owne righteousnesse which is of the lawe but that which is thorough the faith of Christ of these the Apostle speaketh here that in part doe themselues liue according to the lawe and shewe their faith by their fruits supplying that which is wanting in them by the obedience of Christ by faith 3. There are two kinds of iustification one is verily and indeede before God which is by faith in Christ Rom. 3.26 the other is in the opinion of men Luk. 16.15 Ye are they which iustifie your selues before men of the former the Apostle speaketh here Gryneus see further for the exposition of this place controv 7. following Quest. 27. How the Gentiles which had not the lawe did by nature the things contained in the lawe This place is diuersly expounded 1. Some doe here vnderstand the Gentiles converted to the faith of Christ which doe naturally the worke of the lawe that is to beleeue in Christ not that faith is naturall but because duce natura credunt they beleeue nature so guiding them and while they beleeue opus legis oftendunt they shewe the worke of the Lawe to this purpose Ambrose whose meaning seemeth to be this that the Gentiles which receiued the Gospel were mooued by the light of nature seeing the great miracles which Christ did to acknowledge him to be the Messiah But 1. this is an improper speech to say that to beleeue is to doe the things of the lawe neither is faith a worke of the lawe for then he that is iustified by faith might be said to be iustified by the lawe which the Apostle euerie where opposeth and setteth one against the other and faith is called the work of God not of the lawe as Ioh. 6.29 This is the worke of God that ye beleeue c. 2. Neither by the light of nature can any come to beleeue but he hath neede of speciall illumination Iohn 6.44 No man can come vnto me except my father drawe him 2. Augustine likewise lib. de spirit liter c. 26. vnderstandeth this place of the Gentiles conuerted to the faith of Christ and so also lib. 4. con Iuli. c. 3. And thus he seemeth to prooue it because afterward v. 26. he saith If circumcision keepe the ordinances of the lawe shall not his vncircumcision be counted for circumcision here the Apostle speaketh of a Gentile conuerted for otherwise how could he keepe the lawe and it is like that in all these places the Apostle speaketh of the same kind of Gentiles and they are said naturally to doe the things of the lawe quia vt crederint ipsa in eis per Christi gratiam sanata est natura because that they might beleeue their nature was healed by grace to this purpose Augustine But this exposition may be thus obiected against 1. though it be admitted that afterward the Apostle speaketh of a Gentile conuerted to the faith it followeth not that he should so meane here for in this place the Apostle maketh mention of such Gentiles as had no other direction but the lawe of nature and their conscience and so are said to sinne without the law but in the other place he compareth with the Iewes such vncircumcised Gentiles which kept the ordinances of the lawe and had the true circumcision of the heart which they could not attaine vnto by the light of nature And so Origen though before he vnderstand the vnbeleeuing Gentiles qu. 21. yet there he thinketh the Apostle to meane the Gentiles conuerted see qu. 43. following Some thinke that the Apostle is there to be vnderstood to speake by way of supposition if circumcision keepe the ordinances of the lawe not that it did but if it did Calvin but it is there better referred to the conuerted Gentile O siand see afterward question 43. 2. If to doe by nature the things of the law were to doe it by nature illuminated by grace and faith then were there no difference here betweene Iewe and Gentile for the Iewe also did so keepe the lawe 3. and whereas it is said they hauing not the law he sheweth that they haue no other helpe but the lawe of nature whereas the conuerted Gentiles did such things by the instinct of grace and faith rather then by the light of nature 4. And whereas Augustine thus obiecteth that if it be the lawe of nature which is written in their hearts the Gospel should haue no priuiledge more then the lawe which the Lord is said to write in their hearts Ierem. 31.33 It may be answeared that the one is written in the heart ratione luminis naturalis by the meanes of the naturall light the other is written ratione luminis fidei by the light of faith and by the first naturall onely and morall duties are imprinted in the heart by the other beside these all other mysticall points of religion which nature cannot bring one vnto without faith this is the priuiledge then of the Gospel more then the lawe of nature hath Tolet. And Ieremie speaketh there of a supernaturall inscription and writing in the heart by grace the Apostle here of the naturall Pareus dub 14. 3. Some doe take the Gentiles here to be vnderstood not conuerted to the Gospell but such as liued before the times of the Gospel but beside the light of nature had auxilium diuinae gratiae the helpe of Gods grace whereby they kept the morall precepts of the lawe Thus Thomas interpreteth and Vega lib. 6. super decret concil Tridentin c. 21. so also Tolet that they did the workes of the lawe non quidem sine fide gratia but not without faith and grace annot 25. But this opinion is confuted by Medina lib. 4. de certa fide c. 7. and Pererius disput 8. numer 61. and it may be further refelled thus 1. If that were S. Pauls meaning that the Gentiles by their naturall light helped by faith did keepe the lawe they should not in this behalfe differ from the Iewes who did keepe the lawe by the same meanes also the light of nature assisted by grace 2. the Apostle saith they hauing not the lawe are a lawe to themselues but they which are ayded by grace are not a lawe to themselues they are guided and directed by grace 4. Some here vnderstand such among the Gentiles as had the true knowledge of God such were Melchisedeck Iob the Niniuites Cornelius Chrysost. Faius But these were not many among the Gentiles the Apostle seemeth to speake more generally of a great number among the Gentiles 5. Some thinke that the Gentiles by the light of nature though they beleeued not in God might doe workes of the lawe worthie of reward to this purpose Origen whose opinion is before confuted qu. 21. Lyranus seemeth also to incline hereunto obseruatio legis naturalis cum fide cultu vnius Dei ad quod inducit ratio naturalis aliquo modo sufficit c. the naturall obseruation of the lawe with the faith and worship of one God to
and of the Apostles by Christ excepting Paul whereas for the former the text saith that Ionas fled from the presence of the Lord that called him who were called extraordinarily if the Apostles were not both in respect of the caller which was Christ God in the flesh and of their extraordinarie and miraculous gifts Now the ordinarie calling is in a Church alreadie setled and constituted the extraordinarie when a Church is to be setled and it is of two sorts either when there is no Church at all as the Apostles were sent vnto the Gentiles who were altogether straungers from God or when the Church is wholly corrupted with false doctrine and corrupt manners as the Prophets were raised vp in Israel when they were fallen to idolatrie and noâ—â— in this last age when Christians vnder Antichrist were becom idolaters God hath stirred vp many zealous preachers as Hus Hierome Luther Calvin with other excellent instruments Doct. 7. Of the peace which the Gospel bringeth v. 15. How beautifull are the feete of them which bring glad tidings of peace Whereas without Christ God was offended with the world and there was no peace but the earth was full of tribulation 2. Chron. 15.4 God by Christ reconciled the world to himselfe and sent peace according to the song of the Angels at the birth of Christ glorie to God in heauen and in the earth peace which peace is threefold first toward God in the assurance of the remission of sinnes Rom. 5.1 peace of conscience in that sinne hath no more power ouer vs to perplex and trouble our mindes and peace with our brethren of these two our Sauiour speaketh Matth. 9.57 Haue salt in your selues haue peace one with an other But whereas Christ saith he came not to send peace but debate Luk. 12.51 that is to be vnderstood of the peace of the world which hateth the light and with it the children of light can haue no peace 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. Against inherent iustice v. 3. They beeing ignorant of the righteousnesse of God c. Stapleton Antidot p. 601. contendeth this place to be vnderstood of inherent not of iustice imputed for that which is imputed saith he is not giuen neither receiueth he any iustice to whom it is imputed onely but remaineth still wicked in himselfe Contra. 1. The righteousnesse which is inherent in a man is the righteousnesse of works which the Apostle calleth their owne righteousnesse but the righteousnesse of God is not the righteousnesse of workes but that which is of faith as the Apostle sheweth v. 6. there he calleth that the righteousnesse of faith which here he nameth the righteousnesse of God but this is no other then righteousnesse imputed now faith is imputed for righteousnesse without workes Rom. 4.5 6. thus then the argument is framed the righteousnesse of God is the righteousnesse of faith this is prooued both out of this place v. 4. and c. 3.22 the righteousnesse of God by faith but the righteousnesse of faith is by imputation c. 4.5 6. therfore the righteousnes of God is righteousnes imputed 2. That iustice is not onely giuen which is actually conferred but that also which is accounted and imputed as the debt which is freely pardoned is as fully discharged as if the debt were paied and they which are iustified by righteousnesse imputed remaine not wicked because they are counted righteous in Christ beeing iustified by faith and are sanctified in some measure and so are regenerate and become new beeing mortified vnto sinne by which their mortification and dying vnto sinne they are not iustified before God but onely by faith in Christ. Controv. 2. Against the workes of preparation which are done without faith v. 4. Christ is the ende of the law Here Chrysostome well noteth that if Christ be the end of the lawe it followeth that qui Christum non habet etsi legis iustitiam habere videatur eam tamen non habeat he which hath not Christ though he seeme to haue the righteousnesse of the lawe yet he hath it not c. without Christ then and faith in him there is no true righteousnesse before God for without faith it is impossible to please God Heb. 11.6 what is become then of the Popish workes of preparation which should goe before iustification as though a man hauing not faith yet by his workes might prepare and make himselfe fit for iustification following for all such workes which come before faith and so are not sanctified in Christ are before God no better then sinnes Controv. 3. That it is impossible for any in this life to keepe the lawe v. 5. The man that doth these things shall liue thereby 1. Hence it is euident that no man can performe the lawe in euerie point for the lawe requireth perfect obedience in all things and as he that keepeth it shall liue thereby so he that fayleth in any part thereof is vnder the curse of the lawe as S. Paul sheweth Galat. 3.10 2. If it be answeared that it is impossible to keepe the lawe by the power onely of free-will but by grace it is possible to be kept S. Iohn sheweth that euen the regenerate by grace are not without sinne 1. Ioh. 1.8 and consequently they transgresse the lawe 〈◊〉 sinne is the transgression of the lawe 1. Ioh. 3.4 3. And whereas Stapleton obiecteth antid p. 637. that then this should be a ridiculous deceitfull and idle promise He that doth these things shall liue thereby if none were able to doe them and it were like as a father should promise his sonne an inheritance if he could get a kingdome which were impossible for him to doe Contra. 1. Though the condition be impossible to vs to be fulfilled yet is it possible in Christ who hath performed the perfect obedience of the lawe 2. and though it be not possible to keepe the lawe perfectly yet by grace we are made able in some measure to keep the lawe and the rest where we faile is supplied by the perfect obedience of Christ. 3. neither is the example like for the sonne is not bound by any dutie to fulfill that condition but we are debters vnto God for the keeping of the lawe which if it be now impossible it is mans owne fault who in his creation was made righteous and endued with sufficient strength to keepe the law See further hereof Synops. Centur. 4. err 63. Contr. 4. Against the doubting of saluation v. 6. Say not in thine heart who shall ascend c. 1. The Apostle sheweth the contrarie effects of the lawe and Gospell they which depend vpon the righteousnesse of the law are continually in doubt how they shall come to heauen and how they shall escape hell but the righteousnesse of faith remooueth all these doubts because their faith is grounded vpon the word of God which teacheth them that Christ ascended into heauen for them and that he died for them they neede none other to ascend to prepare
Argum. Christ forbiddeth to iudge iudge not and ye shall not be iudge Peter is bidde to put vp his sword Christ refused to diuide the inheritance and to condemne the adulteresse he saith his kingdome is not of this world Answ. 1. Christ forbiddeth all rash iudgement and priuate censuring one of an other he speaketh not of publike iudgement 2. Peter and in him all Ecclesiasticall persons as also all priuate persons are forbidden to vse the sword because it is not committed to them 3. Christ came not to be a Iudge or ciuill Magistrate therefore he refused to deale in those ciuill causes the adulteresse he condemned not because the Pharisies accused her of hatred and he would not be an instrument of their malice 4. though his kingdome be not of this world yet because it is in this world of necessitie we must vse this world and the helpes thereof for our present necessitie as we vse meate and drinke plowing sowing and such like though we must be as though we vsed it not 7. Arg. There is neither precept nor president in the newe Testament for the lawfulnes of warre among Christians Ergo it is not lawfull Answ. 1. It followeth not for Christ came to preach faith not to giue rules of warre because they are sufficiently prescribed in the old lawe and Testament which Christ came not to dissolue 2. the antecedent also is false for there are both precepts and presidents in the new Testament as shall follow now to be shewed in the contrarie arguments Contra. Now for the affirmatiue part that it is lawfull for a Christian to beare the Magistrates office and beeing a Magistrate to vse the sword both in ciuill iudgements and hostile warre these reasons are brought 1. We haue in the old Testament both precepts for iudiciall matters as Exod. 21.22.23 and touching warre Deut. c. 13. c. 20. c. 31. and presidents also for both Moses Iosuah Dauid Iehosophat were both iudges in deciding controversies at home and victorious captaines against their enemies abroad But it will be obiected concerning Dauid that God refused him that he should not build his temple because he was a man of warre and blood 1. Chron 28.3 Answ. Dauid was not refused as though God allowed not the warres which he fought against the enemies of God for he saith the Lord taught him to fight Psal. 18.35 144.1 but for these reasons 1. because the Lord was yet to employ him in his warres and he should haue no leasure to attend that worke Iunius annot 2. Sam. 7.5 2. or because he had shed the innocent blood of Vrias Pare 3. adde hereunto the Temple was a figure of Christ whose kingdome should be peaceable and therefore that the shadowe and the bodie might fully agree the Lord would haue the materiall Temple a figure of the true Temple to be builded by Salomon a peaceable man But against all these precepts and presidents in the old Testament the Anabaptists will obiect with the old Manichees that there is great difference betweene the old and new Testament that the God of the lawe was cruell and bloodie but the father of Christ in the newe is mercifull and gentle therefore to stoppe such blasphemous mouthes and to shew that herein the old Testament and the newe agree as both written by one spirit we haue both precepts practise and presidents for all these in the newe Testament For precepts of exercising Iustice and Magistracie S. Paul saith He the Magistrate beareth not the sword in vaine Rom. 13.4 it is lawfull then for a Magistrate to vse the sword for the lawfulnes of warre Iohn Baptist doth not bidde the souldiers renounce their calling but that they should doe no wrong but be content with their wages Luke 3. For practise S. Paul appealed vnto Caesars iudgement seat therein allowing the thrones and places of iustice For presidents of magistracie the ruler Iohn 4. beleeued with all his house and Sergius Paulus beeing conuerted Act. 13. renounced not his Magistracie of captaines Cornelius the Centurion was a man that feared God and yet a captaine so is the Centurion commended Matth. 8. And after the Apostles times the Christians warred vnder the Emperours beeing yet Pagans and infidels against their enemies as Iustinus Martyr in the ende of his 2. apologie maketh mention of the epistle of Mar. Aurelius the Emperour to the Senate of Rome wherein he ascribeth his victorie against the Germanes to the Christians in the campe who when they were readie to perish for thirst prayed vnto God who sent them raine to comfort them and thunder vpon their enemies Controv. 7. Whether lawe Ciuill and Ecclesiasticall doe simply bind in conscience Before I come to examine the arguments on both sides produced certaine distinctions must be premised for the better opening and vnderstanding of the question 1. Some lawes are iust which are agreeable vnto the word of God in particular or in generall and these doe some way or other bind in conscience some are vniust prescribing and commanding vnlawfull things these doe not bind the conscience at all but rather in keeping them the conscience is defiled 2. Lawes may bind in conscience either in generall or particular in generall some lawes may bind because obedience is commanded toward our gouernours in all lawfull things and yet the same lawes shall not bind in particular in respect of the thing commanded 3. Lawes may bind in conscience per se of themselues in respect of the thing commanded directly concerning the worship of God or the duties of the second table or they may bind per accidens accidentally in respect of the scandall that may followe 4. Some lawes that bind in conscience of themselues do so bind sub ratione cultus divint as a part of the diuine worship for all those workes which men are bound in conscience to doe though they were commanded by no humane lawe belong to the seruice of God some lawes bind of themselues but not by reason of the diuine worship but in respect of some order or discipline prescribed to that ende 5. Some lawes doe onely inducere culpam ciuilem make one guiltie of a ciuill offence as to eate flesh vpon dayes inhibited or to weare apparell contrarie to the lawe these ciuill offences doe not bind the conscience properly or they make one guiltie of a morall offence as when men are forbidden vsurie extortion drunkennesse and such like these doe binde the conscience Now according to these distinctions these propositions may be framed 1. That the diuine lawes by whomsoeuer enioyned Magistrate superiour or inferiour which concerne either the duties of the first or of the second table doe bind in conscience simply of themselues both in generall and particular 2. Ciuill lawes which doe determine of circumstances necessarie and profitable toward the obseruation of the morall lawe as the lawe that forbiddeth men to frequent alehouses the better to preuent drunkennesse or to weare any vnlawfull weapon to prevent
bloodshed doe bind simply in conscience at the least in generall because they are morall precepts directly tending to the observation of the morall lawe in such things we are bound in conscience to obey 3. Lawes made concerning ciuill duties which in themselues not beeing commanded are indifferent as of the eating of flesh keeping of watch paying of tribute and such like doe not simply bind in conscience neither in generall nor in particular but accidentally only they doe bind both in generall and particular in regard of the contempt of authoritie and scandall of our brethren 4. Likewise Ecclesiasticall lawes which doe limit the circumstance of times and place concerning external order vsages which do helpe toward the obseruation of the duties of the first table and the exercise of religion doe of themselues properly and simply bind in conscience at the least in generall because in such morall duties our obedience simply is required such are the publike orders of resorting duely vnto diuine seruice of receiuing the sacraments of paying tithes toward the maintenance of the Minister of silence in the church and not disturbing the Preacher and such like 5. Other orders of the Church which doe not so directly concerne the seruice of God but are touching things indifferent in themselues as of some gestures to be vsed rites and observations not offensiue they doe not bind at all in conscience but onely accidentally in respect of the scandall and offence which may be giuen and the breaking of order Now the position of the Romanists is that lawes both ciuill and Ecclesiasticall doe bind simply in conscience not onely in respect of the matter that is commanded beeing agreeable to the word of God or of the scandall and offence which may followe but the thing though in it selfe it be indifferent yet bindeth the conscience quia lege praecipitur because it is commanded by the lawe though by the occasion thereof no offence followe Perer. disput 2. numer 8. and by the binding of the conscience he saith is vnderstood mortall sinne which is committed in the omission of such things commāded their reasons are these 1. S. Paul biddeth vs to be subiect not onely for wrath but for conscience sake v. 5. therefore such lawes bind in conscience Answ. This conscience is to be vnderstood in generall in respect of him who commandeth who of conscience is to be obeyed as Gods Minister not in respect of the thing commanded which is not alwaies such as bindeth the conscience 2. S. Paul willeth obedience to be giuen vnto those which are set ouer vs Heb. 13.17 and our Sauiour faith he that heareth you heareth me Answ. Our Sauiour and the Apostle speake of obedience to be giuen in those things which concerne the doctrine of faith and the saluation of our soules not of euerie observation and order of the Church 3. Argum. The Apostles in their Synodall decree did bind the conscience of Christians to abstaine from strangled and blood and fornication Act. 13. Answ. 1. The former of these was no otherwise imposed vpon the conscience then for the avoiding of offence fornication is ioyned with the rest not because it was indeede as indifferent a thing but it was so counted among the heathen 2. neither haue the Pastors of the Church that power and authoritie to make lawes to binde the conscience as the Apostles had 4. Argum. S. Paul willeth that they which obserued not his precepts should be shunned of all 2. Thess. 3.14 Answ. Because the Apostle vrged nothing but the precepts of Christ therefore he requireth obedience simply and chargeth their conscience therewith But on the contrarie that all Ciuill and Ecclesiasticall lawes doe not simply and in themselues bind in conscience but in regard of the offence we shewe it thus 1. S. Iames saith c. 4.12 there is one lawgiuer which is able to save and to destroy God onely maketh lawes to bind the conscience 2. If euerie law did binde the conscience then by reason of such a multitude of lawes which are impossible to be kept mens consciences should be so snared and entangled as none should be free and so with the Pharisies they should bind heauie burthens and grieuous to be borne and lay them on mens shoulders Matth. 23.3 and S. Paul speaketh against such burdening with traditions as touch not tast not handle not Coloss. 2.21 3. Where the intendment of the lawe is not to bind the conscience there if no scandall followe the omission of the thing commanded doth not bind or pollute the conscience there may be a ciuill offence but no morall or mortall sinne but in diuerse such lawes which are made for ciuill order as in wearing of cappes prouiding of artillerie abstaining from flesh and such like the lawe intendeth not to charge the conscience but imposeth a ciuill mulct onely where such things are omitted therefore such offending if they pay the mulct they satisfie the law their conscience is free where the omission procedeth no◠of contempt nor giueth occasion of offence beside an other way the intentiō of the lawgiuer is kept whē the end and scope of the law is obserued though strictly the letter of the law be not kept as the eating of flesh vpon certaine dayes is prohibited for the benefit of the cōmonwealth that navigation and fishing by the vtterance of such commodities may be maintained now if any eate flesh not vpon any contempt of the lawe but vpon some other occurrent occasion so that the commonwealth be not thereby hindered nor his brother offended the intention of the lawe is kept though the letter of the law be transgressed and further in such penall lawes which onely concerne externall order intentio legislatoris non est obligare ad culpam sed ad poenam the intention of the lawegiuer is not to oblige or bind any to the guiltines of the offence but to the penaltie but in penall lawes which require the obseruation of any morall lawe it is otherwise for there beside the incurring of the outward mulct the offender also transgresseth the lawe of God Pererius then needed not here to haue found such fault with Calvins distinction between forum internum the internall court of the conscience and the externall court which onely bindeth vnto the duties of ciuilitie wherein the conscience before God is free for if vpon euery slippe of a ciuill order being not done with contempt the conscience should be burthened what an importable burthen should be laid vpon Christians whose conscience by this meanes thorough the multitude of lawes should be continually entangled Now then to conclude this point 1. Some lawes beeing vniustly made or commanding any vnlawfull thing doe neither bind the conscience in generall nor particular neither in themselues nor accidentally 2. Some lawes bind euerie way in generall in particular by themselues and accidentally and sub ratione diumi cultus as a part of Gods seruice as all lawes enforcing obedience to the morall precepts
iudgements from heauen tanquam è sublimi loco as out of an high place in the sight of all Faius so manifest that no man can denie it Beza 7. But the best sense is that men shoud not thinke these plagues sent vpon the world to be ordinarie and naturall though God therein may vse naturall and secondarie causes sed à Deo inflicta but that they are inflicted of God Martyr Pareus 5. Vpon all vngodlinesse 1. Origen restraineth this clause that though the wrath of God be said to be reuealed against all impietie non tamen in omnes homines yet not against all men but onely against those among the Gentiles which had the knowledge of the truth such were their wise men and Philosophers 2. But Tolet by diuerse reasons sheweth that all the Gentiles are here comprehended whether the wise or vnwise 1. by the generalitie of the words against all impietie and vnrighteousnesse 2. because they all had the knowledge of God by the creatures 3. v. 26. the Apostle maketh mention of their women whom he would not haue counted among the Philosophers and wiser sort 4. the Apostles intent is to prooue that all the Gentiles were vnder the wrath of God and therefore also the knowledge of the Gospel and of faith in Christ was necessarie vnto all both the wise and vnwise 3. but as Tolet here reasoneth well so yet herein he is deceiued he thinketh as this sentence concerneth all the Gentiles so the former that the iust shall liue by faith he taketh to be meant onely of the Iewes whereas v. 17. the Apostle made euident mention both of Iew and Grecian that the Gospel was the power of God to saluation to euerie of them that beleeued Faius 6. All impietie and vnrighteousnesse 1. Tolet following Theodoret thinketh that these two are applyed to idolatrie which is both impietie because it denieth vnto God his worship and iniustice in giuing that which is due vnto God vnto idols 2. But the vsuall interpretation is better which Origen also hath impiet as peccare in Deum est iniquit as in homines impietie is to sinne against God iniquitie against men so also Chrysostome non de dogmatis tantum dicit sed de vita he speaketh not onely of the errors of doctrine but of the sinnes of the life c. So impietie comprehendeth the transgressions against the first table vnrighteousnesse against the second Pareus 3. some by all impietie c. vnderstand all impious and vnrighteous persons Perer. rather it signifieth super omnes impietatis partes c. vpon all the partes of impietie and vnrighteousnesse Gorrham whereof these two reasons may be yeelded 1. that none should be excepted though they seemed neuer so righteous they might haue some impietie in them Beza 2. and to shew the obiect of Gods wrath which was not properly men but the impietie and vnrightousenesse of men Pareus Quest. 48. What it is to withhold the truth in vnrighteousnesse v. 18. 1. Anselme vnderstandeth this of those qui veritatem id est Dei scientiam habent tamen male vivunt which haue the truth that is the knowledge of God but yet doe liue ill 2. Basil of those qui donis Dei ad proprias voluntates abutuntur which hauing the gifts of God doe abuse them to their owne pleasure But the first restraineth this word veritie or truth as though it onely concerned the knowledge of diuine things whereas there is a truth also in moral duties the second seemeth onely to include those which sinne malitiously and of set purpose whereas all the Gentiles were guiltie of this in detayning the truth in vnrighteousnesse 3. Oecumenius expoundeth it of those which did know the truth in themselues and did keepe it in ne alys splendeat that it should not appeare vnto others But in this sense onely the Philosophers and wise men among the heathen should be touched whereas S. Paul sheweth what was the condition of all the Gentiles in generall 4. Augustine Ambrose Chrysostome Hayme doe specially apply it to the knowledge of God which the Gentiles had by the creatures and abused it in leauing the Creator and worshipping the creature quod per opera Dei cognovisti per opera hominum perdidisti that which thou knewest by the works of God thou hast lost by the handieworke of men August serm 55. de verbo Domini secund Ioan. And Chrysostome thus resembleth it like as one hauing the kings treasure committed vnto him to bestowe in the kings affaires should spend it vpon harlots and other Iewde persons so also Tolet. Perer. But in this sense the Apostles reason should be too much restrained who spake before of all impietie and vnrighteousnesse both against God and man 5. By truth then we here better vnderstand veras notitias de Deo colendo proximo diligendo the true notice both of worshipping God and louing our neighbour such as the Gentiles had by the knowledge of nature which notice of the truth they by their owne concupiscence and vnrighteousnesse abused and did contrarie things to this their knowledge both in their duties toward God and their neighbours Pareus Martyr Hyperius And here the Apostle vseth a sic similitude taken from Tyrants who oppresse the innocent and imprison them so the Gentiles did as it were imprison the truth which they had by nature in their owne corrupt affections which were as setters gives vnto the truth which would haue shewed it selfe but was kept vnder 6. But seeing the truth is powerfull and prevalent why should it be kept vnder more at one time then at an other Ans. The truth is alwaies powerfull but the difference is not in the truth it selfe but in the instrument which we vse in apprehending it our naturall strength is of small force but when the grace of God assisteth vs then the truth breaketh forth and can be no longer kept vnder Martyr 49. Quest. What the Apostle meaneth by these words v. 19. That which may be knowe of God is manifest in them c. 1. The Apostle here preuenteth an obiection for whereas he had said that the Gentiles did hold the truth in vnrighteousnes it might be obiected that they had not the knowledge of the truth at all the Apostle therefore sheweth that they had the knowledge of God by the light of nature and by the sight of the creatures Pareus 2. Chrysostome Oecumenius likewise Ambrose Augustin this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that which may be knowne of God they restraine vnto the knowledge of the creatures making the next verse an exposition of this the inuisible things c. are seene by the creation But the Apostle euidently distinguisheth this knowledge from that for this is saide to be manifest in them the other is without them here therefore he meaneth that naturall light and those principles of truth both concerning God that he is and what he is and touching morall equitie which are by nature imprinted in the minde Pareus
the meaning of the Apostle is this that this was not the proper end vse of this naturall knowledge to make them inexcusable but it is vsus accidentarius an accidentall vse which happeneth thorough mens ingratitude that abusing this naturall knowledge which yet remaineth in man after his fall they thereby are depriued of all excuse or pretext of ignorance Pareus so also Gualter quod gentium vitio factum est Deo per accidens tribuitur that which came to passe by the fault of the heathen is attributed vnto God accidentally this sense is well expressed in the vulgar Latine it a vt sint c. so that they are inexcusable as our common English translation also readeth 55. Quest. Whether there is any naturall knowledge of God in man 1. Pererius here reporteth the opinion of some Schoolemen whome he calleth Nominals Deum non posse naturali ratione c. that God can not demonstratiuely be prooued by naturall reason disput 16. And Pareus maketh mention dub 16. of one Osterodius who directly affirmeth that man hath no knowledge of God by nature or by the contemplation of the creatures but onely by outward fame and heare-say his reasons are these 1. Because many in India and Brasile are found vtterly ignorant of God because they haue not heard that there is a God 2. If there were any such naturall knowledge all should haue it but euen among the Philosophers some were found which denied that there was any God 3. The Apostle speaketh of the workes of the new creation namely of his miraculous works v. 20. whereby God is knowne Contra. 1. The very Indians are not without knowledge of God though they abuse it for some of them worship the Deuill for their god 2. Those Philosophers of malice not of ignorance denied that there was a God 3. The Apostle speaketh euidently of such workes as were manifest and made knowne to all men so were not Christs miraculous workes they came not to the knowledge of all the world 2. Now that there is some knowledge of God euen by nature is euident by the Apostle in this place 1. he saith that God hath manifested vnto them that which naturally may be knowne of him and that the inuisible things of God are seene and vnderstood by his works v. 20. Pareus 2. For how els should all men be inexcusable if they had not by nature some knowledge of God whereas many haue not otherwise heard of God Perer. 3. Cicero an heathen man confesseth lib. 2. de natura Deorum quid potest esse tam apertum c. quà m esse aliquod numen praestantâ—ssimae mentis qua haec regántur what is so manifest when we looke vp to the heauens c. as that there is some diuine nature most excellent whereby all those things are gouerned 4. This was the end wherefore God erected the world that thereby man might learne to know his Creator 5. And if man naturally had not knowledge of God then naturally he were not bound to loue God aboue ll for how naturally can be loue and honour him whome he acknowledgeth not Perer. 56. Quest. Whether the naturall knowledge which the Heathen had of God was sufficient vnto saluation 1. It was neuer doubted of among Christians whether a man by his naturall strength without Gods supernaturall grace might be iustified before God and so attaine vnto euerlasting life for this were to ascribe all vnto mans free will to denie the grace of God But this hath bin called into question whether that this naturall knowledge of God without any supernaturall instruction or reuelation had not beene sufficient concerning knowledge vnto saluation Chrysostome affirmeth hom 37. in Matth. that of those which died before the comming of Christ fides Christi qui nondum venerat non petebatur the faith of Christ which was not yet come was not required c. likewise Iustin. Apolog. 2. qui cum ratione olim vixerunt Christianos esse appellandos c. they which liued in time past according to the rule of reason are to be called Christians although they knew not Christ such as were among the Grecians Socrates Heraclitus with others Clemens Alexandrin lib. 6. stromat saith that they which were before Christ were made iust either by the law of Moses or by Philosophie but they wanted onely faith in Christ and therefore they expected the comming of Christ and his Apostles in hell eorumque ibi praedicatione Christi fidem percepisse and there by their preaching they attained vnto faith and so were saued And further these reasons may be alleadged for this opinion that this naturall knowledge was sufficient 1. God requireth not things impossible but it had beene impossible for the Gentiles beside their naturall knowledge to attaine vnto faith which commeth by hearing the word which they had not 2. To know that God is and that he is a rewarder of them that seeke him had bin sufficient Heb. 11.6 but this they might haue attained vnto by nature 3. The Gentiles by their naturall knowledge of God might haue beene able to lead their life aright and to direct their actions both toward God and man and therefore it might haue beene sufficient Contra. 1. Though it be impossible to attaine vnto faith without the ordinarie meanes yet it is not to be doubted but that if the Gentiles had thankfully acknowledged their Creator and not abused their naturall knowledge God would haue giuen them further instruction as he did afterward in sending the Apostles to preach the Gospel to all the world 2. To beleeue that God is and a rewarder of them that seeke him is the worke of faith and not of naturall knowledge as the Apostle there sheweth 3. Some morall ciuill duties the light of nature might haue directed them vnto but to order their waies aright toward God and men their naturall direction had not sufficed without the grace of God for then some might haue beene found among them who had attained vnto this sufficiencie by their naturall light onely 2. Now on the contrarie side that beside our naturall knowledge faith in Christ is necessarie and that without it there is no saluation thus it appeareth by the Scriptures 1. Christ saith Ioh. 14.6 I am the way the truth and the life and Ioh. 10.9 I am the doore so that none can enter into life but by this way and doore he is the lambe of God that taketh away the sinnes of the world Ioh. 1.29 he is the Mediator betweene God and man 1. Tim. 2.5 And S. Peter saith Act. 4.12 that among men there is giuen none other name vnder heauen whereby we must be saued all these places doe euidently testifie that without the knowledge of Christ there is no saluation 2. Further the necessitie of faith also appeareth 1. because by faith we are iustified as the Apostle alleadgeth here out of the Prophet the iust shall liue by faith and without iustification there is no saluation
that the Gentiles did not conceiue so reuerent an opinion of God in faining him to be like vnto the images of creatures so also P. Martyr Gregor hom 11. in Ezech. thus vnderstandeth it they did not glorifie God non impenderunt ei cultum debitum they did not giue vnto him his due worship Ambrose Anselm Sedulius doe expound the former of the latter they glorified not God in not giuing him thankes but the Apostle set these two downe as two distinct things not to glorifie God and not to giue him thankes Therefore by this word to glorifie is better comprehended both the inward reuerent opinion of God of his iustice mercie eternitie power goodnesse as also the outward worship due vnto him Calvin Pareus So the Gentiles did offend in both these they neither honoured God as they ought worshipping him and reposing their trust and confidence in him neither did they returne him thanks for the benefits receiued but referred all vnto fortune some to the starres some to their owne prouidence 2. They became vaine in their imaginations 1. Erasmus giueth this sense they were deceiued in their expectation because they tooke themselues to be wise yet prooued verie fooles but this the Apostle expresseth afterward in particular 2. some take it in Aristotles sense that is called vaine which is not brought to the due effect as the end of this their knowledge was that God should be honoured which end they attained not vnto Martyr but indeed they neither had the true knowledge of God nor yet propounded vnto theÌ„selues any such end 3. Some referre it to the errors of the Philosophers because they did resemble the Godhead by vaine images Theodoret Chrysost. Tolet but this seemeth to be to particular they had many vanities beside and this the Apostle alleadgeth afterward as a proofe of their foolishnesse v. 23. 4. Augustine whom Anselm followeth vnderstandeth it of their pride the knowledge which they had suis cogitationibus tribuebant they attributed to their owne thoughts and reason but their vanitie was more generall it comprehended other things beside 5. Therefore hereby are vnderstood all the vaine opinions and inventions which the heathen trusting to their owne wit and invention coyâ—ed concerning the diuine nature as 1. some denied there was any God as the Epicures 2. some doubted thereof as Protagoras Diagoras 3. some affirmed that there was a diuine power but they made many gods and them either incorporeall as the spirits so the Platonists 4. or some also made materiall and corporall gods as the Greekes and Romanes made men departed gods the Egyptians other creatures as oxen geese crocodiles yea herbes as onyons leckes 5. Some acknowledged one God as Plato Aristotle but either denied his prouidence in all things done vnder the moone as the Peripatetikes or tied him vnto second and inferior causes as the Stoikes this is the vanitie which the Apostle speaketh of And as this was their vanitie in their iudgement and opinion so were they deceiued in their hope and expectation they thought by such meanes to appease their gods to procure fauour to obtaine good things but the contrarie fell out 3. Their foolish heart was full of darkenesse 1. by the heart is vnderstood the mind their very vndestanding was darkened Faius the naturall reason in them was obscured Gorrham 2. this was a iust punishment vpon them because they abused that knowledge which was giuen vnto them their owne pride and ouerweening of themselues besotted them that whereas they thought themselues wise they became fooles iusto Dei iudicio propter superâ—iam their foolish heart was obscured thorough their pride Lyran. 3. that whereas they boasted of the name and title of wisemen as the Grecians much gloried in their seuen wise men as the Romanes had their wise men also Numa Cato Cicero yet they were all fooles for as fooles delight in toyes and let passe things of greater substance and importance so they worshipped images instead of the true God which the Apostle in the next verse giueth as a reason of their foolishnesse yea Socrates who was counted one of their wisest Philosophers desired his friends beeing now readie to die to offer for him a cocke vnto Aesculapius which he had vowed Pareus 4. Some interpret thus that while they held themselues wise in temporall things stultifacti sunt in spiritualibus they became fooles in spirituall things Lyran. But their vnderstanding was darkened euen in moral duties as Cato gaue his wife vnto Hortensius desiring her and tooke her againe when he was dead Lycurgus exposed virgines naked in their playes and publike spectacles he commended theft if it were secret and many such absurd things euen in ciuill duties were committed by their wisest men Gryneus 5. Augustine whom Hugo Cardinal followeth doth somewhat curiously distinguish these three 1. they became vaine in their imaginations this he applyeth to thâ—â—â— which do measure the diuine nature according to their corporall sense imagining him to haue parts and members like vnto man which was the errour of the Anthropomorphites 2. their foolish heart was full of darkenesse this he vnderstandeth of them which ascribe vnto God the qualities and affections of the soule of man as anger griefe forgetfulnesse remembrance 3. when they thought themselues wise they became fooles this he doth interpret of those which doe imagine such things of God which neither can be found in him nor in any other creature neither in the bodie nor in the soule of man 6. But this description of the error and blindnesse of the Gentiles is better referred generally to their foolish and carnall deuises and pretexes whereby they obscured the truth both in diuine humane duties as they alleadged for their images that they did not worship the image or idol but the thing represented thereby and that as a man cannot haue accesse vnto the Prince but by his courriers so there must be mediators to bring vs vnto God Thus they became foolish in their imaginations for God is not like vnto man that he neede to be informed by others Thus they became fooles leauing the true substance of Gods worship and following after shadowes and shewes as the Apostle saith Col. 2.23 which things haue indeede a shew of wisedome c. but substance they had none Martyr Quest. 61. How the Gentiles changed the glorie of God into the image of men and beasts v. 23. 1. They changed the glorie of the incorruptible God 1. The glorie of God is either absolute in himselfe which can no wayes be changed or it is considered with relation to vs as the worship and honour which is yeelded by the Creatures vnto the Creator this is changed by men when they giue the honour due vnto God vnto creatures Pareus So that indeede they could not depriue God of his glorie sed audaciae accusantur but they are accused of great presumption that as much as in them lay they attempted to rob God of his honour Martyr 2. God is
nature was before and after mans fall and wherein they differ In the lawe of nature there are two principall things first the vnderstanding and iudgement in apprehending and conceiuing these naturall principles touching our dutie toward God and our neighbour the other is in the will and affection in giuing assent and approbation vnto those things so by the vnderstanding conceiued In both these there was greater perfection in the naturall light which Adam was created with and that which is now remaining in his posteritie 1. Concerning the vnderstanding whereas the obiect thereof is either touching mysticall and diuine things apppertaining vnto God or morall and ciuill duties 1. In both these the mind of man is naturally obscured that it doth not so clearely see what is good or euill in morall duties much lesse in spirituall as Adam did in the creationâ— for there are some mysteries concerning the Godhead as of the Trinitie of the creation of the world and of the end thereof of the power and omnipotencie of God and such like which Adam in his creation had a perfect knowledge of but now such things by the light of nature cannot be attained vnto they are reuealed by grace as our blessed Sauiour faith this is life eternall that they knowe thee to be the onely verie God 2. as some things we knowe not at all by nature which were infused to Adam so these principles that remaine are but darkely and obscurely now reuealed in nature which were manifest to Adam both in spirituall things and morall duties that as the Apostle saith by this light of nature they could but grope after God Act. 17.27 3. An other defect in the vnderstanding is that men by great difficultie and labour now attaine vnto these things which Adam had infused without labour whereof the Preacher speaketh when he saith He that encreaseth knowledge encreaseth sorrowe Eccles. 1.18 4. Curiositie is an other fault in the vnderstanding when men are caried away from seeking after things profitable and are tickeled with a desire to search out hid and mysticall things to high aboue their reach as our parent Eue when she began to listen to the serpents suggestion was tempted to desire some accession and encrease of knowledge more then they had therefore the Apostle would haue euerie one vnderstand according to sobrietie Rom. 12.4 5. Now our vnderstanding is ouercast with a vanitie of mind which breaketh out into idle vaine and vnprofitable thoughts which was not in Adam who before his fall should haue beene occupied in nothing els but in the meditation of God and good things according to which patterne Dauid desireth that the meditations of his heart might be acceptable vnto God Psal. 19.14 6. Adam had the knowledge of good by experience of euill by contemplation But after his fall he had an experimentall knowledge of euill which now remaineth in his posteritie And these differences there are betweene Adams naturall vnderstanding and ours 2. In the will of man by nature there are these defects and infirmities which Adam had not 1. In spirituall and morall good things the will hath no inclination at all sauing in some ciuill things but to will that which is good it hath no free will or power at all without grace as the Apostle saith 2. Cor. 3.5 We are not sufficient of our selues to thinke any thing 2. in generall the will consenteth to that which is good but it fayleth in particular as by nature man knoweth that it is euill to steale murther committ adulterie and yet when it commeth to a particular act he approoueth and followeth the contrarie as S. Paul saith Rom. 7.19 I doe not the good thing which I would but the euill which I would not that doe I But Adam both in generall and particular did knowe what was good and might if he would himselfe haue giuen consent thereunto 3. Mans will is so froward by nature and peruerse that when as naturally euerie one desireth to be happie yet he willingly committeth those things against his intendment which make him vnhappier as a thiefe stealeth to keepe himselfe from famine and so from miserie and thus ut miser sic malus fit ideo miserior ect quia malus est least he should be miserable he becommeth euill beeing so much the more miserable because he is euill And by this meanes it falleth out that he becommeth that which he intended not 4. Further whereas the law of nature is that a man should not offer that to another which he would not haue done to himselfe yet now this naturall light is obscured with selfeloue that a man will not haue wrong done to himselfe yet he will wrong an other 5. The lawe of nature is that the reason should gouerne and the affections should be subiect to reason thus was it in Adan so is it nowe for the lust and concupiscence often preuaileth and swayeth against reason 6. the lawe is constant and vnchangeable and the will of man following the light of nature altreth nor but now the will of man is mutable and changeable 7. And whereas by the light of nature onely that which is good should be desired now the will is carried to followe things apparently euill as most notorious vices of adulterie drunkennesse pride and such like which by custome men delight in as Augustine saith peccata qumvis magna horrenda cum in consuetudinem venerint aut parua aut nulla esse creduntur sinnes though great and horrible when they are growne into custome are thought either to be no sinnes or verie small Enehurid c. 80. And in these particulars it is euident how farre the naturall light now remaining is declined from that perfection which it had in the first creation of man 31. Quest. Whether the light of nature though much obscured can altogether be blotted out of the minde of man Though the light of nature may be and is much dimmed and ouercast by the corruption of mans preposterous affections yet that is most true which Augustine resolueth vpon legem scriptam in cordibus hominum ne ipsa quidem delet iniquitas the law written in the hearts of men no not iniquitie and sinne it selfe can blot out lib. 2. confess c. 4. this conclusion may be further thus strengthened and confirmed 1. There are certaine generall principles and rules of nature which doe reuiue and remaine in most wicked men as euery one desireth to be happie neither is there any so carelesse of himselfe but would attaine vnto this ende though he may be deceiued in the means againe euery one by nature knoweth that euill is to be auoided and therefore he would not haue any wrong offered vnto him by an other because he taketh it to be euill and he likewise knoweth that good is to be desired and therefore that which he would haue an other to doe vnto him he desireth so to be done because he thinketh it to be good These generall rules and principles of
speaketh of such as are rewarded for their worke before God and not seeing quod vllum opus ex debitâ— remunerationem Dei poscat that any worke by due debt can require reward at Gods hand he turneth the Apostles meaning an other way and by debts vnderstandeth sinnes as they are called in the Lords prayer and so he also thinketh he speaketh of the wages of sinne as S. Paul saith Rom. 6. That the wages or stipend of sinne is death But the Apostle here speaketh euidently of the wages due vnto good workes not to euill the wages is not counted by fauour but in rendring the wages of sinne there is no fauour but iustice 4. The Schoolemen likewise are grossely deceiued who thinking the Apostle doth set downe this as a positiue rule before God haue here deuised two interpretations 1. they vnderstand this working and not working of the works following iustification and so he that worketh is rewarded uot of fauour onely because of his faith but for the debt also of his workes gloss interlin but he that worketh not that is hath no time to worke is rewarded onely of grace But this glosse is conuinced of many errors 1. in ioyning faith and workes together whereas the Apostle before c. 3.28 ascribed iustification to faith without workes 2. to say that our workes are rewarded by debt is to make God endebted vnto man for the worke which is not farre from blasphemie 3. he that hath true iustifying faith can neuer be without some workes or fruits thereof be his time neuer so short as appeareth in the theife vpon the crosse 5. Gorrhan beside this exposition hath an other to vnderstand the Apostle to speake of workes going before iustification and then he giueth this sense that to him which doth some good workes before faith if he should be rewarded the reward should be of debt which is false for then it should not be of grace but to him that worketh not any such worke before faith righteousnesse is imputed by faith c. Here also are diuerse errors 1. â—o imagine that there can be any good workes at all before faith 2. he imagineth the Apostles speach to be conditionalll if any reward be giuen wheras the Apostle setteth it down â—â—sitiuely the wages is counted not if it be 3. the Apostle speaketh in all that discourse of all workes whether going before iustification or following after for all workes of the lawe are excluded c. 3.28 now all good workes are such as the lawe requireth therefore euen such good workes are shut out from iustifying as well such as followe iustification as goe before 4. all these errors arise out of the misvnderstanding of this place where the Apostle speaketh by way of supposition from the ciuill vse of rewards among men that if there were any such meritorious working before God the wages should in like manner be due by debt Quest. 13. Of the diuerse kinds of rewards 1. Wages or reward is either due by debt per proportionem operae cum re by the proportion of the worke with the reward after a Geometricall kind of proportion as when a labourer is couenanted with to haue so much for his worke as in a due estimation it is valued at there is a wages which is of fauour by promise and not by debt and then it signifieth the same thing that fructus a kind of fruit or commoditie that followeth ones labour as Psal. 127. the fruit of the wombe is called a reward and so life eternall is called a reward because the Lord hath promised to giue it as a fruit following the labour of his Saints Fai. 2. And further life eternall is called a reward by a certaine similitude because that as in ciuill workes the reward commeth after the worke is done so life eternall followeth after mens fruitfull labour in this life Mart. and againe it is called a reward in respect of the thing done not for the manner of the doing because that as the wages is giuen to the worker of debt so is saluation rendred to him which beleeueth of grace Pareus 3. But properly eternall life is not a wages or reward for these reasons 1. because the things are not equall which are giuen and receiued the eternall reward farre exceedeth the worth of our temporarie and imperfect obedience 2. he that meriteth the wages most doe it ex proprio of his owne but we haue nothing which we haue not receiued it is not our owne 3. he that meriteth must be no way bound vnto him that payeth the wages for his seruice but all that we doe or can doe it is our dutie to doe Quest. 14. How it standeth with Gods iustice to iustifie the wicked v. 5. v. 5. But beleeueth in him that iustifieth the vngodly this may seeme to be contrarie to that Exod. 34.7 where the Lord saith he will not hold the wicked innocent and Prou. 17. it is called an abhomination to iustifie the wicked 1. Bucer hereunto answeareth that S. Paul here speaketh of the first iustification which if it should not be of the wicked none at all should be iustified for we are all the children of wrath and the Lord findeth vs all wicked before we are iustified But Moses speaketh of him which continueth in his sinne and disobedience afterward 2. Gryneus thus answereth that although it be not lawfull for a man to iustifie the wicked yet God may doe it that is omni lege superior aboue all lawe and the reason of this difference is because God onely hath right and power to forgiue sinnes because they are committed chiefly against him Faius 3. Pareus addeth further that then it is vniust to iustifie the wicked when as it is done without cause and against the rule of iustice there beeing no satisfaction made by the offender himselfe or some other for him but with God it is so for he iustifieth the wicked hauing receiued a sufficient satisfaction by the death of Christ who hath payed the price of our redemption 4. To this also may be adioyned that this must be vnderstood in sen su diuiso in a diuided sense that God iustifieth the wicked not him that remaineth wicked but was so before he was iustified Faius Anselmus vnderstandeth him to be wicked that beleeueth not he then which beleeueth is no longer to be counted wicked so then whom God iustifieth be also sanctifieth and of an vnrighteous man he is made righteous which righteousnesse is imperfect here in this life and therefore it cannot iustifie Par. dub 4. Quest. 15. How our sinnes are said to be forgiuen and couered v. 7. 1. First it is here to be observed that whereas S. Paul bringeth in this testimonie out of the Psalmes Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen and whose sinnes are couered to prooue the former proposition that God imputeth righteousnesse without workes that these two to remit and couer sinnes and to impute righteousnesse are taken for one and the same thing for
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
pro benedictione eleemosynam intelligere you may vnderstand for blessing almes c. but they adde further this aboundance of blessing to be vniuersa bona all good things digna benedictione i. laude worthie of blessing that is praise so they vnderstand blessing of the praise and commendation which their vertues were worthie of not actiuely of the blessing which the Apostle should conferre vpon them so also the Greeke scholiast I shall finde you omnibus bonis ornatos furnished with all good things M. Calvin also followeth this sense that the Apostle at his comming should reioyce quod spiritualibus Euangelij divitijs affluerent that they abounded in all spirituall riches of the Gospel But it is euident by the text it selfe that the Apostle saying I shall come in the aboundance of blessing that it sheweth rather what the Apostle shall bring with him then what he should there finde 3. Some referring it to S. Paul doe vnderstand this aboundance of blessing of the gift and power of miracles whereby the Apostle should come furnished to confirme the Gospel among them Ambrose so also Hugo miracula multa mihi dabit facere inter vos God shall giue me power to worke many miracles among you but in this sense this blessing should be too much restrained 4. Theodoret applyeth it to the many troubles and afflictions out of the which the Lord had deliuered Paul and so aboundantly blessed them but he speaketh of such blessing as he should receiue to bestow vpon them as Origen well saith venieutis gratia suscipientium merita pariter designantur both the great grace of the commer and the worthines of the receiuer is expressed 5. So then the Apostles meaning is that he should so come vt benedictione Evangelij impleam that I shall fill you with the blessing of the Gospel Oecum that he should come in abundantia honorum spiritualiuos in the aboundance of spirituall grace Lyran. he should afferre copiam spiritualium honorum bring then aboundance of spirituall things Martyr he hopeth adventum suum fore frugiferum that his comming vnto them shall be fruitfull Beza and Haymo well expound it by that place c. 1.11 I long to see you that I might bestowe vpon you some spirituall gift 6. Origen here further obserueth that the Apostle spake thus by the spirit and by the gift of prophesie supra hominem namque est haec scire de futuris for it is aboue mans teach to knowe concerning things to come that he should not onely come vnto them but come in the aboundance of blessing And indeede the Apostles going to Rome was reuealed by the spirit as S. Luke testifieth Act. 19.20 that he purposed by the spirit after he had bin at Ierusalem to see Rome also but his other purpose of going into Spaine was not by diuine reuelation but humane disposition and therefore it is probable he failed in the one as hath beene shewed before though not in the other Quest. 39. Of the Apostles request that they would ioyne in prayer with him v. 30. I beseech you by our Lord Iesus c. 1. It appeareth how much the Apostle was troubled in spirit vsing this vehement obtestation as to entreate them by the Lord Iesus and by the holy spirit not that the Apostle was so carefull for his life but because Ecclesia periculum in eo agisciebat he knewe nothing could happen vnto him without great danger of the Church 2. the force of this obtestation lieth herein that if they did not pray for him it would redound much to the dishonour of Christ and of the holy Ghost for â—o entreat one by a thing is to insinuate that the thing which is most deare vnto them will thereby receiue hurt or be wronged if he prevaile not in his request Pareus or he entreateth them by the ende which he propounded it was the cause of Christ which they ought to further by their praiers and the by efficacie of charitie whereby they were bound to performe this dutie toward him Tolet and in effect be chargeth them by the loue of Christ wrought in them by the holy Ghost to ioyne in prayer with him as if he should haue said si in eum creditis if ye beleeue in him if there be in you any charitie gloss interlin as the Apostle Phillip 2.1 more at large vseth the like obtestation if there be any consolation in Christ if any comfort of loue if any fellowship of the spirit if any compassion and mercie fulfill my ioy so that he presseth and vrgeth them three wayes by this vehement obtestation both in respect of their loue vnto Christ whom they should seeme to neglect in respect of the Apostle to whom they were bound in charitie and in regard of themselues who should be found not to haue those graces of the spirit in truth not bringing forth the fruit of them 2. For the loue of the spirit 1. Chrysostome obserueth that the Apostle naming Christ and the spirit and not the father doth insinuate that we should not be troubled when in like manner he nameth the Father and the Sonne without the spirit or the father alone because non semper eodem modo ponit sanctam Trinitatem he doth not alwaies in one and the same manner set downe the Trinitie 2. Chrysostome further taketh the loue of the spirit actiuely for the loue whereby the spirit hath loued vs for as the Father and the Sonne loued the world so likewise the holy Ghost but rather that loue and coniunction is here signified which is wrought by the holy Ghost in the members of Christ Martyr will haue the loue of the spirit to be taken for the spirit of loue as c. 9.31 the law of righteousnes is put for the righteousnesse of the lawe but this inversion of the words is not here necessarie 3. To striue with me by prayers 1. certamen vocat ferventem orationem he calleth a feruent prayer a strife he would haue them pray for him earnestly 2. and they must pray with feeling and compassion for they which pray eorum in se recipiunt personam c. doe as it were take their person vpon them for whom they pray Calvin and make their case their owne 3. and hereby is signified that maximum praesidium fidelis oratio that a faithfull prayer is the cheifest defense against the spirituall adversaries Bucer 4. Origen obserueth further that the Apostle vseth this word of striuing together in prayer because of the resistance of the spirituall adversarie obsistunt enim daemones in oratione c. for the euill spirits doe resist in prayer first that one be not found such as the Apostle speaketh to lift vp pure hands without wrath and if one doe obtaine so much as to pray without wrath vix est vt effugiat esse sine disceptatione t. sine superfluis cogitationibus yet that will hardly scape him to pray without doubting that is without vaine and idle cogitations for