carnaletu copulam before carnall knowledge or naturall which is by death properly for it is the common opinion of that side that the man or woman hauing contracted matrimonie may either of them forsake the other before the consummation of marriage to take vpon them the profession of single life The Romanists also haue another opinion that marriage contracted in the time of infidelitie before baptisme is dissolued and made void if either of the parties afterward be conuerted to the Christian faith Bellar. de matrimon c. 12. But these two exceptions for the disparitie of religion or profession to dissolue matrimonie are contrarie to the rule of our Sauiour Matth. 19.9 who alloweth no marriage to be dissolued but for fornication and Saint Paul directly prescribeth that the woman should not forsake her vnbeleeuing husband if he be content to dwell with her 1. Cor. 7.13 See further hereof Synops. Centur. 3. er 82. er 95. Controv. 5. Whether the bill of diuorce permitted to the Iewes did lawfully dissolue matrimonie vnder the law This question ariseth by reason of the Apostles generall words here that if the woman take another man as long as the first liueth she is called an adulterer hence then this doubt is mooued what was to be thought of the men which dismissed their wiues vnder the law and married others and the woman likewise so dismissed married againe whether it were adulterie in them 1. Some are of opinion that by the bill of diuorcement giuen the verie bond of matrimonie was dissolued and that then it was lawful for either partie to marrie againe as Scotus Dorandus Poludanus in 4. Sententiar distinct 33. Caietanus in 24. Deuter. Abulens in c. 19. Matth. qu. 49. and Burgens against Lyranus in 24. Deuter. But the words of our Sauiour Christ make against them who saith that Moses permitted them so to doe for the hardnes of their heart Matth. 19.8 it was therefore tolerated onely and suffered because of their infirmitie it was not made lawfull and our Sauiour Christ addeth from the beginning it was not so this their instance then of distinguishing their wiues was a departing from the first institution 2. Wherefore their opinion is more sound which thinke that although because of the hardnes of their heart to auoid a greater mischeefe namely vxoricidium the murthering of their wiues they were permitted to send them away yet the marriage was not in truth dissolued they married againe sine poena legali without any legall punishment but yet non sine peccato not without sinne Thus Pererius shewing the same to be the opinion of Thomas Bonaventure Lyranus with others and before them Augustine lib. 19. cont Faustum c. 26. and Hierome in c. 2. Malach. And further Augustine sheweth that Moses intendment in graunting a dismission of the wife vpon a bill of diuorcement was to haue them reconciled that whereas onely the Scribes were to write the bills of diuorcement of purpose henc interposuit moram he put in this caution to delay the matter that while the man went vnto the Scribe while his bill was in writing his minde might be altered especially by the perswasion of the Scribe who in his discretion was not to write any such bill if reconciliation might otherwise be had So then of this libertie of the Iewes the like iudgement is to be giuen as of the polygamie or marriage of many wiues that neither was void of infirmitie which God did beare within those times but neither was euer simply lawfull the first institution beeing violated Controv. 5. Against the workes of propitiation v. 4. That we
haue no other Gods c. and thou shalt make to thy selfe no grauen image c. but one 2. Contra. 1. The Apostle calleth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a commandement in the singular number not commandements 2. if they were two commandements it should not be knowne in what order they should be set which before the other for Exod. 20. it is first said thou shalt not couet thy neighbours house but Deuter. 5.21 thou shalt not couet thy neighbours wife is put in the first place 3. beside if euery particular act of coueting should make a diuerse commandement the number of them should be infinite Pareus 3. Pet. Martyr herein concurreth that the precept thou shalt not lust is but one but he hath here a singular opinion by himselfe that the two first commandements thou shalt haue no other Gods c. and thou shalt not make to thy selfe c. are but one and the first commandement he would haue that to be which is set as a preface before the rest I am the Lord thy God which brought c. for here it is enacted that the Lord onely is the true God and in this first commandement the Gospel is offred vnto vs for in that mention is made of their deliuerance out of Egypt there the promise concerning Christ is contained But this is onely a priuate opinion and a singular conceit of so learned a man by himselfe which may be thus reasoned against 1. all the commandements are propounded imparatively thou shalt not doe this or thou shalt not doe that but those words are vttered enuntiative they are propounded onely not spoken by way of commanding 2. and if he will haue the temporall deliuerance out of Egypt to containe a promise of Christ it is so much the rather no part of the morall commandements for the law and faith are opposite one containeth not nor includeth an other as the Apostle saith the law is not of faith Gal. 3.12 no more is faith of the law 10. Controv. Against free will v. 19. The euill that I would not that doe I. The Rhemists note here that this maketh nothing against free will but plainely prooueth it because to consent or not consent is alwaies free though the operation may be hindred by some externall force Contra. 1. The will of the vnregenerate is free from coaction and compulsion but not from a necessitie alwaies of willing that is euill 2. and in the regenerate of which state the Apostle speaketh in his owne person the will is reformed by grace to will that which is good as our blessed Sauiour saith Ioh. 8.33 If the Sonne make you free then you are free in deede this place then euidently maketh against the naturall strength of free will vnto that which is good 6. Morall obseruations 1. Observ. Euery one must descend into himselfe v. 7. I knew not sinne but by the law As Paul here giueth instance in himselfe and examineth his sinnes by the law so euery one is taught by his example to enter into himselfe and call his life and acts to account as Dauid saith Psal. 32.5 I acknowledged my sinne vnto thee c. 2. Observ. Against phanaticall spirits that excuse sinne v. 17. It is no more I that doe it men that are giuen ouer to all carnall lusts must not thinke to excuse themselues thus that it is sinne that doth it and not themselues for they must also say with the Apostle v. 16. I doe that which I would not they cannot then apply this to themselues qui non pugnant which doe not fight or striue against sinne 3. Observ. Of delighting in the lawe of God v. 22. I delight c. Hypocrites may seeme to conforme themselues often to the obedience of the lawe as Herod that a while heard Iohn gladly but it is not in loue or with delight which is onely in them that are regenerate as the Prophet Dauid saith that the lawe of God was sweeter vnto him then the honie or honie combe Psal. 19. Observ. 4. Of the fight and combate betweene the spirit and the flesh v. 23. I see an other lawe c. Onely the righteous doe feele this strife in themselues the spirit drawing them one way and the flesh an other as the Apostle here sheweth in himselfe and so as Gregorie saith fit certo moderamine c. this is done in such moderation that the Saints while they are in spirit carried one way and hindered by the flesh nec desperationis lapsum nec elationis incurrunt they neither fall into despaire nor yet are lifted vp in mind the like combate betweene the spirit and flesh we may finde to haue been in Dauid Psal. 73. 2.17 in Elias 1. King 19.4 in Ieremie c. 20.7 the like temptations Hierome felt in himselfe pallebant or a iciunijs mens desiderijs ardebat in frigido corpore my face was pale with fasting and yet my minde burned with desire euen in a chill bodie epist. 22. this is much to the comfort of Gods children not to despaire when they are likewise tempted CHAP. VIII 1. The text with the diuerse readings v. 1. Now then there is no condemnation to them which are in Christ Iesus which walke walking Gr. not after the flesh but after the spirit which walke not after the flesh L. S. detr 2 For the law of the spirit of life which is in Christ Iesus hath freed me thee S. from the law of sinne and of death 3 For that which was impossible to the law in as much as it was weake because of the flesh God sending his owne Sonne in the similitude of sinnefull flesh flesh of sinne Gr. in a forme like vnto flesh subiect to sinne Be. this is the sense but not the meaning of the words and for sinne not of sinne L.V. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for condemned sinne in the flesh in his flesh S. ad 4 That the righteousnes the iustification L.T.S. the right Be. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the law might be fulfilled in vs which walke not after the flesh but after the spirit 5 For they which are after the flesh which are in the flesh S. which are carnall V.B. doe sauour the things of the flesh Be. G. doe thinke the things of the flesh S. are carnally minded B. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. but they that are after the spirit the things of the spirit 6 For the wisdome of the flesh is death but the wisdome of the Spirit is life and peace 7 Because the wisdome of the flesh the affection of the flesh V. the fleshly mind B. the vnderstanding of the flesh S. is enmitie against God for it is not subiect to the law of God neither in deede can be 8 So then they that are in the flesh can not please God 9 Now ye are not in the flesh but in the Spirit seeing the Spirit of God not if so be the spirit of God L.S.B. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for as much as 2. Thess. 1.6 dwelleth in you but if any haue not the Spirit of Christ the same is not his 10 And if Christ be in you the bodie is dead because of sinne but the Spirit is life because of righteousnes for righteousnes sake B.G. 11 But if the Spirit of him that raised vp Iesus from the dead dwell in you he that raised Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortall bodies by his spirit because of his Spirit V.L.S.B. but the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 put to a genitiue case rather signifieth by that dwelleth in you 12 Therefore brethren we are debters not to the flesh to liue after the flesh 13 For if ye liue after the flesh ye shall die but if ye mortifie the deedes of the bodie flesh L. by the Spirit ye shall liue 14 For as many as are led driuen V. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Spirit they are the sonnes of God 15 For ye haue not receiued the spirit of bondage againe vnto feare but ye haue receiued the spirit of adoption of Sonnes S. of the Sonnes of God L. add whereby wherein L. we crie Abba father 16 The same spirit beareth witnesse with our spirit that we are the sonnes of God 17 If we be sonnes children G. we are also heires euen the heires of God and ioynt heires heires annexed G. partakers of the inheritance of S. coheires Be. V. with Christ if so be we suffer together with him that we may be also glorified together with him 18 For I count that the afflictions of this present time are not answerable or meete V. Be. S. worthie L. B. G. but the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worthie beeing construed with the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rather taken in the first sense to the glorie which shall be reuealed vnto vs. 19 For the earnest expectation B. fervent desire G. expecting with lifting vp the head Be. or fastening of the eyes S. as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth of the creature the created world Be. waiteth when the sonnes of God should be reuealed 20 Because the creature the created world Be. is subiect to vanitie not of it owne will but by reason of him which hath made it subiect subdued it vnder hope G.B. but these words vnder hope are better referred to the next verse B. S. 21 Vnder hope that the creature also shall be deliuered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious libertie of the sonnes of God 22 For we knowe that euerie creature the world created Be. all the creatures S. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 groaneth together or sigheth and trauaileth in paine together with vs vnto this present 23 And not onely the creature but we also which haue the first fruits of the spirit euen we doe sigh groane L. V. mourne B. in our selues waiting for the adoption of the sonnes of God L. ad euen the redemption of the bodie 24 For we are saued by hope but hope that is seene is not hope for that which one seeth why not how G. B. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should he hope for 25 But if we hope for that we see not we doe with patience abide it expect it Be. 26 Likewise the spirit also helpeth our infirmities for this what we should pray for as we ought we knowe not but the spirit it selfe maketh intercession maketh request L.G. with sighes groanes B.S.V. which cannot be expressed 27 But he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the meaning sense Be. vnderstanding S. desire L. affection V. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sense meaning of the spirit for he maketh intercession for the Saints according to God that is according to his will S. G. according to his pleasure B. 28 Also we knowe that to those which loue God all things work together God helpeth them in euerie thing S. ad for the best vnto good Gr. euen vnto them which are called of his purpose predestinate to be called S. called to be Saints ad of his purpose L. 29 For those whom he knewe before he also predestinate to be like fashioned or conformable to the image of his sonne that he might be the first borne among many brethren 30 Moreouer whom he predestinate them also he called and whom he called them also he iustified and whom he iustified them also he glorified 31 What shall we then say to these things if God be for vs on our side B. G. who can be against vs 32 Who spared not his owne Sonne but gaue him vp for vs all how shall he not also with him giue vs all things 33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge or put in any accusation against Be. of Gods chosen it is God that iustifieth 34 Who is he that condemneth who shall condemne det G. it is Christ which is dead or rather which is risen againe who is at the right hand of God and maketh intercession B. Be. L. maketh request G. for vs. 35 Who shall separate vs from the loue of Christ shall tribulation or anguish or persecution or famine or nakednes or perill or the sword 36 As it is written For thy sake are we killed all day long we are counted as sheepe for the slaughter 37 Neuerthelesse in all these things we are more then conquerors we doe ouercome L. S.V.B. but the compound word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth more then simply to ouercome thorough him that loued vs. 38. For I am perswaded am certaine V. B. that neither death nor life nor Angels nor principalities nor powers not things present nor things to come nor strength ad L. 39. Nor height nor depth nor any other creature shall be able to separate vs from the loue of God which is in Christ Iesus our Lord. 2. The Argument Method and Parts In this Chapter the Apostle concluding the doctrine of iustification remooueth and taketh away the impediments 1. the reliques remainder of sinne in the sonnes of God doe not hinder their iustification to v. 17.2 neither are their afflictions an impediment which he exhorteth them by diuerse reasons patiently to suffer to v. 31.3 then he concludeth with the certaintie of saluation in the elect v. 31. to the end 1. The first impediment that the reliques of sinne which remaine in the seruants of Christ whereof the Apostle gaue instance in himselfe in the former Chapter doe not hinder their saluation he taketh away but with a double limitation if they be in Christ and doe not walke after the flesh both which are propounded v. 1. and afterward amplified and handled more at large The first limitation he setteth forth 1. by the fruites and effects of the spirit in the faithfull in freeing them from sinne and so from death and condemnation whereof he giueth instance in himselfe v. 2. from the end of Christs incarnation and death which was to destroie sinne and fulfill righteousnesse which the law could
of death Pareus so also Osiander doctrina euangelij side apprehensa the doctrine of the Gospel apprehended by faith doth deliuer me likewise Rolloc liberatio hac non est regeneratio sed peccatorum remissio this dedeliuerance is not regeneration but remission of sinnes and his reason is because the Apostle speaketh of a full and absolute deliuerance from sinne and death which is in remission of sinnes not in regeneration which is but in part 5. But I rather ioyne both these together regeneration and remission of sinnes from the which we are deliuered by the grace of Christ as Augustine comprehendeth both for sometime he expoundeth the Apostles words of the remission of sinnes lib. 1. de mixt concupis c. 32. how hath he deliuered vs nisi quia concupiscentiae reatum peccatorum omnium facta remissione c. but that the spirit of life hath dissolued the guilt of concupiscence remission of all sinnes beeing made sometime he applieth them to this worke of regeneration the law of the spirit of life hath deliuered thee from the law of sinne and death ne scilicet concupiscentia c. re in peccatum mortem pertrahat c. lest concupiscence challenging thy consent should draw thee into sinne and death lib. 1. cont 2. epist. Pelagian c. 10. And Calvin also though he cheefely insist vpon the second as he is alleadged before yet he omitteth not the first by the spirit of life vnderstanding the spirit of God which hath besprinkled our soules with the blood of Christ not onely to cleanse them à labe peccati quoad reatum from the staine of sinne in respect of the guilt sed in veram puritatem sanctificat but to sanctifie vs with true puritie c. And the ioyning of these two together doth best fit the occasion of these words and most agreeth vnto the words themselues for the Apostle hauing before spoken both of our iustification in Christ and our sanctification in not walking after the flesh now bringeth in this as a reason of both which is the spirit of life in Christ applied vnto vs by faith and concerning the words the spirit of regeneration answereth to the law that is the force of sinne and the life of grace to the law of death from the first we are deliuered by the spirit of sanctification from the other by the life of righteousnesse in our iustification 6. But Origens exposition is farre wide who by the spirit of life vnderstandeth the spirituall sense of the law and so he will haue in the law both literam occidentem spiritum viâ—ificantem the killing letter and the quickning spirit for the Apostle here directly against the law opposeth the spirit of grace and life in Christ. Quest. 3. What is vnderstood by the law of sinne and death 1. Some by the law of sinne vnderstand the morall law which was the ministrie of death and by it came the knowledge of sinne So Ambrose who propoundeth this obiection that seeing the Gospell and law of faith is likewise vnto sinne the sauour of death vnto death vnto some the sauour of life vnto life as the Apostle saith 2. Cor. 2. why faith if it worke the same thing which the law doth may not be said also to be lex mortis the law of death maketh this answer qui non obediunt fidei non occiduntur à fide sed à lege c. they which obey not faith are not killed by faith but by the law because they which came not vnto the faith are condemned by the law as guiltie of sinne and death c. But this were to confound the law and faith as though the law commanded and prescribed the Euangelicall faith for the law punisheth onely the breach and transgression thereof but the law commandeth one thing namely doe this and thou shalt liue saith onely in the Gospel requireth of vs to beleeue Rom. 4. 10.9 Pet. Martyr giueth this answer that the Gospel quamdiu fâ—ris sovat c. so long as it onely foundeth outwardly and the spirit worketh not within doth differ nothing from the law but when the spirit worketh inwardly together with the preaching of the Gospel then it hath the effect to saluation which the law cannot haue because it requireth other things then the Gospel the Gospel then is not the ministrie of death as the law not for that it doth not punish vnbeleeuers as the law doth the disobedient but in respect of the doctrine of saluation by faith which men are capable of by grace whereas the doctrine of workes by the law can bring no saluation vnto any no not beeing in the state of grace Together with Ambrose Vatablus and Pareus by the law of death will haue the law of Moses to be vnderstood quia peccatum deteget occidit because it discouereth sinne and killeth it iudging it worthie of death so also Bellarmine lib. 4. de iustificat c. 13. ration 5. and gloss interlin But if the law doe condemne sinne and sentence it with death it is not the law of sinne beeing against it it is called the ministerie of condemnation 2. Cor. 3.9 but so it is nostro vitio by our fault not of it selfe but that is said to be the law of a thing which it properly prescribeth and aymeth at 2. Origen seemeth to vnderstand the ceremoniall law which was impossible to be obserued as he giueth instance of the law of the Sabboth and of sacrifices as before by the spirit he interpreteth the spirituall sense of the law But the Apostles intent is not here to compare the literall and spirituall sense of the law together but to shew what libertie we haue obtained by Christ from sinne and condemnation 3. Some by the law of sinne and death vnderstand carnis imperium the dominion or power of the flesh or of sinne raigning in the flesh and the tyrannie of death which followeth Calvin the law of sinne is the law of the members which the Apostle spake of before Chrysostome Pet. Martyr the accusing of sinne and power of death Osiander or ab obligatione from the bond and obligation of sinne and death Lyranus à iure peccati c. from the right or power of sinne and death as Erasmus we are deliuered both from the power and guilt of sinne for Moses law the Apostle no where calleth the law of sinne Chrysostome So here there is mention made of three lawes two good the law of grace which taketh away sinne the law of Moses which is mentioned in the next v. which sheweth sinne but taketh it not away and one euill law namely of sinne which maketh vs guiltie gloss ordin Quest. 4. Of the best reading of the 3. verse 1. Erasmus and Vatablus doe supplie the word effecit or praestitit did or performed in this sense that which was impossible to the law c. God sending his Sonne c. did c. This reading also follow the Ecclesiasticall expositors collected by Marlorat
proceede from the pravitie of the flesh 2. And the Apostle saith is enmitie not an enemie as the Latine readeth for then it should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the neuter not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the feminine and here the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the accent in the first syllable which signifieth enmitie not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 accented in the last syllable which is the adiective in the femine gender enemious and the Apostle speaketh in the abstract not by the figure Metalepsis taking it for the concrete enmitie for enemie the substantiue for the adiectiue as Pareus nor yet doth he so speake vt vehementior fit oratio to make his speach more vehement and forcible Martyr but hereby is expressed the irreconciliable enmitie betweene the flesh and the spirit for that which is an enemie may be reconciled as Esau was to Iacob but enmitie can neuer be reconciled Faius 3. Now the Apostle here giueth a reason of the former verse why the wisdome of the flesh is death because it is enmitie with God from whome commeth life but yet the wisdome of the spirit is not so the cause of life and peace with God as the wisdome of the flesh is of death for this is the meritorious cause of the one so is not the wisdome of the spirit that is regeneration of the other but it is as the meane and way whereby we are assured of saluation and to haue peace with God but that which procureth and worketh it is faith in Christ Rom. 5.1 therefore here the Reader must take heede of a corrupt note of Lyranus that the confidence of the spirit meretur vitam gratiae in prasenti c. doth merit the life of grace in this present and the peace of glorie in the next 4. And as the wisedome of the flesh is enmitie with God so the wisdome of the spirit is enmitie and freindship which is defined to be a mutuall goodwill which is declared by freindly partes and offices for vertues sake thus then Aristotles rule is found to be false inter valide in aequales non dari amicitiam that there cannot be freindship betweene such as are much vnequall for in the beginning there was freindship betweene the creator and his creature and this auncient amitie is renewed and restored by Christ who vouchsafeth to call his Apostles freinds Ioh. 15.14 5. But by flesh 1. neither with the Manichees must we vnderstand the substance of the flesh for by flesh he meaneth the prauitie and corruption of the flesh 2. nor yet with Chrysostome doe we interpret it to be carnalem vitam onely a carnall life which onely sheweth the corrupt actions but it signifieth the prauitie of our nature 3. neither doe we with Ambrose onely referre it to the vnderstanding quae non potest capere divina which is not capable of diuine things for here the continuance rather and rebellion of the flesh is signified then the impotencie and weaknes of it 4. nor yet by the flesh is vnderstood onely the sensuall part and by the spirit rationabilitas mentis the reasonablenes of the soule but euen the minde also is carnall as Theophylact calleth it carneam mentem a carnall mind as v. 9. if any haue not the spirit of Christ but their owne naturall spirit they alwaies haue 6. And whereas it is said it is not subiect to the law of God neither can be 1. neither is it to be restrained to that particular law of the Gospel of rendring good for euill which carnall men transgresse that render euill for euill as Haymo 2. not yet because they thinke God can doe nothing beside that which is to be seene and found in nature gloss ordinar for this but one particular act of carnalitie 3. nor yet is it to be vnderstood with this limitation â—â—m eo perseueret if a man continue in the flesh he cannot so long be subiect vnto the law of God Oecumen for the Apostle speaketh of the wisedome of the flesh it selfe not of those that are in it which can neuer be changed to become subiect vnto God but they which are in the flesh may cease to be in the flesh and so please God 4. and this doth manifestly conuince the Pelagians of error which hold that a naturall man might fulfill the law of God and of the Popish schoolmen who affirmed that a man without grace might keepe the law quoad substantiam operis in respect of the substance of the worke though not ad intentionem legis after the intention of the law Quest. 10. How they which are in the flesh cannot please God v. 8. 1. Not they which follow the law secundum literam according to the letter as Origen the Apostle speaketh generally of all as well Iewes as others that are in the flesh 2. Neither as the Maniches by the flesh is vnderstood the bodie for so none in this life should please God 3. Nor yet as Hierome in his passionate and too much loue of virginitie and partiall and preiudicate opinion of marriage that they which inseruiunt officio coniugali serue the marriage duties were in the flesh and thus also Pope Syricius did descant vpon these words applying them against marriage epistol ad Himmer Tarracon but they are said to be in the flesh qui post concupiscentias eunt which follow the lust and concupiscence of the flesh 4. But this must be vnderstood with a limitation quamdiu tales fuerint as long as they are such as Theophylact with other Greeke expositors as Augustine doth set it forth by this example as the same water may be both frozen with cold and be made hoate with the fire so the same soule of man may be first subiect to the flesh then to the spirit Quest. 11. Of the dwelling of the spirit of God in vs v. 9. Seeing the spirit of God dwelleth c. not if the spirit as the vulgar latine hath it and so the Romanists read and so Lyranus expoundeth the former words yee are not in the flesh i. esse non debetis ye ought not to be for so Chrysostome and Oecumenius well obserue non â—â—a ponit vt quidubitet he saith not thus as doubting but certainely beleeuing that they had the spirit 2. And in that he saith the spirit dwelleth 1. he sheweth that the spirit is otherwise in them then in other things for he is euery where and in all things immensitate essentia in his infinite essence but he is in the faithfull praesentia efficacia gratia by the presence and efficacie of his grace 2. in that the spirit is said to dwell thereby is signified that he is not in vs tanquam hospes as a straunger but indigena perpetuus an indweller for euer as Iob. 14.16 he shall abide with you for euer Pareus 3. and as a dweller in an house doth not onely occupie it but also in ea imperat doth command and beare rule and sway in
it so the spirit dwelleth in the faithfull as the ruler and commander in the house the spirit and the flesh may be in the same house together if the flesh be as the seruant and the spirit as the master but if the flesh haue the masterie the spirit departeth like as where extreame cold hath taken possession there can be no heate at all but if the extremitie of cold be abated then there may be place for heate Martyr 4. And here we must distinguish as Origen well doth between the extraordinarie gifts of the spirits such as the Prophets and Apostles had when the spirit came vpon them in the likenes of fierie tongues and the ordinarie gifts for where the spirit is those extraordinarie graces alwaies follow not but those which the Lord seem to be conuenient for God giueth vnto euery one as he will 2. Cor. 12.11 3. And whereas the Apostle saith he that hath not the spirit of Christ is not his Origen well thus expoundeth creatura eius est sed non discipulus he is his creature still as all other things are but he is not his Disciple nor a member of his mysticall bodie 12. Quest. Of the meaning of these words v. 10. The bodie is dead because of sinne the spirit is life c. 1. Origen vnderstandeth the two parts of man the bodie and the soule and he giue in this sense the bodie is dead because of sinne mors imponitur ne peccet death is imposed vpon the bodie that it should not sinne alwaies remembring the ende and so the spirit vivit ad faciendam institiam liueth to worke righteousnes but the Apostle sheweth the cause of death in the one namely sinne and of life in the other namely righteousnes rather then the ende of both 2. Ambrose seemeth by the bodie to vnderstand the whole man that is dead because of sinne and by the spirit the holy Ghost â—â— author of life because he is giuen to iustifie vs so also Chrysostome will haue the holy Ghâ—â—t to be vnderstood which onely is not life in himselfe but giueth life vnto others so also Martyr but the other opposite part of the bodâ—â— sheweth that the spirit hath relation also vnto man 3. Some vnderstand the first clause of mortification as if the Apostle should say the â—â— die is dead quantum attinet ad peccati operationem in respect of the operation of sinne Oecumen Piscat but in this sense the same thing should be expressed in both clauses the mortifying of sinne and liuing vnto righteousnes which the opposition betweene the contraâ—â— parts of the bodie and spirit wil not heare 4. Calvin and so Osiander will haue the bodie to signifie the vnregenerate part the spirit the spirituall and regenerate but in this sense the Apostle vseth to oppose the flesh in the spirit not the bodie and the spirit 5. Wherefore by bodie we may better vnderstand that mortall part of man which is subiect to death and by the spirit the inward part of man namely his soule regenerate which liueth by faith Beza thinketh that the life of the soule is here vnderstood when it is separate from the bodie Chrysostome referreth it to the life of the resurrection Lyranus to the life of grace now in present But we may better comprehend both that both now for the present the spirit of man liueth by grace as the iust is said to liue by faith and that also is a pledge of life euerlasting afterward And this sense is most agreeable to the scope of the Apostle for hitherto he hath shewed how the spirit of Christ hath freed vs from the law of sinne in the flesh now he commeth to set forth the other part of our libertie which is from death and first presently in the spirit we liue by faith and then afterward the bodie also shall liue in the resurrection by the spirit of Christ which the Apostle sheweth in the next verse Quest. 13. How the quickening of the dead is ascribed to the spirit of Christ seeing all both good and bad shall rise 1. M. Calvins opinion is here refused who thinketh that the Apostle doth not here speake of the last and finall resurrection sed de continua spiritus operatione but of the continuall working of the spirit in vs in mortifying the reliques of sinne so also Piscator vificabit corpora vestra ad sanctificationem shall quicken your bodies vnto sanctification c. But in that sense our bodies are said to be mortua dead not mortalia mortall and the Apostle speaking of the time to come pointeth at the resurrection which shall be not that which is present in rising vnto newnes of life 2. There are three arguments of the resurrection here expressed by the Apostle the first from the power of God he that raised Christ from the dead shall also raise vs vp secondly from the correspondencie of Christ with his members as Christ was raised from the dead so shall we that are his members thirdly from the office of the spirit who shall raise vs vp that are his temples wherein he dwelleth Pareus 3. As God is said to haue raised Christ vp by his spirit so Christ raised vp himselfe by his eternall spirit omnia quippe divina pâ—â—er per Filium in Spiritu Sancto operatur all diuine things the father worketh by the Sonne in the holy Ghost Oecumen 4. Although our redemption purchased vnto vs by Christ was sufficient at once to haue redeemed both our soules and bodies tamen ordinate nobis datur it is giuen vnto vs in order and by degrees that as Christ had first a passible bodie before he had a glorious bodie so our bodies must first be mortall before they can haue immortalitie Lyran. 5. Now although the members of Christ shall be raised vp by his spirit yet the wicked also which haue not the spirit of Christ shall also rise againe but vnto iudgement they shall be raised vp by the omnipotent power of God but the righteous shall be raised by the spirit of Christ and therefore it is not said he shall raise but vinificabit he shall quicken your mortall bodie quod ipsa resurrectione maius est c. which is a greater worke then the resurrection and onely graunted to the righteous Chrysostome whom Martyr and Pareus followe Quest. 14. What it is to be lead by the spirit of God 1. There are two kind of actions of the spirit generall wherbey all things mooue liue and haue their beeing and speciall whereby the Lord worketh in the hearts of his children such is the worke of sanctification Calv. 2. And in that they are said to be lead we must not thinke that any are compelled by the spirit but this signifieth vehementem inclinationem non coactionem a vehement inclination not coaction Gorrhan God by his spirit ex nolentibus volentes facit of vnwilling maketh vs willing so he draweth vs volentes willing consequenter not antecedenter we are willing
from her 2. But the Master of sentences maketh fowre kinds of feare beside the naturall feare of death 1. There is mundanus timor a worldly feare as when a man forsaketh Christ for feare he should loose his life or goods this is a feare of men this is altogether perniciosus pernicious and dangerous 2. timor seruilis the seruile feare is when men doe well for feare of punishment this feare is good and profitable sed non sufficiens but not sufficient 3. there is a feare called initialis a feare in the beginning when one so feareth punishment as yet he is mooued with the loue of God and vertue this feare is bonus sufficiens a good feare and sufficient 4. then is there timor castus filialis the chast and filiall feare which bonus est perficiens is good and perfect and is nothing else but a reuerence of God ioyned with loue 3. Feare also is taken two wayes either in respect of the obiect for the commotion of the mind expecting some imminent or approaching danger or it signifieth onely a reuerence and obseruance which is the effect of the other and in this sense the spirit of feare is said to haue rested vpon Christ Isay. 11.2 in whom there was no feare of punishment which is due vnto sinne whereof Christ was free there was in him onely a reuerence of God observance and obedience the naturall feare of death also he had but thereof we speake not here and this kind of feare of God may be said also to be in the Angels and in the elect that are in heauen 4. But whereas the Apostle saith 1. Ioh. 4.18 there is no feare in loue 1. neither doth the Apostle speake of humane feare when one feareth to suffer persecution for Christ but he that loueth God expelleth all such feare he is readie to suffer any thing for Christ. 2. not yet doth he referre vs onely to that perfect loue of God which shall be in the next world when all feare shall be chased away 3. but he meaneth a seruile and desperate feare which is seuered from faith and hope which driueth to despaire such was the feare that Iudas had Quest. 18. Why the Apostle ioyneth together two words of the same sense Abba father 1. The first of these words is an Hebrewe or Syriake word and signifieth father and in three seuerall places in the Gospel doe we finde these two words repeated in this manner Mark 14.36 Galath 4.6 and in this place Augustine if the place be not corrupted faith that Abba is a Greeke word and pater a Latine epist. 178. but Augustine could not be ignorant that S. Paul wrot not in Latine and therefore that place in Augustine is most like to haue beene mistaken by the writers and such as copied it out Thomas saith better that Abba is an Hebrew word and pater father is both a Greeke and Latine word 2. Now why these two words of the same signification should be ioyned together there are diuerse reasons giuen 1. Chrysostome thinketh that the Apostle vseth the word Abba because it is puerorum legitimorum vocabulum that word which legitimate children doe vse they first of all learne to call father 2. Augustine serm 13. de verbis Apostol whom Anselme followeth thinketh that the Apostle vseth these two words one for the Iewes the other for the Gentiles to signifie the adoption and calling of them both to be one people so also Martyr and M. Calvin who applyeth here the prophesie of Isay c. 19.18 that all should speake the language of Canaan non respicit linguae idioma sed cordis harmomoniā he respecteth not the proprietie of the tongue but the harmonie and consent of the heart in the worshipping of God but Beza refuseth this as too curious 3. he therefore thinketh that the latter word is added as an explication of the former so also Pareus and Tolet annot 13. who giueth this as a reason because Christ in his prayer Mark 14.36 vseth this ingemination abba father and yet it is certaine he vsed onely the Hebrew word But this here may be answeared not as the ordinar gloss that Christ vsed both an Hebrew and Greeke word before his passion because he suffred both for Iewes and Gentiles for Christ spake in the Hebrew not in the Greeke tongue rather as the Syrian interpreter translateth Christ did double the word father father abba abba which the Euangelist retaineth in the first place because it was as familiarly knowne as the other 4. Lyranus thinketh that by the ingemination of this word is expressed duplex Dei paternitas a double kind of fatherhood in God one by creation common as well to the bad as good and a speciall kind of paternitie by adoption and grace peculiar to the righteous But the Apostle here speaketh onely of the invocation of the faithfull how they crie Abba father 5. Wherefore I resolue here with Erasmus that this is spoken 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by way of conduplication this repetition facit ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is for more vehemencie it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 more forcible and effectuall to double the word father Faius ista conduplicatio amplificationem continet this doubling of the word serueth for amplification Calvin as it is familiar and vsuall in Scripture for the Saints in their prayers to shewe their vehement affection to double the word Lord Lord. 3. Calvin here well obserueth how the Apostle hauing said before in the second person yee haue not receiued the spirit of bondage now changeth the person whereby we crie including himselfe vt sortem communem omnium sanctorum exprimeret to shewe the common condition of all the Saints Quest. 19. Of the testimonie of the spirit what it is v. 16. The spirit beareth witnesse 1. Caietan here well observeth that this testimonie of the spirit is internall for it testifieth vnto our spirit and conscience that we are the sonnes of God and beside it is a testimonie de facto in fact that we are indeed the sonnes of God not de possibili of a possibilitie onely that we may be thus farre Caietan well but he further sheweth that this testimonie of the spirit ariseth partly of our loue toward God partly of our continuall experience of Gods provident care in preserving of vs but Chrysostome well saith that this testimonie of the spirit is not onely vox praestiti charismatis sed praestantis illud paracleti the voice of the grace or gift which is conferred vpon vs but of the comforting spirit the comforter the testimonie then of the spirit is vnderstood to be an other thing beside the testimonie of the graces and effects of the spirit in vs. 2. Origen interpreteth this testimonie of the affection of the minde when we are obedient vnto God not for feare but of loue 3. Ambrose Anselme referre it to the imitation of God and Christ whereby the spirit maketh vs like vnto God
all the time of the world since the persecution of Abel but the second sense before seemeth to be the fittest 57. Quest. Wherein the faithfull are compared vnto sheepe We are counted as sheepe for the slaughter v. 36. 1. Gorrhan here obserueth eight seuerall points wherein they are resembled vnto sheepe 1. for their innocencie 2. their patience 3. their immolation and offering vp in sacrifice 4. their doctrine is as the milke 5. their godly conuersation as the fleece 6. the tyrants and persecutors are toward them as wolues 7. they are fruitfull in bringing forth many children vnto God as sheepe that bring out twinnes 8. they are obedient to Christ our chiefe shepheard as the sheepe heare the voice of the shepheard 2. But these resemblances are somewhat farre fetched and concerne not the scope of the Apostle here herein therefore this similitude consisteth 1. as Chrysostome Theophylast Haymo quia occiduntur sine reluctatione they are slaine without any resistance 2. sunt simplices they are simple as beseemeth the flocke of Christ. Martyr 3. like as butchers draw out the sheepe to be killed at their pleasure so tyrants vpon euery occasion make slaughter of Gods seruants euen as butchers slay their sheepe as it happened in France in the great massaker at Paris Lyons Orleans and other places Gryneus 4. like as sheepe are killed for their flesh and fleece so tyranni bona martyrum rapiebant did ceaze vpon the goods of the Martyrs 5. herein appeareth the conformitie betweene Christ and his members who was as a sheepe lead to the slaughter Isa. 53.7 Bucer 6. adde hereunto they are counted sicut â—ves morbidae as specked and diseased sheepe and so killed Gorrhan 58. Quest. How the faithfull are said to be more then conquerours 1. The vulgar Latine readeth onely superamus we ouercome so also Haymo and the Syrian translator so interpreteth but the word in the originall is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we doe more then ouercome 2. Which is diuersly expounded 1. Basil in Psal. 114. giueth this sense he ouercommeth which giueth not place to those troubles which are necessarily inflicted vpon him he doth more then ouercome qui vltro accersit molestiâ—â— c. which willingly doth offer himselfe â—â— endure more then is laid vpon him as Origen giueth instance in Iob who beside the plagues which were laid vpon him by the malice of Sathan did of himself 〈◊〉 vnto his sorâ—â—â—â—es as in renting his garments and scraping his sore wounds with a posthead c. but this obseruation seemeth somewhat curious 2. Chrysostome and Theophylâ—â—◠〈◊〉 referre it both vnto the afflictions which they suffer the persons which doe suffer and the persecutors which procure their suffrings in the first which are teâ—tations to trie them they are more then conquerors triumphyng in those things in quibus infidias patimur wherein we are sought to be supplanted and concerning the persons of the sufferers they ouercome with great facilitie sine sudore labore without sweat or labour and concerning the persecutors flagellati flagellatores vicimus we beeing whipped ouercame the whippers the patience of the Saints which is invincible vanquisheth and wearieth the tormentors 3. But the fittest sense is that we are more then conquerours because the Saints are nor only not broken and terrified with their manifold suffrings but doe also glorie and reioyce in their tribulation Beza and are brought vnto an heauenly kingdome wherein the excellencie of the victorie appeareth Osiand Quest. 59. Of the diuerse interpretations in generall of the 38.39 vers I am perswaded that neither life nor death c. 1. Hugo Card. here obserueth that the Apostle rehearseth an eleuen seuerall impediments which might hinder the certaintie of our saluation which is numerus transgressione the number of transgression because it exceedeth the number of the commandements by one and so hereby he thinketh whatsoeuer to be meant whereby a man may be seduced or induced to transgresse but this obseruation beside that it is curious is builded vpon a false ground for there are but onely tenne particulars named by the Apostle the eleuenth utque fortitudo nor strength is inserted by the Latine translator not beeing in the originall and Augustine omitteth it in citing of this text lib. de grat liber arb c. 17. though it be found in the allegation of Hierome epist. ad Algas qu. 9. yet seeing neither the Greeke originall nor the auncient Syriake translation hath it it is better omitted 2. Gorrhan setteth out this enumeration of the Apostle in diuerse heads as all kind of actions doe either tend ad esse or bene esse to the beeing of man or his well beeing the being of man is either preserued and that is by life or destroyed by death that which tendeth vnto mans well beeing is either by the spirituall creature onely or by the corporall onely or from the creature partly spirituall partly corporall which is man the spirituall creature is expressed by 3. names Angels principalities powers the corporall is distinguished in respect of things present or to come the creature both spirituall and temporall is set forth with three diuerse actions as of violence signified by fortitude or strength of craft and subtiâ—â—ie called depth or of prosperitie called here height But this curious diuision agreeth not with the simple and plaine enumeration which the Apostle vseth and beside he groundeth this conceit vpon the Latine text which addeth one word fortitude more then is in the originall he fayleth also in the particular explication of things present things to come bright depth as shall be seene afterward 3. Origen observeth well that as the Apostle had rehearsed before omnes humanas tentationes all humane tentations v. 35. as famine nakednesse the sword and such like nowe be reckoneth vp tentations maiores humanis greater then humane tentations as he speaketh of Angels principalities powers But that other note of his is not so good that whereas before the Apostle spake confidenter confidently saying in all these we are more then conquerours yet here valde tenuiter aijâ— he saith somewhat slenderly or faintely not that we are more then conquerours as before but nothing can separate vs c. whereas in truth the Apostle saying I am perswaded speaketh no lesse confidently then before Quest. 60. Of the diuerse interpretations in particular 1. Death nor life 1. Origen vnderstandeth by death the death of the soule which is a separation from God and by life the life of sinne 2. Chrysostome applyeth it to euerlasting death and an other immortall life that though they could promise vnto vs an other immortall life to separate vs from Christ we ought not to giue consent 3. Osiander interpreteth mors horrenda vita aerumâ—â—sa an horrible death and a miserable life 4. Lyranus vnderstandeth amor vitae the loue of this life and the feare of death the one threatened by persecutors the other promised 5. But it may be more generally taken for omnia
in fulfilling and performing it he hath perfited the ceremoniall law beeing the substance whereof the ceremonies were but shadowes he hath performed the morall law both in his actiue obedience in fulfilling euery part thereof by his holy life and by his passiue obedience in bearing the curse and punishment due by the law for vs and in this sense Augustine saith Christus sinis legis perficiens non interficiens Christ is the perfiting not the destroying end of the law tract 55. in Iohn Of all these the second and last interpretation are most agreeable to the scope of the Apostle who in these words bringeth a proofe of that which he said before that the Iewes were ignorant of the righteousnesse of God because they were ignorant of Christ the true end of the law both directly in respect of Christ who fulfilled the law and was in all things obedient vnto it which thing the law intended and indirectly in respect of vs whose weakenesse it discouereth in not beeing able to keepe the law and so directeth vs to Christ beeing therein a schoolemaster to vs as the Apostle saith Gal. 3. â—â— Quest. 7. How Christ is said to be the end of the law seeing the law requireth nothing but the iustice of workes The law is taken two wayes 1. more largely for the whole doctrine contained in Moses and the Prophets and in this sense the law directly maketh mention of Christ as in this place Saint Paul doth prooue the righteousnesse of faith by the testimonie of Moses as our Sauiour himselfe also saith had you beleeued Moses you would haue beleeued me he wrote of â—â— Ioh. 5.46 2. The law is taken more strictly for the precepts onely of the morall law wherein although faith in Christ be not directly commanded yet it is implied and intended in which sense Christ is said to be the end of the law in these three respects 1. in respect of his personall obedience and righteousnesse which the law required 2. in regard of the satisfaction by Christs death for the punishment due by the law 3. and in iustifying vs by faith in him that is our righteousnesse whereunto the law bringeth vs as a schoolemaster leading vs vp by the hand as the glasse shewing the spottes doth admonish the beholder to mend them so the law discouering our sinnes sendeth vs to seeke out the onely true Physitian to heale them Quest. 8. That Christ is not the end of the law that we by grace in him should be iustified in keeping of the law 1. Pererius saith that Christ is said to be the end that is the perfection and consummatioÌ„ of the law quia fide in Christo impetratur gratia c. because that by faith in Christ grace is obtained to fulfill and keepe the law disput 1. numer 2. and Stapleton Antidot p. 617. insisteth vpon the same point that by this fulfilling of the law which we obtaine by faith in Christ we are iustified Contra. 1. We denie not but this also is one of the ends of our comming to Christ to shew our obedience in keeping Gods commandements as Zacharie saith in his song Luk. 2.75 That we beeing deliuered out of the hand of our enemies should serue him c. in holines and righteousnesse all the daies of our life yet this is neither required as the principall end which is to be iustified by faith in Christ as here the Apostle saith neither is this our obedience enioyned to that end that we should be iustified thereby for we are iustified by faith before we can bring forth any fruits of obedience and therefore by such workes as follow our iustification we are not iustified and beside our obedience is imperfect and can not iustifie vs in the sight of God but this our obedience is necessarie to shew our conformitie vnto Christ and to iustifie our thankfulnes for the benefit receiued by Christ and to be a pledge and an assurance of our perfect regeneration in the next life 2. Herein then Christ is the end of the law that we by faith in him which hath fulfilled the law perfitly should be iustified without the fulfilling of the law in our selues 1. for the Apostle saith not Christ is the end of the law to euery one fulfilling the law but to euery one that beleeueth 2. this end would take away the force of Christs death for to giue vs grace to fulfill the law our selues it was not necessarie that Christ should haue died for he might by his diuine power without his death haue conferred that grace vpon vs. 3. and againe if Christ gaue vs power to keepe the law our selues this were to establish our owne righteousnesse for that is our owne righteousnesse which is performed by vs though not by our owne strength but the doctrine of faith doth not establish our owne righteousnesse Quest. 9. What life temporall or spirituall is promised to the keepers of the law v. 5. 1. Origen vpon this place thinketh that the law onely promised to the obseruers thereof temporall not eternall life so likewise Theodoret Ambrose Anselme Lyranus Tolet annot 5. Pererius disput 1. numer 3. doe vnderstand it of escaping onely corporall death which was inflicted vpon the transgressors of the law as idolaters adulterers murtherers But this were no great benefit seeing many vngodly men might be free from these offences which by the law were punished by death and yet in other points might be offenders against the law 2. Augustine lib. de spirit lit c. vnderstandeth it of the spirituall life of faith and iustification thereby per fidem concilians iustificationem facet legis iustitiam vivat in ea c. he that hath obtained iustification by faith doth the righteousnesse of the law and may liue thereby But this were to confound the law and the Gospel whereas the Apostle here speaketh onely of the righteousnesse which the law requireth 3. The law then promised eternall life vnto the obseruers thereof but that it was impossible for any perfitly to keepe the law so Chrysostome well interpreteth that men should haue beene iustified in keeping of the law if it had beene possible but because it was not possible iustitia illa intercidit that iustice falleth to ground our Sauiour also saith If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandements Matth. 19.16 meaning eternall life as the young man had asked the question what he should doe to haue eternall life Pererius answeareth that this must be vnderstood of a iust man which out of a liuely charitie keepeth the commandements But Christ there speaketh not of the iustice of faith working by loue but of such keeping and obseruing of the commandements as the law required if any could haue attained vnto it for as the question was not of beleeuing but of doing what shall I doe so Christ maketh his answer of such iustice as was required by the law 4. But if the law doe promise and propound eternall life to the obseruers
and keepers thereof how doth the Prophet Ezech. c. 20.25 call them statutes that are not good the answer is that the law of it selfe promiseth life but in respect of mans weaknes that is not able to keepe the law it is not good because it bringeth death and so Moses saith Deut. 30.15 I haue set before you this day life and death c. the law was life to them that had power to keepe it which none haue in this life but death vnto the trangressors Faius Quest. 10. Whether Paul did of purpose alleadge that place of Moses Deuter. 30.12 or allude onely vnto it 1. Some thinke that Moses in that place directly speaketh of the law according to the literall sense and Saint Paul by a certaine allusion applieth that vnto faith which Moses vttereth of the law so Theodoret Chrysostome Oecumenius likewise Tostatus vpon that place Paul per quandam concordantiam transtulit ad fidem Paul by a certaine agreement hath translated this place and applyed it vnto faith Vatablus also saith that Paul followeth not Moses sense but some words But this would extenuate the force of S. Pauls argument if he should allude onely vnto this place of Scripture and not confirme that which he intended by the same and the Apostle himselfe saith that the iustice of faith thus speaketh that is as Origen expoundeth Christ who is our iustice by faith thus speaketh by the mouth of Moses wherefore Moses in that place speaketh of the iustice of faith 2. Some thinke that S. Paul followeth not the litterall but the mysticall sense of Moses thus Lyranus thinketh that the booke called Deuteronomie the second law was a figure of the Gospel which was indeede a newe and a second law and that this was figuratiuely spoken of the gospel that as they needed not goe to heauen or to the furthest parts of the Sea to fetch the Law because it was neere them as it were put into their mouth by Moses so neither neede they nowe seeke farre for the knowledge of Christ either to heauen or hell seeing he was euidently preached by the Apostles this sense also followeth Bellarmine de grat liber arbit lib. 5. c. 6. But that Moses speaketh not of the precepts of the law in that place is euident because he sheweth the facilitie of them it is in thy mouth and heart to do it c. but it was not so easie a thing to performe the Lawe Bellarmine answeareth with Tostatus that Moses speaketh not of the performing but of the knowledge of the lawe whereas the words are directly to do it Sotus in his commentarie thinketh that Moses speaketh of the externall obseruation of the law which was readie at hand but for the internall and spirituall obedience they were to expect further grace But Moses speaketh directly of the inward obedience it is in thy mouth and in thy heart c. 3. Some thinke that the Apostle applyeth that testimonie vttered by Moses of the lawe vnto the Gospel by an argument from the lesse to the greater that if Moses gaue such commendation of the lawe much more is it true of the Gospel But the Apostle sheweth the iustice of faith to be a farre different thing from the iustice and righteousnes of the law and therefore not to differ onely as the lesse and greater but as things of a diuerse nature 4. Wherefore it may be more safely affirmed that the Apostle citeth this verie place out of Moses as Origen thinketh haec à Deuteronomio assumpta sunt these words are taken out of Deuteronomie yet the Apostle as an interpreter alledgeth them omitting some things in Moses and inserting some other by way of exposition as that is to bring Christ againe from aboue and to bring Christ againe from the dead and some words he altereth as that which Moses calleth the Sea S. Paul nameth the deepe which in effect is the same to this purpose Iun. in parall 16. lib. 2. Faius and Pet. Martyr affirmeth that it is so euident a thing that Moses here speaketh of Christ that certaine great Rabbines among the Iewes confesse that Moses in all that 30. chapter of Deuteronomie hath reference to Christ yet Pareus inclineth to thinke S. Paul here vseth but an allusion to that place of Moses dub 6. Quest. 11. Whether Moses in that place directly speaketh of the righteousnesse of faith 1. Tolet annot 6. and likewise Caietan which take this place to be alleadged by Moses in the litterall sense doe thinke that Moses speaketh of the circumsion and conuersion of the heart vnto God which belongeth vnto the righteousnesse of faith that when God should conuert and turne their heartes they should then not find it an hard and difficult thing to keepe the commandements of God Pet. Martyr much dissenteth not that Moses then simply speaketh not of the precept of the law but vt iam per gratiam facile factu erat but as now made easie by grace and faith in Christ so also M. Calvin denieth not but that Moses in that place speaketh of the obseruation of the law but ex suo fonte diducit he fetcheth it from the fountaine and originall thereof namely the iustice of faith 2. Some thinke that Moses in that place speaketh not onely of the law sed de vniuerso doctrina but of the whole doctrine which he hath taught which was not onely legall but contained many euangelicall promises But the words of Saint Paul are against both these interpretations The righteousnesse which is of faith speaketh on this wise c. and this is the word of faith which we preach therefore Moses onely in that place speaketh of the word of faith 3. Wherefore their opinion is to be preferred who thinke that Moses in that place directly treateth of the doctrine of faith and not by way of consequent onely as Iunius well obserueth because Moses saith this commandement which I command thee this day but that day Moses deliuered not the precepts of the law which were giuen before but of faith and so the Apostle ex consilio Mosis by the counsell and according to the meaning of Moses himselfe applyeth this place vnto Christ Iun. lib. 2. parall 16. so also Faius est apposita loci applicatio c. it is a fit application of that place likewise Osiander it is no doubt but that S. Paul appositissime allegaverit most fitly aptly applied that place of Moses to his purpose Quest. 12. By what occasion Moses maketh mention in that place of the Gospel and of the meaning of the words 1. Origen thinketh that Moses and the Apostles intendment is this to shew that Christ is euerie where that he is not onely in heauen and in earth but in euerie place to the same purpose Haymo he instructeth vs by these words ne putemus Christum localem esse that we should not thinke that Christ is confined to a place But this is not to the Apostles purpose for of this
voluntarie connivence or negligence of the keeper or some other way as it were made by God for so we reade that Peter escaped out of prison the doores beeing opened by the Angel before him Act. 12. but this is not rashly to be done for the aforesaid reasons but vpon good warrant when God shall as it were make a way for a man to set him free Quest. 8. What kind of iudgement they procure to themselues which resist the magistrate 1. Whereas the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth both condemnation as Beza damnation as the vulgar Latine iudgement as the Syrian interpreter punishment as Piscator some take this to be vnderstood not of eternall punishment but of the temporall inflicted by the Magistrate when as the powers beeing offended doe either punish rebells with death or cast them into prison Haymo so also Vatablus 2. Lyranus contrariwise interpreteth it de aeterna morte of euerlasting death not excluding also temporall punishment so also Martyr 3. Some vnderstand poenam punishment generally without limitation Olevian Piscator Iunius annot 4. Some will haue the punishment in this life vnderstood whether inflicted by the Magistrate or by God himselfe who will take reuenge for the transgression of his owne ordinance as is euident in the fearefull punishment of rebellious Cote Dathan and Abiram Numb 16. Pareus Gualter and so before them Chrysostome and Theophylact cum à Deo tum ab hominibus poenas daturum he shall endure punishment both from God and men 5. But all these are better ioyned together that such as resist the Magistrate are punished by the publike lawes and God often taketh reuenge also beside they make themselues guiltie of euerlasting damnation which is due vnto the transgression of Gods commandement and the violating of his ordinance Faius 6. Tolet hath here this conceite by himselfe it is said they shall receiue iudgement because beeing not restrained by the Magistrate whom they stand not in awe of they cast themselues into those sinnes for the which damnationem incurrunt they incurre damnation but here the Apostle speaketh of that punishment which is due for the resisting of Gods ordinance 7. Pareus here obserueth well these two things that the purposes and endeauours of such are frustrate and beside they shew their madnes and foolishnes in beeing accessarie to their owne punishment for it is an vnwise part for one to procure his owne hurt Quest. 9. How the Prince is not to be feared for good workes but for euill 1. Concerning the words in the originall they stand thus Princes are not a feare of good workes and so the vulgar Latine that is for good workes as the Syrian interpreter putteth it in the datiue bonis operibus to good workes so also Tertullian readeth in scorpian and Beza followeth this sense and the meaning is that they are not a terror or to be feared ratione boni operis by reason of the good worke Lyran. or his qui sunt boni operis to them which are of good workes Gorrhan so before him Chrysostome bene agentibus to those which doe well good workes are here to be vnderstood not as Diuines take them for morall workes but for ciuill workes agreeable to the publike lawes which are either against the diuine lawe whereof the Magistrate ought to haue speciall care or against the positiue constitution Pareus 2. Touching the occasion of these words Tolet will haue them to depend of the former sentence and to shewe the cause why they which resist the powers doe receiue iudgement to themselues because they contemne the Magistrate who is ordained to restraine euill workes and so they without restraint fall into euill and so incurre punishment but the better coherence is to make this an other argument to mooue obedience to the higher powers from the vtilitie thereof as Chrysostome or à duplici sine from the twofold ende of magistracie which is for the punishment of the euill and praise of the good 3. They which doe good workes must feare the Magistrate still but timore reverentiae non seruili c. with a reuerent not a seruile feare as the malefactors doe which hauing a guiltie conscience are afraide of punishment to be inflicted by the Magistrate Gorrhan Quest. 10. What it is to haue praise of the power v. 3. 1. Whereas often it falleth out that the Magistrate doth punish the good and encourage the wicked how then is this true which the Apostle saith doe well and thou shalt haue the praise of the same the answear is that first we must distinguish betweene the power it selfe and authoritie which is ordained of God to these ends for the reward of the good and punishment of the euill and the abuse of this power secondly although gouernours abusing their power do offend in some particulars yet in generall more good commeth by their gouernement then hurt as vnder cruell Nero there was some execution of iustice for Paul was preserued by the Romane captaine from the conspiracie of the Iewes and appealed vnto Caesar which was then Nero and his appeale was receiued 2. It will be obiected that euen vnder good Princes where there is punishment for offenders yet the righteous receiue not their reward 1. Origen thus vnderstandeth these words thou shalt haue praise of the same c. that is in the day of iudgement ex istis legibus landem habebis apud Deum by these lawes thou shalt haue praise with God for keeping them c. but the Apostle speaketh not of hauing praise by the lawes but of the power that is the Magistrate 2. Augustine thinketh it is one thing to be praised of the power that is to be commended and rewarded by it an other laudem habere ex illa to haue praise of it that is exhibit se laude dignum he sheweth himselfe worthie of praise whether he be actually praised or not of the power Tolet alloweth this sense though he take the distinction betweene these phrases to be somewhat curious so also Haymo but the Apostle speaketh not simply of hauing praise and commendation but of hauing it from the Prince 3. the ordinar glosse thus thou shalt haue praise of the power si iusta est ipso laudante if it be iust it will praise thee si iniusta occasionem prebente if vniust it will giue thee occasion of praise so also Gorrhan it shall praise thee either causaliter by beeing the cause of thy praise or occasionaliter by beeing the occasion c. causa erit maigris coronae it shall be the cause of thy greater crowne gloss interlin laudaberis apud Deum thou shalt be praised with God Haymo but the Apostle speaketh of receiuing praise from the power as Chrysostome and Theophylact well obserue erit laudum tuarum praeco futurus he shall be a setter forth of thy praise 4. Bucer thinketh that the Apostle alludeth vnto the custome of the Grecians and Romanes among whom they which had done any
Magistrate himselfe 6. Chrysostome and Theophylact here mooue this doubt how the Apostle enioyneth the subiect to feare the Magistrate and before he freeth good subiects from it and would haue them onely to feare that doe euill he answeareth by a distinction of feare that feare which is ex mala conscientia of an euill conscience good subiects are free from but yet they haue a kind of feare which is nothing els but a reuerence of the Magistrate Pet. Martyr addeth that though a good man feareth not the power for any thing that is done and past yet he may feare ne quid in posterum committat that he commit nothing in time to come as Ambrose hath the like distinction of feare aliud est timere quia peccasti aliud timere ne pecces ibi formido est de supplicio hic sollicitudo de praemio it is one thing to feare because thou hast sinned an other to feare least thou sinne there is fearefulnesse of the punishment here carefulnes of the reward 7. Honour also is to be yeelded to the Magistrate which is nothing els but an externall signification of our inward reuerent opinion which we haue of one for his excellencie and greatnesse wherein these three things are considered the inward reuerence the outward gesture the obiect the excellencie of the person betweene honour and glorie this is the difference honour is giuen propter officij dignitatem for the dignitie of the place and office glorie propter virtutem because of his vertue to a good magistrate both are due to an euill honour is to be shewed for his place though he deserve no glorie for any vertue and a private person may be worthie of glorie for his vertue though not of honour which is the Magistrates due Quest. 16. The seuerall duties summed together which are due to the Magistrate Gorrhan reduceth them to these seuen 1. we owe vnto the Magistrate subiection 1. Pet. 2.13 submit your selues 2. honour 1. Pet. 2.17 feare God honour the King 3. feare Prov. 24.21 Feare God and the King 4. fidelitie as in Ittai that said to Dauid 2. Sam. 15.21 In what place my Lord the King shall be whether in death or life euen there will thy seruant be 5. obedience as the people said to Ioshua 1.17 as we obeyed Moses in all things so will we obey thee 6. paying of tribute Matth. 22.21 Giue vnto Caesar the things that are Caesars 7. prayer 1. Tim. 2.2 The Apostle willeth supplications to be made for Kings Pareus obserueth that fiue things belong to the honouring of our superiours 1. reuerence because of the diuine ordinance 2. loue because of their labour and care in watching ouer vs. 3. thankefulnesse for the benefits which we enioy vnder them 4. obedience in all lawfull things 5. equitie and charitie in couering and extenuating the faults and infirmitie s in gouernours Quest 17. How farre the Magistrate is to be obeyed and wherein not to be obeyed It may seeme that in no wise it is lawfull to resist the Magistrate but that obedience must be absolutely yeelded vnto him vpon these reasons 1. The ordinance of God is not to be resisted euill Magistrates are the ordinance of God therefore euen the euill must be obeyed and not resisted 2. S. Peter biddeth seruants to obey their Masters not onely the good and curteous but euen the froward 1. Pet. 2.8 so likewise subiects must obey their Magistrates 3. It is not lawfull to recompence euill for euill Rom. 12.17 therefore the subiect beeing oppressed is not to resist 4. It is not lawfull for a priuate person to vse the sword for it is said onely of the Magistrate he beareth not the sword in vaine but to resist the Magistrate is to take the sword Er. Ans. 1. True it is that the ordinance of God is not to be resisted so it be not against God for like as the inferiour Magistrate to whom the Prince committeth the sword is not to vse it against his Prince so neither is the Prince to be obeyed vsing his authoritie against God in commāding impious and vnhonest things we must giue vnto Caesar the things that are Caesars and vnto God the things which are Gods we may not giue vnto the Prince the things which are Gods that is the conscience And in this case the Apostles giue vs a rule to obey God rather then man Act. 4.19 when obedience then is denied in vniust vnlawfull things not the authority which is Gods ordināce but the abuse of the authoritie is gainsaid 2. True it is that both euill Masters and euill Magistrates are to be obeyed but with this limitation that nothing be enioyned against the conscience and so much is implyed by the words following v. 19. This is thanke worthie if a man for conscience toward God endure griefe suffring wrongfully so that when any thing is commanded against the conscience a man is to suffer rather an so the power is obeyed not in doing but in suffring 3. To disobey vnlawfull commandements is no requitall of euill for euill nor yet for a man to vse lawfull defense but if the subiect should beare armes against his Prince and seeke to assault his bodie or life which is vnlawfull that were indeede to recompence euill for euill 4. There are three degrees of not obeying an euill Magistrate in not doing that which is commanded and here the subiect vseth not the sword at all he onely refuseth to doe any thing against his conscience in vsing his lawfull defense against wrongs offered tending to apparent impietie here he taketh the sword no otherwise then as the lawes arme a priuate man to defend himselfe in case of necessitie against a theife and robber the third is in assaulting the Prince by force which is a taking of the sword and most vnlawfull Now on the other side certaine cases shall be propounded wherein obedience is to be denied to vniust Magistrates and some kind of resistance to be vsed And here a distinction is to be made of subiects some are either publike persōs and the same either Ecclesiasticall as the Pastors and ministers of the Church or ciuill as inferiour Magistrates or more priuate persons according to this diuision we are to see how farre each of these may proceede in denying their obedience to the Magistrate commanding vniust things 1. Concerning the Pastors of the Church these propositions may be set downe 1. that they are not to attempt any thing at all by the sword and outward violence against the Magistrate for it is forbidden that a Bishop should be a striker 1. Tim. 3.3 Ambrose saith coactus repugnare non noui potero flere potero gemere aduersus arma milites lachrymae me◠erma sunt beeing vrged I knowe not how to resist I can mourne I can weepe against armed souldiers my weapons are teares orat in Auxent and in an other place epist. 33. nogamus Auguste non pugnamus we entreat O Soueraigne we fight not
Sathan 2. they are called armour rather then garments for we are not thereby couered in Gods sight as iustified by our own righteousnes yet we are thereby defended from Satans assaults 6. They are called the armour of light because they proceede from the knowledge of God the true light of the soule and they doe shine and giue light before men who seeing them doe glorifie God Par. and they defend vs against the workes of darkenes illuminate the soule and bring vs ad lucem aeternam to euerlasting light Lyranus Quest. 24. What time is vnderstood by the day and night 1. Chrysostome by the night seemeth to vnderstand the time of this life and by the day the resurrection prope est resurrectio the resurrection is at hand but as Tolet wel obserueth that the day cannot be vnderstood here of the day of iudgement as beside Chrysostome other of the Fathers interpret this place as Athanas. 44. ad Antioch qu. 90. August epist. 80. ad Isich for then the Apostles exhortation would be of small force who mooueth to cast off the workes of darkenes in respect of the time because the day was come but if the day were not yet come then the ground of this exhortation faileth 2. Anselme by the day vnderstandeth the time after this life which is so much the nearer as death approacheth so also the ordin glosse but when death commeth it is no time to worke here the Apostle exhorteth to walke honestly which is in the day therefore this day must be in this life present 3. Some doe expound this night to be the time before the comming of Christ and the day the time of preaching the Gospell when Christ the Sunne of righteousnes did shine vnto the world so Lyranus the night is past obscuritas figurarum legis the darkenes of the figures of the lawe likewise Erasmus vnder the lawe vmbra fuit magis quà m res there was a shadow rather then the thing Osiander also vnderstandeth that time quando nondum fuit exhibitus Christus when Christ was not yet exhibited to the world so also Faius But as Beza noteth the Apostle in this sense should haue had reference onely to the Iewes whereas he writeth to the beleeuing Gentiles among the Romanes which were not acquainted with the figures of the lawe 4. Wherefore with Pet. Martyr Pareus Beza by night rather we vnderstand tempus ignorantiae caecitatis the time of blindnes and ignorance which goeth before regeneration for till they were called to the knowledge of Christ they were in darkenes as the Apostle saith Ephes. 5.8 Ye were sometime darkenes but now are ye light in the Lord walke as children of light this day light as Martyr obserueth if it be compared with our darkenes ignorance in times past it may be called the day but in respect of the life to come it is but as the twilight or breake of the day Martyr so whereas the Apostle saith not the night is past but processit it is well nie spent thereby he signifieth the imperfection of the state present because yet there remaineth some darkenes euen in the regenerate like as whē we see noctem properae ad diluculum the night hasten to the dawning and the swallowes beginne to chatter we one call vp an other and say it is day Chrysostome and Theophylact yet maketh the matter more plaine as allowing 12. houres to the night and tenne of them be spent we say the night is wearing away and it is toward day c. so the grosse darkenes is past when the light of faith and knowledge riseth vp in vs but yet it is but as the dawning of the day in this life Thus Origen followeth this sense as is alleadged before si Christus in corde sit c. if Christ be in our hearts he maketh it day Quest. 25. How we should walke honestly v. 13. So that we walke honestly 1. Chrysost. obserueth wel whom Theophyl followeth that whereas the Romanes were much affected with the opinion of glorie he perswadeth them decoro honesto by that which was comly and honest 2. and further he saith that we walke not walk ye putting himselfe in the number that he might exhort thē without envie 3. that which he saith here in one word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 honestly he elswher Tit. 2.12 thus distinguisheth to these three to liue soberly righteously and godly 4. and he addeth as in the day like as a man wil be ashamed to go naked or cladde with tottered and ragged garments in the day so this time of the light of faith requireth vs to walke honestly Not in riot and drunkennesse 1. Some by these two vnderstand by the first excesse in meat by the other excesse in drinke Gorrhan but Origen better distinguisheth them by the first vnderstanding in honesta luxuriosa convivia vnhonest and riotous feasts by the other drunkennes which is a companion of such feasts such excessiue feasts were vsed among the Egyptians where the manner was to haue a dead mans scull brought in in the middes of their feasts that they beeing put in minde of mortalitie might more freely spend the short time which they had in following of their pleasure 2. Chrysostome here noteth also bibere non prohibet sed praeter mensuram bibere he forbiddeth not to drinke but to drinke beside measure Chambering and wantonnes 1. Gorrhan and so Hugo by the first vnderstandeth the sinne of slouth by the other fornication and vncleanes 2. But Origen taketh these to be cubilia impuditiae the chambers of wantonnes and thinketh here some reference to be made to the dennes of beasts because these filthie sinnes are more agreeable to beasts then men 3. Chrysostome noteth that the Apostle forbiddeth not all kind of bedding and chambering for the marriage bed is vndefiled Heb. 13.4 non mulieribus commisceri sed scortari he forbiddeth not to companie with women but to followe whoredome Not in strife and envying 1. As before he touched the sinnes of the flesh so now he forbiddeth the vices of the minde contention emulation Origen 2. these are ioyned to the other as beeing the perpetuall companions of banqueting and drunkennesse as the wise man sheweth that to such is woe sorrowe and strife that followe wine Prou. 23.29 3. these two are the fruits and effects of drunkennesse concupiscence and wrath so that the Apostle taketh away the verie occasions of these euill affections Chrys. for excesse in meat and drinke is the cause of wantonnesse and of the sinne of vncleanes and of strife and contention 4. Haymo thinketh that by strife is here vnderstood the contention about questions of faith rather such brawles and contentions are here restrained which followe vpon excessiue rioting and drunkennesse Quest. 28. How we must put on Christ. 1. The Apostle altereth his phrase of speach for whereas before he spake of the armour of light now he vseth an other metaphor of putting on a garment for our
things without any scruple of conscience giueth God thankes pro pastu largiore for his more plentifull feeding so he which eateth onely of some things yea of herbes giueth thankes also pro victu â—enuiore for his food though but slender as the wiseman preferreth a dinner of greene herbs with loue and eaten in the feare of God before a stalled oxe with hatred Prou. 15.17 7. But it will be obiected that this seemeth not to be a good argument he that eateth giueth God thankes therefore he eateth to the Lord for one may giue God thankes even when he eateth and drinketh to gluttonie and drunkennes the answear is that he which eateth doth well ex parte cibi on the behalfe of the meate which is sanctified by giuing of thanks as the Apostle saith 1. Tim. 4.8 that euerie creature is sanctified by the word of God and prayer But if any doe exceede in eating and drinking the fault is not in the meate as though he did eate any vncleane thing but in the person that eateth Quest. 15. Whether S. Pauls defense that he which doth or omitteth any thing in matters of religion doth or not doth it vnto God be perpetuall Here are diuerse necessarie points to be considered for the solution of this question for if this doctrine of S. Paul were vniversall and generall that one should not regard what an other doth but euerie man should be left vnto himselfe and that it were not lawfull to censure any ones doings then many wicked persons should goe vncontrolled and doe what they lift wherefore these considerations are here necessarie 1. of what things the Apostle entreateth 2. and of what manner of iudgement 3. of what persons he speaketh 4. in what time 5. in what manner these things were done 6. and to what ende 1. Concerning the things he speaketh not of things in their owne nature good or euill directly forbiddeÌ„ or commanded but of things indifferent in themselues and such as sometime were commanded in the lawe as abstinence from some kind of meate obseruing of dayes so Chrysostome well noteth sed cum de dogmatis illi sermo est c. but when the Apostle speaketh of points of doctrine he is in an other tune whosoeuer shall teach otherwise c. is accursed Galat. 10. 2. The iudgement and iudging one of an other which the Apostle speaketh against is not so much the iudgment of the thing which may be done with charitable moderation as of the person whom we must not take vpon vs to censure condemne in such things Beza 3. The Apostle speaketh not of obstinate and refractorie persons for to such S. Paul would not haue giuen place at all for though he caused Timothie to be circumcised for feare of offending the weake Act. 16.1 yet would he not circumcise Titus least he should haue yeilded to the obstinate and peruerse in iudgement Galat. 2.3 so Chrysostome saith novella erat adbuc Romanorum fides the faith of the Romanes was but yet young and neophytorum in gratiam ista disserit he disputeth thus for their sakes which were newely planted in 4. The time also must be considered nondum tempus erat it was not yet time Chrysostome so we are to distinguish of three times the one vnder the lawe when all these things were necessarie to be obserued and kept of the Iewes an other vnder the Gospel published to the world when all Iudaicall rites were as vnlawfull then there was tempus intermedium a time betweene both when after Christ was ascended the commonwealth of the Israelites was yet standing and Evangelium tanquam in cunabulis the Gospell was as in the cradle it was requisite that some thing should be yeelded to the infirmitie of the Iewes for a while 5. The maner was this these things were obserued sine opinione necessitatis meriti without opinion of necessitie or merit Osi. and Calv. well distinguisheth here between obseruatio the obseruation it selfe opinio the opinion conceiued thereof which is superstitious the other the Apostle tolerateth for a time in the weake in respect of their infirmitie but in the epistle to the Colossians c. 2. Gal. c. 4. c. 5. he condemneth them which retained the ceremonies of the lawe with an opinion of necessitie for Christ should profit them nothing Gal. â— â— which were so superstitiously addicted to the legall rites and ceremonies 6. The ende also maketh a great difference for these eating or not eating discerning meates or not discerning did both to the glorie of God but they which either sought their owne glorie as among the Galathians that sought to get disciples vnto them c. 4.17 and to make a faire shewe in the flesh c. 6.2 were not at all to be borne with so likewise the Popish festivals which are dedicated vnto the honour of Saints and not of God are not within the compasse of the Apostles rule here Gualter Quest. 16. Of the coherence of these words none of vs liueth to himselfe v. 7. c. 1. Chrysostome thinketh that this saying is applyed onely to the weake that it is impossible that God should contemne them but that in convenient time ista correcturus sit he will amend those things and confirme them because they liue and die vnto him and so there should be reference to the 4. ver God is able to make him stand 2. Some will haue it a confirmation of the former verse why all our actions should be directed to the glorie of God because he is our Lord and Master Hyper. Martyr 3. Tolet maketh it an other reason of that saying v. 5. that euerie one should abound in his owne conscience and not examine an others doings 4. Gualter will haue it to be a reason taken from the generall ende of man he was created vnto the glorie of God and his we are therefore all our actions must be referred to his glorie and then he addeth non haerendum in cibis that we should not insist in meats but seeke whether in our meates or in any thing else to please God 5. But it is rather a newe argument to prooue the thing in question that one should not iudge or condemne an other because they are the Lords seruants and so it answeareth to the 4. v. he standeth or falleth to his owne Master Beza Gryneus Faius and so he giueth the same reason of the second instance concerning the observing or not observing of dayes as he did of the other particular before touching eating or not eating Quest. 17. How we are saide to liue vnto the Lord. 1. Origen vnderstandeth it of the spirituall life vnto righteousnes and death vnto sinne so we liue vnto God because novitas vitae c. Christo reputatur the newnes of life is imputed vnto Christ it is not of our selues and à Christo sumit mortis exemplum euery one from Christ taketh his example of dying who died first vnto sinne But in this sense to liue and die should
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
the manner and circumstances because they were not directed to a tight ende 4. Concerning the meaning of this place which we vrge against the Romanists Whatsoeuer is not of faith is sinne how it is expounded by the Papists and their exposition refelled See before quest 36. and of this whole question see cap. 2. quest 27. and controv 9. 6. Morall obseruations Observ. 1. That we ought to beare with the weake v. 1. Him that is weake in the faith receiue Like as in a familie the greater doe tender the children and young ones so Christians should cherish and foster the weake and younglings in faith not to be rash or harsh censurers of them but to beare with them in the spirit of meekenesse as the Apostle saith c. 15.1 We which are strong ought to beare the infirmities of the weake Observ. 2. Not to be austere in censuring our brethren v. 3. For God hath receiued him Our weake brother though he haue many infirmities we are not to reiect seeing God hath receiued him this maketh against those which vpon euerie slip and infirmitie are readie to censure their brethren as reprobates and cast-awayes but charitie would haue vs hope the best of the saluation of our brethren and to thinke of them notwithstanding some infirmities as receiued of God and such as for whom Christ died v. 15. Observ. 3. Of giuing thankes for meate v. 6. He that eateth eateth to the Lord for he giueth God thankes c. This sheweth what was the vse of Christians in those dayes to giue thanks before their receiuing of meat so it was the godly custome in Samuels time for the people not to eat in their solemne feasts and sacrifices till Samuel came and blessed the sacrifice and meate 1. Sam. 9.13 This holy vse was continued by our blessed Sauiour Matth. 26.27 and S. Paul exhorteth that whether we eate or drinke or whatsoeuer we doe els we should doe all to the glorie of God 1. Cor. 10.31 Observ. 4. The consolation of the faithfull both in life and death v. 8. Whether we liue we liue vnto the Lord whether we die c. As this teacheth vs to put away all securitie while we liue and to frame our liues vnto Gods glorie for as Chrysostome saith liberi non sumus Dominum habemus we are not our owne men we haue a Lord and Master whom we must serue so in our death the Lord watcheth ouer vs that although the world and all that therein is doe forsake vs yet he that liueth vnto the Lord shall die also vnto the Lord and liue for euer with him as they are pronounced blessed which die in the Lord Rev. 14.13 Observ. 5. That euery one must giue account vnto God and that all shall be iudged v. 12. Chrysostome hath here an excellent morall to shewe that all the wicked and vngodly shall be punished 1. Seeing by daily experience it is confirmed that many wicked ones are punished in this life as were the old world and the Sodomites what equitie can there be in it vt qui eadem pariter peccarunt easdem poenas non luant that they which commited the same sinnes should not suffer the same punishment non omnes hic punit vt alijs poenitentiae spatium tribuat c. he punisheth not all here to giue space of repentance vnto others neither are all punished onely there ne plerisque causa detur illius negandi providentiam least some might take occasion to denie Gods providence 2. But it will be said how can God punish for euer seeing we sinned here but a short time do we not see that in the course of humane iustice he that committed murther but once and it was quickly done is perpetually condemned to the mines and we read of a man that was lame had the palsey thirtie eight yeares which punishment was for his sinnes for Christ said vnto him sinne no more in like manner it is iust with God to punish the temporall and momentanie act of sinne eternally 3. And how is not the sinner worthie of punishment beeing so often admonished and threatned before and hauing so easie a way shewed him vnto life the Publican said but only God be mercifull vnto me a sinner quid hic sudoris quid laboris what great labour and paynes was it to doe this 4. And if there were no hell to punish the wicked neither should the deuill be punished and it should fare alike with the good and bad stabit cum Nerone Paulus Nero shall be as good a man as Paul 5. And thinkest thou then there is no hell quis daemonum hoc asseret is there any of the deuils that will say so nay they confessed there was an hell crying out to Christ commest thou to torment vs before our time how then dost thou not tremble to denie that which the deuill confesseth 6. euen among the Barbarians that haue no knowledge of God the Iudges and Magistrates bonos honorant malos puniunt doe honour the good and punish the euill and shall not God much more to this purpose Chrysostome Observ. 6. Of the tearme of the day of iudgement and what vse we should make of it v. 10. We shall all stand before the iudgement seat of Christ. Therefore euerie one ought to be exceeding carefull in this life how he walketh and to watch ouer his thoughts words and workes that he may appeare in that day with ioy S. Paul saith to the same purpose 2. Cor. 5.10 we must all appeare before the iudgement seat of Christ c. and then he inserteth v. 11. knowing the terror of the Lord we perswade c. the terror then of this day ought to perswade vs to walk circūspectly Origen here well saith quisuam est qui se ata decipiat c. who is there that will so much deceiue himselfe vt ad iudicium Christi ad tribunal cognitionis cius se non putet venturum who thinketh he shall not come vnto the iudgement of Christ and to his throne of knowledge c. Observ. 7. How dangerous a thing it is to giue offence v. 13. Iudge this rather that no man put a stumbling blocke c. Chrysostome saith wel tu si reliquis perditionis causa fueris graviora patieris c. thou if thou shalt be the cause of other mens perdition shalt be worse punished then they which are by thee subverted as the serpent was more punished then the woman and the woman more then the man Iezabel maiores poenas dedit and Iezabel had a greater punishment then Ahab because she did instigate and set on the king and was the cause of his ruine in taking away Naboths vineyard we must then take heed of offences that we scandalize not the Gentiles and Grecians by our euill life for thus will they obiect how shall I know that God hath cōmanded easie and possible things cum tu ex progenitoribus Christianos c. seeing thou beeing a Christian from
creatures but to belong onely to the Creator 2. S. Peter saith if any speake let them speake as the words of God 1. Pet. 4.11 but the word of God thus speaketh not neuer did the Apostles vse in their thanksgiuings to ioyne Christ and his mother together nor yet any of the found auncient writers therefore it is a superstitious phrase taken vp by the Romanists without any warrant of Scripture or antiquitie 3. as prayer and invocation is due onely to God because in him onely we are to beleeue Ioh. 14.1 Rom. 10.14 so thanksgiuing beeing a kind of prayer and a part of religious worship is only to be giuen vnto God 4. we acknowledge the Virgin Marie to haue beene a chosen vessell of the Lord and graced with the greatest blessing that could be in this world to be the mother of our Lord and therefore of all generations to be held and called blessed as she her selfe prophesieth in her song and not to be held inferiour to any of Gods Saints but yet no religious worship is to be giuen to her neither therein is she to be partener with her Sonne Our blessed Sauiour foreseeing the superstition which in time to come might grow in too high conceit of this externall priviledge giuen to his mother as it were to preuent this inconveniencie doth of purpose extenuate this carnall respect and detracteth from it as when one cryed out happy is the wombe that bare thee c. he answered nay blessed are they which heare the word of God and keepe it Luk. 11. and an other time when his mother forgetting her selfe would haue prescribed vnto Christ what to doe to turne water into wine he sharpely rebuked her saying woman what haue I to doe with thee Ioh. 2. and after this when it was told him that his mother and brethren were without desirous to speake with him he not willing to be interrupted in his heauenly busines by any such temporall respect answeared he that doth the will of my Father which is in heauen he is my sister and brother and mother Matth. 12.50 Contr. 8. Whether S. Peter were euer at Rome and continued there Bishop 25. yeares Now in the last place because that in this last chapter wherein S. Paul sendeth salutations by name vnto many brethren at Rome and maketh no mention of S. Peter the Protestants do inferre that Peter was not then at Rome so either was not there at all or could not there so long continue as the Papists generally hold it shall not be amisse briefly to examine the truth herein and first we will answear the Papists obiections and then propound our owne reasons It is the generall receiued opinion of the Romish Catholikes that Peter should come thither in the 2. or 3. yeare of Claudius in the 45. yeare of Christ and continue there Bishop 25. yeares sauing that sometime he was absent thence by occasion of the affaires of the Church vnto the 14. yeare of Nero when he was beheaded in the 70. yeare of Christ so Bellar. l. 2. de Rom. Pont. c. 5. Rhemists in their table of S. Peter set after the Acts of the Apostles they reason and obiect thus 1. Ob. S. Peter writ his first epistle from Rome as it appeareth 1. ep 5.13 the Church which is at Babylon saluteth you and Marcus my sonne but this Babylon is Rome as it is called Rev. 17. and so Papias in Euseb. l. 2. c. 15. and Hierome de viris illustribus do vndestand it Rhemist annot 1. Pet. 5. v. 13. Ans. 1. This Babylon some take to be that great citie in Assyria Beza or rather it was the Egyptian Babylon that great citie now called Cayre or Alcayre which is 13. or 14. german miles about and this is most like because Marke was with Peter at this time who is held to haue beene constituted the first Bishop of Alexandria in Egypt where also he was put to death and buried as Nichep l. 2. c. 35. Doroth. in the life of Marke 2. the Apostle would not date his epistle from a place so called in an allegoricall sense epistles are dated from places and cities as they are vsually called 3. in the Revelation Rome is called mysticall Babylon not the first Rome but as it should be vnder Antichrist but S. Peter handleth no such thing in this place of the seate and place of Antichrist 4. Eusebius reiecteth diuerse of Papiâ—s fables lib. 3. c. 36. neither is euery thing that Hierome writeth Gospel 2. Ob. The sight of the monuments of S. Peters chaire sepulchre death at Rome doe euidently convince them which denie his beeing there Rhemist Ans. This is to prooue one vncertaine thing by an other for how doe they prooue that S. Peter sate in such a chaire or that his bodie lieth there buried when as they themselues haue deceiued the world with diuerse fables concerning this matter halfe of his bodie they say is at S. Peters in Rome and halfe at S. Pauls his head at S. Iohn Lateran his neather iaw with the beard vpon it at Poyters in Fraunce at Triers many of his bones at Geneva part of his braine which was found to be a pumice stone Therefore this argument taken from the sepulchre of Peter prooueth nothing their own fables take away the credit of their report 3. Ob. But diuerse auncient writers to testifie that S. Peter was at Rome and among the rest Egesip l. 3. c. 2. de excid Hierosol Iren. l. 3. c. 3. Euseb. l. 2. c. 13.15 Hier. in Cat. with diuerse other fathers Chrysost. Amb. August Cypr. cited by the Rhemists an 4. in 16. c. Rom. Answ. 1. In generall we say that the fathers might followe the receiued opinion of those dayes not obseruing how the mysterie of iniquitie then wrought and a way euen theÌ„ was a preparing for Antichrist and that their testimonie without warrant of Scripture is too weake a ground to build an article of faith vpon such as the Papists make this to be of Peters beeing at Rome and sitting Bishop there 2. either the fathers writings comming afterward to be handled with soule fingers may be thought herein to be corrupted or of small credit considering the great varietie of their reports which shall be examined among our arguments following 2. In particular iust exception may be taken to the fowre authors first alleadged Egesippus is held to be but a fabler and not that auncient Egesippus meÌ„tioned by Eusebius but an other of later time or a counterfeit author 1. that auncient Egesippus wrote the Acts of the Apostles their doctrine out of the Gospel secundum Hebraeos Syros according to the Hebrewes and Syrians but this fabulous Egesippus wrot in Greek 2. This last Egesippus maketh mention of Constantinople to which Rome should be equall in dignitie which was concluded after Constantines time after an 340. but the elder Egesippus liued an 146. or thereabout neere 200. yeare before 3. the fables themselues are vnsauourie
qu. Why the Apostle onely maketh mention of sinnes past 36. qu. How God is said to be iust and a iustifier of him which is of the faith c. v. 26. 37. qu. How reioycing is excluded not by the law of works but by the law of faith 38. qu. Of the difference betweene these two phrases of faith through faith v. 30. 39. qu. How the Law is established by the doctrine of faith Questions vpon the fourth Chapter 1. qu. Vpon what occasion S. Paul bringeth in the example of Abraham 2. qu. Of the meaning of the first verse 3. qu. Of the meaning of the 2. verse 4. qu. How the Apostle alleadgeth that testimonie concerning the imputation of Abrahams faith for righteousnes v. 4. 5. qu. Of the meaning of the words who counted this for righteousnes vnto Abraham 6. qu. What it was that Abraham beleeued 7. qu. Why Abrahams faith was imputed to him at this time and not before 8. qu. What imputation is and what to be imputed 9. qu. How Abrahams faith was imputed to him for righteousnes 10. qu. Whether Abraham were iustified by any thing beside his faith 11. qu. How S. Paul and S. Iames are reconciled about the manner of Abrahams iustifying 12. qu. Of the explication of the 4. and 5. verses 13. qu. Of the diuers kinds of rewards 14. qu. How it standeth with Gods iustice to iustifie the wicked v. 5. 15. qu. How our sinnes are said to be forgiuen and couered v. 7. 16. qu. In what sense circumcision is said to be a signe and wherefore it was instituted 17. qu. In what sense circumcision is called a seale of the righteousnes of faith v. 11. 18. qu. Whether the mysterie of faith in the Messiah to come were generally known vnder the Law 19. qu. Certaine questions of circumcision and first of the externall signe why it was placed in the generative part 20. qu. Certaine doubts remooued and obiections answered concerning circumcision 21. qu. How Abraham is saide to be the father of them which beleeue v. 11 12. 22. qu. How Abraham is saide to be the father of circumcision v. 12. 23. qu. How and where Abraham was promised to be heire of the world v. 13. 24. qu. Wherein Abraham was made heire of the world and wherein this inheritance consisted 25. qu. How faith is said to be made voide if they which are of the law be heires 26. qu. How they law is said to cause wrath 27. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 15. where no law is there is no transgression 27. qu. Who are meant by Abrahams seede which is of the law v. 16. 28. qu. Of the meaning of these words I haue made thee a father of many nations before God 29. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 17. who quickneth the dead and calleth those things which be not c. 30. qu. How God is said to call those things which be not as though they were 31. qu. Whether it be peculiar to God onely to quicken and raise the dead 32. qu. How Abraham is said against hope to haue beleeued vnder hope 33. qu. How Abrahams bodie is said to be dead v. 19. 34. qu. What promise of God made to Abraham it was whereof he is saide not to haue doubted v. 20. 35. qu. Whether Abraham doubted of Gods promise 36. qu. How Abraham is said to haue giuen glorie vnto God v. 20. 37. qu. What was imputed to Abraham for righteousnes 38. qu. Of these words Now it is not written for him onely c. v. 23. 39. qu. How Abrahams faith is to be imitated by vs. 40. qu. Wherein Abrahams faith and ours differ and wherein they agree 41. qu. How Christ is said to haue bin deliuered vp for our sinnes v. 25. 42. qu. Why the Apostle thus distinguisheth the benefits of our redemption ascribing remission of sinnes to Christs death and iustification to his resurrection v. 25. Questions vpon the fifth Chapter 1. qu. What peace the Apostle meaneth v. 1. 2. qu. Of the second benefit proceeding of our iustification which is to stand and persevere in the state of grace 3. qu. Of the benefit of our iustification the hope of euerlasting glorie 4. qu. How we are said to reioyce in tribulation 5. qu. How S. Paul and S. Iames are reconciled together the one making patience the cause of trialls or probation the other the effect 6. qu. Of the coherence of these words with the former because the loue of God is shed abroad in our hearts v. 5. 7. qu. What kind of loue the Apostle speaketh of saying the loue of God is shed abroad c. 8. qu. Why the loue of God is said to be shed abroad in our hearts 9. qu. Why it is added by the holy Ghost which is giuen vs. 10. qu. How Christ is said to haue died according to the time v. 6. 11. qu. Of the meaning of the 7. v. One will scarce die for a righteous man c. 12. qu. Of the difference betweene Christs dying for vs and those which died for their countrey 13. qu. Of the greatnes of the loue of God toward man in sending Christ to die for vs v. 8. 14. qu. Whether mans redemption could not otherwise haue beene wrought but by the death of Christ. 15. qu. Wherein the force of the Apostles reason consisteth saying Much more beeing reconciled we shall be saued by his life v. 9. 16. qu. Why the Apostle saith not onely so but we also reioyce in God c. v. 11. 17. qu. Whether any thing neede to be supplied in the Apostles speach v. 12. to make the sense perfect 18. qu. Who was that one by whome sinne entred into the world v. 12. 19. qu. What sinne the Apostle speaketh of here originall or actuall by one man sinne entred 20. qu. How sinne is said to haue entred into the world 21. qu. And death by sinne what kind of death the Apostle speaketh of 22. qu. Whether the death of the bodie be naturall or inflicted by reason of sinne 23. qu. Of the meaning of the Apostle in these words in whome all haue sinned and of the best reading thereof v. 12. 24. qu. Whether the Apostle meaneth originall or actuall sinnes saying in whome all haue sinned 25. qu. Of the coherence of these words Vnto the time of the Law was sinne in the world 26. qu. How sinne is said to haue beene vnto the time of the Law 27. qu. What sinne the Apostle meaneth which was in the world vnto the time of the law 28. qu. How sinne is said not to be imputed where there is no law 29. qu. How death is saide to haue raigned from Adam to Moses 30. qu. Of the meaning of these words which sinne not after the transgression of Adam 31. qu. How Adam is said to be the figure of him that was to come v. 14. 32. qu. Of the names and tearmes which the Apostle vseth in this comparison 33. qu. Of the comparison betweene Adam
and Christ in generall 34. qu. Of the disparitie and vnlikenes betweene Adam and Christ in this comparison 35. qu. Of the excellencie and superioritie which the benefit by grace in Christ hath beyond our fall and losse in Adam 36. qu. Some other opinions refused wherein this excellencie should consist 37. qu. In what sense the grace of God is said to haue abounded vnto more 38. qu. How all men are said to be iustified in Christ v. 18. 39. qu. Why the Apostle saith v. 19. By one mans disobedience many were made sinners and not all 40. qu. How many are said to be sinners in Adam 41. qu. How the law is said to haue entred thereupon v. 20. 42. qu. How the offence is saide to haue abounded by the entring of the law v. 20. 43. qu. How grace is said to haue abounded more 44. qu. Of the raigne of sinne vnto death and of grace vnto life Questions vpon the sixt Chapter 1. qu. Of the meaning of these words Shall we continue in sinne v. 1. 2. qu. What it is to die vnto sinne 3. qu. What it is to be baptized into Iesus Christ. 4. qu. Of the diuers significations of the word Baptisme and to be baptized 5. qu. What it is to be baptized into the death of Christ v. 3. 7. qu. Of the meaning of this phrase to be graft c. 8. qu. What resurrection the Apostle speaketh of v. 5. 9. qu. What is vnderstood by the old man v. 6. 10. qu. What is meant by the bodie of sinne v. 6. that the bodie of sinne might be destroied 11. qu. How the dead are said to be freed frō sinne v. 7. 12. qu. What life the Apostle speaketh of v. 8. We beleeue that we shall also liue with him 13. qu. How death is said to haue bad dominion ouer Christ v. 9. 14. qu. How Christ is said to haue died to sinne v. 10. 15. qu. How Christ is said now to liue vnto God v. 10. 16. qu. Of these words v. 11. Likewise think ye c. 17. qu. How sinne is said not to raigne c. v. 12. 18. qu. What the Apostle meaneth by mortall bodie v. 12. 19. qu. Of these words that we should obey it in the lusts c. v. 12. 20. qu. How we are not to giue our members as weapons vnto sinne v. 13. 21. qu. What it is not to be vnder the law but vnder grace v. 14. 23. qu. Whether the Fathers also that liued vnder the law were not vnder grace 24. qu. What the Apostle meaneth by the forme of doctrine whereunto they were deliuered 25. qu. How we are made seruants of righteousnes 26. qu. Of the meaning of these words I speake after the manner of men because of your infirmitie v. 19. Questions vpon the seauenth Chapter 1. qu. How the law is said to haue dominion ouer a man as long as he liueth 2. qu. Whether the woman be simply free if the man be once dead 3. qu. Whether the woman haue not the like libertie and freedome in respect of the bond of mariage as the man hath 4. qu. Why the Apostle saith we are dead to the law v. 4. and not rather the law is dead to vs. 5. qu. How we are said to be mortified to and freed from the law 6. qu. What is meant by the bodie of Christ. 7. qu. Of the meaning of these words beeing dead vnto it 8. qu. What is meant by the newnes of the spirit and oldnes of the letter 9. qu. How S. Paul beeing brought vp in the knowledge of the law could say I knew not lust v. 7. and I was aliue without the law v. 9. 10. qu. What law the Apostle speaketh of v. 7. is the law of sinne 11. qu. What lust or concupiscence the Apostle speaketh of I had not knowne lust c. except c. 12. qu. Why the Apostle giueth instance in the tenth Command Thou shalt not lust and alledgeth not all the words of the law 13. qu. What sinne the Apostle meaneth v. 8. sinne tooke an occasion c. 14. qu. How sinne tooke occasion by the Law 15. qu. Of what time S. Paul speaketh when he knew not the law and afterward sinne tooke occasion by the law c. 16. What the Apostle meaneth by all concupiscence 17. qu. In what sense the Apostle saith Sinne was dead and he aliue without the law v. 8. 18. qu. How sinne is said to haue revived 19. qu. How sinne is said to haue deceiued 20. qu. How sinne is said to haue slaine him 21. qu. How the law is said to be holy iust good and likewise the commandement 22. qu. How sinne is said to be out of measure sinnefull 23. qu. How the law is said to be spirituall 24. qu. How the Apostle saith he is carnall and sold vnder sinne v. 17. 25. qu. Of these words v. 15. I allow not what I doe what I would that doe I not 26. qu. What the Apostle vnderstandeth by flesh I know that in me that is my flesh dwelleth no good thing c. v. 18. 27. qu. How the Apostle saith To will is present with me c. but I find no meanes to performe c. v. 18. 28. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 21. I finde a law c. 29. qu. How the Apostle saith Euill is present with me v. 21. 30. qu. Of these words I delight in the law of God c. v. 22 23. of the number of these laws and what they are 31. qu. Why these are called Laws and why they are said the one to be in the inner man the other in the members 32. qu. Of the Apostles exclamation O wretched man that I am 33. qu. What the Apostle vnderstandeth by this bodie of death from the which he desireth to be deliuered 34. qu. Why the Apostle giueth thankes to God v. 25. 35. qu. Of these words I in my minde serue the law of God c. 36. qu. Of that famous question whether S. Paul doe speake in his owne person or of an other here in this chapter Questions vpon the eight Chapter 1. qu. Who are said to be in Christ. 2. qu. What is meant by the law of the spirit of life 3. qu. What is vnderstood by the law of sinne and death 4. qu. Of the best reading of the 3. v. 5. qu. What is meant by the similitude of sinfull flesh 6. qu. Of these words And for sinne condemned sinne in the flesh 7. qu. How Christ condemned sinne in the flesh 8. qu. Who are after the flesh and sauour the things of the flesh 9. qu. How the wisdome of the flesh is enmitie against God 10. qu. How they which are in the flesh cannot please God v. 8. 11. qu. Of the dwelling of the spirit of God in vs v. 9. 12. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 10. The bodie is dead because of sinne the spirit is life c. 13. qu. How the quickning of the dead is ascribed to the
opinion examined that our sinnes are remitted onely by Christs death not for the the obedience and merit of his life Controversies vpon the 5. Chapter 1. contr Whether a good conscience and integritie of life be the cause of peace with God 2. contr Against invocation of Saints 3. contr Of the certaintie of salvation and of perseverance 4. contr That the tribulation of the Saints is not meritorius though it be said to worke patience 5. contr That we are not iustified by the inherent habite of charitie 6. contr Against the heresie of impious Socinus who denieth that Christ died for our sinnes and payed the ransome for them 7. contr Against other obiections of Socinus and other impugning the fruit and efficacie of Christs death in reconciling vs to God his Father 8. con That Christs death was a full satisfaction for our sins against Socinus his cauils 9. contr That Christs death was not onely satisfactorie but meritorious against Socinus Certaine controversies touching Originall sinne 10. cont That there is originall sinne in men by the corruption of nature against the opinion of the Hebrewes 11. contr That Adaws sinne is entred into his posteritie by propagation not imitation onely against the Pelagians 12. contr Of the manner how originall sinne is propagated against the Pelagians where it is disputed whether the soule be deriued from the Parents 13. contr Against the Pelagians and Papists that originall sinne is not quite taken away in Baptisme 14. contr What originall sinne is against the Romanists and some some others and specially against them which hold it to be Adams sinne imputed onely to his posteritie 15. contr That originall sinne is not onely the privation of originall iustice 16. contr Of the wicked heresie of Marcion and Valentinus with the blasphemous Manichees 17. cont That all sinnes are mortall and worthie of death by nature 18. contr That Henoch and Elias are not yet aliue in the bodie 19. contr The Virgin Marie conceiued in originall sinne 20. contr Againe meritts 21. contr That the punishment of originall sinne is euerlasting death 22. contr That Christs essentiall iustice is not infused into vs. 23. contr Against the Patrons of vniuersall grace 24. contr Against the Popish inherent iustice 25. contr That we are iustified both by the actiue and passiue obedience of Christ. 26. contr Against the Philosophers who placed righteousnes in their owne workes 27. contr Against the Manichees and Pelagians the one giuing too much the other too little to the lawe 28. contr Of the assurance of salvation 29. contr Of the diuerse kinds of grace against the Romanists Controversies out of the 6. Chapter 1. contr Against the administring of the Sacraments in an vnknowne tongue 2. contr Concerning inherent iustice 3. contr That the Sacrament of Baptisme doth not conferre grace by the outward worke 4. contr That Baptisme serueth as well for the remission of sinnes to come as of sinnes past 5. contr Whether in Baptisme our sinnes be cleane taken away 6. contr Of the baptisme of infants 7. contr Of the assurance of salvation 8. contr That Christ shall not die in the next world againe for those which were not healed here 9. contr Against the Sacrifice of the Masse 10. contr Concerning freewill 11. contr That concupiscence remaining in the regenerate is properly sinne 12. contr Whether a righteous man may fal into any mortall or deadly sinne 13. contr Against the Manichees 14. contr Concerning inherent iustice 15. contr Against the power of freewill in the fruits of righteousnesse 16. contr Whether all death is the wages of sinne 17. contr Against the distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes 18. contr That everlasting life cannot be merited by good workes Controversies vpon the 7. Chapter 1. contr Against Purgatorie 2. contr Of the lawfulnes of second marriage 3. contr Whether the marriage bond be indissoluable before the one partie be dead 4. contr That the disparitie of profession is no cause of the dissolution of marriage 5. contr Whether the bill of diuorce permitted to the Iewes did lawfully dissolue matrimonie vnder the Law 6. contr Against the workes of propitiation 7. contr Against the Heretikes which condemned the Lawe 8. contr That we are freed by grace from the strict and rigorous observation of the lawe 9. contr That concupiscence though it haue no deliberate consent of the will is sinne forbidden by the commandement 10. contr That the commandement thou shalt not lust is but one 11. contr Against freewill Controversies out of the 8. Chapter 1. contr That concupiscence remaining euen in the regenerate is sinne and in it selfe worthie of condemnation 2. controver That none are perfect in this life 3. controver That regeneration is not the cause that there is no condemnation to the faithfull 4. contr Against the Arrians and Eunomians concerning the dietie of the holy Ghost 5. contr Against the Pelagians that a man by nature cannot keepe and fulfill the lawe 6. contr The fulfilling of the lawe is not possible in this life no not to them which are in the state of grace 7. con That not the carnall eating of Christs flesh is the cause of the resurrection but the spirituall v. 11. 8. contr Against merits 9. contr Whether in this life one by faith may be sure of salvation 10. contr Against the invocation of Saints 11. contr That a strange tongue is not to be vsed in the seruice of God 12. contr That euerlasting glorie cannot be merited 13. contr That hope iustifieth not 14. contr Whether hope relie vpon the merit of our workes 15. contr Against the naturall power and integritie of mans will 16. contr That predestination dependeth not vpon the foresight of faith or good workes 17. contr Against the opinion of Ambrosius Catharinus concerning predestination 18. contr That election is certaine and infallible of grace without merit and of some selected not generally of all 19. contr That the elect cannot full away from the grace and fauour of God and be wholly giuen ouer vnto sinne 20. contr Whether a reprobate may haue the grace of God and true iustice 21. contr That the elect by faith may be assured of euerlasting salvation Controversies out of the 9. Chapter 1. contr That succession of Bishops is no sure note of the Church of Christ. 2. contr Against the old heretikes the Manichees Arrians Nestorians confuted out of the 5. ver 3. contr Against the prophane and impious collections of Eniedinus and Socinus late heretikes 4. contr That the water in baptisme doth not sanctifie or giue grace 5. contr Against the vaine observation of Astrologers in casting of nativities 6. contr That the soules had no beeing in a former life before they came into the body 7. contr Whether the foresight of faith or workes be the cause of election 8. contr That not onely election vnto grace but vnto glorie also is onely of the good will of God 9. contr That the Apostle treateth as well of
discriâ—iâ—â— all perills which put the life in danger Mort. omnia extrema secunda adversa and â—ll exceeding great prosperitie or adversitie 2. Angels principalities powers 1. Origen vnderstandeth onely the euill Angels and adversarie powers so Osiander also 2. Chrysostome onely the good Angels and Hierome so also Lyranus and they vnderstand it by way of supposition that if the good Angels should seeke to withdraw vs from Christ which is impossible yet we should not giue 〈◊〉 vnto them so the Apostle hath the like supposition of the good Angels Galat. 1.8 Calv. 3. But we may better vnderstand the Angels good and bad Mart. Gryn Pareus who by principalities and powers vnderstandeth the kingdomes and commanders of the world but they are titles rather giuen to the Angels as Ephes. 1.21 Gryneus following Chrysostome 3. Things present nor things to come 1. Not in this world and the next as Origen 〈◊〉 hath a speculation of the passage of the soule out of the bodie which in that instant is many times seduced and deceiued by the euill spirits 2. But he meaneth the dangers of this life present or to come Mart. Par. 3. he maketh no mention of the things past for they are ouercome alreadie Lyran. and as for our sinnes past they are forgiuen vs in Christ Gryn 4. Neither height nor depth 1. Origen vnderstandeth it of the spirits in the ayre and in the deepe 2. Lyranus of the depth and profunditie of Sathan 3. Gorrhan of the height and depth of humane wisedome so also Mart. 4. Osiander of the diuerse kinds of death as by hanging aloft and beeing drowned in the deepe 5. Chrysostome and Theophylact better vnderstand things in heauen and earth the elements aboue and belowe Pareus ret sâ—premas infernas things aboue and beneath Bulling 6. Theodoret vnderstandeth heauen and hell 7. Oecumenius prosperitie and adversitie 5. Or any other creature 1. not beside those which are visible Origen for he had spoken of invisible things before 2. nor a newe creature beside those which God made as Ambrose as equus hipes an horse with two legges and such like gloss ordinar Hugo Gorrhan 3. But the Apostle absolvit inductionem doth make an ende of his induction because it had beene infinite to reckon vp all the creatures Martyr so Chrysostome if there be any other creature of what manner soeuer how great soeuer 4. Places of Doctrine Doct. 1. How the same worke may be both good and sinnefull as it proceedeth from God the deuill and man v. 3. Sending his Sonne c. God in sending his Sonne and giuing him vp vnto death onely intented his owne glorie and the salvation of man but Sathan stirred vp the Iewes of envie and malice to put that holy and Iust one to death so the same action as it proceeded from God was good as it came from Sathan man was euill So that God is no way the author of euill though he be author of that thing which is abused vnto euill Mart. This further is euident in the affliction of Iob which as God was the author worker of it tended to Gods glorie and the triall of Iobs faith but as Sathan had his finger in it he would thereby haue supplanted the faith of Iob. Doct. 2. Of the causes of saluation v. 3. Here all the causes of our saluation are expressed 1. The author and efficient cause is God who sent his Sonne to redeeme vs. 2. the materiall cause is Christ who came in the similitude of sinful flesh not that he had not true flesh as Marcion the heretike said but it was true flesh yet without sinne so in that behalfe like vnto sinfull flesh as hauing the true nature of our flesh but not the sinfull qualitie thereof 3. the forme is also set forth he condemned sin in the flesh that is suffred the punishment due vnto our sinne in his flesh 4. the impulsiue or motiue cause was the imbecilsitie weaknes of the law for if the law could haue saued vs Christ needed not haue died 5. the finall causes were these two 1. for sin that is he came to expiate purge and take away sinne 2. and that the lawe might be fulfilled and the righteousnesse of the lawe fulfilled by Christ imputed to vs by faith v. 4. Doct. 3. That the holy Ghost is God v. 9. The spirit of God dwelleth in you Hence Didymus inferred well that the holy spirit is God because he dwelleth in all the faithfull this infinitenes and immensitie of the spirit sheweth that he is God for who but God can dwell in so many temples at once and beside in that he is called the spirit of God that also prooueth him to be God for the spirit of God is of the same nature and substance with God Doct. 4. That the three glorious persons of the Blessed Trinitie are of one efficacie and power v. 11. The raising vp of the dead is a worke of Gods omnipotencie but God the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost doe all raise vp the dead as God is said to raise vp our dead bodies because his spirit dwelleth in vs God the father then raiseth and his spirit also raiseth and quickeneth the dead and Christ also raiseth the dead because the same spirit is here called the spirit of God and of Christ so Ioh. 6.54 He that eateth my flesh c. I will raise him vp at the last day Doct. 5. Of euerlasting glorie v. 18. Not worthie of the glorie which shall be reuealed in vs Thomas Aquin. obserueth 4. necessarie points out of these words concerning euerlasting life 1. it is called glorie to shew the excllencie of it for in this life noble wittes are desirous of nothing more then glorie it is set forth by the name of that thing which is most desired 2. it shall be which sheweth the eternitie of it for that which is now present is but short and momentarie 3. reuealed the glorie to come then is of it selfe invisible but God shall so illuminate our minds as that he himselfe will be seene of vs. 4. this glorie shall be shewed in vs which signifieth the stabilitie of this glorie it shall not depend of externall things as riches honour but within vs it shall be and possesse and replenish both our bodies and soules Doct. 6. Of the nature and properties of hope v. 24. Hope that is seene is no hope 1. the author and efficient cause of hope is God Rom. 15.13 The God of hope c. 2. the subiect is the faithfull heart 3. the obiect things which are not seene 4. the forme thereof is with patience to abide 5. the effect thereof is ioy in the spirit Rom. 1â— 1â— reioycing in hope 6. the ende is our saluation we are saued by hope 7. the contrarie to all is despaire and diffidence ex Gryneo Doct. 7. Of true prayer that consisteth not in the sound of the voice but in the sighes of the heart v. 26.