existimaret least any should thinke that he did glorie plus quam veritas facti exigebat more then the truth of the thing required the Apostle sheweth that what he glorieth in was truely effected Tolet but the force lieth not in the word wrought as shall be shewed afterâ—ard 4. Origen placeth the force in this word by me as it hath relation vnto others quae loquor non sunt alieni operis verba what I speake are not the reports of other mens labours and this sense Erasmus approoueth as best agreeable to that which followeth v. 20. that he did not build vpon an others foundation but still this fitteth not the Apostles purpose here who intendeth onely to shew how he had wherein to glorie in Christ not comparing himselfe to others 5. Chrysostome in an other sense interpreteth these words by me of his owne workes omnia Dei esse ostendit nihil suijpsius he sheweth that all was of God and nothing of himselfe so Pet. Martyr nolle de 〈◊〉 rebus gloriari he will not boast of his owne doings nequid de seipso dicere ausit that he dare not speake any thing of himselfe whereof Christ was not author 6. Theophylact putteth both these last senses together non insolens praedico quod ipse non gesserim quin potius nil ipse confeci I doe not insolently publish that which I haue not done my selfe or rather it is not I that haue done it but God vsing me as the instrument 7. As this last sense is not much to be misliked yet the greatest emphasis lieth in Christ what Christ hath not wrought by me for the Apostles purpose is not so much to shewe by what instrument Christ wrought as by him not by others by him assisted by grace not working of himselfe as who it was that wrought all things in him namely Christ. So then as in the former verse he shewed in whom he gloried namely in Christ and in what or for what things belonging to God so now he proceedeth to prooue both these first who it was that wrought in him Christ and then what things he wrought by him as it followeth in the next verse Pareus Quest. 24. Of the things which Christ wrought by S. Paul as signes wonders how they differ v. 19. In word and deede c. These words must not be ioyned with the obedience of the Gentiles but with the former words which Christ hath not wrought by me c. in word and deede 1. the latter Chrysostome vnderstandeth of S. Pauls conuersation that both by his doctrine and life he converted the Gentiles 2. the most by deeds vnderstand his miracles as Origen opere signorum by the worke of signes Haymo factis miraculorum by the deeds of miracles so also Lyranus Tolet and of our writers Martyr Osiander Hyperius with others but the Apostle speaketh of signes and wonders afterward 3. Gualter vnderstandeth by deed indefessam industriam assiduos labores his neuer wearied industrie his continuall labours his trauailes imprisonment and other afflictions for the preaching of the Gospel 4. Pareus better comprehendeth both as by word are vnderstood not onely his publike preachings but his priuate exhortations also and his epistles and writings so by the deede or fact both are signified his great labours and trauails as also his example of godly life Pet. Martyr refuseth this sense because these labours were common to the Apostle with others so was also his preaching but these notwithstanding were more excellent in the Apostles then in others and therefore are fitly alleadged by him as arguments of his Apostleship v. 19. With the power of signes and wonders c. 1. Some take signes to be the generall word for all these things here rehearsed by the Apostle as the first signe they make to be his excellent gift of teaching the second the holy actions of his life the third his miracles the fourth the power of the holy Ghost Hyperius but the Apostle ioyning signes and wonders together doth euidently distinguish them from word and deed before mentioned 2. Origen thus distinguisheth signes and wonders the signes are wherein beside some wondrous thing done aliquid futuurm ostenditur somewhat to come is signified but prodigia wonders wherein mirabile tantum aliquid onely some wondrous thing is shewed but he confesseth that alwayes this distinction holdeth not and that in Scripture sometime oâ—â— is taken for an other 3. Haymo somewhat differeth here from Origen a signe he thinketh to containe both quiddam mirabile quiddam futuri some strange thing and it sheweth also somewhat to come but a wonder he taketh to be that wherein onely something is shewed that is to come and therefore he thinketh they are called prodigia as if one should say porrodigia or porrodicentia telling things a farre off Hugo Cardinal giueth an other notation of the word as if it should be said procul à digito farre off from the finger such a thing as was neuer seene 4. Lyranus gloss interlin Gorrhan vnderstand signes to be minima miracula the lesse miracles and wonders to be maiora the greater and so to differ only in degree 5. Tolet taketh those to be signes which though they are supernaturally done yet may be done also in some sort by naturall meanes as the healing of sickenesses and infirmities but wonders doe altogether exceede the power and worke of nature as is the raising of the dead the healing of them that are borne blind so also Faius 6. But howsoeuer there may be some difference in other places betweene signes and wonders yet here they are taken for one and the same namely the great works which were done by the Apostles as Haymo confesseth for all the miracles which the Apostles wrought were signes quibus veritas praedicationis probabatur whereby the truth of their preaching was confirmed Martyr they were also wonders for the strangenes of the â—orke which drewe men into admiration By the power of the spirit of God c. 1. which is added to shewe a difference between true and false miracles which as they differ in the end the one beeing to confirme the truth the other to deceiue so they haue diuerse beginnings for the true miracles are wrought by the spirit of God the false by the working of Sathan 2. Thess. 2.9 2. Origen also obserueth an excellencie betweene the miracles of S. Paul and the other Apostles who converted many nations vnto God and the miracles of Moses and Aaron who did convert thereby verie few of the Egyptians 3. and whereas these things are said here to be done by the power of the spirit which elswhere are ascribed vnto God Heb. 2.4 God bearing witnes by signes and Mark 16.17 in my name saith Christ they shall cast out deuils therein manifestly is prooued the diuinitie of Christ and the holy Ghost and the vnitie of essence of the Blessed Trinitie 4. the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 power vertue is taken here two waies
to shew the difference between the originall of the flesh which was from Abraham and of the soule from God but this distinction is nothing pertinent to the thing in question 4. Therefore by according to the flesh the Apostle rather vnderstandeth the works of the law so Theodoret the ordin glosse and the reason hereof is this because the Apostle doth not simply denie vnto Abraham all kind of righteousnes but that which is by works Beza so Phil. 3.3.9 the righteousnes in the flesh of the law are taken for the same with the Apostle Gryn But in this sense great aduantage may seeme to be giuen vnto the Popish sophisters who thinke that onely Abrahams works done before he had faith while he was yet in the flesh are excluded from iustification not those which came after vpon the which reason Pareus seemeth to incline to the other exposition to ioyne according to the flesh with Abraham our father But we neede not for this reason to refuse the other exposition for euen the workes which proceede from faith if any merit or worthines be reposed in them may be said to be after the flesh for the Apostle opposeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by fauour and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by debt v. 4. that then which is by debt and merit of the worke is according to the flesh and is opposite to fauour and grace Quest. 3. Of the meaning of the 2. verse v. 2. If Abraham were iustified by workes he hath wherein to reioyce 1. Origen Ambrose Chrysostome doe thus frame the argument if Abraham were iustified by workes he had no glorie with God but he had true glorie with God therefore he was not iustified by workes so also Faius collecteth the argument assuming affirmatiuely but the assumption is put negatiuely with the Apostle but not with God so that thus rather the argument holdeth if Abraham were iustified by workes he hath wherein to glorie with God he hath somewhat to glorie in as beeing iustified by his workes but he had not wherein to glorie with God Ergo thus Beza Pareus 2. Gorrhan maketh all this verse the proposition If Abraham were iustified by workes he hath wherein to glorie but not with God but such glorie but not with God Abraham had not for if it be vnderstood of true glorie in deed such glorie none can haue but from God if false glorie among men Abraham would no such glorie But in this collection the Apostle should denie that Abrahams workes had no praise or glorie at all among men whereas the Apostle seemeth to graunt so much that his workes might be praise worthie among men but before God they could not iustifie him 3. Chrysostome hath here a distinction of glorying one is by workes which a man cannot haue with God an other is by faith which is before God and Pet. Martyr approoueth this distinction and thinketh that by the glorie of God c. 3.23 are depriued of the glorie of God the Apostle meaneth our iustification by faith wherein the glorie of God sheweth it selfe but an other word is vsed there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth glorie here the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 glorying or reioycing and indeede before God we cannot glorie either of works or faith for he is said to glorie with God that can bring any thing to God of his owne now seeing faith also is a gift of God we cannot glorie in it as the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 4.7 why gloriest or boastest thou as though thou hadst not receiued it But whereas the Apostle saith he that glorieth let him glorie in the Lord he speaketh not of any glorying of any gift which any man hath but of the meere grace of God and the meaning is let him giue all glorie vnto God confessing that he hath nothing of himselfe 4. Now whereas the Apostle saith he hath wherein to glorie Oecumenius vnderstandeth this of glorying in himselfe but so would not Abraham glorie at all among men therefore by glorying here is vnderstood nothing els but the praise and commendation of men his workes might cum honor abilem reddere make him honourable with men but not with God Lyran. Tolet here distinguisheth betweene the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here vsed which signifieth praise and glorie and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before expressed c. 20.23 which signifieth glorying boasting annot 3. but this distinction to be perpetuall he sheweth not Quest. 4. How the Apostle alleadgeth that testimonie concerning the imputation of Abrahams faith for righteousnesse v. 4. 1. The Apostle readeth in the passiue it was imputed whereas Gen. 15.16 whence this testimonie is cited it is put in the actiue vaiaâ—h shebeha and he imputed it 1. the reason hereof Tolet. annot 5. thinketh to be that the Septuagint and the Hebrewes did read without prickes and then the word might be taken either actiuely or passiuely but this is no found opinion to thinke that the Hebrew pricks came in so late for so there should be great vncertentie of the Scripture and further set the pricks aside yet the word is not expressed with the same letters when it is actiuely and passiuely put for Gen. 15.6 the word is as before it is set downe but Psal. 106.31 where it is put passiuely the word is techasheb it was imputed the letters are diuers and further in this place Gen. 15.6 there is an affix of the feminine gender which sheweth a difference in the verie letters of the word beside the pricks 2. some thinke that the Apostle writing by the same spirit which Moses did by his Apostolike authoritie did so cite this Scripture Faius but this would haue giuen great offence vnto the Iewes and converted Gentiles if the Apostles should haue cited the Scriptures otherwise then they were found in the old Testament 3. Therefore it was more safely affirmed that the Apostle followeth the Septuagint which was the receiued translation among the Gentiles Mar. specially seeing they keepe the sense of the place and the rather because this reading in the passiue is warranted by an other Scripture Psal. 106.31 where it is read in the passiue and it was imputed vnto him 2. An other difference in this reading is that the Apostle beside that he changeth the voice turning the actiue into the passiue doth not interpret the Hebrew affix he imputed 〈◊〉 that is Abrahams faith God imputed for so the word cenunah faith beeing vnderstood after the manner of the Hebrewes in the verbal word heemin he beleeued answereth vnto the affix ha of the feminine gender but this the Apostle afterward euidently supplieth v. 9. that faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousnes 3. A third difference there is that in the Hebrew text there is no preposition set before the word tzedekah iustice as here the Apostle translateth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for righteousnes but there Moses saith he imputed it vnto him for righteousnes but this doubt is easily remooued for Psal.
nations at Rome in so much that Iuvenal calleth it Graecam vrbem a Greeke citie because of the abundance of strangers there Erasmus 2. Beloued of God 1. because God loued vs before any merits of ours gloss ordinar 2. there is a twofold loue of God vna predestinationis one of predestination as it is said Iacob haue I loued Esau haue I hated alia presentis iustificationis another of present iustification as it is also said in the Prouerbs c. 8.17 I loue them that loue me of the former the Apostle speaketh in this place Hugo Cardin. delectis per praedestinationem beloued in Gods predestination Gorrham 3. herein Gods loue is vnlike vnto mans for man loueth vpon some cause or desert going before but God loued vs without any desert of ours Tolet so then the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beloued is here taken passiuely not actiuely not for the louers of God but for them which are beloued of God Aretius 3. Called Saints 1. Chrysostome here noteth that thrice S. Paul hath vsed this word called of himselfe v. 1. and tâ—ice of the Romanes v. 6.7 which he doth not superfluously but volent illis beneficij admouere willing to put theÌ„ in mind of the benefit that they should ascribe all to the calling of God and that S. Paul beeing called writeth to those that are called he prepareth them to heare him seeing he was ab eodem vocatus called by the same by whom they were called Aretius 2. they are called Saints that is called â—â— sint sancti to be Saints Tolet. and hereby the Apostle maketh a difference betweene their former state wherein they liued which was vnholy and impure and the condition to the which they were now called to be holy Aretius and hereby is taken away the difference betweene the Iewes and the Gentiles that the Iewes should not exalt themselues aâ— the onely holy people but the Gentiles also were called to the same glorious condition of holinesse Erasm. here the name of Saints non perfectionem denotat doth not note a perfection but signifieth him which was consecrate vnto God Gualter he is counted holy qui affectu tenet sanctitatem which retaineth holinesse in his affection though he haue some imperfections And though there might be some hypocrites and carnall professors among them yet respicit ad meliorem parâ—em he hath respect to the better part of the Church Aretius Quest. 22. What the Apostle vnderstandeth by grace and peace ver 7. In these words is contained the salutation it selfe wherein two things are expressed 1. what the Apostle wisheth vnto them and from whom 1. Grace and peace 1. Origen here noteth that this benediction of the Apostle was nothing inferiour vnto those blessings pronounced by the Patriarkes as the blessing of Noah vpon Sem and Iapheth and Melchisedekes benediction vpon Abraham because Paul also blessed by the spirit as he saith 1. Cor. 7.40 I thinke that I also haue the spirit of God But it is not vsuall in the old Testament to vse this blessing of grace and the reason may be this because the lawe was giuen by Moses but grace and truth came by Iesus Christ Ioh. 1.17 Hyperius 2. By grace Ambrose vnderstandeth remission of sinnes by peace reconcillation with God Lyranus gracia in praesenti gloria in futuro grace in this life present and glorie in the next Hugo gratias agant Deo pacem habeant cum proximo that they should giue thanks to God and haue peace with their neighbours Tolet by grace vnderstandeth donum animae c. a gift of the minde whereby a man is made acceptable vnto God but there is no gift conferred vpon the soule that can make it acceptable vnto God but the grace and fauour of God in Christ therefore by grace rather is signified the grace and fauour of God whereupon followeth the collation of all other graces beside and by peace prosperous successe but especially the tranquilitie of minde which is the speciall fruite of iustification by faith Rom. 5.1 Gryneus and so this benediction answeareth to the salutation of the Angels Luk. 2.14 Peace in earth toward men good will for the mercie and gracious fauour of God is the fountaine of our peace 2. From God the Father and the Lord Iesus Christ. 1. the Greeke construction is doubtfull whether we vnderstand thus the Father of vs and of our Lord Iesus Christ or referre the last clause to the first preposition and from the Lord Iesus Christ whereupon Fransiscus Dauid a Samosetian heretike taketh aduantage that Paul doth not wish grace from Iesus Christ but from the father onely But this cauill is easily remooued for Ioh. 2.2 the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from is repeated from God the father and from our Lord Iesus Christ and so must it be taken here Pareus 2. Some distinguish these two thus that grace is wished from God the father as the author of grace and peace from Iesus Christ who is our reconciler Aretius But Haymo misliketh that and would haue this grace and peace indifferently to be conferred and equally by God the father and the Lord Iesus 3. Tertullian giueth this reason why the title of God is giuen vnto the father of Lord vnto Christ least the Gentiles might hereby haue taken occasion to thinke of the pluralitie of gods but when the Apostle speaketh of Christ alone he saith who is God ouer all blessed for euer Rom. 9.5 Tertullian aduers. Praxeam But the reason rather is this why Christ is called Lord because the father hath committed vnto him all authoritie for he is called the Lord which hath plenarie power and authoritie and yet the father is so called God as that the Sonne is not excluded and the Son is also Lord as that the father be also included and this name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lord answereth to the Hebrewe Iehouah which sheweth that Christ is verie God with his father Aretius 4. but further the question is mooued why there is no mention here made of the holy Ghost Haymo answereth that intelligitur in donis suis he is vnderstood in his gifts because grace and peace are also the gifts of the holy Ghost so also gloss ordinar But the better answer is that seeing these graces doe equally flowe from the whole Trinitie the Apostle by naming the father and the Sonne includeth also the holy Ghost and sometime he expresseth them all as 2. Cor. 13.13 The grace of our Lord Iesus Christ and the loue of God and the communion of the holy Ghost be with you all Quest. 23. Of Pauls giuing of thankes for the faith of the Romanes which was published abroad v. 8. 1. In this thanksgiuing fowre things are obserued to whom he giueth thankes to God by whome thorough Christ for whom for you all and for what because their faith was published through the world And this wise beginning S. Paul maketh thus insinuating himselfe that his admonition afterward might seeme to
the Syrian translatour placeth them so by nature must be ioyned to vncircumcision not to keeping the lawe and it is a description of the Gentiles which haue vncircumcision by nature Pareus 2. Obiect The words of the Apostle are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consummans as the Latine interpreter readeth perfecting the law which phrase Origen thus distinguisheth from the former word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to keepe the lawe which the Apostle vseth v. 26. he that liueth according to the letter of the lawe is said to keepe it but he that keepeth it according to the spirituall sense is said to perfect or accomplish it Contra. But Beza here well obserueth that both these are here taken for one that the perfect keeping of the lawe is not here opposed to the imperfect keeping but the keeping and obseruing of the lawe is set against the not hauing care to keepe it but to rest onely in the outward signe and ceremonie Quest. 44. Of the explanation of certaine termes here vsed by the Apostle and of the letter and the spirit 1. v. 26. Where the Apostle saith if vncircumcision keepe the lawe by a Metonimie he vnderstandeth the vncircumcised the signe is taken for the thing signified but afterward it is taken for the signe it selfe 2. His vncircumcision shall be counted for circumcision that is it shall be as no circumcision Chrysostome readeth it shall be turned into circumcision it shall be all one as if he were circumcised 3. By the ordinances of the lawe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some vnderstand the ceremonies and rites of the law But rather the morall duties of the lawe are thereby signified which the Gentiles performed hauing not the written lawe otherwise the rites and ceremonies of the lawe they could not obserue without the knowledge of the written lawe 4. Shall iudge thee To iudge is taken three wayes 1. Personally as it is said the Saints shall iudge the world 1. Cor. 6. shall personally stand against them in iudgement 2. actually as to iudge may be taken to accuse or testifie against as it is said v. 15. their thoughts accusing them 3. or by example as it is said the Ninevites and the Queene of the South shall iudge the Israelites so is it taken here the Gentiles going beyond the Iewes in example of life shall condemne them that is shewe them to be worthie of iudgement for their euill life Mart. Calvin Pareus 5. What is meant by the letter and spirit there are diuerse expositions 1. Sometime Augustine by the letter vnderstandeth the litterall sense of the lawe by the spirit the spirituall sense exposit in epist. ad Roman so also Origen he transgresseth the lawe qui spiritualem eius non tenet sensum who keepeth not the spirituall sense but euen the spirituall sense of the lawe if it were apprehended onely and the heart not thereby circumcised and reformed was in the Apostles sense but literall 2. some by the letter vnderstand legem scriptam the lawe written as separate from the grace of Christ as the Syrian interpreter readeth scripturam the Scripture which is so called because it was written in tables of stone gloss interlin 3. But it is better here more specially applyed to circumcision so that the letter and circumcision are here taken pro literali circumcisione for litterall circumcision Calvin Pareus that is the externall signe and ceremonie of circumcision onely according to the letter of the lawe which was made literalibus cultris with literall that is externall knifes Gorrhan and by the spirit is not vnderstood the soule as Tolet following Chrysostome but the efficacie of grace wrought in the soule by the spirit of God and so Augustine taketh it els where thus describing the circumcision of the heart quam facit non litera legis docent minans sed spiritus Dei sanans adiuvans which not the letter of the law teaching and threatning but the spirit of God worketh healing and helping lib. de spirit liter c. 8. so then there is no difference quoad rem in respect of the thing which is propounded betweene the spirit and the letter sed quoad animi affectum but in respect of the affection of the mind and the inward operation of the spirit Mart. for euen he that heareth the Gospell but beleeueth it not may be said to be a Gospeller according to the letter not after the spirit 6. By transgressing the lawe is meant the voluntarie breaking thereof not the fayling therein thorough ignorance or infirmitie Mart. as Origen noteth Paul himselfe did not alwaies keepe the lawe non tamen fuit praevaricator legis yet he was not a prevaricator or transgressor of the lawe 7. v. 28. He is not a Iewe which is a Iewe outward here must be vnderstood the word onely he was not a Iewe indeed that was onely so outwardly And in this sense the Apostle saith els where he was not sent to baptize that is onely Martyr Quest. 45. Of two kinds of Iewes and two kinds of circumcision v. 28. v. 28. He is not a Iewe which is one outwardly c. 1. The Apostle here maketh a double comparison both of the persons setting a circumcised Iewe not keeping the lawe against an vncircumcised Gentile keeping of the lawe and of the things betweene inward circumcision of the heart and outward in the flesh onely Mart. 2. And here there is a fowrefold antithesis or exposition 1. From the formes the one is within the other without in outward appearance onely 2. from the subiect one is in the heart the other in the flesh 3. from the efficient one is wrought by the spirit the other is in the letter it consisteth in literall and ceremoniall observations 4. from the ende the one hath praise of God the other is commended onely of men Gryneus 3. Hence the Apostle prooueth by three arguments that the spirituall circumcision is better then the carnall 1. That is best which is in secret and in truth then that which is openly and in shewe onely 2. and that which is wrought by the spirit is more excellent then that which is in the letter 3. and that hath the preheminence whose praise is of God 4. This distinction of spirituall and morall circumcision S. Paul hath out of Moses Deut. 10.16 Circumcise the foreskinne of your heart Deut. 30.6 The Lord thy God will circumcise thine heart which the Apostle further describeth thus Coloss. 2.11 In whom yee are also circumcised with circumcision made without hands by putting off the sinfull bodie of the flesh thorough the circumcision of Christ. And as there are two kinds of circumcision so there is also a twofold vncircumcision as Burgens noteth addition 1. out of the Prophet Ieremie c. 9.26 All the nations are vncircumcised and all the house of Israel are vncircumcised in the heart there is then an vncircumcision of the heart and an other of the flesh 5. Yet this must not be so vnderstood as though there were
two kinds of circumcisions rather then two parts of one and the same circumcision which are sometime ioyned together both the inward and outward as they were in Abraham sometime separate one from the other and this separation is of two sorts it is either salutaris healthfull or not for when the inward circumcision is without the outward it is profitable as in Noah but when the outward is and not the inward it is vnprofitable as in Iudas Iscariot 6. Origens obseruation seemeth here to be somewhat curious thus distinguishing the circumcision of the flesh that because there is some part of the flesh cut off and lost some part remaineth still the lost and cut off part saith he hath a resemblance of that flesh whereof it is said all flesh is grasse the other part which remaineth is a figure of that flesh whereof the Scripture speaketh all flesh shall see the saluation of God But thus Origen confoundeth the circumcision of the flesh and the spirit making them all one Further to shewe these two circumcisions of the heart and spirit he alleadgeth how the Israelites were circumcised againe by Iosuah who was a type of Christ that circumciseth the heart who were circumcised before by Moses in the desert wherein Origen is greatly deceiued for it is euident by the text Iosuah 5.5 that they which were circumcised by Iosuah had not beene circumcised before 4. Places of doctrine 1. Doct. v. 1. In that thou iudgest another thou condemnest thy selfe he which doth giue sentence vpon another for that wherein he is guilty therein is a iudge against himselfe so Iuda did iudge Thamar for her incontinencie beeing in greater fault himselfe and Dauid pronouncing sentence of death against him that had taken away his poore neighbours sheepe did by his owne mouth condemne himselfe Piscator see further addition 1. following 2. Doct. v. 11. There is no respect of persons with God c. In that God freely without respect vnto any workes electeth some vnto eternall life it is done without respect of persons for though God decree vnequall things vnto those that are in equall case for all by nature are the children of wrath yet it followeth not that God hath respect of persons for he doth it not either against any law for God is not tied vnto any lawe nor yet vpon any finiâ—ter cause either for feare for there is none greater than God to be feared of him or sauour for there are no merits or deserts which God respecteth in his election And when God commeth to giue the reward then he distributeth vnto euerie man according to their workes see further addit 3. following 3. Doct. v. 16. At the day when God shall iudge here the certaintie of the day of iudgement is expressed with the manner thereof 1. who shall iudge God 2. whom men and what not their open and manifest workes onely but their secret things 3. by whome in Iesus Christ in his humane shape 4. According to what rule namely the Gospell is be saith Ioh. 12. that his word shall iudge them Gualter 4. Doct. v. 21. Thou which teachest another c. the carnall Iewe though he did not himselfe as he taught yet was not his teaching and doctrine therefore to be refused so our Sauiour saith Matth. 23.3 Whatsoeuer they bid you obserue and doe but after their workes doe ye not Mart. 5. Doct. v. 25. Circumcision is profitable c. Baptisme succeedeth in the place of circumcision as the Apostle sheweth Coloss. 2.11 In whom ye are circumcised c. thorough the circumcision of Christ in that yee are bound in him thorough baptisme c. then like as infants were circumcised so are they now to be baptised but baptisme is not now tied vnto the eight day as it was then for by the libertie of the Gospell are we deliuered from the obseruation of the circumstances of the time and place 6. Doct. v. 28. Neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh as these were not two diuerse circumcisions but two acts of the one and same circumcision the internal and externall so there are two acts in one and the same baptisme there is the baptisme of the spirit and the baptisme of water which both are ioyned together in the lawfull vse they haue the baptisme of the spirit to whom the Sacrament is vpon vrgent necessitie denied but infidels vnbeleeuers and euill liuers haue onely the baptisme of water for he that beleeueth not shall be condemned Pareus 7. So likewise in the Eucharist there is an externall act of eating and an internall the vnworthie receiuers haue onely the latter the faithfull when they communicate haue both and in case the Sacrament be denied they may spiritually eat Christ without the Sacrament our Sauiour saith Ioh. 6.54 Whosoeuer eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternall life And though they doe spiritually eate Christ before they receiue the Sacrament for otherwise they would not desire it yet the Sacrament also must be celebrated for their further comfort and strengthening and the testifying of their faith Gryneus Certaine additions to the former doctrines Addit 1. Concerning the iudgement which a man giueth against himselfe which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thus much may further be obserued out of the 1. verse 1. What it is namely the testimonie of ones conscience of his owne guiltinesse before God 2. Whence it is partly by the prouidence of God which striketh into a mans conscience this sense of sinne partly by the force of the conscience it selfe conuincing one of sinne 3. Of whom it is namely of all men 4. It is necessarie and profitable to diuerse ends 1. to humble vs in respect of Gods iudgement for if our conscience condemne vs God can much more who is greater then our conscience 1. Ioh. 3.20 2. It is for our comfort working in vs bouldnesse if our hearts condemne vs not 1. Ioh. 3.21 3. it will make vs not to be too seuere in iudging of others our owne heart condemning vs. Addit 2. Out of the 5. v. concerning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the hardnesse of the heart we are to consider 1. What it is namely the contumacie and rebellion of the heart against the lawe of God 2. Whence it is originally by the corruption of mans nature Sathan concurreth as the efficient the occasion are the externall obiects and God by his secret iudgement yet most iust hath an ouerruling hand herein 3. the effect is the treasuring vp of the wrath of God 4. it is curable not by mans free will for it is not subiect to the lawe of God neither can be Rom. 8.8 but by the grace of Gods spirit as Dauid prayeth Psal. 51.12 Create in me a newe heart Addit 3. The accepting or respect of persons called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is when things equal are giuen to them which are vnequall or contrariwise things vnequall to them which are equall onely
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
not doe v. 3. The other condition and limitation that they must not walke after the flesh if they would haue Christ to profite them 1. he prooueth by this argument iustification and righteousnesse is not for them that cannot please God v. 8. the conclusion followeth that righteousnesse and iustification is not appointed for such v. 4. the assumption he prooueth by shewing the contrarie effects of the flesh and the spirit as 1. they sauour the things of the flesh v. 5. the wisedome of the flesh bringeth forth death v. 1. it is enmitie against God v. 7. but the spirit worketh the contrarie to all these 2. Then followeth an application of this generall doctrine to the comfort of the Romans that they are not in the flesh 1. from the efficient the spirit of God dwelleth in them v. 9. 2. from the coniunction they haue with Christs they are Christs which he sheweth by their present mortification v. 10. and the hope of the resurrection v. 10. 3. Then he inferreth a vehement exhortation that they should not walke after the flesh v. 12. 1. from the effects that would follow they should die set forth by the contrarie v. 14. which he prooueth by two effects the externall is their inuocation of God v. 15. the internall the testimonie of the spirit v. 16. 2. In the second part he exhorteth vnto the patient bearing of affliction by diuerse arguments 1. from the end the partaking of glorie after our sufferings v. 17. 2. from the impuritie of our afflictions and the reward v. 18. 3. from the lesse to greater the creature groneth and trauaileth and waiteth for deliuerance v. 19.20.21.22 much more we v. 23. 4. from the nature of hope which is not of things that are seene v. 24.25 5. from the effects wrought by the spirit by occasion of affliction which is prayer with sighes which are not in vaine the Lord heareth them v. 26.27 6. from other effects in generall they worke for the best v. 28. in particular they make vs conformable vnto Christ v. 29. which he sheweth by the first cause the purpose of God in the decree of predestination which vocation iustification glorification follow v. 30. 3. In the third part he sheweth the immutable state and condition of the elect 1. from the power of God v. 31. 2. from his beneficence who together with Christ giueth all good things v. 32. 3. from his mercie iustifying vs in Christ from all our sinnes v. 33.34 4. from the effects of faith in Christ which is victorie in all afflictions v. 37. and therefore they cannot separate vs from Christ v. 35. 5. frō the immutable loue of God in Christ which is so sure a bond as nothing can breake it as the Apostle sheweth by a particular induction v. 38.39 3. The questions and doubts discussed Quest. 1. Who are said to be in Christ. v. 1. There is no condemnation to those c. 1. P. Martyr here well obserueth the wisedome of the Apostle who before speaking of the humane infirmities and of the force of sinne in our members gaue instance in himselfe that no man though neuer so holy should be thought to be freed altogether from sinne in this life but now comming to set forth the priuiledge of those which are in Christ he makes it not his own particular case but inferreth a generall conclusion that there is no condemnation not onely to him but not to any that are in Christ Iesus And here the argument well followeth from the particular to the generall for like as that which is incident by nature to one man is common to another so the priuiledge of grace is common to all that are sanctified 2. to be in Christ Tolet interpreteth to haue the grace of regeneration whereby we are deliuered from the seruitude of sinne and so the Syrian interpreter seemeth to thinke who ioyneth the words thus together which walke not after the flesh in Christ but these are two diuerse effects to be graft into Christ which is by faith and not to walke after the flesh which is the fruits of faith per fidem facti sumus vnum in Christo we are by faith made one with Christ Beza insui per fidem graft in by faith 3. indeed vpon this coniunction with Christ followeth a materiall coniunction that as we are made one flesh with him so also one spirit he is not onely partaker with vs of the same nature but we doe receiue of his spirit that like as the braunch doth receiue not onely substance from the vine but sap and life as in matrimonie there is a coniunction not onely of bodies but euen of the affections so is it betweene Christ and his members but this is onely the materiall coniunction as Pet. Martyr calleth it the formall coniunction is by faith Quest. 2. What is meant by the law of the spirit of life 1. The law of the spirit of life 1. Chrysostome by the law of the spirit vnderstandeth the holy spirit whereby we are sanctified and this difference he maketh betweene the law of Moses and this law that is said to be spirituall because it was giuen by the spirit but this is said to be the law of the spirit quia spiritum suppeditat because it supplieth the spirit to those which receiue it So also Bellarmine vnderstandeth it of the spirit which is shed into our hearts enabling vs to keepe the law lib. 4. de iustificat likewise Thomas interpreteth it to be spiritus inhabitans the spirit that dwelleth in vs and sanctifieth vs so also Tolet annot 2. Pere And these make this grace of the spirit infused a cause of our spiritual deliuerance from sinne 2. Calvin also vnderstandeth the grace of the spirit which sanctifieth vs but this is added saith he not as a cause sed modum tradi quo solvimur à reatu but the way is shewed whereby we are freed from the guilt of sinne so also Hyperius Piscator vnderstandeth here the spirit of sanctification But seeing our sanctification is imperfect this were a weake ground for vs to stay vpon to assure vs that we are farre from condemnation 3. Beza neither taketh this for the law of the spirit nor for the law of faith but he vnderstandeth perfectam naturae nostrae in Christo sanctificationem the perfit sanctification of our nature in Christ whereby we are deliuered But this righteousnesse of Christ if it be not applied vnto vs by faith how can it deliuer vs. 4. Some by the law of the spirit of life doe interpret with Ambrose legem fides the law of faith and with Haymo gratiam sancti Euangeli the grace of the holy Gospel which teacheth faith Pareus Faius the doctrine of the Gospell is called the law of the spirit and life because it is the ministrie of the spirit and life the law was spirituall in as much as it prescribed and commanded spirituall obedience but was not the ministerie of the spirit and life but rather
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
afterward not before Pareus 3. And although men are so led by the spirit as that they followe his direction willingly yet they followe also necessarily this leading and moouing of the spirit is effectuall and cannot be resisted Melancth yet this taketh not away the libertie of the will in it selfe like as a blind man followeth his leader willingly though it be not free for him to goe which way he will the will of man remaineth free in it selfe as when one is set in two wayes he may take which he will yet by an accident the will may notwithstanding it is free in it selfe be determined and limited certainely to one thing as a blinde man by his leader is directed to take one certaine way so the spirit of God directeth and guideth the will vnto that which is good and the corruption of our nature to that which is euill 4. Chrysostome here further noteth that it is not said they which liue by the spirit and Theophylact they which haue receiued the spirit but they which are lead by the spirit to shew that the spirit must be the guide and ruler of our life quemadmodum navigij nauclerus as the Pilot is of the ship and the rider of the horse hereby then is expressed the continuall actiuitie and operation of the spirit in vs. 5. And this similitude may be taken either from those which are guided and directed as the blind man in the way or from them which wanting strength of their owne are borne and carried of others and so we are both wayes lead by the spirit for we neither can see the way vnto that which is good vnlesse the spirit direct vs neither haue we power and strength to followe it vnlesse the spirit drawe vs. Quest. 15. What is vnderstood by the spirit of bondage 1. Not the euill spirit namely Sathan by whom they are lead which walke after the flesh as Augustine vpon this place for the Apostle speaketh not of two diuerse spirits but diuerse effects of one and the same spirit working feare and bondage by the lawe and freedome by the Gospell 2. Neither yet is this spirit the soule of man which sometime is in the seruitude of sinne sometime it enioyeth the libertie of the spirit for v. 16. the Apostle maketh a manifest difference betweene this spirit and our spirit 3. Nor yet is this spirit not the holy Ghost but the lawe so called because it was giuen by the spirit as Chrysost. for euen the fathers vnder the law had the spirit of God as shall be shewed in the next question 4. But by the spirit the holy Ghost is signified which by the lawe worketh feare by the Gospell confidence and assurance Quest. 16. Whether the fathers vnder the lawe had onely the spirit of seruitude 1. Chrysostome hath here many strange assertions of the people of the Iewes that liued vnder the lawe as 1. Spiritum sanctum non acceperant c. the people of the Iewes had not receiued the holy spirit the lawe is called spirituall so also the manna which they did eate and the rocke whereof they dranke are called spirituall quia supra naturam perfecta erant they were perfect aboue nature And to make this his assertion good he saith that they opere tenus continebantur were restrained onely by the lawe from the outward act we from the verie inward thoughts they onely vsed corporall purgations and had a promise onely of temporall blessings as of a land that flowed with milke and honie Contra. 1. The Scripture euidently testifieth that Moses and the rest of the Prophets were endued with the spirit of God and it is said of Saul the spirit of God departed from him then he had it before and seeing they receiued Christ when they did eate manna and drinke of the rocke they had also his spirit for without Christs spirit they could not spiritually eate or drinke Christ. 2. and that the lawe of Moses restrained not the outward act onely but the heart and affections our Blessed Sauiour sheweth Matth. 5. where he deliuereth not a newe exposition of the lawe but he doth cleare it from the corrupt glosses of the Iewes 3. and though they had many more carnall rites then we haue yet euen in those externall ceremonies spirituall graces were represented as the Apostle saith that circumcision was the seale of the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 4.11 4. yea and vnder those temporall promises they looked for celestiall as the Apostle sheweth that they sought an heauenly countrey Heb. 11.16 2. Some thinke that here two diuerse states are not compared together of the fathers that liued vnder the lawe and of vs that are vnder the gospell but onely two diuerse degrees of our conversion as first by the lawe we are made to knowe our selues and thereby terrified and afterward we finde Evangelicall comfort by faith in Christ Martyr and so M. Calvin thinketh that the things themselues the ministerie and operation of the lawe and of the Gospell are here set one against an other rather then the persons 3. But here is both an opposition of the persons and things together as Origen doth illustrate this place by that Galat. 4. where they which were vnder the lawe are likened vnto children which were vnder tutors and gouernors and we in the Gospell are like the heire that is come to age and hath no more neede of tutors but yet our state is not set as opposite to theirs as though they had onely the spirit of bondage onely they differ in degrees for they also had the spirit of Christ but not in that euident and conspicuous manner which we haue Pareus And here we may deuide the Iewes into 3. sorts some were altogether carnall which had no knowledge of Christ such onely had the spirit of bondage some were perfect and spirituall as Moses and the Prophets who had the spirit of Christ though for the time they serued vnder ceremonies some were weake yet hauing knowledge of the Messiah they receiued also of his spirit though not in the same degree with the other Martyr Quest. 17. Of the diuerse kinds of feare v. 15. Ye haue not receiued the spirit of bondage to feare 1. There are two kinds of feare a seruile feare when one is mooued onely by the feare of punishment and so kept in awe and obedience and there is filialis timor a filiall feare such as is in children when one feareth to offend God not so much because of punishment as because he findeth the Lord gracious and good vnto him of this feare the Prophet speaketh when he saith the feare of God endureth for euer of the other S. Iohn perfect loue excelleth feare Angustine thus resembleth these two kind of feares the seruile feare is like as an adulterous woman is afraid of her husband least he should come and finde her in her wickednesse the other feare is seene in a chast wife who feareth to offend her husband least he should depart
alienum esse à spiritis c. he wisheth to be a straunger from the spirit and to be a false Prophet so that his people might escape all those plagues which were foretold as S. Paul here wisheth to be estraunged and separated from Christ In like manner Moses obiecit se exitio Moses did offer himselfe to destruction for the people sake thus Anselme But 1. though we allow Anselmes interpretation he is deceiued in his first proofe for though the vulgar Latine doe so read that place of Micah yet it is truely according to the originall translated thus If a man walking after the mind and lying falsly c. that is if there were one that were giuen vnto lies which would prophesie of prosperous things vnto the people he should be a meete Prophet for them And the Prophet was not to wish vpon any occasion to commit sinne in telling of lies 2. Concerning the other example of Moses it is rightly alleadged but because there is some question about Moses manner of wish how it is to be taken though elsewhere it be handled at large it shall not be amisse breefely to touch it here for it is a great hinderance to the studious reader in a point wherein he expecteth present satisfaction to make reference to another booke which it may be is not so readie at hand Quest. 6. How Moses wished to be blotted out of the booke of life for Israels sake Moses words are these Exod. 32.31 If thou wilt not pardon their sinne blot me out of the booke which thou hast written Because that desire of Moses and this of Paul here are verie like as Hierome saith If we consider Moses voice making request for his people we shall see eundem fuisse Mosi Paulo erga creditum gregem affectum c. that both Moses and Paul had the same affection toward the flocke committed to them it shall not be amisse to insert somewhat here touching Moses wish Two things doe here breede question the manner of Moses wish and the matter and sense thereof 1. for the manner Moses vseth that bouldnes of speach that a subiect will scarcely vse speaking to his Prince non solum claâ—â—â— apud Deum sed reclamat he doth not onely crie vnto God but he reclaymeth and crieth as it were against his minde But Philo remooueth this doubt because the Scripture saith that God talked with Moses as with his friend he speaketh therefore freely and boldly as to his friend this libertie then and freedome of his speach is not to be attributed vnto his arrogancie but vnto his friendship and familiaritie arrogantis est audacia amici est fiducia boldnes and rashnes sheweth arrogancie but confidence is in friendship 2. But there remaineth a greater doubt as touching the matter and meaning of Moses vowe and desire for whereas Gods booke of life signifieth his ordaining of some vnto eternall life which is of two sorts either secundum praedestinationem according to the decree of predestination which cannot be altered or secundum praesentem iustitiam according to mens present iustice in the first sense it would seeme to be stulta petitio a foolish request to desire that which was impossible to be blotted out of Gods decree of predestination and in the other it would be thought to be impia an vngodly desire to wish to fall from the present state of iustice now for the solution of this doubt there are diuerse answears framed 1. Rabbi Salomon taketh this to be the booke of Moses law that it should haue no denomination from him but that his name might be taken out thence but it appeareth in the Lords answer I will blot out of that booke him that sinneth that this booke belonged vnto more then Moses onely 2. Rab. Moses Gerundens thinketh Moses extra se captum to haue beene as it were beside himselfe and in his great zeale to his people to haue spoken he knew not what But seeing Moses prayer was so well accepted of God it is not to be thought that he offended in making so rash and inconsiderate a prayer 3. Paulus Burgensis varieth not much from the first interpretation he taketh the booke here for the historicall narration in Scripture of the acts and doings of the Saints and so he thinketh that Moses onely desired that the great workes which God had wrought by his hand should not be written of him But this had beene to pray against the setting forth of Gods glorie which was manifested in those great workes 4. Caietan vnderstandeth it de libro principatus of the book of principalitie that whereas God had appointed Moses to be gouernour of a greater nation and people if he should destroy Israel Moses desireth rather to be no gouernour at all then that Israel should perish But the words of the Lord I will blot out him that sinneth shewe that Moses speaketh not of a personall writing in any such booke which concerned him alone but of such a booke wherein others were written as well as himselfe 5. Augustine maketh this sense qu. 147. in Exod. as thou hast made it certaine that I can not be raced out of the booke which thou hast written so let me be as sure and certaine that thou wilt remit the sinne of this people But Gods answear I will blot out c. ouerthroweth this sense for there the Lord answeareth negatiuely vnto Moses that he should not be blotted out then Moses wish was to be blotted out 6. Lyranus saith that Moses did thus wish secundum desiderium partis inferioris animae according to the desire of the inferiour part of his minde not in the superiour part which was his iudgement and vnderstanding as Christ prayed that the cup might passe from him but yet there is a more sufficient answear then this see answ 6. following 7. Thostatus qu. 44. in 32. Exod. thinketh that it is an hyperboricall speach as that of Rachel giue me children or else I die and yet shee had rather haue had no children then to haue died yet in such passionate speeches they shewe their seruent and exceeding great desire But in this sense Moses should haue had no such meaning to be blotted out of Gods booke the contrarie whereof appeareth in the Lords answear 8. Oleaster will haue this to be the meaning blot me out of thy booke that is obliuiscere 〈◊〉 perpetuo forget me for euer for as we vse to commit those things to writing which we would remember so the things which we desire to forget we blot out But it is more then a metaphoricall speach as is euident by the Lords answear to Moses 9. Heirome epist. 151. ad Algas and Grego lib. 10. Moral c. 7. Euthym. in Psal. 68. vpon these words let them be blotted out of the booke of the liuing doe take this booke to be the decree onely of this temporall life and those to be blotted out which are depriued of life so Moses in their opinion
them a way into heauen not to descend to suffer death and deliuer them from hell 2. There is not then any question remaining in the faithfull of their saluation either debitando by doubting how they shall goe to heauen or trepidando in beeing afraid of hellâ— but because our faith is not here perfect there may be some strife and wrastling in the soule betweene the assurance of faith and carnall infirmitie sometime the faithfull may aske question luctando in wrestling and striving against carnall distrust saying if God be with vs who can be against vs but at the length faith prevayleth and triumpheth resoluing that with the Apostle who shall separate vs 3. But here we must make a difference of feare faith expelleth not all feare but onely the slauish and seruile feare of hell and damnation ioyned with distrust and torment of conscience yet a filiall feare and reverent awe of God remaineth in the servants of God which is chiefely for the time past they feare to offend so gracious a God and mercifull a father they feare not for the sinnes alreadie committed which they are assured are forgiues â—â— Christ. 4. And this assurance and firme perswasion of saluation the Apostle insinuateth afterward where he speaketh in the second person to euerie faithfull person If thou shalt confesse with thy mouth c. thou shalt be saued signifying thus much that euerie one examining himselfe by the beleefe of his heart and confession of his mouth may vndoubtedly conclude that he is saued This maketh against the Popish vncertaintie and doubting of saluation Whereof see more Synops. Controv. 5. Against vnwritten traditions v. 8. This is the word of faith which we preach c. The Apostle here sheweth that the Gospel which he preached was agreeable to the Scriptures he preached no other thing then he here writeth and he writeth nothing but was consonant to the old Scriptures as Ireneâ— thus testifieth per Apostolos Evangelium pervenit ad nos c. by the Apostles the Gospell came vnto vs which they then preached but afterward by the will of God in the Scriptures they deliuered fundamentum columnam fidei nostra the foundation and piller of our faith c. lib. 3. c. 1. The Romanists then may be ashamed to flie vnto that vile and base refuge of the old Manichees to say that the Apostles preached some things and committed other to writing See Synops. Controv. 6. Against freewill v. 8. The word is neere thee c. Erasmus in his defense of freewill against Luther vrgeth this place to shew the power and strength of freewill in keeping the commandements and he presseth those other words of Moses non est suprate it is not aboue thee that is beyond thy strength Contra. 1. But the Latine translator there fayleth in the rendring of the right sense of the words which are is not hid from thee not which is not aboue thee 2. he speaketh of the facilitie of the commandements not by the power of freewill but by faith in Christ who hath fulfilled the law for vs and by whose grace we are enabled in some good measure to keepe the commandements of God which are not greeuous vnto vs which are iustified by faith and sanctified by the spirit 3. and if it be admitted that Moses there speaketh of the law his meaning onely is that the knowledge of the law was not hid from them neither was it farre off that they had neede fetch it from heauen or from the vtmost partes of the Sea it was present with them and continually in their mouth beeing rehearsed by the Priests and Levites so that nulla ignorantiae excusatio sit reliqua their remained no excuse of ignorance thus Luther answeareth Erasmus and Bellarmine also acknowledgeth that Moses there speaketh de facilitate non observandae sed cognoscendae legis of the facilitie of knowing not doing the law lib. 5. de grat c. 6. Controv. 7. Against Limbus Patrum that Christ went not downe thither to deliuer the Patriarkes v. 7. Say not who shall descend into the deepe that is to bring Christ againe from the dead the ordinarie glosse would inferre vpon these words that Christ descended into Limbus to fetch the Fathers from thence for he that saith who hath descended in a manner denieth that none descended thither and so not the Patriarks and consequently neither Christ who descended not nisi pro illis liberandis but to deliuer them Contra. 1. But Lyranus refuseth this interpretation vpon these two reasons because it is neither agreeable to that place of Moses Deuter. 30. which will beare no such sense nor yet vnto the words following where he expoundeth the descending into the deepe of the raysing of Christ from the dead v. 9. 2. Some of our owne expositors doe interpret this clause descending into the deepe thus that Christ subierit inferâ—â— dolores hath vndergone the verie dolours of hell for vs Calvin Martyr expoundeth it of the place of hell as if one of curiositie should aske who should goe downe to hell to certifie vs that Christ hath ouercome hell and damnation for vs. some vnderstand it of the graue as Lyranus Osiander to say who shall descend into the deepe is all one as to denie that Christ is risen from the dead but Moses for the deepe saith Sea which cannot properly be taken for the graue Some thinke that by going to heauen and descending to the deepe are meant things of great difficultie and impossible to shew that the Gospel requireth no such thing of vs to goe to heauen or hell Faius But beside this last it may be added further that by the confession of the death of Christ we are consequently deliuered from the feare of descending to hell that is of beeing condemned because by Christs death we are deliuered from the feare of hell so that he which remaineth stil fearefull of hell doubteth of the truth of Christs death and resurrection to this purpose Pareus See before qu. 12. Controv. 8. Whether the righteousnesse of faith and the righteousnesse of the law be one and the same or contrarie the one to the other 1. Stapleton affirmeth them to be the same Antidot p. 618. by these arguments 1. the law leadeth vs to no other righteousnesse but to the righteousnesse of the law but it leadeth also to faith in Christ therefore faith in Christ is that righteousnesse 2. the end of the law is the righteousnesse of the law and Christ is the end of the law therefore faith in Christ is the end of of the law 3. that which is perfect and imperfect doe not differ in kind as an infant and a man of perfect age the iustice of the law is imperfect the iustice of faith perfect they then differ no otherwise Contra. 1. The law directly intendeth the iustice of the law and indirectly it leadeth vnto Christ so it is false that it leadeth and directeth onely to the iustice of the law it