〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for as much as 2. Thess. 1.6 dwelleth in you but if any haue not the Spirit of Christ the same is not his 10 And if Christ be in you the bodie is dead because of sinne but the Spirit is life because of righteousnes for righteousnes sake B.G. 11 But if the Spirit of him that raised vp Iesus from the dead dwell in you he that raised Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortall bodies by his spirit because of his Spirit V.L.S.B. but the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 put to a genitiue case rather signifieth by that dwelleth in you 12 Therefore brethren we are debters not to the flesh to liue after the flesh 13 For if ye liue after the flesh ye shall die but if ye mortifie the deedes of the bodie flesh L. by the Spirit ye shall liue 14 For as many as are led driuen V. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Spirit they are the sonnes of God 15 For ye haue not receiued the spirit of bondage againe vnto feare but ye haue receiued the spirit of adoption of Sonnes S. of the Sonnes of God L. add whereby wherein L. we crie Abba father 16 The same spirit beareth witnesse with our spirit that we are the sonnes of God 17 If we be sonnes children G. we are also heires euen the heires of God and ioynt heires heires annexed G. partakers of the inheritance of S. coheires Be. V. with Christ if so be we suffer together with him that we may be also glorified together with him 18 For I count that the afflictions of this present time are not answerable or meete V. Be. S. worthie L. B. G. but the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worthie beeing construed with the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rather taken in the first sense to the glorie which shall be reuealed vnto vs. 19 For the earnest expectation B. fervent desire G. expecting with lifting vp the head Be. or fastening of the eyes S. as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth of the creature the created world Be. waiteth when the sonnes of God should be reuealed 20 Because the creature the created world Be. is subiect to vanitie not of it owne will but by reason of him which hath made it subiect subdued it vnder hope G.B. but these words vnder hope are better referred to the next verse B. S. 21 Vnder hope that the creature also shall be deliuered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious libertie of the sonnes of God 22 For we knowe that euerie creature the world created Be. all the creatures S. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 groaneth together or sigheth and trauaileth in paine together with vs vnto this present 23 And not onely the creature but we also which haue the first fruits of the spirit euen we doe sigh groane L. V. mourne B. in our selues waiting for the adoption of the sonnes of God L. ad euen the redemption of the bodie 24 For we are saued by hope but hope that is seene is not hope for that which one seeth why not how G. B. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should he hope for 25 But if we hope for that we see not we doe with patience abide it expect it Be. 26 Likewise the spirit also helpeth our infirmities for this what we should pray for as we ought we knowe not but the spirit it selfe maketh intercession maketh request L.G. with sighes groanes B.S.V. which cannot be expressed 27 But he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the meaning sense Be. vnderstanding S. desire L. affection V. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sense meaning of the spirit for he maketh intercession for the Saints according to God that is according to his will S. G. according to his pleasure B. 28 Also we knowe that to those which loue God all things work together God helpeth them in euerie thing S. ad for the best vnto good Gr. euen vnto them which are called of his purpose predestinate to be called S. called to be Saints ad of his purpose L. 29 For those whom he knewe before he also predestinate to be like fashioned or conformable to the image of his sonne that he might be the first borne among many brethren 30 Moreouer whom he predestinate them also he called and whom he called them also he iustified and whom he iustified them also he glorified 31 What shall we then say to these things if God be for vs on our side B. G. who can be against vs 32 Who spared not his owne Sonne but gaue him vp for vs all how shall he not also with him giue vs all things 33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge or put in any accusation against Be. of Gods chosen it is God that iustifieth 34 Who is he that condemneth who shall condemne det G. it is Christ which is dead or rather which is risen againe who is at the right hand of God and maketh intercession B. Be. L. maketh request G. for vs. 35 Who shall separate vs from the loue of Christ shall tribulation or anguish or persecution or famine or nakednes or perill or the sword 36 As it is written For thy sake are we killed all day long we are counted as sheepe for the slaughter 37 Neuerthelesse in all these things we are more then conquerors we doe ouercome L. S.V.B. but the compound word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth more then simply to ouercome thorough him that loued vs. 38. For I am perswaded am certaine V. B. that neither death nor life nor Angels nor principalities nor powers not things present nor things to come nor strength ad L. 39. Nor height nor depth nor any other creature shall be able to separate vs from the loue of God which is in Christ Iesus our Lord. 2. The Argument Method and Parts In this Chapter the Apostle concluding the doctrine of iustification remooueth and taketh away the impediments 1. the reliques remainder of sinne in the sonnes of God doe not hinder their iustification to v. 17.2 neither are their afflictions an impediment which he exhorteth them by diuerse reasons patiently to suffer to v. 31.3 then he concludeth with the certaintie of saluation in the elect v. 31. to the end 1. The first impediment that the reliques of sinne which remaine in the seruants of Christ whereof the Apostle gaue instance in himselfe in the former Chapter doe not hinder their saluation he taketh away but with a double limitation if they be in Christ and doe not walke after the flesh both which are propounded v. 1. and afterward amplified and handled more at large The first limitation he setteth forth 1. by the fruites and effects of the spirit in the faithfull in freeing them from sinne and so from death and condemnation whereof he giueth instance in himselfe v. 2. from the end of Christs incarnation and death which was to destroie sinne and fulfill righteousnesse which the law could
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
discriâ—iâ—â— all perills which put the life in danger Mort. omnia extrema secunda adversa and â—ll exceeding great prosperitie or adversitie 2. Angels principalities powers 1. Origen vnderstandeth onely the euill Angels and adversarie powers so Osiander also 2. Chrysostome onely the good Angels and Hierome so also Lyranus and they vnderstand it by way of supposition that if the good Angels should seeke to withdraw vs from Christ which is impossible yet we should not giue 〈◊〉 vnto them so the Apostle hath the like supposition of the good Angels Galat. 1.8 Calv. 3. But we may better vnderstand the Angels good and bad Mart. Gryn Pareus who by principalities and powers vnderstandeth the kingdomes and commanders of the world but they are titles rather giuen to the Angels as Ephes. 1.21 Gryneus following Chrysostome 3. Things present nor things to come 1. Not in this world and the next as Origen 〈◊〉 hath a speculation of the passage of the soule out of the bodie which in that instant is many times seduced and deceiued by the euill spirits 2. But he meaneth the dangers of this life present or to come Mart. Par. 3. he maketh no mention of the things past for they are ouercome alreadie Lyran. and as for our sinnes past they are forgiuen vs in Christ Gryn 4. Neither height nor depth 1. Origen vnderstandeth it of the spirits in the ayre and in the deepe 2. Lyranus of the depth and profunditie of Sathan 3. Gorrhan of the height and depth of humane wisedome so also Mart. 4. Osiander of the diuerse kinds of death as by hanging aloft and beeing drowned in the deepe 5. Chrysostome and Theophylact better vnderstand things in heauen and earth the elements aboue and belowe Pareus ret sâ—premas infernas things aboue and beneath Bulling 6. Theodoret vnderstandeth heauen and hell 7. Oecumenius prosperitie and adversitie 5. Or any other creature 1. not beside those which are visible Origen for he had spoken of invisible things before 2. nor a newe creature beside those which God made as Ambrose as equus hipes an horse with two legges and such like gloss ordinar Hugo Gorrhan 3. But the Apostle absolvit inductionem doth make an ende of his induction because it had beene infinite to reckon vp all the creatures Martyr so Chrysostome if there be any other creature of what manner soeuer how great soeuer 4. Places of Doctrine Doct. 1. How the same worke may be both good and sinnefull as it proceedeth from God the deuill and man v. 3. Sending his Sonne c. God in sending his Sonne and giuing him vp vnto death onely intented his owne glorie and the salvation of man but Sathan stirred vp the Iewes of envie and malice to put that holy and Iust one to death so the same action as it proceeded from God was good as it came from Sathan man was euill So that God is no way the author of euill though he be author of that thing which is abused vnto euill Mart. This further is euident in the affliction of Iob which as God was the author worker of it tended to Gods glorie and the triall of Iobs faith but as Sathan had his finger in it he would thereby haue supplanted the faith of Iob. Doct. 2. Of the causes of saluation v. 3. Here all the causes of our saluation are expressed 1. The author and efficient cause is God who sent his Sonne to redeeme vs. 2. the materiall cause is Christ who came in the similitude of sinful flesh not that he had not true flesh as Marcion the heretike said but it was true flesh yet without sinne so in that behalfe like vnto sinfull flesh as hauing the true nature of our flesh but not the sinfull qualitie thereof 3. the forme is also set forth he condemned sin in the flesh that is suffred the punishment due vnto our sinne in his flesh 4. the impulsiue or motiue cause was the imbecilsitie weaknes of the law for if the law could haue saued vs Christ needed not haue died 5. the finall causes were these two 1. for sin that is he came to expiate purge and take away sinne 2. and that the lawe might be fulfilled and the righteousnesse of the lawe fulfilled by Christ imputed to vs by faith v. 4. Doct. 3. That the holy Ghost is God v. 9. The spirit of God dwelleth in you Hence Didymus inferred well that the holy spirit is God because he dwelleth in all the faithfull this infinitenes and immensitie of the spirit sheweth that he is God for who but God can dwell in so many temples at once and beside in that he is called the spirit of God that also prooueth him to be God for the spirit of God is of the same nature and substance with God Doct. 4. That the three glorious persons of the Blessed Trinitie are of one efficacie and power v. 11. The raising vp of the dead is a worke of Gods omnipotencie but God the Father the Sonne and the Holy Ghost doe all raise vp the dead as God is said to raise vp our dead bodies because his spirit dwelleth in vs God the father then raiseth and his spirit also raiseth and quickeneth the dead and Christ also raiseth the dead because the same spirit is here called the spirit of God and of Christ so Ioh. 6.54 He that eateth my flesh c. I will raise him vp at the last day Doct. 5. Of euerlasting glorie v. 18. Not worthie of the glorie which shall be reuealed in vs Thomas Aquin. obserueth 4. necessarie points out of these words concerning euerlasting life 1. it is called glorie to shew the excllencie of it for in this life noble wittes are desirous of nothing more then glorie it is set forth by the name of that thing which is most desired 2. it shall be which sheweth the eternitie of it for that which is now present is but short and momentarie 3. reuealed the glorie to come then is of it selfe invisible but God shall so illuminate our minds as that he himselfe will be seene of vs. 4. this glorie shall be shewed in vs which signifieth the stabilitie of this glorie it shall not depend of externall things as riches honour but within vs it shall be and possesse and replenish both our bodies and soules Doct. 6. Of the nature and properties of hope v. 24. Hope that is seene is no hope 1. the author and efficient cause of hope is God Rom. 15.13 The God of hope c. 2. the subiect is the faithfull heart 3. the obiect things which are not seene 4. the forme thereof is with patience to abide 5. the effect thereof is ioy in the spirit Rom. 1â— 1â— reioycing in hope 6. the ende is our saluation we are saued by hope 7. the contrarie to all is despaire and diffidence ex Gryneo Doct. 7. Of true prayer that consisteth not in the sound of the voice but in the sighes of the heart v. 26.
not borne of his seede for any merit of his but of grace Haimo and because he vouchsafed to be borne of sinners to shew quod non dedignetur peccatores that he disdaineth not sinners Gorrham 14. Quest. How it can be shewed that Christ was borne of the seede and posteritie of Dauid Seeing both Matthew and Luke doe set downe the genealogie of Ioseph the reputed husband of Marie the question is how this concerneth the birth of Christ who onely tooke his flesh of Marie 1. Ambrose giueth a good reason why the genealogie is deriued by the man not by the woman because it is the manner of the Scripture to expresse the generation of men not of women secundum carnem natus vsum debuit sequi carnis he that is borne after the flesh was to follow the vse and custome of flesh which is to count the petigree by the men 2. Then the genealogie of Ioseph thus concerneth Christ because Ioseph beeing a iust man tooke a wife out of his owne tribe Origen also with Ambrose propoundeth this solution yet he insisteth not vpon it but runneth to allegories that Ioseph was not the naturall but spirituall father of Christ But it is euident that the Euangelists doe set downe the naturall generation and descent of Christ. The best solution then is the former that Ioseph maried with Marie beeing of his owne tribe and so they were both of Dauid and therefore they went both vp vnto Bethlem a citie of Dauid to be taxed Luk. 2.4 3. But where it wil be obiected that Elizabeth which was maried to Zacharie a Priest of Levi is called Maries cousin and therefore Marie is not like to haue beene of Iuda it is not sufficient to say with Origen that Elizabeth was Maries cousin not in respect of the tribe but the nation because they were both of Israel for so Elizabeth had beene no more her cousin then any other beside Theophylact in Luk. 1. thinketh that the kinred came in thus because Aaron married Elizabeth the daughter of Aminadab of the tribe of Iuda Exod. 6. and so this Elizabeth was descended of Iuda by her great grandmother Elizabeth But this kinred was too auncient and would haue growne in so many descents out of knowledge whereas it seemeth that Marie and Elizabeth were so of kinred that they were of acquaintance also for Marie went to visit Elizabeth Luk. 2.41 Augustine thinketh it might be thus that some woman of the tribe of Levi was maried into the tribe of Iuda and so Christ was descended not onely of the kingly but the priestly stocke also quaest super Iudic 47. But the best solution is that some rather of the tribe of Iuda was maried into the tribe of Levi for though the other tribes might not one marie within an other to auoide confusion yet the Levites might take their wiues out of any tribe for they had no inheritance and so there was no daunger of any such confusion So Iehoida the high Priest maried Iehosabath the daughter of king Ioram the sister of Ahaziah the king 2. Chron. 22. Pareus Genevens 4. Now as Matthew doth set downe the pettigree of Ioseph the reputed husband of Marie so Luke doth prosequute the genealogie of Marie for Heli whole sonne Ioseph is said to be was the father of Marie and father in law to Ioseph for sonnes and daughters in law in Scripture are called by the names of sonnes and daughters simply as Naomi calleth Ruth her sonnes wife her daughter Beza Pareus But Ambrose hath an other answer that Heli and Iacob were brethren and Iacob dying without children Heli according to the law tooke his wife and raised seede to his brother Ambr. lib. in Luc. 3. of these two the first solution is the best for Matthew saith that Iacob begat Ioseph Heli then begat him not but he was the naturall father of Marie 15. Quest. Whether Christ descended of Dauid by Salomon or Nathan But an other doubt there is about this genealogie for Matthew descendeth by Salomon Luke by Nathan Hereof a question ariseth of which of these Salomon or Nathan Christ came after the flesh 1. Eusebius thinketh that he was descended of Salomon which he would prooue by the 72. Psal. v. 1. Giue thy iudgement to the King and thy righteousnes to the kings sonne where by the king he thinketh Salomon to be vnderstood and by the kings sonne not Rehoboam but Christ which was to come of him Euseb. Demonstr l. 7. c. 7. Origen before approoued the same opinion who giueth this reason thereof because in Matthewes genealogie the word he begate is repeated still and so is it not in S. Lukes catalogue and therefore he thinketh that Christ came of Salomon whome Matthew maketh mention of not of Nathan whose generation S. Luke rehearseth Contr. 1. That Christ was not lineally descended of Salomon it is euident because all Salomons posteritie ended in Iechoniah as is euident Ierem. 22.30 Write this man destitute of children 2. In the place obiected out of the Psalme by the king is vnderstood Dauid by the kings sonne Salomon who was a figure of Christ. 3. Neither in Matthewes genealogie properly is euery one said to beget for Iechonias is said to beget Salathiel who was in deede the sonne of Neri as S. Luke setteth it downe in his genealogie but Iechonias dying without heire appointed Salathiel his next heire 2. Origen Ambrose Beda thinke that Christ came of Nathan both a Priest and Prophet but that can not be for it is certen Christ came of Iuda not of Levi Hebr. 7.14 It is euident that our Lord sprang out of Iudah and therefore Apoc. 7 he is called the lyon of the tribe of Iudah 3. Wherefore our Lord descended of Dauid by Nathan his sonne who is thought to haue beene brother vnto Salomon not onely by his father but by his mother also 1. Chro. 3.5 Damascen lib. 4. c. 15. Pareus 16. Quest. Of the meaning of these words v. 4 Declared mightily to be the Sonne of God c. 1. The vsuall interpretation is to gather from hence three arguments of Christs diuine nature 1. by the power of miracles 2. by the holy Ghost which he gaue vnto them which beleeued in him and specially in the feast of Pentecost 3. by the raising of himselfe vp from the dead to this purpose Chrysostome Hyperius Aretius with others But the better interpretation is this that here three things are expressed concerning Christ what he was declared to be the Sonne of God mightily or in great power by which nature namely his diuine by the spirit of sanctification wherby he sanctified his own flesh and his mysticall bodie the Church and by what argument namely by his resurrection from the dead wherein he manifestly shewed himselfe by his owne power beeing able to raise vp his owne bodie from the graue Beza Pareus But these three clauses declared mightily to be the Sonne of God according to the spirit of sanctification by
the resurrection from the dead it shall not be amisse to handle distinctly because of the difficultie and diuers expositions of them 17. Quest. Of the meaning of these words Declared to be the Sonne of God in power 1. Some read predestinate to be the Sonne of God which they expound diuersly 1. Ambrose giueth this sense he was predestinate not to be the Sonne of God for he was from the beginning sed vt manifestetur but to be manifested in the flesh But then had S. Paul spoken very imperfectly and doubtfully saying onely predestinate to be the Sonne of God without any other addition 2. Augustine ioyneth it with the last clause by the resurrection of the dead he was predestinate to be the first and chiefe of those which should rise from the dead August in 1. ad Roman But by this exposition the order of the words is transposed 3. Anselmus and so also Lyranus thus expound that Christ as the Sonne of God could not be predestinate beeing coeternall with his father sed vnio illa facta est à dei praedestinatione but that vnion betweene the humane and diuine nature came to passe according to Gods predestination But this deuise Tolet ouerthroweth by this argument that it can not be saide that Christ as man was predestinate to be the Sonne of God for when we say Christ we affirme him to be God as we can not say a man is predestinate to haue a soule for he can not be a man without a soule ad quod aliquid praedestinatur est extra ipsam quod praedestinatur that whereunto any thing is predestinate is an other thing beside that which is predestinate Christ then can not be predestinate to be the Sonne of God because Christ is alwaies the Sonne of God therefore not Christ but the humane nature of Christ was predestinate to be vnited to the diuine 4. Tolet vnderstandeth this predestination not of the prioritie of time but of order that Christ was predestinate that is prae omnibus declaratus filius before all declared to be the Sonne of God for he onely is the true naturall Sonne of God But predestination is not taken in that sense and this beeing admitted that Christ was preordained to be the Sonne of God then he was ordained but that can not be said seeing he was alwaies the Sonne of God And all these expositions doe faile in mistaking the Greeke word which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ordained or defined not preordained 2. Origen mistaketh the word predestinate and therefore readeth simply without the preposition destinate or appointed for praedestinatur quod non est destinatur quod est that is predestinate which is not that is destined which is But Origens distinction holdeth not for euen Christ in respect of his office though not as God is saide by the Apostle to be ordained before the foundation of the world 1. Pet. 1.20 3. There is then a third exposition which is best of all to interpret the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 declared demonstrated as Chrysost. Theophyl Tertullian advers Propeam so also Erasmus Beza with most of our new writers so the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth not onely to decree define but to demonstrate prooue declare and this sense is most agreeable to the words following according to the spirit of sanctification by the resurrection c. that is in his diuine nature shewing it selfe by Christs raising of himselfe from the dead he was declared to be the sonne of God 4. And touching the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in power it neither is to be restrained to the miracles and signes which Christ wrought as Chrysostome for that expresseth not the full meaning of the Apostle nor yet is it to be referred to the word declared that he was mightily declared though that be true also Genevens but rather vnto the last words the Sonne of God he was declared to be the Sonne of God omnipotent of the same power and maiestie with his Father Beza Pareus Gorrham 18. Quest. Of these words according to the spirit of sanctification v. 4. 1. Some doe here vnderstand by the spirit of sanctification the holy Ghost the third person in Trinitie and in this sense it is diuersly applied 1. Some referre it to the clause before of Christs birth he was made according to the seede of Dauid after the flesh c. by the spirit of sanctification because he was conceiued by the holy Ghost gloss ordinar 2. Some doe ioyne it with the 1. v. put apart for the Gospel of God c. by the spirit of sanctification but the order of the Apostles words will admit neither of these interpretations 3. Chrysostome expoundeth it of the gifts of the spirit which Christ distributed at the sending of the holy Ghost so also Tolet vnderstandeth it of the vertue and operation of the spirit whereby the Apostles wrought wonders and signes But the phrase will not beare this exposition which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the spirit not by the spirit which are two diuers things as Beza noteth if any of these interpretations be receiued the Apostle would have said by the spirit not according to the spirit 4. Gorrham sheweth how Christ was declared to be the Sonne of God by the spirit of sanctification these 7. waies 1. because he was conceiued by the holy Ghost 2. he was replenished with the gifts of the spirit 3. manifested by the spirit when it descended vpon him in the likenes of a doue 4. he was glorified by the spirit Ioh. 16.14 5. he breathed the spirit vpon his disciples 6. he sent the holy Ghost vpon his Apostles 7. he giueth his spirit to all that beleeue in him Eph. 1.13 Ye were sealed by the holy spirit of promise 2. Origen by the spirit vnderstandeth the soule and spirit of man but that manifested Christ to be man not the Sonne of God 3. But by the spirit of sanctification is not here meant the holy spirit the third person of the Trinitie but the diuine nature of Christ. And whereas Tolet obiecteth nec diviâ—iâ—â—â— in Scriptura vnquam tali voce significatio that the diuine nature is neuer signified by this manner of speach it is euident that where S. Paul saith 2. Tim. 3.16 iustified in the spirit and Heb. 9.14 he offered himselfe through the eternall spirit that the diuine nature is here vnderstood which is said to sanctifie because of the effects by his diuine spirit he sanctifieth his owne bodie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hypostatically and his mysticall bodie the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 powerfully or effectually This to be the meaning is euident by the opposition betweene the flesh and the spirit as he was made according to the flesh so he was the Sonne of God according to the spirit Beza Pareus And before them Ambrose so expoundeth which was the Sonne of God according to the sanctifying spirit that is secundum
and Christ in generall 34. qu. Of the disparitie and vnlikenes betweene Adam and Christ in this comparison 35. qu. Of the excellencie and superioritie which the benefit by grace in Christ hath beyond our fall and losse in Adam 36. qu. Some other opinions refused wherein this excellencie should consist 37. qu. In what sense the grace of God is said to haue abounded vnto more 38. qu. How all men are said to be iustified in Christ v. 18. 39. qu. Why the Apostle saith v. 19. By one mans disobedience many were made sinners and not all 40. qu. How many are said to be sinners in Adam 41. qu. How the law is said to haue entred thereupon v. 20. 42. qu. How the offence is saide to haue abounded by the entring of the law v. 20. 43. qu. How grace is said to haue abounded more 44. qu. Of the raigne of sinne vnto death and of grace vnto life Questions vpon the sixt Chapter 1. qu. Of the meaning of these words Shall we continue in sinne v. 1. 2. qu. What it is to die vnto sinne 3. qu. What it is to be baptized into Iesus Christ. 4. qu. Of the diuers significations of the word Baptisme and to be baptized 5. qu. What it is to be baptized into the death of Christ v. 3. 7. qu. Of the meaning of this phrase to be graft c. 8. qu. What resurrection the Apostle speaketh of v. 5. 9. qu. What is vnderstood by the old man v. 6. 10. qu. What is meant by the bodie of sinne v. 6. that the bodie of sinne might be destroied 11. qu. How the dead are said to be freed frō sinne v. 7. 12. qu. What life the Apostle speaketh of v. 8. We beleeue that we shall also liue with him 13. qu. How death is said to haue bad dominion ouer Christ v. 9. 14. qu. How Christ is said to haue died to sinne v. 10. 15. qu. How Christ is said now to liue vnto God v. 10. 16. qu. Of these words v. 11. Likewise think ye c. 17. qu. How sinne is said not to raigne c. v. 12. 18. qu. What the Apostle meaneth by mortall bodie v. 12. 19. qu. Of these words that we should obey it in the lusts c. v. 12. 20. qu. How we are not to giue our members as weapons vnto sinne v. 13. 21. qu. What it is not to be vnder the law but vnder grace v. 14. 23. qu. Whether the Fathers also that liued vnder the law were not vnder grace 24. qu. What the Apostle meaneth by the forme of doctrine whereunto they were deliuered 25. qu. How we are made seruants of righteousnes 26. qu. Of the meaning of these words I speake after the manner of men because of your infirmitie v. 19. Questions vpon the seauenth Chapter 1. qu. How the law is said to haue dominion ouer a man as long as he liueth 2. qu. Whether the woman be simply free if the man be once dead 3. qu. Whether the woman haue not the like libertie and freedome in respect of the bond of mariage as the man hath 4. qu. Why the Apostle saith we are dead to the law v. 4. and not rather the law is dead to vs. 5. qu. How we are said to be mortified to and freed from the law 6. qu. What is meant by the bodie of Christ. 7. qu. Of the meaning of these words beeing dead vnto it 8. qu. What is meant by the newnes of the spirit and oldnes of the letter 9. qu. How S. Paul beeing brought vp in the knowledge of the law could say I knew not lust v. 7. and I was aliue without the law v. 9. 10. qu. What law the Apostle speaketh of v. 7. is the law of sinne 11. qu. What lust or concupiscence the Apostle speaketh of I had not knowne lust c. except c. 12. qu. Why the Apostle giueth instance in the tenth Command Thou shalt not lust and alledgeth not all the words of the law 13. qu. What sinne the Apostle meaneth v. 8. sinne tooke an occasion c. 14. qu. How sinne tooke occasion by the Law 15. qu. Of what time S. Paul speaketh when he knew not the law and afterward sinne tooke occasion by the law c. 16. What the Apostle meaneth by all concupiscence 17. qu. In what sense the Apostle saith Sinne was dead and he aliue without the law v. 8. 18. qu. How sinne is said to haue revived 19. qu. How sinne is said to haue deceiued 20. qu. How sinne is said to haue slaine him 21. qu. How the law is said to be holy iust good and likewise the commandement 22. qu. How sinne is said to be out of measure sinnefull 23. qu. How the law is said to be spirituall 24. qu. How the Apostle saith he is carnall and sold vnder sinne v. 17. 25. qu. Of these words v. 15. I allow not what I doe what I would that doe I not 26. qu. What the Apostle vnderstandeth by flesh I know that in me that is my flesh dwelleth no good thing c. v. 18. 27. qu. How the Apostle saith To will is present with me c. but I find no meanes to performe c. v. 18. 28. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 21. I finde a law c. 29. qu. How the Apostle saith Euill is present with me v. 21. 30. qu. Of these words I delight in the law of God c. v. 22 23. of the number of these laws and what they are 31. qu. Why these are called Laws and why they are said the one to be in the inner man the other in the members 32. qu. Of the Apostles exclamation O wretched man that I am 33. qu. What the Apostle vnderstandeth by this bodie of death from the which he desireth to be deliuered 34. qu. Why the Apostle giueth thankes to God v. 25. 35. qu. Of these words I in my minde serue the law of God c. 36. qu. Of that famous question whether S. Paul doe speake in his owne person or of an other here in this chapter Questions vpon the eight Chapter 1. qu. Who are said to be in Christ. 2. qu. What is meant by the law of the spirit of life 3. qu. What is vnderstood by the law of sinne and death 4. qu. Of the best reading of the 3. v. 5. qu. What is meant by the similitude of sinfull flesh 6. qu. Of these words And for sinne condemned sinne in the flesh 7. qu. How Christ condemned sinne in the flesh 8. qu. Who are after the flesh and sauour the things of the flesh 9. qu. How the wisdome of the flesh is enmitie against God 10. qu. How they which are in the flesh cannot please God v. 8. 11. qu. Of the dwelling of the spirit of God in vs v. 9. 12. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 10. The bodie is dead because of sinne the spirit is life c. 13. qu. How the quickning of the dead is ascribed to the
with the singular vertues of God But Tolet obiecteth that the word quoque also is here a note non declarationis sed adiectionis not of declaration but of addition Contra. Though the vulgar Latine so translate quoque also yet in the originall the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is as much as nempe or videlicet that is to say as Vatablus and the Syrian interpreter read so likewise Beza 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the world created These words are diuersly expounded for whereas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth both the very act of creating of the world and the creature it selfe that was made as Erasmus noteth hereupon these diuers interpretations are giuen 1. Some read by the creation of the world Beza Genevens and Aretius thus distinguisheth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is tota mundi fabrica the whole frame of the world taken together but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the workes afterward mentioned are the speciall workes as the starres the elements and such like But if by the creation the workes themselues created should be vnderstood then the Apostle should seeme superfluously afterward to make mention of the workes are vnderstood by the workes Perer. Tolet. and beside 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put in the genitiue and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the datiue and therefore they can not be ioyned appositiuely together by way of declaration Pareus 2. The Latine translatour readeth à creatura of the creature which Anselme and the ordinarie glosse following vnderstand of man in which sense it is taken Mark 16.15 preach the Gospel to euery creature And man is so called the creature by a certaine excellencie because he hath some agreement with euery creature he is in a place as other bodies he hath sense as beasts and vnderstanding as Angels But as Tolet well noteth the other word which is ioyned with creature of the world excludeth this particular sense and application vnto man 3. Therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is here better taken for the world created and is referred vnto the time à mundo condito since the world was created Pareus à fundamentis mundi from the foundation of the world as the Syrian interpreter for so the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from is taken as Matth. 13.35 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the foundation of the world Tolet so that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here signifieth not the act of the creation for it is taken for the world created afterward in this epistle Rom. 8.20 nor yet for the creatures simply but for the state of the world when it was created from the world created à constitutione mundi from the constitution of the world as Chrysostome is translated 3. Beeing vnderstood by his workes Non corporea vel imaginaria visione sed intellectuali not by a corporeal or imaginarie vision are they seene but by an intellectual gloss interlin as the cause is vnderstood by the effect Lyran. like as by an image representing one that is absent we are brought to the knowledge and remembrance of him so God is seene in his workes Perer. 4. To wit his eternall power and Godhead 1. Some by the inuisible things of God vnderstand the person of God the father by the vertue or power the person of the Sonne by the deitie the holy Ghost which interpretation Theophylact mentioneth here onely Gorrham seemeth to follow it But this reason maketh against it that the mysterie of the Trinitie is to high a matter to be searched out by the light of nature that knowledge commeth onely by reuelation Perer. 2. These three things then are here vnderstood the eternitie power and diuine maiestie of God the knowledge whereof man is lead vnto in part by his naturall instinct Perer. 3. And vnder the deitie or Godhead are vnderstood the rest of his attributes his wisdom goodnes iustice which are seene in the administration of the world whereby his Godhead which is in it selfe incomprehensible is knowne as by the effects Pareus 52. Quest. Of the knowledge which the Philosophers had of God and by what meanes they attained vnto it 1. Theodoret rehearseth fiue waies whereby the Philosophers were brought to the knowledge of the Creator 1. by the contemplation of the heauens and the starres and their orderly motion 2. by the consideration of the elements the fire the aire the water the earth 3. by the admirable frame and workemanship of mans bodie 4. by the operation of mans hands and by the manifold arts inuented by man 5. by the dominion which man hath ouer the creatures Theodor. in serm de provid But some Philosophers had their speciall and peculiar reasons beside which induced them to thinke there was a God 2. Socrates especially considered the prouidence of God in prouiding so bountifully for man as he bringeth Euthydemus by this particular induction to acknowledge that God hath speciall care of man as he hath giuen him the light and day to guide him the night for him to rest in the fire to warme him the fruits of the earth to nourish him And whereas Euthydemus obiected that these things were common vnto men with bruit beasts Socrates sheweth that euen the beasts themselues also are for mans vse and beside God hath giuen more excellent gifts vnto man then to any other creature as vnderstanding memorie speach wherein Gods speciall care appeareth more to man then toward any other creature This was Socrates inducement ex Grynaeo 3. The Platonists did finde out God by comparing the Godhead with other things first they were perswaded that God was not a bodie secondly they held God to be immutable and so they sought not God in the soule of man or among the mutable spirits and therefore they held God to be an infinite and immutable essence beyond them all to this purpose August lib. 8. de civ Dei c. 6. And further they rose vp thus by degrees to finde out the Godhead first they held spirituall things to be better then corporall then the things that had life they preferred before those that had no life and of the things that had life them that had sense and motion and of these they held to be most perfect the things that were endued with reason and of the things hauing reason such as were intellectuall spirits such as are the Angels and among those he to be most perfect that was totus actus onely in act void of all passiue qualitie which is God for the other spirits doe consist partly in act partly in a possibilitie as they may not be But it is impossible that God should not be and thus by these steppes did they ascend to the contemplation of the diuine nature Faius 4. Aristotle was perswaded that there was a God and that all things consisted by the diuine power because it was haereditaria fama omnium mortalium an hereditarie opinion of all mortall men lib. 12. Metaphys c. 6 7. lib. 7. Ethicor. c. 13. thereupon
also that he was endued with an humane soule which though it be not here comprehended vnder the name of flesh yet it followeth by necessarie consequence that hauing an humane bodie he likewise receiued of God a reasonable soule as he himselfe saith Matth. 26.38 My soule is heauie vnto death his diuine spirit was not subiect to griefe or heauines This ouerthroweth the heresie of the Apollinarists which denied Christ to haue an humane soule but affirmed that his flesh was animated by his diuine nature 7. Controv. That the Romane faith is not the same now which was commended by the Apostle v. 8. Your faith is published through the whole world Pererius among other commendations of the Romane faith alleadgeth this That the Romane Church hath kept inviolablely the faith once receiued by the Apostles and therefore the fathers Ireneus Tertullian Opsatus by this argument vsed to confute heretikes because they dissented from the faith of the Church of Rome The Rhemists also alleadge diuers testimonies of the fathers in the commendation of the Romane faith as of Cyprian who saith whose faith was praised to whom misbeleefe can haue no accesse epist. 55. nu 6. likewise Hierome the Romane faith commended by the Apostles mouth will receiue no such deceits nor can be changed possibly though as Angel taught otherwise beeing sensed by S. Pauls authoritie adv Ruffin l. 3. c. 4. Contra. 1. The meaning of these fathers is not to giue such priuiledge vnto the Romane Church as that it should neuer faile in faith for Cyprian though in error himselfe chargeth Stephanus Bishop of Rome with error and Hierome sheweth that Liberius Bishop of Rome fell into heresie catalog and he himselfe reprooueth the custome of the Church of Rome and preferreth the custome of the Catholike Church in all the world◠Evagrio 2. But they giue this commendation of the Romane faith which was commended by the Apostle which while the Church of Rome held as it did vntill those times it could not possibly erre Now beeing fallen from that faith more then any Christian Church in the world it hath lost this commendation which S. Paul gaue of the faith of the Romanes therefore as P. Martyr well saith dolendae magis sunt vices Romana Ecclesia c. this change of the Church of Rome is much to be lamented which beeing sometime so highly commended by the Apostle is now become the seat of Antichrist as at Ierusalem Antioch Alexandria Constantinople which were sometime famous Churches the Mahometarie profession is now receiued and the Christians that are there are addicted to infinite superstitions 8. Controv. That the Pope is not vniuersall Bishop v. 5. By whome we haue receiued grace and Apostleship c. among all the Gentiles hence the Romanists may pretend the Popes vniuersall Pastorship ouer all the world because he succeedeth the Apostles Contra. 1. Other Bishops also as well as the Pope succeeded the Apostles therefore they also may chalenge as well as he to be vniuersall Bishops 2. But neither they nor he doe succeede the Apostles in their speciall calling to be Apostles but in their generall ministerie in office in beeing Pastours and Bishops 3. The Pope chalengeth to be Peters successour not Pauls but Peter was the Apostle of the circumcision not of the vncircumcised Gentiles 4. Gregorie the 1. Bishop of Rome condemneth the title of vniuersall Bishop and thus wrote concerning Iohn Patriarke of Constantinople who affected that title lib. 6. epist. 30. Ego fideliter dico quia quisquis se vniuersalem sacerdotem vocat vel vocari desidevat in electione sua Antichristū praecurrit c. I speak confidently that whosoeuer calleth himselfe vniuersal Priest or desireth to be so called in his pride forerunneth Antichrist likewise in the Africane Councell it was thus decreed the Bishop of the first Sea shall not be called the Prince of Praists or the chiefe Priest but onely Bishop of the first Sea Vniuersalis autem nec etiam Romanus pontifex appelletur c. But no not the Bishop of Rome shall be called Vniversall distinct 100. primae sedis Controv. 9. Against the Popish distinction between 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to worship and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to serue ver 9. Whom I serue in my spirit 1. The Romanists make this difference they take the first to signifie religious worship due onely vnto God the other to betoken seruice which is giuen vnto Saints and men Bel. lib. 1. de Sanctor beatitud c. 12. Erasmus much dissenteth not sauing that he vnderstandeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be worship which is giuen Diuis aut Deo to Saints or God Contra. That these words are indiffently taken for the same is euident both by the Scripture and prophane writings 1. as the Apostle here saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whom I worship so in other places he vseth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to serue Act. 10.19 Rom. 7.6 and 12.11 Ephes. 6.7 Philip. 2.22 Pareus And as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to serue is giuen vnto God so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which they would haue onely to signifie to worship is vsed of men as in Leviticus 23.7 where it is said thou shalt doe no seruile worke the words are as the Septuag translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 likewise Deuter. 28.48 where it is said thou shalt serue thine enemies the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. likewise these words are in forren writers taken in the same sense as Pet. Martyr sheweth out of Suidas that at the first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but that the first word afterward was taken to be of the same sense with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to worship So also Xenophon lib. 3. Cyropaid bringeth in the husband thus speaking vnto Cyrus concerning his wife that he had rather giue his life then she should serue the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beza also sheweth the same out of Pindarus in Olymp. od 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a reward for seruice So that the vanitie of this distinction sufficiently appeareth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is derived of the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is added for more vehemencie and the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth to tremble because it is the vse of seruants to be much afraide and tremble at the presence of their Masters Erasmus This diuise then will not serue their turne to coine two kinds of religious seruice by this curious distinction one peculiar vnto God the other vnto Saints Controv. 10. That God onely is spiritually to be serued and worshipped v. 9. Whome I serue in the spirit God onely is so to be serued as our Blessed Sauiour saith Matth. 4.10 thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him onely shalt thou serue Origen saith lib. 1. in epist. ad Roman Nos nullam creaturam sed patrem filium spiritum sanctum adoramus colimus we worship no creature but
the which naturall reason iuduceth was some way sufficient to the Gentiles vnto saluation c. But nothing can be acceptable to God without faith not that generall faith and knowledge of one God but the knowledge of God in Christ for he is the way and doore and without him is no entrace into life 6. Wherefore the Apostle here describeth the Gentiles in generall euen before the times of the Gospel and such as had no other direction then by the lawe of nature which they had as the Apostle sheweth by these two arguments both by the externall workes of the lawe and by the inward testimonie of their conscience But the Apostle faith not they fulfilled the lawe they onely did certaine things prescribed in the lawe Martyr And he speaketh rather de notitia naturali quam de implenda legis facultate of the naturall knowledge which they had not of any power or facultie to fulfill the lawe Calvin Beza And he meaneth not all the Gentiles in generall but the wiser sort among them as Solon Socrates Aristides the Sciptoes Catoes with other who outwardly did some externall workes which the lawe commanded though they wanted the inward obedience Pareus Quest. 27. How any thing can be said to be written in the heart by nature seeing the minde is commonly held to be as a bare and naked table v. 15. Which shewe the effect of the lawe written in their heart It is the opinion of the best Philosophers as of Plato in Philebo that the soule of man by nature is like vnto a booke wherein nothing is written or like vnto a bare naked table Aristot. lib. 3. de anima c. 4. how then doth the Apostle here say that the lawe is written in their heart Answ. 1. Plato was of opinion that all things were at the first written in the soule but when it commeth into the bodie is blotted out againe and forgotten and vpon this ground that opinion is mentioned by the Platonists that scire est reminisci to know is nothing els but to remember But this assertion presupposeth that the soule of man had a beeing without the bodie and that there is a certaine promptuarie or seminare of soules from whence the soules are deriued into the bodies But this opinion is contrarie to the Scripture which affirmeth that God formeth the spirit of man within him Zach. 12.1 the soule of man is created within him in his bodie infundendo creatur creando infunditur it is created by infusion into the bodie and iufused by creation 2. therefore a better answer is that whereas Aristole saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that nothing is written in the vnderstanding it must be vnderstood actually yet potentia in possibilitie euerie thing is written there because the vnderstanding is apt and hath a capacitie to receiue and apprehend euerie thing 3. neither is that axiome of Philosophie generally to be vnderstood but to be restrained to such principles as are not engendred in the mind without instruction experience and obseruation as is the knowledge of arts otherwise there are some principles which are by nature imprinted in the soule as first the naturall conclusions which the soule apprehendeth of it selfe without any other demonstration as that God is to be worshipped parents are to be honoured that good and honest things are to be desired secondly there are certaine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 generall notions which are at the first apprehended onely by the sense as that the fire burneth that the whole is greater then the part and such like ex Perer. Quest. 28. Of the Lawe of nature what it is It shall not be amisse by occasion of these words of the Apostle who speaketh here of the lawe of nature written in the heart a little to digresse and briefly touch certaine questions of this matter and first we will see what this lawe of nature is and of what precepts it consisteth 1. It is euident by the Apostle here that there is a lawe of nature which he prooueth by â—o effects the one externall in the performance of some things agreeable to the lawe the other internall in the testimonie of the conscience But in this inward testimonie there are two things to be considered there is first that which is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the comprehension of certaine practicall principles and a naturall discerning betweene good and euill iust and vniust then there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the conscience which either accuseth one for doing euill or excuseth him in choosing of that which is good the synteresis doth frame the proposition the syneidesis or cosncience the assumption as thus the naturall lawe reacheth that parents must be honoured and that they which disobey parents are worthie of punishment thus the proposition is framed out of the principles of nature then the conscience of the guiltie person supplyeth the assumption But we Cham Esau Absolom haue disobeyed our parents therefore we deserue punishment and the like practicall syllogismes may be made in other commandements Gryneus 1. Melancthon thus defineth the lawe of nature it is a knowledge of certaine principles belonging to the practise of life and of the conclusions thence necessarily inferred agreeable with the eternall rule of truth which God hath planted in the mind of man to be a testimonie vnto man that there is a God which ruleth and iudgeth the actions of men c. In this description there are the former causes expressed of the law of nature 1. the materiall cause or the obiect thereof wherein it is occupied and whereof it consisteth namely of certaine practicall principles with the conclusions gathered thereupon for the speciall scope of this naturall direction is for the the practise of life and not for speculation and in this naturall knowledge are not onely contained the first principles as parents are to be honoured but the conclusions thence diducted as out of this principle in generall euery one is taught by the light of nature in particular to conclude that therefore he must honour his parents 2. the formall cause is the agreement with the rule of truth and the equitie of Gods written lawe for the lawe of nature is a summarie abridgement of the morall lawe 3. then the efficient cause and author is God who hath written and imprinted this law in the heart of man as Ambrose thus defineth this naturall law quam Deus omnium creator singulorum hominum pectoribus iufudit which God the Creator of all hath infused into euerie mans breast epist. 71.4 then the end is that it should be a testimonie of the diuine prouidence and iudgement whereby he ruleth all things and in the ende will iudge the actions of men This description of the lawe of nature agreeth with the Apostles definition here it is the effect of the lawe written in our hearts the effect or worke sheweth the matter of the lawe the forme written the efficient for it is Gods writing the ende
other vnto it which bodie notwithstanding is farre from perâ—â—â— health though the smaller infirmities are not felt where a greater disease hath takeÌ„ possessiâ—â— 5. Now if our nature be vnsufficient to produce any good morall worke much lesses it able to direct a man vnto godly liuing for the truth onely maketh one free Ioh. 8.32 vnto such godly works we had neede to haue the grace of God to direct vs Psal. 4.6 maâ— say who will shew vs any good but Lord lift thou vp the light of thy countenance vpon vs. 34. Qu. Of the testimonie of the conscience and the accusing or excusing of the thoughts v. 16. Their conscience also bearing witnes and their thoughts c. 1. Faius thinketh thâ— three effects of the conscience are here expressed the first to testifie that is to propose the things done vnto the minde then to accuse and thereby to defend or excuse But rather theâ— first is the generall to testifie and beare witnesse which is expressed afterward in these two particulars that according as the things committed are good or euill so the conscienceâ— beareth witnesse by accusing or defending Gorrhan Pareus 2. Their thoughts are said â—â— accuse one an other 1. non cogitationibus inter se digladiantibus not as though the thoughtâ— did at the same time striue together about the same fact that some thoughts accused aâ—â— other excused 2. not yet is it meant of diuers men as that the thoughts accused the vnbeleeuers and excused the beleeuers gloss interlin Gorrh. or the accusing thoughts conceiued puniendos such as were to be punished the excusing servandos such as were to be saued Graeca caten 3. but in one and the same man as his facts were euill his conscience accused and as they were wel done his conscience excused him Par. Tol. 4. Some think that wheâ—â— in euery iudgement there must be three actor retis index â—he actuarie the guiltie person and the iudge that in diuers respects the conscience is all these the conscience accusing is thâ— actor the conscience accused is the guiltie partie and the iudge also is the conscience Faius But the partie accused is rather the man himselfe whome his conscience accuseth or excuseth and the conscience is the witnes the iudge supreame is God sitting in the conscience and the subalternate iudge is the light of nature imprinted in the heart which Lyranus calleth naturale indicatorium hominis the naturall iudgement place of man All these are here expressed by the Apostle he saith the effect of the law is written in their heart the iudgement seate is the heart the iudge the naturall law their written then the partie accused or defended are themselues and the witnesse and giuer of euidence is the conscience 5. Photius ex Oecumen here noteth that the conscience is not said to iustifie or condemne but onely to accuse or excuse sententiam iudex ipse fert the sentence the iudge himselfe giueth c. which is now for the present the euidence of naturall light in the soule but the superiour iudge is God himselfe in the day of iudgement 6. Here Origen disputeth very curiously what this conscience should be and he resolueth that the spirit of the conscience is an other thing beside the soule beeing ioyned vnto it as an inseparable companion in the bodie but if the soule of man be not ruled by it it shall be separated from the soule afterward and the spirit shall returne to God and the soule shall goe to torment to this purpose he expoundeth these words of the vnfaithfull seruant Matth. 24.51 He will separate him and giue him his portion with hypocrites as though the soule and the spirit should be separated a sunder Contr. True it is that there are two faculties in the soule there is in the minde the notion and apprehension of the naturall principles which are graft in vs by nature and then the conscience in the heart Pareus but that these should be diuers in substance and that one may be separated from the other is a strange conceit for the very spirits and soules of the wicked shall be tormented in hell not their soules onely as S. Peter speaketh of the spirits in prison which were disobedient in the daies of Noah 1. Pet. 3.19 by separating in that place our Sauiour meaneth the cutting such off and separating of them from the liuing 35. Qu. Why the Apostle maketh mention of the day of iudgement v. 16. 1. Some ioyne this verse with the 13. Not the hearers of the law but the doers shall be iustified in the day c. and all the rest comming between they enclose in a parenthesis so Beza Pareus and the Greeke catena Beza giueth this reason because if it should be referred to the next words before their thoughts accusing one an other or excusing which is spoken onely of the Gentiles this generall iudgement should be supposed to be onely for the Gentiles But the same inconuenience will follow if it be ioyned to the 13. v. which is specially meant of the Iewes that the day of iudgement would be thought onely to concerne them it is therefore no good consequent because the Gentiles are mentioned before that this iudgement should be onely for them for how followeth it the conscience of the Gentiles shall in that day accuse or excuse them therefore no mans conscience els 2. Wherefore this verse is better annexed to the next words before then to the other words so farre off to the which they can not well be ioyned without great divulsion of the sentence and suspending of the sense the meaning then is this not that the conscience accuseth not or excuseth none till that generall day of iudgement but 1. it is felt now sed tum maxime omnium sentietur but then it shall be felt most of all Osiand so also Lyran. 2. And now many men beeing carried away with the delights of this life present cogitationes accusatrices non audiunt doe not heare or regard their thoughts accusing them but in that day they shall be brought to light euery mans conscience shall touch him Mart. 3. Hactenus occultus est testis hetherto the conscience is but a secret witnes onely knowne to him that hath it but then omnibus apparebunt they shall be made manifest and apparant to all Tolet. 4. and by this the Apostle sheweth ne morte cas extingui that such accusing or excusing thoughts are not extinguished no not by death And Origen here well noteth that the thoughts shall accuse or excuse them in the day of iudgement not which they shall haue then but which they haue now for cogitationum malaruÌ„ quaedam notae certaine marks of euill thoughts doe remaine in the soule which shall be manifested then Origen ficut stile en cera nota imprimitur as a seale leaueth a print in the waxe Haymo 36. Qu. Why it is called the day and of the application of other words v. 16. 1. At the day
those which beleeue vnto vnbeleeuers therefore they doe not appertaine Pareus But it will be further obiected that the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 11.27 that he which eateth and drinketh vnworthily shall be guilty of the bodie and blood of Christ but they could not be guilty vnlesse they were partakers Answ. It doth not followe one may be guiltie of a thing which he is not partaker of as many may be guilty of violating the princely maiestie which had no interest therein neither were partakers thereof so then the wicked and vnbeleeuers are guilty non manducati sed non dâ—â—dicati corporis c. not of the eating but of not discerning the Lords bodie Gryneus Controv. 4. That the Romane Church hath not the promise of the perpetuall presence of Gods spirit The Romanists alleadge this place for themselues that the vnbeleefe of some make not the promises of God of no effect and therefore seeing the Lord hath promised to be present with and to giue his spirit to his Church they cannot faile thereof notwithstanding their sinnes and corruptions Answ. Christ promised the presence of his spirit to his disciples they must then first prooue themselues to be the disciples of Christ in following his doctrine and keeping his word in adding nothing thereto nor decreeing any thing against it before they can haue any interest in this promise God indeede hath promised to be present with his Church but a companie of mitred Bishops following humane traditions and leauing the word of God doe not make the true Church of Christ Martyr Controv. 5. The Virgin Marie not exempted from sinne v. 10. There is none that is righteous no not one Chrysostome handling these words in his commentarie vpon the 13. Psalme giueth instance how that when Christ was crucified this saying was then most of all verified that there was not one that did good discipuli omnes fugerunt c. all the disciples fledde Iohn went away Peter denied Mariae animam gladius dubitationis incredulitatis pervasit and a sword of doubtfulnesse and vnbeleefe did pierce the soule of Marie c. the like is affirmed by Chrysostome hom 49. in Genes and by Origen hom 17. in Luc. and by Augustine lib. question veter nov Testam qu. 73. But Pererius refusing the iudgement of these fathers confidently affirmeth that the Virgin Marie fuisse expertem omnis peccati etiam minimi levissimi per omnem vitam was free from the least and lightest sinne all her life and of Chrysostome he is bold to say veritatis pietatis terminos excessisse that he exceeded the bounds of veritie and pietie Perer. 〈◊〉 6. numer 33. Contra. But Pererius in thus affirming will make not Chrysostome onely and other ancient writers liers but Christ himselfe and his blessed mother for if Mary were without the least sinne why did our Blessed Saviour reprooue her for taking so much vpon her saying Iohn 2.4 Woman what haue I to doe with thee would he checke her without any fault and againe Marie her selfe saith in her song Luk. 2.47 My spirit reioyceth in God my Sauiour what needed she a Sauiour if she were free from sinne see further hereof Synops. Centur. 2 â—â—â— 79. Controv. 6. The reading of Scripture is not to be denied vnto any v. 10. As it is written c. in that the Apostle alleadgeth testimonies of Scripture to prooue all men to be sinners thereupon appeareth the necessitie of the reading of Scripture 〈◊〉 of the generall vse for all both laymen and others for by the Scriptures commeth the knowledge of sinne which concerneth all Chrysostome in his homilie of Lazarus and the rich man exhorteth all men to reade the Scriptures euen such as did trade in the world and kept families further shewing that they could not attaine vnto saluation vnlesse both day and night they were conuersant in the Scriptures yea he affirmeth that such of the common sort had more neede to reade the Scriptures then men of more holy life quod perpetus versantur in maiori discrimine because they are conversant in greater danger Here then that corrupt vsage of the Romane Church is to be taxed who denie the generall vse of the Scriptures vnto the people neither doe permit them to reade them shutting the Scriptures vp in an vnknowne language Martyr Controv. 7. Against the adversaries of the Lawe the Marcionites and other heretikes v. 20. By the lawe commeth the knowledge of sinne hereupon those wicked heretikes tooke occasion to speake against the lawe malaradix lex c. the law then is an euill root and an euill tree by the which commeth the knowledge of sinne to this Origen vpon this place answeareth well non dexit ex lege agnitio peccati sed per legem vt scias non ex ipsa â—tum sed per ipsam cognitum he saith not of the lawe is the knowlede of sinne but by the lawe to knowe that sinne did not spring of it but is onely knowne by it As physicke by the which we come to haue the knowledge of our diseases is not therefore euill thus Origen Controv. 8. Against the Counsels of perfection v. 19. That euerie mouth may be stopped c. here the opinion of the Romanists is euidently conuinced that beside the precepts which are commanded there are Euangelicall counsels which are more then one is bound to doe notwithstanding he that doth them is worthie of a greater reward such are these counsels of perfection as they call them â—â— vowe single life to giue all to the poore and to take vpon them voluntarie pouertie and such like and Origen hath the like conceit who in his commentarie vpon this third chapter giueth this corrupt glosse vpon these words of our Sauiour Luk. 17.10 When ye haue done all these things which are commanded you say we are vnprofitable seruants as long as a man saith he doth that which he is bound to doe he is an vnprofitable seruant si aâ—â—m addas aliquid praeceptis iam non eris invtilis servus but if you adde any thing to the precepts then are you no longer an vnprofitable seruant Contra. 1. Concerning Origens glosse we haue as great libertie to refuse it as Pererius had before to reiect Chrysostomes opinion concerning the Virgin Marie and to accuse him of falshood and impietie especially seeing that his glosse corrupteth the text for if we cannot doe those things which are commanded much lesse beside the commandement can any doe more then is required 2. the Apostle here in saying That euerie mouth may be â—â—ped ouerthroweth this arrogant and presumptuous opinion of such counsels of perfection for then a man should haue wherein to reioyce if he could doe more then is commanded and his mouth would not be stopped Controv. 9. Against the Pelagians which established freewill Augustine c. 9. lib. de spirit liter handling these words confuseth that presumptuous error of the Pelagians who affirme that the lawe onely sheweth what should be
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
also passe ouer vnto his posteritie euen in respect of the fault this he prooueth by the testimonie of the Hebrewes themselues iust by the words which they vse in circumcision which are these Deus noster pars nostra protector noster praecepit erui carneâ— nostram ab infâ—â—â—â— propter foedus suum quod posuit in causa nostra God our portion and our protector hath commanded that our flesh should be deliuered from hell for his couenant like which he hath placed in our flesh c. But infants which are circumcised haue not deserued hell by any actuall sinnes which they had committed therefore they are guiltie of hell in respect of originall sinne To this purpose also he produceth the testimonie of R. Salmo who giueth this note vpon that place Genes 2.4 These are the generations of heauen and earth c. that in two places onely this word teldoth generations is written fully namely with chalom in the beginning and ende in this place before Adams fall for in the beginning men were created secundum plenitudinem 〈◊〉 perfectioâ—â—â— in their fulnesse and perfection but after Adam had sinned their generations were corrupted and therefore Gen. 4. and other where that word it not expressed fully with chalom in the ende the other place is Ruth 4. These are the generations of Pâ—â—â—rs c. these the word toldoth is written fully because Christ the sonne of Dauid was the Sonne of Pâ—â—res for vntill he came the generation of man should not be restored â—â— Burgens 3. But there are euident places beside out of the old testament for the proofe of originall sinne as Genes 9.21 the imagination of mans heart is euill from his youth and Dauid confesseth Psal. 54. I was borne in iniquitie and in sinne hath my mothere conceiued me c. Controv. 11. That Adams sinne is entred into his posteritie by propagation not imitation onely against the Pelagians The Pelagians held these two hereticall positions concerning this matter 1. That Adams sinne is deriued into his posteritie nor by any naturall propagation but by corrupt imitation 2. the other that death is entred into Adams posteritie not as a punishment of Adams sinne but as a defect of nature issuing out of the fraile and brittle composition and constitution of mans bodie these strange assertions are thus confuted by Augustine 1. If the Apostle had spoken here of the beginning of sinne by imitation not by propagation non eius principium fecisset Adamum sed diabolum c. he would not haue made Adam the beginning but the deuill c. for he sinned first he was a lier from the beginning Iohn 8.44 2. As he in whom all are quickned and made aliue beside that he gaue an example of righteousnesse to those that imitate him dat etiam occultissimam fidelibus gratiam c. giueth also secret grace vnto the faithfull c. so he in whom all die beside the example of imitation in transgressing Gods commandement occulta etiam labe c. he also infected all his ofspring with the secret contagion of concupiscence Augustine lib. 1. de peccator merit remissi c. 9. 3. Further Augustine presseth these words of the Apostle Rom. 5.16 the fault is of one offence to condemnation but if men are onely guiltie of condemnation for their actuall sinnes he should haue said condemnationem fieri ex multis peccatis c. that condemnation came through many offences not through one epist. 89. ad Hilarium 4. And in an other place he vrgeth this reason because many in sinning doe not propound vnto themselues the example of Adam but haue other occasions which moue them as when a theefe killeth a man he did it nihil de Adamo cogitans thinking nothing of Adam but to this end that he might haue his gould c. Adams eating of an apple which was forbidden can yeeld no example of imitation to a murtherer and there are many wicked men in the world that neuer heard of Adams transgression to this purpose Augustine lib. 6. cont Iulian. c. 12. 5. Beside the Apostles words euidently conuinceth them for the Apostle saith as sinne entred so death by sinne then as death actually is propagated so also sinne Tolet. annot 15. And death is entred vpon all because all haue sinned seeing then infants die it followeth that they sinne but not actually therefore they haue originall sinne P. Martyr 6. Hence it is euident that the commentaries which passe vnder Hieromes name are forged for that author saith vpon this place insaniunt qui de Adamo per traducem ad â—â— asserunt venisse peccarum they are madde which affirme that sinne is come vpon vs as traduced and deriued from Adam c. for Hierome liuing in the same time that Pelagius broached his heresie did condemne and detect it as Augustine and other orthodoxall writers did Controv. 12. Of the manner how originall sinne is propagated against the Pelagians where it is disputed whether the soule be deriued from the parents The Pelagians to strengthen their error in denying the propagation of originall sinne from Adam to his posteritie obiected thus the seate and place of sinne is the soule but the soule is not propagated nor deriued by generation from the parents therefore neither sinne To this obiection diuerse answers are made 1. Some thinke that originall sinne is conueied by that carnall pleasure and delight which the parents haue in the act of generation but this is not so for these two reasons 1. because that carnall pleasure is not sinne 〈◊〉 some euill affection beside do concurre with it for without that delight there is no generation which if it were necessarily accompanied with sinne the Scriptures would not haue giuen libertie to marrie if it were in it selfe a sinnefull act 2. And if it were admitted that this naturall delight were sinne yet there by that infirmitie onely should be conueied whereas originall sinne is a generall corruption of nature 2. Some thinke that God createth the soules of men agreeable to their corrupt bodies like as he giueth vnto dogs and other creatures spirits answerable to their state and condition But this opinion is reiected likewise for if God should create or make any soule euill he should be the author of sinne 3. Some doe thinke that the soule of man is deriued also ex traduce as they tearme it and propagated from the parentes as the bodie is this opinion Tertullian seemed to fauour and Augustine holdeth it probable Genes ad liter c. 10. some of their reasons are these 1. because in the making of the woman it is not said that God breathed into her the breath of life as it is expressed of Adam and therefore it is like that she had as her bodie so her soule from Adam Answer Nay rather the contrarie is inferred because no mention is made of the soule and spirit of Eue that it had the like beginning which Adams had otherwise he would haue said this
is soule of my soule as he saith bone of my bones flesh of my flesh 2. Gen. 46.26 it is said that 66. soules came out of the loines of Iacob Answ. here the soule is taken for person and by a synecdoche the whole man is vnderstood by a part and that is said of the whole because of the vnitie of the person and the neare coniunction of the soule and bodie which is true onely in the one part namely the bodie which onely came out of the parentes loines in the same sense Marie is said to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the mother of God because Christ both God and man was borne of her and yet he was borne onely as man 3. If the soule be not propagated by generation but created in the bodie then it would follow that God on the seauenth day had not made an end of the creation Answ it followeth not God ceased from creating any new kind but now the inspiring of the soule is but a continnuing of that way of the soule which God in the first creation made for it The better opinion then is animas creando infundi infundendo creari that the soules are infused by creation and created by infusion the reasons of which opinion are these 1. the direct words of Scripture Zacha. 12.1 God is said to haue formed the spirit of man within him And Hebr. 12.9 he is called the father of spirits 2. an other ground of this opinion is taken from the nature and condition of the soule it is a spirituall and immateriall essence immortall and incorruptible and therefore cannot come of corruptible and corporall seed 3. Christs soule came the same way which other mens soules doe for otherwise he should not be like vs in all things sinne excepted but his soule was not propagated from Marie for if he had both his bodie and soule from her he might as well be said to haue beene in the loines of Abraham when he paied tithes to Melchisedech as Levi Hebr. 7.10 and yet though Leui had his bodie onely not his soule from the loines of Abraham he is said to be in his loines because he came from thence by the ordinarie and common generation but so did not Christ seeing then this opinion is refused of the generation and derivation of the soule we also reiect this answer concerning the propagating of originall sinne 4. This then is our more full answer vnto this obiection of the Pelagians 1. although we can not giue a sufficient reason of this how originall sinne should be propagated yet it is enough for vs that it is so that we are all by nature the children of wrath 2. it is not true that onely the flesh and bodie of man is propagated from the parents for then man should conferre lesse in his generation then brute beasts from whom not the bodies onely but the spirits doe issue in the generation of their kind so then totus homo ex toto homine nascitur whole man is generated of whole man and anima licet non materialiter tamen originaliter the soule though not materially yet originally is taken from Adam Pareus we doe not say that the soule of man is deriued from the soule of the father yet man consisting of bodie and soule is begotten of his father the Lord beeing the father of spirits concurring in that naturall act of carnall generation 3. it is denied that the soule onely is the feate of sinne it is the corruption of the whole man consisting both of bodie and soule the whole man then is corrupted and so the feate and place of sinne Pareus and how the soule beeing created pure commeth to be infected with sinne Lyranus wel sheweth sicut liquor bonus inficitur ex corruptione vasis c. as a good liquor is infected by the corruption of the vessell so originall sinne provenit ex carne causaliter sed tamen in anima est subiective formaliter commeth of the flesh as the cause but it is in the soule as the subiect and formally like as sickenes and infirmitie commeth of corrupt and vnholesome meats as the cause but the meate is not capable of sickenes as the subiect the bodie is the subiect of sickenes to this purpose Lyranus Faius expresseth it by this similitude the pure soule is infected with the contagion of impute seed sicut manu immunda flos insignis polâ—â—â—tur c. like as a faire flower is polluted with vncleane hands Pet. Martyr yet more distinctly sheweth the manner how this pollution entreth into the soule corporis impuritate imbecillitate sua by two waies the impuritie of the bodie and it owne weaknesseâ— for both the soule is weake and not able to resist the corrupt inclination of the flesh it is not created in such strength and perfection as Adams soule was and the bodie is vnapt and vnfit for any spirituall worke and this may suffice for an answer vnto this obiection of the Pelagians concerning the originall of the soule Controv. 13. Against the Pelagians and Papists that originall sinne is not quite taken away in baptisme 1. The Pelagians obiect further that there is no originall sinne propagated vnto Adams posteritie or at the least remaining in them for that which is taken away and blotted out remaineth not now originall sinne is taken away in baptisme and therefore it is no more extant Answer There must be two things considered in sinne the act thereof as the matter and the guilt now there is herein a great difference betweene originall and other actuall sinnes for in those the act is transitorie and remaineth not and the guilt is remitted by faith in Christ in originall sinne though the guilt thereof be remitted in baptisme yet the matter thereof which is the corruption and deprauation of mans nature remaineth it passeth not away as the transitorie act of other actuall sinnes and for the more full demonstration hereof Augustine vseth two similitudes like as the corne is sowen without chaffe or straw and yet the corne that springeth of the seed hath both and as they which were circumcised beget children that are vncircumcised and had neede of a new circumcision so the fathers beeing regenerate by a new birth yet doe beget vnregenerate children the sanctitie of the parents no more passeth to their children then their knowledge and other vertues Mart. 2. The Romanists denie not but there remaineth a corruption of nature still in the children of God after Baptisme but they say it remaineth vt poena exercenda vertâ—tis materia not as a fault but as a punishment and matter or occasion for the exercising of vertue Lyran. And it was concluded in the Councell of Trent in baptisme tolli omne illud quod veram habet propriam rationem peccati all that to be taken away which hath the proper and true nature of sinne Concil Trident. sess 5. the Rhemists also affirme that children baptized haue neither mortall nor
in the first the reason is not shewed why we are said to be graft into Christ but onely the similitude explained how he is said to be graft and we also 5. Erasmus because the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 planted together referreth it to the planting of the Iewes and Gentiles together into one bodie But Tolet well obserueth annot 5. that the Apostle speaketh of our planting into Christ not of one into an other 6. The meaning then of this phrase is this that Christ is the vine and we the branches as our Sauiour sheweth Iob. 15. and so we are by faith whereof baptisme is the Sacrament and seale planted and graft into Christ and doe receiue of his grace and spirit as the branches receiue the iuyce of the tree and as the tree and branches die together and growe together so Christs death causeth vs to die to sinne and his resurrection maketh vs to rise vnto newnesse of life Pareus But as similitudes must not be vrged in euerie point so must not this for betweene the naturall grafting of plants and our supernaturall and spirituall planting into Christ there is great difference for in the one the stocke for the most part is the worst but the science or plant is of a better kind and correcteth the euilnes of the stocke but here it is farre otherwise for we are of our selues wild plants and the stocke into the which we are planted is good and full of sappe Martyr Quest. 8. What resurrection the Apostle speaketh of v. 5. 1. There is some difference in the reading of the words Chrysostome who thinketh that the Apostle speaketh here de futura resurrectione of the resurrection to come will not haue the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 similitude supplyed non subiunxit similitudini resurrectionis the Apostle added not and to the similitude of the resurrection But then the Greeke construction cannot hang together if for of the resurrection beeing in the genitiue case 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cannot agree with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 graft in which before is ioyned with a datiue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the similitude Haymo will haue it put in the datiue to the resurrection but in the originall it is in the genetive Therefore the word similitude must be supplied that as he said before we are graft into the similitude of his death so we shall be to the similitude of his resurrection and so Origen also readeth 2. Concerning the meaning of these words Chrysostome Origen Tertullian Haymo with others vnderstand them of the second resurrection and they vrge this reason because the Apostle putteth the word in the future erimus we shall be Chrysostome and whereas else where the Apostle speaketh in the time past hath raised vs vp together Ephes. 2.5 but here in the future Origen thereupon inferreth that there are two resurrections one of the mind in this life the other of the bodie in the next But this is no argument taken from the time for the Apostle speaketh in the future tense because our renouation is not perfect in this life but we must daily rise from the dead workes of sinne to the newnes of life Beza 3. The Apostle then here specially intendeth the first resurrection vnto newenesse of life as he said before as Christ was raised vp from the dead by the glorie of the father not to the glorie of the father as Beza and the Syrian interpreter for the praeposition is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 per thorough yet it signifieth that Christ beeing raised vp by the glorious power of the Godhead for he hath one power with his father was raised vp to liue in glorie as the Apostle faith afterward v. 10. he liueth vnto God so we should walke in newenesse of life 4. Yet from hence also we haue an assurance of the resurrection of our bodies Calvin that by Christs resurrection we now are raised vp to the life of righteousnesse and afterward to the life of glorie as the Apostle ioyneth them both together Coloss. 2.3 for yee are dead and your life is hid with Christ in God when Christ which is our life shall appeare then shall yee also appeare with him in glorie Mart. Quest. 9. What is vnderstood by the old man v. 6. 1. The old man some take for the bodie the newe for the soule as Haymo alleadgeth out of Augustine but euen the prauitie of the affections and mind are part of this old man and therefore the Apostle saith Ephes. 4.23 be renewed in the spirit of your minde 2. Neither is the old man here taken for mans nature but the corruption thereof as Theodoret veterem hominem non naturam appellat sed pravam mentem the old man he calleth not our nature but the depraued minde and in that he saith our old man he distinguisheth the old man from our selues then we our selues are not this old man but it is aliqâ—â—d nostrum something of ours Pareus 3. Now it is called the old man in two respects first as Adam the old man is compared with the latter Adam and from Adam is deriued originall sinne which bringeth forth such euill fruites in vs before we are regenerate secondly in respect of our selues because our former conuersation is old beeing compared with our renovation and regeneration Beza the first both is according to the first Adam in sinne our second and new birth is according to the latter Adam in holines and righteousnesse 4. To this our state in the old man belong these three things 1. the guiltines of sinne 2. the custome and continuance in sinne 3. fomes peccati the occasion procurement enrising vnto sinne which proceedeth from the sinne of our parents ex Thom. 5. But whereas the ordinar gloss giueth this note that whereas the oldnes of our nature consisteth in two things in culpa poena in the fault and punishment Christus sus simpla vetustaie duplicem nostram consumpsit Christ by his single oldnes that is his death hath taken away both ours c. this can no way agree with the scope of the Apostle for if the old man be of Adam and we are made newe in Christ then cannot the old man be said to be in Christ. Quest. 10. What is meant by the bodie of sinne v. 6. that the bodie of sinne might be destroyed 1. Haymo propoundeth this interpretation among others that as Christ is the head of the elect and they with all their vertuous actions are his bodie so the deuill is as the head of sinne and the vngodly with all their sinnes are his bodie so that this bodie of sinne should haue relation vnto the deuill as the head but this bodie of sinne the Apostle called before our old man it hath relation to our selues not vnto the deuill 2. Some do take this bodie for our flesh in qua peccatum haeret whereto sinne cleaueth Beza Genevens and before them Theodoret but this cannot agree with the phrase which the Apostle
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
tooke away the handwriting of the lawe which was against vs Calvin so Oecumen by the bodie of Christ pro nobis interemptum slaine for vs so also Ambrose tradens corpus suum Servator mortem vicit peccatum damnavit our Sauiour deliuering vp his bodie ouercame death and condemned sinne c. So we are dead vnto the lawe in the bodie of Christ because he in his body was made a curse for vs to redeeme vs from the curse of the law Par. Quest. 7. Of the meaning of these words v. 6. beeing dead vnto it There are 3. readings of these words 1. some reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we are deliuered from the law of death so the vulgar Latine and Ambrose with Anselme Haymo and Origen also maketh mention hereof though he approoue an other reading But the morall lawe is not properly called the law of death which title better agreath vnto sinne which indeed is the law of death Beza obserueth that no Greek copie but one which he had seen so readeth 2. Some read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being dead in the nominative which some expound thus in the which we were held as dead Origen but here is a traiection or transposing of the words which stand thus in the originall dead wherein c. not wherein we were dead some vse a harder kind of traiection we which are dead are deliuered whereas the order of the words is this we are deliuered from the lawe beeing dead c. some vse no traiection at all but supply the pronounc it or that dead vnto it wherein c. and they vnderstand the lawe Theophylact Erasmus Bucer Calvin P. Mart. 3. But the better reading is in the genetive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and some ioyne it with the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lawe the lawe beeing dead wherein c. but it is rather put absolutely and the pronoune that or it must be supplyed that beeing dead wherein we were holden not in Oecumenius sense who vnderstandeth it actiuely we are dead by sinne but passiuely with Chrysostome that beeing dead namely sinne wherein we were holden id quod detinebat peccatum c. that which did hold vs namely sinne hath now nothing to hold vs with Quest. 8. What is meant by the newenesse of the spirit and the oldnesse of the letter 1. Origen vnderstandeth by the oldnes of the letter the ceremonies of the lawe as circumcision the Iewish Sabbaths by the newenesse of the letter the spirituall and allegoticall sense so also Haymo saith he serueth God in the newenes of the spirit that spiritually practiseth the circumcision of the heart not the carnall obseruation of the ceremonies But S. Paul treateth here of the morall not the ceremoniall lawe as Tolet well obserueth annot 18. 2. Chrysostome and Theophylact following him vnderstand the oldnes of the letter of the externall obedience which was practised vnder the law the newenesse of the spirit they expound to be the inward obedience of the heart wrought in vs by the spirit of Christ But we must here take heede that we doe not so thinke that the literall sense of the lawe onely concerned outward obedience for it required the perfect loue of God and our neighbour and restrained the verie inward concupiscence Neither must we imagine that all they which liued vnder the lawe onely serued God in the oldnes of the letter yeelding onely externall obedience as Chrysostome seemeth to insinuate that they were commanded onely to abstaine from murther adulterie and such like but we are restrained from anger wantonnes the inward motions for many of the holy men vnder the lawe had the newenesse of spirit in the renovation of their inward desires as the faithfull haue vnder the Gospell 3. Some by the oldnesse of the letter vnderstand sinne which was not reformed by the letter of the lawe by the newenesse of the spirit the fruits of righteousnesse as Hierome epist. ad Hedib quest 8. vivamus sub pracepto qui prius in modum brutorum c. let vs liue vnder the precept which before as bruite beasts said let vs eate and drinke c. so also Tolet annot 8. but if by the oldnes of the letter we vnderstand sinne how can any be said to serue God in sinne 4. Ambrose by the newenesse of the spirit doth vnderstand legem fidei the lawe of faith by the oldnes of the letter the law of works but the Apostle here speaketh of our obedience and sanctifie which is the fruits indeede of iustification rather then iustification it selfe 5. Wherefore the Apostle rather by the oldnes of the letter vnderstandeth the outward and externall obedience onely ot iosam legis notitiam the idle and fruitlesse knowledge of the lawe without the true conuersion of the heart the newenes of the spirit is the true sanctitie both of bodie and soule wrought in vs by the spirit of God which is called newe compared with our former state and condition vnder the old man and in respect of our newe mariage with Christ Pareus so Calvin non habemus in lege nisi externam literam c. we haue not in the lawe but onely the externall letter which doth bridle our outward actions but doth not restraine our concupiscence so Pet. Martyr vnderstandeth quoddam obedientia genus a certaine kind of outward obedience but not such as God requireth to the same purpose Osrander the newenes of the spirit is when we serue God move spontaneo spiritu with a readie and willing spirit they serued God in the oldnes of the letter that is indignabundo spiritus with an vnwilling mind And the law as Beza well noteth is called the letter quia surdis canit because it speaketh as vnto deafe men till they be regenerate and renewed by the spirit of grace 6. So here are three things set one against the other solutio contra detentionem libertie or freedome against detayning or holding the newenesse against the oldnes the spirit against the letter Gorrhan Quest. 9. How S. Paul beeing brought vp in the knowledge of the law could say I knew not lust 7. and I was aliue without the law v. 9. 1. The occasion of this question is because elswhere the Apostle professeth his integrity as Philip. 3.6 touching the righteousnesse which is in the law I was vnreproouable and Act. 23.1 he saith I haue in all good conscience serued God vnto this day how then could he be ignorant of the law or be without the law Ans. 1. It may be answered that either S. Paul spake of his first age in the time of his childhood when he knew not the law or he speaketh figuratiuely in the person of an other But neither of these is likely not the first for the things which the Apostle here toucheth show the law wrought in him all manner of concupiscence are not incident into the age of children or vnexperienced young men nor the other for thoroughout this whole chapter the
in Oecumen 2. or I finde by the lawe that when I would doe good euill is present Vatab. Genevens Calvin but here the preposition per by is inserted which is not in the originall 3. Erasmus to the same purpose I finde the lawe this to worke in me that I vnderstand when I would doe well that evill is present c. but here many words are added not in the originall Of them that vnderstand the lawe of the members 1. Beza thus interpreteth I finde legem impositam this lawe to be imposed vpon me by reason of the corruption of my nature so also Mart. that when I would doe good euill is present 2. some directly vnderstand legem carnis the lawe of the flesh the concupiscence which hindreth him beeing willing to doe good so Tolet Osiand and these two last expositions are most agreeable to the text because it is added as a reason because euill is present with me in which words he sheweth what lawe he meaneth that which is opposite vnto him which is further explained in the verses following Quest. 29. How the Apostle saith v. 21. euill is present with me 1. Ambrose hath here a curious observation euill is said to be present adiacere to be readie at hand because it lutketh in the flesh as at the doore that when one is inclined and willing to do good sinne is at hand to hinder And he giueth this reason why sinne hath the habitation in the flesh rather then in the soule because the flesh onely is deriued ex traduce by propagation and not the soule which if it were propagated as well as the flesh sinne rather should haue the feare in the soule because it sinneth rather then the flesh which is but the organe or instrument of sinne likewise expoundeth Tolet adiacet mihi it is naturally resiant in my flesh as he said before that to will is present with me that is naturally in his minde annot 21. 2. But 1. Ambrose reason concludeth not for though the flesh haue the beginning by propagation and not the soule and so the first pollution is by the flesh yet sinne disperseth it selfe into the whole nature of man both soule and bodie as the Apostle sheweth Coloss. 2.18 that there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a mind of flesh or fleshly minde 2. neither naturally is the mind willing or apt vnto that which is good for why then should the Apostle exhort to be renewed in the spirit of the minde Ephes. 4.23 the aptnesse and inclination of the mind vnto good is by grace the meaning then of this phrase is nothing else but to shewe the readinesse and strength of our naturall concupiscence which lyeth in waite and is at hand to hinder euerie good worke and to stirre vs vp vnto euill Quest. 30. Of these words I delight in the law of God c. v. 22 23. of the number of these lawes and what they are 1. Concerning the number 1. some referre these laws vnto two the law of God and the law of the minde they make one and the same the law of the members and the law of sinne also they thinke to be one Pareus Martyr Tolet. annot 22. 2. Photius in Oecumenius maketh three lawes he distinguisheth the law of God and the law of the minde the law of the members and the law of sinne he confoundeth 3. But Hierom. epist. ad Hedib qu. 8. and Ambr. in Luc. 17. doe recite fowre lawes as they are here named by the Apostle the law of God the law of the minde the law of the members and the law of sinne so also Calvin Hyper. and the Apostle indeede setteth downe so many 2. The like difference is what these lawes should be 1. Oecumenius thus describeth these lawes two are without vs the law of God the knowledge whereof we haue by the preaching of the Gospel and the law of the members which commeth by the suggestion of Satan ministring euill cogitations two of them are within vs the law of the minde that is the law of nature which is imprinted in the minde and the law of sinne which is the euill custome of sinning 2. Pererius will haue the law of God to be the written law and the law of the mind the naturall law the law of the members the naturall concupiscence and inclination vnto the seuerall proper obiects of the desire the law of sinne is deordinatio earundem virium the disordering of the naturall faculties and abusing of them vnto euill But all these faile herein 1. the law of the minde is not naturall for naturally the minde is not apt vnto that which is good without the worke of grace 2. and the law of the members is internall and within vs. 3. neither is this the naturall facultie of desiring which is not euill but the disordered pravitie of nature 3. Pet. Mertyr as he maketh the law of God and the law of the minde to be the same yet in a diuers respect for it is called the law of God in respect of the author and of the minde in regard of the subiect so in his iudgement the same is called the law of sinne because concupiscence in it selfe is sinne as the efficient and the law of the members because they are as the instruments 4. But I rather consent vnto M. Calvin who vnderstandeth the law of God to be the morall law the rule of equitie and the law of the minde to be the obedience and conformitie which the mind regenerate hath with the law of God and by the law of the members the concupiscence which is in the members consenting to the law of sinne 5. And further the law of the members and the law of sinne are not severed in subiect they are both in the members but thus they differ Some thinke the law of the members to be the corruption and pravitie of our nature called before the bodie of sinne c. 6.6 and the law of sinne the euill concupiscence springing from thence so Vatablus the law of the members is vis in carne the strength of the flesh resisting the law of the minde and the law of sinne is affectus carnis the carnall affections so Haymo interpreteth the law of the members onus pondus mortalitatis the burthen of mortalitie and the law of sinne to be euill concupiscence custome and delight in sinne so Lyranus vnderstandeth by the law of the members fomitem peccati vel inclinationem pravam the food and matter of sinne or the corrupt inclination and the law of sinne consuetudinem pravam the euill custome of sinning 6. But I rather with Beza by the law of sinne vnderstand the corruption of nature by the law of the members the euill concupiscence springing from thence for otherwise the opposition betweene the law of God and the minde on the one side and the law of the members and of sinne on the other will not be correspondent and answerable together for the law of the members must be
set against the law of the minde and the law of sinne against the law of God like as then the regenerate minde is conformable to the law of God so the vnregenerate members are captived to the law of sinne in the members which is the corruption of nature euen originall sinne 31. Quest. Why these are called lawes and why they are said the one to be in the inner man the other in the members 1. For the first 1. Chrysostome giueth this reason it is called the law of sinne propter vehementem exactam obedientiam because of the exact and forced obedience which is giuen vnto it for the laws of tyrants are so called abusive though not properly Calvin lex quia dominatur it is a law because it ruleth gloss 2. Lyranus a law is called à ligando of binding ducit membra ligata ad mala it leadeth the members and holdeth or tieth them to that which is euill they can doe no other 3. Pererius sicut lex dirigit c. as the law directeth to that which is good so the lawe of sinne to that which is euill 4. legitime factum est it commeth iustly to passe that illi non serviat suum inferius t. caro that mans inferiour that is his flesh should not serue him seeing he serued not his superiour namely God gloss ordinar Anselmus so it is called a lawe as in iustice imposed of God vpon man for his disobedience 2. For the second the one is called the lawe of the minde and inner man the other the lawe of the members and outward man 1. not that the minde and reason onely wherein the naturall lawe is written is the inner man and the sensitive part is the flesh as Lyranus Gorrhan with others which opinion is confuted before quest 26. for euen the minde is corrupt and so carnall in the vnregenerate as the Apostle speaketh of some which were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 corrupt in their minde 2. Timoth. 3.8 2. But the regenerate part is called the inner man and the vnregenerate both in soule and bodie the outward 1. because intus potissimum regnat it raigneth chiefely within and is discerned chiefely and knowne in the mind Mart. 2. quia in cordis conuersione c. because it consisteth in the heart nec patet hominum oculis and is not open and apparent vnto the sight of men Pareus in which sense it is called the hid man of the heart 1. Pet. 3.4 3. and because non externa vel mâ—â—dana quaerit it seeketh not things externall belonging to the world whereas appetitus carnis vagi sunt extra hominem the fleshly appetite is wandring and as it were without a man Calvin and as Caietane carnalibus officijs immersae sunt the faculties of the outward man are drenched as it were and wholly spent in carnall offices 4. and the regenerate part is called by the name of the inner man and the minde per excellenciam because of the excellencie for as the minde is more excellent then the bodie so is the spirit then the flesh Calvin Quest. 32. Of the Apostles exclamation O wretched man that I am 1. The word which the Apostle here vseth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth one that is perpetus pugnis fatigatus wearied with continuall combates Beza like as a champion which striuing along time is like at last to be ouercome of his aduersaries vnlesse he be helped the vulgar latine readeth O vnhappie man but that is not so fit 2. neither doth the Apostle thus crie out either as a man in despaire or doubting by whom he should be deliuered but he sheweth his great desire vox est anhelantis it is the voice of one breathing and panting desiring to be deliuered from this seruitude Calvin 3. and by this exclamation certaminis gravitatem ostendit he sheweth the greatnes of this combate out of the which he was not able to wrestle by his owne strength and if Paul were not able who is it is then a patheticall speach like vnto that Psal. 86. Who will giue me the wings as it were of a done Faius 4. And in this crying out the Apostle sheweth the state of all men in this life into what miserie they are brought by their sinne and likewise his desire longing to be deliuered therfrom Pareus Quest. 33. What the Apostle vnderstandeth by this bodie of death from the which he desireth to be deliuered 1. Ambrose by the bodie of death vnderstandeth vniuersitatem vitiorum a general collection of sinnes which he called before the bodie of sinne but there was not in the Apostle such a gathering together and confluence of all sinne 2. Pererius chargeth Calvin to agree with Ambrose who vnderstandeth by the bodie of death massam vel congeriem peccati ex qua homo constatus the masse and heape of sinne whereof man consisteth and thereupon he crieth out ô hominem impurum atque impium O wicked and filthie man that is not ashamed so to charge the Apostle c. Whereas Calvin onely saith that there were in the Apostle reliquiae peccati some reliques of sinne of that masse of sinne and corruption which is in man Calvin then and Melancthon do thus vnderstand the Apostle naturam hanc carnalem immersam esse peccato that this carnall nature is wholly drowned and drenched in sinne so also Martyr vitiatam corruptam naturam intelligit he vnderstandeth our corrupt nature but the Apostle speaketh of death here not of sinne 3. neither is the bodie of death taken here properly for sinne as Faius thinketh it was called before the bodie of sinne c. 6. and it is considered tanquam moles onus incumbens as a masse or burthen lying vpon vs so also Roloch it is taken for sinne in this place which is in the bodie and in the whole man likewise Piscator mortem intelligit peccatum inhabitans by death he vnderstandeth the sinne that dwelleth in vs and so before them Vatablus à concupiscentia c. he wisheth to be deliuered from concupiscence which did make him guiltie of eternall death and before him Photius in Oecumenius applyeth it to the corporall and sinnefull actions which bring the death of the soule But in their meaning the Apostle should say in effect who shall deliuer me from this sinnefull bodie what could an vnregenerate man haue said more 4. neither yet doe I approoue of their opinion which referre it onely to the mortalitie of the bodie as Theophylact morti subiecti subiect to death Lyranus quia sancti resurgent c. because the Saints shall rise in an immortall bodie and Pererius à corpore mortis huius from the bodie of this death that is subiect to mortalitie and corruption for the Apostle hath respect thus crying out vnto the conflict between the flesh and the spirit from which he desireth to be deliuered 5. Cassianus by the bodie of death would haue vnderstood the terrene busines and necessitie quae spirituales
he be called a man of desires that is beloued and excepted of God yet had his sinnes which he confessed in his owne name and person as Dauid is said to be a man after Gods owne heart yet he had his sinnes and imperfections Arguments for the affirmatiue part that S. Paul speaketh in his owne person as of a man regenerate First these two points must be premised that the Apostle speaketh of himselfe not of another still continuing his speach in the first person I am carnall I will I consent I delight and so throughout that it should be a great forcing of the Apostles speach to make him to speake of another and not of himselfe secondly the Apostle from the 14. v. to the end speaketh of his present state who was then regenerate as may appeare because while he was yet vnder the law he speaketh as of the time past v. 9. I was aliue and v. 10. sinne seduced me but from the 14. v. he speaketh of the time present I am carnall and so throughout to the end of the chapter Argum. 1. Hence then is framed our first reason the Apostle speaketh of himselfe as he then was because he speaketh in the present tence but then he was a man regenerate Ergo. Theophylact answereth the Apostle saith I serue v. 15. that is serviebam I did serue Contra. As the Apostle saith I serue so he saith I delight in the law of God v. 22. and in this verse 25. I thanke God c. which immediately goe before the other I serue but those words must be vnderstood as they are vttered of the time present therefore the other also Argum. 2. Gregorie vrgeth these words v. 18. to will is present with me he that saith he will per infusionem gratiae quae in se iam lateant semina ostendit doth shew what seede lyeth hid in him by the infusion of grace lib. 29. moral c. 15. Ans. Euen the vnregenerate by nature doe will that is good they may imperfecte velle 〈◊〉 siue gratia in peccato imperfectly will that is good without grace euen in the state of sinne Tolet. in tractat c. 9. Contra. There is bonum naturale morale spirituale that which is naturally good morally good spiritually good the first one by nature may desire as bâ—ute beasts doe the same and therein they doe neither good nor euill the second also in some sort as the heathen followed after morall vertues but they did it not without sinne because they had no faith but that which is spiritually good the carnall haue no mind at all vnto for it is God which worketh both the will and the deed Phil. 2.13 Argum. 3. Augustine presseth these words v. 17. It is not I that doe it but sinne that dwelleth in mee this is not vox peccatoris sed iusti the voice of a sinner but of a righteous man lib. 1. cont 2. epist. Pelag. c. 10. Ans. A sinner may be said not to doe euill not because he doth not consent vnto it but because he is not onely mooued of himselfe but drawen by his concupiscence Tolet. ibid. Contra. There is nothing in a man to giue consent vnto any action but either his spirituall or carnall part but in the vnregenerate there is nothing spirituall but all is naturall therfore whatsoeuer such an one doth he wholly consenteth he himselfe is not one thing and his sinne another to giue consent but he is wholly mooued and lead of sinne Argum. 4. Augustine addeth further the Apostle thus beginneth the 8. chapter there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus which words follow as inferred vpon the other which sheweth that the Apostle spake before of those which were in Christ Iesus Ans. Nay rather those words following vpon the other who shall deliuer me c. which the Apostle vttereth of a man not yet deliuered or freed from his sinne and maketh answer the grace of God c. shew that he spake before as of our not beeing in the state of grace Tolet. ibid. Contra. 1. It is the bondage of corruption which the Apostle desireth to be deliuered from as is shewed before qu. 33. neither doth the Apostle answer the grace of God c. but I giue thankes to God as likewise hath beene declared qu. 34. before but one not in the state of grace cannot giue thanks vnto God therefore the immediate connexion of these words c. 8. sheweth that he spake before of those which are in Christ. Argum. 5. Further Augustine thus reasoneth a carnall man cannot delight in the law of God in the inner man as Saint Paul doth neither indeed is there any inner man that it regenerate and renewed in those which are carnall Pareus Ans. 1. The vnregenerate may delight in the law as Herod did and it is nothing else but velle bonum to will that which is good Tolet. ibid. and they haue also the inner man which is the mind as the outward man is the bodie Contra. 1. The carnall cannot delight in the law but they hate it as Psal. 50.17 this hatest to be reformed and hast cast my words behind thee Herod gaue care to Iohn Baptist not of loue but for feare for afterward he put him to death Hypocrits and carnall men may stand in some awe and feare a while but it is not of loue nor in truth or from the heart 2. the inner part is that with spirituall and renewed but in the wicked their verie mind is defiled Tit. 1.15 therefore in them there is no inner man see before qu. 26. Argum. 6. The Apostle desireth to be deliuered from his corruptible and sinfull bodie hoping then for perfect libertie but in the resurrection the carnall shall haue no such libertie they shall rise to greater miserie Augustine Ans. The deliuerance there spoken of is by iustification from sinne not in the resurrection Tolet. ibid. Contra. The Apostle euidently speaketh of beeing deliuered from this bodie of death that is his mortall bodie which shall not be till the resurrection Argu. 7. The children of God that are regenerate do onely find in themselues the fight combate betweene the spirit and flesh Gala. 5.17 as the Apostle doth here v. 22. Pareus Argum. 8. The vnregenerate doe not vse to giue thanks vnto God but they sacrifice to their owne net as the Prophet saith Hab. 1.16 they giue the praise to themselues But S. Paul here giueth thankes Faius Argum. 9. No man but by the spirit of God can hate and disalow that which is committed against the law of God as the Apostle doth here v. 15. Hyperius Argum. 10. To what end should the Apostle thus at large shew the effects and end of the law for their cause qui prorsus sunt à Deo alieni which are altogether straungers from God and care not for his law Faius by these and such like reasons it is concluded that S. Paul speaketh in the person of a man regenerate Quest. 37.
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
as hath beene also shewed before qu. 28.5 4. The ordinaire gloss thus obserueth the Apostle saith euery creature noting not singula generum sed genera singulorum not the particular of euery kind but the kinds of the particulars But if the Apostle meane euery particular creature before and here the kind then euery creature should not be as much as the creature which was spoken of before 5. Wherefore with Chrysostome and Theophylact I thinke the Apostle speaketh here of creatures without life as before but he saith all that is structura mundi the frame of the world which Beza interpreteth totum mundum conditum the whole created world to shew the consent of them together and he saith all ad maiorem expressionem sententiâ— more expressely signifying his meaning and because the principall partes of the world perpetuâ— sunt are continued and ioyned together Tolet yet vnder the continent may be insinuated the things contained and so all creatures in the continent of the world do communicate with vs in this groning Quest. 33. Whom the Apostle vnderstandeth v. 23. we which haue the first fruits of the spirit 1. We neither vnderstand with Origen primitias spiritus the first fruites of the spirit to be the spirit it selfe which is called the first fruites that is the cheefe and more excellent spirit aboue all other for the spirit is one thing and the fruits that is the gifts of the spirit an other 2. Nor yet with Augustine by the creature is vnderstood the soule and the bodie wherein man communicateth with other creatures and by the spirit the spirituall part of man which is offered as the first fruits vnto God Augustine lib. 83. quest c. 67. for the Apostle speaketh here of man sanctified by the spirit diuerse from the creatures before mentioned 3. Nor yet are the Apostles here vnderstood onely which had receiued the excellent and miraculous gifts of the spirit as Origen also hath this other exposition which Ambrose followeth epistol 22. Anselme Lyranus Thomas gloss interlin Gorrhan Perer. disput 15. Haymo Gualter 4. But the common exposition is to be preferred which Chrysostome and Theodoret follow that the faithfull are here insinuated which haue receiued the grace of iustification so also Calvin Martyr Beza Pareus Osiander for though the Apostles had more excellent gifts then others yet here they are not compared with other faithfull but the other faithfull are compared with the creatures before spoken of that if they sigh and grone then we much more that haue receiued the first fruits of the spirit which doe shew that as we haue but the beginning now so we shall haue the perfection and accomplishment afterward in the kingdome of God Gryneus as the first fruits in the law spem faciebant futurae messis did giue certaine hope of the haruest to come Pareus 5. And whereas the Apostle addeth wayting for the adoption euen the redemption of our bodies he must be vnderstood to speake of the perfection of our adoption and redemption now begunne in our soules and bodies in part but then perfited when our bodies shall be freed from corruption And Origen giueth a good satisfaction here because the Apostle saith we are saved by hope we are now then adopted redeemed in hope but when these things shall be perfited and finished we shall haue râ—m not spem the thing not the hope And another doubt also may be answeared that although saluation and sighing cannot stand together for a man cannot sigh for that he hath yet because he saith we are saued in hope we may sigh for the accomplishment of that which we hope for Gryneus so then the Apostle speaketh of our adoption and redemption as it shall be perfited and consummate in the next life not as it is inchoate and begunne here in this for we are now redeemed and now are we the sonnes of God by adoption as the Apostle said before v. 15. But yet we haue not full possession of our inheritance as Saint Iohn saith 1. epist. 3.2 We are now the sonnes of God yet it appeareth not what we shall be our adoption is taken three waies in Scripture 1. one is of our election as the Apostle saith Ephes. 2.3 We are predestinate to be adopted in Christ. 2. the second is of our vocation whereof the Apostle spake before v. 19.3 and there is an adoption in our glorification when we shall haue a full and perfect fruition of eternall glorie which the Apostle meaneth in this place Pareus 6. Origen by the bodie here vnderstandeth the Church but the Apostle the redemption of our bodie now the Church is not our bodie but Christs The Apostle meaneth then that when our mortall bodie shall be deliuered from corruption then shall our adoption be perfect which now the Saints doe sigh and long for Quest. 34. That no liuing creatures shall be restored in the next world but onely man v. 23. Because the Apostle saith of the faithfull wayting for the adoption the redemption of the bodie here it may be inferred because other creatures are not partakers of adoption therefore neither of the redemption of their bodies to immortalitie for the more explication hereof three things shall be breefely touched 1. what creatures shall remaine after the resurrection 2. to what vse 3. what creatures shall not be restored 1. Concerning the first it hath beene shewed before qu. 28.6 that the creatures which shall be restored into the glorious libertie of the Sonnes of God shall be the heauens and earth and the elements betweene them for so the Lord promiseth by Isaiah 65.17 Saint Peter beleeueth the same according to Gods promise 2. ep 3.13 S. Iohn in vision seem the same accomplished Reuel 21.1 what shall be the forme and fashion of the new heauens and earth is not expressed in Scripture and it were curiositie for vs to enquire but new heauens and earth we are certaine by the Scriptures that there shall be which Chrysostome well expresseth by this similitude que madmodum nutrix regium puerum educans c. like as a nurse that bringeth vp a Kingâ— sonne when he commeth to his kingdome she also is made partaker of his preferment so the creatures as the heauens and earth which are now our preseruers and nourishers after that man is brought to his glorie shall be glorified also with him 2. Concerning the vse first for the heauens 1. they shall not then serue for mans necessitie as now for he shall not need the Sunne to giue light nor the clouds to raine 2. neither to informe and instruct man touching his creature for we shal then know as we are knowne 3. nor yet shall the Sunne then runne his course as now for there shall be no time Reuel 10.6 which is measured by the course of the Sunne neither any more generation of things which is now procured by the heate and motion of the Sunne 4. yet though it be probable that the Sunne shall haue
is most probable and commeth nearest to the truth the former reasons may demonstrate to any of vnderstanding Quest. 35. How we are said to be saued by hope v. 24. 1. For the coherence of these words 1. Chrysostome thinketh the Apostle maketh mention of hope because he had spoken before of the excellent graces of the spirit which he called the first fruits ne omnia in hoc tempore quaereremus left we should make accouÌ„t of all things as present 2. some make this as a reason of the sighing and longing of the faithfull because they haue onely yet things in hope Tolet. 3. Martyr thinketh the Apostle answeareth an obiection how it may stand with the condition of children to sigh and grone because yet they haue their saluation but in hope 4. some make the obiection this how can it be said that we waile for our adoption seeing we are alreadie the adopted sonnes of God in Christ and so the answer shall be that we haue these things onely in hope Rolloch Piscator 5. But it is rather an other argument of consolation to moue the faithfull patiently to beare their tribulations from the nature of hope Pareus Gryneus 2. Hope is taken three waies in Scripture 1. it signifieth generally the doctrine of faith as 1. Pet. 1.15 be readie to giue an answer to euery man that asketh a reason of that hope which is in him 2. hope is taken for the obiect of hope the thing hoped for as Gal. 5.5 we wait for the hope of righteousnes through faith afterward in this place hope that is seene that is the thing hoped for is no hope 3. it betokeneth that godly affection of the mind in hoping for that which is promised and beleeued Gryneus 3. Saluation is taken sometime for iustification in this life Tit. 3.5 Not by the workes of righteousnesse c. but according to his mercie he saued vs But here it signifieth the perfection and happie estate both of soule and bodie in the kingdome of heauen Pere disp 16. 4. But these words of the Apostle must not be so taken as though we had onely things in hope and nothing in possession for we are now iustified by faith and sanctified by the spirit but the perfection and accomplishment of these things we haue onely in hope Martyr 5. And two conditions are considered in the things hoped for that it is both difficult for if it were easie and in our owne power we would not hope for it and beside though it be hard and difficult yet is it not impossible for then we should despaire altogether and neuer hope for it Martyr and hereunto adde a third qualitie required in hope it selfe that it is not wauering and doubtfull for that is contrarie to the nature of hope but it is certaine and firme and therefore is it called the ankor of the soule Heb. 6.19 6. We are saide to be saued by hope not efficienter not as though it were the cause of saluation but consequenter in respect of the sequele and consequent that after we haue patiently waited and expected by bope that the thing hoped for will certainely follow Quest. 36. Of the difference betweene faith and hope They differ three waies 1. ordine in order and prioritie 2. operatione in the worke and operation and obiecto in the obiect 1. Faith goeth before hope and begetteth hope as the Apostle defineth hope Heb. 11.1 it is the ground hypostasis or foundation of things hoped for for first we beleeue the things promised then we hope for them and in the third place followeth our loue and delight in them yet faith is not the efficient cause of hope the spirit of God is the author efficient and working cause of all these graces but the way and manner of working them is according to this order that first we haue faith then by faith the spirit bringeth vs to hope 2. The operation of them is diuerse for it is the proper effect of faith to iustifie vs and assureth vs of remission of sinnes in Christ but hope doth not iustifie vs it doth by patience vphold and support the soule in the expectation of the finishing of that which is begunne in vs by faith 3. The obiect of them both doth differ 3. waies modo gradu tempore in the manner the measure or degree and the time 1. in the manner for faith relyeth vpon the promise it selfe hope resteth in the thing promised 2. in the measure initium salutis fide habetâ—r complementum spe the beginning of saluation is had and obtained by faith the complement and perfection thereof by hope 3. in the time for faith apprehendeth the promise of remission of sinnes and iustification as present hope is exercised in the expectation of eternall life to come Quest. 37. Whether things hoped for cannot be seene It will be here thus obiected 1. we looke for heauens and earth in the next world but they are seene Origen answeareth that they are not these heauens and earth which are now visible which we looke for but other heauens and earth as Saint Peter saith we looke for new heauens and new earth 2. Pet. 3.13 for as touching these visible heauens and earth they shall passe away Matth. 5.18 2. Obiect Stephen saw the heauens open and Iesus sitting at the right hand of God Act. 7. he saw that which he hoped for Gorrhan answeareth he saw indeed gloriam Christi non suam the glorie of Christ but not his owne glorie hope is of those things which belong vnto a man himselfe he saw the glorie of Christ which shall be communicated to his members but his participation of that glorie he saw not but hoped for it 3. Obiect Saint Paul was taken vp into the third heauen and heard things not possible to be vttered and beeing there he likewise saw the glorie of Christ. Ans This was not any corporall sight but a spirituall vision and sight for Saint Paul determineth not whether his spirit were then in the bodie or out of the bodie when he was so taken vp 4. Obiect A man running in a race may set his eie vpon the price which he runneth for â—â— hopeth to obtaine Caietan answeareth that there are two things considered in that which is hoped for materiale the materiall part the thing it selfe and formale the formal part which is the possession and obtaining of it the first may be seene the second is not seene but onely hoped for Quest. 37. What spirit is said to helpe our infirmities v. 26. 1. Chrysostome by the spirit vnderstandeth the spirituall gift of prayer that whereas the Church was in heauines and much perplexed then he which had the gift of praier did rise vp and by framing of a praier shewed the people how and what they should pray for But thus it may be be excepted against this sense 1. the spirit is not thus taken throughout this Chapter and diuersely in the same place to vnderstand the same word is
the perfection of the parts because regeneration is both in the bodie and soule but not perfectione graduum by the perfection of degree for so it is onely begunne here and shall be perfited in the next life 2. and sanctification followeth after iustification and so is no part of it for first we are iustified then sanctified Controv. 7. That not the carnall eating of Christs flesh is the cause of the resurrection but the spirituall v. 11. 1. The Apostle sheweth the cause of the resurrection of the Saints to be the inhabiting and dwelling of the spirit of God in them so that the spirituall communicating with the flesh and blood of Christ by faith is that by the vertue and power whereof our bodies shall be raised againe at the last day it is not the carnall eating of Christs flesh in the sacrament as the Romanists hold wherwith to the same end they housle the sicke that is in our bodies the seede of the resurrection for there may be a spirituall eating and drinking of Christs flesh and blood euen without the sacrament which is both necessarie and sufficient vnto life whereof our Blessed Sauiour treateth Ioh. 5.4 Whosoeuer eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternall life and I will raise him vp at the last day Christ speaketh not here of the sacramentall eating and drinking but of his spirituall for the sacrament was not yet instituted 2. And that the carnall and corporall receiuing of Christs flesh is not possible neither yet requisite or necessarie to the resurrction of our bodies doth euidently appeare by these two reasons 1. because the Fathers that died before Christ was incarnate could not in that manner eate and drinke Christ and yet they died in the hope of the resurrection 2. infants are not admitted to the sacramentall eating and yet they shall rise againe at the latter day Martyr Controv. 8. Against merites v. 12. We are detters not to the flesh c. hence it followeth that we are detters to the spirit which part the Apostle suppresseth as beeing euident enough of it selfe out of the other 1. It is manifest then that whosoeuer seruice we doe performe vnto God it is ex debito a due debt we are endebted to God 1. by reason of our creation that he hath giuen vs these bodies and soules to the end that we should set forth his praise in the world 2. we are bound vnto God for our redemption by Christ our regeneration and sanctification by his spirit all which the Lord hath wrought for vs that we should performe him faithfull seruice 3. and likewise we are bound vnto God for the hope of our resurrection and glorification promised in his kingdome which the Apostle touched in the former verse 2. If then whatsoeuer seruice we doe vnto God we doe but our bounden dutie then there is no place for merits for our selues much lesse for works and merites of supererogation for others as the Romanists hold and teach for debitum meritum debt and merite doe one take away another as the Apostle sheweth Rom. 4.5 And whatsoeuer workes we do they are either according to the flesh or the spirit if after the flesh they are sinfull if according to the spirit they are of dutie 3. But they will thinke here to helpe themselues by a distinction that though our works merite not in the rigour of Gods iustice yet they merite ex acceptatione diuina through the diuine acceptance c. God indeed accepteth of our good workes in Christ yet not as merits but of grace and so in mercie rewardeth them Controv. 9. Whether in this life one by faith may be sure of salvation v. 16. The same spirit beareth witnesse with our spirit that we are the children of God Though this be an euident place to prooue the certaintie of saluation in the perswasion of the faithfull because the testimonie of the spirit is vnfallible yet the Romanists are not ashamed to denie that any such certaintie may be gathered from hence they say this testimonie of the spirit is nothing else but the inward good motions comfort and contentment of spirit which the children of God doe daily feels more and more c. Rhemist annot And Pererius it is but gustus quidum spiritualis praesentiae a kind of tast of the spirituall presence of grace and he consenteth vnto Thomas who thus interpreteth this testimonie of the spirit to be câ—â—iecturalem perswasioneÌ„ a coniecturall perswasion but infallibilis certitudo an infallible certaintie cannot be had citra specialem Dei reuelationem without the speciall reuelation of God their reasons are these 1. Thomas thus argueth a thing may be knowne either by speciall reuelation from God and so it may be reuealed vnto some that they are saued or a man may know somewhat in himselfe and that two waies certainely or coniecturally a thing is certainely knowne by the principles thereof as God is the beginning of grace but because God cannot perfitely be knowne none can attaine vnto this certaintie the coniecturall knowledge is by signes and effects as when a man doth perswade himselfe that because he feareth God and contemneth the world he is in Gods fauour but this knowledge is imperfect as S. Paul saith I know nothing by my selfe yet am I not thereby iustified 2. Pererius addeth this reason fowre waies may a thing certainely be knowen per lumen naturale c. by the naturall light of the vnderstandingâ— by the light of the Catholike faith by speciall reuelation per lumen fidei infusa by the light of faith infused but by none of these can one be assured of his saluation not by the first for it is a supernaturall light nor by the second for then all that beleeue the Catholike faith should haue this assurance neither hath euery Christian the third which is by special reuelatioÌ„ neither by the fourth can it be attained vnto for that perswasion riseth of two propositions the one apprehended by faith the other collected out of that by some naturall euidence and experience as faith reacheth vs that all which are truely contrite and penitent shall be saued then one out of his owne experience inferreth but I am contrite and penitent Ergo But this experience is vncertaine because that many actions proceeding from a man himselfe may carrie some semblance of those which are wrought by the spirit and a man may haue many sinnes which he knoweth not and so cannot repent him of them Contra. 1. To Thomas argument we answer 1. that two waies is a faithfull man perswaded and made certaine of his saluation both by the efficient cause the spirit of God which giueth such testimonie and assurance vnto them and by the signes and effects which are wrought in them 2. though God cannot here be perfitely knowne yet so much is knowne of God as may make a man sure of his saluation as we know by the Scriptures the great loue and mercie of God towards vs in
wisheth onely to be depriued of this mortall life so also Pererius But this cannot be so for the Lord saith he will blot out him which sinneth now not onely sinners but righteous men are taken away out of this life 10. But Chrysostomes exposition is best who lib. 3. de prouident doth interpret these words of Moses as the other of Paul of the finall seperation from Christ and of beeing depriued of the vision of God and fruition of Christ so also Bernard Moses noluit introduci in gaudium Domini c. Moses would not be brought into the ioy of the Lord the people remaining without Bernar. in serm 12. in Cantic the reasons for the confirmation of this see in the end of the former question and the solution of this doubt how Moses could desire an impossible thing of God see also there in the answer to the 3. obiection Quest. 7. Whether in matters of saluation one kindred after the flesh ought to haue any prioritie before others v. 3. My kinsmen according to the flesh 1. Basil regal brev res 190. deliuereth this doctrine that in spirituall matters none ought to haue more respect vnto their kindred after the flesh then vnto others that are not neere in blood And that saying of Saint Paul may seeme to confirme this opinion 2. Cor. 5.16 Hence forth know we no man after the flesh us though we had knowne Christ after the flesh yet henceforth know we him no more Contra. In this place the Apostle opposeth himselfe against these false teachers which stood vpon carnall prerogatiues and the legall and carnall ceremonies and the generation of Christ onely after the flesh these things Saint Paul would no longer know that is trust vnto before his calling he stood vpon such outward priuiledges as that he was circumcised an Hebrew of the tribe of Beniamin and such like Phil. 3.5 But he counted all these things a drosse and dung in comparison of Christ and he wil not know Christ onely according to the flesh in respect of his outward state in the world for our Sauiour himselfe saith Ioh. 6.13 It is the spirit that quickneth the flesh profiteth nothing Mar. 2. But that euen spirituall things may by the rule of charitie be first wished vnto our â—â—â—ted it may thus appeare 1. because our naturall affection is not destroyed by religion but perfected pietie doth qualifie and moderate naturall compassion it doth not extinguish it 2. charitie must be ordinata ordered it proceedeth in degrees first a man may expresse his loue toward his owne 1. Tim. 5.4 Let them first learne to shewe godlinesse toward their owne house 3. S. Paul giueth this as a reason of his heauinesse and griefe for the Israelites because they were his kindred after the flesh where though he vseth a limitation that after the flesh they were onely his brethren but otherwise they were not beeing vnbeleeuers and contemners of the Gospell yet it much mooued him for them because they were his kinred after the flesh Quest. 8. The causes which made the Apostle to be so much grieued for the Iewes v. 4.5 He recounteth diuerse priuiledges and immunities of the Iewes which made him the more to desire their conversion 1. in respect of himselfe they were his brethren not so properly called but they were his kinsmen after the flesh though in other respects they were not his brethren this phrase after the flesh is afterward v. 5. beeing spoken of Christ taken in an other sense it sheweth him to be of an other nature then that which he had after the flesh here it sheweth not a diuersitie of nature but a differeÌ„ce of brotherhood in Paul theÌ„ 2. Then he reckoneth vp their priuiledges with relation vnto God 1. they are the Israelites they are rather called by that name of Iacob then by the name of Abraham and Izaac for that these had sonnes which belonged not to the people of God but all Iacobs sonnes were the fathers of the Lords people and they are named of Israel rather then Iacob because it was the more worthie name both for that the Lord imposed it and for the more excellent signification Israel signifieth one prevailing with God 2. Theirs was the adoption that is they were adopted to be a peculiar people vnto God selected from all the world and therefore they are called Exod. 4.22 the Lords first borne there is an other adoption when we are adopted to be the sonnes of God by grace Rom. 8.15 but the Apostle speaketh here of the outward adoption and calling to be the people of God 3. the glorie which Chrysostome vnderstandeth in that they were the peculiar people of God so also Haym Gor. gloss interl Theodoret of the miracles and great works whereby they became famous and glorious Lyranus of the diuine visions and apparitions but it is better referred vnto the Ark of the couenant which is called the glorie of God 1. Sam. 4.21.22 Gryn Calv. Mart. Tol. Pareus 4. The couenants giuing of the law the seruice of God Origen by the couenants or testaments vnderstandeth the diuerse renewing of Gods couenant with his people so Mar. Osian Hier. in epist. ad Algas qu. 9. of the old and newe Testament so Haymo but the new testament is afterward expressed in the word promises the couenants were rather the two tables of couenant as the Apostle calleth them Heb. 9.4 and so here the Apostle reckoneth vp three kind of lawes which Israel had the morall contained in the tables of the lawe the iudiciall called here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the giuing of the lawe and the ceremoniall which consisted of the priesthood and sacrifices called here the seruice 5. the promises which were of two sorts either temporall as touching the inheriting of the land of Canaan or spirituall of the Messiah Gryn both legall promises and Euangelicall Mart. both of this life and the next Pellican these promises first belonged vnto them and vpon their reiecting they were fulfilled vpon the Gentiles Osiander 3. The third sort of priuiledges are with relation vnto the fathers thence were the fathers that is of that nation were the honourable patriarkes of whom they are descended and God promised to be their God and of their seede Gen. 7.4 yea to a thousand generations Exod. 20.6 though they were degenerate children yet vnto them belonged the promise made vnto their fathers 4. The forth kind of priuiledge is with relation to Christ and of whom Christ came some leaue out the coniunction and and vnderstand the fathers of whom Christ came so Orig. Haymo Lyran. following the vulgar Latine But the better reading is with the coniunction and of whom that is of the Israelites came Christ so Chrysost. Theophyl Tertul. l. de Trinit Iren. l. 3. c. 8. Hilarie lib. 8. Trinit with others according to the Greeke originall for it is a commendation of the whole nation of Israel and an excellent prerogatiue that Christ came of them according to the flesh
is subsequens gratia subsequent or following grace whereby the Lord assisteth those which are called as Augustine saith gratia praevenit vt velimus subsequiâ—â—â—â— frustrà velimus grace preuenteth vs that we may be willing and it followeth vs that our will be not in vaine 3. the cause of the grace of God is his owne mercie the Apostle saith here v. 35. who hath giuen vnto him first the internall motiue is the free loue of God the externall impulsiue and moouing cause is the merit of Christ. 4. the effects of the grace and fauour of God are either externall as election predestination or such as are brought forth in time as vocation iustification sanctificatioÌ„ 5. the graces in the second sense which are the gifts of the spirit are either salutis the graces belonging to saluation as knowledge faith hope or they are vocationis such as appertaine vnto our vocation and calling which are either extraordinarie as were the miraculous and propheticall gifts which the Prophets and Apostles had or ordinarie as are the knowledge of arts the gift of vtterance and such like which now are attained vnto by diligent labour and industrie Doct. 5. Concerning good workes the qualitie and kinds thereof the causes and effects v. 6. But if of workes c. 1. The works of men are either naturall as to sleepe or ciuill as to buy to sell which are indifferent or they are morall which are either good or evill 2. the efficient cause of good works is first God moouing by his spirit then the will of man converted and prepared by grace the helping causes are instruction exhortation faithfull endeauour prayer 3. the matter of good works is the internall and externall act of the will and mind heart and bodie the forme is the consent and agreement with the lawe of God 4. the effects of good works are toward God our obedience which in Christ is pleasing and acceptable to him in our selues the fruits and testimonie of our faith toward our brethren their edification they are stirred vp by our good conuersation to glorifie God Doct. 6. We must compare the present state of the Church with the times past v. 5. Euen so now at this present time As S. Paul compared the estate of the Church then present with the times of Elias so we are taught to comfort our selues in the afflictions of the Church of God in these dayes with looking backe into the times past for God doth after the same manner gouerne his Church So Origen well obserueth sicut factum est sub Helsa c. as it was vnder Helias so it was in the comming of Christ and in S. Pauls time c. like as the small number of true professors was then no preiudice to the truth no more ought it to be now Doct. 7. Of the priviledge of the seede of the faithfull v. 16. If the first fruits be holy so is the whole lumpe like as the Iewes which were descended of Abraham were within the couenant and so vnto them belonged circumcision the signe of the couenant the paschal lambe the Temple and sacrifices vnto the which the seede of the Gentiles which were not of Abraham had no right so now the seede and ofspring of Christians are counted holy vnto them belongeth baptisme and other Sacraments and rites of Christian profession for they are an holy seede as the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 7.14 Els were your children vncleane but now are they holy Doct. 8. How the Church or a righteous man is resembled to a tree v. 16. If the roote be holy so are the branches c. 1. a iust man is resembled to a tree 1. propter pedis i. fidei immobilitatem for the stedfastnes of his foot that is his faith v. 20. thou standest by faith 2. propter stipitis i. spei erectionem c. for the erecting of the stalke or truncke which signifieth hope and therefore Iob saith 19.10 he hath remooued my hope like a tree 3. the roote is charitie Eph. 4. beeing rooted and grounded in loue 4. The branches are his vertues Hosh. 14.7 His branches shall spread and his beautie shall be as the olive tree 5. the bloomes and blossomes are his sweete manners 6. the leaues his gracious words 7. the fruit good workes 8. the shadowe of the tree is his mercie Hosh. 14.7 They that dwell vnder his shadowe shall returne Gorrhan Doct. 9. The old Testament and the newe one and the same in substance v. 18. Thou bearest not the roote but the roote thee c. There was then the same roote both of the Iewes and beleeuing Gentiles the same faith the same Mediator the same substance efficacie and force of the Sacraments though the externall rites and symboles were diuerse Martyr so S. Paul Ephes. 4. There is one bodie one spirit c. one Lord one faith c. Doct. 10. Of Gods omnipotencie v. 23. God is able to graffe them in againe The Apostle prooueth the returne and graffing in of the Iewes by the power of God though simply and generally this is no good argument God can doe it therefore it shall be yet here is a sufficient reason because there was no doubt of Gods will seeing the Iewes were his people of old otherwise Gods power is not limited to his will for he can doe more then he will it is contrariwise with man who willeth many things that he cannot effect and so his will is larger then his power Martyr Doct. 11. Christ prooued to be God by the remission of sinnes v. 27. This is my couenant when I shall take away their sinnes c. This sheweth Christ to be God who onely is able to forgiue sinnes men may remit the punishment that it be not inflicted but the guilt of sinne is onely purged by God the keyes are indeede committed to the Church in the preaching of the word but they are the instruments onely whereby God forgiueth sinnes the Ministers are onely the proclaymers of Gods will herein they cannot remit sinnes but onely ministerially as the instruments Doct. 12. Of the excellencie of the knowledge of God v. 33. O the depth of the riches of the wisedome and knowledge of God c. Gods knowledge is excellent 1. for the largenes of it in knowing all things 2. the perfection of it he knoweth all things perfitly 3. the manner he needeth no meanes of his knowledge but himselfe 4. the celeritie of it he knoweth all things in a moment 5. the certaintie of it it cannot be deceiued 6. the eternitie it was from the beginning 7. the efficacie it is the cause of all things 8. the secunditie of it all things are lightened by his knowledge 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. That none which are elected can finally fall away v. 2. Whereas the Apostle saith God hath not cast away his people which he knewe before c. Hence it may be obiected thus God knewe his people before that is elected them vnto saluation but
sacrificing of it so here the Apostle saith exhibite or giue vp there is the oblation then the thing offred is their bodies and they must make it a sacrifice not by slaying it but by mortifying their lusts 3. Pererius observeth fowre things in this sacrifice which were obserued in the legall oblations 1. the sacrifice must be entire and perfect without spot so here it must be a liuing sacrifice 2. it was holy and for euer separated froÌ„ prophane and common vses so it is here prescribed to be holie 3. The sacrifice was consumed vpon the altar and so was a sweete savour vnto God here it is said also acceptable vnto God 4. they put to their sacrifices salt which signified spirituall vnderstanding and here it is added which is your reasonable service 4. But Gorrhan more distinctly thus setteth forth the parts and causes of this spirituall sacrifice we haue 1. the efficient in this word giue vp it must proceed from a true and sincere devotion 2. then the materiall cause your bodies 3. the forme it must be liuing holy resonable 4. then the ende it must be to please God acceptable vnto God Quest. 5. Of the conditions of this spirituall sacrifice in particular 1. The Apostle exhorteth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to exhibite present giue vp themselues 1. herein alluding to the rite of the sacrifices which were first exhibited and presented vnto God at the altar Beza this word is vsed of our blessed Sauiour how they brought him into the temple and presented him before the Lord Luk. 2.23 2. we are said also to exhibite that which was before promised and so we exhibite our selues vnto God by the holines of life to whose seruice we were promised and devoted in baptisme Erasm. 3. Chrysostome further noteth in this word that we must so giue vp our selues no more to be our owne as they qui donant alijs bellicosos equos c. which doe yeeld vnto others warlike horse for seruice doe challenge no more propertie in them so debemus membra nostra Deo tanquam Imperatori we doe owe our members vnto God as our Emperour Theophyl 4. and hereby is signified that they should sponte offerre offer vp willingly as in the lawe they must offer all their offrings with a willing heart Gorrh. 5. and whereas it was peculiar vnto the Priest to offer externall sacrifices all Christians are admitted to offer this spirituall sacrifice as S. Peter saith Ye are an holy priesthood to offer vp spirituall sacrifices acceptable to God thorough Iesus Christ Tolet. 2. Your bodies 1. by bodies he vnderstandeth by a synecdoche of a part for the whole whole man both bodie and soule and by an other figure called a Metonimie he putteth the subiect for the adiunct the bodie for the affections in the bodie or which shewe themselues most in and by the bodie so that the bodie here non tam nomen naturae est quà m vitij is not so much the name of nature as of vice Mart. as els where the Apostle saith Col. 3.5 mortifie your earthly members Par. 2. we must then offer vp vnto God not our soules onely and so as we haue receiued both our bodies and soules from God we must render them vnto him againe contrarie to the opinion of the Platonists who held that the soule onely came from God the substance of the bodie from the elements the complexion from the celestiall spheres the affections from the spirits and therefore they thought it sufficient if the minde onely and soule were rendred vnto God ex Martyro 3. now our bodies two wayes are offred to God one is as Origen and Chrysostome here obserue by mortifying of the carnall affections as he which mortifieth pride doth sacrifice a bullock he which bridleth his anger a ramme he which keepeth vnder his lust a goate Origen so the Apostle saith 1. Corinthians 9.27 I doe chastice or tame my bodie the other way is in making the bodie an instrument of euery good worke as Augustine obserueth lib. 10. de ciuit c. 6. and so the Apostle exhorteth Giue your members seruants to righteousnesse Rom. 6.19 4. Lyranus addeth further the Apostle saith your bodies non aâ—iena not the bodies of others against those which thinke to be saued by other mens repentance 3. A living sacrifice 1. which is added not to signifie that they should not thinke to kill themselues and so sacrifice their bodies as Chrysostome Theodoret for the Romanes were no so absurd to collect any such thing out of S. Pauls words 2. nor yet saith the Apostle living to note a difference betweene the sacrifices of the law which were first killed and then sacrificed and the sacrifices of liuing Christians gloss ordin Tolet Osiand Perer. 3. Neither is there a relation to the vsage of the lawe which counteth all dead things vncleane Hyper. it sheweth a difference rather from the legall vsages 4. neither as Caietan observeth doth the Apostle by this tearme distinguish this spirituall sacrifice from martyrdome which was performed by death for as Tolet well obserueth the Apostle exhorteth generally Christians to sacrifice themselues in holy obedience vnto God which not onely though principally is seene in Martyrdome which none can vndertake that haue not first mortified their bodies with the affections thereof 5. Pet. Martyr by this liuing sacrifice vnderstandeth a willing sacrifice which is not vi sed ex animo by force but from the heart 6. but it signifieth more namely the spirituall life of the soule which is by faith in Christ Galat. 2.20 Mart. as Origen well obserueth he calleth it a liuing sacrifice qua Christum id est vitam in se gerit which beareth Christ the true life as the Apostle saith Eph. 2.1 who hath quickned vs c. Gryneus which life of the soule is neuer idle but continually bringeth forth good workes for idlenes is a kind of death of the soule as Seneca passing by the house of one Vacia who liued in pleasure and idle said hic situs est Vacia here lyeth Vacia as though it were rather his sepulchre then his habitation so also Haymo he is a liuing sacrifice qui viuit virtutibus moritur vitijs who liueth vnto vertue and is dead vnto sinne and Chrysostome vpon this place sheweth at large how all the members must be mortified that they may liue vnto the seruice of God neque offerri poteriroculus c. for neither can an eye he offered that serueth fornication not an hand that oppresseth neque lingua turpia loquens not a tongue speaking filthie things nor feete theatra visitantes that runne to theatres and playes But this outward conformitie of the members is rather signified in the next word holy 4. Holy 1. Which some thinke is added by way of distinction from the legall sacrifises which beeing corporall were not holy Greek catena 2. some note a difference betweene the sacrifices of the Pagans which were not holy and of Christians they many times
reason and good counsell doth those things continually which are agreeable to the will of God he performeth this reasonable service c. Beza misliketh here this exposition of Baesil but it may verie well be receiued and is agreeable to the Apostles minde as in the next verse he saith that you may prooue what is the goodwill of God c. he then doth follow this reasonable service of God that prooueth what Gods will is and conformeth himselfe thereunto Quest. 6. How we must not fashion our selues to this world v. 2. 1. Concerning the occasion of these words some thinke that as the Apostle spake before of the sacrifice of the bodie so now he sheweth how the minde should be reformed Lyran. Gorrhan Tolet but the Apostle speaking of the reasonable seruice of God v. 1. comprehendeth both the seruice of the soule and bodie therefore here rather the Apostle now more plainely expresseth that which before he figuratiuely set downe Nyper Martyr maketh this the connexion as the Apostle shewed before quid curandum what was to be cared for in this spirituall sacrifice so here quid cauendum what is to be taken heed of Beza maketh it a second precept that in the seruice of God we should not conforme our selues to the opinion or fashions of the world Gryneus maketh it a consectation a consequent necessarily inferred vpon the former exhortation But I insist vpon the former sense pianiùs explicat rationalem cultum the Apostle more plainely expresseth this reasonable seruice Par. 2. Fashion not your selues or be not fashioned 1. Chrysostome here obserueth a diffeerence betweene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the figure of the world to the which we must not fashion our selues which is tanquam scenica persona as a person counterfeited vpon the stage which is in shewe not in truth but afterward he biddeth vs be transformed in the minde the formes hath substance whereas a figure is no permanent or existent thing but this distinction seemeth to be too curious neither is it perpetually obserued for Phil. 2.7 S. Paul atributeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 figure vnto Christ he was found in figure or shape as a man 2. But this is better obserued that the Apostle forbiddeth vs not either not to be in the world nor to vse the world for neither of these are possible so long as we are in the world but we must not fashion our selues to be like vnto the word 3. for it is the propertie of the soule to beare the image of that thing to the which it turneth it selfe as we see in a glasse he then fashioneth himselfe to this world that doth seeke onely or chiefely for the things of the world who followeth the corruptions thereof with greedines and what the fashion of this world is S. Peter sheweth It is sufficient for vs that we haue spent the time past of the life after the lust of the Gentiles walking in wantones lusts drunkennes gluttonie 3. To this world 1. Origen hereupon obserueth this difference aliam esse formam seculi praesentis aliam futuri that there is one forme or fashion of this present world an other of the world to come they which loue things present fashion themselues to this world but they which set their minds on spiritual and invisible things do conforme themselues to the world to come 2. by the world we vnderstand not as Haymo noteth the outward state and condition of the world as it consisteth of dayes moneths yeares but men carnall conversatione seculo deditos which by their carnall conuersation ate giuen to the world Quest. 7. Of our transforming by the newenes of mind 1. Be ye transformed 1. there is a transformation of the bodie as Christ was transformed in the mount and our bodies shall be in the resurrection Philip. 3.20 but here the Apostle speaketh of the transformation of the minde 2. and it must be transformed not in the substance thereof but onely in the condition and qualitie Faius 3. man was formed by his creation deformed by sinne reformed by grace informed by the word conformed and made like to Christ by the spirit transformed in the newenesse of the minde Gorrhan 2. By the newnes 1. the oldnes of man is his sinne and corruption of nature deriued frō Adam that is called newnes which is wrought by grace as faith hope charitie hereof the one is called the old man which is after Adam the other the newe man which is created a newe by grace this renouation is sometime called the newenesse of life Rom. 6.4 from the effects which shewe themselues in the life sometime the newnesse of the spirit Rom. 7.6 from the author and efficient cause which is the spirit sometime the newenes of the mind of the subiect and place where this renouation beginneth 2. Chrysostome vseth this fit resemblance quod in adibus facimus subinde reformantes inveteratum ita in te ipso facias that which we vse to doe in our houses repayring that which is decayed the same doe in thy selfe thou art decayed and waxed old by sinne be renewed by repentance c. 3. Of the mind 1. not of the sense as the vulgar Latine whom Gorrhan followeth vnderstanding here the reforming of the affections and hereupon that common error was grounded that sinne had the seat place in the affections whereas the very mind hath need to be reuiued as S. Paul saith be renewed in the spirit of your mind 2. Faius here noteth that a naturall man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath but a soule and a bodie but a spirituall man hath a spirit soule and bodie as S. Paul saith I pray God that your whole spirit soule and bodie may be kept blameles c. 1. Thess. 5.23 not that any newe part is added to the soule in the regenerate but a newe spirituall qualitie is wrought in it 3. Haymo following Origen by the minde thinketh the vnderstanding to be signified which must be exercised in the Scriptures but this is too particular by the minde rather is vnderstood all the faculties of the soule the intellectual part and the will where this renouation must take beginning Quest. 8. Of these words That ye may prooue what the good will of God is acceptable and perfect c. v. 2. 1. That yee 1. which some thinke is put 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to shewe the ende of this their renovation Mart. Pareus 2. Theodoret will haue it the effect and that the Apostle sheweth cui rei conducat c. to what purpose this renovation of the minde is profitable 3. Chrysostome maketh it to be the cause sic poteritis renouari c. by this meanes ye may be renewed if ye learne what Gods will is so also Tolet annot 6. 4. Gryneus maketh it an adiunct and propertie of renouation for they which are not renewed cannot vnderstand what the good will of God is and Melanchton maketh it a part of our renovation
a tradition Apostolicall therefore necessarie to be oserued and kept Ans. We graunt that the free vse of fasting to be ioyned as an helpe vnto praier was taken from the Apostles but not this necessarie kind of fasting tied vnto certaine daies which may thus appeare 1. Eusebius lib. 5. c. 24. sheweth the libertie and varietie of fasting in the Church and maketh mention how Irenaeus reprooued Victor Bishop of Rome for excommunicating the East Churches for obseruing an other kind of forme in celebrating of the Pasch and in fasting 2. Sozomen lib. 7. c. 19. declareth how at Rome they fasted onely three weekes before the Pasch in Greecia six and Telesphorus in his decretall ordained the fast of seauen whole weekes it was not then an Apostolike tradition 3. Chrysost. hom 47. in Matthew denieth the Lenton fast to haue beene instituted by Christ non dicit ieiunium suum esse imitandum c. he saith not his fasting is to be imitated though he might haue propounded his fourtie daies fast but he saith Learne of mee for I am humble and meeke c. Argum. 4. In the new Testament there is no other abstinence from meates forbidden but the legall and Iudiciall Ans. 1. The argument followeth not it is not forbidden therefore it is a part of the diuine worship the contrarie is inferred therefore it is no part of the diuine worship beeing neither commanded nor forbidden for all necessarie parts of the worship of God is prescribed in the word if then it were not forbidden it should remaine free and therefore is not to be imposed as a necessarie thing 2. the antecedent is false for not onely the Iewish abstinence but all other superstitious kindes of fasting and abstinence are forbidden Coloss. 2. 1. Tim. 4. and if such abstinence as was sometime commanded by the law by the libertie of the Gospel be taken away much more such as is the meere invention of man 5. Argum. The taming and mortifying of the flesh is a necessarie thing but abstinence from flesh doth helpe to the taming and subduing of the flesh Ergo c. Ans. 1. The continuall mortifying of the flesh is a necessarie thing which is to be practised all the life long but to tame and subdue the flesh for a time as in fasting certaine daies is but a superstitious and hypocriticall mortification which is reprooued by the Prophet Isai. 58.5 Is it such a fast that I haue chosen that a man should afflict his soule for a day and to bow downe his head as a bulrush c. 2. neither by such Popish abstinence is the flesh â—amed when they abstaine from fleshmeate and eate of other confected meates as of marmaled and sucker and such like things and drinke wine which doe more inflame and instigate the flesh then the eating of flesh-meates Thomas answer is ridiculous that flesh doth increase the humors of the bodie which are of long continuance wine doth but nourish the spirits which doe soone passe away for the Phisitians will refute him who affirme that as meate doth engender the solid nutriment of the bodie so drinke doth encrease the liquide nutriment which in effect is all one Arg. 6. The abstinence of the Rechabites by the coÌ„mandement of their father pleased God in so doing as a part of his worship much more abstinence which is inioyned by our mother the Church Ans. 1. The argument followeth not for there is great difference betweene the abstinence of the Rechabites and the ceremoniall abstinence 1. in the matter that was not from flesh egges and such like but from wine tillage dwelling in cities 2. in the forme they abstained all their life time and with a libertie in time of necessitie for in Ieremies time they dwelt in Ierusalem because of the warre Ierem. 35.11 3. and further by the law the parents might either confirme or disanull the vowes of their children Num. 30. but now vnder the Gospel such legall rites are ceased 2. The antecedent is false for they did not keepe their fathers precept as an act of religion but for some politike and morall respects as they are forbidden inhabiting in cities least they might be corrupted with the vices thereof and were commanded to dwell in tents to put them in minde that they were straungers beeing descended of the Kenites these and such other arguments are produced by Bellarmine lib. 4. de verb. Dei c. 3. lib. 2. de bonis operib c. 71. c. 11. Now on the contrarie against such superstitious abstinence vrged by the Papists as a necessarie part of Gods seruice the same meritorious some of our arguments are these 1. Argum. The Apostle saith c. 14.17 The kingdome of heauen is not meate nor drinke and Heb. 13.9 It is good to haue the heart established with grace and not with meates which haue not profited them that haue bin occupied therein therfore to be occupied in abstinence froÌ„ meats is a thing indifferent not in it selfe meritorious or a part of Gods worship 2. Argum. That which God hath purified and made cleane no man must pollute Act. 20.15 but he which for religion and conscience sake maketh meates vnlawfull which God hath made cleane doth pollute them Ergo. 3. Arg. All will worship is no part of Gods seruice but the choice of meates touch not tast not handle not is a voluntarie and will worship Coloss. 2.21.23 therefore no part of Gods seruice Bellarmine answeareth that the Apostle doth not speake against all ecclesiasticall abstinence but onely the Iudaicall or the Philosophicall abstinence which was practised among the heathen Contra. The Apostles reason is generall against all choice of meates and other humane inuentions which are according to the doctrines of men v. 22. but this ecclesiasticall and Popish canonicall fast is an humane invention meerely and according to the doctrines of men therefore euen against such speaketh the Apostle 4. Argu. Our Blessed Sauiour saith that which entreth in by the mouth defileth not the man Matth. 15.17 therefore flesh at all times eaten and entring in by the mouth is lawfull in it selfe because it defileth not so it be done without scandale and offence our Blessed Sauiour giueth a generall rule as well against Pharisaicall traditions as all other invented by man that the conscience before God is not defiled with the breach thereof 5. Argu. The doctrine of Deuils is no part of the diuine worship but the forbidding of meates is the doctrine of Deuils 1. Tim. 4.3 Ergo. Bellarmine telleth vs that the Apostle there noteth such heretickes as the Manichees Tatians Eucratites which condemned flesh as euill and so did dishonour the Creator Contra. The Apostle onely noteth not those heretickes but euen the Papists which should forbid meates for he prophecieth of the latter times and not onely they which simply condemne meates but doe place an holinesse in merite in some meates rather then others are these forbidders of meates and how doe not they condemne meates which thinke
that this Epistle was written by Paul and is of diuine authoritie by the epistle it selfe 2. contr That S. Pauls epistles are not so obscure that any should be terrified from the reading thereof 3. contr Against the Ebionites which retained the rites and ceremonies of Moses 4. contr Against the Marcionites that reiected the lawe of Moses 5. contr Against the Romanists which depraue the doctrine taught by S. Paul in his Epistle 6. contr Against Socinus that blasphemously subverteth the doctrine of our redemption by Christ and iustification by faith 7. contr Whether Paul may be thought to haue beene married Controversies vpon the 1. Chapter 1. contr Against the Manichees which refuse Moses and the Prophets 2. contr Against Election by the foresight of workes 3. contr Against the Nestorians and Vbiquitaries 4. contr Against the heresie of one Georgius Eniedinus a Samosatenian heretike in Transilvania 5. cont Against the Marcionites that Christ had a true bodie 6. contr Against the Apollinaâ—â—sts that Christ had no humane soule 7. contr That the Romane faith is not the same now which was commended by the Apostle 8. contr That the Pope is not vniversall Bishop 9. contr Against the Popish distinction betweene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to worship and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to serue v. 9. whom I serue in my spirit 10. contr That God onely spiritually is to be serued and worshipped 11. contr Of the vaine vse of Popish pilgrimages 12. contr None to be barred from the knowledge of Gods word 13. contr Against diuerse hereticall assertions of Socinus touching the iustice of God 14. contr Against inherent iustice 15. contr That the Sacraments did not conferre grace 16. contr That faith onely iustifieth 17. contr How the Gospel is the power of God to salvation to euerie one that beleeueth 18. contr Of the difference between the law and the Gospel 19. contr Whether by naturall meanes the Gentiles might haue attained to the knowledge of the onely true God without the speciall assistance of Gods grace 20. contr Against some Philosophers that the world is not eternall 21. contr Against the adoration and setting vp of images in Churches and places of prayer v. 23. they turned the glorie of the incorruptible God to the similitude of an image 22. contr Of the corrupt reading of the vulgar Latine translation v. 32. 23. contr Against the Popish distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes Controversies out of the 2. Chapter 1. contr Against the power of freewill in good things 2. contr Of iustification by the imputatiue iustice of faith 3. contr Against the merit of workes 4. contr Which are to be counted good works 5. con Whether any good works of the faithfull be perfect 6. contr Whether men ought to doe well for hope of recompence or reward 7. contr Against iustification by workes vpon these words v. 13. Not the heares of the lawe but the doers shall be iustified 8. contr That it is not possible in this life to keepe the lawe 9. contr Whether by the light of nature onely a man may doe any thing morally good 10. contr Of the imperfection of the vulgar Latine translation 11. contr That the Sacraments do not conferre grace 12. contr That the Sacraments depend not vpon the worthines of the Minister or receiuer 13. contr Against the Marcionites and other which condemned the old Testament and the ceremonies thereof 14. contr Against the Anabaptists which reiect the Sacraments of the newe Testament 15. contr That the want of Baptisme condemneth not 16. contr That the wicked and vnbeleeuers eate not the bodie of Christ in the Sacrament Controversies vpon the 3. Chapter 1. contr That the Sacraments of the old Testament did not iustifie ex opere operato by the work wrought and so consequenly neither the newe 2. contr Of the Apochryphall Scriptures 3. contr That the wicked and vnbeleeuers doe not eate the bodie of Christ in the Eucharist 4. contr That the Romane Church hath not the promise of the perpetuall presence of Gods spirit 5. contr The Virgin Marie not exempted from sinne 6. contr The reading of the Scripture is not to be denied to any 7. contr Against the adversaries of the law the Marcionites and other heretikes 8. contr Against the counsels of perfection 9. contr Against the Pelagians which established free-will 10. contr That the vertue of Christs death is indifferently extended both to sinnes before baptisme and after 11. contr That the beleeuing fathers before Christ were not kept in Limbo 12. contr Against the Marcionite heretikes 13. contr Against the Novatian heretikes 14. contr Against inherent iustice 15. contr Against the Popish distinction of the first and second iustification 16. contr Against the works of preparation going before iustification 17. contr What iustifying faith is 18. contr What manner of faith it is that iustifieth 19. contr Of the manner how faith iustifieth 20. contr Whether faith alone iustifieth 21. contr How S. Paul and S. Iames are reconciled together 23. contr Against Socinus that Christ properly redeemed vs by paying the ransome for vs and not metaphorically 23. contr That Christ truely reconciled vs by his blood against an other blasphemous assertion of Socinus Controversies out of the 4. Chapter 1. contr That the Apostle excludeth all kind of workes from iustification 2. contr Whether blessednes consist onely in the conversion of sinners v. 7. 3. contr Whether sinne is wholly purged and taken away in the iustification of the faithfull 4. contr Against workes of satisfaction 5. contr Of imputatiue iustice against inherent righteousnes 6. contr That the Sacraments doe not conferre grace by the externall participation onely 7. contr That there is the same substance and efficacie of the Sacraments of the old and newe Testament 8. contr That circumcision was not onely a signe signifying or distinguishing but a seale confirming the promise of God 9. contr Whether circumcision were availeable for the remission of sinne 10. contr Of the presumptuous titles of the Pope calling himselfe the father and head of the faithfull 11. contr Against the Chiliasts or Millenaries that hold that Christ should raigne a 1000. yeares in the earth 12. contr Of the certaintie of faith v. 16. that the promise might be sure 13. contr Whether faith be an act of the vnderstanding onely 14. contr That iustifying faith is not a generall apprehension or beleeuing of the articles of the faith but an assurance of the remission and forgiuenesse of sinnes in Christ. 15. contr That faith doth not iustifie by the merit or act thereof but onely instrumentally as it applyeth and apprehendeth the righteousnesse of Christ. 16. contr The people are no to be denied the reading of the Scriptures 17. contr Against the heretikes which condemned the old Testament and the author thereof 18. contr Whether iustification consist onely in the remission of sinnes 19. contr Against Socinus corrupt interpretation of these words v. 25. was deliuered vp for our sinnes 20. contr Piscators
homines à coelestium meditatione retrahit which draweth spirituall men from the meditation of heauenly things but the Apostle spake before of the combate betweene the flesh and the spirit and they are not all carnall which are occupied in the necessarie affaires of this life 6. Tolet ioyning the pronoune this vnto death not vnto the bodie reading thus from the bodie of this death will haue reference to be made vnto the tyrannie of the lawe of concupiscence whereof he spake before but the pronoune is better ioyned to bodie as the Syrian interpreter Erasmus and Beza well obserue for of his flesh and members he spake before but of death he made no mention This demonstrative then this is better referred to bodie 7. Wherefore the Apostle calling his present state out of the which he desireth to be deliuered this bodie of death ioyneth both mortalitie and sinne together he meaneth his mortall bodie subiect to sinne as Hierome expoundeth quod morti perturbationibus est oppositum which is opposed to death and perturbations apolog advers Ruffin and so Beza the Apostle by the bodie designeth carneam corporis molem the fleshie masse of the bodie which is nothing else but mussa mortis peccati a lumpe of death and sinne so Origen it is called the bodie of death in quo habitat peccatum quod est mortis causa wherein sinne dwelleth which is the cause of death 8. And this deliuerance which the Apostle longeth for is not the spirituall deliuerance in this life from the captiuitie of sinne as Tolet but the finall deliuerance from the bondage of mortalitie and corruption which we looke for in the resurrection as Augustine expoundeth lib. 1. cont epist. Pelag. c. 11. and so the Apostles meaning is non finiri hoc confluctus c. that these conflicts cannot be ended as long as we carrie this mortall bodie about with vs Pareus And here we may consider a threefold state of mans bodie the one in Paradise cum non potuit mori when it was in mans power if he had not sinned not to die at all vnder the state and condition of sinne where non potest non mori he cannot but die a necessitie of death is laid vpon all Adams posteritie vnder the state of glorie non possumus mori we cannot die we shall be exempted from the condition of all mortalitie Pererius Quest. 25. Why the Apostle giueth thanks to God ver 25. 1. There is some difference in the reading of these words the Latine interpreter thus readeth the grace of God thorough Iesus Christ so also Origen before who maketh it an answear to the former words of the Apostle who shall deliuer 〈◊〉 likewise Augustine followeth this reading serm 45. de tempor but all the Greek copies haue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I giue thankes and the Apostle did not aske the question before who should deliuer him but suspirat potâ—â—s be sigheth and sheweth his desire to be deliuered Beza 2. For the meaning of the words 1. some thinke that the Apostle giueth thanks for his redemption in Christ Mart. that he is deliuered à reatu peccati from the guilt of sinne originall and actuall Roloch and that his sinnes are not imputed Osiander and before them Oecumenius quod me liberavit per mortem filij that he hath deliuered me by the death of his Sonne But this deliverance the Apostle had alreadie obtained he speaketh in the future sense who shall deliuer me 2. Theophylact referreth it to the former benefit quod viriliter adversatur peccato that he did manfully resist sinne which strength he had not either by the law of nature or by the law of Moses but by grace in Christ So also Pareus thinketh the Apostle doth giue thankes that he doth not succumbere in certamine sed vincere giue ouer in this combate but at the length ouercommeth But the Apostle wisheth yet a further deliuerance which as yet he had not because he speaketh of the time not to come who shall deliuer me and yet he giueth thankes for it as enioying the fame in hope 3. Tolet and Pererius thinke that the Apostle giueth thankes that he was deliuered from concupiscence quod non mentem trahit in consensum that it did not draw his mind to consent and so he was deliuered from it as it was malum culpae as there was sinne or fault in it that is to consent vnto it but not as it was malum poenae a punishment that is concupiscere to couet or desire simply without assent so also Lyranus But if the Apostle did not sometime thorough his infirmitie giue consent vnto his concupiscence how could he say it did lead him captiue vnto the law of sinne more it is prooued at large afterward that the commandement thou shalt not lust whereof the Apostle confesseth himselfe a transgressor v. 7.18 doth not onely restraine the first motions of concupiscence which haue not the consent of the will but the second also which haue controv 8.4 Vatablus will haue this thanksgiuing to be referred to the deliuerance which the Apostle expected in the life to come 5. But it is better to ioyne them together as Augustine doth serm 45. de tempor the grace of God nunc perfecte innovat hominem c. doth now perfectly renew a man by deliuering him from all his sinnes ad corporis immortalitatem perducit and bringeth him also to the immortalitie of the bodie Lyranus likewise comprehendeth both these deliuerances that both the regenerate are here deliuered from their sinnes and in the next life shall be freed from all corruption as the Apostle saith Philip. 3.21 Who shall change our vile bodie that it may be fashioned like vnto his glorious bodie so Chrysostome saith the Apostle giueth thanks quod non solum principibus malis liberamur sed eoruÌ„ quae futura sunt capaces facti sumus that we are not onely deliuered from the former euills namely our sinnes but are made capable of the good things to come thus also Pellican the Saints reioyce se primitijs spiritus donatos c. that they are endued with the first fruits of the spirit which giue them certaine hope of the inheritance to come and Beza the Apostle sheweth that he resteth in that hope quam habet in Christo fundatam which he hath grounded on Christ. 35. Quest. Of these words I in my minde serue the law of God c. 1. By the mind the Apostle vnderstandeth the inner man reformed by grace by the flesh the part vnregenerate so that in this speach of the Apostle a double figure is to be admitted first a metonymie in that the subiect is taken for the adiunct the minde for the sanctitie and holines wrought in the minde by grace as Vatablus well interpreteth secundum spiritum meum doctum à spiritu sancto in my spirit taught by the holy spirit and the flesh for the carnall sensualitie whereby it is lead there is also a