4 Therefore my brethren or euen so B.G. ye are made dead also or mortified Be. L.A. dead B.G. to the law by the bodie in the bodie Be. T. of Christ that ye should be vnto an other euen vnto him that is raised not risen L.T. from the dead that we should fructifie L. bring forth fruit Be. B.G. vnto God 5 For when we were in the flesh the motions infirmities T. affections Be. lusts B. passions L. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gr. of sinnes which were by the law did worke L.B. had force Be. G. were effectuall in our members to bring forth fruit vnto death 6 But now we are deliuered from the law that beeing dead not of death L. or we beeing dead vnto it B.G.T. see the question following vpon this place wherein we were holden that we should serue in the newnes of the spirit not in the oldnes of the letter 7 What shall we say then is the law sinne God forbid let it not be Gr. yea I knew not sinne but by the law for I had not knowne lust except the law had said Thou shalt not lust 8 But sinne taking occasion by the commandement wrought in me all manner of concupiscence B.G.T. some read thus sinne taking occasion by the commandement c. Be. L. see v. 11. following for without the law sinne was dead 9 For I once was aliue without the law but when the commandement came sinne revived but I died 10 And the commandement which was ordained vnto life the same was found to be to me vnto death 11 For sinne tooke occasion by the commandement and deceiued me and thereby flew me 12 Wherefore the law is holy and the commandement is holy and iust and good 13 Was that then which was good made death vnto me God forbid but sinne that sinne might appeare wrought death in me by that which is good L. G. T. A. some thus but sinne was death vnto me that sinne might appeare in working in me death by that which is good Be. B. that sinne might be out of measure sinnefull by the commandement 14 For we know that the law is spirituall but I am carnall sold vnder sinne 15 For what I worke I acknowledge not allow not G. vnderstand not L. for not what I would that doe I but what I hate that I doe 16 If I doe then that which I would not I consent to the law that it is good 17 Now it is no more I that worke it but sinne that dwelleth in me 18 For I know that good dwelleth not in me that is in my flesh for to will is present with me but how to performe that which is good I find not 19 For I doe not the good which I would but the euill which I would not that doe I. 20 Now if I doe that I would not it is no more I that worke it but sinne that dwelleth in me 21 I find then a law L. Gr. this law to be imposed Be. by the law B. Ge. that when I would doe good euill is present with me see the question following vpon this verse 22 For I delight in the law of God concerning the inner man 23 But I see an other law in my members rebelling against the law of my minde and leading me captiue to the law in the law L. of sinne which is in my members 24 O wretched man that I am who shall deliuer me out of this bodie of death Be. T. the bodie of this death L. B.G. 25 I thanke God through Iesus Christ our Lord Then I my selfe in my minde serue the law of God but in my flesh the law of sinne 2. The Argument Method and Parts IN this Chapter the Apostle sheweth how we are freed and exempted from the seruice of the law yet so as that he commendeth the law in it selfe and deliuereth it from all blame laying the imputation vpon his owne weaknes and infirmitie where he taketh occasion to shew the combate betweene the flesh and the spirit This Chapter then hath three parts 1. he sheweth how we are deliuered from the law to v. 7. 2. he excuseth and commendeth the law to v. 14. 3. he sheweth the infirmitie that remaineth in the regenerate and the combate betweene the flesh and the spirit 1. In the first part the Apostle sheweth that we are not freed and discharged from the morall obedience of the law but from the seruitude and bondage thereof in respect of the curse and irritation and prouocation to sinne this is set forth by an allegorie taken from the lawe of matrimonie the proposition is contained v. 1.2 3. consisting of three parts like as the woman is 1. free from her husband when he is dead v. 2. 2. after his death she may take an other husband and therein is no adultresse v. 2. 3. the third is implyed that she may also bring forth by an other the reddition followeth which hath three correspondent parts so we are 1. dead to the law 2. we are married to Christ. 3. to bring forth fruit vnto him v. 4. this last part is amplified by the contrarie that as sinne by the lawe did fructifie vnto death v. 5. so we now beeing freed should fructifie vnto the spirit v. 6. 2. Then he taketh vpon him the defense of the law that whereas he had said v. 5. that the matrons of sinne which were by the Law c. did bring forth fruit vnto death hereupon two obiections might arise that the lawe is the cause of sinne and of death to both which he answeareth The first obiection is propounded v. 7. is the law sinne then he answereth 1. in bringing a reason from the effect that the law connot be sinne nor the cause thereof because it reuealeth and discouereth sinne v. 7. 2. he sheweth how not the law but sinne taking occasion by the law wrought concupiscence reuiued in him deceiued him and in the end slew him all which he giueth instance of in his owne person v. 8. to v. 12. 3. he sheweth what the law is in it selfe iust and holy v. 12. the second obiection followeth v. 13. that it might seeme that the law beeing good wrought death in him then the answer is that not the lawe but sinne by the lawe wrought death 3. The Apostle in this third part sheweth first the combate betweene the flesh and the spirit to v. 24. then the issue thereof v. 24.25 the combate is set forth in three degrees 1. in that he by sinne is brought to doe that euill which he would not where he sheweth the opposition betweene the lawe commanding and his will consenting and sinne ouer-ruling him and his flesh obeying v. 14. to v. 18. 2. the next degree is that he is hindered by sinne from doing the good which he would this is prounded v. 18. then prooued by the contrarie effects v. 19. and by the contrarie causes the lawe moouing to good whereunto he consenteth and sinne hindring him v. 20.21 3. the third degree consisteth in
set against the law of the minde and the law of sinne against the law of God like as then the regenerate minde is conformable to the law of God so the vnregenerate members are captived to the law of sinne in the members which is the corruption of nature euen originall sinne 31. Quest. Why these are called lawes and why they are said the one to be in the inner man the other in the members 1. For the first 1. Chrysostome giueth this reason it is called the law of sinne propter vehementem exactam obedientiam because of the exact and forced obedience which is giuen vnto it for the laws of tyrants are so called abusive though not properly Calvin lex quia dominatur it is a law because it ruleth gloss 2. Lyranus a law is called à ligando of binding ducit membra ligata ad mala it leadeth the members and holdeth or tieth them to that which is euill they can doe no other 3. Pererius sicut lex dirigit c. as the law directeth to that which is good so the lawe of sinne to that which is euill 4. legitime factum est it commeth iustly to passe that illi non serviat suum inferius t. caro that mans inferiour that is his flesh should not serue him seeing he serued not his superiour namely God gloss ordinar Anselmus so it is called a lawe as in iustice imposed of God vpon man for his disobedience 2. For the second the one is called the lawe of the minde and inner man the other the lawe of the members and outward man 1. not that the minde and reason onely wherein the naturall lawe is written is the inner man and the sensitive part is the flesh as Lyranus Gorrhan with others which opinion is confuted before quest 26. for euen the minde is corrupt and so carnall in the vnregenerate as the Apostle speaketh of some which were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 corrupt in their minde 2. Timoth. 3.8 2. But the regenerate part is called the inner man and the vnregenerate both in soule and bodie the outward 1. because intus potissimum regnat it raigneth chiefely within and is discerned chiefely and knowne in the mind Mart. 2. quia in cordis conuersione c. because it consisteth in the heart nec patet hominum oculis and is not open and apparent vnto the sight of men Pareus in which sense it is called the hid man of the heart 1. Pet. 3.4 3. and because non externa vel mâ—â—dana quaerit it seeketh not things externall belonging to the world whereas appetitus carnis vagi sunt extra hominem the fleshly appetite is wandring and as it were without a man Calvin and as Caietane carnalibus officijs immersae sunt the faculties of the outward man are drenched as it were and wholly spent in carnall offices 4. and the regenerate part is called by the name of the inner man and the minde per excellenciam because of the excellencie for as the minde is more excellent then the bodie so is the spirit then the flesh Calvin Quest. 32. Of the Apostles exclamation O wretched man that I am 1. The word which the Apostle here vseth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth one that is perpetus pugnis fatigatus wearied with continuall combates Beza like as a champion which striuing along time is like at last to be ouercome of his aduersaries vnlesse he be helped the vulgar latine readeth O vnhappie man but that is not so fit 2. neither doth the Apostle thus crie out either as a man in despaire or doubting by whom he should be deliuered but he sheweth his great desire vox est anhelantis it is the voice of one breathing and panting desiring to be deliuered from this seruitude Calvin 3. and by this exclamation certaminis gravitatem ostendit he sheweth the greatnes of this combate out of the which he was not able to wrestle by his owne strength and if Paul were not able who is it is then a patheticall speach like vnto that Psal. 86. Who will giue me the wings as it were of a done Faius 4. And in this crying out the Apostle sheweth the state of all men in this life into what miserie they are brought by their sinne and likewise his desire longing to be deliuered therfrom Pareus Quest. 33. What the Apostle vnderstandeth by this bodie of death from the which he desireth to be deliuered 1. Ambrose by the bodie of death vnderstandeth vniuersitatem vitiorum a general collection of sinnes which he called before the bodie of sinne but there was not in the Apostle such a gathering together and confluence of all sinne 2. Pererius chargeth Calvin to agree with Ambrose who vnderstandeth by the bodie of death massam vel congeriem peccati ex qua homo constatus the masse and heape of sinne whereof man consisteth and thereupon he crieth out ô hominem impurum atque impium O wicked and filthie man that is not ashamed so to charge the Apostle c. Whereas Calvin onely saith that there were in the Apostle reliquiae peccati some reliques of sinne of that masse of sinne and corruption which is in man Calvin then and Melancthon do thus vnderstand the Apostle naturam hanc carnalem immersam esse peccato that this carnall nature is wholly drowned and drenched in sinne so also Martyr vitiatam corruptam naturam intelligit he vnderstandeth our corrupt nature but the Apostle speaketh of death here not of sinne 3. neither is the bodie of death taken here properly for sinne as Faius thinketh it was called before the bodie of sinne c. 6. and it is considered tanquam moles onus incumbens as a masse or burthen lying vpon vs so also Roloch it is taken for sinne in this place which is in the bodie and in the whole man likewise Piscator mortem intelligit peccatum inhabitans by death he vnderstandeth the sinne that dwelleth in vs and so before them Vatablus à concupiscentia c. he wisheth to be deliuered from concupiscence which did make him guiltie of eternall death and before him Photius in Oecumenius applyeth it to the corporall and sinnefull actions which bring the death of the soule But in their meaning the Apostle should say in effect who shall deliuer me from this sinnefull bodie what could an vnregenerate man haue said more 4. neither yet doe I approoue of their opinion which referre it onely to the mortalitie of the bodie as Theophylact morti subiecti subiect to death Lyranus quia sancti resurgent c. because the Saints shall rise in an immortall bodie and Pererius à corpore mortis huius from the bodie of this death that is subiect to mortalitie and corruption for the Apostle hath respect thus crying out vnto the conflict between the flesh and the spirit from which he desireth to be deliuered 5. Cassianus by the bodie of death would haue vnderstood the terrene busines and necessitie quae spirituales
word 2. Cor. 13.7 though we be as reprobates that is in mans iudgement In the other place he speaketh of the full possession of the inheritance not of the perfect assurance 2. the epistle to the Philippians was written after that to the Romanes as hath beene shewed therefore it is impertinently alleadged to prooue greater perfection to haue beene in the Apostle when he writte to the Romanes then when he indited the epistle to the Philippians 3. The same assurance of saluation which S. Paul professeth Rom. 8. he sheweth also 2. Cor. 2.9 the things which eye hath not seene c. which God hath prepared for those that loue him But God hath reuealed them vnto vs by his spirit c. Here the Apostle in saying vs perswaded himselfe to be one of those to whom these things were reuealed and prepared 2. But Chrysostome better sheweth the reason why it is profitable to distinguish of the time of the writing of these epistles because the Apostle handleth the same things diuersely treating of circumcision and other Ceremonies for to the Romanes he saith concerning such things c. 14. him that is weake in the faith receiue vnto you But to the Galatians he writeth more sharpely c. 5.2 If ye be circumcised Christ shall profit you nothing and to the Colossians he calleth them the ordinances of the world the commandements and doctrines of men Coloss. 2.20.22 the reason of which difference Chrysostome alleadgeth to be this quia principio condescendere oportuit successu temporis non item because in the beginning the Apostle was to condiscend and yeelde somewhat but not so afterward like as physitians and schoolemasters doe more gently and tenderly vse their patients and young schollers at the first then afterward Quest. 19. Of the order of placing the Epistles and why this to the Romanes is set first 1. Athanasius in Synops. placeth the 7. canonicall epistles before S. Pauls which are foureteene in all and of them the epistle to the Hebrewes he maketh the tenth next before the epistles to Timothie Luther setteth the epistle to the Hebrewes after S. Iohns epistles and diuideth it from S. Pauls Tertullian lib. 5. cont Marcionem placeth them in this order the epistles to the Galatians Corinthians Romanes Thessalonians Ephesians Colossians Philippians But the best order is that which is vsually receiued to the Romanes Corinthians Galatians Ephesians Philippians Colossians Thessalonians to Timothie Titus Philemon to the Hebrewes 2. And why the epistle to the Romanes is prefixed before the rest the reasons are these 1. not for that it was the first in time for the contrarie is shewed before 2. nor so much for the prolixitie and largenes thereof as the prophesie of I say in that behalfe is set first Pareus 3. or for the dignitie of that nation because the Romanes were chiefe Lords of the world Aretius for this had beene but a temporall respect 4. or for the dignitie and excellencie of the Romane Church for he giueth the preheminence to the Iewes whom he calleth the oliue tree and the Gentiles the banches of the wilde oliue tree c. 11.5 But the chiefe reason was because of the excellent matter this epistle treateth of that principall question of iustification by faith which is handled also in the epistle to the Galatians but here more at large and of the chiefe questions beside of Christian religion as of the workes of nature c. 1.2 the force of the lawe c. 7. the fruites of iustifying faith c. 5. of election and reprobation c. 9. of the calling of the Gentiles and the reiection of the Iewes c. 11. of the diuersitie of gifts c. 12. of the dutie towards Magistrates c. 12. of the vse of indifferent things c. 14.15 so that this epistle is as a catechisme and introduction to Christian religion and therefore is worthily set before the rest Aretius Pareus Quest. 20. Vnto whom this epistle to the Romanes was written and from whence 1. It was not written generally to the whole Romane state for the Emperor of Rome with his Princes ministers and officers were persecutors of the Church of God but it was directed to those among the Romanes whether of that nation or strangers both Iewes and Gentiles that had imbraced the Gospell of Christ Aretius Faius As now in the Romane papall state we doubt not but there are many which professe the gospell of Christ and are members of the true Church 2. And although this epistle were personally directed to the Romanes yet it entreateth of the common faith which concerneth the whole Church of God and to the vse thereof is generall and that which was written vnto them is written vnto vs. As that which our Blessed Sauiour said vnto his Apostles he said vnto all Mark 13.37 So that which the Apostles did write to some speciall Churches they did write vnto all Gryneus 3. This epistle was written from Corinthus as not onely the subscription sheweth both in the Greek and Syriake but Origen beside doth collect so much by these three arguments out of the text it selfe 1. It was sent by Phebe a seruant of the Church of Cenchrea Rom. 16.1 which Cenchrea is neere vnto Corinth yea portus ipse Corinthe the verie hauen of Corinth 2. he saith Gaius mine host and of the whole Church saluteth you c. 16.23 which Gaius dwelt at Corinth as the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 1.14 I baptized none of you but Crispus and Gains 3. he addeth further Erastus the chamberlaine of the citie saluteth you which Erastus is the same whom Paul left at Corinth 2. Timoth. 4.20 Quest. 21. Of the excellencie and worthines of this epistle Three things doe commend this epistle 1. the matter 2. the forme 3. the kind and methode 1. Concerning the matter it containeth the chiefe articles and most waightie points of the Christian faith as is partly shewed before qu. 6. Origen further setteth it forth thus multa de lege Mosis connectuntur c. many things are knit together in this epistle as of the lawe of Moses of the calling of the Gentiles of Israel which is according to the flesh and of Israel not according to the flesh of the circumcision of the heart and of the flesh of the spirituall lawe and the lawe of the letter of the Lawe of the members and the lawe of the mind of the lawe of sinne of the inward and outward man to this purpose Origen praefat in epistol ad Romanos 2. The forme and methode of this epistle is most exact consisting of the definition of that which is handled and the tractation and explication thereof for the most perfect and artificiall Methode is that which beginneth with the definition as the Apostle sheweth what the Gospel is it is the power of God to saluation to euerie one that beleeueth c. 1. v. 16. in the which definition are expressed all the causes thereof the efficient and author God the ende saluation the materiall cause Christ Iesus the formall faith and
signifie non deinceps vivendum esse peccatis sed iustitiae that we should not liue afterward vnto sinne but vnto righteousnes for it were a signe of great vnthankfulnes hauing receiued so great a benefit in the forgiuenes of sinnes past if we should estsoone fall into the same againe 3. Pererius giueth two other reasons first that because it seemed an hard and impossible thing that sinnes before done should be remitted by the Redemption of Christ following many yeares after for the cause must be secundum existentiam haue a beeing before the effect therefore the Apostle to take away this scruple and difficultie maketh expresse mention of precedent sinnes to the which the vertue of Christs death was applied by faith 4. But Pererius other reason is false and friuolous that those former sinnes are mentioned to shew that there was no full remission of them for though they were remitted quanâ—â—â— ad culpam poenam aeternam in respect of the fault and euerlasting punishment yet the fathers vntill Christs comming were kept in Limbo and had no entrance into heauen â—at seeing by the blood of Iesus their sinnes were remitted they also by the vertue of the same blood had power to enter into heauen as the Apostle saith Hebr. 10.19 By the blood of Iesus we may be bold to enter into the holy place And againe v. 14. he saith With one offering hath he consecrated for euer them that are sanctified if then the beleeuing fathers of the old Testament were sanctified by Christs blood they were consecrated for euer that is perfectly but more followeth afterward of this matter among the Controversies 5. The true reason therefore why the Apostle giueth instance in sinnes which were past is to shew that from the beginning of the world there was no remission of sinnes from Adam vnto Moses and from Moses vnto Christ but onely by faith in his blood And therfore Iohn Baptist pointeth at Christ and saith Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sinnes of the world Some doe alleadge that place Apoc. 13.4 whose names are not written in the booke of life of the Lamb which was slaine from the beginning of the world Pareus Faius but this place seemeth not to be so fitly alleadged to that purpose for these words from the beginning of the world are rather to be ioyned with the former words whose names are not written in the booke of life c. from the beginning of the world so Aretus distinguisheth whome Beza and Pererius follow And so are the words ioyned c. 17.8 6. And further as hereby is expressed that all the sinnes of such as beleeued were remitted in Christ which were done before so much more the sinnes of the age then present and which should be committed afterward are forgiuen by no other way as the Apostle saith Heb. 13.8 Iesus Christ yesterday and to day and the same also is for euer Pareus 36. Quest. How God is said to be iust and a iustifier of him which is of the faith c. v. 26. 1. Some vnderstand this iustice of God generally of his holines vprightnes integritie which appeared in the worke of our redemption throughout Pareus wherein most of all shined forth the power of God his wisdome and benignitie vnto man his power in iustifying the wicked which was no lesse worke then in first creating him his wisdome in iustifying him by the death of Christ so fit and conuenient a meane for the reparation of man his benignitie appeared in beeing so mindfull of man as to appoint a way for his redemption Hugo 2. Ambrose doth vnderstand God to be iust that is faithfull in keeping his promises so also Beza 3. Some thus interpret iust that is benignus bonus good and gracious Osiand but Gods iustice is one thing his clemencie an other 4. Tolet vnderstandeth God to be iust in that he would not be satisfied for the sinne of man non accepto pretio sanguinis vnlesse he had first receiued the price of Christs blood so also Pareus 5. Oecumenius applieth it to Gods iustice which should be shewed in the iust punishment of those which should refuse grace offered but the Apostle speaketh of the time present not to come 6. The meaning then is this that he might be iust that is appeare and be acknowledged onely to be iust and all men lyars that is sinners and vniust as he saide before and as he is iust in himselfe so this iustice is communicated vnto vs by faith in Christ to this purpose Calvin Bucer Pellican so also the interlin glosse that he might be iust aliter non posse ipsoâ—vare otherwise he could not helpe to iustifie others if he were not most iust in himselfe God then is onely iust in himselfe and as he is the fountaine of all iustice so he doth iustifie others by that way which he hath appointed namely by faith in Christ. 37. Qu. How reioycing is excluded not by the law of works but by the law of faith 1. There are two kinds of reioycing one is in our redemption purchased by Christ whereof the Apostle speaketh 1. Cor. 1.31 He that reioyceth let him reioyce in the Lord there is an other reioycing in man as the Apostle saith in the same place v. 29. that no flesh should reioyce in his presence of the latter kind of reioycing which is in mens works speaketh the Apostle here 2. But the ordin glosse vnderstandeth this de laudabili gloriatione of the commendable reioycing and by excluded he vnderstandeth manifested or expressed as goldsmiths doe exclude and set out the stones set in siluer but this is a very vnfit interpretation the reioycing which the Apostle will haue here excluded is the reioycing before men as he sheweth afterward c. 4.2 3. By the law of works he vnderstandeth not onely the ceremonials iudicials of the law which are abolished vnder the Gospel as Lyranus but the morall also for the Apostle shewes c. 4.2 that Abraham might reioyce in works before men but not with God where he meaneth works of the morall law for the ceremonies were not yet instituted 4. Neither by the law of works doth the Apostle vnderstand such workes as are done without faith and by the law of faith the law of workes with faith but he excludeth all works whatsoeuer for seeing that such works they say proceede partly of freewill then this reioycing should not be taken away for where the freewill of man worketh there is merit and where there is merit there is reioycing Pareus 5. By the law of workes and the law of faith is vnderstood the rule and doctrine of works and the rule and doctrine of faith for in the Hebrew phrase the law is taken for the strength of a thing for doctrine or direction as afterward c. 7. he saith the law of the spirit the law of the members the law of the minde Mart. Faius 6. And Moses law is called the law of works not because it
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
inordinate lasts as specially after these things which concerne the tast feeling and such like Faius Quest. 20. How we are not to giue our members as weapons vnto sinne v. 13. 1. Chrysostome here noteth that the bodie as a middle and indifferent thing betweene sinne and righteousnesse it may be both vsed as weapons for sinne and as an instrument of righteousnesse as both the souldier vseth armour of defence for his countrie and the theefe against it and he maketh mention here of two Kings God and sinne shewing what great difference and oddes there is betweene them that it should be a shame for vs to leaue the seruice of God and to betake vs to the vile seruitude of sinne 2. Origen here also ascribeth a difference in the Apostles phraise he speaking of iniquitie maketh mention onely of our members which must not be giuen as weapons vnto it but he willeth vs to giue our selues vnto God because when first we haue deuoted our selues our inward minde and desire to Gods seruice so we shall make also our members instruments of holines 3. Theophylact noteth that sinne is called by the name of iniquitie because he that sinneth in scipsum vel in proximum iniurius est is iniurious and vniust against himselfe or his neighbour 4. By members we must not vnderstand onely the externall partes of the bodie as the eyes eares hands but the inward also as will affection heart that none of these must become the instruments of vnrighteousnesse Pareus 5. The Apostle setteth downe two partes of our seruice vnto God as he did before of seruice to sinne the first is obedience and subiection giue your selues vnto God the other is to striue and fight for the kingdome of righteousnesse as before he forbad them to vse their members as weapons for sinne Pareus 6. The Apostle inserting these words as aliue from the dead giueth a reason why we should not serue sinne but bequeath our selues to the seruice of God because we hauing receiued so great a benefit as to be raised in Christ from the death of sinne should now as no more dead but as liuing serue God and therefore in this regard iustum est it is iust as Chrysostome inferreth so the Apostle saith are aliue and therefore potestis yea may and ye were dead and therefore debetis ye ought to giue your selues vnto God gloss interline Origen maketh it as an effect and consequent of the former that in giuing your selues to God yea by this meanes shall die vnto sinne and liue vnto righteousnesse but it is rather a reason taken from the ende of our spirituall mortification as is obserued before out of Chrysostome Quest. 21. What it is not to be vnder the law but vnder grace v. 14. There are two things which doe encourage men to fight bonitas causa facilitas victoriae the goodnes of the cause and the facilitie of the victorie both these arguments the Apostle vseth here the goodnesse of the cause he shewed before which was to take part with God and to fight his battels against sinne the easines of the victorie he now setteth forth because we are not vnder the law but vnder grace which doth helpe vs and giue vs strength to resist sinne But these words are diuersely expounded 1. Origen vnderstandeth here the law of the members which continually resisteth against the law of the minde But as Beza well noteth the law of the members is not put absolutely without any other addition as it is here but alwaies something is added by way of explanation 2. Neither doth the Apostle speake here of the ceremoniall or iudiciall law from both which we are free from the first wholly both from the obligation but not from the substance in obseruing the equitie of these lawes the Apostle speaketh of neither of these but of the morall law against the which the concupiscence of the flesh continually inciteth and stirreth men vp 3. The Apostle then speaketh here of the morall law in the which three things are to be considered the substance in the obseruation thereof and the consequents either iustification in obseruing it or malediction if it be not obserued the question is in which of these respects we are said to be free from the law and not vnder it in this place it is confessed of of all that we are free from the iustification by the workes of the law the question is here of the other two the malediction of the law and the obseruation or obedience of it some take the first to be here meant that not to be vnder the law but vnder grace is not to be vnder the curse of the law but to haue remission of sinnes in Christ so Haymo ye are not vnder the law quae punit damnat peccatores which punisheth and condemneth sinners but vnder the grace of Christ that is the remission of sinnes to the same purpose Vatablus to be vnder grace is to haue the conscience assured omne peccatum nobis remissum esse c. that all sinne is remitted vs by the mercie of God so also Calvin they are not vnder the law that is opera eorum non exiguntur ad severum legis examen their workes are not now exacted according to the seuere censure and examination of the law thus also Melancthor Piscator likewise legi satisfecistis in Christo yea haue satisfied the law in Christ But Beza refuteth this interpretation vpon this reason because the Apostle speaketh not here of the remission of sinnes but of mortification and of the fruites of righteousnesse begunne in vs by the spirit 4. Some doe vnderstand it of the obseruation of the law in respect of the manner not of the substance for we are still vnder the obedience of the law to performe the holy workes and duties which are therein prescribed but we are not now vnder the law for the manner of our obedience to be forced thereunto by feare and terrour but the grace of God maketh vs willing and able in some measure to keepe the law which prescribed what was to be done but helped not toward the doing thereof thus Augustine Lex reos faciebat iubendo non adiuvando gratia adiuvat vt quisqne sit legis factor the law made men guiltie in commanding not in helping but grace helpeth euery one to be a doer of the law And to this purpose he maketh sowre degrees of men ante legem sub lege sub gratia in pace before the law vnder the law vnder grace in peace ante legem non pugnamus before the law we do not so much as fight or striue against sinne at all vnder the law pugnamus sed vincimur we fight but are ouercome vnder grace pugnamus vincimus we fight and by grace ouercome sinne in pace ne pugnamus quidem but in the state of peace which is in the kingdome of heauen we shall not so much as fight because then all our spirituall enemies shall be
in Oecumen 2. or I finde by the lawe that when I would doe good euill is present Vatab. Genevens Calvin but here the preposition per by is inserted which is not in the originall 3. Erasmus to the same purpose I finde the lawe this to worke in me that I vnderstand when I would doe well that evill is present c. but here many words are added not in the originall Of them that vnderstand the lawe of the members 1. Beza thus interpreteth I finde legem impositam this lawe to be imposed vpon me by reason of the corruption of my nature so also Mart. that when I would doe good euill is present 2. some directly vnderstand legem carnis the lawe of the flesh the concupiscence which hindreth him beeing willing to doe good so Tolet Osiand and these two last expositions are most agreeable to the text because it is added as a reason because euill is present with me in which words he sheweth what lawe he meaneth that which is opposite vnto him which is further explained in the verses following Quest. 29. How the Apostle saith v. 21. euill is present with me 1. Ambrose hath here a curious observation euill is said to be present adiacere to be readie at hand because it lutketh in the flesh as at the doore that when one is inclined and willing to do good sinne is at hand to hinder And he giueth this reason why sinne hath the habitation in the flesh rather then in the soule because the flesh onely is deriued ex traduce by propagation and not the soule which if it were propagated as well as the flesh sinne rather should haue the feare in the soule because it sinneth rather then the flesh which is but the organe or instrument of sinne likewise expoundeth Tolet adiacet mihi it is naturally resiant in my flesh as he said before that to will is present with me that is naturally in his minde annot 21. 2. But 1. Ambrose reason concludeth not for though the flesh haue the beginning by propagation and not the soule and so the first pollution is by the flesh yet sinne disperseth it selfe into the whole nature of man both soule and bodie as the Apostle sheweth Coloss. 2.18 that there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a mind of flesh or fleshly minde 2. neither naturally is the mind willing or apt vnto that which is good for why then should the Apostle exhort to be renewed in the spirit of the minde Ephes. 4.23 the aptnesse and inclination of the mind vnto good is by grace the meaning then of this phrase is nothing else but to shewe the readinesse and strength of our naturall concupiscence which lyeth in waite and is at hand to hinder euerie good worke and to stirre vs vp vnto euill Quest. 30. Of these words I delight in the law of God c. v. 22 23. of the number of these lawes and what they are 1. Concerning the number 1. some referre these laws vnto two the law of God and the law of the minde they make one and the same the law of the members and the law of sinne also they thinke to be one Pareus Martyr Tolet. annot 22. 2. Photius in Oecumenius maketh three lawes he distinguisheth the law of God and the law of the minde the law of the members and the law of sinne he confoundeth 3. But Hierom. epist. ad Hedib qu. 8. and Ambr. in Luc. 17. doe recite fowre lawes as they are here named by the Apostle the law of God the law of the minde the law of the members and the law of sinne so also Calvin Hyper. and the Apostle indeede setteth downe so many 2. The like difference is what these lawes should be 1. Oecumenius thus describeth these lawes two are without vs the law of God the knowledge whereof we haue by the preaching of the Gospel and the law of the members which commeth by the suggestion of Satan ministring euill cogitations two of them are within vs the law of the minde that is the law of nature which is imprinted in the minde and the law of sinne which is the euill custome of sinning 2. Pererius will haue the law of God to be the written law and the law of the mind the naturall law the law of the members the naturall concupiscence and inclination vnto the seuerall proper obiects of the desire the law of sinne is deordinatio earundem virium the disordering of the naturall faculties and abusing of them vnto euill But all these faile herein 1. the law of the minde is not naturall for naturally the minde is not apt vnto that which is good without the worke of grace 2. and the law of the members is internall and within vs. 3. neither is this the naturall facultie of desiring which is not euill but the disordered pravitie of nature 3. Pet. Mertyr as he maketh the law of God and the law of the minde to be the same yet in a diuers respect for it is called the law of God in respect of the author and of the minde in regard of the subiect so in his iudgement the same is called the law of sinne because concupiscence in it selfe is sinne as the efficient and the law of the members because they are as the instruments 4. But I rather consent vnto M. Calvin who vnderstandeth the law of God to be the morall law the rule of equitie and the law of the minde to be the obedience and conformitie which the mind regenerate hath with the law of God and by the law of the members the concupiscence which is in the members consenting to the law of sinne 5. And further the law of the members and the law of sinne are not severed in subiect they are both in the members but thus they differ Some thinke the law of the members to be the corruption and pravitie of our nature called before the bodie of sinne c. 6.6 and the law of sinne the euill concupiscence springing from thence so Vatablus the law of the members is vis in carne the strength of the flesh resisting the law of the minde and the law of sinne is affectus carnis the carnall affections so Haymo interpreteth the law of the members onus pondus mortalitatis the burthen of mortalitie and the law of sinne to be euill concupiscence custome and delight in sinne so Lyranus vnderstandeth by the law of the members fomitem peccati vel inclinationem pravam the food and matter of sinne or the corrupt inclination and the law of sinne consuetudinem pravam the euill custome of sinning 6. But I rather with Beza by the law of sinne vnderstand the corruption of nature by the law of the members the euill concupiscence springing from thence for otherwise the opposition betweene the law of God and the minde on the one side and the law of the members and of sinne on the other will not be correspondent and answerable together for the law of the members must be
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.
the obseruation of ceremonies and externall worship the Gospel in interiori cultu fidei in the inward worship by faith so that the law was lex puerorum the law of children which were kept vnder it as a schoolemaster but the Gospel is lex virorum the law of men come to ripe age August lib. de spirit lit 6. They differ also in the manner that which was couertly and darkely shadowed in the law is manifestly and apertly set forth in the Gospel 7. In the time they differ the law promised things to come the Gospel presently performed that which was in the law promised is Ignatius epist. ad Philadelp quod supra legem pracipuum habet Euangelium nempe praeseâ—tiam adventus Salvatoris what hath the Gospel aboue the law euen the presence of Christs aduent and comming 42. Quest. Why the Iewes are named before the Grecians v. 16. To the Iew first and also to the Grecian c. 1. Here by the Grecians generally all the Gentiles are vnderstood because they of all other nations seemed to be the wisest and therefore speciall instance is giuen in them that they also haue neede of the preaching of the Gospel Tolet. and at that time almost all nations vsed the Greeke tongue and therfore they are called by the name of Grecians Gualter especially when they are set against the Iewes Beza 2. Chrysostome thinketh that the Iew is named first not for any other excellencie or prerogatiue sed in hoc solo honoratur quod primus illam accepit but he is honoured onely in this because he first had the Gospel preached so he giueth onely vnto the Iew the prioritie of other 3. Origen thinketh that the Iew is set first because that like as the Grecian preferred himselfe before the Barbarian because of their lawes and ciuill life whereas the Barbarians liued without law so the Iew hath preheminence before the Grecian because they receiued their lawes from God 4. Lyranus giueth this reason the Iewes had a better preparation vnto the Gospel by the knowledge of the law and the Prophets then the Grecians who onely had the light of nature and the knowledge of the creatures 5. But the Iew hath a preheminence before the Gentile in respect of the prerogatiue which was giuen them of God vnto their fathers were the promises made and of them was descended the Messiah according to the flesh so that this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 first doth not so much signifie ordinem temporis the order of time as ordinem dignitatis the order of dignitie as when Christ saith Seeke ye first the kingdome of God Matth. 6.33 that is chiefly and most of all Tolet. Pareus This order our blessed Sauiour obserued both in himselfe saying he was sent onely to the lost sheepe of Israel and gaue the like charge when he sent out his Apostles that they should not goe the way of the Gentiles Matth. 10.5 yea and at his ascension he appointed his Apostles to be his witnesses first in Iudea Ierusalem Samaria and then to the vttermost part of the earth Act. 1.8 This order the Apostles accordingly kept Act. 13.46 It was necessarie that the word of God should first haue him spoken vnto you 43. Quest. v. 17. The iustice or righteousnes of God is reuealed what iustice the Apostle meaneth 1. There is a iustice of God wherein he is righteous and iust in himselfe as Psal. 11.7 The righteous Lord loueth righteousnes but this the Apostle speaketh not of the essentiall iustice of God is not communicated to vs by faith 2. There is a iustice distributiue in God whereby he rendreth vnto euery man according to his works Origen vnderstandeth this iustice of God but this is not the iustice whereby a man is iustified to saluation for if the Lord should marke what is done amisse no man should be able to abide it Psal. 130.3 3. The iustice of God signifieth his veritie and truth in keeping his promises so Gorrham taketh it here true it is that God graciously performeth whatsoeuer is promised in Christ but yet his mercie must goe before in promising 4. Theodoret vnderstandeth the perfect iustice of Christ whereby he satisfied the wrath of God for our sinnes and accomplished our redemption and this perfect iustice of Christ is reuealed in the Gospel but the Apostle speaketh euidently of such iustice whereby a man is iustified before God which is not that perfect iustice inherent in Christ but the applying thereof vnto vs by faith 5. Therefore Chrysostomes exposition is the best who Homil. 3. taketh this for that iustice which is communicated and infused vnto vs by that iustice of Christ and so Augustine vnderstandeth that iustice not whereby God is iust in himselfe seâ qua hominem induit cum eum iustificat but wherewith he endueth man when he instifieth him lib. de spirit liter cap. 9. of this the Apostle speaketh chap. 3.28 We conclude that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the Lawe 6. But this iustice is not an habite infused into the mind whereby a man is made apt to exercise good workes as Pererius saith that this iustice comprehendeth two things remissionem peccatorum the remission of sinnes animi rectitudinem c. and the vprightnesse of the minde whereby it is now acceptable vnto God and is exercised in good workes for the Apostle saith of this iustice of God that it is Made manifest without the lawe by the faith of Iesus c. c. 3.21 But this infused habite which is charitie and the exercising of good workes is not reuealed without the lawe for the lawe requireth and commandeth charitie This iustice then consisteth onely in the remission of sinnes and in imputing vnto vs the righteousnesse of Christ by faith c. 4.5 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne Pareus 7. It is called the iustice of God both because it is giuen vs from God not procured by our owne workes and for that we thereby are made righteous not before men but in the sight of God Tolet. 8. And this iustice is sometime called the righteousnes of God Phil. 3.9 because he is the author thereof sometime of Christ he is our righteousnesse 1. Cor. 1.30 because by his obedience we are iustified sometime of faith Philip. 3.9 because faith is the instrument whereby Christs righteousnesse is applyed vnto vs Gryneus Quest. 44. Of the meaning of these words v. 17. is reuealed from faith to faith 1. Is reuealed 1. Which sheweth a double preheminence of the Gospel in respect of the matter it sheweth such things as cannot be otherwise knowne then by reuelation from God whereas the lawe of the Iewes and the Philosophie of the Gentiles treateth of common and knowne things and for the manner that which was obscurely set forth in the law is plainely declared in the Gospel Pareus 2. and it is so reuealed that it is not onely made knowne but indeede exhibited Beza 3. And
committed against others 2. These words they regarded not to know God 1. some thus interpret that they thought God to haue no knowledge or no great care of such things as they committed gloss ordin Gorrham and so before them Ambrose but the words must be much forced and strained to make this sense as though the Apostle should say they regarded not that God knew 2. Some thinke the Apostles meaning is that they had not Gods feare before their eyes that knowing him they much regarded not what was pleasing or displeasing vnto him Haymo But the Gentiles had not the true knowledge of God for they neglected the meanes which should haue brought them to know him 3. Some giue this sense neglexerunt c. they neglected Tolet. non curarunt they had no care to know God Vatab. they did not seeke to know God according to that naturall light and direction which they had 4. But there is more signified here then a negligence rather spreverunt they despised to know and acknowledge God Faius they scorned and derided the true knowledge of God and preferred their owne vaine inuentions And so Chrysostome noteth that the Apostle saith not as they knew not God but regarded not to know God so that it was corrupts iudicij of a corrupt iudgement not a sinne of ignorance that they refused the knowledge of God The Apostle then sheweth voluntariam caecitatem their wilfull blindnes Pareus it seemed not good vnto them as Beza or they iudged it not good as the Syrian translator to know God it was a voluntarie election in them to preferre their superstitions before the knowledge of God And Erasmus whome P. Martyr therein approoueth noteth here a difference betweene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 knowledge and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acknowledgement the latter word is here vsed though they had some knowledge of God yet they did not acknowledge him to be God as in glorifying him giuing thanks vnto him as the Apostle said before v. 21. Quest. 70. What it is to be deliuered vp to a reprobate minde 1. Some vnderstand this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reprobate passiuely that is quod omnibus displicet which displeaseth and is reprooued of all Eras. mentem improbandam a minde to be reprooued or disalowed Sa. but this expresseth not the whole meaning their reprobate minde was not so called so much in respect of others as of themselues 2. Some take it passiuely in respect of God that they were as reprobates that is reiected and reprobate of God But all the Gentiles which followed these sinnes were not reprobates Beza many of them afterward were washed from their sinnes and sanctified in the name of Christ 1. Cor. 6.11 3. Therefore this word reprobate is rather here taken actiuely for a minde voide of all iudgement Beza which taketh good for euill and euill for good Esa. 5.10 Bucer which prauitie of minde commeth not by one or two euill acts but by a continuall custome to euill per acquisitum habitum when it is growne into an habite like as the rast that is corrupted taketh sweet things for bitter Lyran. So the Gentiles were not deliuered ouer to this reprobate minde all at once but by diuerse degrees first they were giuen vp to their hearts lustes v. 24. then to vile affections v. 26. last of all to a reprobate sense to such an euill habit that they could doe nothing but euill Faius 4. This prauitie of the minde is here described 1. by the subiect in the verie mind not in the sense as the Latine translator the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth the verie iudgement and vnderstanding both theoreticall and practicall they erre both in their iudgement and conscience as the Apostle saith Tit. 1.15 their mindes and consciences are defiled 2. the materiall part wherein this reprobate disposition of the mind consisteth is more distinctly shewed Ephe. 4.18 where the Apostle imputeth to the Gentiles vanitie of mind their iudgement and vnderstanding was corrupt then their cogitations were darkenes their reason and thoughts were obscured and their hearts were hardened that is their wills and affections 3. the causes are expressed the meritorius cause is their reiecting of God they regarded not to knowe God they reiected God and he reiecteth them where there is a fit allusion in the words for it is saide of them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they approoued not to know God so they are deliuered vp 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into a reprobate mind Pareus The efficient cause not of their reprobate mind but of giuing them vp to a reprobate minde is God who as a iust iudge doth deliuer them to this punishment Gryneus 4. Then followe the effects of their reprobate mind to doe things not conuenient that which was forbidden both by diuine and humane lawes Haymo 5. But here it is to be considered that God is not said to be author or worker of their reprobate minde but of the deliuering of them vp to a reprobate minde Faius not that their minde beganne now to be wicked and euill which was not so before but God finding their minde euill and lewde doth deliuer them ouer that is to themselues first in withholding his grace then vnto Sathan to worke his will in them Gryneus and not onely to but God by his iust iudgement doth secretly so worke and dispose euen in the hearts of the wicked that all things doe tend still to their further hardening Aretius 6. This reprobate minde or corrupt and depraued iudgement is of two sorts either in generall when things that are euill and vnlawfull are iudged to be good and commendable and in particular when as the affection is misled in some particular act to doe that which generally the iudgement condemneth as to steale to commit adulterie the Gentiles failed in both these for some of them iudged many things to be lawfull which were euill as to commit fornication to steale But most of them fayled in particular committing those things which in their generall iudgement they allowed not Tolet. Quest. 71. Generall obseruations out of the Catalogue of the sinnes of the heathen reckoned vp by the Apostle ver 29.30 1. As before the Apostle touched those sinnes of vnrighteousnesse which the Gentiles committed against themselues in their mutuall defiling so now he rehearseth such sinnes as were perpetrated against others Rareus 2. And in that he saith full of all vnrighteousnesse this happened vnto them propter aversionem à Deo because they had now forsaken and turned aside from God therefore they fell into all euill Lyran. for as the feare of God is the fountaine of all righteousnesse so incredulitie and want of the faith and feare of God is the beginning of all iniquitie 3. Origen seemeth to make this the cause why they were giuen ouer to a reprobate minde because they were full of all vnrighteousnesse and the Latine interpreter referreth it to the word deliuered vp that they beeing full of
the which naturall reason iuduceth was some way sufficient to the Gentiles vnto saluation c. But nothing can be acceptable to God without faith not that generall faith and knowledge of one God but the knowledge of God in Christ for he is the way and doore and without him is no entrace into life 6. Wherefore the Apostle here describeth the Gentiles in generall euen before the times of the Gospel and such as had no other direction then by the lawe of nature which they had as the Apostle sheweth by these two arguments both by the externall workes of the lawe and by the inward testimonie of their conscience But the Apostle faith not they fulfilled the lawe they onely did certaine things prescribed in the lawe Martyr And he speaketh rather de notitia naturali quam de implenda legis facultate of the naturall knowledge which they had not of any power or facultie to fulfill the lawe Calvin Beza And he meaneth not all the Gentiles in generall but the wiser sort among them as Solon Socrates Aristides the Sciptoes Catoes with other who outwardly did some externall workes which the lawe commanded though they wanted the inward obedience Pareus Quest. 27. How any thing can be said to be written in the heart by nature seeing the minde is commonly held to be as a bare and naked table v. 15. Which shewe the effect of the lawe written in their heart It is the opinion of the best Philosophers as of Plato in Philebo that the soule of man by nature is like vnto a booke wherein nothing is written or like vnto a bare naked table Aristot. lib. 3. de anima c. 4. how then doth the Apostle here say that the lawe is written in their heart Answ. 1. Plato was of opinion that all things were at the first written in the soule but when it commeth into the bodie is blotted out againe and forgotten and vpon this ground that opinion is mentioned by the Platonists that scire est reminisci to know is nothing els but to remember But this assertion presupposeth that the soule of man had a beeing without the bodie and that there is a certaine promptuarie or seminare of soules from whence the soules are deriued into the bodies But this opinion is contrarie to the Scripture which affirmeth that God formeth the spirit of man within him Zach. 12.1 the soule of man is created within him in his bodie infundendo creatur creando infunditur it is created by infusion into the bodie and iufused by creation 2. therefore a better answer is that whereas Aristole saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that nothing is written in the vnderstanding it must be vnderstood actually yet potentia in possibilitie euerie thing is written there because the vnderstanding is apt and hath a capacitie to receiue and apprehend euerie thing 3. neither is that axiome of Philosophie generally to be vnderstood but to be restrained to such principles as are not engendred in the mind without instruction experience and obseruation as is the knowledge of arts otherwise there are some principles which are by nature imprinted in the soule as first the naturall conclusions which the soule apprehendeth of it selfe without any other demonstration as that God is to be worshipped parents are to be honoured that good and honest things are to be desired secondly there are certaine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 generall notions which are at the first apprehended onely by the sense as that the fire burneth that the whole is greater then the part and such like ex Perer. Quest. 28. Of the Lawe of nature what it is It shall not be amisse by occasion of these words of the Apostle who speaketh here of the lawe of nature written in the heart a little to digresse and briefly touch certaine questions of this matter and first we will see what this lawe of nature is and of what precepts it consisteth 1. It is euident by the Apostle here that there is a lawe of nature which he prooueth by â—o effects the one externall in the performance of some things agreeable to the lawe the other internall in the testimonie of the conscience But in this inward testimonie there are two things to be considered there is first that which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the comprehension of certaine practicall principles and a naturall discerning betweene good and euill iust and vniust then there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the conscience which either accuseth one for doing euill or excuseth him in choosing of that which is good the synteresis doth frame the proposition the syneidesis or cosncience the assumption as thus the naturall lawe reacheth that parents must be honoured and that they which disobey parents are worthie of punishment thus the proposition is framed out of the principles of nature then the conscience of the guiltie person supplyeth the assumption But we Cham Esau Absolom haue disobeyed our parents therefore we deserue punishment and the like practicall syllogismes may be made in other commandements Gryneus 1. Melancthon thus defineth the lawe of nature it is a knowledge of certaine principles belonging to the practise of life and of the conclusions thence necessarily inferred agreeable with the eternall rule of truth which God hath planted in the mind of man to be a testimonie vnto man that there is a God which ruleth and iudgeth the actions of men c. In this description there are the former causes expressed of the law of nature 1. the materiall cause or the obiect thereof wherein it is occupied and whereof it consisteth namely of certaine practicall principles with the conclusions gathered thereupon for the speciall scope of this naturall direction is for the the practise of life and not for speculation and in this naturall knowledge are not onely contained the first principles as parents are to be honoured but the conclusions thence diducted as out of this principle in generall euery one is taught by the light of nature in particular to conclude that therefore he must honour his parents 2. the formall cause is the agreement with the rule of truth and the equitie of Gods written lawe for the lawe of nature is a summarie abridgement of the morall lawe 3. then the efficient cause and author is God who hath written and imprinted this law in the heart of man as Ambrose thus defineth this naturall law quam Deus omnium creator singulorum hominum pectoribus iufudit which God the Creator of all hath infused into euerie mans breast epist. 71.4 then the end is that it should be a testimonie of the diuine prouidence and iudgement whereby he ruleth all things and in the ende will iudge the actions of men This description of the lawe of nature agreeth with the Apostles definition here it is the effect of the lawe written in our hearts the effect or worke sheweth the matter of the lawe the forme written the efficient for it is Gods writing the ende
corrupt branches Pareus There is none that doth good no not one here none are excluded some thus giue the sense none sauing one namely Christ gloss interlin Gorrhan and so Augustine before them but the originall will not beare that sense the words are none vnto one that is no not one v. 13. Their throat is an open sepulchre 1. They are instar voraginis like vnto a gulph to destroy men and therefore are compared to a sepulchre 2. and an open sepulchre quod tetros spargit odores which sendeth forth stinking smells so they doe vtter filthie and vaine words 3. and they are likened to an open sepulchre quia vsus scelerum verecundiam sustulit their custome in sinne hath taken away all shamefastnes and modestie they are impudent in their sinne Origen 4. and as an open graue can neuer be satiate but it receiueth one bodie after an other so they doe still seeke to deuoure men and as it were eate them vp with their filthie and slanderous tongues They haue vsed their tongues to deceit where they can not openly deuoure they attempt to doe it by craft and deceit gloss interlin The poison of aspes is vnder their lippes The biting and venemous tongue is thus resembled 1. because this serpent doth morsu inficere infect and poison by biting Gryneus 2. it is insanabile a poison incurable gloss interlin Pellic. 3. and they are incorrigible and intractable like as the serpent stoppeth the eares and will not heare the voice of the charmer v. 14. Their mouth is full of cursing and bitternes 1. Their mouth is said to be full because ex pleno oris vasculo out of their mouth as a full vessell doe continually flow forth bitter and cruell words Origen 2. as they haue gall and bitternes in their heart Act. 8.23 so they doe vtter it with their mouth Gryneus 3. thus the Apostle sheweth how they abuse all the instruments of speaking their throat their tongues their lippes their mouth Tolet. 4. And as before they were giuen to flatterie and deceit so they sometime brake forth into open blasphemie both against God and man Calvin 5. Haymo specially refereth it to the bitter and blasphemous words which the Iewes vttered against Christ charging him to haue a deuill and crying out against him to be crucified v. 15. Their feete are swift to shed blood 1. The Apostle hetherto alleadged those testimonies out of the Psalmes now he citeth the Prophet Isa because in the mouth of two or three witnesses euery word shall be established Faius 2. by the feete are vnderstood their affections as Origen expoundeth consilium quo agimus iter vitae the counsell whereby we take in hand the trauell of this life and hereby their readines is signified vpon euery occasion to shed blood Tolet. 3. as Doeg by his false tongue caused many innocent Priests to be slaine Gryneus 4. and by this phrase of shedding is shewed how they doe vilipend the blood of the Saints powring it out as water Gorrhan v. 16. Destruction and calamitie are in their waies 1. Whereas the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 contrition Origen vnderstandeth it of their sinne and disobedience whereby they doe â—â—â—rere iugum domini cast off and beat in pieces the Lords yoake so also the Greeke scholâ—â—â— as by the way he vnderstandeth life so by contrition sinne whereby the life is worne as the way is beaten with trampling 2. some vnderstand it passiuely of the destruction and â—â—lâ—mitie which was brought vpon them by the Romanes gloss interlin Haymo Gorrhaâ— 3. but it is better taken actiuely for the destruction and calamitie which they bring vpon others they are the authors and deuisers of nothing but mischiefe Gryn Calv. Pare as the Romane histories doe write of Hannibal who in his dreame following one that was sent of Iupiter to be his guide into Italie seemed to see behind him an huge serpent deuouring and destroying all as he went whereby was signified the horrible vastitie which he should bring vpon Italie v. 17. The way of peace they haue not knowne 1. Origen vnderstandeth Christ to be 〈◊〉 way of peace whome they acknowledged not so also Haymo Gorrhan gloss 3. but thereby is signified their turbulent nature who delighted in warre and filled the world with tumults and troubles Gryneus Pareus and although some among the heathen did seeke to preserue the peace and tranquilitie of the commonwealth yet it did not helpe them any thing toward their euerlasting peace Osiand v. 18. The feare of God is not before their eyes 1. As the feare of God is the beginning of true wisdome and pietie so the want of that feare giueth way vnto all impietie and therefore sine retinaculo currunt ad malum they runne into all kind of mischiefe without any stay Lyran. These doe not say there is no God yet they doe not feare God August ex Beda and so are giuen ouer to all impietie 20. Quest. v. 19. Whatsoeuer the Law saith what is here vnderstood by the law and how diuersly this word is taken Hierome epist. 151. noteth this word Law to haue sixe seuerall significations in the Scripture 1. it is taken precisely for the Law giuen by Moses which contained both morall precepts iudiciall and ceremoniall as Ioh. 1.17 The Law was giuen by Moses 2. the law signifieth not the precepts onely but the historie of the old Testament as S. Paul calleth Abrahams historie concerning his two sonnes the law Gal. 4.22 3. the book of the Psalmes is called the law Ioh. 15.25 It is written in the law they hated me without a cause 4. the prophesie of Isai is called the law 1. Cor. 14.21 In their law it is written by men of other tongues c. will I speake vnto this people which testimonie is taken out of Isa c. 28.21 5. the spirituall sense and meaning of the old Testament is called the law as the Apostle saith The Law is spirituall Rom. 7. 6. the law is taken for that naturall light which is imprinted in the minde by nature as S. Paul saith c. 2.14 The Gentiles which haue not the law are a law vnto themselues Here then by the Law the Apostle generally vnderstandeth the old Testament as the booke of the Psalmes and the Prophets 21. Quest. It saith to them which are vnder the law who are here vnderstood to be vnder the law 1. Origen taketh here the law for the naturall law vnder the which not onely the Iewes but the Gentiles also are vnder and this he would prooue by two reasons 1. because it followeth afterward that euery mouth may be stopped but the mouthes of the Gentiles could not be stopped by the written law which was not giuen vnto them 2. the Apostle also saith afterward that by the law commeth the knowledge of sinne which is not the written but the naturall law for both Cain and the brethren of Ioseph did confesse and acknowledge their sinne before yet there was any
law written Contra. 1. The Apostle inferreth not that euery mouth is stopped by the written testimonies but that generall word is vsed least the Iewes should thinke themselues excluded so then not that writing but the thing written that all men are sinners serueth to stoppe all mens mouthes and especially the Iewes it conuinceth both Iewes and Gentiles the Iewes both for the manner because the written law was giuen vnto them and for the matter also they were sinners the Gentiles it conuinceth for the matter they were guiltie of all these sinnes 2. Though law be there taken generally both for the naturall and written law by the which came the knowledge of sinne and yet both Cain and Iosephs brethren had beside the naturall law instructions receiued from their fathers yet in this place it is euident that the Apostle meaneth the written and speaking law whatsoeuer the law saith 2. Origen beside hath here an other strange conceit he thinketh that not onely men but Angels and spirits are here saide to be vnder the law because they also haue a law and rule giuen them to be ordered by but seeing the Angels are not saued by faith in Christ which the Apostle treateth of here he saith directly that by the works of the law no flesh shal be iustified in his sight the angels can not be said to be vnder the law for they are not in the flesh 3. Theodoret here hath this distinction that the law saith thus to them which are vnder the law seà non de ijs but not onely of them for the Prophets haue many comminations concerning the Egyptians Babylonians and other nations Pererius also hath this obseruation that wheÌ„ as any prophesie is directed against other nations they are touched by name but those things which are set downe in generall and absolutely without any such particular direction doe properly appertaine vnto those who are vnder the law c. And although the Scripture make mention of other nations yet the speciall intent thereof is to profit the Church of God Faius 4. Now the occasion of these words of the Apostle is this the Iewes hearing these generall sentences setting forth the iniquitie of the world might thinke that the Gentiles were specially meant and so shift them off from themselues Therefore the Apostle sheweth that these things were specially directed to the Iewes and that by these three arguments 1. from the relation which the law hath to them to whome it is giuen it seemeth specially to concerne them therefore because the Scriptures wherein these things were found written were giuen vnto the Iewes to them they were specially directed 2. from the end that euery mouth should be stopped if the Gentiles should be vnderstood and not the Iewes also then they might haue somewhat to glorie in and to exalt themselues against God therefore that all occasion of boasting should be taken away euen the Iewes are conuinced by these testimonies to be sinners 3. an other ende is that not onely all occasion of boasting should be taken away but that the whole world should be found 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 guiltie and culpable before God Chrysostome by this word vnderstandeth him qui sibi ipsi aâ— defensionem non sufficit who is not sufficient or able to defend himselfe but it signifieth more one that is guiltie and subiect to condemnation Pareus 5. Tolet thinketh not this to be the occasion to meete with such a secret obiection of the Iewes for they could not be ignorant saith he but that whatsoeuer was written in the Scriptures was spoken to them but rather to shew the reason why they could not be iustified by the law because the law which was giuen vnto them condemned them annot 11. Contra. The Iewes did know that the Scriptures did speake vnto them but not of them they might flatter themselues as though such things were vttered against the Gentiles and therefore as Augustine saith in Iudaeis confringenda erat superbia c. the Iewes pride was to be taken downe exposit epist. ad Galat. and both these may very well stand together that an obiection of the Iewes is met withall and a reason also shewed that the law which condemned them could not iustifie them 6. But the Psalme whence the Apostle alleadgeth his first words toucheth those which said there is no god Psal. 14.1 but so did not the Iewes Hierome answereth they did confesse God with their mouth sed factis negabant but denied him in their works 23. Quest. How no flesh is iustified by the workes of the law v. 20. 1. By the works of the law in that he decreeth iustification to the very workes not to the persons or workers onely it is euident that the places before alleadged as v. 10. there is none righteous no not one are to be vnderstood generally of all and not of the most although some should be excluded that did some good workes either among the Iewes or Gentiles for euen the workes of the law which they did were not able to iustifie them Melancthon 2. By the workes are not here vnderstood those quae praecipiuntur which are commanded and required by the law for if a man could performe those works he should finde life thereby but such quae praestantur which are performed of men Beza either before grace which can not iustifie because they can not be good or acceptable to God without faith or in the state of grace which can not iustifie neither because they are imperfect Pareus 3. By the law here he vnderstandeth both the natural whereby the Gentiles were conuinced and the written law giuen to the Hebrewes for the Apostle disputeth generally against both the Gentiles and Hebrewes proouing them both to be transgressors of the law and so not able to be iustified thereby Pareus and by the works of the law are vnderstood not onely the ceremonials and iudicials as the ordinarie gloss but the morall works which the Gentiles did by the light of nature for otherwise the Iewes onely should be excluded whereas the disputation of the Apostle is generall both against Iewes and Gentiles Pareusâ— Tolet. 4. The word flesh is diuersly taken in Scripture it signifieth the humane nature of man as Ioh. 1.6 the word was made flesh or the corruptible and mortall state of man as wheâ— the Apostle saith flesh and blood can not inherit the kingdome of God or the sinfull state and condition of man in which sense it is saide they that are in the flesh can not please God in which sense Origen would haue it taken here that they which are carnall not spirituall aâ—â— denied iustification by works but in this sense the meaning of the Apostle should be much peruerted who generally affirmeth that there is no iustification for any by the works of the law but by faith but yet the Apostle vseth this word flesh to put man in minde of his fresh condition and state beeing not apt of it selfe to bring forth
prepared for you for when I was hungred ye gaue me meate he sheweth not the cause of their saluation but the condition state qualitie of those which should be saued to this purpose Faius see further before c. 1. quest 26. and controv 7. Quest. 25. How by the lawe came the knowledge of sinne 1. The Apostle here confirmeth that which he said before that none are iustified by the workes of the lawe by the contrarie vse of the lawe because thereby commeth the knowledge of sinne therefore iustice and righteousnesse is not attained thereby 2. The lawe Origen vnderstandeth of the lawe of nature Augustine onely of the morall lawe lib. de spirit liter c. 8. but indeed the lawe is vnderstood here in generall both the naturall for euen before the lawe written by the lawe of nature Abimelech knew that adulterie was sinne Genes 20. but the morall more by the which came a more full knowledge of sinne likewise by the ceremoniall and iudiciall lawe sinne was manifested but after a diuerse manner ex accidente accidentally because the one was appointed in expiationem for the expiation the other in poenam for the punishment of sinne Tolet. annot 14. 3. Now diuerse wayes doth the written lawe whereof the Apostle specially speaketh reueale sinne 1. Ambrose sheweth that before the law written there was some knowledge of sinne as he giueth instance in Ioseph who detested the sinne of adulterie to the which his mistresse enticed him but it is so said quia lex ostendit peccata non impune futura because the lawe sheweth that sinnes shall not goe vnpunished so also Theodulus 2. and by the written lawe peccata clarius fuerunt cognita sinnes were more euidently knowne and some were knowne to be sinnes that were not so taken before leviora quaque non cognoscebantur esse peccata the smaller sinnes were not knowne as concupiscence Hierome as the Apostle saith he had not knowne lust vnlesse the law had said thou shalt not lust quaedam etiam grauiora c. and some things by the lawe were knowne to be greater then before gloss ordinar 3. Oecumenius thus expoundeth because sinne was encreased by the knowledge of the lawe for he that sinneth wittingly is so much the more a grieuous offender 4. And before the lawe written sinne was knowne as beeing against reason but by the law it is discerned as beeing against the will of God and so the nature and qualitie of sinne is more fully and perfectly knowne by the lawe Perer. 5. and euen the knowledge of sinne before the lawe written did issue out of the grounds and principles of the morall lawe which were imprinted by nature in the minde Faius 4. But whereas the lawe sheweth as well what things are honest and vertuous as it discouereth sinne the Apostle onely toucheth that vse of the lawe which is to reueale sinne both because it was more pertinent to his purpose which was to shewe that there is no iustification by the lawe because thereby we haue the knowledge of sinne and for that men are more prone vnto the things forbidden in the lawe then to the duties commanded so that the lawe doth not so much teach our dutie to God and our neighbour as that we doe not performe that which is our dutie Beza 5. Now further whereas the Apostle saith by the lawe commeth the knowledge of sinne we must supply the word onely not that the lawe doth nothing else but reueale sinne for it iudgeth and condemneth sinne likewise but here the opposition is between the knowledge of sinne and the remission thereof the lawe onely giueth the one the agnition or knowledge of sinne not the remission Perer. by the lawe is cognitio peccati non consumptio the knowledge of sinne not the consumption of sinne gloss 6. But it will be obiected that in Leuiticus there are oblations prescribed for sinne and the Priest was to pray for such as had sinned and it should be forgiuen them Gorrhan answeareth that it was onely a legall remission quoad poenam non quoad culpam onely concerning the punishment of the lawe not of the fault But Lyranus answeareth better that such sacrifice for sinne was protestatio Christi passuri a protestation or profession of Christ which was to suffer so that such remission of sinnes though it were vnder the lawe yet was not by vertue and force of the lawe but by faith in Christ for the sinnes of the offerers were forgiuen at the prayers of the Priests which could not be heard if they were not of faith 7. It will here be further obiected that the politike and ciuill lawes of Princes intend more then the shewing of sinne they also doe helpe to reforme sinne and reclaime men from it therefore Gods lawe should doe more then manifest sinne Answ. 1. Humane lawes doe onely require an externall ciuill iustice but the lawe of God discouereth the corruption of the heart so that herein there is great difference betweene them Melancth 2. Humane lawes may by proposing of rewards and punishments helpe to perswade and induce men but they cannot instill or infuse obedience into the heart 3. God also intendeth more then the reuealing of sinne by his lawe for if any could keepe it they should liue thereby which while none is able to doe yet the law beside the discouering of sinne ferueth as a Schoolmaster to bring vs to Christ so that it is thorough mans owne infirmitie that the lawe giueth not life and it sheweth Gods power and wisedome that turneth the lawe vnto our good namely to bring vs vnto Christ which by our infirmitie is become vnto vs the minister of death 8. So then there are two other speciall vses and benefits of the lawe beside the reuealing of sinne the one that concerning faith it is a Schoolmaster to bring vs to Christ and touching manners and life it sheweth vs the way wherein we should walke Mars 9. There is a double knowledge of sinne by the lawe there is one which is weake and vnprofitable which neither thoroughly terrifieth the conscience nor reformeth the life such was the knowledge which the heathen had of sinne as the poets in their satyricall verses did set forth the sinnes of their times but themselues followed them there is an other effectuall knowledge of the lawe whereby the soule is humbled and this is of two sorts when such as is ioyned onely with terror of conscience without any hope such was the knowledge of sinne which Cain and Iudas had that betrayed Christ or it hath beside some liuely hope and comfort such was Dauids agnition and confession of his sinne But this comfort is no worke of the lawe it is wrought in vs by the spirit of grace Martyr Quest. 26. Of the meaning of these words The righteousnesse of God is made manifests without the lawe 1. Ambrose by the iustice of God vnderstandeth that iustice wherewith God is iust â—estans promissa sua in keeping his promises Origen
of faith in any other gift it can not stand together for where merit and worke is the wages is not counted by fauour and so freely but by debt Rom. 4.4 2. The better answer then is that we are iustified freely although the condition of faith be required because faith doth not iustifie vt actus quidem noster est as it is an act of ours but all the vertue thereof proceedeth from the obiect as the Israelites beeing healed by looking vpon the brasen serpent obtained not their health by the very act of opening their eyes but by the obiect which they beheld which was the serpent And like as when a rich man giueth his almes vnto the poore though he stretch out his hand to receiue it yet is it said notwithstanding to be a free gift Tolet. annot 20. 3. But adde here further that as when a blind man putteth forth his hand but he that giueth is faine to direct it to receiue the almes or if a man haue a weake and withered hand which he is not able to stretch out vnlesse the other that giueth doe lift it vp in this case euery way the gift is free So our will is not of it selfe apt to beleeue or will any thing aright vnlesse the Lord direct it faith then beeing both the worke of God in straining our will and faith receiuing all the vertue from the obiect which it apprehendeth namely Christ it remaineth that faith notwithstanding we are iustified freely Faius 33. Quest. v. 25. To declare his iustice or righteousnes what iustice the Apostle vnderstandeth here 1. Chrysostome vnderstandeth the declaration of Gods iustice by the effects thereof like as God declareth his riches not that he is rich in himselfe but in making others rich and his power not in that he euer liueth himselfe but in raising others to life so his iustice is declared not in beeing iust in himselfe but in making others iust But this iustifying of sinners is a worke of Gods mercie not of his iustice 2. Theodoret herein will haue Gods iustice to be manifested because he did sustaine the sinnes of the world with patience forbearing to punish them but this likewise was an effect of his goodnes and mercie not of his iustice 3. Ambrose vnderstandeth this iustice of God in keeping and performing his promise but the iustice of God is not here to be taken in a diuers sense then before v. 22. the righteousnes of God by the faith of Iesus Christ. 4. Some doe take the iustice of God here for his goodnes mercie and clemencie as the Prophet Dauid vseth to pray Iudge me according to thy righteousnes that is thy goodnes Pareus but this seemeth not to be so proper here 5. Some vnderstand the iustice of God in not leauing sinne vnpunished Lyran. it was the iustice of God that the price of our redemption should not be paid otherwise then by the blood of Christ but this is not the iustice of faith which the Apostle spake of before 6. Therefore this iustice which the Lord manifested and declared is none other but the righteousnes of faith before touched and as the words here following doe shew by the forgiuenes of sinnes God reuealed and manifested this to be the true iustice whereby men are iustified before him euen the righteousnes of faith so August lib. de spir lit cap. 13. Anselme Tolet Osiander 34. Quest. What is meant by sinnes that are past v. 25. 1. Some think that this is vnderstood of the fathers in the law which were kept in Limbus who though thorough remission of their sinnes they were freed from punishment yet they were not receiued vnto glorie gloss ordin Gorrhan But Tolet confuteth this interpretation though he allow the opinion as not agreeable to the Apostles minde for the words are not to be so limited and restrained but generally the Apostle vnderstandeth such sinnes as he spake of before v. 23. All haue sinned and are depriued of the glorie of God And if the sinnes were not yet remitted vntill Christs comming vnto the Patriarks they could not be freed no not from the punishment 2. The Novatians vnderstand those former sinnes which were passed of sinnes going before vocation and iustification denying all remedie vnto sinnes committed afterward But this were to make the death of Christ of small force if there were no place for forgiuenes euen after one is iustified Dauid fell into those two grieuous sinnes of murther and adulterie after he was called and yet was restored againe 3. Catharinus with other Romanists vnderstand likewise sinnes going before iustification and baptisme the rest that follow after they say must be purged by other meanes as by repentance and satisfaction But the Apostle speaketh generally of all sinnes If any man sinne we haue an advocate with the Father Iesus Christ the iust 1. Ioh. 2.2 Christ is our aduocate as well for sinnes before baptisme as after but see more for the confutation of thir error among the Controversies 4. The Apostle then compareth not the persons but the sinnes and the times and sheweth that euen the sinnes committed vnder the law and from the beginning of the world were redeemed by no other way then by faith in Christ God by his patience did forbeare to punish those sinnes as not imputing them because of the Redeemer which was to come Agreeable hereunto is that place Heb. 9.15 For this cause is he the Mediatour of the new Testament that thorough death which was for the transgression in the former Testament they which were called might receiue the promise of euerlasting inheritance By conference of these places together it is euident that by sinnes that are past are meant not the sinnes going before baptisme or iustification but the sinnes committed vnder the old Testament to shew that there was no remission of sinnes from the beginning of the world but by faith in Christ. And this further appeareth because the Apostle faith v. 26. to shew at this time his righteousnes c. he setteth the present time of the Gospel and the reuelation of grace against the former times 35. Quest. Why the Apostle onely maketh mention of sinnes past Now the Apostle so extendeth the effect and fruit of our redemption by Christ vnto the sinnes passed as that the sinnes present and to come also shall be by vertue thereof remitted but he maketh mention only of the sinnes past and before committed for these reasons 1. Hereby the Apostle sheweth the imbecillitie of the law of Moses and the ceremonies thereof that they were expiationes non verae sed vmbratiles not true expiations but onely in shadow Pareus as the Apostle saith Heb. 9.9 that those gifts and sacrifices could not make holy concerning the conscience and so Thomas yeeldeth this reason vpon this place God remitted the sinnes before passed quae lex remittere non potuit which the law could not remit 2. Adamus Safhout addeth that the Apostle maketh mention onely of former sinnes to
two the Apostle manifestly distinguisheth Rom. 6.22 Beeing freed from sinne c. you haue your fruit in holines holines then and sanctitie is the fruit of our iustification whereby we are freed from sinne Againe Apoc. 23.11 He that is righteous let him be righteous still be that is holy let him be holy still here these two to be iust and holy are manifestly distinguished 16. Controv. Against the works of preparation going before iustification Pererius concerning the works and motiues of preparation tending to iustification hath these positions 1. There are sixe of these preparatiue motions faith the feare of God hope to obtaine pardon the loue of God the purpose of a new life repentance and sorrow for sinnes past thus he alleadgeth out of the Councell of Trent sess 6. can 6. so also Stapleton in Antidot 2. These works of preparation proceede partly from mans free will partly from the assistance of the spirit concurring and hereof it is that sometime the worke of our conuersion is ascribed vnto man as Ioel 2. Turne vnto me with your whole heart Iam. 4. Draw neere vnto God and he will draw neere vnto you sometime it is giuen vnto God as Ier. 31. Conuert vs and we shall be conuerted 3. These works of preparation though they doe not merit the grace of iustification â—â— condigno of condignitie yet de congruo by way of congruitie they may that is God seeth it to be meere and conuenient that such works of preparation should be rewarded with the grace of iustification following Perer. disput 7. Contra. 1. Concerning faith it is no where said in Scripture to prepare or dispose vnto iustification but in deede to iustifie by the imputation of the righteousnes of Christ and as for the other preparations they follow iustification they doe not prepare a way vnto it â— for good works follow iustification as the fruit and effect thereof Rom. 6.22 Beeing freed from sinne you haue your fruit in holines And againe there is no good worke or motion but it is commanded in the law seeing then that we are iustified by faith without such works they can not goe before iustification as preparatiues thereunto 2. The Scripture ascribeth euery good worke motion and thought of the minde vnto God for of our selues we are not able to thinke a good thought 2. Cor. 3.5 and our Sauiour saith Ioh. 15.5 Without me you can doe nothing wherein the Scripture exhorteth men to be conuerted and to draw neere vnto God that sheweth not this power to be in themselues but by these exhortations the spirit of God worketh in them and stirreth them vp that by grace they should seeke to doe that which they finde no strength in themselues to performe 3. But that distinction of merit of congruitie and condignitie is vaine and friuolous for in the matter of iustification there is no merit at all the whole worke is ascribed onely to grace Eph. 2.8 By grace are ye saued thorough faith not of your selues it is the gift of God not of works c. least any should boast if all boasting be taken away then there is no merit for of merits men may boast Augustine hath an excellent testimonie to this purpose Vocantis est gratia percipientis vero gratiam postea sunt opera bona c. Grace is of the caller and then good works belong vnto those which haue receiued grace quae non pariant gratiam sed quae à gratia pariantur c. which works doe not beget grace but are begotten of grace for the fire doth not burne thereby to waxe hoate but it is first hoat and then it burneth and the wheele therefore runneth not well that it may be round but it is first round and then it runneth well so nemo propterea bene operatur vt accipiat gratiam c. no man therefore worketh well to receiue grace but because he hath receiued grace by the saâ—â—e he worketh well lib. 1. ad Simplician qu. 2. no works then going before the grace of iustification haue any worthines in them at all to procure grace 17. Controv. What iustifying faith is Pererius that he may euery where shew some tricke of his Popish profession misliketh three things in that description of faith which is vsually receiued by Protestants for whereas we thus define faith that it is a confident assurance of the heart whereby we are perswaded of the remission and forgiuenes of our sinnes in Christ he taketh exception to these three points 1. He denieth that faith is any such confidence and assurance which he graunteth must be ioyned with faith but that faith is not such assurance and confidence he would thus prooue Eph. 3.12 the Apostle saith by whome we haue boldnes and entrance with confidence by faith in him here it appeareth that confidence is a distinct thing from faith Againe 1. Tim. 3.13 They that haue ministred well get themselues a good degree and great libertie as the faith here the Apostle sheweth that confidence is a diuers thing from faith and that it springeth from charitie and a good conscience Contra. 1. Pererius first argument is faith worketh confidence therefore it is not the same with confidence Answ. 1. This argument may rather be retorted faith worketh confidence therefore it is much more a kind of confidence for as the cause is so is the effect 2. faith is not the same with that confidence which it worketh but they are thus distinguished faith hath a generall assurance confidence in all Gods promises out of this fountaine doe proceede those speciall acts of confidence as to pray confidently to be confident in tribulation which are as little riuers running forth out of the same head and fountaine 2. His second argument is this confidence is wrought by charitie and a good conscience therefore not by faith Ans. The argument followeth not for there may be diuers causes of the one and the same thing faith worketh confidence and yet the same is more encreased and confirmed by a good conscience because the Sunne giueth heat doth it follow that the fire doth not heat also like as the warmth of the Sunne may be augmented by the heat of the fire so may the assurance of faith by charitie and a good conscience be encreased See further Synops. Centur. 4. err 48. 2. Pererius second exception is that the obiect of faith is not the assurance of remission of sinnes The Eunuch when he was baptised beleeued onely that Iesus Christ was the Sonne of God Act. 8. And Paul required none other faith of the keeper of the prison but that he should beleeue in the Lord Iesus and so he should be saued Act. 16. Abrahams faith was counted vnto him for righteousnes which was no other faith then to beleeue that in his seede that is in Christ all the nations of the world should be blessed of none of these was required such faith to beleeue their sinnes were forgiuen them to this purpose Pererius
inward circumcision of the heart which is by faith 2. Anselmus thinketh that the Apostle reporteth here that which he said before that Abraham is the father of them which beleeue though they be vncircumcised but he toucheth here rather the other part that Abraham is the father of the circumcision also which he further explaineth that he meaneth not such as onely haue the carnall circumcision but such as walke in the steppes of Abraham 3. By walking in the steppes the Apostle vnderstandeth not here the fruites and effects of faith but rather faith it selfe in which respect Abraham is said to be the father of the faithfull Beza annot And herein they must followe the steppes of Abraham 1. he was not counted iust not by any merits or workes of his but by faith 2. this faith was ioyned with a constant and full assurance herein they must be like vnto Abraham 4. Origen here obserueth that though at this time he were called Abram not Abraham when he was pronounced iust by faith Gen. 15. yet the Apostle retaineth that name which was afterward imposed by the Lord quod enim divinitus sumitur obseruari in posterum convenit for that which is once appointed of God it is fit afterward to be observed Quest. 23. How and where Abraham was promised to be heire of the world v. 13. 1. Gryneus by the world vnderstandeth by a Synecdoche of the whole taken for a part the land of Canaan which was promised to Abraham and his seede but the Apostle speaketh here not of a temporall but of a spirituall promise 2. Faius Osiander with others doe apply it vnto Canaan also but mystically as it was a type and figure of the kingdome of heauen 3. Lyranus will haue this fulfilled in Christ to whom was giuen all power in heauen and earth so also Peter Martyr and Caluin who alleadgeth that place Heb. 1.2 Whom he hath made heire of all things 4. Pareus by the world vnderstandeth the world of the faithfull and beleeuers dispersed ouer the world and so in effect it is the same which he said before that Abraham should be the father of all which beleeue whether of the circumcision or vncircumcision So also Origen here referreth vs vnto that promise Gen. 15. that in Abraham all the kinreds of the earth should be blessed likewise Beza 5. As this last seemeth to be the fittest interpretation so I thinke it best to ioyne both these last together that Abraham was made heire of the world that is the father of all beleeuers in the world yet so as this was chiefely performed in Christ as it is said Psalme â—â— I will giue the heathen for thine inheritance and the vttermost parts of the earth for thy possession And so S. Paul also Galath 3. vnderstandeth the seede of Abraham vnto whom the promise was made of Christ to this purpose the ordinarie glosse that Abraham was heres mundi secundum propositum exemplum heire of the world in respect of his example of beleeuing but Christ secundum potestatem in regard of his power Quest. 24. Wherein Abraham was made heire of the world and wherein this inheritance consisted 1. This inheriting of the world is not meant of any temporall dominion which snoâ—â— fall vnto the posteritie of Abraham as the Iewes dreamed for the obiect of faith is spirituall not temporall as it is defined by the Apostle to be the euidence of things that are not seene Heb. 11.1 2. It must therefore be referred vnto Christ. 1. Abraham in Christs right is promiseâ—â— the inheritance of the world which should be chiefely accomplished in the celestiall inheritance 2. and now in the earth this spirituall inheriting of the world is vnderstood of the Church of Christ which is dispersed thorough the world 3. and beside the faithfull onely haue true tight and interest vnto the temporall things of this life which the wicked 〈◊〉 bold as vsurpers as the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 3.21 all things are yours and ye Christs and Christ Gods Pareus Quest. 25. How faith is said to be made voide if they which are of the lawe be heires 1. Haymo by the promise here vnderstandeth the blessing which was promised to Abraham should in his seede come vpon all nations so that if they which were of the lawe and circumcision should onely be heires vnto Abraham that promise should not be accomplished that all nations should in his feede be blessed 2. Origen thus expoundeth evacuabitur id that should be evacuated and made voide that Abraham was iustified by faith his meaning is that the word of God should not be found true so also Osiander taketh here faith for the constancie of Gods promises it would follow that God did not stand to his promise seeing the promise was made to the faith of Abraham but faith is not taken in that sense in this chapter but thereby is meant beleefe in God and the relying vpon his promises 3. Bucer and Calvin giue this sense that seeing faith is ioyned with an assured confidence and trust if the promise were made to the keeping of the law which beeing a thing impossible would make doubtfulnesse and distrust in the minde this were contrarie vnto the nature of faith and so in this respect faith should be made voide 4. Tolet here referreth vs to that place Galat. 3.17 where the Apostle reasoneth from the time that the lawe which came 400. yeares after the promise could not make voide the promise which was made before but if the inheritance came by the lawe then should the promise which was made first be of no effect which were verie absurd and inconuenient 5. But the Apostle rather reasoneth here from the contrarie and diuerse nature of the lawe and promise for the lawe requireth workes and so the reward is of due debt the promise is of faith and so the reward is of grace and fauour these then doe one destroy an other for that which is of fauour cannot be of desert and due debt if the inheritance then come by the lawe of workes the lawe of faith is made voide and so Gods promise should be frustrate which is impossible Pareus in ver 14. Quest. 26. How the lawe is said to cause wrath 1. This is not brought in as an argument and proofe of the former speach that the promise is of no effect if the inheritance were by the lawe but it is a new argument to prooue that inheritance is not by the lawe by the contrarie effect because the promise procureth a blessing but the lawe wrath and so malediction therefore the inheritance is not by the law 2. Origen by the lawe vnderstandeth the lawe of the members which maketh vs captiue vnto sinne and indeede causeth wrath and where this law is not there is no transgression Haymo thinketh it may be of the lawe of nature but it is euident that the Apostle speaketh of the written lawe of Moses as he calleth the Iewes Abrahams seede of the lawe v.
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
it followeth v. 14. and againe it is too great bouldnesse to insert the word dead for thus we may make any sense of the Scripture 3. Wherefore the Apostles meaning is that from Adam vntill the lawe was giuen for of the time after the lawe there could be no question there was sinne in the world for though they had not the written lawe yet they had the lawe of nature in transgressing the which they sinned Lyran. Beza Mart. Quest. 27. What sinne the Apostle meaneth which was in the world vnto the time of the lawe 1. Some doe vnderstand it onely of actuall sinne which was in the world in that the lawe of nature was transgressed though yet there were no written lawe giuen Tolet but it is euident in that the Apostle maketh direct mention of infants v. 14. which sinned not as Adam did that is actually that he meaneth originall sinne also 2. Pererius onely referreth it to originall sinne which though it were knowne vnto the Patriarkes yet it was not by the lawe of nature acknowledged for sinne so also Anselme Tolet replyeth that it cannot be so taken for neither vnder the law is originall sinne imputed vnto punishment But this reason is not sufficient for both before and after the lawe death raigned ouer all as brought in by originall sinne 3. But it is more agreeable to the Apostles minde to vnderstand sinne here generally both originall and actuall yet with speciall relation to originall sinne because the Apostles intendment is to shewe that all are sinners in Adam and so subiect vnto death and this appeareth to be the Apostles meaning v. 14. where he speaketh of the raigning of death ouer all as well those which committed actuall sinne as those which did not Thus Haymo interpreteth sinne was in the world originale actuale both originall and actuall Augustine likewise and Theodoret in the exposition of this place comprehend both so also Beza Pareus Quest. 28. How sinne is said to be imputed where there is no lawe ver 13. 1. Chrysostome here reporteth the opinion of some that make this a part of the obiection but he refuseth it and Tolet addeth this reason further because men doe not vse to obiect but that hath some shewe of probabilitie now none could doubt whether there were sinne in the world before the lawe for that was euident and apparant to all these words then the Apostle vttereth in his owne person 2. Oecumenius thinketh that the Apostle speaketh of the imputation of such sinnes as were against the ceremoniall lawe of Moses as touching circumcision sanctifying of the Sabboth and such like for other sinnes before the lawe of Moses were both knowne and imputed as is euident in the examples of Cain Lamech the Sodomites which were punished for their sinnes But the Apostle directly speaketh of such sinnes as were in the world before the lawe now the breach of ceremonies commanded by the lawe was counted no transgression before the lawe 3. Some by the imputation of sinne vnderstand the account made of sinne and take imputation for reputation as the Syrian interpreter and Beza in his last edition non putatur esse peccatum it is not thought to be sinne which is referred vnto the iudgement and opinion of men before the lawe came they had no perfect knowledge of sinne obscurum tum erat naturae lumen the light of nature was so obscure that men did not see their sinnes Mart. so also Osâ—ander non reputabatur it was not reputed sinne also Melancthon vbi non est lex non agnoscitur non accusatur c. where no lawe is sinne is not acknowledged accused to the same purpose M. Calvin though euen before the lawe their consciences accused them and there were diuerse examples of Gods iudgements vt plurimum tamen ad sua scelera connivebant yet for the most part they did winke at their sinnes c. Thus before them Augustine vnderstandeth it of the knowledge of sinne because per legem cognitio peccati by the lawe commeth the knowledge of sinne lib. 1. de peccat merit c. 10. and Oecumenius also to the same purpose taketh it comparatiuely magnitudo peccati non erat ita cognita c. the greatnesse of sinne was not knowne so before the lawe as afterward by the law and Haymo so expoundeth peccatum non agnoscebatur tam graue malum esse sinne was not knowne to be so great euill to the same purpose Lyranus Hug. Card. But these expositions seeme not to be agreeable to the scope of the Apostle for to what purpose should the Apostle vse this qualification sinne was in the world though it were not imputed and taken to be sinne before the law came for the Apostle doth not here intend to shew the effects or propertie of the law but his purpose is to prooue that men before the law came were punished with death euen because of their originall sinne 4. Origen taketh the imputation of sinne for the reputation but he followeth his former sense vnderstanding the law of nature that in children while yet they haue no vse of reason and so no knowledge of the law of nature that which they doe is not counted sinne But the Apostle euidently sheweth in the next verse speaking of Moses that he meaneth here the written law of Moses Origen fortifieth his opinion that the Apostle here meaneth the law of nature because if it be vnderstood of any other law diabolus angeli eius videdutur absolvi the Deuill and his angels may seeme to be absolved because they had no other law then the law of nature Contra. The Apostle speaketh not of the sinne of Angels but of men propagated from Adam whome he prooueth all to be sinners in Adam because they die in Adam but in the spirits there is neither propagation nor mortalitie 5. Ambrose referreth this imputation of sinne vnto the opinion which men had of God whom they thought not to regard nor punish the sinnes of men But the contrarie is euident in Pharaoh and Abimelech who knewe that they were punished for keeping Sarah Abrahams wife 6. Anselme and Pererius doe vnderstand this to be spoken onely of originall sinne that it was not acknowledged to be sinne before Moses lawe came by the light of nature though to the Patriarkes and holy men it were knowne But the contrarie is prooued by the Apostle that originall sinne was imputed to men euen before the law was giuen because death raigned ouer all euen ouer children so farre is he from saying that originall sinne was not imputed for where death was inflicted for sinne there sinne was imputed 7. This word of imputing of sinne is taken two wayes it signifieth either to haue the fault imputed or the punishment but here the latter rather to impute sinne is adiudicare 〈◊〉 reum to adiudge the guiltie person worthie of punishment in this sense is the word taken 2. Tim. 4.16 All haue forsaken me I pray God it be
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
Apostle giueth instance in himselfe as v. 24. O wretched man that I am and 25. I thank my God and so he doth here the Apostle then speaketh here neither of his present state nor yet of his first age but of the middle part of his life when he liued a Pharisie 2. That commendation then which S. Paul giueth of his former life while he was a Pharisie did onely concerne his outward cariage which was to the iudgement of the world without reproofe and he kept a good conscience according to his knowledge yet was it farre from a pure conscience because he had no knowledge then of our faith in Christ whose way he persecuted whereby the heart is purified Act. 15.9 Notwithstanding then his outward shew of obedience his heart and affections were not right within and so he had not the true vse and vnderstanding of the law as Augustine saith lib. 1. ad Bonifac. c. 9. potuit intus esse in affectionibus pravus prauaricator legis c. he might inwardly in his peruerse affections be a transgressor of the law and yet outwardly fulfill the workes of the law c. So Saint Paul himselfe confesseth Tit. 3.3 We our selues were sometime vnwise c. seruing lusts c. Quest. 10. What law the Apostle speaketh of v. 7. is the law of sinne 1. Some thinke that the Apostle by the law here vnderstandeth the precept which was giuen to Adam in Paradise not to eate of the forbidden fruite of this opinion was Methobus in Epiphanius haeres 64. and Heirome maketh mention of it epist. ad Hedib qu. 8. but he reiecteth it Theodoret hath the like conceit that the law is here vnderstood to be the law of Moses mandatum vocat quod Adamo datum est but that he calleth the commandement which was giuen to Adam Theodoret in Commentar But 1. Photius in Oecummenius reiecteth this opinion because no where doth the Apostle call that particular commandement giuen vnto Adam the law 2. Tolet further addeth these reasons the Apostle speaketh of the verie inward desire and concupiscence but the act was forbidden Adam that he should not eate of the forbidden fruite and againe the Apostle in saying I knew not sinne but by the law insinuateth that sinne was before but he knew it 〈◊〉 but before that commandement was giuen vnto Adam it had beene no sinne in him to haue eaten and receiued the fruite of the tree 2. Some thinke that the Apostle speaketh not of the law of Moses but of the law of nature for before the witten law was giuen men had knowledge of sinne as Cain knew he had sinned and Abimelech was not ignorant that adulterie was sinne thus Heirome and before him Origen But 1. Photius in Oecumenius thus refelleth this opinion that the Apostle speaketh not of the law of nature because the Apostle had said before yee are dead to the law v. 4. in this sense then some should be found naturali lege priuati depriued of the naturall law and againe the Apostle saith I was aliue sometime without the law but neither Adam nor any other liuing were at any time without the law of nature 2. Tolet addeth that if the Apostle had meant the law of nature he would not haue said I knew not sinne but by the law but rather sinne was not but by the law 3. And concerning the obiection of Cain and Abimelechs knowledge of sinne Chrysostome answereth that the Apostle saith omnem concupistratuâ— vehementiam significans sinne wrought in me all manner of concupiscence signifying the vehemenencie of it c. that although these sinnes did raigne before yet they appeared not to be so great sinnes as afterward by the law and Theophylact addeth noscibatur peccatum sed nondum erat concupiscentia interdicta sinne was knowne before the law that is outward and notorious sinnes but yet the inward concupiscence was not restrained 3. Tolet thinketh that together with the morall law the Apostle meaneth the ceremoniall and iudiciall law because by them also were the knowledge of sinne But the Apostle giuing instance of the inward vnlawfull concupiscence which was not punished by the iudiciall nor ceremoniall law sheweth that he speaketh not of them 4. Wherefore it is euident that the Apostle meaneth none other but the written morall law of Moses because he giueth instance of the last commandement thou shalt not couet Martyr Pareus Quest. 11. What lust or concupiscence the Apostle speaketh of I had not knowne lust c. except c. 1. Some thinke that here by concupiscence the Apostle intendeth all sinne whatsoeuer as Anselme and the ordinarie glosse following Augustine bona est lex qua â—â—â—dum concupiscentiam prohibet omnia peccata prohibet c. the law is good which while it forbiddeth concupiscence forbiddeth all sinnes c. Heirome epist. 152. refuseth their opinion which take this for the commandement and by concupiscence he thinketh to be vnderstood omnes animi perturbationes all the preturbations and passions of the minde whatsoeuer as of feare greefe desire But it is euident in that the Apostle propoundeth the verie words of the line that he hath reference to that precept thou shalt not lust whereby indeed all corrupt concupiscence and desire whatsoeuer is forbidden 2. By this concupiscence is not vnderstood onely the act of concupiscence as Pererius holdeth with other Romanists we vnderstand not saith he ipsam concupiscendi facultatem sed actum ipsum concupiscendi the facultie of coueting but the act it selfe disput 8. numer 47. nor yet the second motions of concupiscence onely whereunto the will consenteth but euen the first vnlawfull desires and motions which haue not the consent of the wil. And that this may the better appeare it shall not be amisse further to shew what concupiscence is and the diuerse kinds thereof there is a threefold concupiscence naturalis sensitivus voluntarius the naturall which is euen in stirps and plants as to couet and draw vnto them their food and nourishment and this is properly called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 desire the sensitiue is in bruit beasts the voluntarie and sensitiue both in man and they are called by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concupiscence 2. further this concupiscence is deuided into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the facultie it selfe and the exercising or act thereof and both of them are considered either physice as they are naturall as to couet meate drinke and such like which are things indifferent or morally as they haue relation to the commandement 3. and herein there is to be considered both the maâ—ter and obiect of concupiscence and the manner as if either things vnlawfull be desired as the wife horse seruant of our neighbour which appertaine not to vs or if we exceed measure in desire of things vnlawfull as of meate drinke apparell riches and such like or desire them to an euill end 3. Now to apply this which hath beene said to our purpose 1.
neither the naturall desire as of meate and drinke is forbidden by this commandement as beeing a thing indifferent nor yet the supernaturall as to couet and desire such things as concerne the glorie of God and the saluation of our soules for these are good desires and conformable to the will of God but the euil and vnlawfull desires are forbidden either in the matter or manner 2. not the act of concupiscence onely but the verie facultie it selfe ipsa concupiscibilitas is forbidden as it is corrupt and auerse from God 3. and not onely the second motions which haue the consent of the will which the schoolmen call concupiscentiam formatam the formed and perfite concupiscence but euen the first motions which haue not the deliberate consent of the will which they call informem the vnformed concupiscence contrarie to the opinion of Pererius and other Romanists who thinketh concupiscentiam carnalem sed vt à voluntate approbatam c. that carnall concupiscence onely as it is approoued of the will to be forbidden in this commandement disput 8. numer 47. but the contrarie shall appeare afterward controv 8. that the law forbiddeth cupiditatem nudam the verie base and naked concupiscence as Beza calleth it because prauas cupiditates euill and disordred lusts and desires the very law of nature reprooued Augustine saith cupiditateÌ„ voco motum animi c. I call concupiscence the verie motion of the minde to enioy either himselfe or his neighbour or any other thing non propter Deum not for God de Doctrin Christian. lib. 3. c. 10. Quest. 12. Why the Apostle giueth instance in the tenth commandement thou shalt not lust and alleadgeth not all the words of the law 1. The Apostle could not giue instance in the grosser and more notorious sinnes which euen the wiser sort of the Gentiles abhorred nor yet in the vile and corrupt affections of man which the Philosophers also condemned but he singleth out those corruptions which could not be discerned by the light of nature especially so much obscured and darkned and could not be perfectly knowne but by the law of God Tolet. annot 9.2 And this the Apostle doth to shew the excellencie of the law of God beyond both the law of nature and the politike lawes of men for the first the law of nature is much obscured obliterated and empaired by the blindnesse and corruption of mans nature but the written law though it were much depriued by the corrupt gloses of the Scribes and Pharisies lex tamen scripta mâ—â— sit eadem yet the written law remained the same and beeing well examined was able to reprooue the false interpreters thereof and it is more perfect then other humane lawes which onely bridle the outward act of sinne but they can not meete with the inward concupiscence as the law of God doth 2. And S. Paul contenteth himselfe onely to repeat the first words of the commandement not adding the rest thou shalt not couet thy neighbours house c. as Moses doth for he hauing to doc in hominis durioribus with a rude people and of hard vnderstanding giueth instance in some sensible and particular obiects but S. Paul writing scientibus legem to men knowing the law thinketh it sufficient to giue them onely an hint by producing some words onely of the law Neither yet did Moses expresse all the particulars of this law but hauing reported some he concludeth with this generall clause nor any thing that is his And indeede in all the commandements Moses vseth the figure called synecdoché by one part signifying the rest and that both in the negative part wherein forbidding the most notorious vices he meeteth with the rest as our Sauiour sheweth Matth. 5. how the law bindeth not onely the hands but euen the heart and affections in the sinnes of murther adulterie and such like as also in the affirmative the contrarie vertues in euery commandement beeing comprehended in the prohibition of the contrarie vices so that Aristotles tenne predicaments are not so generall to containe whatsoeuer is in the world as Moses tenne commandements are to comprehend all vices committed in the world ex Martyr Quest. 13. What sinne the Apostle meaneth v. 8. sinne tooke an occasion c. 1. Some by sinne here vnderstand the deuill who taking occasion by the commandement did tempt man more strongly to breake it Methodius Ambrose Oecumenius sauing that the first by the law vnderstandeth the commandement giuen to Adam in Paradise the other two the law giuen by Moses But in this sense it cannot be properly said sinne reuiued if by sinne we vnderstand the deuill or thus sinne did dwell in the Apostle as he saith v. 10. 2. Chrysostome vnderstandeth this sinne to be vitium de fidiae the vice of flouthfulnes that man hauing receiued a law by his negligence was not the better for it but the worse But he expresseth not the whole minde of the Apostle 3. Anselmus will haue it to be peccati fomes the matter or nourishment of sinne which as Lyranus is called sinne for that it is the cause of sinne as the Sunne is said to be hoat beeing the cause of heat But the Apostle calleth it sinne properly because it was forbidden by the commandement 4. Hierom. epist. ad Hedib qu. 8. taketh this to be the sinne quod lege prohibetur which is forbidden by the commandement which while it is forbidden doth inflame the concupiscence the more but the Apostle speaketh not of actuall sinne before it is committed but of sinne dwelling in him v. 17. 5. This is none other but naturae corruptio the corruption of our nature Calvin lib. 1. de peccand the lust or desire of sinning Hyper. peccatum regnans in homine sinne raigning in man Tolet. annot 11. which is none other but the originall pravitie of our nature called before lust or concupiscence v. 7. it is pravitas nativa our naturall pravitie Pareus 14. Quest. How sinne tooke occasion by the law 1. The Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 occasion is taken three waies first it properly signifieth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the opportunitie of doing a thing but so the law was not the occasion as offering any opportunitie for there can be no opportunitie to doe euill 2. it signifieth any circumstance or accident whereby one is occasioned to doe any thing as the burning of an house may be said to be the occasion of building it againe 3. an occasion is that which draweth a man from doing that he intended as a rub in ones way turneth him beside the way Both these last waies sinne tooke occasion by the law for both the prauitie of our nature is more inflamed by the prohibition and we seeke to build our ruinous house which the law pulleth downe and beside because the law standeth vp in the way of sinne we decline it as a thing which hindreth vs in our pleasant and plaine iourney following after sinne and therefore we wish that it
statutes that were not good Gorrhan here answereth that they were good in themselues but became euill ipsorum vitio by their fault Iunius vnderstandeth that place of the hard iudiciall laws and sentences of death both ordinarie and extraordinarie But rather it is referred to the ceremoniall laws which were as a yoke and burthen laid vpon the people which they were not able to beare as S. Peter expoundeth Act. 15.10 Quest. 23. How the lawe is said to be spirituall 1. Origen thinketh it is called spirituall because it must be vnderstood not literally but spiritually But the Apostle treateth here of the morall lawe where was no place for allegories 2. Theodoret because it was giuen of God who is a spirit 3. Ambrose because the lawe directed vs to the worship of God who is a most pure spirit 4. Augustine because it cannot be fulfilled nisi à viris spiritualibus but of spirituall men but no man in this life is so spirituall that he can keep the law 5. Thomas because concordat cum spiritu hominis it agreeth with the spirit of man that is reason so also Lyranus because it directeth man to followe the instinct of the spirit or reason so also Gorrhan spiritum hominis aleus it nourisheth the spirit of man But the verie spirit of man is corrupt and contrarie to the law by nature and therefore the Apostle saith Ephes. 4.23 be renewed in the spirit of your mind 6. Pet. Martyr giueth this reason why it is called spirituall because it requireth not onely the externall obedience in the outward workes but the spirituall in the heart and affections 7. But hereunto it may be added that it is spirituall because it requireth a spirituall that is a perfect obedience both in bodie and soule and an angelicall and diuine obedience to followe vertue and shunne vice so Chrysostome and Theophylact and Calvin Pareus Osiand following them 8. that seemeth to be somewhat curious which the ordinar gloss here obserueth that the Lawe is onely called spirituall because therein are those things quae Dit sunt which are Gods but the Gospel is called lex spiritus the lawe of the spirit because there Deus ipse est God himselfe is Quest. 24. How the Apostle saith he is carnall and sold vnder sinne v. 17. 1. Pererius well obserueth here that one may be said to be carnall two waies quia serâ—â— carni because he serueth the flesh or he which by reason of his corrupt nature procliuis est is prone vnto concupiscence to this purpose Pareus that in the first sense the vnregenerate are said to be carnall in the other the regenerate because they are yet infirmitatibus abnoxque subiect to infirmities quia nondums habent spirituale corpus because they haue not yet a spirituall bodie freed from all infirmities such as they shall haue in the resurrection August lib. ad Bonifac. c. 10. so we haue inchoatam non plenam liberationem a deliuerance begunne in Christ but not yet perfect till our last enemie death shall be destroied 2. Likewise where the Apostle saith he was sold 1. Some take the word properly for such a selling wherein there is a buyer a thing sold and a price which they referre either vnto Adams selling himselfe to the deuill for an apple Lyran. gloss ordinar or to a mans selling of himselfe by his actuall sinnes for the sweetnesse of pleasure which is as the price which men sell themselues to the deuill for Tolet. annot 16. Gorrhan But in this sense S. Paul beeing a spirituall and regenerate man cannot be said to be sold. 2. wherefore this metaphor is not largely to be taken as when Ahab is said to haue sold himselfe to worke wickednes 1. King 21.25 for there are two kinds of slaues one that selleth himselfe into captiuitie and willingly obeyeth a tyrant or one which against his will is brought into servitude as Ioseph was sold by his brethren into captiuitie and this is S. Pauls case here Pareus And Augustine noteth that sometime selling in Scripture is taken for a simple tradition or deliuering ouer without any price lib. 7. in Iudic. c. 17. and so indeed the Hebrew word machar signifieth as well to deliuer as to sell as Isay 52.3 the Israelites are said to be sold for naught and the Lord will redeeme them for naught But these two are said in a diuerse sense Men are said to be sold for naught in respect of God he receiueth no honour but rather dishonour by their selling ouer vnto sinne they are redeemed for naught in Christ in respect of themselues because they gaue nothing for their redemption but yet in respect of Christ and his price they were not redeemed for naught but by the most pretious blood of Christ Mart. Pererius thinketh they are said to be redeemed for naught comparatively because that momentarie pleasure for the which a sinner selleth himselfe is nothing to the price and dignitie of his soule numer 72. but rather selling is here taken for a plaine deliuering ouer as is before shewed out of Augustine Now two waies are the regenerate sold ouer to sinne in respect of their originall corruption and of their carnall infirmities which remaine still in their corrupt nature to the which they are subiect still Pareus but the vnregenerate are said to be sold ouer as Ahab was because they giue themselues wholly ouer vnto sinne Beza doth well expresse these two kinds of seruitude or selling ouer by the like difference in humane servitude for some are slaves because they are borne of serâ—ile and bond parents others make themselues bond like vnto the first are the regenerate and the vnregenerate as the second Quest. 25. Of these words v. 15. I allow not what I doe what I would that doe I not 1. Chrysostome thinking that the Apostle speaketh this in the person of an vnregenerate man referreth this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I know not or vnderstand nor to the vnderstanding not that a sinner knoweth not when he sinneth sed tenebrosa quadaÌ„ vertigine obvoluor but I am ouertaken with a kind of dizines that I know not how I was ouertaken so also Origen non rem ipsam sed causam rei dicitur ignorare he is said not to know not the thing but the cause thereof that is how and by what means he came to sinne But it is euident by the words following what I would c. that the Apostle speaketh of his will rather then vnderstanding 2. Pererius likewise inclining to thinke that this is spoken in the person of a carnall man will haue this vnderstood of a generall and vniversall knowledge will and hatred that men in generall knowe and will vertue and hate vice but not in particular But the Apostle here speaketh of doing and not doing which must be referred to particular actions 3. Augustine verie well interpreteth non agnosco I know not that is non approbo non consentio I approoue not consent not
but yet he vnderstandeth the Apostle onely to speake of the first motions of concupiscence which haue not the consent of the mind concupiscere nolo tamen concupisco c. I would not couet and yet I doe but I consent not to concupiscence c. lib. 1. cont epistol pelag 1.10 but this seemeth to be no fit exposition facio i. concupisco I doe that is I couet as the ordinarie glosse out of Augustine and the Saints doe not onely cupere sed etiam facere desire but doe sometimes things which ought not to be done yet we must not thinke that the Apostle here speaketh of grosse sinnes such as the faithfull sometime may fall vnto as was the adulterie of Dauid for in such sinnes there is no resistance betweene the will and the deede but they which fall into them are for the time giuen ouer 4. Methodius agreeing with Augustine that the Apostle speaketh of righteous men in his owne person by this euil which he would not he vnderstandeth euill cogitations quae occurrunt bene operanti which come into the mind of him that is about a good worke c. This is true but not al for somtime a righteous mā may in passion break out into some action which he would not as he may say some things quae non dicta vellet which he would not had bin spoken Osiander 5. Cassianus collat 33. c. 15. by the good which he would vnderstandeth the contemplation of the minde from which he is hindred occupatione rerum corporalium by the busines of outward corporall things which is called euill not that it is sinne but commeth of sinne c. He well also interpreteth this of the righteous man yet this exposition is not so fit for the Apostle speaketh of the proper effects and friuts of sinne in him v. 17. 6. Oecumenius distinguisheth here the times what I would liber à peccato when I am free from sinne I doe quando in peccato sum when I am in sinne But the Apostle speaketh of one and the same time as may appeare by the words put in the present tense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I will 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I doe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I hate 7. Wherefore the Apostle sheweth here the strife that is in a righteous man whose cheefe will and desire is to doe good but he is often ouercome of his carnall affections and doth that which in his inward will and desire he would not as Dauid in his hast did sweare he would put Nabals house to the sword which afterward beeing well aduised he would not Martyr Now in that he saith what I hate that doe I we must not thinke that the regenerate doe sinne as constrained against their wills sed non tota voluntate but it is not with their whole will Pareus that is also carnis voluntas a will of the flesh but the Apostle calleth that his will quod pracipue cordis affectu appetebat which he desireth cheefely Calvin 8. Hence then appeareth the difference betweene the regenerate and the vnregenerate they are so deuided vt praecipue cordis affectu ad Deum suspirent that in the cheefe desire of their heart they doe sigh after God and desire to doe his will yet are hindred and pulled backe by the reliques of sinne by the other sine repugnantia in cupiditates feruntur are caried after their desires and lusts without resistance and though they are sometime pricked in conscience it cannot be gathered thereby that there is in them any loue of vertue or hatred of vice but God suffereth them to be tormented vt iudicium suum demonstret to shew his iudgement Thus M. Calvin Pererius obiecteth against this exposition that in this sense etiam iniqui censen◠sunt piorum nomine wicked men shall be counted good and godly so that they haue some feare of God and some desire to doe well which may be found in the wicked Pere disput 14. numer 81. Contra. 1. Calvin requireth more in a righteous man that there be in him a lone of vertue an hatred of vice and that his cheefe desire should be set vpon God I hope he thinketh not that it is so with the wicked and vngodly 2. neither can there be any true desire in the wicked to doe well c. as Tolet confesseth imperfectam voluntatem ad 〈◊〉 etiam fine gratia c. that an imperfect will vnto that which is good euen without grace may be in a sinner and vnregenerate man annot 18. which is contrarie to the words of our Sauiour Ioh. 15. 1. Without mee you can doe nothing Quest. 26. What the Apostle vnderstandeth by flesh I know that in me that is my flesh dwelleth no good thing c. v. 18. 1. Lyranus by the flesh here vnderstandeth the sensualitie which alwaies rebelleth against reason and he saith there are these two parts in man sensualitie and reason which are otherwise called the flesh and the spirit the inward and outward man so also Gorrhan interpreteth in carne i. homine sensuali in the flesh that is the sensuall man of the same mind are present Romanists as Tolet who saith a man hath two parts rationalem sensualem the rationall and sensual likewise Per. disput 15. Bel. de stat peccat l. 5. c. 7. their reasons are these 1. Pererius vrgeth the Apostles words v. 26. I in my mind serue the law of God c. that the Apostle manifestly distinguisheth the mind that is the reason from the sensuall part 2. The Apostle himselfe calleth these the outward and inward man 2. Cor. 4.16 the outward man is the bodie the inward the mind 3. Tolet thus reasoneth si in ratione habitaret malum c. if euill dwelled in the reason then could it not will that which is good as here the Apostle saith to will is present with me Contra. 1. By the mind the Apostle vnderstandeth the mind regenerate by grace as he saith Ephes. 4.23 be renewed in the spirit of your mind 2. By the outward man the Apostle vnderstandeth all the inward and outward corruptions which must daily decay and by the inward man which must be renewed all the powers and faculties both of soule and bodie which must be renewed 3. In the naturall reason euill may dwell as it is obscured and darkned by sinne and yet the will beeing reformed and regenerate by grace may encline to that which is good 2. Wherefore by the name of flesh as Calvin well interpreteth the Apostle comprehendeth omnes naturae dotes c. all the gifts of nature and whatsoeuer is in man onely the sanctification of the spirit excepted so that on the one side is signified totus homo the whole man as he is vnregenerate on the other the whole man as he is regenerate Martyr as it may be thus shewed 1. The Apostle writing to the Corinthians which were beleeuers distinguisheth between the naturall man which perceiueth not the things that are of
God and the spirituall man 1. Cor. 2.14.15 and afterward he denieth that they were such spirituall men but carnall c. 3.1 yet were they regenerate there is then in a regenerate man somewhat that is carnall and somewhat that is spirituall 2. The feare of sinne is in the rationall part but sinne is in the flesh therefore euen in the reason there may be somewhat carnall Tolet answereth that though sinne be in the reason yet it hath the effect cheefely by the flesh Contr. The will bringeth forth sinne and that belongeth to the rationall part the bodie doth but execute the edict of the reason and will therefore the rationall part beeing the place and feare of sinne is carnall yea Tolets owne words may be vrged against himselfe he confesseth peccatum adeo infirmam fecit rationalem partem that sinne hath made the rationall part so weake as that it cannot of it selfe perfectly will that which is good though the flesh should not contradict it c. there is then somewhat carnall in the soule because there is sinne 3. The Philosophers as Aristotle lib. 1. Ethicor. c. 13. made two parts of the minde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the reasonable and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which is void of reason where the affections and passions of the mind are If the Apostle should make no other difference between the flesh and the spirit his Apostolicall Theologie would afford no greater comfort then prophane Philosophie Quest. 27. How the Apostle saith to will is present with me c. but I find no meanes to performe c. v. 18. 1. Tolet agreeing with those which vnderstand the Apostle here to speake of a man vnregenerate and in his sinne thinketh that a sinner euen without grace may will that which is good voluntate imperfecta with an imperfect will annot 20. But the Apostle affirmeth the contrarie Philip. 12.13 That it is God which worketh in vs both the will and the deed therefore a carnall man cannot haue any good will of himselfe 2. Pererius expounding the Apostle to speake here in the person of a man regenerate restraineth this will of the Apostle to concupiscence to will is present that is non concupiscere not to couet that which is euill but he could not performe this that is to haue no concupiscence though he did not consent vnto it but this opinion is refused before qu. 25.3 3. But euen they which are regenerate doe faile in the verie good workes which they do not that their will is altogether ineffectuall sed efficaciam operis negat respondere voluntati he denieth that the efficacie of the worke doth answer to his will Calvin he willeth and desireth being moued of the spirit but he cannot perfit the worke as he would he findeth alwaies some imperfection in the worke therfore the Apostle vseth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to perfit or performe aliquo tenus progrediuntur sancti c. the Saints doe make some proceeding but they are farre off from perfection Obiect But God worketh in his both the wil and the deed Ans. God indeed worketh both but not alwaies not alike the Saints sometime will and performe good things sometime they are willing but want strength But the Apostle speaketh not here as though alwaies his will came short but that ostner then he would his will was crossed in good things and therefore he vseth the word dwelling this grace and strength did not alwaies dwell and continue with him Pareus 4. But Pererius thus obiecteth 1. if Saint Pauls will consented at any time to his concupiscence how could he say v. 17. it is no more I that doe it but sinne 2. how could he delight in his minde in the law of God if there were sinne 3. if S. Paul did those things which he would not then fornication adulterie and such like Cont. 1. It was the part of the will vnregenerate which consented not to the will renewed which Saint Paul calleth his will and not the other because he cheifely desired good things 2. in the regenerate part he delighted in Gods law though in his vnregenerate sinne remaine 3. S. Paul speaketh not of such grosse sinnes but of the secret force of concupiscence which often carieth away euen the regenerate 28. Quest. Of the meaning of these words v. 21. I finde a law c. 1. Some doe vnderstand this lawe of the morall lawe giuen by Moses some of the law of concupiscence which afterward is called the law of the members and of both sorts there are diverse opinions Of the first there are two sorts some doe interpret it as though the Apostle should commend the lawe some that he setteth forth the weakenesse and want of strength in the lawe Of the former sort 1. Origen would haue the words transposed thus because when I would doe good and evill is present I finde a lawe and I delight in the lawe c. But this traiection of the words seemeth somewhat hard 2. Photius in Oecumenius doth transpose them thus I finde the lawe to be good vnto me willing to doe c. so also Augustine lib. 2. cont 2. epist. Pelag. c. 10. and Anselmus whom Bellarmine followeth ioyne good with the lawe but it may be gathered v. 19. I doe not the good thing I would that good must be ioyned with the word doe not with the law 3. Chrysostome thus interpreteth I finde the lawe faveâ—tum auxiliantem favouring and helping me so also Theophylact and Lyranus saith that the Apostle sheweth the consent betweene the written lawe and the naturall lawe which mooueth him to doe that which is good so also the Syrian interpreter I finde the lawe to consent to my minde 4. Some supply the word good I finde the lawe to be good Haymo Hugo Gorrhan Pareus 5. Pareus hath an other exposition that the lawe is taken here for studium legis the studie of the lawe and he thinketh the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is present or at hand may be supplyed out of the latter part of the verse in this sense I finde the studie of the lawe to be present with me when I would doe good But all these expositions tending to the commendation of the law are remooued because of the last words because euill is present with me for how can this be a reason that the lawe helpeth or consenteth or is good and profitable to him beeing willing to doe good to say with Pareus that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because may be taken for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 although or with Faius for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but or that it is superfluously added it seemeth not to be so fit Of the other sort that hereby shewe the weakenes of the lawe which serueth to discouer sinne 1. Some giue this sense invento legem agnosco debilem I finde the lawe that is to be but weake it cannot helpe me or make me better but though I would doe good yet euill is present Photius
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
he be called a man of desires that is beloued and excepted of God yet had his sinnes which he confessed in his owne name and person as Dauid is said to be a man after Gods owne heart yet he had his sinnes and imperfections Arguments for the affirmatiue part that S. Paul speaketh in his owne person as of a man regenerate First these two points must be premised that the Apostle speaketh of himselfe not of another still continuing his speach in the first person I am carnall I will I consent I delight and so throughout that it should be a great forcing of the Apostles speach to make him to speake of another and not of himselfe secondly the Apostle from the 14. v. to the end speaketh of his present state who was then regenerate as may appeare because while he was yet vnder the law he speaketh as of the time past v. 9. I was aliue and v. 10. sinne seduced me but from the 14. v. he speaketh of the time present I am carnall and so throughout to the end of the chapter Argum. 1. Hence then is framed our first reason the Apostle speaketh of himselfe as he then was because he speaketh in the present tence but then he was a man regenerate Ergo. Theophylact answereth the Apostle saith I serue v. 15. that is serviebam I did serue Contra. As the Apostle saith I serue so he saith I delight in the law of God v. 22. and in this verse 25. I thanke God c. which immediately goe before the other I serue but those words must be vnderstood as they are vttered of the time present therefore the other also Argum. 2. Gregorie vrgeth these words v. 18. to will is present with me he that saith he will per infusionem gratiae quae in se iam lateant semina ostendit doth shew what seede lyeth hid in him by the infusion of grace lib. 29. moral c. 15. Ans. Euen the vnregenerate by nature doe will that is good they may imperfecte velle 〈◊〉 siue gratia in peccato imperfectly will that is good without grace euen in the state of sinne Tolet. in tractat c. 9. Contra. There is bonum naturale morale spirituale that which is naturally good morally good spiritually good the first one by nature may desire as bâ—ute beasts doe the same and therein they doe neither good nor euill the second also in some sort as the heathen followed after morall vertues but they did it not without sinne because they had no faith but that which is spiritually good the carnall haue no mind at all vnto for it is God which worketh both the will and the deed Phil. 2.13 Argum. 3. Augustine presseth these words v. 17. It is not I that doe it but sinne that dwelleth in mee this is not vox peccatoris sed iusti the voice of a sinner but of a righteous man lib. 1. cont 2. epist. Pelag. c. 10. Ans. A sinner may be said not to doe euill not because he doth not consent vnto it but because he is not onely mooued of himselfe but drawen by his concupiscence Tolet. ibid. Contra. There is nothing in a man to giue consent vnto any action but either his spirituall or carnall part but in the vnregenerate there is nothing spirituall but all is naturall therfore whatsoeuer such an one doth he wholly consenteth he himselfe is not one thing and his sinne another to giue consent but he is wholly mooued and lead of sinne Argum. 4. Augustine addeth further the Apostle thus beginneth the 8. chapter there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus which words follow as inferred vpon the other which sheweth that the Apostle spake before of those which were in Christ Iesus Ans. Nay rather those words following vpon the other who shall deliuer me c. which the Apostle vttereth of a man not yet deliuered or freed from his sinne and maketh answer the grace of God c. shew that he spake before as of our not beeing in the state of grace Tolet. ibid. Contra. 1. It is the bondage of corruption which the Apostle desireth to be deliuered from as is shewed before qu. 33. neither doth the Apostle answer the grace of God c. but I giue thankes to God as likewise hath beene declared qu. 34. before but one not in the state of grace cannot giue thanks vnto God therefore the immediate connexion of these words c. 8. sheweth that he spake before of those which are in Christ. Argum. 5. Further Augustine thus reasoneth a carnall man cannot delight in the law of God in the inner man as Saint Paul doth neither indeed is there any inner man that it regenerate and renewed in those which are carnall Pareus Ans. 1. The vnregenerate may delight in the law as Herod did and it is nothing else but velle bonum to will that which is good Tolet. ibid. and they haue also the inner man which is the mind as the outward man is the bodie Contra. 1. The carnall cannot delight in the law but they hate it as Psal. 50.17 this hatest to be reformed and hast cast my words behind thee Herod gaue care to Iohn Baptist not of loue but for feare for afterward he put him to death Hypocrits and carnall men may stand in some awe and feare a while but it is not of loue nor in truth or from the heart 2. the inner part is that with spirituall and renewed but in the wicked their verie mind is defiled Tit. 1.15 therefore in them there is no inner man see before qu. 26. Argum. 6. The Apostle desireth to be deliuered from his corruptible and sinfull bodie hoping then for perfect libertie but in the resurrection the carnall shall haue no such libertie they shall rise to greater miserie Augustine Ans. The deliuerance there spoken of is by iustification from sinne not in the resurrection Tolet. ibid. Contra. The Apostle euidently speaketh of beeing deliuered from this bodie of death that is his mortall bodie which shall not be till the resurrection Argu. 7. The children of God that are regenerate do onely find in themselues the fight combate betweene the spirit and flesh Gala. 5.17 as the Apostle doth here v. 22. Pareus Argum. 8. The vnregenerate doe not vse to giue thanks vnto God but they sacrifice to their owne net as the Prophet saith Hab. 1.16 they giue the praise to themselues But S. Paul here giueth thankes Faius Argum. 9. No man but by the spirit of God can hate and disalow that which is committed against the law of God as the Apostle doth here v. 15. Hyperius Argum. 10. To what end should the Apostle thus at large shew the effects and end of the law for their cause qui prorsus sunt à Deo alieni which are altogether straungers from God and care not for his law Faius by these and such like reasons it is concluded that S. Paul speaketh in the person of a man regenerate Quest. 37.
dutie vnto God in louing him with all our heart and strength and in obeying of his will is sinne but this doth concupiscence for it hindered the Apostle v. 19. I doe not that good thing which I would Ans. Pererius answereth that concupiscence doth not hinder vs from louing of God doing of his will so far as we are bound to this life for God may be loued with all the heart two wayes one is modus perfectionis the way of perfection which is when the heart actually loueth nothing but God and thus God shall be loued onely in heauen the other way is so farre as it bindeth a man in this life when the heart is habitually inclined vnto God so that it admit nothing against it as this kind of loue is not hindered as he saith by the first motions of concupiscence to the same purpose he alleadgeth Thomas that a precept is two wayes fulfilled the one is perfectly quando pervenitur ad finem when we attaine vnto the ende intended by him which giueth the precept the other imperfectly cum non receditur ab ordine ad finem when we depart not from the way which leadeth to the ende as when the captaine biddeth his souldiours fight to obtaine the victorie he which fighteth and hath the victorie perfitly fulfilleth his will he also which fighteth and doth his best doth his will also though he get not the victorie the first kind of fulfilling the precept shall be in patria in our countrey the other is in via in the way Contra. 1. We grant that there shall be a greater perfection of obedience in the next life then can be attained vnto here but euen that perfect obedience is propounded vnto vs here and required of vs Matth. 5.28 Ye shall be perfect as your heauenly father is perfect whereupon Augustine cur non praeciperetur in hac vita ista perfectio c. why should not this perfection be commanded euen in this life though no man can attaine vnto it here non 〈◊〉 recte curritur c. for we cannot runne right if it be vnknowne whether we should runne c. lib. de spirit liter c. vltim And seeing Christs righteousnesse and obedience of the lawe was most perfect and he came to performe that which was required of vs it followeth that God in the strict rule of his iustice required of vs perfect obedience which not to performe is sinne 2. If God doe command the ende as our perfection then he which commeth short and faileth of the ende fulfilleth not the commandement as if the souldier be commanded not to giue ouer till he haue the victorie breaketh his generalls charge if he get not the superioritie of the enemie And he which misseth of the ende must needes also recedere ab ordine ad finem faile in the meanes to the ende for otherwise he might atchieue the ende 3. And that concupiscence hindreth our obedience euen in this life the Apostle sheweth v. 19. I doe not the good thing which I would 3. Argum. The Apostle directly calleth euen concupiscence wherewith he is vnwilling sinne v. 20. If I doe that I would not it is no more I that doe it but the sinne that dwelleth in me Ergo it is sinne Answ. Pererius answeareth that it is called sinne either because it is effectus peccati the effect of sinne as the writing is called the hand because it was written with the hand or because it bringeth forth sinne as frigus cold is called pigrum slouthfull because it maketh one so Contra. 1. But that is properly and truely sinne which causeth death for death came in by sinne as the Apostle saith of concupiscence that it slue him and was vnto him the cause of death v. 10.11 2. S. Augustine also confesseth that concupiscence is not onely poena peccati the punishment of sinne and causa peccati the cause of sinne sed ipsum peccatum but sinne it selfe Pererius answeareth that Augustine vnderstandeth not peccatum morale a morall sinne but vitium naturae corruptae a fault or vice of our corrupt nature as the vices in the bodie as blindnes or deafenes are called peccata seu errata naturae the faults or errors of nature because they are against the integritie and perfection of the nature of the bodie so the rebelling of the carnall concupiscence against the lawe of reason is against the integritie and perfection of the soule and so an error of nature Contra. 1. We grant that there are naturall faults both in the soule as forgetfulnesse ignorance dulnesse of vnderstanding in the bodie weakenesse infirmitie blindnesse and such like which are the fruits and effects of sinne but not sinne themselues but concupiscence is none of that kind for all these infirmities are effects and passions but the concupiscence rebelling against the minde is actiue and working and Augustine himselfe giueth a reason why he calleth it sinne quia inest illi inobedientia contra dominatum mentis because there is in it disobedience against the lawe of the minde gouerned by grace so that it disobeyeth not only the law of the mind but resisteth the motions of the spirit now all disobedience to the will of God is sinne 2. and that it is not naturall but a morall and spirituall sinne appeareth by the effects because it causeth the spirituall death of the soule Argument 4. Vnlesse the precept Thou shall not lust did prohibite the verie first motions that haue not the consent of the will then should there be no difference betweene this and the other precepts which doe condemne also ipsos prauos affectos the euill affections as of wrath enuie in the sixt of lust and carnall desire to the which the will is inclined in the seauenth so then this commandement ipsos appetitus quibus titillamur doth condemne the verie appetite which tickleth vs though it haue not our consent Calvin Pererius answereth that the other commandements onely prohibite ipsos externos actus the eternall acts of stealing committing adulterie and such like numer 58. Contra. 1. Our Blessed Sauiour confuteth him who Matth. 5. sheweth how in the former commandements the verie affections and inward purposes are restrained as of anger in the sixt thou shalt not kill of lusting after a woman in the heart in the seauenth thou shalt not commit adulterie 2. yea Pererius confuteth himselfe confessing afterward numer 60. praeceptis illis legalibus â—on solum externa peccata c. in those legall precepts not the externall workes of sinne onely to be prohibited but the verie inward concupiscence But we haue staied somewhat to long in this controuersie Controv. 9. That the commandement Thou shalt not lust is but one 1. The Romane catechisme which the Romanists generally follow deuide the last commandement into two the first forbidding the coueting of things of pleasure as the neighbours wife the other things of profit as our neighbours house and goods and they make the two first commandements thou shalt
is to shewe what Christ hath wrought for vs not what he did against his aduersaries 5. Socinus will haue the meaning to be no more but this that Christ did not satisfie by his death for sinne but exauthoravit abolevit he did abolish sinne and take away the power and authoritie thereof for he came to doe that which the lawe could not doe which was not to punish and condemne sinne for that the lawe could doe but to deliuer vs from the seruitude of sinne Socinus part 2. c. 23. p. 195. Contra. 1. True it is that Christ by his death hath also abolished the kingdome of sinne that it shall no longer raigne in his members but first it was abolished by the sacrifice of Christs death who bare the punishment of our sinne in himselfe and this is the proper sense of the word to condemne that is inflict the punishment of sinne as in this chapter v. 34. who shall condemne vs so before c. 2. 1. c. 5.16 2. S. Paul doth not so much shew what Christ came to doe namely that the law could not doe but the reason why he came to doe it because the law could not by reason of the weaknes of our flesh 3. the law indeede did condemne and punish sinne but by the law euery one was to beare his owne sinne the law could not appoint one to beare the punishment for all as Christ did whose sufferings are made ours by faith 6. Some of our owne writers doe vnderstand this condemning of sinne of the abolishing of the kingdome thereof and of our sanctification and regeneration Bucer Musculu◠these differ both from the Papists whose opinion is set downe before that is who make regeneration a part of iustification the other a consequent onely and effect thereof and the Papists differ from Socinus opinion who presupposeth no satisfaction at all to be made for our sinnes by the death of Christ But yet these words can not properly be referred to the condemning of sinne in vs by the worke of regeneration for this Christ did in his flesh or by his flesh not in carne i. homine in the flesh that is man as Lyranus 7. Wherefore the meaning indeede is that Christ in his flesh beeing made a sacrifice for vs vpon the crosse did beare the punishment due vnto our sinne God condēned sinne in the flesh of his Sonne that is poenas peccato debitas exegit he did exact the punishment due vnto our sinne Pareus and by condemning it in the death of his Sonne hath freed vs from condemnation This to be the meaning 1. the vse of the word to condemne sheweth touched before 2. the scope of the Apostle which is to shew that there is no condemnation to those which are in Christ because Christ hath himselfe freed them therefrom by bearing the punishment of sinne 3. the consent of other places of Scripture prooue the same as Gal. 3.13 Christ hath redeemed vs from the curse of the law beeing made a curse for vs and 1. Pet. 2.24 Himselfe bare our sinnes in his bodie on the tree And thus diuers of the fathers expound this of Christs death as Chrysostome eo quod mortuus est peccatum vicit condemnavit in that he died he ouercame and condemned death and Origen per hostiam cornis c. by the sacrifice of his flesh he condemned sinne in the flesh 8. The other sense which the Greeke scholiast followeth that sinne was condemned in Christs flesh quia illam peccato inanem servavit because he kept it free from sinne and so internecio peccati est punitio the killing of sinne is the punishment thereof though it be also found and very comfortable yet it is not here so fit because it is said that God sending his Sonne condemned sinne in the flesh so that it is better referred to the suffering of Christ then to his actiue obedience Quest. 8. Who are after the flesh and sauour the things of the flesh v. 5. 1. Origens sense is here reiected who vnderstandeth the Iewes which carnally vnderstand the lawe them he will to be after the spirit which did follow the spirituall sense of the law for in all this discourse S. Paul treateth specially of the morall lawe of Moses as he gaue instance in the tenth precept thou shalt not lust c. 7.8 2. Nor yet as Tolet annot 15. with other Romanists must we vnderstand spiritum nationalem seu mentem the reason or mind for euen the mind in carnall men is carnall qua carnea sunt mente volutant they doe in their minde thinke of carnall things they haue mentem carneam a fleshly minde Theophyl and Chrysostome saith that a carnall life totem hominem carnem facit maketh the whole man flesh and if we giue our minde to the spirit ipsam spiritualem efficiemus we shall also make it spirituall to walke after the spirit is then to be guided by the grace of Gods spirit Theodor. 3. Sometime to be in the flesh signifieth to remaine in the bodie as 2. Cor. 10.3 though we walke in the flesh we doe not warre after the flesh sometime euen the regenerate are saide to be carnall in respect of that part which is in them carnall and vnregenerate but here it is taken in an other sense for them which are altogether lead by their carnall affections affectus carnis malitians dixit affectus spiritus gratiam the affectious of the flesh he calleth the malice thereof the affections of the spirit grace Chrysost. 4. Now carnall things or the things of the flesh are of three sorts Some are good as the knowledge of artes some indifferent as riches honour some euill as the workes of the flesh adulterie drunkennesse so that two wayes men here may erre either in the matter when they followe things in their nature euill as the sinnefull workes of the flesh or in the manner when they folowe things of this world in themselues indifferent but with an euill minde they doe not referre them to the glorie of God But they preferre things temporall Before eternall like as lingua febricitantis infecta cholera c. the tongue of a sicke man infected with choser taketh sweete things for bitter Lyran. neither yet is it vnlawfull for them which are spiritual to be occupied in the things of this life but they must referre all to Gods glorie and preferre things spirituall before externall like as lingua bene disposita a tongue which is not distempered doth iudge rightly of euery tast Quest. 9. How the wisedome of the flesh is enmitie against God 1. Pareus well noteth that the Apostle here vseth not the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth prudence it selfe least he should seeme to haue condemned that naturall gift and facultie but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which noteth the act rather and execution of that facultie and he addeth to it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the flesh not condemning or reiecting all prudent actions but such as
Obiect The Apostle saith v. 15. If ye liue after the flesh yee shall die but if ye mortifie the deedes of the bodie ye shall liue therefore mortification is the cause of life and saluation Contra. 1. Hence followeth that mortification is necessarie vnto saluation yet not as a cause but as a necessarie condition without the which there is no faith and consequently no saluation 2. eternall life is the gift of God c. 6.23 therefore not due vnto our merits euill workes are the cause of damnation because they iustly deserue it but it followeth not that good workes are the cause of saluation for they are both imperfect and so vnproportinable to the reward and they are due otherwise to be done and therefore merite not Controv. 4. Against the Arrians and Eunomians concerning the deitie of the holy Ghost v. 2. The law of the spirit of life c. hath freedome Chrysostome homil de adorand spirit from this place prooueth the deitie of the spirit against the Arrian and Eunomiâ—au heretikes who made great difference in the persons of the Trinitie the Sonne they affirmed to be a creature and much inferiour to the Father and the holy Ghost they made servum ministrum silij a seruant and minister of the Sonne Chrysostome confuteth them by this place for if the spirit be the author of libertie and freedome to others then is he most free himselfe and not a minister or seruant as the Apostle saith 2. Cor. 2.17 where the spirit of the Lord is there is libertie Controv. 5. Against the Pelagians that a man by nature cannot keepe and fulfill the law This error is confuted by the expresse words of the Apostle who saith that the law was weake by reason of the flesh and so not able to iustifie vs by the flesh the Apostle vnderstandeth not substantiam caruis the substance of the flesh as the Maniches were readie to catch at these and the like places to confirme their wicked opinion who held the flesh of man to be euill by nature nor yet the carnall rites and obseruations of the law which were not able to cleanse the obseruers of them as Origen here interpreteth and Lyranus following him But by the flesh we vnderstand with Chrysostome carnales sensus the carnall affections carnalitatem quae rebellabat the carnalitie of man which rebelled against the spirit gloss ordinar concupisentias carnis the concupiscence of the flesh Haymo prauitatem naturae the pravitie of nature Martyr which hindereth that none can keepe the law to be iustified by it This then manifestly conuinceth the Pelagians for if the flesh make the law weake and vnable to be kept then none by the strength of their nature and flesh can fulfill the law Controv. 6. The fulfilling of the law is not possible in this life no not to them which are in the state of grace 1. The Romanists out of these words of the Apostle v. 4. That the righteousnesse of the law may be fulfilled in vs which walke not after the flesh doe inferre that they which walke not after the flesh may fulfill the law so that either it must be denied that none in this life walke after the spirit or it must be graunted that by such the law may be fulfilled Pere disput 5. Bellarmine addeth that if the law cannot be fulfilled Christus non obtinuit quod vâ—luit Christ hath not compassed or obtained that which he intended for therefore he died that the iustice of the law might be fulfilled Contra. 1. Indeed Origen whose errors and erroneous interpretations our aduersaries themselues will be ashamed of sauing where they serue their turne first deuised this interpretation who by the law here vnderstandeth the law of the mind which is fulfilled quando lex peccati in membris c. when the law of sinne in the members resisteth it not and Haymo hath this glosse that we beeing redeemed by Christ might spiritually fulfill the workes of the law per cuius impletionem possumus iustificari by the fulfilling whereof we may be iustified But this place is better vnderstood of the obedience of Christ who fulfilled the law which is imputed vnto vs by faith and thus doe not onely expound our new writes Melancthon Bucer Hyperius Calvin Beza with others but some of the auncient expositors as Theophylact quae lex facere nitibatur ea Christus nostri gratia executus est those things which the law endeuoured Christ hath performed for vs so also Oecumenius scotus finis legis per Christum partus est exhibitus the scope and end of the law is obtained exhibited by Christ yet we must endeuour to keepe those things which are deliuered per conuersationem bonam fidem by a good conuersation and faith 2. And that this is the meaning of the Apostle 1. the phrase sheweth that the law might be fulfilled in vs he saith not by vs Beza 2. because there is none so perfect in this life that neither in thought word nor deed transgresseth not the law 3. The law was weake through the infirmitie of the flesh but the infirmitie and weakenes of the flesh remaineth still euen in the regenerate therefore neither in them the righteousnesse of the law can be fulfilled 4. To the contrarie arguments thus we answer 1. the Apostle saith not that they which walke after the spirit fulfill the law but the law is fulfilled in them that is imputed vnto them by faith in Christ. 2. though the faithfull cannot fulfill the law yet Christ performed what he intended that he might keepe the law for them and they be iustified by faith in him 3. this clause then which walke not after the flesh is added to shew who they are for whom Christ hath fulfilled the law and to what end namely to such as walke in newnes of life 5. Some doe thinke that the Apostle speaketh here of two kinds of fulfilling the law one imputatione by imputation of Christs obedience which is our iustification the other inchoatione by a beginning onely which is our sanctification begunne in this life and perfited in the next when it shall be fulfilled Martyr Pareus But the other sense is better for the Apostle speaketh of a present fulfilling of the law in them which walke according to the spirit not of a fulfilling respited and excepted in the next life which is most true but not agreeable to the Apostles meaning here 6. So the Apostle in this place setteth forth three benefits purchased vnto vs by Christ 1. remission of our sinnes in that Christ bare in himselfe the punishment due vnto our sins 2. then the imputation of Christs obedience and performing of the law 3. our sanctification that we by the spirit of Christ doe die vnto sinne and rise vnto newnes of life which our sanctification is necessarily ioyned with our iustification but no part thereof 1. because it is imperfect in this life it is perfect after a sort perfectione partium by
point there was no question 2. Theodoret expoundeth it of curiositie that no one should curiously enquire how Christ ascended into heauen for vs and ouercame death to the same purpose Pet. Martyr quis ascendet in coelum vt haec videat c. say not who shall ascend into heauen to see this or goe downe to the deepe to be certified of Christs victorie the word is in thy mouth and heart it sufficeth thee to beleeue these things to haue beene performed by Christ. 3. Anselme doth vnderstand Moses and Paul to speake of incredulitie that no man should doubt of the ascension and descension of Christ so also the ordinarie gloss do not say who hath ascended into heauen that is none shall ascend to heauen pro iustitia fidei observata for obseruing the righteousnes of faith nor shall descend to hell for not obseruing it for this were to denie the ascension and descension of Christ. 4. Lyranus applieth it to the certaintie of the knowledge of the Gospel tollitur omnis excusatio c. all excuse is taken away they cannot be ignorant of the Gospel beeing preached and testified by the Apostles as the Iewes needed not vnder Moses to haue sent farre or neere to haue the law made knowne vnto them seeing it was at home euen at their doores to the same purpose Bellarmine lib. 5. de grat liber arbit c. 6. so also Osiander applieth it to the certaintie of the preaching of the Gospel by the Apostles which shall be so liuely declared that they shall not neede to wish any to goe to heauen or to descend into the deep to bring vnto them the word of promise seeing Christ hath alreadie performed these things for them 5. Chrysostome vnderstandeth this place of the facilitie of the iustice of faith in respect of the lawe that there is no great thing required to be performed by our selues as to ascend to heauen or descend into the deepe licet tibi domi sedenti salutem consequi thou mayest euen sitting at home obtaine saluation though thou goe not ouer thy threshhold Faius also to the like purpose sheweth how Moses in that place and S. Paul here shewe how the lawe is fulfilled for vs in Christ that God requireth not of vs any difficult or impossible worke to be performed by vs to ascend into heauen or descend to hell to be deliuered frō the one and to obtaine the other by our owne workes for this were to call both the ascension and resurrection of Christ into question but Christ by his resurrection ascension had performed for vs the worke of our redemption This is some part of the Apostles meaning but not all 6. Wherefore this is the meaning of the Apostle as he shewed before what the iustice of the lawe required namely perfect obedience to be performed in our selues which being a thing impossible there must needes remaine a doubt and despaire both of obtaining heauen and in escaping hell so now he declareth the nature and propertie of iustifying faith first per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by remoouing that which is contrarie to faith secondly per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by declaring that which is thereunto agreeable And for the first whereas there are two speciall doubts that trouble the mind how we may obtaine heauen and escape hell the Apostle sheweth that the righteousnesse of faith taketh away both these doubts first no man is nowe to say in his heart who shall ascend for me into heauen to bring me thither for Christ hath done it alreadie and this were to bring Christ againe from thence to become man for vs and so to ascend againe neither is any man now to make questiō how he shall escape hell or who shall descend thither for him for Christ by his death hath deliuered vs from thence faith in Christ doth deliuer vs from all doubt he therefore that hath his faith grounded vpon the passion resurrection ascention of Christ shall no longer be perplexed in his mind as they are which hope to be iustified by the law thus Calv. Beza Par. So then he sheweth two notable differēces between the law the gospel the one requireth things impossible to be done namely the complete and perfect obedience of the lawe and so leaueth the minde in doubt and despaire of saluation but the Gospell requireth not any thing impossible to be done by vs but onely to beleeue in Christ and so it freeth vs from all doubt and despaire Quest. 13. Of these words the word is neere thee c. 1. Whereas the Latine translator hath what saith the Scripture this word Scripture is not in the originall therefore the same nominatiue case must be supplyed which is expressed before the righteousnesse of faith speaketh on this wise c. as before he shewed what was not agreeable to the doctrine of faith to make doubts of saluation or to seeke to be iustified by the lawe so now he declareth the true propertie of iustifying faith which requireth no great act to be performed by our selues but onely to beleeue in Christ. 2. The Septuagint adde beside in thy mouth and in thy heart in thy hands which addition Pet. Martyr thinketh nothing to hinder but to helpe the Apostles meaning because that which we beleeue in the heart and confesse with the mouth must be confirmed by the worke of our hands but it rather crosseth the Apostles meaning to make mention here of workes which the iustice of the lawe required but the iustice of faith saith otherwise and Lyranus glosse is here superfluous and idle that the Apostle speaketh in casis mortis in the case of death when as there is no time of working that then it is sufficient to beleeue with the heart and confesse with the mouth whereas the Apostle generally treateth of the iustice of faith how it is sufficient to saluation vnto all 3. And whereas the Apostle saith it is neere thee in thy mouth c. 1. The meaning is not it is neere thee that is consentancum rationi agreeable to reason Hug. gloss for Christ preached things farre beyond humane reason 2. Vatablus referreth it to the preaching of the Apostles this word of faith was in their mouth and heart 3. Osiander likewise applyeth it to the multitude of beleeuers this doctrine of faith which so many thousands beleeued was not remote or farre off 4. Pet. Martyr expoundeth it of the knowledge and vnderstanding of the mysteries which were hid before nobis fit prope per fidem quod per naturam est remotissimum that is neere vnto vs by faith which was before most remote and farre off 5. But the fittest interpretation is that the Apostle sheweth the facilitie of the righteousnesse of faith that God requireth no hard worke of vs to crosse the Seas and climbe vp the mountaines or take long iourneys to seeke out our saluation but by the grace of Gods spirit this faith is planted in our hearts and confessed with our
Apostle expresseth the Hebrew word sorer by these two rebellious and gainesaying so also Beza But Iunius parall 19. thinketh rather that the Apostle doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 compendiously in one word expresse the Prophets meaning which is set forth in many words in that place Isa. 65.3 a rebellious people which walketh a way that is not good after their owne imaginations a people that prouoke me euer to my face c. all this the Apostle comprehendeth in these two words rebellious and gainsaying 2. By all the day 1. Origen vnderstandeth litterally the day wherein Christ did hang vpon the crosse c. and so a part is taken for the whole gloss ordinar but then it should not haue beene said all the day 2. Haymo interpreteth it to be the whole time Dominicae predicationis of the Lords preaching vnto his passion 3. But Oecumenius better taketh it for all that time which went before since they came out of Egypt so also Gryneus with M. Calvin and others vnderstand all that time since the Lord begunne to take speciall care of this people and thus the Prophets vse to speake as Ierem. 7.13 I rose vp earely to speake vnto you c. but ye would not heare toto tempore legis Mosaicae all the time of the law of Moses Lyran. 3. I stretched out my hands 1. not vpon the crosse as Origen and Ambrose for Christ said before he suffered that he would haue gathered them together as the henne her chicâ—â—us but they would not Martyr 2. neither is thereby onely signified the miracles which Christ shewed and the benefits bestowed vpon them as Haymo and as Gorrhan by the extending the left hand signifieth their protecting from euill and by the right hand the collaâ—â—â— of benefits 3. But hereby we vnderstand generally all those meanes which the Lord vsed not onely by his benefits but by his threatnings promises preaching of his word whereby he would haue called them to repentance Pareus 4. Yet they were still a rebellious and gainsaying people rebellious in heart and gainsaying in their mouth contrarie to those two speciall works of grace before spoken of the 〈◊〉 of the heart and the confession of the mouth Pellican so here three sinnes are set 〈◊〉 in the people their ingratitude that regarded not Gods mercie in calling them 〈◊〉 incredulitie in their rebellion obstinacie in gainsaying three vertues also are described 〈◊〉 seruants of God the Prophets their patience in suffering signified by the stretching out of their hands their perseverance all the day the cause for the which they suffered against a rebellious and gainsaying people 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doct. A good intention maketh not a good action v. 1. They haue the zeale of God but not according to knowledge Hence it is euident that make a good action it is not sufficient to haue a kind of zeale and good intention for them beleeue had beene excused for putting Christ to death which they did of a blind zeale 〈◊〉 here the Apostle confesseth that they had zeale but it was not according to knowledge â—â— therefore it was a false and erroneous zeale such as they were ruled with that should â—â—â—ke they did God seruice in killing his seruants Ioh. 16.2 Doct. 2. Of the kinds of prayer v. 1. My hearts desire There is oratio mentalis vocalis a mentall and vocali prayer the one onely in the mind the other vttered by the voice of the first our Sauiour speaketh Matth. 6.6 When thou prayest enter into thy chamber of the other v. 9. after this manner pray yee And Saint Paul sheweth them both in this place that his hearts desire was c. he prayeth both with his heart and voice and the praier of the heart is the more principall Doct. 3. How to discerne true loue and freindship v. 2. That they may be saued c. Herein Saint Pauls true affection appeared toward his countrie men the Iewes in wishing their saluation whatsoeuer one freind wisheth vnto an other beside this it is nothing hence it is that Saint Paul in all his Epistles beginneth his salutation with grace and peace this was Abrahams commendation that he had a case to instruct his familie children and seruants in the waies of God Gen. 18.18 Doct. 4. Of the consent betweene the law and the Gospel v. 4. Christ is the end of the law So then herein both the law and the Gospel agree that both of them doe ayme at Christ the law looketh vnto him as the end and the Gospel also requireth obedience to the law but Christ is couertly insinuated in the law but openly shewed in the Gospel the law leadeth indirectly vnto faith and the Gospel as it were indirectly pointeth at the law requyring the obedience thereof not as a cause but as a â—â—â—ie testimonie and consequent of iustification and so that is fulfilled which S. Paul saith Rom. 3.31 doe we then make the law of none effect through faith God forbid yea we est 〈◊〉 the law Doct. 5. Of the difference betweene the law and the Gospel v. 5. He that doth these things shall liue thereby c. Hence may be gathered there differences betweene the law and the Gospel 1. the law commandeth things impossible and not in mans power as in euery point to keepe and fulfill the law the Gospel onely requireth faith and beleefe 2. the law worketh terrour and perplexitie of conscience breeding doubts and questions in the mind who shall ascend to heauen to bring vs thâ—â—â—er who shall descend to hell to keepe vs from thence But the Gospel bringeth comfort and peace of conscience and assurance of saluation 3. the righteousnesse of the law is grounded vpon the law of Moses but the iustice of faith vpon the Gospel this is the word of faith v. 8. Doct. 6. Of the diuerse kinds of calling and sending to preach v. 18. How shall they preach vnlesse they be sent c. Though the Apostle doe here especially speake of the extraordinarie calling such as was this of the Apostles yet it is true of the ordinarie calling of preachers that none must take vpon them to preach vnlesse they be sent of God which is either immediately as the Prophets were so called of God in the old Testament or mediately by the authoritie of the Church or by them to whom it is committed which kind of mediate calling is not in euery Church the same in respect of some circumstances which are left to the libertie of the Church Pareus but yet the same end must be propounded which is the edifying of the Church and none ought to be sent which are not meete for such are not sent of God but runne vncalled and vnsent and as intruders But no man as the Apostle saith ought to take this honour vpon him but he that is called of God Hebr. 5.4 Here I cannot omit that obseruation of Faius who thinketh the sending of Ionas to haue beene ordinarie from the companie of the Prophets
professed themselues worshippers of God and asked after him therefore the other are the Iewes and this further appeareth because this is reckoned among one of their faults they did eate swines flesh which neither was practised among the then Pagan nor now beleeuing Gentiles 3. Wherefore this rebuke must light vpon the Iewes for they contemning the Lords altar did set vp other altars in gardens to sacrifice vpon to their idols they did visit the graues and sepulchres either to consult with the dead contrarie to the law Deut. 18. or els to adore their reliques as Papists now doe 4. And it is apparant to all the world how this prophesie is fulfilled God hath reuealed himselfe to the Gentiles and the Iewes are blinded still 6. Morall obseruations 1. Observ. Of the securitie and assurance of faith v. 6. Say not in thine heart who shall ascend into heauen c. So long as a man is vnder the terror of the law his mind is continually perplexed and troubled doubting of heauen how he shall come thither and fearing hell who shall deliuer him from thence but beeing iustified by faith and so at peace with God nothing doth trouble vs we neede not to say who shall ascend to heauen to bring vs thither or descend to hell to redeeme vs thence for Christ hath done both for vs in whom we are so sure of Gods loue that nothing can separate vs from it as S. Paul sheweth by his owne experiences Rom. 8.38.39 so long then as the minde is doubtfull perplexed and wauering it is a sure signe that such haue not yet attained vnto this iustifying faith Observ. 2. Against pride and vaine-glorie Chrysostome vpon these words v. 11. He that beleeueth in him shall not be ashamed taketh occasion to shewe the vaine desire of humane praise whereas it is faith in Christ that bringeth true praise and delivereth from shame and confusion I will abridge his morall vpon this point 1. First he describeth this vanitie by the adiuncts thereof quid illa sumptuosius quid difficilius c. what is more sumptuous and more hard as to build goodly houses to provide multitude of seruants great horse to set forth showes to go in pompe and all to get praise what can be more costly 2. By the event it consumeth not onely money but devorat animas it devoureth the soule mater gehennae est inanis gloria vaine-glorie is the mother of hell and vehemently kindleth the fire thereof 3. By the difference between this passion and all other quae morte finiuntur which end by death but this vaine desire sheweth it selfe after death as in the immoderate cost bestowed in garnishing sepulchres that they which could not affoard one halfepennie to the poore while they liued morientes sumptuosam mensam vermibus praebeant beeing dead to prepare a sumptuous table for the wormes 4. By the condition and propertie of it as there is no servitude no not of the Barbarians which is more grieuous then the servitude of vaine-glorie it commandeth most servile things he which is ambitious refuseth no labour nor seruice to further his vnsatiable appetite so that there cannot be a greater slaue then a vaine-glorious man 5. The companions of vaine-glorie are envie couetousnes adulteries for many one in his foolish braverie vaunteth himselfe hanc hanc ego decepi I haue deceiued this woman and that and had my will of them 6. Vaine-glorie is an vncertaine thing though a man had tenne thousand commenders they much differ not à graculis garrientibus from so many cackling iayes for they will vpon any occasion be as readie to dispraise 7. Beside that which a man desireth to be praised he soonest obtaineth by contemning of praise for men doe not more wonder at any then at him qui non laudari sustinet which can not endure to be praised 8. This studie of vaine-glorie is farre vnlike all other studies and professions in other artes men will make them their iudges that haue skill but the vaine-glorious man putteth himselfe vpon the ignorant multitude the harlot is not so vaine for she contemneth and despiseth many louers but the man ambitious of praise doth fawne euer vpon base and vile persons for praise and commendation Now Chrysostome in this manner proceeding to lay open the vanitie of this desire of praise doth also shewe the remedies against it 1. There is a woe denounced to such Luk. 6.26 Woe be vnto you when all men speake well of you for so did their fathers to the false Prophets euill men are sooner commended of the world then good 2. We must set before vs the euerlasting praise of God which will make vs to tread vnder foote the praise of men like as they which delight in the comelinesse of the bodie alia splendidior facies visa à prima separat a more beautifull face doth turne a mans desire from the former the seruant looketh to his master the scholar to his teacher the labourer to his paymaster but he that desireth the praise of men looketh not to God his master and rewarder Athleta in arena certans in theatro probari cupit the champion or combatant striuing in the sand and ground belowe yet seeketh to be approoued in the theatre aboue yet a vaine-glorious man cum theatrum in coelo habet spectatores in terris colligit when he hath his theatre in heauen yet doth seeke vnto him spectators in earth 3. We must consider the dignitie and excellencie of our calling and say with S. Paul knowe ye not that we shall iudge the Angels and wilt thou then that shalt iudge the Angels be iudged of vile and base persons here in earth 4. We must set before our eyes the examples of the Saints that haue condemned the vaine-glorie of this world as Helias when the King and nobles and people were gathered together and wondred at him he sought not their praise but checked them saying how long halt ye betweene two opinions 1. King 18.21 and when all Iudea assembled vnto Iohn be fawned not vpon them but reprooued them O generation of vipers to this purpose Chrysostome Observ. 3. Against despaire v. 12. He that is Lord ouer all is rich vnto all From this place Oecumenius collecteth a comfortable note that seeing Christ is so desirous of our saluation vt suas divitias existimet esse that he couneth it his riches if many be brought vnto the faith that no man should despaire of saluation And that we should haue a desire vnto our saluation which our Blessed Sauiour so thirsteth after as he did when he wept ouer Ierusalem which he would haue gathered vnto him â—â— the henne doth her chickens but they would not Matth. 23. Observ. 4. Against envie M. Calvin vpon the same words he is rich vnto all doth thus collect that one should not envie another as though they lost any thing by the graces bestowed vpon an other for God is aboundantly rich eius opulentiam largitate non
notable exploit were praised publikely or priuately but S. Paul speaketh in generall of the office of all Magistrates whatsoeuer 5. Pet. Martyr thinketh that it is no small part of praise absolvi in iudicio to be absolued in iudgement as it was no small praise to Cato beeing so often accused still to be freed and absolued it is also a great praise for a man to be so innocent that nothing can be obiected against him in iudgement as Fimbria beeing asked what he could obiect vnto Scevola so innocent and harmelesse a man answeared quia telum toto suo corpore non receperit because he receiued not his weapon whole into his bodie but it is one thing to receiue praise and reward another to be freed onely from punishment 6. Wherefore I take this to be the better answear that first the Apostle speaketh here of the power it selfe and of the true ende wherefore it was ordained and not of the personall faults in those that abuse this power for if the good be not rewarded as well as the euill punished it is the fault of the gouernors adde hereunto because it is not possible for a Prince to reward all good subiects that by praise we must vnderstand omnia commoda privilegi\%a c. all the priuiledges and commodities which are by the lawes offered to good subiects Pareus they are praised that is counted worthie qui participent omnibus ijs bonis c. to be made partakers of all those benefits and commodities for the which commonwealths came first together Bullinger as good subiects enioy libertie possession of their lands and goods defense from wrong and such like and as occasion may serue may receiue also praise and encouragement from the Magistrate Quest. 10. How the Magistrate is said to be Gods minister for our wealth or good 1. Some vnderstand this onely of the power to punish loco Dei vindicat he taketh revenge in Gods place gloss interlin Lyranus 2. Haymo giueth these two senses he is Gods minister to defend thee from wrong or for thy good that thou doe no evill but this expresseth but one part of this ministring power 3. therefore Chrysostome better voluntati Dei cooperatur c. he worketh according to Gods will in punishing of the euill and in rewarding the good and therefore he is called his minister so also Theophylact voluntati Dei obsequitur he obeyeth the will of God as in commanding chastitie in forbidding auarice and theft like as the Lord is so must the minister be but God loueth the iust and punisheth the wicked therefore so should the magistrate do that is Gods minister 3. and generally they are Gods ministers 1. because they are ordained of God 2. they are as gods in earth in respect of their preheminence and authoritie ouer others 3. in regard of their office because they doe execute iustice in the earth in awarding rewards to the righteous and punishments to the wicked 4. whereas the Prince is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the minister of God which name and title also agreeth to the spirituall pastors who are the ministers of God yet they are ministers in a diuerse kind both agree in their institution which is from God and in the generall ende which is to seeke the good of Gods people yet they differ both in the obiect for the pastors charge is onely about spirituall things the Prince is occupied also in caring for temporall as also in the meanes for the Prince by his sword and coactiue power procureth the good of his subiects but the pastor seeketh it by the preaching of the word the administration of the Sacraments and discipline and other spirituall meanes For thy good That which the Apostle called before 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 praise now he nameth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 good which is either naturall morall ciuill or spirituall good the Magistrate procureth all these the naturall good as in preseruing the liues and bodies of his subiects the morall good in commanding vertue and punishing vice the civill in maintaining their goods and possessions their spirituall good in setting forth and defending the true religion Pareus 11. Quest. How the Magistrate is said not to beare the sword for nought v. 4. 1. Lyranus doth indifferently vnderstand this of the materiall sword which the ciuill power hath or of the Ecclesiasticall but the whole course of the Apostles speach sheweth that he speaketh of the Civill power to whome tribute and such other customes belong 2. By the sword he vnderstandeth the power of exercising and drawing forth the sword against offenders and he alludeth to the custome of Princes which haue the sword carried before them and other ensignes of their authoritie 3. There are three vses of the civill sword the one is ad vindictam to be reuenged of the euill ad protectionem bonorum for the protection of the good and ad executionem iustitiae for the execution of iustice 4. He beareth not the sword 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in vaine that is temere rashly Beza because he hath his authoritie from God nor sine causa the vulgar Latin without some certaine cause or ende namely the punishment of the euill 5. And so he is called a reuenger vnto wrath 1. which some vnderstand of the diuine wrath which is executed by the Magistrate or to shew the wrath of God in time to come Gorrh. Hug. 2. rather by wrath we vnderstand the punishment it selfe inflicted which is an effect of wrath Pareus Tolet Sa. Quest. 12. Of the right vse of the sword both in time of peace and warre 1. Concerning the vse of the sword in time of peace three things are requisite 1. that there should be good lawes enacted and established 2. that there should be vpright iudgement according to those lawes 3. that of such iudgements once giuen there should be iust execution 1. In the making of lawes three things must concurre the matter of the lawe the end and scope and the extent 1. for the matter it must be agreeable to the lawe of nature and to the will of God Princes must not make lawes according to their owne minde but such as may be consonant to the pure and perfect will of God hereupon it was that the law-makers among the Gentiles would alwaies ascribe the invention of their lawes to some one of the gods to winne more credit vnto them Zoroastres who gaue lawes to the Bactrianes and Persians did make Oromazen whom they held to be a god the author of his lawes Trismegistus among the Egyptians Mercurius Minos among the Cretensians Iuppiter Carundas among the Carthaginians made Saturnus his author Lycurgus among the Lacedemonians Apollo Solon Draco among the Athenians Minerva Xamolpis among the Scythians Vesta Numa among the Romanes the goddes Egeria and Mahomet commended his Alcaron to the Arabians vnder the name of Gabriel the Arkeangel But these were their fabulous conceits we haue indeede the booke of God a perfect
why should they after their conversion vse lesse libertie 8. Chrysostome yeeldeth this reason ne notarentur à Christianis least they should haue beene noted and obserued of Christians if they should haue onely abstained from swines flesh and other forbidden meates they thought it better to betake themselues onely to the eating of herbes vt non legalis observatio sed iciunium magis videretur that it might be thought rather a kind of fasting and abstinence then a legall observation thus also Pareus but it seemeth that they were not ashamed to be counted obseruers of the law because they charged others which did not obserue this difference of meates as transgressors of the lawe 9. Wherefore I take rather that this is the Apostles meaning not that any did in those times altogether abstaine from all kind of meats and thought it lawfull onely to eate herbs but that where other choice of meat was not they had rather eate of herbs then either of meates offered to idols or forbidden by the lawe Tolet so Faius malebat c. he had rather eate herbs then of such kind of flesh likewise Piscator yet Chrysostome and Augustines sense are not much to be misliked Quest. 4. Whether any things be indifferent in their nature as beeing neither good nor euill of themselues The occasion of this question is out of the 3. verse where the Apostle maketh the difference of meates as a thing in it selfe indifferent and would not haue him that did eate and make no difference to despise him that did not him that did not eate and made a difference to iudge him that did eat here then this in generall would be considered whether any thing in it owne nature is neither good nor euill as neither commanded by the law of God nor forbidden but left indifferent betweene both 1. That nothing is indifferent it may be thus obiected 1. betweene good and euill there is no meane but euerie action is either good or euill agreeable or not agreeable vnto the lawe of God 2. euerie thing is done of faith or without faith if of faith it is good if without it is euill therefore there is no indifferent thing but it is either good or euill Answ. Some things are simply good or euill in their owne nature and of themselues as the things which are commanded by the lawe of God are simply good the things forbidden are simply euill some things are neither good nor euill in their owne nature but yet in respect of the intention ende and minde of the doer though indifferent in themselues they may not be indifferent by this distinction the obiections proposed are easily answered 1. Euerie action is good or euill not in it selfe but in regard of the intention or ende as to eate or not to eate flesh of it selfe is neither good nor euill but not to eate it as thinking flesh to be vnholy or to merit by it is euill and so likewise to eate it vncharitably with offence of the weake 2. So to doe a thing of faith or not of faith respecteth the intention and perswasion of the doer not the thing it selfe in it owne nature Now on the contrarie side that some things are indifferent in their owne nature neither good nor euill it is thus prooued 1. The things which God hath neither forbidden nor commanded he hath left free and indifferent but some things are such as vpon certaine dayes to eate or not to eate flesh is neither commanded nor inhibited therefore in it owne nature it is a thing indifferent 2. Those things which neither commend vs to God nor yet doe displease God are indifferent but some things are such as meate doth not commend vs vnto God as S. Paul saith 1. Cor. 8.8 3. Those things which neither helpe to nor hinder vs from saluation are indifferent but such are meat drinke apparell v. 17. of this chapter Ergo. Quest. 5. How the Apostle maketh the eating or not eating of flesh and the observing of dayes indifferent which elsewhere he condemneth The occasion of this question ariseth out of the 4.5.6 verses where the Apostle seemeth to make these things indifferent yet he condemneth the obseruation of dayes Galat. 4.10 Ye obserue moneths times and yeares and he reprooueth Peter Gal. 2. because he abstained from certaine meates and 2. Tim. 4 he calleth it a doctrine of deuils Answ. 1. Tolet would thus reconcile these places that these things were indifferent till the Church had determined otherwise at that time nondum erat per Ecclesiam declaratum c. it was not declared by the Church what they should doe in this case annot 1. in fine But this was not all the reason for the Apostles in their preaching did not cease to teach the people that the ceremonies of Moses lawe were abrogated as is euident Act. 21.21 S. Paul was so knowne to teach the people that they were no longer to keepe the custome of Moses lawe and further after that the Apostles had made a decree of these things that they should onely abstaine from strangled and blood Act. 15. yet S. Paul circumcised Timothie Act. 16. and he was shorne as a votarie Act. 21. 2. Lyranus otherwise answeareth that vntill the passion of Christ all the ceremonies of Moses lawe were in force but post publicationem Evangelij after the publication of the Gospell the obseruation of them was mortifera damnable for that was as it were to denie Christ to be come but tempore intermedio in the time betweene these it was lawfull to obserue them This is verie true that for a time the Apostles suffered the Iewes converted to the faith to retaine some ceremonies of the lawe least they might at the first haue beene discouraged from receiuing the Gospell and Augustine doth fitly resemble the abrogating of the ceremonies vnto the decent buriall of humane bodies which are not as soone as they are dead cast forth as stinking carions but are brought decently to the sepulchre so the ceremonies which were instituted of God were not at once to be cast off as though there were no difference betweene them and humane inventions but they must haue a time after their death as it were in Christs death to be brought honourably to the grave but whosoeuer should reviue them afterward he should not be pius deductor funeris sed impius sepultura violator a devout solemnizer of the funerall but a prophane raker in the graue and violater of the sepulture 3. Adde hereunto that to the Galatians the Apostle doth not so much reprooue them for obseruing those ceremonies as that they did keepe them opinione necessitatis with an opinion of necessitie neither was S. Peter reprooued of S. Paul simply for the forbearing of some meates which he might haue done to avoide scandall and offence but because by his example he constrained the Gentiles to doe the like and in that place the Apostle speaketh not of abstinencie but of the precept of abstinencie
Martyr 2. The other opinion is which I hold more probable that Saint Paul was hindred of his purpose and did not visite Spaine at all 1. Hierome speaketh hereof vncertainely as writing against Helvidius he saith that it cannot be concluded that Paul went into Spaine because he so purposed cum varijs de causis impederi potuerit seeing he might by diuerse causes and meanes be hindered and vpon the 3. to the Ephesians he saith Paulus vel ad Hispanias perrexit vel ire disposuit Paul either went into Spaine or disposed to goe 2. But Gelasius as he is cited by Gratian Caus. 22. qu. 2. c. 5. affirmeth directly that Paul performed not what he promised concerning his going into Spaine Cum ad Hispaniam se promisisset iturum dispositione divina maioribus occupatus ex causis implere non potuit quod promisit when he had promised to goe into Spaine beeing occupied in greater assures God so disposing he would not fulfill what he promised Pererius disput 2. num 5. would thus shift off Gelasius authoritie 1. that he saith not that Paul neuer went into Spaine but not at that time when he purposed 2. and this was no decree belonging to the faith but onely the sentence of the Pope tanquam particularis Doctoris as of some particular Doctor Contra. 1. He saith simply that Paul did not performe what he had promised he speaketh not of any time neither did Saint Paul set any time when he would come 2. the sentence of one of their Popes though but as a priuate and particular Doctor howsoeuer we doe esteeme it in their valuation should counteruaile the priuate opinion of any Doctor beside but this was not the Popes priuate sentence it is inserted into the decrees and so a rule of their Canon law 3. and not onely Gelasius but Innocentius ad Decentium an other of their Popes is in the same mind neminem excepto Petro Hispanos c. that no man except Peter onely did teach Spaine or other Provinces of the West Pererius answeareth that Paul did not teach in Spaine in such sort as that by him the nation was conuerted Churches planted Pastors and Bishops constituted for in those things they receiued direction from Peter at Rome neither did S. Paul continue there so long a time to doe these things beeing either called thence by other waightie affaires of the Church or not finding that successe of his labours which he expected he would not spend his labour in vaine yet this followeth not but that Paul was in Spaine though he continued not there so long for the foresaid purposes Contra. 1. Although we produce not this testimonie as approouing euery part thereof for it is more vnlike that Peter preached in Spaine beeing the Apostle of the circumcision then Paul to whome the Apostleship ouer the vncircumcision was committed yet it may serue to prooue that which is intended that Paul is denied to haue beene in Spaine 2. Innocentius words are generall that none beside Peter taught in Spaine if Paul taught not there he was not there for he went if at all to teach 3. and how is it like that S. Paul should preach there and none converted no Church planted no Pastors elected would S. Paul take so long a iourney to the vtmost coasts of the West to doe nothing and is it like that he going thither by the direction of the Spirit went to no purpose And how commeth it to passe that their best Catholikes beeing now in Spaine he will lay such an imputation vpon it that it was then worse then all other countries and more hardly subdued to the faith these are but weake and simple coniectures Other answers Pererius hath beside but not worth the while to answer specially in a matter of no greater moment 4. Beside these testimonies Thomas Aquine in his commentarie here is of the same minde that Paul was not in Spaine and Dominicus Sotus himselfe a Spaniard yet thinketh that Paul preached not there though it had beene a great honour to that nation to haue so noble a founder yet he is not partiall in seeking the credit of his countrey by a thing vnlikely and improbable Sotus reasons I confesse are but weake that S. Paul was two yeares in custodie at Rome and then he could not be permitted to visit Spaine and in the ende of those two yeares he was put to death vnder Nero and because no mention is made of S. Pauls iourney into Spaine in the Acts of the Apostles for after those two yeares of imprisonment at Rome Paul was set at libertie and suffered not till 8. yeares after in the 14. yeare of Nero. Neither doth S. Luke set downe all the Acts of S. Paul but onely such as he did before he was brought to Rome vpon his appeale 5. Now other probable coniectures shall be alleadged of this opinion that S. Paul neuer was in Spaine 1. I omit Pet. Martyrs reason that S. Paul hoped also se vinculis liberandum c. that he should be deliuered from his bonds at Rome but it did not so fall out and beeing there in captiuitie still he could not visit Spaine for it is more probable that S. Paul was deliuered out of his first captiuitie at Rome as hath beene shewed before qu. 12. generall 2. Gualters coniecture also hath no great certentie toties praepeditus praeter animi voluntatem c. that Paul beeing so often hindred beside his will and purpose might be hindred now also 3. I rather thus reason with M. Calvin the best euidence for S. Pauls beeing in Spaine is out of this place for els where I find no such purpose of the Apostle but this text prooueth it not de spe enim tantum loquitur for he speaketh onely of his hope wherein he might be deceiued as other faithfull men often are in their hopes But the best reason against S. Pauls going into Spaine is this if euer he were there then either at his first comming to Rome or at his second but in neither if in his first then either at his arriuall there after he had seene and visited the brethren but that was not for he was kept two yeares in bonds vnder the custodie of a souldier Act. 28. or after the two years expired when he was set at libertie but then he returned to visit the East Churches as he signified he would in diuers of his Epistles written from Rome and it is not like that he went first into Spaine and then backe againe into Grecia and Asia for these are East from Rome Spaine lieth toward the West Neither at his second comming to Rome is it like he went into Spaine for then he was againe apprehended by Nero and there suffered his glorious martyrdome it is very probable that in his second comming to Rome he intended to fulfill this his promise and to be accompanied by the brethren of Rome thitherward but that he was intercepted at Rome and so the Lord
Whether a Iudge be bound herein to be like vnto God to iudge according to the truth which he knoweth 5. qu. Of the reasons why the Lord vseth patience and forbearance towards sinners 6. qu. Whether the leading of men to repentance by Gods long suffrance argueth that they are not reprobate 7. qu. How the bountifulnes of God in leading men to repentance and the reuelation of his wrath spoken of ch 1.18 may stand together 8. qu. How God is said to harden the heart seeing the wicked doe harden their owne hearts 9. qu. Whether hardnes of heart and finall impenitencie be a speciall kind of sinne 10. qu. Whether it stand with Gods iustice to punish twice for the same sinnes 11. qu. Whether euery one shall be rewarded according to his works 12. qu. How it standeth with Gods goodnes to punish euill with euill 13. qu. Of the true reading of the 7. vers 14. qu. What the Apostle meaneth by patience of good works 15. qu. What glorie honour and immortalitie the Apostle speaketh of v. 7. 16. qu. How it standeth with Gods iustice to punish eternally sinne temporally committed 17. qu. How eternall life is to be sought 18. qu. Whome the Apostle meaneth by contentious and such as disobey the truth 19. qu. Of the punishment due vnto the wicked indignation wrath tribulation anguish c. v. 8. 20. qu. Why the Iewe is set before the Grecian 21. qu. What Iewes and Gentiles the Apostle here meaneth 22. qu. Of the diuers acception of the word person v. 11. 23. qu. How God is said not to accept the persons of men 24. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 22. As many as haue sinned without the law shall perish without the Law 25. qu. Of the occasion of these words v. 13. The hearers of the Law are not righteous before God but the doers shall be iustified 26. qu. Of the meaning of these words Not the hearers of the Law c. but the doers shall be iustified v. 13. 27. qu. How the Gentiles which had not the Law did by nature the things contained in the Law 28. qu. How any thing can be said to be written in the heart by nature seeing the mind is commonly held to be as a bare and naked table 29. qu. Of the Law of nature what it is 30. qu. What precepts the law of nature containeth and prescribeth 31. qu. What the law of nature was before and after mans fall and wherein they differ 32. qu. Whether the light of nature though much obscured can altogether be blotted out of the mind of man 33. qu. Whether ignorance of the law of nature in man doth make any way excusable 34. qu. That the light of nature is not sufficient of it selfe to direct a man to bring forth any vertuous act without the grace of Christ. 35. qu. Of the testimonie of the conscience the accusing or excusing of the thoughts 36. qu. Why the Apostle maketh mention of the day of iudgement v. 16. 37. qu. Why it is called the day and of the application of other words v. 16. 38. qu. Whence the Iewes were so called v. 17. Behold thou art called a Iewe. 39. qu. Of the priuiledges of the Iewes here recited by the Apostle 40. qu. How the Iewes are said to commit sasacriledge v. 22. 41. qu. How the name of God was blasphemed by the Iewes and whether this testimonie be rightly alleadged by the Apostle 42. qu. In what sense the Apostle saith Circumcision is profitable v. 25. 43. qu. How circumcision was availeable for infants 44. qu. What vncircumcised the Apostle here speaketh of whether such of the Gentiles as were conuerted to the faith and what keeping of the lawe he meaneth 45. qu. Of the explanation of certaine terms here vsed by the Apostle and of the letter and spirit 46. qu. Of two kinds of Iewes and two kinds of circumcision v. 28. Questions vpon the third Chapter 1. qu. Of the priviledges of the Iewes and of their preheminence before the Gentiles 2. qu. How mens vnbeleefe cannot make the faith of God without effect 3. qu. How God is said to be true 4. qu. How euery man is said to be a liar 5. qu. Whether euery man can be said to be a liar 6. qu. How the Prophet Dauid is to be vnderstood saying euery man is a liar Psal. 116.11 7. qu. Of the occasion of these words cited our of the 51. Psalme that thou mightest be iustified c. against thee onely haue I sinned 8. qu. Of the diuers acceptions of this word iustified 9. qu. Of the meaning of these words That thou mightest be iustified in thy words and ouercome when thou iudgest 10. qu. Whether a man may doe euill and commit sinne to that end to set forth Gods iustice 11. qu. Of the meaning of the 5 6 7 8 verses 12. qu. Whether none euill is to be done at all that good may come thereof 13. qu. Whether God doe not euill that good may come thereof in reprobating the vessels of wrath to shew his power 14. qu. In what sense the Apostle denieth the Iewes to be more excellent then the Gentiles v. 9. 15. qu. Of the meaning of certaine phrases which the Apostle vseth v. 9. We haue alreadie prooued and Vnder sinne 16. qu. Whence the Apostle alleadgeth those testimonies v. 10. to 18. 17. qu. Of the matter and order obserued by the Apostle in citing those testimonies 18. qu. How none are said to be iust seeing Noah and other holy men are reported to haue bin iust in their time 19. qu. Of the particular explication of the sinnes wherewith the Apostle here chargeth both Iewes and Gentiles 20. qu. v. 19. Whatsoeuer the Law saith what is here vnderstood by the Law and how diuersly this word is taken 21. qu. It saith to them which are vnder the Law who are here vnderstood to be vnder the law 23. qu. How no flesh is iustified by the works of the law v. 20. 24. qu. How the Apostle here denieth iustification by works seeing he said before c. 2. v. 13. that the doers of the Law are iustified 25. qu. How by the Law came the knowledge of sinne 26. qu. Of the meaning of these words The righteousnesse of God is made manifest without the law 27. qu. How the righteousnes of faith had witnes of the Law and Prophets 28. qu. Of these words v. 22. The righteousnes of God by the faith of Iesus Christ vnto all and vpon all 29. qu. What it is to be depriued of the glorie of God v. 23. 30. qu. Of iustification freely by grace v. 24. 31. qu. How God is said to haue purposed or set forth Christ to be our reconciliation 32. qu. How we are said to be iustified freely seeing faith is required which is an act in the beleeuer 33. qu. v. 25. To declare his iustice or righteousnes what iustice the Apostle vnderstandeth here 34. qu. What is meant by sinnes that are past v. 25. 35.
rather inclineth to thinke that the Apostle taketh vpon him the person of a man regenerate And Origen seemeth to haue beene of this minde that sometime the Apostle speaketh in his owne person as I thanke God through Iesus Christ and sometime in the person of a weake man and young beginner as in the rest 3. Some take all this discourse of the Apostle neither to touch the regenerate or vnregenerate in the particular but the nature of mankind in generall as Hierome noteth that the Apostle saide not O wretched sinner but O wretched man vt totam complecteretur naturam omnium hominum non tantum peccatorum c. that he might comprehend the nature of all men and not onely of sinners lib. 2. cont Pelag. so also Erasmus humani generis in se personam recipit c. he taketh vpon him the person of mankind wherein is both the Gentile without the law the carnall Iew vnder the law and the spirituall man made free by grace Annot. in hunc locum Now of all these opinions which are tenne in all we embrace the fourth of the second fort and this diuersitie of opinion may be reduced to this point whether the Apostle speake in his owne person of a man regenerate or in an assumed person of a man vnregenerate the other particular differences haue beene dispersedly touched before Now then the arguments shall be produced with their answers which are vrged on both sides and first for the negative that the Apostle giueth not instance here of a man regenerate and spirituall but carnall and vnregenerate Argum. 1. Origen vrgeth these reasons first the righteous man is not said to be carnall 2. Cor. 10.3 We doe not marrie after the flesh But the Apostle here saith v. 14. I am carnall 2. Of the righteous the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 6.20 ye are bought for a price but here the Apostle saith v. 14. I am sold vnder sinne 3. Of the righteous it is said c. 8.9 the spirit of God dwelleth in you but here the Apostle confesseth that no good thing dwelleth in him 4. Origen also presseth these words v. â—8 in my flesh I serue the lawe of sinne if the Apostle should speake thus of himselfe desparationem mihi videtur incutere it were able to strike despaire vnto vs that there is no man who doth not serue sinne in the flesh 5. The regenerate such as Paul was doe not onely will that which is good but performe it also but this man cannot doe that he would of whom the Apostle speaketh ver 15. Tolet. 6. The righteous and iust man cannot be said to be captiued vnto sinne as the Apostle saith of that man whose person he beareth v. 23. Cassianus collat 22. in fine 7. The Apostle speaking of himselfe and of others which are regenerate said before v. 5.6 When we were in the flesh c. the motions of sinnes c. had force in our members c. but now we are deliuered from the law c. But here the Apostle speaketh of a man that is captiued vnto the motions of the flesh so that the Apostle if he should speake here of a regenerate man would contradict himselfe 8. The scope of the Apostle is to shewe the invaliditie of the lawe that it cannot take away sinne but sinne rather is encreased thereby by reason of the weakenes of mans nature it is therefore more agreeable to the Apostles intent to giue instance of a carnall man in whom sinne yet raigneth then of a regenerate man that by grace is brought to yeeld obedience to the law Tolet. c. 10. in tractat 9. Hierome and before him Origen thus shewe that the Apostle here assumeth the person of an other like as Daniel beeing a iust man yet prayeth in the person of sinners saying c. 9. we haue sinned we haue done wickedly Hierome epist. 151. ad Algasiam The former arguments answeared 1. The regenerate simply are not called carnall but secundum quid after a sort they are carnall in respect of the vnregenerate part as the Apostle speaking to the Corinthians that were beleeuers and iustified sanctified 1. Cor. 6.11 yet calleth them carnall in regard of the sects and diuisions among them 1. Cor. 3.1 And one is said to be carnall two wayes either he which is altogether obedient to the flesh and fleshly lusts or he that doth not yeeld himselfe vnto them but striueth against them and yet against his will feeleth the violent motions thereof so the Apostle confesseth that though he warre not after the flesh yeâ— he walketh after the flesh 2. Cor. 10.3 2. The righteous is bought for a price and redeemed from his sinnes and yet in respect of his vnregenerate part the corruption of nature and reliques of sinne remaining he is said to be sold vnder sinne not simply as the vnregenerate is giuen ouer wholly but in part only 3. In the faithfull as they are regenerate the spirit of God dwelleth but in their vnregenerate part sinne inhabiteth there is no inconuenience to graunt that two diuerse inhabitants may dwell in one and the same house in two diuerse parts for the Apostle speaking of the regenerate saith Galat. 5.17 The spirit lusteth against the flesh and the flesh against the spirit and these are contrarie one to the other they which feele not this fight and combate are either Angelicall as the Saints in heauen or they haue not yet receiued the spirit at all as they which are carnall 4. There are two kinds of seruices to sinne the one is a willing seruice such as is in the vnregenerate the other vnwilling and in a manner forced as in the regenerate 5. The vnregenerate haue no will at all to doe good for the wisedome of the flesh is not subiect to the Lawe of God neither can be Rom. 8.7 the regenerate receiue grace to will and sometime to performe though not as they would they are therefore regenerate though not perfectly as none are in this life 6. There are two kinds of captiuitie the one when one is wholly captiued vnder the bondage of his owne voluntarie sinne the other is a forced captiuitie vnder the bondage of originall sinne this is in the righteous not the other 7. The Apostle is not contrarie to himselfe for it is one thing to obey the lusts of the flesh as the vnregenerate and carnall an other to feele the motions of the flesh and to striue against them as in the regenerate 8. The Apostles intent and meaning is to shewe that the law in it selfe is good and iust and that it commeth by reason of mans owne infirmitie that it is otherwise to him and thereupon the Apostle to set forth the perfection of the lawe giueth instance in the regenerate that they are not able to keepe the law much lesse the vnregenerate so that it is more agreeable to the scope and purpose of the Apostle to speake of a man regenerate then of one vnregenerate 9. Euen Daniel though