Gods promises taketh him in effect not to say the truth and so dishonoureth him 5. Tolet nihil impossibile Deo credidit he beleeued that nothing was impossible vnto God 6. Lyranus he ascribed the promise not vnto his merit or worthinesse but vnto the goodnesse of God 7. But with Beza I ioyne all these together agnito collandato Deo c. he acknowledged and praised God that he is true and gratious so Bucerus illum verum omnipotentem credit illum invocat colit c. he beleeueth him to be both true and omnipotent and doth call vpon him worship and adore him Thus Abrahams faith is set forth quod credidit confidenter that he beleeued confidently He did not doubt of the promise of God thorough vnbeleefeâ— gratanter he beleeued thankefully because he gaue God the glorie and certainely he was fully assured Gorrhan Quest. 37. What was imputed to Abraham for righteousnesse v. 22. Therefore euen it was imputed to Abraham for righteousnesse 1. Tolet will haue this referred not simply vnto Abrahams saith to prooue that not his workes but his faith were imputed vnto him for righteousnesse but vnto the qualitie of his faith which was perfect because he was assured he beleeued confidently But seeeing the Apostle addeth that it was not written for Abraham onely but for vs also that faith should be imputed to vs for righteousnesse it is euident that the Apostle hath not relation vnto the particular qualitie of Abrahams faith but generally vnto the condition and nature of faith whereby all that beleeue are iustified for otherwise none should be iustified but they which haue the like perfect faith as Abraham had 2. Origens collection here also is not found that because the Greeke coniunction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and is here vsed inferreth that the like may be said of other his vertues as pietie mercie charitie quod reputata est ad iustitiam that it was reputed vnto him for iustice But this glosse is contrarie vnto the text which saith Abraham beleeued God and it was counted vnto him for righteousnesse this iustice is imputed vnto his faith not to any other of his vertues for it is the office onely of faith to beleeue and not of the rest now the Apostle inserteth the coniunction and because the sentence is so expressed by Moses which dependeth on the other clause Abraham beleeued God then it followeth and it was counted to him for righteousnesse Quest. 38. Of these words Now it is not written for him onely c. ver 23. 1. Here then is confuted their error who thinke that the Prophets did write vpon speciall and particular occasions onely for that age wherein they liued But the Apostle sheweth that this Scripture was written for our vse as he saith againe c. 15.4 Whatsoeuer is written is written for our learning Pareus 2. But all things which are written of Abraham are not written for our imitation as his arming of himselfe to recouer Lot that was taken captiue his offring vp of his sonne in sacrifice and such like acts for we must distinguish betweene the vniuersall or generall calling of those holy men which was to be worshippers of God and their particular which was for some speciall seruice in their generall calling the holy Patriarkes are by vs to be imitated and in such actions as thereunto belonged as Abraham is set forth to vs an example for beleeuing but the particular acts which they did by some speciall and extraordinarie direction of the spirit are not by vs to be imitated Martyr 3. Yet there is somewhat to be obserued euen in the singular and extraordinarie acts of the fathers worthie of our imitation As in Abrahams readinesse to sacrifice his sonne thus much we learne that as he preferred the commandement of God before the life of his sonne so we should preferre the will of God before all other things Martyr And so Origen here obserueth well est viri sapientis c. it is the part of a wise man to obserue quoâ—â—â—â— vnum quodque opus quod de Abrahame scribitur c. how euerie worke which is written of Abraham may be fulfilled in him 4. The same Origen also here hath an other good observation not onely the things written of Abraham are written for vs sed quae de Isaac scripta sunt similiter accipienda c. 〈◊〉 the things written of Isaac are so to be taken likewise and so of Iacob c. for the Apostles rule is generall as is alleadged before that whatsoeuer is written is written for our â—â—â—â—ing Quest. 39. How Abrahams faith is to be imitated by vs. v. 24. But also for vs to whom it shall be imputed c. 1. Here the Apostle sheweth that our faith must be answerable vnto Abrahams in these three things 1. first in the benefit of imputation of righteousnes as iustice came vnto Abraham by imputation so also it is giuen vnto vs the same kind of iustice before was alwaies in the Church from the beginning of the world to the ende 2. he sheweth to whom this benefit of imputation is imputed namely vnto beleeuers such as Abraham was vnbeleeuers then are excluded 3. what must be beleeued euen the same thing which AbrahaÌ„ beleeued of God that he was able to quicken the dead so we must beleeue in God that raised vp Iesus from the dead in which faith two things are contained the manner we must beleeue in God which noteth a firme and stedfast assurance and the matter which sheweth three things the author God that raised Iesus that is raised and the end in confessing him to be our Lord that is our Sauiour Mediator and Redeemer 2. But it will be obiected that Abrahams faith is inimitable because it was great and miraculous and a perfect faith Answ. 1. It was a perfect faith in comparison of ours but not perfect in it selfe for there is no mortall mans faith so perfect but it is mingled with some doubting 2. we are not required to imitate his faith in the quantitie and greatnesse thereof but in the qualitie that we beleeue in God as he did Faius and yet Abrahams faith was a great faith rather in respect of the fathers which liued vnder the old Testament then of the faithfull vnder the newe Quest. 40. Wherein Abrahams faith and ours differ and wherein they agree 1. They differ in promissionis specie in the kind and qualitie of the promise for Abraham was promised beside the spirituall blessing in the Messiah the possession of the land of Canaan the multiplying of his seede the victorie of his enemies the inheritance of the world to vs is onely promised the inheritance of the kingdome of God 2. in obiecto fidei in the particular obiect of faith Abraham beleeued in him which doth quicken the dead but we beleeue in him that raised Iesus from the dead which particular point of faith was not so plainly reuealed to Abraham 3. Abrahams faith was exemplarie for vs
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
in faith Pareus 4. And although S. Paul had giuen such excellent commendation before of their faith yet they might notwithstanding haue neede to be strengthened as Peter when he beganne to sinke in the waters had faith when he cried to Christ Saue me or els I perish yet Christ saith vnto him Why didst thou doubt O thou of little faith his faith had neede to be encreased 5. So here are three reasons of the Apostles desire to see them 1. that he might bestow vpon them some spirituall gift 2. to confirme and strengthen them 3. to be mutually comforted with them Aretius 33. Quest. Of the impediments whereby S. Paul was letted to come vnto the Romanes v. 13. I haue oftentimes purposed to come vnto you but haue beene let hitherto 1. Chrysostome thinketh he was hindred and letted by the Lord and so also Theophylact Dei iussis prohibeor I am inhibited by the commandement of God as Origen giueth instance of that place Act. 16.7 where Paul was not suffered by the spirit to goe into Bithynia 2. But Basil thinketh he was hindred by Satan as the Apostle saith he was letted by Sathan to come vnto the Thessalonians 1. Thessalon 2.18 where is to be considered a double difference betweene Gods hindering and Sathans first Sathan may hinder the outward actions but the inward purpose and desire he can not let but God can stay both secondly when Sathan hindereth it is by Gods permission for otherwise he could doe nothing but God often hindereth without the ministerie of Sathan at all Now in this place the first opinion is more agreeable because he entreated of God by prayer that he might haue a prosperous iourney therefore it seemeth that he letted him vnto whome he praied that he might haue opportunitie giuen him Tolet. 3. Origen ioyneth both together that he might be hindered first in the Lords purpose and then impediments might be cast in his way by Sathan so also Pareus Genevens and Aretius But for the former reason the first opinion is rather to be receiued 4. It beeing resolued vpon that God staied S. Pauls comming yet there is some diuersitie concerning the causes why the Lord should thus let him â—â— Sedulius thinketh that God saw not the hearts of the Romanes yet prepared to beleeue and therefore the Lord sent Paul then and not before quando praescâ—â—t eos creditâ—nos when he foresaw that they would beleeue But Sedulius is herein deceiued thinking that it was in the Romanes free-will to prepare their owne hearts to beleeue whereas euery good gift is of God Sam. 1.17 And if it were in mans power to beleeue every one might attaine vnto faith that would but the Apostle saith 2. Thess. 3.2 all men haue not saith And againe seeing the Apostle giueth such commendation of the Romanes saith there is no doubt but God had prepared their hearts 2. Hugo thinketh that Saint Paul was prohibited propter peccata Romanorum because of the sinnes of the Romanes This indeede sometimes is a let as Paul and Barnabas did shake off the dust of their feete against the Iewes and would no more preach vnto them because of their obstinacie and wilfull refusal Act. 13.51 Hyperius But this seemeth not to haue beene the cause here seeing the Apostle giueth such commendation of their faith v. 8. and of their goodnes c. 15.14 and obedience to the faith c. 16.19 3. There are also externall lets and impediments as his bonds imprisonment persecution Tolet. and he suffered by the way shipwracke and other casualties Aretius 4. But the most likely reason why the Lord staied S. Pauls comming to Rome was the necessitie of other Churches which the Lord would haue first established Gregorie teacheth this reason lib. 21. Moral c. 13. that God therefore letted him that he might more profit those Churches where he remained and S. Paul himselfe rendreth this reason Rom. 15.20 Therefore I haue beene oft let to come vnto you but now seeing I haue no more place in these quarters and also haue beene desirous many yeares againe to come vnto you c. his employment in other Churches deferred his comming to Rome Beza annot 34. Quest. Why S. Paul expresseth not the cause in particular which letted him 1. Gualter giueth this reason why the Apostle hauing diuers lets as namely new occasions continually offered in preaching the Gospel and beside his persecutions and afflictions and manifold troubles yet he maketh mention of none of these quia de his non poterat sine iactantiae suspicione because he could not speake of these things without suspition of boasting 2. But I rather approoue Chrysostomes reason non scrutatur Dominipropositum the Apostle doth not search into Gods purpose why such an Apostle was kept so long from such a famous citie when there was great hope of winning many vnto Christ it was sufficient that he was letted he is not curious to know the cause teaching vs thereby ne factorum rationem vnquam à Deo exigamus that we neuer require a reason of Gods works 3. And indeede Gods secret counsell herein is diuers waies vnsearchable 1. in respect of the teachers why sometime God sendeth many sometime few why some and not others why some are true pastors some wolues some true teachers some false 2. in regard of them which be taught why God sendeth preachers to one place and not vnto an other why Christ wrought miracles in Corazin and Bethsaida not in Tyrus and Sidon to bring them to repentance Matth. 11.21 3. and for the places why the Spirit suffered not Paul to preach in Asia and Bithynta Act. 16.6 7. And why in our daies in some certaine cities as at Constance God suffered the preaching of his Gospel to be intermitted 4. for the time why the Gospel is preached in some age and not in an other and some enioy it long some but a short time 5. for the manner why sometime the Gospel is preached obscurely and darkely sometime openly and manifestly why some preach it of enuie some of sincerities All these considerations doe set forth vnto vs how the iudgements of God are hid and vnsearchable Gryneus 4. And by this reason may the like obiection be answered why the Apostle was letted seeing his purpose was good that he might haue some fruite among them Because the Apostle beeing the Lords minister was not to prescribe the times and occasions fittest for the worke of the Gospel but to depend vpon God therein who best knewe how to sort out the best time for euerie purpose Quest. 35. Whether S. Pauls desire to goe to Rome beeing therein letted were contrarie to Gods will and so sinned therein 1. S. Pauls desire was not absolute but conditionall if it were the will of God for so he saith that I might haue a prosperous iourney by the will of God to come vnto you 2. But here we must consider of the will of God as it is secret and hid and as it is manifest and
the same way of iustification which is of blessednesse and happinesse but we are counted happie by the not imputing and forgiuing of sinne v. 7 8. therefore so also are we iustified and consequently not by any of our owne workes 3. Argum. The father of those which beleeue and the children must be iustified after the same manner but Abraham the father of those which beleeue was iustified by faith and not by the workes of the lawe Ergo the proposition is insinuated v. 11. from the end why Abraham receiued circumcision as the seale of the righteousnesse of faith that he should be the father c. the father then and children must be iustified by one and the same way the assumption is thus prooued the first part thereof that he was the father of all the faithfull is prooued by a distributiō he was the father both of the vncircumcised which is shewed by the time v. 10. he was iustified by faith beeing yet vncircumcised and of the circumcised because he receiued circumcisiō v. 12. the other part that he was iustified by faith is proued by the effects because he receiued the promise not through the law but faith v. 13. 〈◊〉 otherwise the promise had bin of no effect if it had bin by the law which were absurd v. 14. 4. Argum. From the contrarie effects of the lawe and of faith the promise ought to be firme and sure vnto Abraham and his seede v. 16. but the lawe cannot worke any 〈◊〉 assurance but it rather causeth wrath because it discouereth transgression v. 15. 2. Then followeth a description of Abrahams faith 1. by the foundation thereof Go◠omnipotencie shewed by the effects v. 17. 2. the obiect of his faith to beleeue to be the father of many nations euen as the starres or sand in multitude v. 18. 3. the strength is his faith in ouercomming all impediments v. 19. 4. the qualitie it was without doubting v. 20. which wrought in him assurance v. 23. 5. by the effects it was imputed to him for righteousnesse v. 23. 3. The application of this example followeth 1. from the ende of the Scripture which was not written onely for Abraham but for vs. 2. from the description of faith 1. the foundation God 2. the obiect Christ Iesus crucified and raised vp 3. the end remission of sinnes and our iustification v. 25. 3. The questions and doubts discussed Quest. 1. Vpon what occasion Saint Paul bringeth in the example of Abraham 1. Chrisostome taketh this to be the occasion that now the Apostle intending to set forth how glorious and excellent iustification by faith is would shew it by the example of Abraham whose righteousnesse was most glorious But the Apostle insisteth yet in the proofe of his former conclusion that a man is iustified by faith not by works it had been yet vnseasonable for the Apostle to set forth the praise and commendation of iustification by faith and to stand vpon the glorie and excellencie of it the truth whereof the Iewes addicted to the works of the law were not yet thoroughly perswaded of 2. Anselme thinketh that whereas a double question was mooued in the beginning of the former chap. v. 1. concerning the preferment of the Iew touching circumcision as the Apostle answered to the former question in the third chapter so he commeth to the other here to treat of circumcision But both the Apostle had alreadie said much concerning circumcision c. 2. so that he needed not againe to fall into any speciall treatise thereof and beside if he should haue singled out the example of Abraham to that purpose the doctrine of iustification without all kind of workes as well ceremoniall as morall should not haue beene sufficiently prooued 3. Some thinke that whereas the Apostle had said c. 3.21 that the righteousnesse of faith had testimonie of the lawe and the Prophets that now the Apostle prooueth the same by the example of Abraham But that assertion of the Apostle went not immediately before many other things which concerne the principall argument of iustification by faith came betweene with the which this chapter rather must haue coherence 4. And therefore it is the opinion of others as of Origen Oecumen to whome consent Tolet Pererius that the Apostle directly by this example of Abraham goeth about to proue the generall argument that we are iustified by faith without works because Abraham was so iustified 5. But as we denie not but that the example of Abraham is very pertinent to that purpose to prooue iustification by faith without works yet beside this generall scope of the example of Abraham here produced there is this particular reason of the connexion and coherence that after the Apostle had concluded generally without exception that euery man must be iustified without works the Iewes might straitway haue obiected the example of Abraham whose memorie was honourable among them that at the least he and Dauid should seeme to be excepted out of this generall rule their works were renowned and glorious and somewhat must be yeelded vnto them The Apostle therefore here preuenteth this obiection and confesseth that Abraham was very glorious by his works among men yet before God he did not glorie by his works but it was his faith whereby he was approoued iust in Gods sight Thus Pareus Pellican Gryneus Quest. 2. Of the meaning of the first verse v. 1. What shall we say then that Abraham our father 1. The Apostle vseth an interogation both for the more full declaration of the thing in question and for more vehemencie sake ad struendam dictis fiduciam to win the more credit to his sayings as c. 3.1 6.1 2. The Apostle speaketh in the first person what shall we say and Abraham our father that he might the better insinuate himselfe Pareus 3. He vseth the name of Abraham not Abram because now it was the vsuall name whereby he was called though as yet his name was not changed when he was counted iust by faith for the which purpose S. Paul bringeth in his example Mart. 4. Concerning that addition after the flesh 1. Some doe ioyne vnto Abraham our father after the flesh to distinguish the carnall children of Abraham from the spirituall for he was the father of the Gentiles not according to the flesh but the spirit Chrysost. Theophy Oecumen Tolet But then the Apostle would haue said rather your father if he had spoken onely of the carnall generation Beza neither doth the Apostle seeme to derogate vnto the Iewes as hauing onely a carnall prerogatiue he would not therefore vse any such limitation as excluding them from beeing his spirituall children 2. Some doe ioyne it with the word hath found after the flesh as indeede the order of the words sheweth but then by flesh they vnderstand circumcision as Ambrose and the interlin glosse but the Apostle disputeth generally against all works of the law not the ceremonialls onely 3. Lyranus thinketh that according to the flesh is added
redemption remission of sinnes and iustification are in themselues and in the vse of them common and vndeuided and are indifferently sometime ascribed to Christs death and passion Rom. 3.24 Ephes. 1.7 and sometime to his resurrection Rom. 10.9 yet in respect of their proper causes they are discerned rather then distinguished as the remission of sinnes is properly referred to Christs passion iustification to his resurrection Pareus and the reason is yeelded by Thomas effectus habet aliqualiter similitudinem causae the effect hath in some sort the similitude of the cause our mortification in the remission of sinne answeareth to Christs death our iustification and spirituall life to Christs rising againe to life Mart. Thus the workes of our creation redemption sanctification are indifferently ascribed to the whole Trinitie as works of their deitie and yet are discerned in respect of their seuerall persons And this shall suffice of this intricate and difficult question 4. Places of doctrine Doct. 1. Iustification by workes sheweth pride and vaine-glorie v. 2. If Abraham were iustified by workes he hath wherein to reioyce or glorie c. It is euident then that for one to stand vpon the iustice of his workes it commeth of pride and vaine boasting it maketh a man to extoll and advance himselfe against the grace of God but God resisteth the proude and giueth grace to the humble the proud Pharisie was not iustified but the humble Publican then let proud Pharisies and vaine-glorious Papists knowe that as long as they stand vpon the merit of their workes they shall neuer be truely iustified But yet whereas the Apostle addeth he hath wherein to reioyce but not with God we learne that all reioycing in good workes and in the keeping of a good conscience is not denyed we may modestly professe and protest before men what the grace of God hath wrought in vs but we must not glorie therein as thereby iustified before God as the Apostle else where saith 1. Cor. 4.4 I knowe nothing by my selfe yet am I not thereby iustified Pareus Doct. 2. Of the nature and substance of the Sacraments v. 11. Circumcision is called the seale of the righteousnes of faith this is not proper and peculiar to circumcision but it sheweth the vse and end of all sacraments which is to seale confirme vnto vs the promises of God in Christ So here are collected all the causes of the Sacraments 1. the efficient cause and author is God onely because he onely is able to giue efficacie and vertue vnto the sacraments as God was the author of circumcision so of all other the Sacraments both of the old and newe Testament 2. the materiall cause is the visible and externall signe 3. the forme is the rite and manner of institution 4. the ende to seale vnto vs the promises of God for remission of our sinnes in Christ Faius pag. 238. Doct. 3. Of the baptisme of infants From the circumcision of infants in the old Testament is inferred the baptisme also of infants vnder the newe for there is the same reason of both the Sacraments and S. Paul doubteth not to call baptisme circumcision Col. 2.11 And if circumcision beeing graunted to infants then baptisme should be denied nowe this were to make God more equall vnto the Iewes and their seede which were the carnall offspring of Abraham then vnto beleeuing Christians which are the spirituall sonnes of Abraham If it be obiected that we knowe not whether infants haue rem sacramenti the thing represented in the Sacrament neither should we put to the signe we answear 1. that this were to reason against God for the same question may be mooued concerning circumcision 2. no more doth the minister know the minde and intention of all those which communicate in the Lords Supper 3. infants are baptized though they haue no vnderstanding as yet of the Sacrament to shewe that they belong vnto the couenant of grace whence their saluation dependeth and not of the outward signe and both presently the Church receiueth edifying when they see infants baptized and the children themselues are admonished and stirred vp when they come to yeares of discretion to learne the true signification and vse of their baptisme which they receiued in their infancie Peter Martyr Doct. 4. Of the vnitie of the Church and the communion of Saints v. 11. That he should be the father of all them that beleeue In that Abraham is called the father of all that beleeue whether of the circumcision or vncircumcision hence it is euident that there is but one Church and one way of iustification for all whether circumcised or vncircumcised vnder the Lawe or the Gospel and that there is a communion and common fellowship of all beleeuers as beeing all brethren and children of faithfull Abraham So the Apostle saith Ephes. 4.4 There is one bodie one spirit c. one Lord one faith one baptisme Doct. 5. Faith requisite in those which are made partakers of the Sacraments v. 11. The seale of the righteousnesse of faith which he had Circumcision profited not Abraham without faith neither can any Sacrament to them which are of discretion and able to vnderstand and discerne be of any force without faith and therefore S. Pauls rule is 1. Cor. 11.28 That a man should examine himselfe when he commeth to the Lords table and to this examination it belongeth to prooue whether they be in faith 2. Cor. 13.5 Doct. 6. The faithfull are the true owners and heares of the world the wicked are vsurpers v. 13. The promise to be heire of the world was made to Abraham thorough faith to them then that beleeue who are the right seede of faithfull Abraham doe the promises belong both of this life and of the next as the Apostle saith 1. Tim. 4.8 That godlinesse haue both the promise of this life and of that which is to come the faithfull then may vse the blessings of this life with a good conscience as pledges of the life to come but the wicked are vsurpers and therefore defile themselues in abusing the things of this life Gryneus Doct. 7. The difference betweene the true God and the false v. 17. He beleeued God who quickeneth the dead Hence are gathered three arguments of the Godhead 1. his omnipotencie both in giuing a beeing vnto things which are not be calleth the things that are not as though they were and in restoring vnto things the beeing which they had 2. his eternitie he is the first and the last both at the first he created all things and shall in the last day raise them vp to life againe 3. his omniscience he can foretell things to come in calling them that is giuing them a beeing which yet are nothing These things cannot idols doe nor any strange gods by these arguments the Prophet Isa confoundeth the Idols of the heathens shewing that they are not like vnto the true God Isa. 44.6 I am the first and the last and without me there is no
state is now made firme and sure in Christ. Controv. 9. Against the sacrifice of the Masse v. 10. For in that he died he died once This place is verie pregnant against the Popish sacrifice of the Masse wherein they say they doe dayly offer vp Christs bodie in sacrifice vnto God for there is no oblation of Christ in sacrifice but by death he died but once and therfore one sacrifice of him in his death sufficeth for all and the Apostle saith Heb. 10.14 that he hath with one offring made perfect for euer them that are sanctified This then is a blasphemous derogation to make iteratiue sacrifices as though that one sacrifice had beene imperfect and whereas they alleadge that their Masse is a sacrifice applicatorie of Christs death such applications are superfluous seeing the death of Christ is effectually applyed by faith which is reviued strengthened and increased by the commemoration of Christs death in the Sacraments See more hereof Synops. Centur. 3. err 31. Controv. 10. Concerning freewill v. 12. Let not sinne raigne c. This place may be vrged by the adversaries of the grace of God to prooue that man hath some power in himselfe to resist sinne seeing otherwise the Apostles exhortation should be in vaine to exhort men vnto that which is not in their power Contra. 1. The Apostle elswhere euidently teacheth that man hath no power or inclination of himselfe to any thing that is good as 2. Corinth 3.5 Wee are not sufficient to thinke any thing of our selues but our sufficiencie is of God Philip. 2.23 it is God that worketh in you both the will and the deed of his good pleasure we must not then make the Apostle contrarie to himselfe as though in this place he should ascribe any thing to mans freewill 2. the Apostle speaketh here to men iustified and regenerate by the spirit of God by the which they are enabled to performe this whereunto they are exhorted so that this abilitie is not in themselues but from God 3. the Apostle sheweth a difference by thus exhorting betweene these actions which the Lord maketh in other creatures which either haue no sense at all or sense onely which creatures God vseth without any stirring at all feeling and inclination in them and those which he worketh in man whose reason will and vnderstanding he vseth by incicing and stirring it vp 4. So then these exhortations are not superfluous for thereby we are admonished rather what we ought to doe then what we are able to doe and by these exhortations of Gods word grace is wrought in vs to enable vs to doe that which of our selues we haue no power to doe See further Controv. 15. following Controv. 11. That concupiscence remaining in the regenerate is properly sinne v. 12. Let not sinne raigne The Apostle here speaketh of concupiscence which is sinne though it raigne not in vs the verie suggestions and carnall thoughts that arise in the regenerate haue the nature of sinne though they yeeld not consent vnto them Bellarmine with other of that side doe expound these and such like places wherein concupiscence is called sinne de causa vel effectu peccati of the cause or effect of sinne so concupiscence is improperly called sinne in their opinion either because it is the effect and fruit of Adams sinne as a writing is called ones hand because the hand writ it or because it bringeth forth sinne as we say frigus pigrum flouthfull cold because cold maketh one full of flouth Contra. 1. Concupiscence is sinne properly because it is contrarie to the lawe of God it striueth and rebelleth against it and continually stirreth vs vp to doe that which is contrarie to the Lawe sinne properly is the transgression of the lawe as the Apostle defineth it 1. Iohn 3.4 therefore concupiscence beeing contrarie to the lawe of God is properly sinne S. Paul also calleth it sinne dwelling in him Rom. 7.17 2. Whereas it may be obiected that all sinne is voluntarie but the motions and suggestions of the flesh are involuntarie we answear that all sinne is not voluntarie for then originall corruption should not be sinne which is euen in children which can giue no consent and yet in respect of the beginning and roote of this sinne which was Adams transgression it was voluntarie See more of this controversie Synops. Papism Centur. 4. err 16. Controv. 12. Whether a righteous man may fall into any mortall or deadly sinne v. 12. Let not sinne raigne there is then peccatum regnans sinne raigning as when one sinneth against his conscience and setteth his delight vpon it and followeth it with greedinesse and so for the time looseth the hope of forgiuenesse of sinne and maketh him subiect to euerlasting death without the mercie of God peccatum non regnans sinne not raigning is originall concupiscence suggestions motions of the flesh infirmities and such like Now the Romanists simply denie that a righteous man can commit any mortall sinne neither can any continuing the Sonne of God fall into it Rhemist 1. Ioh. 3. sect 3. Among the Protestant writers some thinke that the righteous may haue sinne for the time raigning in them as Aarons idolatrie and Dauids adulterie sheweth so Vrsinus vol. 1. pag. 107. but Zanchius denieth it miscellan p. 139. Contra. 1. Touching the assertion of the Romanists it is manifestly conuinced of error by the example of Dauid for it is absurd to thinke that in his fall he ceased to be the child of God for he that is once the sonne of God shall so continue to the ende Dauid was a righteous and faithfull man and yet fell into great and dangerous offences which they call deadly and mortall sinnes 2. The other may be reconciled by the diuerse taking and vnderstanding of raigning sinne for if that be vnderstood to be a raigning sinne which is committed of an obstinate minde with contempt of God without any feeling or remorse of conscience so we denie that any of the elect can fall into any such sinne but if that be taken for a raigning sinne when for a time the conscience is blinded and a man is ouercome and falleth yet rather of infirmitie then obstinacie yet afterward such vpon their repentance are restored in this sense sinne may raigne in the righteous as in Aaron Dauid but it is said improperly to raigne because this kingdome of sinne continueth not it is but for a time Controv. 13. Against the Manichees v. 22. In your mortall bodie Theophylact hence reprooueth the error of the Manichees who affirmed that the bodie of man is wicked and euill but seeing the Apostle compareth it to armour or weapons which the souldier vseth for his countrey the theife and rebell against it so the bodie is an indifferent thing it may either be abused as an instrument of sinne or by the grace of God it may be applyed to the seruice of the spirit as the Apostle sheweth v. 19. Giue your members as seruants vnto
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
it so the spirit dwelleth in the faithfull as the ruler and commander in the house the spirit and the flesh may be in the same house together if the flesh be as the seruant and the spirit as the master but if the flesh haue the masterie the spirit departeth like as where extreame cold hath taken possession there can be no heate at all but if the extremitie of cold be abated then there may be place for heate Martyr 4. And here we must distinguish as Origen well doth between the extraordinarie gifts of the spirits such as the Prophets and Apostles had when the spirit came vpon them in the likenes of fierie tongues and the ordinarie gifts for where the spirit is those extraordinarie graces alwaies follow not but those which the Lord seem to be conuenient for God giueth vnto euery one as he will 2. Cor. 12.11 3. And whereas the Apostle saith he that hath not the spirit of Christ is not his Origen well thus expoundeth creatura eius est sed non discipulus he is his creature still as all other things are but he is not his Disciple nor a member of his mysticall bodie 12. Quest. Of the meaning of these words v. 10. The bodie is dead because of sinne the spirit is life c. 1. Origen vnderstandeth the two parts of man the bodie and the soule and he giue in this sense the bodie is dead because of sinne mors imponitur ne peccet death is imposed vpon the bodie that it should not sinne alwaies remembring the ende and so the spirit vivit ad faciendam institiam liueth to worke righteousnes but the Apostle sheweth the cause of death in the one namely sinne and of life in the other namely righteousnes rather then the ende of both 2. Ambrose seemeth by the bodie to vnderstand the whole man that is dead because of sinne and by the spirit the holy Ghost â—â— author of life because he is giuen to iustifie vs so also Chrysostome will haue the holy Ghâ—â—t to be vnderstood which onely is not life in himselfe but giueth life vnto others so also Martyr but the other opposite part of the bodâ—â— sheweth that the spirit hath relation also vnto man 3. Some vnderstand the first clause of mortification as if the Apostle should say the â—â— die is dead quantum attinet ad peccati operationem in respect of the operation of sinne Oecumen Piscat but in this sense the same thing should be expressed in both clauses the mortifying of sinne and liuing vnto righteousnes which the opposition betweene the contraâ—â— parts of the bodie and spirit wil not heare 4. Calvin and so Osiander will haue the bodie to signifie the vnregenerate part the spirit the spirituall and regenerate but in this sense the Apostle vseth to oppose the flesh in the spirit not the bodie and the spirit 5. Wherefore by bodie we may better vnderstand that mortall part of man which is subiect to death and by the spirit the inward part of man namely his soule regenerate which liueth by faith Beza thinketh that the life of the soule is here vnderstood when it is separate from the bodie Chrysostome referreth it to the life of the resurrection Lyranus to the life of grace now in present But we may better comprehend both that both now for the present the spirit of man liueth by grace as the iust is said to liue by faith and that also is a pledge of life euerlasting afterward And this sense is most agreeable to the scope of the Apostle for hitherto he hath shewed how the spirit of Christ hath freed vs from the law of sinne in the flesh now he commeth to set forth the other part of our libertie which is from death and first presently in the spirit we liue by faith and then afterward the bodie also shall liue in the resurrection by the spirit of Christ which the Apostle sheweth in the next verse Quest. 13. How the quickening of the dead is ascribed to the spirit of Christ seeing all both good and bad shall rise 1. M. Calvins opinion is here refused who thinketh that the Apostle doth not here speake of the last and finall resurrection sed de continua spiritus operatione but of the continuall working of the spirit in vs in mortifying the reliques of sinne so also Piscator vificabit corpora vestra ad sanctificationem shall quicken your bodies vnto sanctification c. But in that sense our bodies are said to be mortua dead not mortalia mortall and the Apostle speaking of the time to come pointeth at the resurrection which shall be not that which is present in rising vnto newnes of life 2. There are three arguments of the resurrection here expressed by the Apostle the first from the power of God he that raised Christ from the dead shall also raise vs vp secondly from the correspondencie of Christ with his members as Christ was raised from the dead so shall we that are his members thirdly from the office of the spirit who shall raise vs vp that are his temples wherein he dwelleth Pareus 3. As God is said to haue raised Christ vp by his spirit so Christ raised vp himselfe by his eternall spirit omnia quippe divina pâ—â—er per Filium in Spiritu Sancto operatur all diuine things the father worketh by the Sonne in the holy Ghost Oecumen 4. Although our redemption purchased vnto vs by Christ was sufficient at once to haue redeemed both our soules and bodies tamen ordinate nobis datur it is giuen vnto vs in order and by degrees that as Christ had first a passible bodie before he had a glorious bodie so our bodies must first be mortall before they can haue immortalitie Lyran. 5. Now although the members of Christ shall be raised vp by his spirit yet the wicked also which haue not the spirit of Christ shall also rise againe but vnto iudgement they shall be raised vp by the omnipotent power of God but the righteous shall be raised by the spirit of Christ and therefore it is not said he shall raise but vinificabit he shall quicken your mortall bodie quod ipsa resurrectione maius est c. which is a greater worke then the resurrection and onely graunted to the righteous Chrysostome whom Martyr and Pareus followe Quest. 14. What it is to be lead by the spirit of God 1. There are two kind of actions of the spirit generall wherbey all things mooue liue and haue their beeing and speciall whereby the Lord worketh in the hearts of his children such is the worke of sanctification Calv. 2. And in that they are said to be lead we must not thinke that any are compelled by the spirit but this signifieth vehementem inclinationem non coactionem a vehement inclination not coaction Gorrhan God by his spirit ex nolentibus volentes facit of vnwilling maketh vs willing so he draweth vs volentes willing consequenter not antecedenter we are willing
hath appointed as Ier. 51.11 God is said to haue raised vp the spirit of the King of the Medes against Babel and yet it is certaine that they sinned in this action which God stirred them vp vnto for God stirred them vp to one end to be ministers of his iudgements vpon that wicked nation but they therein satisfied onely their owne cruell and couetous mind as Isai 10.5 the Lord saith concerning Ashur I will giue him a charge against the people of my wrath c. but he thinketh not so they considered not wherefore the Lord 〈◊〉 them as the end of his wrath 4. Lastly the end must be considered wherefore God raised vp Pharaoh to a most holy and iust end for the setting forth of his glorie as the wise man saith Prov. 16.4 The Lord hath made all things for his owne sake yea euen the wicked against the day of euill In these foresaid respects God is said to haue raised vp and ordained Pharaoh without any touch of iniustice at all Quest. 18. How the Lord is said to harden whom he will v. 18. 1. Origen thinketh that this sentence is part of an obiection propounded in the person of some other and so also Chrysostome But it appeareth to be the Apostles owne assertion both by the note of illation therefore he hath mercie c. and because the obiection followeth in the next words v. 19. thou wilt say vnto me then which sheweth this to be no part of the obiection Beza Gryneus 2. Some thinke that God hardneth by permission onely as Oecumen indurat i. durâ—â—â— esse permittit he hardeneth that is suffereth and permitteth to be hardened so also Bellarmine permittit eos male agere he permitteth them to doe euill But this permission doth suppose God either otiosum vel invitum either to be idle and negligent or against his will to suffer things so it will cast vpon God either an imputation of negligence or indulgence as Heli permitted his sonnes to sinne or of impotencie in permitting things which he cannot hinder therefore this deuise of bare permission doth not satisfie 3. Nor yet did God harden him per patientiam by his patience in sparing to punish him Origen dilatione poenae by deferring of his punishment Basil in Oecumen for in this sense Pharaoh rather hardened his owne heart in abusing Gods longsuffering as the Apostle speaketh of those which through their hardnesse of heart despise the bountifulnesse of God Rom. 2.42 God cannot be said this way to harden it 4. Hierome thinketh that God doth harden the vessels of wrath and malâ—â—fieth the vessels of mercie causis praecedentibus vpon causes proceeding or going before because some beleeued in Christ some beleeued not Hierome epist. 150. resp ad qu. 10. But Pererius refuseth this opinion and vpon good ground because he maketh the wills and dispositions of men to be the first cause why God sheweth mercie on some and hardeneth others as the same heate of the Sunne mollifieth the wax and hardneth the clay whereas the Apostle soli voluntati diuinae aperte assignat doth manifestly assigne the cause to the onely will of God Pere disput 10. numer 55. 5. And farre be it from any to thinke that God is the proper efficient cause of the hardening of mans heart which is the worke of Sathan as Pererius slaundereth Calvin to say Deum causam esse efficientem indurationis that God is the efficient cause of the hardening of the heart c. And thus he challenging Calvin because he saith that this word to burden in Scripture signifieth not onely permission sed diuinae irae actionem but an action of the diuine wrath which is most true but yet as the hardning and hardnesse of the heart is sinne the Lord hath nothing to doe with it 6. Pererius thinketh that by hardening here we may vnderstand ipsam reprobationis originem the verie beginning of reprobation that is the will and purpose of God non miserandi not to shew mercie But hardening of the heart is an effect or consequence rather of reprobation then reprobation it selfe and thus he will make God the proper cause of this induration and hardening which he charged Calvin with before 7. To vnderstand therefore how God is said to harden the heart it must be considered that there are two degrees thereof desertio induritae the leauing and forsaking of men in their hardnes of heart which is either non apponendo vel subtrahendo gratiam in not giuing or in subtracting his grace as Augustine saith he hardeneth not impertiendo malitiam sed non impertiendo gratiam not by imparting malice but by not imparting his mercie and grace epistol 105. ad Sixtumi non quia irrogatur aliquod quo fit homo deterior sed quo ferrer melior non irrogatur not because any thing is irrogated to make man worse but nothing is irrogated to make him better â—lib 1. ad Simplici qu. 2. and he likeneth it to the freezing and congealing of the water by the absence of the Sunne which is done non impretiendo frigiditatem sed non apponendo calorem not by imparting coldnesse but in not putting to heat The other degree in hardening is inflictio grautoris duritiae the inflicting of a greater blindnesse and hardnes of heart which is done three wayes either immediately by God himselfe or mediately by Sathan or by themselues that are hardened and so we reade in Exodus that God is said 8. times to haue hardened Pharaohs heart and thrice Pharaoh hardened his owne heart and fiue times his heart is said simply to be hardened Pareus First God inflicteth the hardnesse of heart as a punishment when either inwardly he giueth them vp to their owne desires not onely in denying vnto them necessarie graces but so working by his invisible power that their corrupt wills are more and more hardened as it is said Reuel 22.11 He that is filthie let him be filthie still hardnesse then of heart as it is a punishment of former sinnes is iustly inflicted by God as Augustine saith prioribus meritia c. hoc redditum est Pharaoni vt cor eius induraretur this was giuen as a iust recompence to Pharaohs former euill merits in afflicting the people of God that his heart was hardened c. As hardnesse of heart is a punishment of former sinnes so it is of God And God by his immediate power hardeneth the heart two wayes 1. the generall facultio whereby euerie one mooueth and willeth this or that is of God Luther vseth this similitude as Pet. Martyr alleadgeth him like as the rider that forceth a lame and halting horse is the cause of his going but his halting pase proceedeth from the lamenesse of the horse so God hardeneth as the generall moouer but the euillnes of the action proceedeth from the corruption of man 2. But more then this God doth by a more speciall prouidence so ouerrule euen the hearts of wicked men that they are ordered
planted in 2. Concerning the reading of the words thou wast graft in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for them that is in their place as the Syrian interpreter translateth but Erasmus refuseth this reading as ridiculous and will haue the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in to be here redundant and superfluous as the like phrases are vsed often in the Hebrew as percussus in gladio smitten in the sword and so he would haue it referred vnto the oliue into the which they were planted likewise some of our owne interpreters read insicus illis graft into them Bucer Martyr But the other reading is the better graft in for them for it hath relation to the braunches broken off and as yet no mention is made of the right oliue tree Lyranus by in them vnderstandeth the braunches yet standing as the Apostles into whom the Gentiles were planted but plants are not properly graffed into the braunches but into the stock therefore the better sense is graft in for them in loco factorum in the stead of the broken braunches so glosse interlin Gorrhan Tolet and of our writers Beza Faius Pareus Genevens or among them B. 3. Was graft in the Apostle sheweth a threefold benefit bestowed vpon the Gentiles first they were planted in stead of the incredulous Iewes which were as braunches broken off then they are made partakers of the roote that is of the faith of Abraham and the Patriarkes Lyran. and made one Church with them and thereby they are partakers of the farmes of the oliue which the ordinarie glosse vnderstandeth of the Apostles who receiued of the fatnes of the spirit to conuay it to the Gentiles Gorrhan of the fatnes of charitie but rather generally thereby is meant the doctrine and grace of Christ Lyran. and all the spirituall graces which the Lord conferreth vpon his Church as the Prophet Dauid saith Psal. 63.3 My soule shall be satisfied as with marrow and fatnes c. Pareus 4. But it will be obiected that the Iewes by nature were a wild oliue as well as the Gentiles as Saint Paul saith Ephes. 2.3 We were by nature the children of wrath as well as others Ans. True it is that in respect of originall corruption there is no difference but the Iewes were the right oliue because they were descended of beleeuing parents to whom the â—â—â—â—ise was made 5. Ambrose here noteth a difference betweene spirituall and externall planting as Origen also obserueth the same husbandmen vse to graffe good plants into a sower stocke not fowre and wild plants into a good stocke but here it is otherwise the wild oliue is planted into the true oliue And the reason is this the Apostle res magis causis quam causas rebus â—â—â—vit did applie the things vnto his cause not the cause to the things from whence he taketh his similitude Origen Quest. 23. Of the meaning of these words Thou bearest not the roote but the roote thee v. 18. Boast not thy selfe against the branches c. 1. This is the consequent or conclusion inferred out of the former reason that the Gentiles considering their former state and condition that they were the branches of a wild oliue should not insult against other which words beside this conclusion doe include two secret reasons against this reioycing 1. Because none ought to reioyce in themselues but onely in the Lord 1. Cor. 1.31 Gryneus 2. Ambrose noteth how it is a thing displeasing vnto God to reioyce in the calamitie and ouerthrowe of others and therefore the Gentiles should offend God if they insulted ouer the Iewes because of their incredulitie Thou bearest not the roote but the roote thee 1. for the connexion of these words because the Apostle passeth from the branches to the root against the which the Gentiles reioyced not Chrysostome thinketh that the Apostle doth it because he would affoard vnto the Iewes vmbram solatij a certaine shadowe of comfort and nothing else and he thinketh that in words onely he seemeth to allay their griefe not in deede but farre be it from vs to thinke that the Apostle should as it were double with his owne nation in so serious a matter hauing made so solemne a protestation before c. 9.1 I speake the truth in Christ I lie not 2. Gryneus maketh this to be the coherence the branches which are graft in should imitate the root it lamenteth for the branches which are broken off and so should they which are planted in but this rather is the reason of the coherence if they should insult against the branches they should in a manner also lift vp themselues against the root which bore those braunches euen against Abraham the Parent of the Iewes Pareus 3. This then is a newe argument that they ought not to insult against the Iewes the branches for so consequently they should insult against the roote it selfe which were either an absurd thing that the braunch should vaunt it selfe against the roote that beareth it or an vncomelie thing to insult against him from whom thou hast receiued so great benefits as they beeing graffed into the roote are made partakers of the fatnes thereof 4. This roote is said to beare the Gentiles and not they the root because they had their conuersion from the Iewes and not the Iewes from them Lyranus as our Bl. Sauiour saith Ioh. 4.22 saluation is of the Iewes the Iewes might receiue the ground of Philosophie and of other arts from the Gentiles but that is not the fatnes of the Oliue nor the sappe of the roote which is faith in Christ which was the faith of Abraham rooted and grounded in Christ. Quest. 24. Of those words v. 22. if thou continue in his bountifulnes 1. Chrysostome giueth this sense si ea feceris if thou dost those things which are answearable to the diuine goodnes non enim fide sola opus est for we haue not neede onely of faith here c. But the Apostle speaketh euidently of the goodnes of God not of man and so Osiander thereby vnderstandeth clementiam Dei the clemencie of God if thou continue in the grace and fauour of God the interlin glosse thus expoundeth si totum Des tribuas if thou ascribe all vnto God But here rather the cause is taken for the effect as the goodnes of God for faith which is wrought in vs by the goodnes and grace of God as afterward v. 31. by mercie is vnderstood faith giuen in Gods mercie and this to be the sense appeareth by the contrarie v. 23. If they abide not still in vnbeleefe 2. If thou continue This neither sheweth that it is in mans power to continue for all is ascribed to the goodnesse and mercie of God neither yet can it be hence gathered that the elect may fall away and not continue but these conditionall speaches are vttered to work in the faithfull a greater care and to stir them vp and take away from them all carnall securitie 3. Or els thou also shalt be