the obseruation of ceremonies and externall worship the Gospel in interiori cultu fidei in the inward worship by faith so that the law was lex puerorum the law of children which were kept vnder it as a schoolemaster but the Gospel is lex virorum the law of men come to ripe age August lib. de spirit lit 6. They differ also in the manner that which was couertly and darkely shadowed in the law is manifestly and apertly set forth in the Gospel 7. In the time they differ the law promised things to come the Gospel presently performed that which was in the law promised is Ignatius epist. ad Philadelp quod supra legem pracipuum habet Euangelium nempe praeseâ—tiam adventus Salvatoris what hath the Gospel aboue the law euen the presence of Christs aduent and comming 42. Quest. Why the Iewes are named before the Grecians v. 16. To the Iew first and also to the Grecian c. 1. Here by the Grecians generally all the Gentiles are vnderstood because they of all other nations seemed to be the wisest and therefore speciall instance is giuen in them that they also haue neede of the preaching of the Gospel Tolet. and at that time almost all nations vsed the Greeke tongue and therfore they are called by the name of Grecians Gualter especially when they are set against the Iewes Beza 2. Chrysostome thinketh that the Iew is named first not for any other excellencie or prerogatiue sed in hoc solo honoratur quod primus illam accepit but he is honoured onely in this because he first had the Gospel preached so he giueth onely vnto the Iew the prioritie of other 3. Origen thinketh that the Iew is set first because that like as the Grecian preferred himselfe before the Barbarian because of their lawes and ciuill life whereas the Barbarians liued without law so the Iew hath preheminence before the Grecian because they receiued their lawes from God 4. Lyranus giueth this reason the Iewes had a better preparation vnto the Gospel by the knowledge of the law and the Prophets then the Grecians who onely had the light of nature and the knowledge of the creatures 5. But the Iew hath a preheminence before the Gentile in respect of the prerogatiue which was giuen them of God vnto their fathers were the promises made and of them was descended the Messiah according to the flesh so that this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 first doth not so much signifie ordinem temporis the order of time as ordinem dignitatis the order of dignitie as when Christ saith Seeke ye first the kingdome of God Matth. 6.33 that is chiefly and most of all Tolet. Pareus This order our blessed Sauiour obserued both in himselfe saying he was sent onely to the lost sheepe of Israel and gaue the like charge when he sent out his Apostles that they should not goe the way of the Gentiles Matth. 10.5 yea and at his ascension he appointed his Apostles to be his witnesses first in Iudea Ierusalem Samaria and then to the vttermost part of the earth Act. 1.8 This order the Apostles accordingly kept Act. 13.46 It was necessarie that the word of God should first haue him spoken vnto you 43. Quest. v. 17. The iustice or righteousnes of God is reuealed what iustice the Apostle meaneth 1. There is a iustice of God wherein he is righteous and iust in himselfe as Psal. 11.7 The righteous Lord loueth righteousnes but this the Apostle speaketh not of the essentiall iustice of God is not communicated to vs by faith 2. There is a iustice distributiue in God whereby he rendreth vnto euery man according to his works Origen vnderstandeth this iustice of God but this is not the iustice whereby a man is iustified to saluation for if the Lord should marke what is done amisse no man should be able to abide it Psal. 130.3 3. The iustice of God signifieth his veritie and truth in keeping his promises so Gorrham taketh it here true it is that God graciously performeth whatsoeuer is promised in Christ but yet his mercie must goe before in promising 4. Theodoret vnderstandeth the perfect iustice of Christ whereby he satisfied the wrath of God for our sinnes and accomplished our redemption and this perfect iustice of Christ is reuealed in the Gospel but the Apostle speaketh euidently of such iustice whereby a man is iustified before God which is not that perfect iustice inherent in Christ but the applying thereof vnto vs by faith 5. Therefore Chrysostomes exposition is the best who Homil. 3. taketh this for that iustice which is communicated and infused vnto vs by that iustice of Christ and so Augustine vnderstandeth that iustice not whereby God is iust in himselfe seâ qua hominem induit cum eum iustificat but wherewith he endueth man when he instifieth him lib. de spirit liter cap. 9. of this the Apostle speaketh chap. 3.28 We conclude that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the Lawe 6. But this iustice is not an habite infused into the mind whereby a man is made apt to exercise good workes as Pererius saith that this iustice comprehendeth two things remissionem peccatorum the remission of sinnes animi rectitudinem c. and the vprightnesse of the minde whereby it is now acceptable vnto God and is exercised in good workes for the Apostle saith of this iustice of God that it is Made manifest without the lawe by the faith of Iesus c. c. 3.21 But this infused habite which is charitie and the exercising of good workes is not reuealed without the lawe for the lawe requireth and commandeth charitie This iustice then consisteth onely in the remission of sinnes and in imputing vnto vs the righteousnesse of Christ by faith c. 4.5 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne Pareus 7. It is called the iustice of God both because it is giuen vs from God not procured by our owne workes and for that we thereby are made righteous not before men but in the sight of God Tolet. 8. And this iustice is sometime called the righteousnes of God Phil. 3.9 because he is the author thereof sometime of Christ he is our righteousnesse 1. Cor. 1.30 because by his obedience we are iustified sometime of faith Philip. 3.9 because faith is the instrument whereby Christs righteousnesse is applyed vnto vs Gryneus Quest. 44. Of the meaning of these words v. 17. is reuealed from faith to faith 1. Is reuealed 1. Which sheweth a double preheminence of the Gospel in respect of the matter it sheweth such things as cannot be otherwise knowne then by reuelation from God whereas the lawe of the Iewes and the Philosophie of the Gentiles treateth of common and knowne things and for the manner that which was obscurely set forth in the law is plainely declared in the Gospel Pareus 2. and it is so reuealed that it is not onely made knowne but indeede exhibited Beza 3. And
acception of the word hath no place here for this declaration of one to be iust by works is before men before God there neede no such declaration for he knoweth what is in man but this iustification is before God which the Apostle here speaketh of it is therefore iustification in deede and not the declaration of it onely 6. Some thinke that the Apostle speaketh of the legall iustification which is by works which if any could doe they should be iustified thereby but it is impossible for any to keepe the law Calv. Pareus Beza annotat But it is euident that the Apostle speaketh not here of a thing impossible to be done and of iustification vpon that supposall if any could be doers of the law but he setteth this downe affirmatiuely and positiuely that they which liued according to the law should be iustified as he said before v. 6. that God will reward euery one according to his workes And as the hearers of the law onely are not iustified so the hearers and doers are iustified but some heare the law in fact verily and in deede therefore some also were verily and in deede doers of the law 7. The meaning then of this sentence is the same with that v. 6. God will approoue iustifie reward them that doe the works of the law whether Iew or Gentile yet it followeth not that a man is therefore iustified by the workes of the law But God approoueth and rewardeth the workers not the hearers or professors so here the Apostle entreareth not of the cause of iustification which is faith without the works of the law but of the difference betweene such as shall be iustified and such as are not Faius they onely which haue a liuely faith which worketh and keepeth the law in part and supplieth the rest which is wanting in themselues by the perfect obedience of Christ they shall be iustified not those which onely professe the law and keepe it not the Apostle then here sheweth who shall be iustified not for what 8. But this place maketh nothing at all for iustification by works 1. if a man is iustified by doing the works of the law either he is iust before he doe the works or nor iust if he be iust then he is iustified before he doe those workes then is he not iustified by those workes if he be not iust then can he doe no good workes whereby he is made iust for the workes done before faith as Tolet himselfe confesseth non possunt iustum afficere can not make one iust Here the Romanists haue no better answer then to confesse fidem sine operibuâ— primaâ— efficere iustificationem that faith without workes doth effect the first iustification which is encreased by workes which they call the second iustification Tolet. ibid. And thus they are driuen to consent with Protestants that iustification is by faith without works as for that distinction of the first and second iustification the vanitie of it is shewed before 2. If workes did iustifie then it would followe that the iustice whereby we are made iust should be an actuall iustice not habituall because that is actuall which worketh the contrarie whereof is maintained by Bellarmine who prooueth by sundrie reasons that one is formally made iust not by an actuall but an habituall iustice wherewith the minde is endued lib. 2. de iustific c. 15. Controv. 8. That it is not possible in this life to keepe the lawe 1. Pererius disput 7. numer 55. taketh vpon him to prooue against Calviu legem divinam impleri posse that the lawe of God may be kept in this life he meaneth by a man in the state of grace 1. Otherwise Dauid had not said true Psal. 18.21 I kept the wayes of the Lord and did not wickedly against my God 2. S. Paul saith he that loueth his brother hath fulfilled the Lawe Rom. 13. 3. What wisedome were there in God to command things impossible vnto man or what iustice to punish him for not keeping of that which was not in his power 2. Contra. 1. Dauids keeping of the wayes of God must be vnderstood either of some particular act of his obedience wherein he behaued himselfe vprightly as Psal. 7.3 If I haue done this thing or if there be any wickednesse in mine hands or els it must be vnderstood of his faithfull endeauour as farre as he was enabled by grace for Dauids sinnes which are mentioned in the Scripture doe euidently shewe that he did not keepe all the wayes of God 2. If a man could perfectly loue his brother as he ought he might fulfill the lawe but so can no man doe and there is as Hierome distinguisheth 2. kinds of iustice or fulfilling the lawe there is a perfect iustice which was onely in Christ and an other iustice quae nostrae competit fragilitati which agreeth vnto our frailtie dialog 1. cont Pelagian and thus may the lawe be fulfilled 3. The commandements are not simply impossible for man in his creation had power to keepe them if he would Gods wisedome is seene in giuing his lawe vnto man beeing vnable in himselfe to keepe it that it might be a schoolemaster to bring him vnto Christ Galat. 3.19 and his iustice appeareth in punishing man for transgressing that lawe which sometime he was able as he was created of God to keepe and now may perfectly performe it by faith in the obedience of Christ who hath deliuered vs from the curse of the lawe 3. Now that it is not possible for a man no not in the state of grace to keepe the lawe of God it is thus shewed out of the the Scripture 1. S. Paul saith Rom. 7.19 To will is present with me but I finde no meanes to performe that which is good a man regenerate now can doe no more then S. Paul could who confesseth that he was vnable to doe that which was good and agreeable to the lawe 2. If a man by grace could keepe the law by grace he hath power to redeeme himselfe from the curse of the lawe for as he which keepeth not euerie thing contained in the law is vnder the curse so he that keepeth all things which the lawe commandeth is free from the curse but no man can redeeme himselfe from the curse of the lawe for Christ hath redeemed vs from the curse of the lawe Galat. 3.13 3. Further The lawe is not of faith Galat. 3.12 but if the lawe might be kept by grace and faith then should it be of faith 4. And if a man regenerate were able to keepe the lawe then it were possible for a man in this life to be without sinne for where no transgression of the lawe is there should be no faâ—e for sinne is the transgression of the law 1. Ioh. 3.4 see more hereof Synops. Centur. 4. â—rr 63. pag. 916. Controv. 9. Whether by the light of nature onely a man may doe any thing morally good Bellarmine hath this position that a man if no tentation doe vrge
any thing that is good Beza 5. To iustifie is taken three wayes first to make one actually and verily iust so if any man could perfectly keepe the lawe he should thereby get an habituall and inherent iustice secondly it signifieth to be counted and declared iust as wisedome is said to be iustified of her children and thirdly it signifieth to forgiue discharge and acquite sinnes and so is it taken here that no man is iustified by the workes of the lawe that is thereby findeth forgiuenesse of his sinnes and so is taken for iust before God but this iustification is by faith in Christ by whome we are acquited of our sinnes and cloathed with his righteousnesse Martyr 6. The Apostle addeth in his sight to shewe a difference betweene iustification and righteousnesse before men which may be attained vnto by workes and the perfect righteousnesse which God requireth sometime this phrase in Gods sight is vsed to shewe a difference betweene that righteousnesse which is but in shewe and hypocrisie and that which it in truth as in this sense Zacharie and Elizabeth are said to haue beene iust before God Luk. 1.6 sometime it distinguisheth betweene the righteousnesse euen of good men and the righteousnesse before God as the Apostle graunteth that Abraham had wherein to glorie before men in respect of his workes but not before God Rom. 4.1 and so the Apostle taketh it here It is Christ onely that maketh vs holy and vnblameable in the sight of God Coloss. 1.22 Beza And further these reasons may be yeelded hereof why none can be iustified by works in Gods sight though before men they may 1. in respect of the Maiestie of God and most perfect puritie of his nature before whom the verie Angels doe couer their faces and feete Isay 6. and the heauens are not cleane in his eyes how much more is man abhominable Iob. 15.15 2. God looketh not vnto the outward shew but to the inward disposition of the heart which is perfect in none 3. the lawe of God is spirituall and requireth exact obedience of Gods commandements so that he which offendeth in one is guilty of all Iam. 2.10 this perfection none can attaine vnto Pareus Quest. 24. How the Apostle here denieth iustification by workes seeing he said before c. 2. v. 13. that the doers of the Lawe are iustified 1. The ordinar gloss giueth this solution secundum ceremonialia intellige vnderstand this according to the ceremonials he thinketh that the Apostle speaketh here of the ceremoniall workes of the lawe whereby none are iustified but in the other place of the morall workes which doe instifie But the Apostle here euen excludeth morall workes for of the morall lawe the words following are specially vnderstood by the lawe commeth the knowledge of sinne 2. Caietan thinketh that the Apostle speaketh here of iustification before God there of the iustice of workes before men but the verie words of the text doe ouerthrowe this interpretation for euen in that place the Apostle speaketh of those which are righteous before God which are not the hearers but the doers of the lawe 3. Ambrose to this purpose lex temporalem habet iustitiam fides aeternam the law may giue a temporall kind of iustice but faith an euerlasting be thinketh that men are said here not to be iustified by workes that is without faith but yet a temporall kind of iustice they might haue by the lawe without faith But the Apostle in both places as hath beene said speaketh of true iustice and righteousnesse before God 4. The moderne Papists tell vs here of two iustifications the first which is by faith onely without workes the second which is by workes which proceede of faith and grace of the first speaketh the Apostle here as they thinke and of the other in the former place Rom. 2.13 Perer. disput 8. to the same purpose Tolet that the Apostle speaketh here of workes going before faith which doe not iustifie there of workes which followe faith the other doe iustifie in encreasing iustification which was begunne before by faith annot 13. Contra. 1. This is but a Popish fiction of the first and second iustification the Apostle is saying Rom. 8.30 whom he iustified he glorified maketh but one iustification after the which followeth glorification 2. euen the Apostle excludeth here the workes of the regenerate which may appeare by these reasons 1. because there neede no question to be made of the workes of carnall men which are euill because they are without faith there can be no shewe at all that such workes should iustifie 2. the workes of Abraham were the workes of grace which the Apostle excludeth from iustification c. 4.2 3. This is the reason why workes cannot iustifie that all occcasion of reioycing may be taken away from men and euerie mouth may be stopped but now if men might be iustified by their works after they are called and haue faith they might glorie in such works by the which they say they doe merit and which in their opinion proceede in part from mans owne free will 5. Some thinke that the Apostle Rom. 2.13 speaketh ex hypothesi by way of supposition that the doers of the lawe shall be iustified that is if any could keepe and performe the lawe they should thereby be iustified But here he simply denieth iustification to workes because no man is able to keepe the lawe Pareus This is a good distinction and in other places it may well be receiued where the Scriptures seeme to attribute much vnto the law as he that doth these things shall liue thereby But here it is not so fit for in that place Rom. 2.13 the Apostle encreateth not of the causes of iustification but onely sheweth who they are which shall be iustified not hearers and professors but doers and followers 6. Peter Martyr saith that when iustification seemeth to be ascribed vnto workes it must be vnderstood in respect of faith and grace wherewith they are ioyned as a man is said to be a reasonable creature yet in respect of his soule onely though he consist both of soule and bodie yet it is faith properly that iustifieth and not workes which followe faith But the Apostle doth not at all in that place or any other ascribe iustification before God vnto workes 7. Wherefore the best solution is this that here S. Paul disputeth indeede of the proper and true causes of iustification which he simply denieth vnto workes and giueth vnto faith but there he sheweth who and vpon what condition men are iustified and who are not iustified namely such as hauing a liuely faith doe bring sorth the fruits thereof and doe their endeauour to keepe the lawe are iustified as the Apostle in the same sense had said before c. 2.6 that God will reward euerie man according to his workes And in the like sense Christ shall say vnto the righteous in the day of iudgement Matth. 25.34 Come ye blessed of my father inherite the kingdome
of faith in any other gift it can not stand together for where merit and worke is the wages is not counted by fauour and so freely but by debt Rom. 4.4 2. The better answer then is that we are iustified freely although the condition of faith be required because faith doth not iustifie vt actus quidem noster est as it is an act of ours but all the vertue thereof proceedeth from the obiect as the Israelites beeing healed by looking vpon the brasen serpent obtained not their health by the very act of opening their eyes but by the obiect which they beheld which was the serpent And like as when a rich man giueth his almes vnto the poore though he stretch out his hand to receiue it yet is it said notwithstanding to be a free gift Tolet. annot 20. 3. But adde here further that as when a blind man putteth forth his hand but he that giueth is faine to direct it to receiue the almes or if a man haue a weake and withered hand which he is not able to stretch out vnlesse the other that giueth doe lift it vp in this case euery way the gift is free So our will is not of it selfe apt to beleeue or will any thing aright vnlesse the Lord direct it faith then beeing both the worke of God in straining our will and faith receiuing all the vertue from the obiect which it apprehendeth namely Christ it remaineth that faith notwithstanding we are iustified freely Faius 33. Quest. v. 25. To declare his iustice or righteousnes what iustice the Apostle vnderstandeth here 1. Chrysostome vnderstandeth the declaration of Gods iustice by the effects thereof like as God declareth his riches not that he is rich in himselfe but in making others rich and his power not in that he euer liueth himselfe but in raising others to life so his iustice is declared not in beeing iust in himselfe but in making others iust But this iustifying of sinners is a worke of Gods mercie not of his iustice 2. Theodoret herein will haue Gods iustice to be manifested because he did sustaine the sinnes of the world with patience forbearing to punish them but this likewise was an effect of his goodnes and mercie not of his iustice 3. Ambrose vnderstandeth this iustice of God in keeping and performing his promise but the iustice of God is not here to be taken in a diuers sense then before v. 22. the righteousnes of God by the faith of Iesus Christ. 4. Some doe take the iustice of God here for his goodnes mercie and clemencie as the Prophet Dauid vseth to pray Iudge me according to thy righteousnes that is thy goodnes Pareus but this seemeth not to be so proper here 5. Some vnderstand the iustice of God in not leauing sinne vnpunished Lyran. it was the iustice of God that the price of our redemption should not be paid otherwise then by the blood of Christ but this is not the iustice of faith which the Apostle spake of before 6. Therefore this iustice which the Lord manifested and declared is none other but the righteousnes of faith before touched and as the words here following doe shew by the forgiuenes of sinnes God reuealed and manifested this to be the true iustice whereby men are iustified before him euen the righteousnes of faith so August lib. de spir lit cap. 13. Anselme Tolet Osiander 34. Quest. What is meant by sinnes that are past v. 25. 1. Some think that this is vnderstood of the fathers in the law which were kept in Limbus who though thorough remission of their sinnes they were freed from punishment yet they were not receiued vnto glorie gloss ordin Gorrhan But Tolet confuteth this interpretation though he allow the opinion as not agreeable to the Apostles minde for the words are not to be so limited and restrained but generally the Apostle vnderstandeth such sinnes as he spake of before v. 23. All haue sinned and are depriued of the glorie of God And if the sinnes were not yet remitted vntill Christs comming vnto the Patriarks they could not be freed no not from the punishment 2. The Novatians vnderstand those former sinnes which were passed of sinnes going before vocation and iustification denying all remedie vnto sinnes committed afterward But this were to make the death of Christ of small force if there were no place for forgiuenes euen after one is iustified Dauid fell into those two grieuous sinnes of murther and adulterie after he was called and yet was restored againe 3. Catharinus with other Romanists vnderstand likewise sinnes going before iustification and baptisme the rest that follow after they say must be purged by other meanes as by repentance and satisfaction But the Apostle speaketh generally of all sinnes If any man sinne we haue an advocate with the Father Iesus Christ the iust 1. Ioh. 2.2 Christ is our aduocate as well for sinnes before baptisme as after but see more for the confutation of thir error among the Controversies 4. The Apostle then compareth not the persons but the sinnes and the times and sheweth that euen the sinnes committed vnder the law and from the beginning of the world were redeemed by no other way then by faith in Christ God by his patience did forbeare to punish those sinnes as not imputing them because of the Redeemer which was to come Agreeable hereunto is that place Heb. 9.15 For this cause is he the Mediatour of the new Testament that thorough death which was for the transgression in the former Testament they which were called might receiue the promise of euerlasting inheritance By conference of these places together it is euident that by sinnes that are past are meant not the sinnes going before baptisme or iustification but the sinnes committed vnder the old Testament to shew that there was no remission of sinnes from the beginning of the world but by faith in Christ. And this further appeareth because the Apostle faith v. 26. to shew at this time his righteousnes c. he setteth the present time of the Gospel and the reuelation of grace against the former times 35. Quest. Why the Apostle onely maketh mention of sinnes past Now the Apostle so extendeth the effect and fruit of our redemption by Christ vnto the sinnes passed as that the sinnes present and to come also shall be by vertue thereof remitted but he maketh mention only of the sinnes past and before committed for these reasons 1. Hereby the Apostle sheweth the imbecillitie of the law of Moses and the ceremonies thereof that they were expiationes non verae sed vmbratiles not true expiations but onely in shadow Pareus as the Apostle saith Heb. 9.9 that those gifts and sacrifices could not make holy concerning the conscience and so Thomas yeeldeth this reason vpon this place God remitted the sinnes before passed quae lex remittere non potuit which the law could not remit 2. Adamus Safhout addeth that the Apostle maketh mention onely of former sinnes to
signifie non deinceps vivendum esse peccatis sed iustitiae that we should not liue afterward vnto sinne but vnto righteousnes for it were a signe of great vnthankfulnes hauing receiued so great a benefit in the forgiuenes of sinnes past if we should estsoone fall into the same againe 3. Pererius giueth two other reasons first that because it seemed an hard and impossible thing that sinnes before done should be remitted by the Redemption of Christ following many yeares after for the cause must be secundum existentiam haue a beeing before the effect therefore the Apostle to take away this scruple and difficultie maketh expresse mention of precedent sinnes to the which the vertue of Christs death was applied by faith 4. But Pererius other reason is false and friuolous that those former sinnes are mentioned to shew that there was no full remission of them for though they were remitted quanâ—â—â— ad culpam poenam aeternam in respect of the fault and euerlasting punishment yet the fathers vntill Christs comming were kept in Limbo and had no entrance into heauen â—at seeing by the blood of Iesus their sinnes were remitted they also by the vertue of the same blood had power to enter into heauen as the Apostle saith Hebr. 10.19 By the blood of Iesus we may be bold to enter into the holy place And againe v. 14. he saith With one offering hath he consecrated for euer them that are sanctified if then the beleeuing fathers of the old Testament were sanctified by Christs blood they were consecrated for euer that is perfectly but more followeth afterward of this matter among the Controversies 5. The true reason therefore why the Apostle giueth instance in sinnes which were past is to shew that from the beginning of the world there was no remission of sinnes from Adam vnto Moses and from Moses vnto Christ but onely by faith in his blood And therfore Iohn Baptist pointeth at Christ and saith Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sinnes of the world Some doe alleadge that place Apoc. 13.4 whose names are not written in the booke of life of the Lamb which was slaine from the beginning of the world Pareus Faius but this place seemeth not to be so fitly alleadged to that purpose for these words from the beginning of the world are rather to be ioyned with the former words whose names are not written in the booke of life c. from the beginning of the world so Aretus distinguisheth whome Beza and Pererius follow And so are the words ioyned c. 17.8 6. And further as hereby is expressed that all the sinnes of such as beleeued were remitted in Christ which were done before so much more the sinnes of the age then present and which should be committed afterward are forgiuen by no other way as the Apostle saith Heb. 13.8 Iesus Christ yesterday and to day and the same also is for euer Pareus 36. Quest. How God is said to be iust and a iustifier of him which is of the faith c. v. 26. 1. Some vnderstand this iustice of God generally of his holines vprightnes integritie which appeared in the worke of our redemption throughout Pareus wherein most of all shined forth the power of God his wisdome and benignitie vnto man his power in iustifying the wicked which was no lesse worke then in first creating him his wisdome in iustifying him by the death of Christ so fit and conuenient a meane for the reparation of man his benignitie appeared in beeing so mindfull of man as to appoint a way for his redemption Hugo 2. Ambrose doth vnderstand God to be iust that is faithfull in keeping his promises so also Beza 3. Some thus interpret iust that is benignus bonus good and gracious Osiand but Gods iustice is one thing his clemencie an other 4. Tolet vnderstandeth God to be iust in that he would not be satisfied for the sinne of man non accepto pretio sanguinis vnlesse he had first receiued the price of Christs blood so also Pareus 5. Oecumenius applieth it to Gods iustice which should be shewed in the iust punishment of those which should refuse grace offered but the Apostle speaketh of the time present not to come 6. The meaning then is this that he might be iust that is appeare and be acknowledged onely to be iust and all men lyars that is sinners and vniust as he saide before and as he is iust in himselfe so this iustice is communicated vnto vs by faith in Christ to this purpose Calvin Bucer Pellican so also the interlin glosse that he might be iust aliter non posse ipsoâ—vare otherwise he could not helpe to iustifie others if he were not most iust in himselfe God then is onely iust in himselfe and as he is the fountaine of all iustice so he doth iustifie others by that way which he hath appointed namely by faith in Christ. 37. Qu. How reioycing is excluded not by the law of works but by the law of faith 1. There are two kinds of reioycing one is in our redemption purchased by Christ whereof the Apostle speaketh 1. Cor. 1.31 He that reioyceth let him reioyce in the Lord there is an other reioycing in man as the Apostle saith in the same place v. 29. that no flesh should reioyce in his presence of the latter kind of reioycing which is in mens works speaketh the Apostle here 2. But the ordin glosse vnderstandeth this de laudabili gloriatione of the commendable reioycing and by excluded he vnderstandeth manifested or expressed as goldsmiths doe exclude and set out the stones set in siluer but this is a very vnfit interpretation the reioycing which the Apostle will haue here excluded is the reioycing before men as he sheweth afterward c. 4.2 3. By the law of works he vnderstandeth not onely the ceremonials iudicials of the law which are abolished vnder the Gospel as Lyranus but the morall also for the Apostle shewes c. 4.2 that Abraham might reioyce in works before men but not with God where he meaneth works of the morall law for the ceremonies were not yet instituted 4. Neither by the law of works doth the Apostle vnderstand such workes as are done without faith and by the law of faith the law of workes with faith but he excludeth all works whatsoeuer for seeing that such works they say proceede partly of freewill then this reioycing should not be taken away for where the freewill of man worketh there is merit and where there is merit there is reioycing Pareus 5. By the law of workes and the law of faith is vnderstood the rule and doctrine of works and the rule and doctrine of faith for in the Hebrew phrase the law is taken for the strength of a thing for doctrine or direction as afterward c. 7. he saith the law of the spirit the law of the members the law of the minde Mart. Faius 6. And Moses law is called the law of works not because it
away our selues for our sinnes then Christ came and by the price of his blood redeemed vs againe and restored vs to our former libertie so the Prophet Isai saith 50.1 For your iniquities are ye sold. Now whereas in Scripture redemption is taken sometime for a franke deliuerance where no price is paid yet here the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken properly for such redemption where the price is paid which was Christs blood as 1. Cor. 6.20 You are bought for a price c. 13. Controv. Against the Novatian heretikes Whereas the Apostle saith v. 25. to declare his righteousnes by the forgiuenes of sinnes that are past the Novatians hereupon denied remission of sinnes to those which fell away after they were called who beeing pressed and vrged by arguments out of the Scripture in the contrarie confessed and graunted that God indeede by his absolute power might giue remission of sinnes vnto such as fell away but the Church had no authoritie to graunt reconciliation vnto such But 1. they remembred not the answer of our blessed Sauiour made to Peter how often one should forgiue his brother not onely seuen times but seuentie times seuen times 2. Dauid sinned grieuously after he was called yet was restored to the Church so was the incestuous young man after due repentance for his incest 3. for how els should the blood of Christ clense vs from all sinne 1. Ioh. 1.7 if that there were not remission of sinnes and reconciliation euen for offences committed after our calling 14. Controv. Against inherent iustice v. 28. We conclude that a man is iustified by faith c. This word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be iustified or made iust the Romanists contend to signifie ex impio iustum effici of a wicked man to be made iust and righteous Staplet in Antâ—dot and so their opinion is that there is in iustification an habituall righteousnes infused into the soule whereby a man is iustified 1. This they would prooue by the grammaticall sense of the word because words compounded with facio to doe as magnifico purifico certifico to magnifie purifie certifie signifie to make one great pure certaine and so to iustifie should be taken to make one iust 2. The Apostle expresseth it by an other phrase Rom. 5.19 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be made or constituted righteous before God 3. It is not agreeable to the nature and puritie of God to absolue and hold for innocent those who are wicked and vngodly Contra. 1. This word to iustifie though sometime it signifie to teach one iustice and righteousnes as Dan. 12.3 they which iustifie others c. that is teach them or turne them to righteousnes and sometime to perseuere or continue in iustice as Apoc. 22.11 he that is iust iustificetur adhuc let him be more iust yet vsually in Scripture it is taken to absolue to pronounce and hold iust and that in a double sense as either to acknowledge and declare him to be iust that is iust as wisdome is said to be iustified of her children Matth. 11.19 so is it taken before in this chapter v. 4. that thou mightest be iustified in thy words c. or 〈◊〉 to count him iust who is vniust in himselfe that is absolue free and discharge him as c. 8.33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of Gods chosen it is God that iustifieth that is acquiteth dischargeth who shall condemne so is it vsed in the same sense Act. 13.39 From all things from the which ye could not be iustified by the law of Moses by him euery one that beleeueth is iustified Neither doth that grammaticall construction alwaies hold for Marie saith My soule doth magnifie the Lord that is declareth or setteth forth Gods greatnes here it can not signifie to make great Lombards obseruation then is not found that to iustifie in Scripture signifieth foure things 1. to be absolued and freed from sinne by the death of Christ. 2. beeing freed from sinne to be made iust by charitie 3. to be cleansed from sinne by faith in the death of Christ. 4. by faith and imitation of Christs death to bring forth the works of righteousnes Lobmard lib. 3. distinct 19. for of these foure significations the 1. and 3. are all one which may be acknowledged but the 2. and 4. are not found in Scripture 2. We are also made and constituted righteous before God not by any inherent righteousnes in our selues but by the righteousnes of faith as the Apostle saith that I may be found in him not hauing mine owne righteousnes which is of the law but that which is thorough the faith of Christ. 3. Yet it is most agreeable to the puritie of the diuine nature to accept vs as iust in Christ who is most absolutely righteous before God and so to impute his righteousnes vnto vs by faith so sanctifying also our hearts by his holy spirit that we should delight in the works of righteousnes 4. If we should be iustified by any inherent and inhabiting iustice and not by righteousnes imputed by faith these inconueniences would follow 1. that iustification and sanctification should be confounded for that sanctitie which is wrought in the faithfull is a fruit of iustification by faith 2. this holines and charitie which is in the faithfull is a worke of the law which requireth that we should loue God and our neighbour but faith and the worke of the law can not stand together 3. this habite of pietie and charitie is imperfect in vs for no man loueth God and his neighbour as he ought now that which is imperfect can not iustifie See further of inherent iustice Synops. Centur. 4. err 56. 15. Controv. Against the Popish distinction of the first and second iustification The Romanists generally doe hold that there are two kind of iustifications the first which is an infused habite of iustice formed by charitie to the which we are prepared by faith other dispositions of the mind and this they say is without works the other is the encrease of this iustification by the works of charitie the grace of God concurring with mans free-will and this they say is by works and truly meritorious sic Stapl. in Antidot Perer. disput in 2. c. ad Rom. disput 16 17. Contra. 1. The Scripture acknowledgeth but one kind of iustification in all which is both begunne continued and ended by faith as c. 1.17 The righteousnes of God is reuealed from faith to faith and c. 3.30 For it is one God who shall iustifie circumcision of faith and vncircumcision through faith here the whole worke of iustification is ascribed to faith and Rom. 8.20 whome he iustified he glorified there is nothing that commeth betweene this one iustification and glorification 2. They confound iustification and sanctification for that which they call the second iustification is nothing els but sanctification which is the bringing forth of the fruits of holines after that we are iustified by faith these
iustifieth cannot be without workes yet it iustifieth without workes it alone iustifieth yet it must not be alone The fourth Chapter 1. The text with the diuers readings v. 1. What shall we say then that Abraham our father hath found concerning the flesh 2 For if Abraham were iustified by works he hath wherein to glorie Be. to reioyce â—â— to boast he hath glorie L.T. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he hath matter of reioycing but with God 3 For what saith the Scripture but Abraham beleeued God Be. V.T. Abraham beleeued God L.B.G. but here the Greeke particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is omitted and it was counted or repâ—ted L. to him for righteousnes 4 Now to him that worketh the wages reward B.R. but a reward may be of fauour so is not wages is not counted by fauour or of grace Be. but of debt dutie Be. but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth debt 5 But to him that worketh not but beleeueth in him that iustifieth the vngodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse according to the purpose of God L. this is not in the originall nor yet translated in the Syriake 6 Euen as Dauid declareth G. or pronounceth Be. or expresseth V. rather then teâ—â—meth R. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith calleth the blessednesse of the man vnto whom God imputeth righteousnesse without workes 7. Blessed are they whose iniquires are forgiuen and whose sinnes are couered 8. Blessed is the man to whome the Lord not our Lord L. R. imputeth not sinne G. hath not imputed L.R. will not impute T. B. the word is in the future tense but according to the phrase of the Hebrew it is taken for the present 9 Came this blessednes G. Be. or belongeth it V. or befalleth B. better then abideth remaineth L. R. there is no word expressed in the originall it must be supplied and vnderstood vpon the circumcision onely or vpon the vncircumcision also the prepuce R. but that is no English word For we say that faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousnes 10 How was it then imputed when he was in circumcision when he was circumcised G. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in circumcision or in vncircumcision not in the circumcision but in vncircumcision 11 And or after G. he receiued the signe of circumcision as the seale of the righteousnes of faith which he had in vncircumcision that he should be father of all them which beleeue in vncircumcision that is beeing not yet circumcised not by vncircumcision V. L. R. the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is better here translated in for by vncircumcision they did not beleeue that were to giue more vertue to vncircumcision then to circumcision that righteousnes might be imputed to them also 12 And the father of circumcision not vnto them onely which are of the circumcision but vnto them also which walke in the steppes of the faith which was euen in vncircumcision of our father Abraham 13 For not by the law was the promise giuen to Abraham or his seede that he should be the heire of the world but thorough the righteousnes of faith 14 For if they which are of the law be heires faith is in vaine B. or made void G. and the promise is made of none effect 15 For the law procureth or causeth G. worketh L. wrath for where no law is there is no transgression 16 Therefore the inheritance is of faith that it might be by grace that the promise might be sure to all the seede not to that onely which is of the law but also to that which is of the faith of Abraham who is the father of vs all 17 As it is written a father of many nations haue I appointed thee euen before God not according to the example of God V. whome he beleeued not whome thou didst beleeue T. L. or whome ye beleeued B. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he beleeued who quickneth the dead and calleth those things which be not as though they were not as those things which are L. for the speaketh of the same things still which God causeth to be whereas they were yet nothing 18 Who contrarie to hope B.Be. L. aboue hope G. beside hope V. without hope the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is here taken in the first sense for Abrahams hope was in deede beyond all expectation beleeued vnder hope that he should be the father of many nations according to that which was spoken to him So shall thy seede be as the starres of heauen and the sand of the Sea L.R. but these words are not in the originall 19 And he not weake in faith considered not his owne bodie he was not weake in faith when he considered his bodie T. but in the originall it is put negatiuely he considered not which was now dead beeing almost an hundred yeares old neither the deadnes of Saras tombe 20 Neither did he stagger or stirke L.V.T. doubt G. dispute B. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is better taken here in the first sense at the promise of God thorough vnbeleefe but was strengthened in the faith and gaue glorie vnto God 21 Beeing fully assured G. or perswaded V. Be. certified B. rather then fully knowing L.R. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth not onely knowledge in the vnderstanding but assurance also in the heart that he which had promised was also able to doe it 22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousnes 23 Now it is not written onely for him that it was imputed vnto him for rightesounes L.G.T. but these words are not in the originall 24 But also for vs to whome it shall be imputed beleeuing in him which raised our Lord Iesus from the dead 25 Who was deliuered vp for our sinnes and was raised againe for our iustification 2. The Argument Method and parts THis Chapter hath three parts 1. the first is a proofe of the former proposition that we are iustified by faith without the workes of the lawe by the example of Abraham the testimonie of Dauid with some other arguments vnto the 17. verse 2. A commendation and description of the excellencie of Abrahams faith to â—â— 2. The third is the vse and explication of Abrahams imputatiue iustice In the first part the Apostle vrgeth 4. principall arguments to prooue that we are iustified by faith without workes 1. Argum. If any were iustified by workes most like Abraham But he was not iustified by workes but by faith Ergo the assumption is diuersely prooued 1. from the effects then Abraham should haue had wherein to glorie with God but he had not v. 2. from a testimonie of Scripture propounded v. 3. faith was counted to Abraham for righteousnesse then dilated and implyed by the contrarie that which is counted is of fauour and debtâ— 4. but Abrahams faith was counted his righteousnesse by fauour v. 5. therefore not by debts 2. Argum. From the testimonie of Dauid there is
Abraham obeied God to goe out of his countrey and to dwell in a strange land Heb. 11.8 and other promises as Gen. 12.3 and 13.16 also Abraham beleeued wherein he shewed his faith yet Moses reserueth this commendation of Abrahams faith to this place for these reasons 1. Moses would not straight vpon the first promise made Gen. 12. speake of Abrahams iustification by faith before he had brought forth diuers excellent and glorious works that his iustification might appeare to be of his faith not by works so Faius and Tolet. annot 5. 2. Neither would Moses deferre this testimonie of Abrahams faith vnto that act of his in offering his Sonne to be sacrificed but he setteth it downe here as soone as he had receiued an expresse promise concerning his seede which was Christ that it might appeare to be faith in Christ and none other whereby he was iustified before this Abraham had receiued some generall promises concerning Christ as that in Abraham all the families of the earth should be blessed Gen. 12.3 and that his seede should be as the dust of the earth but the seede out of his owne bowels was not promised vntill now Tolet. Faius 3. Further then was his faith commended because it had at that time beene throughly tried when he thought that Eliezer his seruant should be his heire 4. And though Abraham had faith before yet was it still more perfected and Abraham was now more certenly perswaded of his iustification and therefore he is said now first to be iustified though indeede by the same faith he had beene iustified before Pareus dub 2. Quest. 8. What imputation is and what to be imputed 1. This word is distinguished according to that which is imputed as sometime that which is euill is said to be imputed sometime that which is good 1. An euill thing is imputed two wayes either rightfully as when a sinne is worthily imputed to him that committed it as Quintilian putteth this case lib. 5. c. 10. vtrum caedes ei imputanda sit c. whether the murther be to be imputed to him that beganne the strife or it is imputed wrongfully as adulterie was imputed to Susanna her charge without cause 2. a good thing is imputed three wayes 1. iure by right as the reward is imputed to the worke by debt as the Apostle vseth the word here v. 4. but then this word imputed is taken for to giue and it is improperly called an imputing 2. iniuria by wrong as when innocencie is imputed to a malefactor which is forbidden Prou. 17.15 to iustifie the wicked 3. gratia by grace and fauour a thing is imputed but not against right propter alienum meritum for an others merit and so are we said to be iustified by faith in Christ Pareus like as when a Creditor of grace and fauour accepteth a debt to be paied and accounteth it discharged when yet the partie indebted is not able to pay it in this sense is the word taken Numb 18.27 Your offring shall be reckoned vnto you as the corne of the barne it shall be so counted or be in stead of it though it be not it Faius 2. This word to be imputed likewise is taken either Physice in a Phisicall sense as when a plant is said to be imputed that is set in or graft into the stocke or relate by way of relation when a thing is imputed by way of acceptation and fauour as when the victorie archieved by the soldiers is for honors sake ascribed vnto the captaine though absent or when the captaine to whom the spoyle belongeth giueth it vnto the souldiers that did not fight for it and thus is the righteousnesse of Christ which we wrought not our selues imputed vnto vs by faith 3. And thus for faith to be imputed for righteousnesse or to be iustified by faith of faith or thorough faith are with S. Paul taken for one and the same thing Quest. 9. How Abrahams faith was imputed to him for righteousnesse 1. Origen thinketh that Abrahams faith was imputed to him now for righteousnesse because it was perfect whereas before vntill now it was onely in part and hereof it is that whereas it is said of the Israelites Exod. 14.31 they beleeued the Lord and his seruant Moses yet they are not said to be iustified by this faith it was for that their faith was not perfect as was Arahams But 1. no mans faith can be perfect here for as we knowe in part 1. Cor. 13.12 so is our faith in part 2. that beleefe which there Moses speaketh of was of an other kind it was not a iustifying faith which is ioyned with confidence for they reposed not their trust in Moses but it was onely a beleeuing and giuing credit vnto God and his minister Moses 2. Neither was Abraham iustified merito fidei by the merit and worthinesse of his faith as by the worke and act thereof as the Romanists teach and Origen gaue occasion of this error who thinketh as it is here said of faith it was imputed for righteousnesse idem de alijs vertutibus dici potest that the same thing may be said of other vertues as humilitie wisedome may be reputed vnto iustice c. But this is a manifest error for faith or any other vertue as it is a worke cannot iustifie because it is but an act of one vertue and so not obedience and conformitie to the whole lawe and beside we are said to be iustified by faith without workes then neither faith nor any vertue iustifieth as a worke 3. Neither yet is faith taken here by a synecdoche when one part is taken for all as including workes as P. Martyr reporteth their error for faith cannot include that which it excludeth if faith iustifie without workes then vnder workes cannot faith be comprehended 4. Here also we refuse that corrupt note of the ordinarie glosse that to him which beleeueth si non habet tempus operandi if he haue not time to worke faith onely sufficeth to righteousnesse but to him that hath time to worke the reward shall be giuen not according to his beleefe onely sed secundum debitum operationis but according to the debt of his worke But two wayes is this glosse erroneous 1. because it flatly contradicteth the Apostle who affirmeth where faith is counted for righteousnesse there is no reward due by any debt v. 4.5 2. it is impossible that he which hath a iustifying faith should be without some workes as euen the theife vpon the crosse shewed his faith by his workes in confessing his sinne and honouring Christ. 5. Tolet also here is verie nice and curious he will not haue the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here to be interpreted by the word imputo to impute but by the word reputo to repute the difference betweene the which two is this reputatur id quod tale non est ac si tale esset c. that is reputed which is not such as though it were such to
law that is by the righteousnesse of the law the workes of the law are the righteousnesse of the law which are excluded from iustification Rom. 3.28 neither did the Iewes so cleaue vnto the workes of the law as that they excluded the grace of God for the Pharisie in his vaine glorious prayer Luk. 18. giueth formall thanks vnto God 4. And although Augustine seeme to make some difference betweene these tearmes yet he is farre off from thinking that we are iustified by the fulfilling of the law but by faith onely his meaning onely is that we haue no power to doe the workes of the law of our selues but by the grace of Gods spirit and concerning iustification by faith onely and not by workes he saith quantaelibet fuisse vertutis antiquos iustos praedicas non eos salvos fecit nisii fides of how great value soeuer you reporte the auncient righteous persons to haue beene nothing saued them but their faith c. 5. Some by the righteousnesse of the law in the first place vnderstand the righteousnesse prescribed in the law but in the latter the true righteousnesse of the Euangelicall law and make this to be the sense while they followed the legall righteousnesse they could non attaine vnto veram iustificationis rationem the true way of iustification Calvin quae est propria Evangelij which is peculiar and proper to the Gospel Hyper. so also Tolet and Lyranus vnderstandeth in the latter place legem fidei Catholicae the law of the Catholike faith and before them Origen thus expoundeth that while they followed the law according to the letter they attained not vnto the law of the spirit for if the Apostle did meane the same law he would not haue said that they attained not vnto that law which they had to this purpose Origen But the Apostle saith not they attained vnto or had the law of righteousnesse but onely followed it and in both places the law of righteousnesse is taken in the same sense that whereas the Iewes endeauoured by keeping of the law to be iustified they failed and came short euen of that iustice which they sought for in keeping of the law Martyr Pareus and so Chrysostom excellently sheweth a threefold difference here between the Gentiles and the Iewes first the Gentiles 1. found iustice 2. which they sought not for 3. and the most perfite iustice euen of faith which exceeded the iustice of the law But the Iewes 1. missed of iustice 2. which they earnestly sought for 3. yea they attained not vnto the iustice of the law which is the lesse and inferior kind of iustice because they sought not aright namely by faith Quest. 30. How Christ is said to be a stumbling stone and rocke of offence v. 33. 1. In the citing of this testimonie three things are to be noted 1. that this former testimonie is collected out of two places of Isay the first words I lay in Sion a stone are taken out of the 28. c. v. 16. the other a rocke of offence and a stumbling stone are found c. 8.14 2. The Apostle in both places admitteth diuerse words onely alleadging that which was most pertinent to his purpose 3. whereas the Prophet saith I lay in Sion lapidem probationis a stone of triall and the Apostle translateth it lapidem offendiculi a stumbling stone Iunius lib. 2. parall 15. doth thus reconcile them that which the Prophet setteth downe in generall that Christ is a stone of triall to all the Apostle doth particularly applie and by way of consequent vnto beleeuers that vnto them he is a stone of triall in that they take occasion to stumble at him But other interpreters thinke that these words a stumbling stone and rocke of offence are rather cited out of the other place Isai 8.14 where both these words are found 2. How Christ is a stumbling stone and rocke of offence is diuersely interpreted 1. the ordinarie glosse which Gorrhan followeth doth thus earnestly distinguish betweene a rocke and a stone the one is rough and vnhewne the stone is wrought and fashioned so Christ was a rocke of offence before he was as it were hewed and squared in his passion when they tooke offence at Christ because he made himselfe the Sonne of God but in his passion he was a stone to stumble at for then most of all they were offended at him But this is too curious 2. Faius thinketh that he was a rocke of offence and scandall in respect of the Iewes and a stumbling stone to the Gentiles the one were thereby turned out of the way and the other were kept from comming into the way But this is alleadged specially against the Iewes that stumbled at Christ as he was a stumbling blocke to them so he was foolishnes to the Gentiles 3. Tolet annot 39. doth thus distinguish these two the stone to stumble at is the stone which men fall vpon and so the Iewes were offended at Christ the rock of offence is that which falleth vpon them so Christ was lapis offensionis propter eorum incredulitatem a stumbling stone because of their incrudulitie and a rocke of offence per punitionem by their punishment so the ordinarie gloss Christ is called the one in respect of his stare and condition quo apparuit malis wherein he appeared to the euill and the other in regard of that quod in futura faciet malis which in time to come he shall doe vnto the wicked in punishing of them he is a stumbling stone in praesenti per culpam in the present by their fault which beleeued not vpon him in futura per poenam and a rocke of offence in time to come by their punishment Gorrhan And this difference Tolet would further approoue by the signification of the words for abeu is a little stone fir for one to stumble at but tzur a rocke is a great stone able to ouerwhelme one and both these kind of offenses are noted by our Sauiour Matth. 21.44 Whosoeuer shall fall on that stone shall be broken but on whom it falleth he shall be broken all to powder so Augustine well obserueth this difference serm 40. de verb. Domini Iudaeos offendisse in Christum c. that the Iewes stumbled at Christ when he was a small stone in the world but beeing a great rock in the day of iudgement he shall fall vpon them c. All this is a truth that Christ shall fall vpon them that fell and were offended at him but this is not the Apostles meaning here for he alleadgeth this testimonie for proofe of that which he alleageth before they haue stumbled at the stumbling stone And Saint Peter likewise vnderstandeth this place that Christ passiuely is a stone and rocke of offence to stumble at not actiuely in falling vpon them 1. Pet. 2.8 a stone to stumble at and a rocke of offence to them which stumble at the word c. so then the one word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an
point there was no question 2. Theodoret expoundeth it of curiositie that no one should curiously enquire how Christ ascended into heauen for vs and ouercame death to the same purpose Pet. Martyr quis ascendet in coelum vt haec videat c. say not who shall ascend into heauen to see this or goe downe to the deepe to be certified of Christs victorie the word is in thy mouth and heart it sufficeth thee to beleeue these things to haue beene performed by Christ. 3. Anselme doth vnderstand Moses and Paul to speake of incredulitie that no man should doubt of the ascension and descension of Christ so also the ordinarie gloss do not say who hath ascended into heauen that is none shall ascend to heauen pro iustitia fidei observata for obseruing the righteousnes of faith nor shall descend to hell for not obseruing it for this were to denie the ascension and descension of Christ. 4. Lyranus applieth it to the certaintie of the knowledge of the Gospel tollitur omnis excusatio c. all excuse is taken away they cannot be ignorant of the Gospel beeing preached and testified by the Apostles as the Iewes needed not vnder Moses to haue sent farre or neere to haue the law made knowne vnto them seeing it was at home euen at their doores to the same purpose Bellarmine lib. 5. de grat liber arbit c. 6. so also Osiander applieth it to the certaintie of the preaching of the Gospel by the Apostles which shall be so liuely declared that they shall not neede to wish any to goe to heauen or to descend into the deep to bring vnto them the word of promise seeing Christ hath alreadie performed these things for them 5. Chrysostome vnderstandeth this place of the facilitie of the iustice of faith in respect of the lawe that there is no great thing required to be performed by our selues as to ascend to heauen or descend into the deepe licet tibi domi sedenti salutem consequi thou mayest euen sitting at home obtaine saluation though thou goe not ouer thy threshhold Faius also to the like purpose sheweth how Moses in that place and S. Paul here shewe how the lawe is fulfilled for vs in Christ that God requireth not of vs any difficult or impossible worke to be performed by vs to ascend into heauen or descend to hell to be deliuered frō the one and to obtaine the other by our owne workes for this were to call both the ascension and resurrection of Christ into question but Christ by his resurrection ascension had performed for vs the worke of our redemption This is some part of the Apostles meaning but not all 6. Wherefore this is the meaning of the Apostle as he shewed before what the iustice of the lawe required namely perfect obedience to be performed in our selues which being a thing impossible there must needes remaine a doubt and despaire both of obtaining heauen and in escaping hell so now he declareth the nature and propertie of iustifying faith first per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by remoouing that which is contrarie to faith secondly per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by declaring that which is thereunto agreeable And for the first whereas there are two speciall doubts that trouble the mind how we may obtaine heauen and escape hell the Apostle sheweth that the righteousnesse of faith taketh away both these doubts first no man is nowe to say in his heart who shall ascend for me into heauen to bring me thither for Christ hath done it alreadie and this were to bring Christ againe from thence to become man for vs and so to ascend againe neither is any man now to make questiō how he shall escape hell or who shall descend thither for him for Christ by his death hath deliuered vs from thence faith in Christ doth deliuer vs from all doubt he therefore that hath his faith grounded vpon the passion resurrection ascention of Christ shall no longer be perplexed in his mind as they are which hope to be iustified by the law thus Calv. Beza Par. So then he sheweth two notable differēces between the law the gospel the one requireth things impossible to be done namely the complete and perfect obedience of the lawe and so leaueth the minde in doubt and despaire of saluation but the Gospell requireth not any thing impossible to be done by vs but onely to beleeue in Christ and so it freeth vs from all doubt and despaire Quest. 13. Of these words the word is neere thee c. 1. Whereas the Latine translator hath what saith the Scripture this word Scripture is not in the originall therefore the same nominatiue case must be supplyed which is expressed before the righteousnesse of faith speaketh on this wise c. as before he shewed what was not agreeable to the doctrine of faith to make doubts of saluation or to seeke to be iustified by the lawe so now he declareth the true propertie of iustifying faith which requireth no great act to be performed by our selues but onely to beleeue in Christ. 2. The Septuagint adde beside in thy mouth and in thy heart in thy hands which addition Pet. Martyr thinketh nothing to hinder but to helpe the Apostles meaning because that which we beleeue in the heart and confesse with the mouth must be confirmed by the worke of our hands but it rather crosseth the Apostles meaning to make mention here of workes which the iustice of the lawe required but the iustice of faith saith otherwise and Lyranus glosse is here superfluous and idle that the Apostle speaketh in casis mortis in the case of death when as there is no time of working that then it is sufficient to beleeue with the heart and confesse with the mouth whereas the Apostle generally treateth of the iustice of faith how it is sufficient to saluation vnto all 3. And whereas the Apostle saith it is neere thee in thy mouth c. 1. The meaning is not it is neere thee that is consentancum rationi agreeable to reason Hug. gloss for Christ preached things farre beyond humane reason 2. Vatablus referreth it to the preaching of the Apostles this word of faith was in their mouth and heart 3. Osiander likewise applyeth it to the multitude of beleeuers this doctrine of faith which so many thousands beleeued was not remote or farre off 4. Pet. Martyr expoundeth it of the knowledge and vnderstanding of the mysteries which were hid before nobis fit prope per fidem quod per naturam est remotissimum that is neere vnto vs by faith which was before most remote and farre off 5. But the fittest interpretation is that the Apostle sheweth the facilitie of the righteousnesse of faith that God requireth no hard worke of vs to crosse the Seas and climbe vp the mountaines or take long iourneys to seeke out our saluation but by the grace of Gods spirit this faith is planted in our hearts and confessed with our
leadeth vs vnto the righteousnesse of the law one way by the proper scope and intent thereof and to Christ an other way indirectly and by an accident because when we see our weaknes in performing of the law we are driuen to seeke vnto Christ that hath kept the law for vs. 2. the same answer serueth for the next obiection Christ is the end of the law one way as is said and the righteousnesse of the law an other 3. they differ rather as a thing perfect and imperfect of two diuerse kindes not as an infant and a man of yeares but as reasonable and vnreasonable creatures they agree onely in generall they are both a kind of iustice and haue one efficient cause God is the giuer and worker of the one iustice and of the other but they differ in the seuerall properties the one is imputed the other inherent and is by faith the other by workes 2. Neither yet doe these two kinds of righteousnesse differ as contrarie the one to the other as some thinke 1. one good thing is not contrarie to another but both the righteousnesse of the law and of faith are good 2. neither doth God command contrarie things but both the iustice of the law and of faith are commanded 3. and one contrarie doth expel an other but the righteousnesse of the law doth necessarily follow and accompanie faith though not to be iustified by it as sanctification doth accompanie iustification 3. Neither doe they differ onely ratione non re not in the thing or indeed but in a certaine respect as Gryneus saith they are vna specie of one and the same kind and that the distinction and difference betweene them is not realis sed rationis is not reall but rationall as the Peripaterike Philosophers doe make morall vertue and vniuersall iustice one and the same re subiecto in the matter it selfe and subiect and to differ onely ratione in a certaine respect for as it is considered as an habite of the word it is called vertue but as it giueth vnto euery one his own it is iustice so he thinketh these two kinds of iustice do differ not in nature and substance but onely in a certaine respect and rationall difference But vnder correction of so worthie a man there is a greater difference then thus betweene the the iustice of the law and the iustice of faith 1. Gryneus himselfe confesseth in the same place that they differ subiecto in the subiect for the iustice of faith is subiective in Christ by way of a subiect the iustice of the law hath man for his subiect therefore they differ otherwise then in a diuerse respect 2. that which differeth in forme matter qualitie subiect differeth more then onely in a certaine respect But the iustice of the law and of faith differ in all these 1. in forme the iustice of the law saith doe this and thou shalt be saued faith saith beleeue onely c. 2. in matter they differ the one consisteth of workes the other of faith 3. in qualitie the one is imperfect the iustice apprehended by faith is absolute and perfect 4. in subiect the iustice of faith is imputed vnto vs beeing inherent in Christ the iustice of the law is inherent in man and not imputed 4. Wherefore these two iustices 1. are neither one and the same as Stapleton 2. nor contrarie 3. not differing onely in a certaine respect as Gryneus 4. but they differ as diuers species or kinds of the same gender they are both iustice but the one inherent the other imputed the one consisteth in doing the other in beleeuing Par. dub 5. and Pet. Mar. will haue them differ as in Logike the difference and propertie of a thing the difference is that which giueth essence vnto a thing as Christs iustice applied by faith maketh our iustification the propertie is that which followeth the nature of a thing and so the iustice of the law in our holines and sanctification doth follow necessarily our iustification by faith Controv. 9. Whether the righteousnesse of the law and that which is by the law doe differ Pererius disput 2. maketh three kinds of iustice 1. one is iustitia legis the iustice of the law or the law of iustice which is that iustice when God by his grace doth helpe vs to fulfill the law 2. the iustice of faith is that which is giuen vnto those that beleeue in Christ. 3. iustitia ex lege iustice by the law is that which a man doth of himselfe without faith and grace onely by the strength of freewill and this is that iustice which the Apostle here setteth against the iustice of faith This distinction also hath Stapleton making the like difference betweene iustitia legis and iustitia ex lege righteousnesse of the law and righteousnesse by the law and Bellarmine as is before alleadged qu. 29. Contra. 1. As the righteousnesse of faith and by faith with Saint Paul are one and the same as Rom. 4.11 it is said to be of faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and here v. 6. righteousnesse which is by faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so neither doe the righteousnesse of the law and by the law differ for both of them haue the same definition he that doth the law shall liue thereby so that these termes of the law by the law through the law in the law in the matter of iustification are all one and in effect the same as that which he calleth the righteousnesse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the law Rom. 8.4 the same is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the law c. 10.5 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through the law Gal. 2.21 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the law Gal. 10.11 1. Concerning that distinction it faileth in one of the parts thereof for that which they call iustitiam ex lege righteousnesse by the law which a man doth without grace and faith onely schooled by the law and mooued by the terrour thereof that is no iustice at all for the law is holy and good Rom. 7.12 and the workes thereof holy and good but without faith and grace no man can doe any good thing neither doth Saint Paul dispute of any such imagined iustice but euen of those workes of the law which are done by men sanctified by grace as the Apostle giueth instance in Abraham and Dauid sanctified men Rom. 4. who yet by the workes of grace were not iustified 3. Indeed Augustine hath such a distinction betweene the righteousnes legis of the law which is fulfilled in vs by grace and ex lege by the law which is that righteousnesse which a man worketh by his owne freewill as is before alleadged qu. 29. But Augustines meaning is not that a man is iustified by either of these kinds of righteousnesse therefore that distinction as he vseth it is impertinent to this purpose for we affirme that the righteousnesse of the law whereby they pretended to be iustified is indifferently called of the law
qu. Why the Apostle onely maketh mention of sinnes past 36. qu. How God is said to be iust and a iustifier of him which is of the faith c. v. 26. 37. qu. How reioycing is excluded not by the law of works but by the law of faith 38. qu. Of the difference betweene these two phrases of faith through faith v. 30. 39. qu. How the Law is established by the doctrine of faith Questions vpon the fourth Chapter 1. qu. Vpon what occasion S. Paul bringeth in the example of Abraham 2. qu. Of the meaning of the first verse 3. qu. Of the meaning of the 2. verse 4. qu. How the Apostle alleadgeth that testimonie concerning the imputation of Abrahams faith for righteousnes v. 4. 5. qu. Of the meaning of the words who counted this for righteousnes vnto Abraham 6. qu. What it was that Abraham beleeued 7. qu. Why Abrahams faith was imputed to him at this time and not before 8. qu. What imputation is and what to be imputed 9. qu. How Abrahams faith was imputed to him for righteousnes 10. qu. Whether Abraham were iustified by any thing beside his faith 11. qu. How S. Paul and S. Iames are reconciled about the manner of Abrahams iustifying 12. qu. Of the explication of the 4. and 5. verses 13. qu. Of the diuers kinds of rewards 14. qu. How it standeth with Gods iustice to iustifie the wicked v. 5. 15. qu. How our sinnes are said to be forgiuen and couered v. 7. 16. qu. In what sense circumcision is said to be a signe and wherefore it was instituted 17. qu. In what sense circumcision is called a seale of the righteousnes of faith v. 11. 18. qu. Whether the mysterie of faith in the Messiah to come were generally known vnder the Law 19. qu. Certaine questions of circumcision and first of the externall signe why it was placed in the generative part 20. qu. Certaine doubts remooued and obiections answered concerning circumcision 21. qu. How Abraham is saide to be the father of them which beleeue v. 11 12. 22. qu. How Abraham is saide to be the father of circumcision v. 12. 23. qu. How and where Abraham was promised to be heire of the world v. 13. 24. qu. Wherein Abraham was made heire of the world and wherein this inheritance consisted 25. qu. How faith is said to be made voide if they which are of the law be heires 26. qu. How they law is said to cause wrath 27. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 15. where no law is there is no transgression 27. qu. Who are meant by Abrahams seede which is of the law v. 16. 28. qu. Of the meaning of these words I haue made thee a father of many nations before God 29. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 17. who quickneth the dead and calleth those things which be not c. 30. qu. How God is said to call those things which be not as though they were 31. qu. Whether it be peculiar to God onely to quicken and raise the dead 32. qu. How Abraham is said against hope to haue beleeued vnder hope 33. qu. How Abrahams bodie is said to be dead v. 19. 34. qu. What promise of God made to Abraham it was whereof he is saide not to haue doubted v. 20. 35. qu. Whether Abraham doubted of Gods promise 36. qu. How Abraham is said to haue giuen glorie vnto God v. 20. 37. qu. What was imputed to Abraham for righteousnes 38. qu. Of these words Now it is not written for him onely c. v. 23. 39. qu. How Abrahams faith is to be imitated by vs. 40. qu. Wherein Abrahams faith and ours differ and wherein they agree 41. qu. How Christ is said to haue bin deliuered vp for our sinnes v. 25. 42. qu. Why the Apostle thus distinguisheth the benefits of our redemption ascribing remission of sinnes to Christs death and iustification to his resurrection v. 25. Questions vpon the fifth Chapter 1. qu. What peace the Apostle meaneth v. 1. 2. qu. Of the second benefit proceeding of our iustification which is to stand and persevere in the state of grace 3. qu. Of the benefit of our iustification the hope of euerlasting glorie 4. qu. How we are said to reioyce in tribulation 5. qu. How S. Paul and S. Iames are reconciled together the one making patience the cause of trialls or probation the other the effect 6. qu. Of the coherence of these words with the former because the loue of God is shed abroad in our hearts v. 5. 7. qu. What kind of loue the Apostle speaketh of saying the loue of God is shed abroad c. 8. qu. Why the loue of God is said to be shed abroad in our hearts 9. qu. Why it is added by the holy Ghost which is giuen vs. 10. qu. How Christ is said to haue died according to the time v. 6. 11. qu. Of the meaning of the 7. v. One will scarce die for a righteous man c. 12. qu. Of the difference betweene Christs dying for vs and those which died for their countrey 13. qu. Of the greatnes of the loue of God toward man in sending Christ to die for vs v. 8. 14. qu. Whether mans redemption could not otherwise haue beene wrought but by the death of Christ. 15. qu. Wherein the force of the Apostles reason consisteth saying Much more beeing reconciled we shall be saued by his life v. 9. 16. qu. Why the Apostle saith not onely so but we also reioyce in God c. v. 11. 17. qu. Whether any thing neede to be supplied in the Apostles speach v. 12. to make the sense perfect 18. qu. Who was that one by whome sinne entred into the world v. 12. 19. qu. What sinne the Apostle speaketh of here originall or actuall by one man sinne entred 20. qu. How sinne is said to haue entred into the world 21. qu. And death by sinne what kind of death the Apostle speaketh of 22. qu. Whether the death of the bodie be naturall or inflicted by reason of sinne 23. qu. Of the meaning of the Apostle in these words in whome all haue sinned and of the best reading thereof v. 12. 24. qu. Whether the Apostle meaneth originall or actuall sinnes saying in whome all haue sinned 25. qu. Of the coherence of these words Vnto the time of the Law was sinne in the world 26. qu. How sinne is said to haue beene vnto the time of the Law 27. qu. What sinne the Apostle meaneth which was in the world vnto the time of the law 28. qu. How sinne is said not to be imputed where there is no law 29. qu. How death is saide to haue raigned from Adam to Moses 30. qu. Of the meaning of these words which sinne not after the transgression of Adam 31. qu. How Adam is said to be the figure of him that was to come v. 14. 32. qu. Of the names and tearmes which the Apostle vseth in this comparison 33. qu. Of the comparison betweene Adam
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
oppressors of the people of God and therefore the vision which the Prophet receiued c. 2. was to Minister comfort againe the present afflictions of Gods Church Ans. It is the manner which the Lord obserueth in the visions and prophesies by occasion of temporall deliuerances to raise vp the mindes of his people to looke for their euerlasting deliuerer as Psal. 72. vnder the type of Salomon the kingdome of the Messiah is properly described and Dan. 9. the Prophet prayeth for the deliuerance of his people out of the captiuitie of Babel and he receiueth that prophesie of the 70. weekes concerning the Messiah who should deliuer them from their sinnes And so in this place the Prophet praying for the deliuerance of the people from their oppressors receiueth a vision concerning the Messiah in whom whosoeuer beleeueth shall liue for euer Pererius 5. Theodoret thinketh that this saying of the Prophet concerned not those times then present but was a prophesie of the times of Christ that then the iust by faith should liue so also Ireneus lib. 4. c. 67. But the Apostle otherwise applyeth it Galat. 3.11 that neither vnder the lawe nor vnder the Gospel any were iustified by the lawe but by saith for his words there are generall And that no man is iustified by the lawe in the sight of God it is euident for the iust shall liue by faith 6. Ambrose and so likewise Chrysostome because the word is put in the future tense shall liue doe vnderstand this not of this present life but of eternall life to come But it is euident that S. Paul Galat. 3.11 vnderstandeth this life of iustification and so the Apostle calleth iustification by faith the life of the soule Galat. 2.20 I liue by faith of the Sonne of God and the future tense with the Hebrewes indifferently is oftentimes put for the present yet the Apostle so vnderstandeth the present life of the soule by faith and grace as that he excludeth not the other sense concerning eternall life as he applyeth this sentence of the Prophet to the second comming of Christ Heb. 10.37 Tolet. 7. Now whereas Moses saith as S. Paul citeth him Rom. 10.5 The man that doth these things shall liue the Prophet may seeme to be contrarie vnto him saying the iust by faith shall liue but they are easily reconciled Moses speaketh of the iustice of the lawe which none could attaine vnto the Prophet of the iustice of the Gospel which the faithfull obtaine by faith in Christ Mart. 8. Thus the Apostle setteth downe the chiefe benefits which we haue by faith saluation v. 16. it is the power of God to saluation iustice or righteousnesse the iust by faith life shall liue Matyr Quest. 47. How the wrath of God is said to be reuealed from heauen against all vnrighteousnesse ver 18. 1. This clause is a probation of the former that there is no way whereby one is iustified before God but by faith which the Apostle prooueth by the contrarie because either by workes or faith must men he iustified but not by workes as he prooueth first in this chapter by particular induction in the Gentiles that their workes deserued nothing but Gods wrath and in the Iewes c. 2. This is the reason of the connexion of this verse with the former Beza Aretius Mart. And the causes why the Apostle thus beginneth to reprooue the Gentiles are these 1. S. Paul was the Apostle of the Gentiles and therefore he first dealeth with them 2. because the qualitie and nature of faith and of the grace of God can not be well vnderstood vnlesse we first looke into our selues and consider the vilenesse of our owne workes 2. And because such is mans pride by nature vt opera sua maximifaciat that he setteth much by his owne workes therefore the Apostle doth first beginne to beat downe the pride of man 3. It is the manner of the Prophets and of our Blessed Sauiour in their prophesies and sermons to beginne with the Lawe and then to proceede to the promises of the Gospel Hyper. 2. By the wrath of God is signified declaratio irae Dei the declaration of the wrath of God Aretius there is in God no motion or perturbation as in man wrath according to the Hebrewe phrase is taken for reuenge or punishment Erasmus 3. Reuealed 1. three waies is the wrath of God reuealed against sinne 1. by the light of nature for euery mans conscience accuseth or excuseth him 2. by the Gospel which threateneth euerlasting punishment to the wicked and vnbeleeuers 3. and by daily experience which sheweth that God is angrie with the sinnes of the world Pareus 2. God doth by daily experience testifie his wrath against the vngodly of the world and euen at this time when the Apostle thus wrote the world was plagued with warre famine and other grieuous calamities for the contempt of the Gospel Gualter 3. but this revelation also may be applyed to the Gospel wherein is reuealed the wrath of God against sinners as Mat. 3. Iohn Baptist preached Now is the axe laid to the root of the tree and our Blessed Sauiour saith Luk. 13.3 vnlesse ye repent yee shall likewise perish 4. vnder the lawe also the wrath of God was declared against the vngodly as in the destruction of Sodome and of the Egyptians in the red Sea but the wrath of God did then onely shew it selfe in such externall and temporarie punishments But the gospel doth threaten euerlasting condemnation as Matth. 10.28 feare not them which kill the bodie but rather feare him who is able to destroy both bodie and soule in hell Perer. And the Law did onely in theft generally condemne all infidelitie but the Gospel in hypothesi in particular condemneth incredulitie and vnbeleefe in Christ Pareus And then it beeing a time of ignorance the iudgements of God though they were in the world yet were not marked and obserued but now they are euident to all men Aretius 4. From heauen 1. Ambrose expoundeth ipsos coelos demonstrare c. that the heauens doe declare the wrath of God against sinners and shall be their accusers who refused to worship God which made the heauens so sometime the Lord calleth the heauens and earth to be witnesses against men Isa. 2.1 Gryneus 2. Origen giueth this sense quia spirituales nequitiae in coelestibus sunt because the spirituall wickednesses that is the euill spirits are aboue in the celestiall places who are ministers of Gods iudgements vpon the wicked 3. Chrysostome Theophylact Oecumenius referre it to the reuelation of the last and finall iudgement from heauen at the second comming of Christ. 4. Caietan and gloss ordinar thus vnderstand it quia Euangelium de toelo est because the Gospel is from heauen wherein this wrath of God is reuealed 5. Some hereby vnderstand the vniuersalitie of Gods iudgements that they shall be vpon all men vnder heauen wheresoeuer they are Per. 6. Some referre it to the manifest appearance of Gods
the father Sonne and holy Ghost c. Therefore if no creature is to be worshipped much lesse an image which is the work of mans hands if not the liuing are to be adored much lesse the dead But here this obiection will be mooued if no creature is to be worshipped how then doe we adore Christ Chrysostome answeareth Nemo veneraturus regem dicit illi exuas purpuram c. no man comming to doe reuerence to the king saith put off thy robes So Christ beeing cloathed with our flesh is worshipped in and with our humanitie which is vnited vnto his Godhead in one person yet the originall and first cause of this adoration giuen vnto Christs humanitie proceedeth from his diuine nature adoration then beeing due vnto the person of Christ is yeelded vnto him both God and man Martyr Controv. 11. Of the vaine vse of popish pilgrimages v. 13. That I might haue some fruit Paul desireth to see Rome to the intent that he might receiue some fruit by them and they by him this was the ende of this his iourney and peregrination Much vnlike herein were the pilgrimages which in times past and now in many countreys are made to Rome Ierusalem and other places which are onely of a superstitious meaning to offer before some idol and to performe their vowes But the end of the travaile comming together of Christians should be for their mutuall edifying Mar. Controv. 12. None to be barred from the knowledge of Gods word v. 14. I am detter both to the Grecians and Barbarians seeing there was no nation so barbarous to whom the Apostle was not willing to impart the knowledge of the Gospell the Romanists are euidently conuinced of error that will not admit their lay people generally to the reading of the Scripture If the gospel of saluation must be communicated to all then the Scriptures also which containe the knowledge of saluation should be common to all Hyperius the booke â—â— the lawe was appointed to be read in the hearing of the people that they might learne and feare God Deuter. 31.12 see more Synops. Centur. 1. error 3. Controv. 13. Against diuerse hereticall assertions of Socinus touching the iustice of God v. 17. For by it the iustice of God is reuealed because in this place the iustice of God is taken for his benignitie and mercie shewed by Christ in the Gospell Socinus that blasphemous heretike taketh occasion thus to broach his errors 1. he saith that iustice beeing vndestood of God is neuer in Scripture set opposite to Gods mercie but the contrarie is euident Psal 5.6 thou shalt destroy them that speake lies here the Prophet speaketh of Gods reuenging iustice and in the next verse he compareth it with Gods mercie But I will come into thine house in the multitude of thy mercies 2. he affirmeth that that which is opposed to Gods mercie is not called the iustice of God but wrath indignation seueritie which is euidently refelled v. 31. they knowing the iustice of God that they which commit such things are worthie of death here the vengeance of God vpon sinners is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iustice And yet more euidently Psal. 145.17 the Lord is iust in all his wayes and mercifull in all his workes here the iustice and mercie of God are compared together 3. further he saith that this iustice of God as it is set against his mercie is of two sorts there is one whereby he punisheth the wicked and obstinate sinners an other whereby he chasteneth euen those that are not altogether impenitent But herein is his error he maketh them two kinds of iustice which are but diuerse degrees of one and the same iustice for when God sheweth seueritie in punishing the wicked therein he exerciseth his strict and rigorous iustice and when he chastiseth sometime his owne children for their amendment he vseth the same iustice but in an other degree tempering his iustice with mercie and fauour Pareus Controv. 14 Against inherent iustice v. 17. The iustice of God is reuealed the Rhemistes apply this place against imputatiue iustice alleadging out of Augustine how it must be vnderstood of that iustice not which God hath in himselfe sed qua induit hominem but wherewith he endueth man when he iustifieth him Contra. 1. They doe not well translate the word induit which signifieth here not to endue but to cloath with and so man beeing iustified by faith is cloathed with Christs righteousnesse he is not iustified by any inherent righteousnesse in himselfe but by an imputed righteousnesse Rom. 4.6 2. And the Apostle doth expound himselfe Rom. 3.22 shewing that the iustice of God is by the faith of Iesus and Philip. 3.9 the Apostle renounceth his owne righteousnesse that he might haue the righteousnesse of God through faith Controv. 15. That the Sacraments doe not conferre grace Kemnitius out of this place v. 16. the Gospel is the power of God to saluation inferreth that the Sacraments doe no otherwise iustifie then the word preached that is excitando fidem by exciting and stirring vp our faith as in this sense the Gospell is said to be Gods power to saluation Bellarmine answeareth 1. that the Gospel is not here taken for the preaching of the Gospel but for the historie of the Gospel as of Christs incarnation and passion 2. if it be taken in the other sense it followeth not because the preaching of the word iustifieth onely by stirring vp faith that therefore the Sacraments iustifie the same way Bellar. lib. 2. de effect sacram c. 11. ration 4. Contra. 1. The Apostle speaketh not onely of the historicall narration of the Gospel but of preaching and publishing the same as it appeareth both by the words before going v. 15. I am readie to preach the Gospel to you that are at Rome and by the words following it is the power of God to saluation to euerie on that beleeueth but they cannot beleeue vnlesse they heare neither can they heare without preaching 2. the argument thus followeth from the greater to the lesse if that which is more principall in the worke of our saluation doe iustifie no otherwise then instrumentally in stirring vp faith namely the preaching of the word then that which is lesse principall cannot iustifie more but the word and preaching of the Gospell is the more principall for they beget faith which the Sacraments onely confirme and seale therefore the Sacraments doe not iustifie men us by conferferring of grace by the worke wrought Controv. 16. That faith onely iustifieth v. 17. The iust by faith shall liue out of this place where the verie iustice life and actiuitie of the soule is ascribed to faith we doe conclude that a man is iustified onely by faith for all is ascribed vnto faith Now the Romanists seeing this place of the Apostle to be so pregnant for iustification by faith onely seeke diuerse shifts to obscure the truth of this testimonie 1. Costerus Euchirid 170. saith that these words
with Christ Phil. 1.23 and of the remission of his sinnes saying I was receiued to mercie 1. Tim. 1.13 2. That the righteous may at other times fall into other sinnes is not the point in question but whether they may faile in their best workes neither is it to the matter whether the goodnes of their worke be from God or themselues for no not from God haue they receuied any perfection of goodnes in this life 3. And in that he confesseth many negligences to be intermingled in the good works of the faithfull he graunteth as much as we desire that the faithful are defectiue euen in their good works 6. Controv. Whether men ought to doe well for hope of recompence or reward v. 7. Which by continuance in well doing seeke glorie It is not to be doubted but that the faithfull may encourage themselues in their well doing by looking vnto the reward set before them as it is said of Moses Heb. 11.26 He had respect to the recompence of reward and S. Paul saith I follow hard toward the marke for the price of the high calling of God in Christ Phil. 3.14 and the same Apostle thus stirreth vp seruants to doe their duties to their masters Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receiue the reward of inheritance Coloss. 3.29 But here two things are to be considered first that men doe not onely or chiefly looke toward the reward but the principall ende of their well doing which they must propound vnto themselues must be the glorie of God secondly they must haue an eye vnto the reward not as wages deserued but as a gift of fauour Thus to expect a reward as a due and deserued recompence is mercenarie which seemeth to be the opinion of the Tridentine Synod sess 6. c. 11. and can 31. and of Bellarm. lib. 5. de iustificat c. 8. and of the Rhemists annot Heb. 11. 26. though Pererius would distinguish here betweene amor mercedis amor mercenarius the loue of the reward and a mercenarie loue But if they propound vnto themselues the reward as merited and deserued by their works it is a mercenarie loue and so derogatorie to the glorie of God who crowneth our good workes in mercie in himselfe not of merit in them Chrysostome here saith oportebat omnia propter Christum facere non propter mercedim we ought to doe all things for Christs sake not for the reward serm 5. See more of this question Synops. Centur. 4. err 66. 7. Controv. Against iustification by works vpon these words v. 13. Not the hearers of the law but the doers shall be iustified This place because it seemeth in shew to be contrarie to these places Gal. 2.16 That a man is not iustified by the workes of the law and Gal. 3.11 No man is iustified by the law diuers expositions are framed of these words which are much vrged by the Romanists to prooue their iustification by workes 1. Ambrose thus interpreteth these words the doers of the law shall be iustified that is they which beleeue in Christ whome the law of Moses promised and in whome it commanded them to beleeue for nemo facit legem nisi qui credit legi no man doth the law but he which beleeueth the law and therefore our Sauiour saith Ioh. 5. If ye had beleeued Moses you would haue beleeued me for he wrote of me But against this exposition it may be thus excepted 1. the Scripture so vseth not to speake to doe the law that is to beleeue in Christ for by this meanes the law of faith and beleefe and the law of works should be confounded whereas the one is opposite to the other 2. the Apostle is not yet entred into the disputation of saith 3. and he speaketh generally of keeping the whole law not of that part onely which prophesied of Christ. 2. Tolet here maketh mention of an other exposition of some of their Catholikes that the Apostle here meaneth a certaine morall or ciuill iustice in keeping of the law which may be found in an vnbeleeuer But he reiecteth this by the Apostles words righteous before God which sheweth that he speaketh of true and perfect iustice in the sight of God 3. Now whereas iustification and to iustifie may be taken three waies either when a man before vniust is made iust or when he is made more iust or declared to be iust as it is said Wisdome is iustified of her children that is declared to be iust Augustine taketh it here in the first sense and he maketh this to be the meaning not that men are made iust by keeping of the law but first beeing iustified by God then they are enabled and made fit to keepe the law as he maketh it to be like vnto this speach homines creaâ—tur men are created not that they were first men and then created but they are created to be men so for the doers of the law to be iustified what is it els but they that are iust by faith are iustified and made able to keepe the law to this purpose Augustine whome Anselms and Thomas followeth But this exposition seemeth not to be agreeable vnto the scope of the Apostle who goeth not about to prooue that men must first be iust before they can keepe the law but that they are approoued before God in doing according to the law in not professing but practising it 4. In the second sense the Rhemists in their annotation here doe take it for the encrease of iustice which they call the second iustification the first iustification is by faith without works the second is by workes But Pererius râ—iâ—cteth this glosse as beeing not consonant vnto the scope of the Apostle here for he speaketh not of the encrease of iustification but simply of iustification But beside this is a new deuise of the first and second iustification the Scripture acknowledgeth but one iustification Rom. 8.30 Whome he iustifieth he glorifieth after iustification followeth glorification that iustification then which glorification followeth is one whole and sufficient iustification there commeth none other betweene 5. Some take iustifying in the third sense for declaring to be iust as the word is sometime taken as Prov. 17.15 He that iustifieth the wicked and condemneth the iust euen they both are an abomination to the Lord to iustifie the wicked here is to declare him to be iust so the doers of the law shall be iustified that is declared and pronounced iust in the day of the Lord in the presence of God and all his holy Angels thus Perer. numb 52. Tollet annot 13. so also Bellarmine in divino iudicio iusti iudicabuntur they shall be adiudged to be iust in the diuine iudgement lib. 2. de iustificat c. 15. Contra. 1. Let it be obserued here that the Romanists approoue that interpretation of this word which is vrged by Protestants where S. Iames saith c. 2. that Abraham was iustified through workes that is declared to be iust 2. but yet this
world 3. Obiect v. 7. which ariseth likewise out of the former testimonie cited out of the Psalme if by mens lies Gods truth is commended then the liar is vniustly punished the answer followeth v. 9. the Apostle calleth it a blasphemie and worthie of iust damnation if any shall iustifie themselues in their euill doing and of purpose doe euill to set forth the iustice of God v. 8. The second part is from v. 9. to 21. where he prooueth the Iewes and Gentiles both to be vnder sinne which is propounded v. 9. prooued by particular induction of their sinnes grounded vpon some testimonies of Scripture v. 10. to 19. then applied to the Iew as well as to the Gentile by three arguments v. 19.1 from the relation which the law hath to those which are vnder the law 2. then from two ends that euery mouth may be stopped all occasion of boasting may be taken away 3. and that all the world may be found culpable The third part followeth wherein the Apostle prooueth that all must be iustified by faith in Christ which he prooueth by a distribution either by the workes of the law or by faith not by the law by the contrarie effect v. 20. Then he confirmeth the other part that we are iustified by faith without the law which proposition is contained v. 1.22 23. by shewing the causes of iustification and who are iustified euen all that beleeue and why v. 23. Then this proposition is confirmed 1. by shewing all the causes the efficient principall the grace of God then Christ by his blood the instrument is faith the formall cause remission of sinnes the ende the setting forth of Gods iustice v. 24 25 26. 2. by the effects it excluding all boasting v. 27. 3. the conclusion followeth v. 28. 4. which is confirmed 1. by remoouing an absurditie because God otherwise should seeme to be God onely of the Iewes v. 29.30 2. by preuenting an obiection v. 31. 3. The questions and doubts discussed 1. Quest. Of the priuiledges of the Iewes and their preheminence before the Gentiles v. 1. What is the preferment of the Iew c. Whereas the Apostle seemed in the end of the former chapter to make the Iewes and Gentiles equall and had extenuated the circumcision of the flesh now it might be obiected by the Iew that by this meanes they should haue no preheminence or preferment more then the Gentile had the Apostle then meeteth with that secret obiection and sheweth wherein consisted the excellencie of the Iew. 1. The Iewes had many priuiledges which the Gentiles had not as 1. they were called to be the peculiar people of God and the Lord professed himselfe to be their God 2. i◠that nation continued the true knowledge of God euen vnto the comming of Christ 3. of them came many holy Patriarks and Prophets that were in high fauour and acceptance with God 4. among them and for their sakes the Lord wrought many miracles and wonders 5. they had many visions prophesies and dreames 6. God gaue vnto them the Sacraments and sacrifices as circumcision the Paschal lamb 7. the Messiah was promised to descend of that nation 8. But the Apostle omitteth these and specially insisteth vpon this that the law and oracles of God were committed vnto them 2. Chiefly or first because vnto them were credited c. This word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Erasmus taketh for to signifie the order of the Apostles speach as before c. 1.8 but there the Apostle beginneth his epistle which he doth not here 2. Some referre it to the number of the priuiledges rehearsed by the Apostle whereof this was the first and the rest follow in the epistle But the Apostle maketh mention of no other priuiledge but this 3. Origen whome Sedulius followeth hath here reference to the Gentiles that vnto the Iewes first were committed the oracles then to the Gentiles but the promises here spoken of were onely made vnto the Iewes 4. Therefore this word first here signifieth chiefe that this was the chiefe priuiledge and immunitie which the Iewes had 3. And the Apostle giueth instance of this that they had the Scriptures 1. because it was most generall multa concludit and concluded many things beside Tolet. 2. herein consisted a chiefe difference betweene the Gentiles which had but the law of nature to direct them and the Iewes which had also the written law of God Perer. 3. and the Apostle omitteth their temporall priuiledges insisting vpon a spirituall as beeing more pretious and durable Gorrhan 4. By oracles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some seeme to vnderstand onely the law which was giuen by Moses as Chrysostome Theodoret but thereby are signified all the propheticall writings which the Iewes had both the law and the Prophets gloss interlin though speciall reference be made to the law as S. Steuen saith that Moses receiued the liuely oracles Act. 7.38 Pare 5. But it will be obiected that God also to others communicated his oracles as to Pharaoh Nabuchadnezzer which were not of Israel it may be answered that 1. God did impart those things not to many of the Gentiles but to a few 2. and that of some particular things 3. neither were such oracles and visions committed to their trust but onely for a time reuealed 4. and that for his peoples sake rather then their owne 6. In that the Apostle saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the oracles of God were committed to their credit or credited vnto them 1. the Syrian interpreter is deceiued who maketh it the nominatiue that the oracles of God were credited or beleeued 2. and Origens obseruation is much like that the oracles of God were committed vnto them which did vnderstand and beleeue them but the letter of the law was giuen to all for by the words following v. 3. what though some did not beleeue it is euident that the Apostle here speaketh of a generall priuiledge which was not made void by some mens vnbeleefe 3. Erasmus saith that those oracles were committed vnto them alijs magis profutura quam ipsis to profit other rather then themselues as though they were committed vnto them to keepe for others vse But Beza noteth better that they had those things committed vnto them non vt alienae rei depositum not as an other mans thing laid to pledge but as their owne proper treasure if they could haue vsed it well 4. And indeede they were faithfull keepers of the Scriptures preseruing them from falsitie and corruption and are to this day though they vnderstand them not and in the daies of our Sauiour when many other corruptions both of life and doctrine were obiected against them yet they were not charged to be falsifiers of Scripture Faius 5. Chrysostome hath here a good note nusquam illorum virtutes sed Dei beneficia in illos enumerat the Apostle doth not recken vp their owne vertues among their priuiledges but he counteth the benefits of God toward them 6. And this word is credited
holy men are reported to haue beene iust in their time 1. Origen thinketh that whereas the Scripture saith in thy sight shall no man liuing be iustified it is spoken by way of comparison that none compared to God are iust and so Lyranus thinketh it is vnderstood de iustitia perfecta of perfect righteousnes there may be iustitia politica a politike and ciuill iustice in liuing according to the rule of nature and iustâ—â—â—â— legalis a legall iustice in keeping Moses ordinances but no perfect iustice Contra. If this were the meaning then they which are iustified by faith in Christ should be here also included for they beeing compared to Gods perfect and exact iustice can not be said to be iust but the Apostle speaketh not of faith he sheweth onely what men are by nature 2. And by the same reason doe we also reiect an other interpretation of Origen that no man liuiâ—â— here is iustified before God that is in this life none can be pronounced to be iust But although in the next world our iustice shall be perfected yet it is begun here otherwise wâ— should neuer come there 3. Chrysostome vnderstandeth this to be spoken onely of the Iewes which are noted of three things 1. that they all had transgressed 2. they onely committed euill and wrought no good 3. they did it with all vehemencic and endeauour so also Anselme thinketh that Paul speaketh of the Iewes 4. Some vnderstand contrariwise onely the Gentiles and vncircumcised Greeke schol and Theodoret thinketh that Psal. 14. there is speciall reference to the rayling of Rabsacah which is declared Isa. 36. But the words of the Prophet are generall and he intendeth by this Scripture to prooue that all both Iew and Gentile were vnder sinne 5. Ambrose and Augustine thinke that these words are vttered onely of the euill and wicked sort not of the righteous so also glosse ordinar But the Apostle generally concludeth of all that they are vnder sinne and that they had neede of the grace of God 6. Pererius mentioneth an other exposition that some would haue it vnderstood of veniall that is the smaller offences which no man liueth without but euery one is subiect vnto But the Apostle reckoneth vp afterwards many grieuous sinnes as their throat is an open sepulchre their feete are swift to shed blood c. these were not small offences but most grieuous and grosse sinnes 7. Pererius thinketh that this is spoken by an hyperbole none are saide to be iust that is the most so that a few onely are excepted 8. But the Apostle vnderstandeth vniuersally all men that there is none iust as afterward he concludeth v. 19. that all the world be culpable before God and whereas some men are called and counted righteous that is ex gratia by grace but yet by nature all both Iewes and Gentiles are sinners that they can not by their owne works be iustified but onely by grace and faith in Christ. Faius Tolet. annot 10. 9. Origen here maketh a question how it could be saide that there was none neither among the Iewes nor Gentiles that did any good seeing there were many among them which did cloath the naked feede the hungrie and did other good things he hereunto maketh this answer that like as one that laieth a foundation and buildeth vpon it a wall or two yet can not be saide to haue built an house till he haue finished it so although those might doe some good things yet they attained not vnto perfect goodnes which was onely to be found in Christ. But this is not the Apostles meaning onely to exclude men from the perfection of iustice for euen the faithfull beleeuers were short of that perfection which is required he therefore sheweth what men are by nature all vnder sinne and in the state of damnation without grace and faith in Christ if any performe any good worke either it is of grace and so not of themselues or if they did it by the light of nature they did it not as they ought and so it was farre from a good worke in deede Perer. num 37. Tolet. annot 10. 19. Quest. Of the particular explication of the sinnes wherewith the Apostle here chargeth both Iewes and Gentiles v. 10. There is none righteous in the Psalme it is there is none that doth good but the sense is the same for he that is righteous doth that which is good he that doth not good is not iust or righteous so he proueth the antecedent by the consequent No not one though this be not in that place of the Psalme according to the Hebrew it is added for a more full explanation to shew that none are excluded some vnderstand this of iustification by faith in Christ there was none which beleeued in him gloss interlin Gorrhan but the Apostle sheweth what euery one was by nature otherwise there were alwaies some in the world to whome the Lord gaue faith and beleefe in him v. 11. There is none that vnderstandeth the Apostle here omitteth some words of the Psalme for there it is set downe affirmatiuely the Lord looked downe from heauen whether any would vnderstand but S. Paul keeping the sense Beza expresseth it by a negation Pareus The Apostle condemneth them all of ignorance which is the mother of prophannes Tolet vnderstandeth this peculiarly of the Gentiles who were idolaters and had not the right knowledge of God some doe specially refer it to their ignorance concerning Christ that they did not know him to be God gloss interlin Gorrhan But it is more generall they had no knowledge of God at all no true and effectuall knowledge which might bring them to the seruice and obedience of God Mart. There is none that seeketh God This Tolet specially vnderstandeth of the Iewes who though they knew God yet they did not seeke him to liue according to his commandement but it is more generall comprehending both Iewes and Gentiles some haue particular reference to Christ that they did not seeke to know him whome they might haue found out to be God by his miraculous workes gloss interl But the Apostle comprehendeth more times then that onely wherein Christ liued Lyranus hath here a corrupt glosse they did not seeke God per opera meritoria by the merit of their works but so God shall neuer be fouÌ„d the prophannes then of men in general is here set forth that had no care to seeke vnto God and to depend vpon him but they were addicted to themselues and their owne lusts conforming themselues vnto this present world Rom. 12.2 Gryneus v. 12. They haue all gone out of the way They fell away beeing destitute of grace from the way which leadeth vnto life vnto the broad way that bringeth vnto euerlasting destruction Gryneus and they became vnprofitable beeing cut off from God as the branch from the vine they could bring forth no fruit Tolet. the Hebrew word signifieth to rot and corrupt so they became as rotten and
taketh this iustice to be Christ rather it signifieth the iustice or righteousnesse which is by faith to Christ so called both because of the efficient cause thereof namely God who worketh it in vs and in regard of the effect because it onely is able to stand before God Calvin 2. Without the Lawe 1. Origen here vnderstandeth the lawe of nature and giueth thiâ— exposition ad iustitiam Dei cognoscendam nihil opitulabatur lex naturae the law of nature did helpe nothing at all to the knowledge of the iustice of God but it was manifested by the written lawe of Moses but the Apostle excludeth not here the written lawe for them it were no consequent speach vnto the former where the Apostle denied iustification vnto all workes of the lawe in generall the same lawe then must be here vnderstood which he treated before that is generally both the naturall and written law 2. Augustine ioyneth this word without the lawe not vnto manifested but vnto righteousnesse so the righteousnesse without the lawe he expoundeth sine adminiculo legis without the helpe of the law lib. de spirit liter c. 9. but this sense first Beza confuteth by the order and placing of the words which stand thus without the lawe is righteousnesse made manifest not righteousnes without the lawe as S. Iames saith faith without works is dead not without works faith is dead for in this transposing of the words the sense is much altered Tolet addeth this reason that righteousnesse without the lawe that is the workes of the lawe was knowne euen vnto the faithfull vnder the lawe therefore the words without the lawe must be ioyned rather vnto manifested then to righteousnesse 3. But yet Tolet is here deceiued for he thus interpreteth absque lege without the lawe that is cossante lege the lawe ceasing and beeing abrogate the Euangelicall faith was manifested for although the workes of the morall law are commanded in the Gospel yet they bind not by reason of the legall bond or obligation but by vertue and force of newe institution thereof by Christ But our Sauiour faith directly that he came not to destroy the lawe and the Prophets Matth. 5.17 but if the morall lawe were first abrogated though it were againe reuiued by Christ it must first be dissolued 4. Ambrose well referreth without the lawe to manifested but he seemeth to restraine it to the lawe of ceremonies sine lege apparuit sed sine lege sabbati circumcisionis it appeared without the lawe but without the lawe of the Sabboth and circumcision and newe Moone c. But in all this disputation the Apostle chiefely entreateth of the morall lawe by the which specially came the knowledge of sinne 5. some referre this to the manifestation of the Gospel by the preaching of the Apostles when the Gentiles were called which had no knowledge of the lawe Mart. and many also among the Iewes which though they had not the lawe yet cared not for it as they say Ioh. 7.48 Doth any of the rulers or Pharisies beleeue in him but this people which knoweth not the lawe Gorrhan â—â— they vnderstand without the lawe that is without the knowledge of the lawe But the Apostle speaketh of that iustice which was manifested both to the Gentiles and the Iewes which had yet the knowledge of the lawe 6. Gryneus whereas the Apostle saith first that righteousnesse is reuealed without the lawe and yet immediately after he saith hauing witnesse of the law and the Prophets would reconcile them thus vnderstanding lawe in the first place of the letter of the lawe which doth not set forth the iustice of God by faith and in the other place the spirituall sense of the lawe 7. But the meaning rather of the Apostle is this that it is not the office of the lawe to teach faith and that beside the lawe there is an other doctrine in the Church concerning faith which doctrine of saluation and iustice by faith neither the naturall nor morall lawe can teach and though in the time of the lawe this doctrine of faith was taught the faithfull yet the knowledge thereof came not by the lawe And for the full reconciling here of the Apostle to himselfe three things are to be considered 1. that in the first place the lawe is vnderstood strictly for the doctrine of the morall lawe whether written or naturall which doth not properly teach faith in Christ afterward the lawe is taken for the bookâ— of Moses wherein many Euangelicall promises are contained beside the legall precepâ—â— Beza annot â—2 The lawe doth properly vrge workes it doth not professedly teach faith and yet it excludeth it not Pareus but accidentally it bringeth vs to Christ as forcing vs when we see our disease to seeke for a remedie 3. this doctrine of faith was manifested without the lawe that is more clearely taught and preached at the comming of Christ yet it was knowne vnto Moses and the Prophets though more obscurely for in that it is said to be manifested nor made or created it sheweth that it was before though not so manifest Perer. disput â—0 Faius So then those words but now doe both note the diuersitie of time and they are aduersatiue particulars shewing that our iustice is not reuealed in the lawe but otherwise and els where Quest. 27. How the righteousnesse of faith had witnesse of the lawe and the Prophets Fowre wayes are the law and Prophets found to beare witnesse and testimonie vnto the Gospell of faith 1. by the euident prophesies of Christ as our blessed Sauiour saith Ioh. 5.46 Moses wrote of me and S. Paul said before c. 2. Which he had promised before by his Prophets in the holy Scriptures and S. Peter saith Act. 10.43 To him also giue all the Prophets witnesse such euident testimonies out of the lawe and Prophets are these which are cited by the Apostles as that Rom. 10.6 The righteousnesse of faith speaketh on this wise say not in thy heart who shall ascend into heauen that is to bring Christ from aboue c. so the Apostle citeth an euident testimonie out of the 31. of Ieremie Hebr. 8.8 how the Lord would make a newe testament with the house of Iuda and many such testimonies in the newe Testament are taken out of the old 2. A second kind of testimonie were the types and figures which went before in the old Testament as the Paschal lambe the Manna the rocke the cloud did shadow forth Christ likewise some acts of the Patriarkes and Prophets did prefigure out Christ as Abrahams sacrificing of Isaac Salomons building of the Temple Ionas beeing in the bellie of the whale with such like 3. The sacrifices and oblations and the blood of rammes and goates did signifie the vnspotted lambe of God that should be slaine for the sinnes of the world Mart. 4. The lawe also by the effect thereof did beare witnesse vnto Christ as Augustine saith lex hoc ipso quod iubendo minando
neminem iustificabat satis indicabat c. the lawe in this selfesame thing that it iustified none in bidding and threatning did sufficiently shew that man is iustified by the gift of God c. Quest. 28. Of these words v. 22. The righteousnesse of Go by the faith of Iesus Christ vnto all and vppon all 1. Here the Apostle toucheth first the efficient and principall cause of this righteousnes which is God then the materiall cause Christ with his obedience both actiue and passiue in performing the lawe and bearing the punishment thereof for vs then the instrumentall cause which is faith and the subiect wherein this faith is seene and vnto whom it belongeth euen vnto all and vpon all 2. The faith of Christ is not here taken actiuely for the faith which Christ had but passiuely for the faith whereby Christ is had and possessed And by faith here is not vnderstood a generall assent onely or naked knowledge but a firme perswasion of the heart ioyned with a sure and certaine knowledge of things hoped for as the Apostle ioyneth both together Hebr. 11.1 defining faith to be the ground of things hoped for there is the assurance and confidence and the euidence of things which are not seene there is the knowledge 3. This faith doth not iustifie effective as working an habituall iustice in vs nor materialiter materially as though faith in it selfe were that whereby we are iustified but it iustifieth obiective as it apprehendeth Christ and organice iustrumentally as it applyeth the righteousnesse of Christ to them which beleeue Pareus 4. Further concerning faith it differeth much from opinion suspition science or knowledge opinion though it incline vnto the truth yet it is vncertaine and doubtfull so is not faith suspition giueth but a weake assent but faith is a firme and sure perswasion as opinion is an vncertaintie of the iudgement so is suspition in the will and assent neither are in faith knowledge bringeth a firme assent but it is by demonstration of reason now faith beleeueth beyond reason And of faith there are two kinds one is a vaine and temporarie faith which is fruitlesse and without charitie as in the parable of the sower some seede fell in stonie and thornie ground such faith iustifieth not there is a liuely and effectuall faith which is onely in the Saints and this is the true iustifying faith which yet admitteth diuerse degrees in some it bringeth forth thirtie in some sixtie in some an hundred fold there are two impediments of faith the one is curiositie to seeke fully to comprehend the things which we beleeue the other is doubtfulnesse to be vncertaine of them Both these Basil toucheth writing of faith ne contendas videre ca qua precul reposita sunt neque eae quae sperentur ambigua statuas striue not to gaze vpon those things which are set farre off neither hold vncertaine the things hoped for Mart. 5. Here it shall not be amisse to note the diuersitie of phrases which the Apostle vseth when he speaketh of faith it is called the righteousnesse of God c. 1.17 and of or from God Philip. 3.10 righteousnesse by faith c. 3.22 and of faith c. 5.1 righteousnesse without works c. 3.28 the righteousnesse of faith c. 4.11.13 righteousnesse in the blood of Christ c. 5.9 righteousnesse by the obedience of Christ c. 5.19 righteousnesse not our owne Philip. 3.9 righteousnesse imputed of God c. 4. v. 6.10 6. And whereas it is added toward all and vpon all 1. Some doe thus distinguish that the first all noteth the Iewes the second the Gentiles Oecumen some by the first vnderstand the Apostles by the second those which were afterward called Anselme super omnes vpon or aboue all interpreteth supra captum omnium aboue the teach or capacitie of all But this is rather doubled to shew neminem excludi that none of the faithfull are excluded Pareus and in that he saith aboue or vpon all Gods ouerflowing iustice is signified which ouerfloweth as waters Faius 2. But this vniuersall particle all must be restrained onely vnto those which beleeue for as Ambrose saith habet populus Dei plenitudinem suam c. the people of God haue a certaine fulnesse specialis quaedam censetur vniuersitas c. and there is a speciall kind of vniuersalitie when the whole world of the elect seemeth to be deliuered out of the whole world c. de vocat gent. lib. 1. c. 3. Quest. 29. What it is to be depriued of the glorie of God v. 23. 1. Origen vnderstandeth these words effective by way of the effect quomodo auderes peccator gloriam Deodare how should the sinner presume to giue glorie vnto God the praise of God is not seemely in a sinners mouth 2. Oecumenius taketh the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 literally thus interpreting they are left behind post tergum est gloria beneficentia Dei the glorie and beneficence of God is behind thy backe that is Gods grace doth preuent thee because a man is iustified freely without his own works 3. Some by the glorie of God vnderstand iustification whereby Gods glorie appeareth Lyran. per quam gloriosus apparet by the which the Lord appeareth glorious so also gloss ordinar Hugo Gorrhan 4. Faius by this glorie vnderstandeth that image of God in righteousnesse and holinesse after the which man was created which man hath blotted out by his fall so also Martyr applyeth it to the corruption of mans nature 5. Theodoret taketh this glorie for the presence of the grace of God in which sense the arke of the couenant was called the glorie of God because there he shewed himselfe visibly present as when the Philistians had takes the Arke it is saide the glorie is departed from Israel 1. Sam. 4.22 6. Melancthon by glorie would haue vnderstood that grace acceptance and approbation which men haue with God beeing iustified by faith so also Osiander Tolet Caietan vnderstand gloriâ—â— hominis apud Deum the glorie of man that is his acceptance with God and there is here a secret opposition betweene glorie with men which we may attaine vnto by workes as the Apostle sheweth c. 4.2 and glorie with God to this purpose also Calvin and Piscatur 7. Wherefore with Chrysostome we here vnderstand rather the glorie of eternall life he that offendeth God non ad eos pertinet quibus ascribenda est gloria doth not appertaine vnto those to whom eternall glorie shall be ascribed and so Beza also well giueth the sense of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is vsed of those which came short in the race and cannot attaine vnto the marke or price that is set before them so also Gryneus they cannot attaine ad metam vitae illius gloriosae to the marke of that glorious life which is set before vs in heauen of this glorie the Apostle spake before c. 2.10 to euerie one that doth good shall be glorie and honour the meaning then is that all
disput 19. err 94. Ans. 1. The Eunuchs faith was not onely an historicall knowledge that Christ was the Sonne of God which the Deuills also knew and confessed but he beleeued to haue remission of his sinnes in his name and therefore he was baptised for baptisme in the name of Christ was for remission of sinnes Act. 2.38 the same may be said of the keeper of the prison who was baptised with his houshold 2. Neither was Abrahams faith onely a generall apprehension that Christ should come of his seede but he made particular application of that promise euen to himselfe trusting to be saued by the Messiah and therefore our Sauiour saith of him Ioh. 8.56 Your father Abraham reioyced to see my day he saw it and was glad 3. Pererius third exception is that a man can not in this life by faith be certaine of remission of sinnes some of his arguments are these 1. Iob faith c. 9.15 Though I were iust yet could I not answer and v. 20. Though I would iustifie my selfe mine owne mouth would condemne me c. And S. Paul saith I know nothing by my selfe yet am I not thereby iustified 2. The Apostle biddeth â—s to worke out our saluation with feare and trembling Philip. 2.12 S. Paul also was not so sure of his iustification but that he still remained in doubt and feare 1. Cor. 9.27 I beate downe my bodie and bring it in subiection least after I had preached to others I my selfe should be a reprobate 3. This certentie of remission of sinnes should be either humane or diuine the humane is of three sorts either by the outward sense or by the inward act of vnderstanding or by euident demonstration but none of these it is the diuine is also of two sorts either by the generall apprehension of the articles of faith but this worketh no such certentie for then euery Christian that knoweth and beleeueth the articles of faith should haue it or by speciall and particular reuelation which euery one can not haue Perer. disput 19. numer 97. Contra. 1. Iob and Paul in those places speake onely of such iustification which might be grounded vpon their owne worthines by such iustification indeede they could haue no assurance but they renounced it I am not thereby iustified saith the Apostle that is by his owne conscience which yet accused him not 2. The Apostle both teacheth others to take heede of carnall securitie and presumption and shewed the practise of it in himselfe one may be sure of remission of sinnes and yet walke in feare and reuerence this certentie then of remission of sinnes onely excludeth carnall securitie not reuerent and faithfull feare neither did S. Paul feare to become a reprobrate but least if he should doe contrarie to his doctrine it should be a reproofe vnto him for he himselfe was most sure of his saluation as he professeth confidently that nothing could separate him from the loue of God in Christ Rom. 8.38 3. This certentie indeede we willingly graunt is not humane but diuine neither is it so diuine as that it needeth alwaies an extraordinarie and speciall reuelation and yet it is more than an vniuersall and generall apprehension of the articles of the faith for betweene these two there is a third a particular application by faith of the generall promises of God whereby a faithfull man groweth into this assurance 4. And whereas he further obiecteth that seeing euery mortall sinne hindreth iustification if a man can not assure himselfe to be free from sinne neither can he be assured of the remission of his sinnes we answer that if a man did thinke by his owne puritie to obtaine remission of his sinnes he can not possibly be assured of forgiuenes so long as he hath sinne but seeing we hope to be iustified by faith in Christ by his righteousnes and not our owne notwithstanding that the faithfull are compassed about with infirmities yet this hindreth not the certentie of iustification by faith So then a faithfull man must be considered two waies in his spirituall part which is quickned and lightened by faith and in his carnall infirmitie which yet remaineth in the regenerate which causeth sometimes doubtfulnes in the seruants of God but the spirituall man preuaileth and faith ouercommeth our carnall infirmities that although they be and remaine in vs yet they doe not raigne 5. This then notwithstanding all these former obiections remaineth as an vndoubted principle of our faith that a faithfull man may be assured by faith of his iustification and of the free remission and forgiuenes of his sinnes in Christ which appeareth to be 1. by the nature and propertie of faith which is to be without wauering Iam. 1.6 Let him aske in faith and wauer not 2. by the effects of faith which worketh boldnes confidence and assurance and peace with God Rom. 5.1 but we could haue no peace of conscience if we were not assured of forgiuenes 3. by the experience which the faithfull had as S. Paul by faith was most assured perswaded of the loue of God toward him in Christ Rom. 8.38 whereof proceeded that his praier to be dissolued and to be with Christ Phil. 1. see further hereof Synops. Centur. 4. err 56. 18. Controv. What manner of faith it is that iustifieth Pererius saith that iustification may be taken two waies either for the preparation and tending vnto iustice or the very production of iustice it selfe as the word generation in naturall Philosophie is sometime taken for the very production of the forme and the perfection of generation or for the first alteration and change of the matter which is but in the way and tending vnto generation the Apostle speaketh of the first kind of iustifying in this place faith is saide to iustifie that is faith not yet formed with charitie prepareth and maketh a way vnto iustification which is per charitatis infusionem by the infusion of charitie disput 18. numer 86. so his opinion is that faith which is said to iustifie is seuered from charitie it is fides informis expers charitatis an imperfect and vnformed faith voide of charitie Contra. This assertion is flat contrarie and opposite to the Scripture for the Apostle sheweth that it is faith working by loue which saueth Gal. 5.6 and S. Iames saith that faith without works can not saue c. 2.14 but such a faith is dead and it is no other but the faith which deuills haue for the deuills beleeue and tremble v. 19. Let the Romanists content themselues with such a bare and naked iustifying faith but we are sure that such a faith which is separate from loue can not helpe vs. Controv. 19. Of the manner how faith iustifieth Here the Romanists haue these positions 1. they say faith iustifieth because it disposeth prepareth and maketh a way to iustification so Bellarm. Staplet c. Contra. 1. The Scripture saith the Iust shall liue by faith if faith bringeth and worketh the life of the
impute is to make one the cause of some commoditie and discommoditie ac si ille talis rei author esset as if he were the author of it c. 1. so then faith is said not to be imputed but reputed for iustice because the act of faith is imputed for iustice for when it doth not bring iustice of it owne nature vt est actus hominis as it is an act of man yet it is so accepted of God 2. and therefore he misliketh the word imputed because we thereupon gather that there is no iustice giuen vnto man whereby he is made iust but the iustice of Christ reputed but he affirmeth that there is a iustice verily giuen vnto man by faith which God accepteth for iustice as the fight of the brasen serpent did verily heale not by the vertue of the fight sed ex diuino beneplacito because it so pleased God 3. for if the word imputed not reputed had beene here vsed the Apostle would haue said he imputed vnto him c. not it was imputed to this purpose Tolet annot 7. Contra. 1. We say that iustice is both imputed and reputed vnto vs by faith for first Christs righteousnesse is imputed and made ours by faith and then it is reputed and accepted as if we had our selues performed it neither can there be any reputed iustice but it must first be by imputation For God in his iustice cannot hold or repute him for iust that is not iust vnlesse for an others rigteousnesse he be reputed and counted iust 2. That figure of beholding the brasen serpent doth make more for imputation of iustice then reputation onely for they which looked vpon the serpent were not reputed as healed but verily were healed from the biting of the serpent by the imputation and application of the vertue apprehended by the sight of the serpent so we are truely healed from our sinnes by the imputation of Christs righteousnesse 3. that which S. Paul vttereth in the passiue it was imputed Moses expressed in the actiue he imputed so that the sense is all one and seeing Tolet following the vulgar Latine readeth v. 8. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not sinne why should not the same sense of the word be retained here 6. Wherefore then all these cauills beeing thus remooued we inferre that Abraham was iustified by faith not materialiter materially as it was an act but relate and obiectur as it hath relation vnto the obiect the iustice of Christ and organice instrumentally as it applyeth and apprehendeth the righteousnesse of Christ. Quest. 10. Whether Abraham were iustified by any thing beside his faith 1. It will be obiected that Genes 22.18 after the Lord had tried Abrahams obedience and faithfulnesse in offring his sonne the Angel said vnto him in the name of the Lord because thou hast done this thing I will surely blesse thee c. here the Lord seemeth to blesse Abraham for his obedience not because of his faith to this we answear that it is not said that Abraham was iustified by this fact he was iustified long before by his faith but that the Lord rewarded Abrahams obedience with ample and large promises and so the Lord crowneth in mercie the workes and obedience in his servant 2. Obiect As it is said here that this faith and beleefe was imputed vnto Abraham for righteousnesse so Psal. 106.31 Phineas act in killing the adulterer and the adulteresse is said to haue beene imputed to him for righteousnesse Answ. There is an vniuersall and particular iustice that is personae of the person the other is facts of some particular fact so in this place in the Psalme the Prophet speaketh not of that vniuersal iustice whereby one is counted iust before God but of the particular iustification approbation of Phineas his fact which otherwise might haue seemed to be vnlawful because he did take the sword being a priuate man but because he did it in the zeale of Gods glorie the Lord approoued it Phinehas by that act beeing but one could not be iustified before God for the law saith cursed is he that continueth not in all things which are written in the lawe one act then of obedience could not iustifie Phinehas before God but that particular act was accepted and approoued so Deut. 14.13 the restoring of the pledge before the Sunne goe downe is said to be ones righteousnesse that is the Lord would accept it as a worke of righteousnesse pleasing and acceptable vnto him But in this place the Apostle speaketh of vniuersall iustice whereby a man is iustified and counted iust before God to this purpose Pareus dub 3. Martyr Faius Quest. 11. How S. Paul and S. Iames are reconciled about the manner of Abrahams iustifying S. Paul saith here v. 3. that Abraham beleeued God and it was counted vnto him for righteousnesse but S. Iames saith c. 2.23 Was not Abraham our father iustified by works when he offred his sonne Isaac 1. Tolet would thus reconcile them that S. Paul should speake of works going before Abrahams iustification and without them he was iustified but S. Iames of workes that followed after whereby Abraham was iustified But this solution will not serue his turne for Abraham before this time when he is said to haue beene iustified by his faith had done many excellent workes after he had beleeued Gods promises in obeying his calling and leauing his countrey which things he did by faith and yet he was iustified without any such workes S. Paul then excludeth euen such workes as followed his iustification 2. Wherefore the true reconciling of them is this 1. that S. Paul and S. Iames speake not of the same kind of iustification the one reasoneth of the manner and causes of our iustifying before God the other of the signes thereof before men 2. they speake of a diuerse subiect S. Paul of Abraham iustificando to be iustified S. Iames iustificati of the same beeing iustified 3. S. Paul of the iustifying of the person S. Iames of the iustifying of a particular fact Gryneus see in the former chapter controv 21. Quest. 12. Of the explication of the 4. and 5. verses v. 4. To him that worketh 1. Here are three expositions set one against the other of him that worketh and worketh not but beleeueth of the debt and fauour or grace of the wages and imputation Mart. and by him that worketh is vnderstood him that worketh with an intent therby to merit or to be iustified for he that beleeueth also worketh but he is said not to work secundū quid after a sort because he doth it not to that end to merit by it 2. This the Apostle speaketh by way of concession vsing a civill axiome taken from humane affaires not that indeede before God any wages by debt is due vnto any that worketh Beza the Apostle then speaketh thus by way of supposition ex hypothesi Faius 3. This Origen not well vnderstanding but supposing that the Apostle indeed
sinnes for we hold also with S. Paul the imputation of Christs righteousnesse by faith as S. Paul saith Philip. 3.9 That I may be found in him not hauing mine owne righteousnesse which is by the lawe but that which is of the faith of Christ c. 2. But though we graunt as well an imputation of righteousnes as a not imputation of sinne concurring vnto iustification yet we denie that any inherent iustice or renouation of life is any part of this iustification neither doth the Apostle meane any such iustification here Christ rose for our iustification not thereby onely to giue vs an example of newenesse of life as Bellarmine and Pererius expound it wherein Tolet his owne fellowe Iesuite and Cardinall is against him as is before shewed qu. 42. but Christs resurrection is the cause and ground of our iustification which is imputed by faith as Ambrose expoundeth resurrexit c. vt nos gratia iustificationis donaret he rose againe to endue vs with the grace of iustification vt iustitiam credentium confirmaret to confirme the iustice of those which beleeue saith Hierome ista resurrectio credita nos iustificat this resurrection beeing beleeued doth iustifie vs saith Augustine 3. an inherent iustice we confesse which is our sanctification the fruit and effect of our iustification by faith but because it is imperfect in vs and not able to satisfie the iustice of God we denie that we are thereby iustified in his sight Controv. 19. Against Socinus corrupt interpretation of these words v. 25. Was deliuered vp for our sinnes Socinus will not haue this phrase to signifie any satisfactioÌ„ made by Christ for our sinnes but onely to betoken the cause or occasion of Christs death as the Lord is said to giue Israâ—l vp for the sinnes of Ieroboam who sinned and caused Israel to sinne 1. king 14.16 thus â—icked Socinus de Seruat part 2. p. 108. Contra. 1. Though sometime this phrase signifie the cause yet it is false that it so onely signifieth for the Scripture speaketh euidently that Christ was our reconciliation and that we haue redemption in him Rom. 3.24 25. our sinnes then onely were not the cause or occasion of his death but he so died for our sinnes as that he by his blood satisfied for them 2. It was the Pelagian blasphemie that Christ died for our sinnes to be an example onely vnto vs to die vnto sinne for thus the power and force of Christs death is extenuated which indeede causeth vs to die vnto sinne it doth not teach vs onely and shew vs the way this were to extoll the power of mans corrupt will against the grace of God 3. The instance of Ieroboam is altogether impertinent Israel was deliuered vp for Ieroboams sinnes which they imitated and followed if Christ were so deliuered vp for our sinnes then they must make him also to be a sinner with vs and to be polluted with our sinnes ex Perer dub 8. 20. Controv. Piscators opinion examined that our sinnes are remitted onely by Christs death not for the obedience and merit of his life These are Piscators words in his annotation vpon the 25. v. Omnia nostra pectata expiatâ— sunt per solam mortem Christi all our sinnes are expiated onely by the death of Christ and therefore neither originall sinne is purged by his holy conception nor the sinnes of omission by his holy life but by Christs death onely to this purpose many places of Scripture are cited and alleadged by him as Matth. 20.28 The Sonne of man came to giue his life a ransome for many Matth. 26.28 Which namely blood is shed for many for the remission of sinnes Act. 20.28 Christ hath purchased his Church by his blood Likewise he affirmeth that by Christs obedience in his death and vpon the crosse partâ—â— esse nobis vitam aeâ—ernam euerlasting life is obtained for vs as Hebr. 10.19 By the blood of Iesus we may be hold to enter into the holy place and other places are cited to the same effect Contra. 1. It is true that Christ onely by his death and other his holy sufferings paied the ransome and bare the punishment due vnto our sinne but seeing Christs blood had beene of no value if he had not beene most perfectly righteous his obedience and righteousnes must as well concurre vnto the remission of sinnes as his death and this is that which S. Peter saith 1. Pet. 1.19 We are redeemed with the pretious blood of Christ as of a Lâ—â—â—e vndefiled and without spot and c. 3.18 Christ hath once suffered for sinnes the iust for the vniust the innocencie then and integritie of Christ must be ioyned with Christs blood to make it an acceptable sacrifice 2. Whereas there are two parts of our iustification the remission and not imputing of sinnes and the imputation of Christs righteousness which two are not separated neither can the one stand without the other neither can there be any remission of sinnes vnlesse Christs righteousnes be imputed as S. Paul saith 1. Cor. 5.21 He hath made him to be sinne 〈◊〉 that knew no sinne that we should be made the righteousnes of God in him the merit of Christs obedience and righteousnes must needes concurre in the remission of sinnes yea Piscator in his annotation vpon the 4. v. confesseth that these words blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiuen idem valere to be as much in effect as to say blessed are they to whom iustice is imputed 3. But that seemeth to be a more straunge assertion to denie that possessio vitae eternat tanquam effectum adscribitur obedientiae Christi the possession of eternall life is ascribed as an effect to Christs obedience which is directly affirmed by the Apostle Hebr. 7.26 Such an high Priest it became vs to haue which is holy harmelesse vndefiled separate from sinners and made higher then the heauens what hath made Christ higher then the heauens but his holines perfection integritie and therefore he is able perfectly to saue them that come vnto God v. 25. 4. And further that we are iustified by Christs obedience the Apostle sheweth Rom. 5.13 As by one mans disobedience many were made sinners so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous here the Apostle saith directly that we are made righteous by the obedience of Christ. Piscator here answereth that by Christs obedience here is vnderstood his obedience in submitting himselfe willingly vnto death in which it was his fathers will he should suffer for vs. Contra. Our iustification consisteth of two parts of the remission of our sinnes and the making of vs iust before God the one is procured by Christs death the other is purchased by his obedience and righteousnes and that the Apostle speaketh not onely of Christs obedience vnto death but generally of his whole course of righteousnes both in life and death is euident because he calleth it the gift of righteousnes v. 17. and the raigning of grace
torments which had not sinned by their owne will in 9. c. Iob. so also Augustine but he saith mitissima omnium pana erit eorum their punishment shall be most gentle and easie of all other which beside originall sinne haue added none other sinnes c. and this may be safely affirmed with Augustine But that when followeth hath more doubt non audeo dicere quodijs vt nulli essent quà m vt ibi essent sotius expediret I dare not say that it were better for them not to be at all then to be there Augustine Enchirid. c. 93. Controv. 22. That Christs essentiall iustice is not infused into vs. v. 17. Much more shall they which receiue abundance of grace c. Osiander did hold not Lucas Osiander who hath written breefe annotations vpon the old and new Testament but another of that name before him that the iustice of Christ is some reall thing infused into the faithfull and that it was his essentiall iustice as he is God that is communicated to the faithfull ex Faio in v. 17. But the Apostle euidently refuteth this error c. 4.22 where he sheweth that it was imputed vnto Abraham for righteousnes because he beleeued in God if we are iustified by faith then not by the essentiall iustice of Christ which still remaineth in Christs person as the subiect thereof but the righteousnesse whereby we are iustified before God is the righteousnes of Christ as he is man which is apprehended by faith and this also is euident in this place where the Apostle ascribeth iustification to the abundance of grace receiued and how is it receiued but by faith Controv. 23. Against the patrones of vniuersall grace v. 18. By the iustifying of one the benefit abounded toward all men c. Hence of 〈◊〉 Huberus and before him the Pelagians would prooue that the benefit of iustification is as vniuersall toward all euen infidels and vnbeleeuers as the condemnation that came in by Adam for the Apostle on both sides nameth all for otherwise the benefite by Christ should be inferiour vnto the losse in Adam which redounded generally vpon all Contra. 1. This tearme of vniuersalitie all must be restrained according to the nature of the subiect as Adam transfused his sinne vnto all which were his ofspring so Christ also iustifieth all his that is all which beleeue in him so by all the Apostle vnderstandeth the vniuersall companie of the faithfull 2. the preheminence of the benefit consisteth not in the equalitie of the number that Christ should saue as many as are lost in Adam for then there should be onely an equalitie not a superioritie 3. But herein is the prerogatiue of grace seene 1. in the excellencie of the effect for life is a more excellent thing then death and righteousnesse then sinne 2. in the powerfulnesse of the worke it sheweth a greater power to saue then to destroie to iustifie then condemne for it is an easier matter to destroie then to saue to pull downe then to build vp to mortifie then to reviue and raise to life 3. the preheminence is in the amplitude and largnes of grace in that we are iustified not onely from one but all kind of sinnes as well actuall as originall whereas originall sinne is onely deriued from Adam See more hereof quest 15. Controv. 24. Against the Popish inherent iustice v. 9. So by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous c. The Romanists as Bellar. lib. 2. de iustificat c. 1. Pererius disputa 17. doe much vrge this argument against imputatiue iustice that we are not iustified by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed by faith but by an inherent righteousnesse wrought in vs by Christ whereby we are formally made iust because we are so made righteous and iust in Christ as we became sinners in Adam but that was not by imputation of Adams sinne but by sinne dwelling in them whereby they are formally made sinners therefore we are formally made righteous by an inherent iustice remayning in vs and not imputed onely Pererius further vrgeth the phrase iusti constituentur many shall be made iust which is not all one as to be reputed iust or to be iust by imputation but to be iust indeed Contra. 1. The comparison betweene Adams disobedience and Christs obedience doth hold verie well euen in this point of imputation for as there is in making of vs sinners both an imputation of Adams sinne to his posteritie as comming out of his loines as also an habituall prauitie and corruption of nature the effect thereof so their is a double operation of Christs obedience both it is imputed vnto vs by faith whereby we are iustified before God and thereby there is wrought in vs holines and righteousnesse which is our sanctification but by this because it is imperfect in this life we are not iustified before God 2. and whereas the Apostle vseth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 constituentur shall be made or constituted iust we confesse that he meaneth they shall be made iust indeede in Christ but therefore the word is put in the future tence because in this life our sanctification is but begun it shall not be absolutely perfect till the next life when all imperfection and impuritie of our nature shall be cleane taken away and then shall we be made perfectly iust indeed See a more full answer to this obiection Synops. Centur. 4. er 56. 3. But if they shall further replie that we are rather made sinners by the reall corruption of our nature then by the imputation of Adams sinne and so consequently we should rather be iustified by an inherent righteousnesse then imputed onely we answer that herein appeareth the preheminence of grace that Christs righteousnesse onely imputed is more able to iustifie vs then Adams sinne onely imputed was to condemne vs. Controv. 25. That we are iustified both by the actiue and passiue obedience of Christ. Piscator in his annotations vpon this verse vrgeth this point that we are not iustified by the obedience of Christ in his life which was his actiue obedience but by his passiue obedience in his death because if we be iustified by his righteousnesse acted in his life then should he not haue needed to haue died for vs for beeing iustified alreadie by the righteousnesse of his life there was no cause for Christ to be punished for vs beeing alreadie made iust by his righteous life Contra. 1. Though the Apostle doe principally meane the particular obedience of Christ in submitting himselfe to his fathers will in his death to giue his life for his sheepe as it is opposed to Adams particular disobedience in eating of the forbidden fruite which was in re facillima in a thing most easie to haue beene kept whereas Christs obedience was in re dissicillima in a most hard difficult thing to giue himselfe for vs euen vnto death yet this his particular obedience in his death depended vpon the generall obedience of
in fulfilling and performing it he hath perfited the ceremoniall law beeing the substance whereof the ceremonies were but shadowes he hath performed the morall law both in his actiue obedience in fulfilling euery part thereof by his holy life and by his passiue obedience in bearing the curse and punishment due by the law for vs and in this sense Augustine saith Christus sinis legis perficiens non interficiens Christ is the perfiting not the destroying end of the law tract 55. in Iohn Of all these the second and last interpretation are most agreeable to the scope of the Apostle who in these words bringeth a proofe of that which he said before that the Iewes were ignorant of the righteousnesse of God because they were ignorant of Christ the true end of the law both directly in respect of Christ who fulfilled the law and was in all things obedient vnto it which thing the law intended and indirectly in respect of vs whose weakenesse it discouereth in not beeing able to keepe the law and so directeth vs to Christ beeing therein a schoolemaster to vs as the Apostle saith Gal. 3. â—â— Quest. 7. How Christ is said to be the end of the law seeing the law requireth nothing but the iustice of workes The law is taken two wayes 1. more largely for the whole doctrine contained in Moses and the Prophets and in this sense the law directly maketh mention of Christ as in this place Saint Paul doth prooue the righteousnesse of faith by the testimonie of Moses as our Sauiour himselfe also saith had you beleeued Moses you would haue beleeued me he wrote of â—â— Ioh. 5.46 2. The law is taken more strictly for the precepts onely of the morall law wherein although faith in Christ be not directly commanded yet it is implied and intended in which sense Christ is said to be the end of the law in these three respects 1. in respect of his personall obedience and righteousnesse which the law required 2. in regard of the satisfaction by Christs death for the punishment due by the law 3. and in iustifying vs by faith in him that is our righteousnesse whereunto the law bringeth vs as a schoolemaster leading vs vp by the hand as the glasse shewing the spottes doth admonish the beholder to mend them so the law discouering our sinnes sendeth vs to seeke out the onely true Physitian to heale them Quest. 8. That Christ is not the end of the law that we by grace in him should be iustified in keeping of the law 1. Pererius saith that Christ is said to be the end that is the perfection and consummatioÌ„ of the law quia fide in Christo impetratur gratia c. because that by faith in Christ grace is obtained to fulfill and keepe the law disput 1. numer 2. and Stapleton Antidot p. 617. insisteth vpon the same point that by this fulfilling of the law which we obtaine by faith in Christ we are iustified Contra. 1. We denie not but this also is one of the ends of our comming to Christ to shew our obedience in keeping Gods commandements as Zacharie saith in his song Luk. 2.75 That we beeing deliuered out of the hand of our enemies should serue him c. in holines and righteousnesse all the daies of our life yet this is neither required as the principall end which is to be iustified by faith in Christ as here the Apostle saith neither is this our obedience enioyned to that end that we should be iustified thereby for we are iustified by faith before we can bring forth any fruits of obedience and therefore by such workes as follow our iustification we are not iustified and beside our obedience is imperfect and can not iustifie vs in the sight of God but this our obedience is necessarie to shew our conformitie vnto Christ and to iustifie our thankfulnes for the benefit receiued by Christ and to be a pledge and an assurance of our perfect regeneration in the next life 2. Herein then Christ is the end of the law that we by faith in him which hath fulfilled the law perfitly should be iustified without the fulfilling of the law in our selues 1. for the Apostle saith not Christ is the end of the law to euery one fulfilling the law but to euery one that beleeueth 2. this end would take away the force of Christs death for to giue vs grace to fulfill the law our selues it was not necessarie that Christ should haue died for he might by his diuine power without his death haue conferred that grace vpon vs. 3. and againe if Christ gaue vs power to keepe the law our selues this were to establish our owne righteousnesse for that is our owne righteousnesse which is performed by vs though not by our owne strength but the doctrine of faith doth not establish our owne righteousnesse Quest. 9. What life temporall or spirituall is promised to the keepers of the law v. 5. 1. Origen vpon this place thinketh that the law onely promised to the obseruers thereof temporall not eternall life so likewise Theodoret Ambrose Anselme Lyranus Tolet annot 5. Pererius disput 1. numer 3. doe vnderstand it of escaping onely corporall death which was inflicted vpon the transgressors of the law as idolaters adulterers murtherers But this were no great benefit seeing many vngodly men might be free from these offences which by the law were punished by death and yet in other points might be offenders against the law 2. Augustine lib. de spirit lit c. vnderstandeth it of the spirituall life of faith and iustification thereby per fidem concilians iustificationem facet legis iustitiam vivat in ea c. he that hath obtained iustification by faith doth the righteousnesse of the law and may liue thereby But this were to confound the law and the Gospel whereas the Apostle here speaketh onely of the righteousnesse which the law requireth 3. The law then promised eternall life vnto the obseruers thereof but that it was impossible for any perfitly to keepe the law so Chrysostome well interpreteth that men should haue beene iustified in keeping of the law if it had beene possible but because it was not possible iustitia illa intercidit that iustice falleth to ground our Sauiour also saith If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandements Matth. 19.16 meaning eternall life as the young man had asked the question what he should doe to haue eternall life Pererius answeareth that this must be vnderstood of a iust man which out of a liuely charitie keepeth the commandements But Christ there speaketh not of the iustice of faith working by loue but of such keeping and obseruing of the commandements as the law required if any could haue attained vnto it for as the question was not of beleeuing but of doing what shall I doe so Christ maketh his answer of such iustice as was required by the law 4. But if the law doe promise and propound eternall life to the obseruers
and keepers thereof how doth the Prophet Ezech. c. 20.25 call them statutes that are not good the answer is that the law of it selfe promiseth life but in respect of mans weaknes that is not able to keepe the law it is not good because it bringeth death and so Moses saith Deut. 30.15 I haue set before you this day life and death c. the law was life to them that had power to keepe it which none haue in this life but death vnto the trangressors Faius Quest. 10. Whether Paul did of purpose alleadge that place of Moses Deuter. 30.12 or allude onely vnto it 1. Some thinke that Moses in that place directly speaketh of the law according to the literall sense and Saint Paul by a certaine allusion applieth that vnto faith which Moses vttereth of the law so Theodoret Chrysostome Oecumenius likewise Tostatus vpon that place Paul per quandam concordantiam transtulit ad fidem Paul by a certaine agreement hath translated this place and applyed it vnto faith Vatablus also saith that Paul followeth not Moses sense but some words But this would extenuate the force of S. Pauls argument if he should allude onely vnto this place of Scripture and not confirme that which he intended by the same and the Apostle himselfe saith that the iustice of faith thus speaketh that is as Origen expoundeth Christ who is our iustice by faith thus speaketh by the mouth of Moses wherefore Moses in that place speaketh of the iustice of faith 2. Some thinke that S. Paul followeth not the litterall but the mysticall sense of Moses thus Lyranus thinketh that the booke called Deuteronomie the second law was a figure of the Gospel which was indeede a newe and a second law and that this was figuratiuely spoken of the gospel that as they needed not goe to heauen or to the furthest parts of the Sea to fetch the Law because it was neere them as it were put into their mouth by Moses so neither neede they nowe seeke farre for the knowledge of Christ either to heauen or hell seeing he was euidently preached by the Apostles this sense also followeth Bellarmine de grat liber arbit lib. 5. c. 6. But that Moses speaketh not of the precepts of the law in that place is euident because he sheweth the facilitie of them it is in thy mouth and heart to do it c. but it was not so easie a thing to performe the Lawe Bellarmine answeareth with Tostatus that Moses speaketh not of the performing but of the knowledge of the lawe whereas the words are directly to do it Sotus in his commentarie thinketh that Moses speaketh of the externall obseruation of the law which was readie at hand but for the internall and spirituall obedience they were to expect further grace But Moses speaketh directly of the inward obedience it is in thy mouth and in thy heart c. 3. Some thinke that the Apostle applyeth that testimonie vttered by Moses of the lawe vnto the Gospel by an argument from the lesse to the greater that if Moses gaue such commendation of the lawe much more is it true of the Gospel But the Apostle sheweth the iustice of faith to be a farre different thing from the iustice and righteousnes of the law and therefore not to differ onely as the lesse and greater but as things of a diuerse nature 4. Wherefore it may be more safely affirmed that the Apostle citeth this verie place out of Moses as Origen thinketh haec à Deuteronomio assumpta sunt these words are taken out of Deuteronomie yet the Apostle as an interpreter alledgeth them omitting some things in Moses and inserting some other by way of exposition as that is to bring Christ againe from aboue and to bring Christ againe from the dead and some words he altereth as that which Moses calleth the Sea S. Paul nameth the deepe which in effect is the same to this purpose Iun. in parall 16. lib. 2. Faius and Pet. Martyr affirmeth that it is so euident a thing that Moses here speaketh of Christ that certaine great Rabbines among the Iewes confesse that Moses in all that 30. chapter of Deuteronomie hath reference to Christ yet Pareus inclineth to thinke S. Paul here vseth but an allusion to that place of Moses dub 6. Quest. 11. Whether Moses in that place directly speaketh of the righteousnesse of faith 1. Tolet annot 6. and likewise Caietan which take this place to be alleadged by Moses in the litterall sense doe thinke that Moses speaketh of the circumsion and conuersion of the heart vnto God which belongeth vnto the righteousnesse of faith that when God should conuert and turne their heartes they should then not find it an hard and difficult thing to keepe the commandements of God Pet. Martyr much dissenteth not that Moses then simply speaketh not of the precept of the law but vt iam per gratiam facile factu erat but as now made easie by grace and faith in Christ so also M. Calvin denieth not but that Moses in that place speaketh of the obseruation of the law but ex suo fonte diducit he fetcheth it from the fountaine and originall thereof namely the iustice of faith 2. Some thinke that Moses in that place speaketh not onely of the law sed de vniuerso doctrina but of the whole doctrine which he hath taught which was not onely legall but contained many euangelicall promises But the words of Saint Paul are against both these interpretations The righteousnesse which is of faith speaketh on this wise c. and this is the word of faith which we preach therefore Moses onely in that place speaketh of the word of faith 3. Wherefore their opinion is to be preferred who thinke that Moses in that place directly treateth of the doctrine of faith and not by way of consequent onely as Iunius well obserueth because Moses saith this commandement which I command thee this day but that day Moses deliuered not the precepts of the law which were giuen before but of faith and so the Apostle ex consilio Mosis by the counsell and according to the meaning of Moses himselfe applyeth this place vnto Christ Iun. lib. 2. parall 16. so also Faius est apposita loci applicatio c. it is a fit application of that place likewise Osiander it is no doubt but that S. Paul appositissime allegaverit most fitly aptly applied that place of Moses to his purpose Quest. 12. By what occasion Moses maketh mention in that place of the Gospel and of the meaning of the words 1. Origen thinketh that Moses and the Apostles intendment is this to shew that Christ is euerie where that he is not onely in heauen and in earth but in euerie place to the same purpose Haymo he instructeth vs by these words ne putemus Christum localem esse that we should not thinke that Christ is confined to a place But this is not to the Apostles purpose for of this
mouthes and nothing els doth God require vnto saluation so Chrysost. in ore corde tuo salutis causa in thy heart and mouth is the casue of saluation so Oecumen brevis salus nihil indigens externis laboribus saluation hath but a short cut it needeth not externall labour facile credere animo ore confiteri potes c. thou mayest easily beleeue with thy minde and confesse with thy mouth by the operation of the spirit Calvin and it seemeth to be a proverbiall speach to shewe the readines and facilitie of that which is in the heart and mouth as it is said Psal. 81.10 Open thy mouth wide and I will fill it Faius so Lyranus ostenditur iustitiae per fidem Christi facilitas the facilitie of righteousnesse by the faith of Christ is shewed And here Origens distinction may be receiued who saith that two waies is Christ neere vs possibilitate in possibilitie and so he may be neere vnto vnbeleeuers for they may haue grace to beleeue and efficacia in efficacie and power and so he is neere vnto those which actually by the spirit doe beleeue with the heart and confesse to saluation 4. But where the iustice of faith is said to be easier then the iustice required by the law that is not vnderstood in regard of the beginning and efficient cause of faith for man hath no more power to beleeue of himselfe then to doe good workes for it is God that worketh iâ— vs both the will and deede Philip. 2.13 but the righteousnesse of faith is easier in regard of the manner of the work because the law requireth the obedience thereof to be performed by our selues but faith referreth vs for the performing of the lawe vnto Christ Neither doth our saluation depend vpon the force and efficacie of faith but vpon the worthines and vertue of Christ apprehended by faith as when a sicke man walketh leaning vpon his staffe it is his staffe that stayeth him not his hand which onely layeth hold vpon the staffe The iustice of the law is as if a weake and sicke man should be enioyned to stand by himselfe without a staffe but faith sheweth how our weakenes is propped and held vp by other helps â—s when a sicke man layeth his hand vpon a staffe Quest. 14. How Moses that preached the law is alleadged for iustification by faith Ob. The obiection is made out of that place Ioh. 1.17 The lawe was giuen by Moses but grace and truth came by Iesus Christ c. but if Moses also taught iustification by faith then grace also came by him Answ. 1. Pet. Martyr answeareth that Moses is said to giue the law because his principall intendment was to propound the law yet he giueth testimonie also to the Gospell because Christ was the ende of the lawe as the Apostles in the new Testament preach repentance which belongeth to the law but their principall scope and intent is to set forth the faith of the Gospell 2. Hereunto for more full answear may be added that the lawe giuen by Moses is taken two wayes either strictly for the precepts of the morall law and so Moses was the minister of the lawe onely and not of grace or for the whole doctrine deliuered by Moses wherein also Euangelicall promises are contained Quest. 15. How Christ is to be confessed v. 9. If thou shalt confesse with thy mouth c. 1. S. Paul here placeth the confession of the mouth first both because he followeth that order which Moses did who nameth it first and for that we doe not knowe the faith of others that beleeue in Christ but by their confession Mart. Pareus 2. By confession is vnderstood not a bare and naked acknowledgment of Christ but the invocation of his name beleeuing in him giuing praise vnto him and whatsoeuer belongeth vnto his worship and this must be such a confession as is ioyned with the beleefe of the heart and not with a generall and historicall beleefe onely such as the deuills haue but a confident trust in Christ in beleeuing him to be our redeemer and Sauiour 3. Here we are to consider of fowre sorts of men 1. some neither confesse Christ nor beleeue and they are atheists 2. some beleeue and confesse not they are timorous and fearefull as Peter when he denied his Master 3. some confesse and beleeue not such are hypocrites 4. some both confesse and beleeue and they are right Christians 4. The Apostle maketh speciall mention of the raising of Christ from the dead 1. because this was the most doubted of his death the Iewes and Gentiles confessed but his resurrection they would not acknowledge Mart. 2. and vnlesse Christ had risen againe all the rest had profited vs little because in his resurrection he obtained a perfect victorie ouer death hell and damnation Calvin 3. and this article of Christs resurrection praesupponis alios articulos presupposeth other articles of the faith and taketh them as graunted as if he rose he died and his death presupposeth his birth Gorrhan Quest. 16. How Christ is said to be raised by God 1. By God in this place is not necessarie to vnderstand the person of the father but the power of the Godhead in the whole Trinitie whereby Christ as man was raised vp So Christ as man was raised vp by the power of his father but as he is one God with his father so he is said to raise vp himselfe Iohn 2.18 Christ is also said to be raised by the spirit of sanctification Rom. 1.4 so then Christ is here considered three wayes as beeing one God with his father as the second person in the Trinitie and as he was man as he is God he onely raiseth is not raised as he is man he is onely raised and raiseth not as he is the Son of God he both raiseth himselfe and the father raiseth him the father raiseth the Sonne by the Sonne and the Sonne raiseth himselfe by the spirit of sanctification whereby he was declared to be the Sonne of God Rom. 1.4 Pareus annot in v. 9. 2. And generally concerning the workes of the Trinitie there is a threefold difference to be obserued for there are some workes wherein the Blessed Trinitie doe concurre together both in their diuine essence and persons and they are ioynt workers as all those which are called extra workes without them as all things now ruled and gouerned by Gods prouidence are so gouerned by the whole Trinitie as Ioh. 5.17 My Father worketh hitherto and I worke and the spirit of God also worketh Psal. 104.30 If thou send forth thy spirit they are created some workes are proper and peculiar vnto the glorious persons of the Trinitie as those which are called ad intra the inward workes as the father begetteth the Sonne is begotten the holy Ghost proceedeth these are so peculiar vnto each of them that what is proper to one agreeth not vnto an other and thirdly some works there are wherein the Blessed
name of his father quia per cum sicut per nomen notificatur because by him as by a name the father is made knowne 6. But that other glosse of Origens here is verie corrupt that whereas he mooueth this question where the Apostle 1. Cor. 12.3 writeth to the Church at Corinth with all that call vpon the name of the Lord Iesus whom the Apostle should meane hereby as though these were not of the Church he resolueth that these which are said to call vpon c. are those which beleeue in Christ but yet are not fully sanctified nor ioyned to the Church but are but beginners and novices as it were in the faith whereas the Apostle in that addition meaneth those faithfull brethren which were in other parts of Achaia to whome he writeth as well as to the church of Corinthus as it appeareth in the inscription of his second epistle to the Corinthians c. 1.1 Quest. 19. Of the gradation here vsed by the Apostle v. 14. and the occasion thereof 1. Whereas the Apostle riseth vp by decrees they which doe invocate God must beleeue and beleefe presupposeth hearing and hearing preaching and preaching sending Chrysostome thinketh that hereby the Apostle intendeth to discouer the ignorance and incredulitie of the Iewes that it was their fault that they beleeued not on Gods behalfe there was no want and so he would haue it a proofe of his former charge that the Iewes were ignorant of the righteousnesse of God But if the Apostle directed his speach against the Iewes onely it should haue no coherence with that which went before where he shewed there was no difference betweene the Iew and Grecian 2. Neither yet as Lyranus saith arguitur hic infidelitas non credentium doth the Apostle in generall reprooue the infidelitie of those which beleeued not among the Gentiles he rather sheweth the contrarie that God was beleeued vpon among the Gentiles because he was there called vpon 3. Osiander taketh it that the Apostle by certaine degrees commeth to set forth the necessitie of the ministerie of the Gospell to make a difference betweene those among the Gentiles which truely invocate the name of God which cannot be where the ministerie of the Gospel is not and those which boast that they are the worshippers of God as the Turks but yet receiue not the ministerie of the Gospell 4. Gryneus following Beza maketh this the scope of the gradation that as invocation is a testimonie of faith faith of vocation vocation of election and saluation so invocation is a sure note of saluation and so they would haue it a proofe of the former proposition Whosoeuer calleth vpon the name of God shall be saued 5. Pareus thinketh the order to be this that as hitherto the Apostle had set forth the doctrine of iustification by faith and the difference betweene it and the iustice of the lawe so now he sheweth the meanes how this iustifying faith is obtained which is by hearing of the word preached by those which are sent thereunto 6. As this is true that the ordinarie meanes to beget faith is the preaching of the word so the Apostle hereby sheweth how the Gospel was to be preached vnto the Gentiles as well as to the Iewes because God had appointed them to beleeue in his name because his name should be called vpon among the Gentiles which could not be without faith nor faith without preaching nor preaching without sending and thus Saint Paul doth together iustifie the vocation of the Gentiles and his Apostleship and sending to preach among them to this purpose Calvin Martyr Hyperius Faius with others Quest. 20. Of these words v. 15. How bewtifull are the foete c. whether it be rightly cited out of the Prophet 1. The Apostle here leaueth the Septuagint and followeth the Hebrew text yet with some omission and alteration the Septuagint read thus adsum tanquam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in montibus I am present as pleasantnes or bewtie in the mountaines c. for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hora with an aspiration signifieth time opportunitie and bewtie and without an aspiration ara carefulnes the Apostle here rather followeth the Hebrew originall leauing the vulgar translation of the Septuagint 2. But he omitteth some things as these words vpon the mountaines because this did specially concerne the situation of Ierusalem but the Apostle applieth this text to the solemne embassage of the Apostles to the whole world and yet euen that part also of the prophesie was fulfilled in the Apostles who were first sent to preach the Gospel in Iudea which was a countrie full of hills and so discurrebant per montes they did goe vp and down vpon the hills And whereas the Prophet Isai 52.7 whence this place is taken doth speake in the singular number how beautifull are the feete of him that bringeth glad tidings the Apostle doth vse the plurall therein expressing the force of the Hebraisme which by the singular vnderstandeth the plurall 3. The Prophet in that place speaketh of the deliuerance of the people from the captiuitie of the Assyrians but because all those particular and temporal deliuerances were grounded vpon the spirituall deliuerance by Christ that place specially intendeth the spirituall ioy which the Church of God should haue in the message of their spirituall deliuerance Mar. Origen vpon this place and Cyrill vpon Isay likewise Ambrose epistol 11. doe interpret that place and applie it vnto Christ whom the Prophet speaketh of in the next verse before behold it is I that doe speake But seeing Saint Paul doth directly applie it to the preaching of the Apostles no other sense is to be followed and so also Tertullian lib. 3. cont Marcion expoundeth it of the Apostles 4. Their feete are said to be bewtifull 1. not as Origen in an allegoricall sense quia ambulabant per viam vitae because they did walke in the way of righteousnesse for this was not peculiar to the Apostles but common to all the faithfull 2. nor as Haymo because the Lord had washed their feete for Saint Pauls feete were not then washed 3. wherefore here by a figure membrum a part is put for the whole person Vatab. the message of the Apostles was welcome and their feete are named because they trauailed preaching the Gospel Par. and thereby is also signified that the Gospel should not be propagated by force and strength sed humili praedicatione but by a lowly and humble kind of preaching 4. and their feete are said to be bewtifull both in respect of the manner of their teaching which was alluring and delighting in respect of their sweete exhortations and holy life Tolet and the powerfull demonstration of the truth by miracles Martyr but especially in respect of the message it selfe which was the preaching of redemption by Christ. 5. But whereas the word vsed by the Prophet bashur signifieth simply to declare publish or bring tidings the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
them a way into heauen not to descend to suffer death and deliuer them from hell 2. There is not then any question remaining in the faithfull of their saluation either debitando by doubting how they shall goe to heauen or trepidando in beeing afraid of hellâ— but because our faith is not here perfect there may be some strife and wrastling in the soule betweene the assurance of faith and carnall infirmitie sometime the faithfull may aske question luctando in wrestling and striving against carnall distrust saying if God be with vs who can be against vs but at the length faith prevayleth and triumpheth resoluing that with the Apostle who shall separate vs 3. But here we must make a difference of feare faith expelleth not all feare but onely the slauish and seruile feare of hell and damnation ioyned with distrust and torment of conscience yet a filiall feare and reverent awe of God remaineth in the servants of God which is chiefely for the time past they feare to offend so gracious a God and mercifull a father they feare not for the sinnes alreadie committed which they are assured are forgiues â—â— Christ. 4. And this assurance and firme perswasion of saluation the Apostle insinuateth afterward where he speaketh in the second person to euerie faithfull person If thou shalt confesse with thy mouth c. thou shalt be saued signifying thus much that euerie one examining himselfe by the beleefe of his heart and confession of his mouth may vndoubtedly conclude that he is saued This maketh against the Popish vncertaintie and doubting of saluation Whereof see more Synops. Controv. 5. Against vnwritten traditions v. 8. This is the word of faith which we preach c. The Apostle here sheweth that the Gospel which he preached was agreeable to the Scriptures he preached no other thing then he here writeth and he writeth nothing but was consonant to the old Scriptures as Ireneâ— thus testifieth per Apostolos Evangelium pervenit ad nos c. by the Apostles the Gospell came vnto vs which they then preached but afterward by the will of God in the Scriptures they deliuered fundamentum columnam fidei nostra the foundation and piller of our faith c. lib. 3. c. 1. The Romanists then may be ashamed to flie vnto that vile and base refuge of the old Manichees to say that the Apostles preached some things and committed other to writing See Synops. Controv. 6. Against freewill v. 8. The word is neere thee c. Erasmus in his defense of freewill against Luther vrgeth this place to shew the power and strength of freewill in keeping the commandements and he presseth those other words of Moses non est suprate it is not aboue thee that is beyond thy strength Contra. 1. But the Latine translator there fayleth in the rendring of the right sense of the words which are is not hid from thee not which is not aboue thee 2. he speaketh of the facilitie of the commandements not by the power of freewill but by faith in Christ who hath fulfilled the law for vs and by whose grace we are enabled in some good measure to keepe the commandements of God which are not greeuous vnto vs which are iustified by faith and sanctified by the spirit 3. and if it be admitted that Moses there speaketh of the law his meaning onely is that the knowledge of the law was not hid from them neither was it farre off that they had neede fetch it from heauen or from the vtmost partes of the Sea it was present with them and continually in their mouth beeing rehearsed by the Priests and Levites so that nulla ignorantiae excusatio sit reliqua their remained no excuse of ignorance thus Luther answeareth Erasmus and Bellarmine also acknowledgeth that Moses there speaketh de facilitate non observandae sed cognoscendae legis of the facilitie of knowing not doing the law lib. 5. de grat c. 6. Controv. 7. Against Limbus Patrum that Christ went not downe thither to deliuer the Patriarkes v. 7. Say not who shall descend into the deepe that is to bring Christ againe from the dead the ordinarie glosse would inferre vpon these words that Christ descended into Limbus to fetch the Fathers from thence for he that saith who hath descended in a manner denieth that none descended thither and so not the Patriarks and consequently neither Christ who descended not nisi pro illis liberandis but to deliuer them Contra. 1. But Lyranus refuseth this interpretation vpon these two reasons because it is neither agreeable to that place of Moses Deuter. 30. which will beare no such sense nor yet vnto the words following where he expoundeth the descending into the deepe of the raysing of Christ from the dead v. 9. 2. Some of our owne expositors doe interpret this clause descending into the deepe thus that Christ subierit inferâ—â— dolores hath vndergone the verie dolours of hell for vs Calvin Martyr expoundeth it of the place of hell as if one of curiositie should aske who should goe downe to hell to certifie vs that Christ hath ouercome hell and damnation for vs. some vnderstand it of the graue as Lyranus Osiander to say who shall descend into the deepe is all one as to denie that Christ is risen from the dead but Moses for the deepe saith Sea which cannot properly be taken for the graue Some thinke that by going to heauen and descending to the deepe are meant things of great difficultie and impossible to shew that the Gospel requireth no such thing of vs to goe to heauen or hell Faius But beside this last it may be added further that by the confession of the death of Christ we are consequently deliuered from the feare of descending to hell that is of beeing condemned because by Christs death we are deliuered from the feare of hell so that he which remaineth stil fearefull of hell doubteth of the truth of Christs death and resurrection to this purpose Pareus See before qu. 12. Controv. 8. Whether the righteousnesse of faith and the righteousnesse of the law be one and the same or contrarie the one to the other 1. Stapleton affirmeth them to be the same Antidot p. 618. by these arguments 1. the law leadeth vs to no other righteousnesse but to the righteousnesse of the law but it leadeth also to faith in Christ therefore faith in Christ is that righteousnesse 2. the end of the law is the righteousnesse of the law and Christ is the end of the law therefore faith in Christ is the end of of the law 3. that which is perfect and imperfect doe not differ in kind as an infant and a man of perfect age the iustice of the law is imperfect the iustice of faith perfect they then differ no otherwise Contra. 1. The law directly intendeth the iustice of the law and indirectly it leadeth vnto Christ so it is false that it leadeth and directeth onely to the iustice of the law it
according to the possibilitie onely of our owne strength 4. neither is the instance brought in to the purpose for when a man is bidde to run perfectly the meaning is he should runne as fast as a perfect man may runne not one that is lame or halting so man in the state of his perfection might haue fulfilled the lawe though now he cannot since his nature hath beene lamed by sinne therefore by his owne example such charitie is commanded as man before his fall might haue performed 2. Now to the argument we answer 1. that he indeede that can loue his neighbour as he ought may fulfill the lawe but so none can loue Martyr and so to the same purpose Calvin that the Apostle sub conditione loquitur speaketh as it were vnder condition that is if a man can so loue his neighbour which condition no man can fulfill 2. But because the Apostle vseth this as an argument to perswade vnto loue because it is the fulfilling of the lawe we will graunt that the Apostle speaketh here of such a fulfilling as is possible but that is not a perfect keeping of the lawe which none can attaine vnto but as Beza saith non vnum praeceptum obijt he that loueth his brother is not readie to keepe one precept onely but all so as Pareus well distinguisheth he speaketh of fulfilling the lawe partibus non gradibus in the parts not in the degrees as he which loueth his brother will shewe it in all the parts of the lawe he will neither steale nor commit adulterie nor doe any other hurt vnto him but perfectly in the highest decree of charitie no man can keepe the lawe for the Apostle saith In many things we offend all Iam. 3.11 then no man can perfectly fulfill the lawe in this life 3. Gualter here hath an other answear that the Apostle speaketh not of the fulfilling of the whole lawe but onely de externis officijs of the externall duties yet he insisteth not vpon this answear for the Apostle speaketh of coueting which is no externall thing but acted in the heart the best answear then is that the Apostle speaketh not of an absolute or plenarie fulfilling of the lawe which is not in mans power but of a totall and generall fulfilling and keeping of euery commandement that loue will not content it selfe with doing of our dutie in one or two commandements but in the rest also 10. Controv. Against the Marcionites which denied the morall precepts to be now in force but to be ceased The Marcionites as Origen sheweth dialog 2. against them would prooue from hence that the old law euen in respect of the morall precepts was ceased because it is here saide loue is the fulfilling of the law Contra. But Origen answeareth well that charitie is an epitome or summe of the law but the epitome or summe taketh not away the things which are therein contained nay rather the contrarie followeth because charitie is the fulfilling of the morall law and charitie alwaies remaineth therefore also the morall law continueth still is not abrogated though the ceremonies be ceased neither are the iudicialls necessarily now enforced 11. Controv. Against iustification by the workes of the law v. 10. Loue is the fulfilling of the law From this place Stapleton inferreth that the keeping of the law is our iustice and that by the works of charitie we are iustified and thus he reasoneth The keeping of the law is iustice but he that loueth his brother keepeth the law Ergo to this purpose Stapl. Antidot p. 973. Contr. 1. The proposition is true if it be vnderstood of the perfect keeping of the law for if any in all points could keepe the law he should thereby be iustified as S. Paul alleadgeth out of the law Rom. 10.5 He that doth these things shall liue thereby 2. but so no man is able to fulfill the law in some measure the faithfull guided by grace doe performe the precepts of the law but perfectly in all points they can not keepe it for then they might be without sinne for sinne is the transgression of the law 1. Ioh. 3.4 and whosoeuer transgresseth the law sinneth but no man is in this world without sinne as the same Apostle saith If we say we haue no sinne we deceiue our selues 1. Ioh. 1.8 6. Morall obseruations 1. Observ. Of the office of the Magistrate in encouraging the good and punishing the euill v. 3. Princes are not to be feared for good works but for euill c. This ought to teach Magistrates that they should not abuse their authoritie in afflicting the good and sparing the euill as Iezabel did who maintained idolatrie sorcerie and adulterie in Israel 2. king 4.22 but persecuted the true Prophets but they must vse their authoritie to feare the euill and to be patrons to the good as the Apostle here saith they must be feared for euill works and not for good 2. Observ. That Magistrates should procure the common good and exercise true iudgement v. 4. He is the minister of God for thy wealth or good Here are two excellent parts of the Magistrates office described first because he is Gods minister he must consider that the iudgement is the Lords and therefore they ought to deale vprightly as Iehosaphac charged his iudges and officers 2. Chron. 19.6 Take heede what ye doe for ye execute not the iudgements of man but of the Lord c. and further the magistrate must propound to himselfe the good of the people not seeke his priuate gaine for he is ordained for their wealth for this is the difference betweene a good gouernor and an oppressor that the one studieth to profit the Commonwealth the other seeketh by laying heauie burthens vpon the people to enrich himselfe 3. Observ. How the Magistrate may comfort himselfe in his gouernment Whereas many cares and troubles are incident into the office of the Magistrate many dangers imminent and conspiracies intended he is herein to comfort himselfe that he is Gods minister and therefore he neede not to doubt but that God will assist his owne ordinance for it were impossible if the Lord did not guard and defend them that Princes could escape such perills as they are subiect vnto that saying then must animate and comfort them Touch not mine Annointed c. 1. Chron. 16.22 4. Observ. Of the vigilant care and painfull office of the Magistrate v. 6. Applying themselues to the same ende this sheweth that the Magistrate is called not to a place of pleasure and ease but of labour and care they must endeauour and applie themselues to this ende that is to seeke and procure the good of their subiects they watch when others sleepe and take care when their subiects are secure this well perceiued the King that said if one knew the cares that belong vnto the crowne and diademe they would not take it vp though it lay in the durt before them This should teach men not ambitiously to aspire to places of
Whether a Iudge be bound herein to be like vnto God to iudge according to the truth which he knoweth 5. qu. Of the reasons why the Lord vseth patience and forbearance towards sinners 6. qu. Whether the leading of men to repentance by Gods long suffrance argueth that they are not reprobate 7. qu. How the bountifulnes of God in leading men to repentance and the reuelation of his wrath spoken of ch 1.18 may stand together 8. qu. How God is said to harden the heart seeing the wicked doe harden their owne hearts 9. qu. Whether hardnes of heart and finall impenitencie be a speciall kind of sinne 10. qu. Whether it stand with Gods iustice to punish twice for the same sinnes 11. qu. Whether euery one shall be rewarded according to his works 12. qu. How it standeth with Gods goodnes to punish euill with euill 13. qu. Of the true reading of the 7. vers 14. qu. What the Apostle meaneth by patience of good works 15. qu. What glorie honour and immortalitie the Apostle speaketh of v. 7. 16. qu. How it standeth with Gods iustice to punish eternally sinne temporally committed 17. qu. How eternall life is to be sought 18. qu. Whome the Apostle meaneth by contentious and such as disobey the truth 19. qu. Of the punishment due vnto the wicked indignation wrath tribulation anguish c. v. 8. 20. qu. Why the Iewe is set before the Grecian 21. qu. What Iewes and Gentiles the Apostle here meaneth 22. qu. Of the diuers acception of the word person v. 11. 23. qu. How God is said not to accept the persons of men 24. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 22. As many as haue sinned without the law shall perish without the Law 25. qu. Of the occasion of these words v. 13. The hearers of the Law are not righteous before God but the doers shall be iustified 26. qu. Of the meaning of these words Not the hearers of the Law c. but the doers shall be iustified v. 13. 27. qu. How the Gentiles which had not the Law did by nature the things contained in the Law 28. qu. How any thing can be said to be written in the heart by nature seeing the mind is commonly held to be as a bare and naked table 29. qu. Of the Law of nature what it is 30. qu. What precepts the law of nature containeth and prescribeth 31. qu. What the law of nature was before and after mans fall and wherein they differ 32. qu. Whether the light of nature though much obscured can altogether be blotted out of the mind of man 33. qu. Whether ignorance of the law of nature in man doth make any way excusable 34. qu. That the light of nature is not sufficient of it selfe to direct a man to bring forth any vertuous act without the grace of Christ. 35. qu. Of the testimonie of the conscience the accusing or excusing of the thoughts 36. qu. Why the Apostle maketh mention of the day of iudgement v. 16. 37. qu. Why it is called the day and of the application of other words v. 16. 38. qu. Whence the Iewes were so called v. 17. Behold thou art called a Iewe. 39. qu. Of the priuiledges of the Iewes here recited by the Apostle 40. qu. How the Iewes are said to commit sasacriledge v. 22. 41. qu. How the name of God was blasphemed by the Iewes and whether this testimonie be rightly alleadged by the Apostle 42. qu. In what sense the Apostle saith Circumcision is profitable v. 25. 43. qu. How circumcision was availeable for infants 44. qu. What vncircumcised the Apostle here speaketh of whether such of the Gentiles as were conuerted to the faith and what keeping of the lawe he meaneth 45. qu. Of the explanation of certaine terms here vsed by the Apostle and of the letter and spirit 46. qu. Of two kinds of Iewes and two kinds of circumcision v. 28. Questions vpon the third Chapter 1. qu. Of the priviledges of the Iewes and of their preheminence before the Gentiles 2. qu. How mens vnbeleefe cannot make the faith of God without effect 3. qu. How God is said to be true 4. qu. How euery man is said to be a liar 5. qu. Whether euery man can be said to be a liar 6. qu. How the Prophet Dauid is to be vnderstood saying euery man is a liar Psal. 116.11 7. qu. Of the occasion of these words cited our of the 51. Psalme that thou mightest be iustified c. against thee onely haue I sinned 8. qu. Of the diuers acceptions of this word iustified 9. qu. Of the meaning of these words That thou mightest be iustified in thy words and ouercome when thou iudgest 10. qu. Whether a man may doe euill and commit sinne to that end to set forth Gods iustice 11. qu. Of the meaning of the 5 6 7 8 verses 12. qu. Whether none euill is to be done at all that good may come thereof 13. qu. Whether God doe not euill that good may come thereof in reprobating the vessels of wrath to shew his power 14. qu. In what sense the Apostle denieth the Iewes to be more excellent then the Gentiles v. 9. 15. qu. Of the meaning of certaine phrases which the Apostle vseth v. 9. We haue alreadie prooued and Vnder sinne 16. qu. Whence the Apostle alleadgeth those testimonies v. 10. to 18. 17. qu. Of the matter and order obserued by the Apostle in citing those testimonies 18. qu. How none are said to be iust seeing Noah and other holy men are reported to haue bin iust in their time 19. qu. Of the particular explication of the sinnes wherewith the Apostle here chargeth both Iewes and Gentiles 20. qu. v. 19. Whatsoeuer the Law saith what is here vnderstood by the Law and how diuersly this word is taken 21. qu. It saith to them which are vnder the Law who are here vnderstood to be vnder the law 23. qu. How no flesh is iustified by the works of the law v. 20. 24. qu. How the Apostle here denieth iustification by works seeing he said before c. 2. v. 13. that the doers of the Law are iustified 25. qu. How by the Law came the knowledge of sinne 26. qu. Of the meaning of these words The righteousnesse of God is made manifest without the law 27. qu. How the righteousnes of faith had witnes of the Law and Prophets 28. qu. Of these words v. 22. The righteousnes of God by the faith of Iesus Christ vnto all and vpon all 29. qu. What it is to be depriued of the glorie of God v. 23. 30. qu. Of iustification freely by grace v. 24. 31. qu. How God is said to haue purposed or set forth Christ to be our reconciliation 32. qu. How we are said to be iustified freely seeing faith is required which is an act in the beleeuer 33. qu. v. 25. To declare his iustice or righteousnes what iustice the Apostle vnderstandeth here 34. qu. What is meant by sinnes that are past v. 25. 35.
Chapter 1. qu. Of the generall scope and intendment of the Apostle in this Chapter 2. qu. How S. Paul prayeth for their saluation whom in the former Chapter he sheweth to be reiected of God 3. qu. Why the Apostle doth thus insinuate himselfe by professing his loue to the Iewes 4. qu. How the Iewes are said to haue zeale but not according to knowledge 5. qu. Why the Iewes ar said to stablish their owne righteousnes v. 3. 6. qu. How Christ is said to be the end of the lawe 7. qu. How Christ is said to be the end of the lawe seeing the Law requireth nothing but the iustice of workes 8. qu. That Christ is not the end of the law that we by grace in him should be iustified in keeping of the law 9. qu. What life temporall or spirituall is promised to the keepers of the law v. 5. 10. qu. Whether Paul did of purpose alledge that place of Moses Deut. 30.12 or allude onely vnto it 11. qu. Whether Moses in that place directly speaketh of the righteousnes of faith 12. qu. By what occasion Moses maketh mention in that place of the Gospel and of the meaning of the words 13. qu. Of these words the word is neere thee c. 14. qu. How Moses that preached the law is alleadged for iustification by faith 15. qu. How Christ is to be confessed 16. qu. How Christ is saide to be raised by God 17. qu. Whether to beleeue in the heart be not sufficient vnto saluation without confession of the mouth 18. qu. Of these words Whosoeuer calleth vpon the name of the Lord shall be saued v. 13. 19. qu. Of the gradation vsed here by the Apostle v. 14. and the occasion thereof 20. qu. Of these words v. 15. how beautifull are the feete c. whether it be rightly cited out of the Prophet 21. qu. Of these words v. 16. but they haue not all beleeued our report c. 22. qu. Of the saying of the Prophet Isai Lord who hath beleeued c. c. 53.1 cited by the Apostle v. 16. 23. qu. Whether all faith come by hearing 24. qu. Whether the Apostle meane the Iewes or Gentiles Haue they not heard v. 18. 25. qu. Whether that place of the 19. Psal. their sound went through all the earth be rightly cited by the Apostle 26. qu. Whether the Gospel were preached to all the world in the Apostles time 28. qu. How God prouoked the Iewes to envie by the Gentiles v. 19. 29. qu. Of these words Isaias is bold c. v. 20. 30. qu. Of these words All the day long haue I stretched forth my hands c. v. 21. Questions vpon the 11. Chapter 1. qu. Of the scope and intent of the Apostle in this chapter 2. qu. Why the Apostle maketh mention of the tribe of Beniamin whereof he was 3. qu. How God is saide not to cast off that people whome he knew before v. 2. 4. qu. Of Elias complaint vnto God concerning Israel 5. qu. Of Gods answer vnto Elias 6. qu. Of the Apostles collection inferred out of this answer made by Elias 7. qu. Of these words If of grace it is no more of works c. 8. qu. How it is said Israel obtained not that he sought v. 7. 9. qu. Of these words v. 8. As it is written God hath giuen them the spirit of slumber whence it is taken 10. qu. How God is said to send the spirit of slumber to giue eares not to heare c. 11. qu. Of the meaning of these words Let their table be made a snare c. v. 9. 12. qu. Whether it be lawfull to vse any imprecation as Dauid doth here 13. qu. Of the ende of the stumbling of the Iewes v. 11. 14. qu. How the stumbling and falling of the Iewes brought saluation to the Gentiles 15. qu. How the Iewes were prouoked to follow the Gentiles 16. qu. What is meant by the diminishing of the Iewes and their abundance v. 12. 17. qu. How it standeth with Gods iustice to cast off the Iewes that the Gentiles might enter in 18. qu. Why the Apostle maketh mention of his Apostleship and how he is said to magnifie his office v. 13. 19. qu. What the Apostle meaneth by these words v. 15. What shall the receiuing be but life from the dead 20. qu. What the Apostle meaneth by the first fruits and the whole lumpe the roote and the branches 21. qu. How the roote can make the branches holy seeing many branches did degenerate and by nature all are vnholy branches 22. qu. How Abraham is said to be the roote to be grafied into whereas we are said to be grafied into Christ c. 6.5 23. qu. What S. Paul meaneth by the wild olive and the grafting of it in v. 17. 24. qu. Of the meaning of these words Thou bearest not the roote but the roote thee 25. qu. Of these words v. 22. If thou continue in his bountifulnes 26. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 24. was grafted contrarie to nature 27. qu. What mysterie the Apostle here meaneth I would not haue you ignorant of this mysterie v. 25. 28. qu. Whether toward the end of the world the whole nation of the Iewes shall be converted 29. qu. Of the testimonies here cited by the Apostle how they are alleadged whence 30. qu. Of these words v. 28. As touching the Gospel they are enemies for your sakes c. 31. qu. Of the meaning of these words The gifts and calling of God are without repentance v. 24. 32. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 31. So now how haue they not beleeued by your mercie 33. qu. How God hath concluded and shut vp all in vnbeleefe v. 32. 34. qu. Of the Apostles exclamation v. 33. The deepenes of the riches c. 35. qu. How these words must be vnderstood Of him through him and for him are all things c. Questions vpon the 12. Chapter 1. qu. Why the Apostle vseth entreatie saying I beseech you brethren by the mercies c. v. 1. 2. qu. Why the Apostle addeth By the mercies 3. qu. Of sacrifices in generall v. 1. vpon these words A liuing sacrifice c. 4. qu. The generall obseruations of the sacrifice which the Apostle here requireth 5. qu. OF the conditions of this spirituall sacrifice in generall 6. qu. How we must not fashion our selues to this world v. 2 7. qu. Of our transforming by the newnes of minde 8. qu. Of these words That ye may prooue what the good will of God is acceptable and perfect c. v. 2. 9. qu. What the Apostle vnderstandeth by grace I say by grace c. 10. qu. What it is to vnderstand aboue that which is meete to vnderstand v. 3. 11. qu. What is vnderstood by the measure of futh 12. qu. Of the similitude which the Apostle taketh from the members of the bodie 13. qu. Of the best reading of the 6. v. seeing then we haue gifts which are diuers c. 14. qu. Of
opinion examined that our sinnes are remitted onely by Christs death not for the the obedience and merit of his life Controversies vpon the 5. Chapter 1. contr Whether a good conscience and integritie of life be the cause of peace with God 2. contr Against invocation of Saints 3. contr Of the certaintie of salvation and of perseverance 4. contr That the tribulation of the Saints is not meritorius though it be said to worke patience 5. contr That we are not iustified by the inherent habite of charitie 6. contr Against the heresie of impious Socinus who denieth that Christ died for our sinnes and payed the ransome for them 7. contr Against other obiections of Socinus and other impugning the fruit and efficacie of Christs death in reconciling vs to God his Father 8. con That Christs death was a full satisfaction for our sins against Socinus his cauils 9. contr That Christs death was not onely satisfactorie but meritorious against Socinus Certaine controversies touching Originall sinne 10. cont That there is originall sinne in men by the corruption of nature against the opinion of the Hebrewes 11. contr That Adaws sinne is entred into his posteritie by propagation not imitation onely against the Pelagians 12. contr Of the manner how originall sinne is propagated against the Pelagians where it is disputed whether the soule be deriued from the Parents 13. contr Against the Pelagians and Papists that originall sinne is not quite taken away in Baptisme 14. contr What originall sinne is against the Romanists and some some others and specially against them which hold it to be Adams sinne imputed onely to his posteritie 15. contr That originall sinne is not onely the privation of originall iustice 16. contr Of the wicked heresie of Marcion and Valentinus with the blasphemous Manichees 17. cont That all sinnes are mortall and worthie of death by nature 18. contr That Henoch and Elias are not yet aliue in the bodie 19. contr The Virgin Marie conceiued in originall sinne 20. contr Againe meritts 21. contr That the punishment of originall sinne is euerlasting death 22. contr That Christs essentiall iustice is not infused into vs. 23. contr Against the Patrons of vniuersall grace 24. contr Against the Popish inherent iustice 25. contr That we are iustified both by the actiue and passiue obedience of Christ. 26. contr Against the Philosophers who placed righteousnes in their owne workes 27. contr Against the Manichees and Pelagians the one giuing too much the other too little to the lawe 28. contr Of the assurance of salvation 29. contr Of the diuerse kinds of grace against the Romanists Controversies out of the 6. Chapter 1. contr Against the administring of the Sacraments in an vnknowne tongue 2. contr Concerning inherent iustice 3. contr That the Sacrament of Baptisme doth not conferre grace by the outward worke 4. contr That Baptisme serueth as well for the remission of sinnes to come as of sinnes past 5. contr Whether in Baptisme our sinnes be cleane taken away 6. contr Of the baptisme of infants 7. contr Of the assurance of salvation 8. contr That Christ shall not die in the next world againe for those which were not healed here 9. contr Against the Sacrifice of the Masse 10. contr Concerning freewill 11. contr That concupiscence remaining in the regenerate is properly sinne 12. contr Whether a righteous man may fal into any mortall or deadly sinne 13. contr Against the Manichees 14. contr Concerning inherent iustice 15. contr Against the power of freewill in the fruits of righteousnesse 16. contr Whether all death is the wages of sinne 17. contr Against the distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes 18. contr That everlasting life cannot be merited by good workes Controversies vpon the 7. Chapter 1. contr Against Purgatorie 2. contr Of the lawfulnes of second marriage 3. contr Whether the marriage bond be indissoluable before the one partie be dead 4. contr That the disparitie of profession is no cause of the dissolution of marriage 5. contr Whether the bill of diuorce permitted to the Iewes did lawfully dissolue matrimonie vnder the Law 6. contr Against the workes of propitiation 7. contr Against the Heretikes which condemned the Lawe 8. contr That we are freed by grace from the strict and rigorous observation of the lawe 9. contr That concupiscence though it haue no deliberate consent of the will is sinne forbidden by the commandement 10. contr That the commandement thou shalt not lust is but one 11. contr Against freewill Controversies out of the 8. Chapter 1. contr That concupiscence remaining euen in the regenerate is sinne and in it selfe worthie of condemnation 2. controver That none are perfect in this life 3. controver That regeneration is not the cause that there is no condemnation to the faithfull 4. contr Against the Arrians and Eunomians concerning the dietie of the holy Ghost 5. contr Against the Pelagians that a man by nature cannot keepe and fulfill the lawe 6. contr The fulfilling of the lawe is not possible in this life no not to them which are in the state of grace 7. con That not the carnall eating of Christs flesh is the cause of the resurrection but the spirituall v. 11. 8. contr Against merits 9. contr Whether in this life one by faith may be sure of salvation 10. contr Against the invocation of Saints 11. contr That a strange tongue is not to be vsed in the seruice of God 12. contr That euerlasting glorie cannot be merited 13. contr That hope iustifieth not 14. contr Whether hope relie vpon the merit of our workes 15. contr Against the naturall power and integritie of mans will 16. contr That predestination dependeth not vpon the foresight of faith or good workes 17. contr Against the opinion of Ambrosius Catharinus concerning predestination 18. contr That election is certaine and infallible of grace without merit and of some selected not generally of all 19. contr That the elect cannot full away from the grace and fauour of God and be wholly giuen ouer vnto sinne 20. contr Whether a reprobate may haue the grace of God and true iustice 21. contr That the elect by faith may be assured of euerlasting salvation Controversies out of the 9. Chapter 1. contr That succession of Bishops is no sure note of the Church of Christ. 2. contr Against the old heretikes the Manichees Arrians Nestorians confuted out of the 5. ver 3. contr Against the prophane and impious collections of Eniedinus and Socinus late heretikes 4. contr That the water in baptisme doth not sanctifie or giue grace 5. contr Against the vaine observation of Astrologers in casting of nativities 6. contr That the soules had no beeing in a former life before they came into the body 7. contr Whether the foresight of faith or workes be the cause of election 8. contr That not onely election vnto grace but vnto glorie also is onely of the good will of God 9. contr That the Apostle treateth as well of
the works of the law c. 3. And he sheweth directly c. 4.10 that Abrahams faith was imputed to him for righteousnes when as yet he was vncircumcised least his iustification might be thought to haue depended vpon his circumcision 4. Controv. Against the Marcionites which reiected the law of Moses These wicked heretikes too much depraued the law of Moses with the rites thereof as the other extolled it too much affirming that it was not appointed nor commanded by the good and gracious God but by the Prince of the darknes of this world But these also are sufficiently confuted in this epistle for S. Paul commendeth the ceremonies of the old Testament as fit for those times and figures of things to come as he calleth circumcision the seale of the righteousnes of faith c. 4.11 and this testimonie he giueth of the morall law Rom. 7.12 Wherefore the Law is holy and the commandement is holy iust and good c. 5. Controv. Against the Romanists which depraue the doctrine taught by S. Paul in this epistle Bellarmine in his controversies and Stapleton in his Antidotes doe apparantly impugne the holy doctrine of the Apostle in this epistle in diuers points 1. Iustification by the imputation and apprehension of faith which we call imputatiue iustice they condemne as a lie and vntruth whereas the Apostle directly teacheth c. 4.5 That to him that worketh not but beleeueth in him that iustifieth the vngodly faith is counted for righteousnes and v. 8. Blessed is he to whome the Lord imputeth not his sinne So that it is euident by the Apostle that our iustification before God is in the not imputing of sinne and in the imputing of Christs righteousnes by faith 2. The Romanists doe teach that a man as long as he liueth here can not be certen of faith whether he beleeueth of remission of sinnes whether he be iustified of reconciliation whether he be in the state of grace of adoption whether he be the child of God of life eternall whether he shall be saued Contrarie to the Apostle who sheweth that by faith we may be assured of all these as of remission of sinnes for otherwise we could not be at peace with God which we obtaine beeing iustified by faith c. 5.1 of adoption that by the spirit we can call God Abba father c. 8.15 of euerlasting saluation for there is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Iesus c. 8.1 3. Whereas the Apostle would haue euery soule subiect to the higher powers c. 13.1 they exempt all their Clergie from the power of the Magistrate and so in a manner the one halfe of the multitude for if their Cardinals Prelates Priests Monks Friers Pardoners with all their ministers be put together à media multitudinis puto vix aberit they will not want much of the halfe part Pareus in praefat But these controuersies shall more fully be handled when we come to deale with them afterward in particular 6. Controv. Against Socinus that blasphemously subuerteth the doctrine of our redemption by Christ and iustification by faith This blasphemous Socinus not many yeares since set forth a booke in Polonia wherein he maketh Christ no otherwise the Sauiour of the world then Moses in teaching the people by his example to liue well and so doing they shall inherit eternall life he further most impudently affirmeth that we haue no neede of any Reconciler or Redeemer with God but that he died for our sinnes no otherwise then the Martyrs not to make any satisfaction for vs but onely to giue vs example These and other such wicked assertions hath he published in that booke Pareus in praefat Thus this wicked heretike opposeth himselfe to the most holy doctrine of S. Paul who euidently teacheth that as faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousnes so is it to vs c. 4.24 and that when we were enemies we were reconciled vnto God by the death of Christ c. 5.10 and that by Christs obedience we are made righteous c. 5.19 But such wicked assertions neede no confutation it is sufficient to propound them for who can not that hath the least spark of grace but at the very first naming of them abhorre them 7. Controv. Whether Paul may be thought to haue beene married The Rhemists much mislike our English translation because we read Philip. 4.3 faithfull roake-fellow so translating the Greeke words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as though we thereby intended to prooue that S. Paul had a wife which they say is contrarie to the Apostles words 1. Cor. 7.8 where he wisheth the vnmarried to abide as he did Anxot Philip. 4.3 Contra. 1. The Protestants doe not much insist vpon it whether Paul had a wife or no neither doe they much vrge this place to that purpose yet Clemens Alexandrin out of this very place inferreth so much that the Apostle by yoake-fellow vnderstandeth his wife lib. 4. stromat Eusebius also is of the same mind that Paul was married ioyning him with Peter and Philip which were both married 2. Yet it followeth not because Paul was vnmarried when he writ vnto the Corinthians that he was so alwaies 3. And what though Paul were not married it is sufficient that he had libertie to take a wife as the other Apostles did 1. Cor. 9.5 Aretius But we will somewhat more distinctly yet consider of this question of S. Pauls mariage whereof there are diuers opinions 1. Some thinke that he was a perpetuall virgin and neuer maried of which opinion is Tertullian who calleth S. Paul Euangelicum spadonem custratum the Euangelicall Eunuch who had made himselfe chast and he saith further Petrum solum invento maritum I finde Peter onely of the Apostles to haue beene an husband lib. de Monogom So thinketh Hierome that Paul was a virgin epist. 22. And Epiphanius haeres 58. reckoneth among those qui perpetuo coluerunt virginitatem which were perpetuall virgins Helias in the old Testament and Paul in the new Ambrose likewise and Theodoret doe giue this reason that S. Paul before his conuersion was too young to be maried and after he was conuerted it is not like he desired mariage which he had neglected before Of the same iudgement are Theophylact Oecumenius Beda vpon the 7. c. 1. epist. ad Corinth The chiefe reason of Pauls virginitie they ground vpon these words 1. Cor. 7.8 I say vnto the vnmaried and vnto the widowes it is good for them if they abide euen as I. But this onely sheweth that S. Paul at that time was not maried not that he neuer had beene maried and that coniecture that Paul was not of age to be maried before he was conuerted hath no probabilitie seeing he was put in great authoritie by the high Priest of whome he receiued letters to persecute the Disciples at Damascus Act. 9.1 2. 2. An other opinion is that S. Paul had a wife both before his conuersion and after so Ignatius epist. ad Philadelphens Clemens Alexandr lib. 3. stromat Leo
Apostle setteth downe the sinnes of the Gentiles despitefull B. or contumelious L. doers of wrong G. proud boasters inuenters of euill things disobedient to parents without vnderstanding couenant breakers dissolute L.R. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not standing to composition without naturall affection such as can not be appeased without fidelitie L.R. truce breakers B.V. but that was said before mercilesse 31. Which knowing the iustice of God the righteousnes B. law G. right of God G.Be. iudgement of God the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iustice that they which doe such things are worthie of death Be. B.G.V. not did not vnderstand that they which doe such things are worthie of death L. for these words did not vnderstand are not in the originall nor that it condemneth to death those which doe such things T. for the word is in the plural are worthie of death but fauour G. or applaud Par. or haue pleasure in B. or patronize Be. not consent L. the word signifieth more then a bare consent those which doe them 2. The Argument and parts of the Chapter IN this Chapter the Apostle after the salutation and exordium of the Epistle falleth to prooue iustification by faith against the Gentiles first shewing their manifold sinnes and bad works whereby they were so farre from beeing iustified that thereby they incurred euerlasting damnation The parts are 1. the inscription to v. 8. 2. the exordium or introduction to the matter to v. 17. 3. the proposition and argument concerning iustification by faith v. 17.18.4 the confirmation or proofe tow 31. 1. The inscription or salutation sheweth 1. the person that saluteth and sendeth greeting which is Paul described by his office and calling in generall a seruant of Iesus Christ in speciall an Apostle to what ende to preach the Gospel v. 1. which is set forth 1. by the antiquitie v. 2.2 the excellencie of the subiect thereof Christ Iesus who is described by the singularitie of his person God and man v. 3.4 and by his office set forth in generall by the worke of our redemption which was finished by his sanctification and resurrection v. 4. and in speciall he was the author of the conuersion and calling of the Apostle v. 5.3 by the effect of the Gospel to winne obedience to the faith among the Gentiles 2. The persons saluted are the Romanes whom he setteth forth by their externall condition generall they were Gentiles speciall at Rome and spirituall what they were called by whom by Christ to what to be Saints v. 6.7 3. The salutation it selfe v. 7. he wisheth vnto them grace and peace 2. In the exordium or proeme 1. there is his gratulation or giuing of thanks for their faith v. 8.2 the testification of his loue toward them confirmed by an oath in which his loue is expressed by two effects 1. his earnest prayer to God to come vnto them v. 9.10 2. his longing desire in himselfe to see them v. 11. with the ende v. 12.3 a preoccupation of a question or purgation of himselfe that he yet came not vnto them where he sheweth 1. the lets of his purpose v. 13.2 his purpose which yet he continued to come vnto thē which is confirmed both by the end to haue some fruit among them v. 13.2 and by his calling in generall he was a debter to all the Gentiles who are set forth by distribution v. 14. in speciall and so consequently he was readie to preach the Gospel vnto them And by this mention made of the Gospel he taketh occasion to passe vnto the matter 3. The third part is the proposition that iustification is by faith where we haue first the occasion whereupon he bringeth it in I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ then the proposition it selfe that the Gospell is the power of God to saluation to euerie one that beleeueth v. 16. and the proofe thereof taken from the Prophet Habacuke v. 17. 4. The fourth part is the confirmation of this proposition that men are iustified by faith which he sheweth by this disiunction they are either iustified by faith or by workes but not by workes which he prooueth by this distribution first that the Gentiles cannot be iustified by workes in this chapter to the 17. v. of the next then that neither the Iewes can chalenge any thing by their workes thence to the ende of the 2. chapter the Gentiles cannot be iustified by their workes because by their workes beeing full of impietie and iniquitie they are made guiltie of eternall death and of the wrath of God the argument standeth thus they which are full of impietie and iniquitie are subiect to the wrath of God this proposition is expressed v. 18. But the Gentiles are such full of impietie and iniquitie Ergo the assumption or second part is prooued distributiuely first their impietie is shewed toward God to v. 28. then their iniquitie toward men v. 32. In the proofe of their impietie first the sinne is shewed then the punishment their sinne in that wittingly and against their knowledge they depraued the worship of God their knowledge is set forth both by the light of nature in them v. 19. and by the creatures v. 20. their deprauation of Gods worship is expressed in the causes their vnthankefulnesse which brought forth vanitie of minde and foolishnesse v. 21.22 the effect in worshipping corruptible things in stead of God v. 23. then the punishment followeth they were giuen vp to their hearts lusts v. 24. 2. As they depraued Gods worship wittingly against their knowledge so they did it willingly their sinne is shewed in their voluntarie forsaking of the Creator v. 25. their punishment in beeing giuen ouer both women and men to vile affections v. 26.27 Then followeth the demonstration of their iniquitie which consisted 1. both in doing things not comely which is declared both by shewing the cause thereof then beeing giuen ouer to a reprobate mind procured by their contempt and wilfull neglect of the knowledge of God v. 28. and by a particular enumeration of the diuerse sinnes which they committed the seuerall distribution whereof see afterwards qu. 72. 2. they did not onely commit such things themselues but they also fauoured and patronized such as did them v. 32. so then the conclusion must followe that the Gentiles made themselues by those their euill workes worthie of death and so consequently thereby depriued themselues of life and saluation 3. The questions and doubts discussed Quest. 1. Why Paul setteth his name before this epistle 1. Chrysostome giueth this reason why neither Moses prefixeth his name before his bookes not yet the Euangelists Mathew Marke Luke Iohn before their gospels ille quippe praesentibus scribentes c. for they writing vnto these which were present had no cause to set to their names But Paul quia longe remotis scribebat c. because he did write to those which were a farre off had reason to set to his name after the manner of epistles
such examples of vnnaturall inhumanitie as Cambyses Remus Romulus and such like Gualter such was Cain Ismael Esau to their brethren The Stoicks among the heathen depriued a wise man of all affection and so doe the wicked Catabaptists among Christians Bucer 22. Such as can neuer be reconciled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some reade absque faedere without fidelitie Lat. such as breake all truces and leagues but they were noted before trucebreakers Lyranus taketh them to be such as would hold no friendship with any but such men were also spoken of before loc 10. they are therefore such as were implurable that beeing once offended would neuer be reconciled againe Mart. Pareus with others such was Saul that would by no meanes be appeased toward Dauid Marlorat 23. Mercilesse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as had no bowels of compassion neither pitied the miseries and calamities of others as among the heathen their cruell warres and bloodshed when they spared neither man woman nor children and their bloody spectacles and sword-playes when they delighted to see the blood of man shed before their face were euident proofes hereof Gualter Chrysostome thus distinguisheth these last fowre they are coneuant breakers that keepe no fidelitie with the same kind as man with man they are without naturall affection which are vnkind to their kindred and such are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which breake ciuill leagues and the last includeth mercie to be shewed euen vnto enemies Quest. 74. Of the true reading of the last verse v. 31. and the meaning thereof 1. The vulgar Latine which Lyranus followeth and Tolet the Rhemists with other Romanists reade thus when they knewe the iustice of God vnderstood not that they which doe such things are worthie of death c. and this reading seemeth also Cyprian to followe epistol 68. But in the originall these words non intellexerunt they vnderstood not are wanting and are inserted beside the text and they doe also quite inuert the sense of the text for they make it a lesse thing to consent vnto euill doers and approoue them then to commit euill not onely they which doe them but also they which consent vnto them as the vulgar Latine text standeth whereas the Apostle euidētly maketh two degrees of sinners they which commit euill and those worse which are patrons and fauourers of euill And so Chrysostome well expoundeth shewing how the Apostle taketh away two pretexts and excuses of the Gentiles one was their ignorance which they could not pretend because they knewe by nature what the iustice of God required the other was their infirmitie but that they could not alleadge seeing they did commit such things in fact but approoued also and commended the euill doers 2. By the iustice of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is here vnderstood not the morall lawe which the Gentiles had not but the iudiciarie iustice of God in punishing of sinne for so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is defined iniusti facti corectio a correcting of that which is vniustly or vnlawfully done Michael Ephesus in ethic Aristot. lib. 5. c. 7. The Gentiles knewe this iustice of God in punishing of sinne both by the light of nature by the testimonie of their owne conscience and by the examples of Gods iustice shewed in the world Pareus Euen Draco which appointed death for all offences was taught by the law of nature that all sinne deserued death Mart. So Abimelech and Pharaoh knew by the light of nature that mariage was not to be violated and therefore they caused Sarah to be restored to Abraham Gualter 3. By death here is vnderstood any kind of punishment tending to the ruine and destruction of the offender Pareus yea also the Gentiles had some knowledge of euerlasting punishment for they had an opinion of hell as Virgil sheweth lib. 6. Aenead as they promised the pleasant Elysian fields after death vnto well doers Plato lib. 10. de repub Cicero in som. Scipton 75. Quest. What a dangerous thing it is to be a fauourer and procurer of sinne in others 1. The vulgar Latine reading thus not onely they which doe such things are worthie of death but they which consent vnto them that doe and Lyranus Toletus with others doe thinke that here to consent with sinners is put as the lesse that no not the consenters onely were free but were worthie of death But it is rather expressed as an higher degree of sinne as Theophylact saith quodque deterius est and that which is worse they gaue assent vnto those which doe euill so also Erasmus Osiander Pererius with others 2. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth not an assent onely but an approbation and patronage as Beza and Pareus read patrocinantur they giue patronage but Piscator rather vseth the word applaudunt because to applaud and approoue is more then patronize for one may be a patron of that vpon some occasion which he doth not altogether approoue 3. The heathen generally were guiltie hereof in defending and maintaining publikely euen those things which by the light of nature they knew to be euill as idolatrie fornication and such like when Alexander had killed Clitus his friend and was striken in conscience for the same he had miserable comforters applied vnto him Anaxarchus Aristander Callisthenes which were all but patrons of his sinne and made him worse the first as an Epicure told him that all was lawfull which Princes did the second beeing a Stoike referred all to fate and destinie the third vsed morall and ciuill perswasions but none of them shewed him the greatnes of his sinne Gryneus 4. Of these fauourers there are two kinds some doe affoard their helpe and assistance to euill doers some hold their peace when they should reprooue And there is a double kind of reproofe or correction fraterna correctio brotherly correction vnto the which all are bound but not alwaies sed pro debito tempore loco but in due time and place there is correctio punitionis correction by way of punishment vnto the which all superiours are bound and at all times as they shall see it to make best for the amendment of sinners Lyr. But both these kind of corrections were much neglected among the heathen 5. Now of these there were three sorts some might commit sinne in themselues and yet not consent vnto it in others and these were worthie of death some might giue consent in not punishing sinne in others though they did it not themselues and these also were worthie of death and some did both practise it in their owne person and fauour it in others and these were worthie of double death Haymo 76. Quest. How one may be accessarie to an others sinne This may be done diuers waies 1. they which command others to doe euill as Saul bid Doeg fall vpon the innocent Priests 1. Sam. 22. are guiltie of others sinnes 2. They which are readie to obey such wicked commandements as Ioab vpon Dauids letter caused
the iust shall liue by faith haue no other meaning but this iustum secundum fidei norman vitam dirigere that the iust doth direct his life according to the rule of faith Contra. 1. He doth not place the words aright for thus are the words to be ioyned together the iust by faith shall liue so that by faith hath rather connexion with the first word the iust then with the last shall liue 2. the Apostle by life here vnderstandeth euerlasting saluation not our conuersion here as is said before v. 16. that the Gospell is the power of God to saluation to euerie one that beleeueth faith then bringeth to euerlasting saluation 2. The Rhemists haue this shift that faith together with workes must be here vnderstood to iustifie the Apostle saith not the iust shall liue by faith onely to this purpose also Bellarmine lib. 1. de iustificat c. 20. Contra. 1. If the whole life of the soule depended not vpon faith but partly vpon faith partly vpon workes then it might as well be said the iust shall liue by workes which were an absurd speach and not farre from blasphemie 2. the Apostle c. 3.28 excludeth works concluding that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the lawe then to liue by faith is to liue onely by faith as we are iustified onely by faith without workes 3. Nowe although the iust liue by faith and not by workes yet faith liueth by workes it must be a liuely and effectuall faith working by loue by the which the iust man liueth and not a dead faith 3. Pererius here slyeth to their old distinction of iustification the first which is by faith the second is perfited by workes so faith is said to iustifie a man because it is exordium fundamentum radix iustificationis the beginning foundation and roote of iustification Perer. dâ—sput 8. in 1. ad Roman sect 46. Contra. 1. That which he calleth the second iustification is properly satisfaction which is the fruit of iustification as the Apostle saith Rom. 6.22 beeing now freed from sinne and made seruants vnto God you haue your fruit in holines and the end euerlasting life where the whole state of the faithfull man is diuided into these three parts his iustification and freedome from sinne which is by faith the fruit of his iustification which is holynesse and the ende or reward which is euerlasting life 2. to liue by faith sheweth that not the beginning but the perfection of our life is by faith and by nothing but faith as the Apostle saith the iustice of God is reuealed from faith to faith faith is the beginning and end of this iustice there is no time wherein saluation is giuen vnto any but by faith as Thomas expoundeth see before quest 42. 4. Bellarmine hath an other deuise he maketh this the meaning the iust shall liue by faith that is ex fide patienter expectare quae Deus promisit by faith he doth patiently expect those things which God hath promised So he would haue it vnderstood rather of patient wayting and expecting then of iustifying lib. 2. de effect sacram c. 9. Contra. This patient expecting of Gods promises is indeede a fruit of iustifying faith for it is the ground of things hoped for and he that is iustified by faith hath this grace also of patient expectation but to liue by faith comprehendeth more 2. and that by this phrase to liue by faith the Apostle vnderstandeth to be iustified by faith is euident Gal. 2.20 Thus I liue not I now but Christ liueth in me and in that I now liue in the flesh I liue by the faith if the Sonne of God c. 3. And whereas Bellarmine further obiecteth that the Prophets meaning from whom the Apostle taketh this saying is none other but to note their patience that waited for the Lords promises it hath beene shewed before qu. 44. that the Apostle keepeth the Prophets sense and doth most fitly apply this sentence to iustification by faith 5. But the Romanists against iustification by faith onely thus obiect 1. It seemeth a verie absurd thing to make men beleeue that they shall be iustified by faith onely without either satisfaction for their sinnes or the workes of righteousnesse by this meanes nothing could be easier then by faith to be saued 2. And this doctrine will make men presumptuous that they will care for no good workes and so there should be no more vse either of precepts to exhort them vnto the workes of pietie nor of threatnings to terrifie them from sinne Contra. 1. Though that faith neede no satisfaction for sinne in our selues nor good workes as helping vnto iustification yet it apprehendeth the satisfaction made by Christs suffering for our sinnes and workes are also necessarie as testimonies of our faith though not as helpes of our iustification neither is such a faith liuely and effectuall so easie a thing seeing man hath no power of himselfe to attaine vnto it vnlesse God doe giue it and to beleeue in Christ as a Christian ought is found to be the hardest thing in the whole world 2. Neither is this a doctrine of presumption nor yet doth it make voide precepts and comminations for faith though it require not workes as causes and helpes to saluation yet it cannot be without them as fruits and effects so that the lawe of faith establisheth the lawe of workes as the Apostle sheweth c. 3.31 doe we then make the lawe of none effect through faith God forbid yea we establish the lawe Pareus Controv. 17. How the Gospel is the power of God to saluation to everie one that beleeueth v. 16. This and such like places which ascribe iustification and saluation to faith as Ioh. 3.16 that whosoeuer beleeueth in him should not perish Act. 13.39 by him euerie one that beleeueth is iustified Bellarmine would thus elude 1. he saith that these Scriptures must be vnderstood negatiuely that without faith none are iustified not that onely by faith they are iustified 2. then by all are vnderstood all nations that there is no difference between Iew and Gentile but that one common way to saluation is propounded to them all 3. And it beeing applyed to euerie particular man the meaning is that not faith of it selfe alone but with other things as hope charitie iustifieth Bellar. lib. 1. de iustifie c. 22. Contra. 1. Yes these sayings hold affirmatiuely that faith is sufficient vnto saluation for our Sauiour saith Iohn 5. he that beleeueth c. hath euerlasting life and is passed from death to life that which giueth a man a present assurance and reall possession of euerlasting life is alone availeable to saluation 2. True it is that none of what nation soeuer are excluded but euerie one that beleeueth wheresoeuer is iustified this confirmeth the doctrine of iustification by faith that there is no other way to saluation either for Iewe or Gentile 3. And if the Gospell be the power of God to saluation
of his goodnes L.V. A.B. or benignitie gentlenes T. Be. rather then bountifulnes G. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and patience and long sufferance or long animitie not knowing that the goodnes or benignitie of God leadeth thee or bringeth thee R. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to repentance not to penance R. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth rather repentance and change of the minde then outward penance 5 But thou after thine hardnes and heart that cannot repent dost treasure vp vnto thy selfe heapest vp L.B.G. gatherest to thy selfe V. but the word properly signifieth to stoare or treasure vp wrath in the day of wrath V.A.L. that is against the day of wrath Be. T.G. B. but in the originall it is in the day and of the reuelation T.A.L. declaration G. B. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reuelation of the iust iudgement of God 6 Who will render to euery man reward euery man B.G. but it is put in the originall in the datiue according to his workes 7 That is to them which by continuance in good workes or in well doing B.G.V. but the word in the originall is good workes not according to patience in good workes L.R. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth as well perseuerance and continuance as patience nor which by perseuerance seeke the glorie of good workes Be. good workes is better referred to continuance seeke glorie honour and immortalitie eternall life 8 But vnto them that are contentious verbat of contention L R. and disobey the truth and obey vnrighteousnes not giue credit to vnrighteousnes L. R. for both the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 disobeying and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 obeying are of the same deriuation shall be indignation and wrath V. A.B.G.Be wrath and indignation L. T. but the first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 excandescentis commotion or indignation is lesse then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wrath rage 9 Tribulation and anguish shall be against the soule Be. V.A. vpon the soule B.G.L. to euery soule T. the first rather see before v. 2. of euery man that doth euill of the Iew first and of the Grecian not to the Iewes first and to the Gentiles T. 10 But glorie honour and peace to euery one euery man B. that doth good to euery one that doth good glorie honour c. G. but here the words are transposed to the Iew first and also to the Grecian not to the Gentiles T. 11 For there is no respect of persons V.B.G. acception of persons Be. L. R. with God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acception of persons 12 For as many as haue sinned without the law not whosoeuer hath sinned L. B. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whosoeuer is put in the plural shall perish also without the law and as many as haue sinned in the law shall be iudged by the law 13 For not the hearers of the law are iust with God before God G.T. in the sight of God B. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apud with but the doers of the law shall be iustified 14 For when the Gentiles which haue not the Law doe by nature not naturally L. R. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by nature the things of the Law contained in the law G. B. which are of the law but in the original it is the things of the law they hauing not the law are a law vnto themselues 15 Which shew the worke of the Law written in their hearts the effect of the law G. but the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worke their conscience also bearing witnes not bearing them witnes L.T.B. for them is not in the original and their thoughts not of their thoughts L. for in the original it is put absolutely in the genitiue accusing one an other mutually or excusing 16 In the day at the day G.B. but in the original it is in the day when God shall iudge the secrets of men according to my Gospel by Iesus Christ. by Iesus Christ according to my Gospel B.G. but the words are here transposed 17 Behold thou art surnamed a Iew V.B.G.Be. not but if thou art surnamed L.R.T. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 behold not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as though it were two words and restest in the law and gloriest in God makest thy beast of God B. but the preposition is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 18 And knowest his will and triest the things that differ A. B. approouest the most profitable things L.T. approouest the more excellent things G.B. but the phrase is vsed in the first sense Philip. 1.10 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly signifieth things differing beeing instructed by the Law 19 And art perswaded or confident V. Be A.G. beleeuest B. presumest L. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which S. Paul vseth of himselfe Rom. 8.38 that thou art a guide of the blind a light of them which are in darknes 20 An instructer of them which lacke discretion B. G. T. of the foolish L. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without wit or discretion a teacher of the vnlearned V. B. G. of infants verbal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L.B.T. he meaneth such as were infants in knowledge hauing the forme of knowledge and of truth in the Law 21 Thou therefore which teachest an other teachest thou not thy selfe thou that preachest a man should not steale doest thou steale 22 Thou which saiest a man should not commit adulterie doest thou commit adulterie thou that abhortest idols committest thou sacriledge A. B.G.Be read these two verses with an interrogation V.T.L. read without and so the next verse also 23 Thou that gloriest in the Law thorough transgression of the law B.V. prevarication L. breaking of the law B. G 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 transgression dishonourest thou God 24 For the Name of God thorough you is blasphemed among the Gentiles as it is written 25 For circumcision verily profiteth Be. V.G. auaileth B. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 profiteth if thou doe the law but if thou be a transgressor of the law thy circumcision is made vncircumcision 26 Therefore if the vncircumcision prepuce R. the word is praeputium in Latin but it can not be made an English word keepe the rites of the law Be. ordinances B. G. iustices L. A. the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rites shall not his vncircumcision be counted for circumcision 27 And shall not vncircumcision by nature keeping the law not by nature keeping the law T. these words by nature are euidently ioyned with the first clause in the original iudge thee that by the letter and circumcision art a transgressor of the law 28 For not he that is in open shew outward B. G. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in manifest in open shew is a Iew not that which is in open shew in the flesh is circumcision 29 But he that is in secret is a Iew he is a Iew which is one within B. G. but the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the
for their person and the person is the state condition or qualitie of a thing now to knowe whether all accepting of the person be vnlawfull first the diuerse kinds of persons and qualities must be considered whereof there are 3. sorts 1. some personall conditions there are which are annexed to promises or comminations diuine and humane as faith obedience in the elect impenitencie impietie vnbeleefe in the wicked this accepting of persons is not vniust as Abraham was respected of God for his faith so also Dauid and Saul reiected for his hypocrisie 2. Some personall respects are so annexed to the cause as thereby it is aggravated or extenuated as he that striketh a magistrate is worthie of greater punishment then he that striketh an other and this respect of persons is also iust â—â— some personall respects are beside the cause as riches pouertie in the case of adulterie theft and such like and such accepting of the person is vniust Secondly the accepting â—â— persons is either in iudgement when it is in the two first senses lawfull but not in the thuâ—â— or extra iudicium out of iudgement and it is of three sorts 1. dilectionis of loue which in common duties is vnlawfull as when a rich man is preferred before a poore man for his riches which is condemned by S. Iames c. 2. v. 2.3 but in speciall and proper duties it is lawfull as in preferring the loue of our parents before others 2. electionis of election â—â— choice as when men of qualitie and gifts are advanced to places of office before them which are not so qualified this respect of persons is lawfull as beeing agreeable both vnto nature and to positiue lawes 3. donationis in matters of gift and donation as one for giueth his debt to one not to another this also is lawfull because here is no wrong done a man may dispose of his owne as it pleaseth him see more hereof before quest 23. 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. Against the power of free will in good things v. 5. Thou after thine hardnesse and heart that cannot repent heapest vnto thy selfe wrath c. Pererius out of this place inferreth that it is in potestate hominis bene vel male agere in the power of man to doe well or euill for it should otherwise be vniust to punish a man for doing euill and for want of repentance whereas he can doe no other disput 2. in c. 2. numer 23. Answ. 1. That man hath free will to doe euill without any compulsion violence or constraint it is confessed of all but this is a freedome à coactione from compulsion or enforcing not à necessitate from necessitie a man cannot now chuse but sinne because his nature is enthralled by the fall of man yet he sinneth willingly no man compelleth him But vnto that which is good man hath no will or inclination of himselfe but by the grace of God as the Prophet saith Ierem. 4.22 They are wise to doe euill but to doe well they haue no knowledge and our Blessed Sauiour saith Ioh. 15.5 Without me ye can doe nothing 2. yet though man cannot repent of himselfe nor yet doe any good thing he is worthily punished because man by his voluntarie transgression when it was in his power not to haue transgressed did abuse his free will giuen in the creation vnto sinne and so enthralled him selfe and his posteritie Once therefore man had free will if he could haue kept it but now that is become necessarie to doe euill which was before free man therefore is iustly punished notwithstanding this necessitie of sinning because he lost this libertie and freedome by his owne default 3. And let it here further be obserued how Pererius beside the falsitie of his assertion is become a falsarie in charging vs with vntrue opinions such as Protestants hold not as first that we should say hominem ad vtrumque impelli à Deo c. that man whether to doe good or euill is compelled and enforced of God whereas we abhorre and detest that as a most wicked heresie that God is the author of any euill or the moouer stirrer or prouoker thereunto Againe he obiecteth that we hold that mans free will is velut quoddam inanime c. is a certaine dead thing without life that it doth nothing of it selfe but is a bare title without any matter whereas we affirme that man is not as a stocke or stone but hath a naturall power to will to elect to desire but to will or doe that which is good it hath no power man willeth desireth chooseth but to doe these things well it is of grace in respect of the generall inclination of the will vnto the obiect it is actiue but in respect of the goodnesse of the will in beeing mooued vnto that which is good it is meerely passiue see Synop. pag. 858. Controv. 2. Of iustification by the imputatiue iustice of faith Whereas the Apostle saith v. 2. We know that the iudgement of God is according to truth Bellarmine hence thus reasoneth against imputatiue iustice Gods iudgement is according to truth but so is not imputed iustice it is not verily and in deede and according to truth but the habituall infused and inherent iustice is according to truth lib. 2. de iustificaton c. 3. Contra. 1. Bellarmine doth mistake the Apostles meaning for according to the truth is not secundum realem existentiam according to the reall existence of a thing but secundum equitatem according to equitie 2. So then the iustice of Christ imputed by faith is according to truth that is the rule of iustice because thereby full satisfaction is made for sinne by faith in Christ but that habituall and inherent iustice is not according to the rule of iustice because it is imperfect and thereby Gods iustice cannot be satisfied Pareus 3. Controv. Against the merit of workes v. 6. Who will reward euery man according to his works out of this place the Romanists contend for the merit of good works the Rhemists vpon this place affirme that life euerlasting is giuen for and according to their good workes there reasons and arguments are these 1. The Apostle vseth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall render which signifieth a iust retribution and so it is taken Matth. 20.8 Bellar. l. 5. de iustificat c. 2. 2. Tolet. annotat 6. vrgeth that place Matth. 25.34 Inherit ye the kingdome prepared for you c. for I was an hungred and ye gaue me meate c. 3. Likewise it is thus obiected God shall reward the wicked according to the merit of their euill workes Ergo the righteous shall be rewarded according to the merit of their good workes Ans. 1. Tolet. annot 6. rehearseth fiue seuerall answers which he supposeth to be vsed by the Protestants 1. some he saith by his workes vnderstand Christs workes according to the which God should reward the righteous 2. some thus he shall render vnto euery man according
prepared for you for when I was hungred ye gaue me meate he sheweth not the cause of their saluation but the condition state qualitie of those which should be saued to this purpose Faius see further before c. 1. quest 26. and controv 7. Quest. 25. How by the lawe came the knowledge of sinne 1. The Apostle here confirmeth that which he said before that none are iustified by the workes of the lawe by the contrarie vse of the lawe because thereby commeth the knowledge of sinne therefore iustice and righteousnesse is not attained thereby 2. The lawe Origen vnderstandeth of the lawe of nature Augustine onely of the morall lawe lib. de spirit liter c. 8. but indeed the lawe is vnderstood here in generall both the naturall for euen before the lawe written by the lawe of nature Abimelech knew that adulterie was sinne Genes 20. but the morall more by the which came a more full knowledge of sinne likewise by the ceremoniall and iudiciall lawe sinne was manifested but after a diuerse manner ex accidente accidentally because the one was appointed in expiationem for the expiation the other in poenam for the punishment of sinne Tolet. annot 14. 3. Now diuerse wayes doth the written lawe whereof the Apostle specially speaketh reueale sinne 1. Ambrose sheweth that before the law written there was some knowledge of sinne as he giueth instance in Ioseph who detested the sinne of adulterie to the which his mistresse enticed him but it is so said quia lex ostendit peccata non impune futura because the lawe sheweth that sinnes shall not goe vnpunished so also Theodulus 2. and by the written lawe peccata clarius fuerunt cognita sinnes were more euidently knowne and some were knowne to be sinnes that were not so taken before leviora quaque non cognoscebantur esse peccata the smaller sinnes were not knowne as concupiscence Hierome as the Apostle saith he had not knowne lust vnlesse the law had said thou shalt not lust quaedam etiam grauiora c. and some things by the lawe were knowne to be greater then before gloss ordinar 3. Oecumenius thus expoundeth because sinne was encreased by the knowledge of the lawe for he that sinneth wittingly is so much the more a grieuous offender 4. And before the lawe written sinne was knowne as beeing against reason but by the law it is discerned as beeing against the will of God and so the nature and qualitie of sinne is more fully and perfectly knowne by the lawe Perer. 5. and euen the knowledge of sinne before the lawe written did issue out of the grounds and principles of the morall lawe which were imprinted by nature in the minde Faius 4. But whereas the lawe sheweth as well what things are honest and vertuous as it discouereth sinne the Apostle onely toucheth that vse of the lawe which is to reueale sinne both because it was more pertinent to his purpose which was to shewe that there is no iustification by the lawe because thereby we haue the knowledge of sinne and for that men are more prone vnto the things forbidden in the lawe then to the duties commanded so that the lawe doth not so much teach our dutie to God and our neighbour as that we doe not performe that which is our dutie Beza 5. Now further whereas the Apostle saith by the lawe commeth the knowledge of sinne we must supply the word onely not that the lawe doth nothing else but reueale sinne for it iudgeth and condemneth sinne likewise but here the opposition is between the knowledge of sinne and the remission thereof the lawe onely giueth the one the agnition or knowledge of sinne not the remission Perer. by the lawe is cognitio peccati non consumptio the knowledge of sinne not the consumption of sinne gloss 6. But it will be obiected that in Leuiticus there are oblations prescribed for sinne and the Priest was to pray for such as had sinned and it should be forgiuen them Gorrhan answeareth that it was onely a legall remission quoad poenam non quoad culpam onely concerning the punishment of the lawe not of the fault But Lyranus answeareth better that such sacrifice for sinne was protestatio Christi passuri a protestation or profession of Christ which was to suffer so that such remission of sinnes though it were vnder the lawe yet was not by vertue and force of the lawe but by faith in Christ for the sinnes of the offerers were forgiuen at the prayers of the Priests which could not be heard if they were not of faith 7. It will here be further obiected that the politike and ciuill lawes of Princes intend more then the shewing of sinne they also doe helpe to reforme sinne and reclaime men from it therefore Gods lawe should doe more then manifest sinne Answ. 1. Humane lawes doe onely require an externall ciuill iustice but the lawe of God discouereth the corruption of the heart so that herein there is great difference betweene them Melancth 2. Humane lawes may by proposing of rewards and punishments helpe to perswade and induce men but they cannot instill or infuse obedience into the heart 3. God also intendeth more then the reuealing of sinne by his lawe for if any could keepe it they should liue thereby which while none is able to doe yet the law beside the discouering of sinne ferueth as a Schoolmaster to bring vs to Christ so that it is thorough mans owne infirmitie that the lawe giueth not life and it sheweth Gods power and wisedome that turneth the lawe vnto our good namely to bring vs vnto Christ which by our infirmitie is become vnto vs the minister of death 8. So then there are two other speciall vses and benefits of the lawe beside the reuealing of sinne the one that concerning faith it is a Schoolmaster to bring vs to Christ and touching manners and life it sheweth vs the way wherein we should walke Mars 9. There is a double knowledge of sinne by the lawe there is one which is weake and vnprofitable which neither thoroughly terrifieth the conscience nor reformeth the life such was the knowledge which the heathen had of sinne as the poets in their satyricall verses did set forth the sinnes of their times but themselues followed them there is an other effectuall knowledge of the lawe whereby the soule is humbled and this is of two sorts when such as is ioyned onely with terror of conscience without any hope such was the knowledge of sinne which Cain and Iudas had that betrayed Christ or it hath beside some liuely hope and comfort such was Dauids agnition and confession of his sinne But this comfort is no worke of the lawe it is wrought in vs by the spirit of grace Martyr Quest. 26. Of the meaning of these words The righteousnesse of God is made manifests without the lawe 1. Ambrose by the iustice of God vnderstandeth that iustice wherewith God is iust â—estans promissa sua in keeping his promises Origen
commeth the knowledge of sinne and the law is a schoolemaster to bring vs vnto Christ it sheweth vs our disease and sendeth vs to the Physitian Faius Sasbout but because this is not the proper effect of the law otherwise then by reason of our infirmitie the Apostle is to be vnderstood to speake of the practise and obedience of the law which Christ requireth of the faithfull who though they doe not looke thereby to be iustified yet by the spirit of sanctification are enabled to walk according to the same as the law commandeth that we should loue the Lord with all our heart and our neighbour as our selfe these precepts euery Christian is bound to keepe And in this sense our Sauiour specially saith Matth. 5. I came not in dissolue the Law but to fulfill it so Origen omnis qui credens Christo bene agit c. viâ—enâ—â— legem confirmat c. euery one which beleeueth in Christ and doth well doth confirme the law by his life to the same purpose Augustine fides impetrat gratiam qua lex impletâ—â— c. faith obtaineth grace whereby the law is fulfilled c. the Gospel giueth grace whereby men are directed to liue and walke according to the law Adde hereunto that without faith it is impossible to keepe the law or any part thereof as the law commandeth vs to loue God with all our heart but no man can loue God vnlesâ— he first know him and beleeue in him Againe the law commandeth the worship of God whereof inuocation is a part but none can call vpon him vpon whome they haue not beleeued Rom. 10. Mart. 6. Other expositions there be of this place Caietane saith that faith doth establish the law because by faith we beleeue that God is the author of the law without which faith iâ— would be of no greater authoritie with men then the laws of Lycurgus and Solon 7. Catharinus a Popish writer herein would haue the lawe holpen by the Gospell because those things which were handled obscurely in the lawe are manifested openly in the Gospell the lawe was kept then thorough a seruile feare but now vnder the Gospell for the loue of iustice But leauing those and other like expositions I insist vpon the fift before alleadged as most agreeable vnto S. Paul 8. Now then whereas the Apostle in some places speaketh of the abrogating of the law as Heb. 7.12 If the Priesthood be changed there must of necessitie be a change of the lawe and v. 18. the commandement that was afore is disanulled because of the weakenesse thereof and vnprofitablenes c. he is not herein contrarie to himselfe for either the Apostle speaketh of the ceremoniall lawe as in the first place but it is the morall law which is established by faith or be meaneth that the vnprofitable ende of the morall lawe which was to iustifie men is abrogated but here he speaketh of an other ende and vse of the lawe which is to be a direction vnto good life in which sense the lawe is established 9. Thus the Apostle hath answeared this obiection least he might haue seemed to abrogate the lawe because he denieth vnto it power to iustifie vnto this obiection he maketh a double answear first in denying that he doth not take away the effect of the lawe for where one ende of a thing is denied all are not taken away secondly he answeareth by the contrarie he is so farre from abrogating or disanulling the lawe that contrariwise he doth establish and confirme it as is shewed before 4. Places of doctrine Doct. 1. Of the preheminence or prerogatiue of the Church v. 1. What is the preferment of the Iewe c. here occasion is offred to consider of the preheminence and excellencie of the Church which consisteth in the consideration of the dignitie state and blessings wherein it excelleth other humane conditions and states This excellencie and preheminence of the Church is either of nature or grace but by nature all men are the children of wrath one as well as an other Ephes. 2.3 therefore all the prerogatiue of the Church is of grace This prerogatiue is either common to the old Church of the Iewes and the newe of the Christians or proper and peculiar the common is either internall in their vocation iustification sanctification by the spirit or externall in their publike profession of religion and adoption to be the people of God with their externall directions by the word and sacraments vnto saluation The peculiar and proper prerogatiue of the old Church is considered 1. in their state that they were a people seuered from the rest of the world and ioyned vnto God by a solemne couenant 2. in the blessings wherewith they were endued which were partly spirituall as the Scriptures of the Prophets were committed vnto them they had the legall sacraments of circumcision and the Paschal lambe the Priesthood of Leui partly temporal as the inheritance of Canaan which was tied vnto Abrahams posteritie The prerogatiue peculiar vnto the Church of the newe Testament consisteth 1. in their state in beeing an holy people taken out from the rest of the world and consecrated to the worship of God 2. in their blessings partly perpetuall as the doctrine of the newe Testament the sacraments baptisme and the supper of the Lord partly temporall as the gift of tongues and miracles which the Church had for a time for the necessarie propagation of the faith but are now ceased ex Pareo Doct. 2. Of the vtilitie and profit of the diuine oracles v. 2. Vnto them were coÌ„mitted the oracles of God The Scriptures called here the diuine oracles are profitable to diuerse ends 1. illuminant intellectum they doe lighten the vnderstanding Psal. 19.8 It giueth light vnto the eyes 2. inflammant affectum they inflame the affection as Luke 24.32 the two disciples said betweene themselues did not our hearts burne within vs while he talked with vs by the way 3. mundant culpam they doe cleanse the fault as Ioh. 15.3 now are ye cleane thorough the word which I haue spoken vnto you 4. conseruant contra tristitiam they doe comfort against heauinesse 5. roborant ad pâ—tientiam they do strengthen vnto patience both these the Apostle sheweth saying Rom. 15.4 that we through patience and consolation of the Scriptures might have hope 6. franâ—â—â—t cordis duritiam they breake the hardnesse of heart Ierem. 23.29 is not my word like an hammer that breaketh the stone 7. protegunt contra tentationes they defend and protect against the tentations of the deuill Prou. 30.5 Euerie word of God is pure it is a sheild c. Ephes. 6.17 the sword of the spirit is the word of God Gorrhan Doct. 3. Of the combination betweene God and his Church v. 3. Shall their vnbeleefe make the faith of God without effect Here are to be considered tria ingorum paria three paire of yokes and bands as it were betweene God and vs. 1. the couenant and
And although by our redemption we are not deliuered or taken from God but reconciled vnto him yet are we deliuered from his wrath Rom. 5.9 and so from his punishing iustice 5. Argum. We are improperly said to be redeemed from that to the which the price was not paied but to the curse of the lawe and wrath that is the punishment of sinne the price was not paied for the bearing of the curse and the sustaining of the wrath of God for vs was the price it selfe therefore we are improperly said to be redeemed from the curse and wrath Answ. 1. The proposition is false for the captiue may be said to be redeemed from that to the which the price is not payed as from the gives fetters prison sword death though principally the redemption is from the hands of him which holdeth any in captiuitie so we may be redeemed from the curse of the lawe though the price were not payed vnto it 2. the curse of the lawe and wrath may be taken two wayes passiuely for the effect of the curse and wrath which is the punishment of sinne and in this sense the price is not paid to the curse or actiuely for the wrath of God and his irefull iudgement pronouncing the sentence of the curse and in this sense the price may be said to be paied vnto the curse that is the iustice and wrath of God inflicting the curse 6. Argum. The operation or curse of the lawe is euerlasting death but Christ did not vndergoe euerlasting death for vs therefore he was not made a curse for vs but onely for our cause he fell into some kind of curse for vs. Answ. 1. The proposition is generally true for the curse or operation doth not onely signifie the punishment due vnto the breach of the lawe but the sentence also pronounced against the transgressors of the lawe as it is said Deut. 21.23 cursed is euerie one that hangeth vpon a tree but euerie one that so hanged was not euerlastingly condemned as the theife that was converted vpon the crosse 2. yet it is most true that Christ in some sense suffred eternall death for vs for in euerlasting death two things are to be considered the greatnesse and infinitnes of the infernall agonies and dolors with the abiection and forsaking of God the other is the perpetuall continuance of such euerlasting horror and abiection the second Christ must needs be freed from both because of his omnipotencie it was impossible for him to be for euer kept vnder the thraldome of death and his innocencie that hauing satisfied for sinne beeing himselfe without sinne he could not be held in death and in respect of his office which was to be our deliuerer yet the verie infernall paines and sorrowe Christ did suffer for vs because our Redeemer was to suffer that which was due vnto vs and why els was our Sauiour so much perplexed before his passion which in respect of the outward tormēt of the body was exceeded by many Martyrs in their sufferings if he feared not some greater thing then the death of the bodie 3. And although sometime in Scripture the preposition for signifieth onely the ende or cause as Christ is said to haue died for our sinnes 1. Ioh. 3.16 yet it signifieth also for and in ones stead to doe any thing as Rom. 5.7 for a good man one dare die that is in his stead that he should not die and so Christ died for vs that is in our place and stead that we should not die eternally ex Pareo 7. Argum. As we are said to be sold vnder sinne so we are bought and redeemed by Christ but we were sold vnder sinne without any price payed therefore so also are we redeemed without the paying of any price Answ. The proposition is not true for it is a metaphoricall speach that we are sold vnder sinne thereby is signified the alienation and abiection from God by our sinnes but we are said to be redeemed properly wherein it was necessarie that a price should be paied for vs both to satisfie the iust wrath and indignation of God against sinne as also because of Gods immutable sentence thou shalt die the death which sentence must take place let the Lord should be found a lier and his word not to be true Christ therefore in redeeming vs by his death payed that price and ransome for vs which we otherwise should haue payed 8. Argum. Where there is a true and proper redemption the price is paied to him which holdeth the captiues in bondage but in this redemption purchased by Christ the price was not so paied for then the deuill should haue had it whose captiues we were therefore it is not properly a redemption Answ. 1. It is not true that we are principally and originally the deuills captiues first we are the Lords captiues as of an angrie and offended Iudge by our sinnes but secondarily we were captiued vnto Sathan because the Iudge deliuereth ouer sinners vnto him as the tormentor that power therefore which Sathan hath ouer sinners is a secondarie power receiued from God this is manifested in the parable Matth. 18.34 where the king deliuereth ouer the wicked seruant vnto the tormentor 2. The price then of our redemption was paied vnto God who had deliuered vs ouer as captiues for our sinnes and so the Apostle saith that Christ offred himselfe by his eternall spirit vnto God Heb. 9.14 not that God thirsted for the blood of his sonne but after 〈◊〉 salvation quia salus erat in sanguine because there was health in his blood as Bernard saith for thereby Gods iustice was satisfied and the veritie of his sentence established thou shalt die the death 3. But whereas it is further obiected that the price could not be payed vnto God 1. because God procured his owne sonne to pay the price of our redemption but be that detaineth captiues doth not procure their deliuerance 2. in paying the price of redemption there is some vantage accruing and growing to him to whom the price is paied but in our redemption there was no gaine or advantage vnto God we further answear thus 1. that in such a redemption wherein the Iudge desireth the life and safetie of the prisoner the Iudge himselfe may procure him to be redeemed and that out of his owne treasure 2. neither in such a kind of redemption doth the iudge seeke for any advantage to himselfe but onely the preservation of the lawes and common iustice as Zaleucus the gouernor of the Loerensians hauing made a lawe that he which was taken in adulterie should loose both his eyes did cause one of his sonnes eyes to be put out for the offence and one of his owne eyes by this he gained nothing but the commendation of iustice and so in our redemption the iustice of God is set forth otherwise there can be no lucre or advantage growing properly vnto God 4. Wherefore notwithstanding all these cauills and sophistications Christ properly and
to shew the difference between the originall of the flesh which was from Abraham and of the soule from God but this distinction is nothing pertinent to the thing in question 4. Therefore by according to the flesh the Apostle rather vnderstandeth the works of the law so Theodoret the ordin glosse and the reason hereof is this because the Apostle doth not simply denie vnto Abraham all kind of righteousnes but that which is by works Beza so Phil. 3.3.9 the righteousnes in the flesh of the law are taken for the same with the Apostle Gryn But in this sense great aduantage may seeme to be giuen vnto the Popish sophisters who thinke that onely Abrahams works done before he had faith while he was yet in the flesh are excluded from iustification not those which came after vpon the which reason Pareus seemeth to incline to the other exposition to ioyne according to the flesh with Abraham our father But we neede not for this reason to refuse the other exposition for euen the workes which proceede from faith if any merit or worthines be reposed in them may be said to be after the flesh for the Apostle opposeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by fauour and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by debt v. 4. that then which is by debt and merit of the worke is according to the flesh and is opposite to fauour and grace Quest. 3. Of the meaning of the 2. verse v. 2. If Abraham were iustified by workes he hath wherein to reioyce 1. Origen Ambrose Chrysostome doe thus frame the argument if Abraham were iustified by workes he had no glorie with God but he had true glorie with God therefore he was not iustified by workes so also Faius collecteth the argument assuming affirmatiuely but the assumption is put negatiuely with the Apostle but not with God so that thus rather the argument holdeth if Abraham were iustified by workes he hath wherein to glorie with God he hath somewhat to glorie in as beeing iustified by his workes but he had not wherein to glorie with God Ergo thus Beza Pareus 2. Gorrhan maketh all this verse the proposition If Abraham were iustified by workes he hath wherein to glorie but not with God but such glorie but not with God Abraham had not for if it be vnderstood of true glorie in deed such glorie none can haue but from God if false glorie among men Abraham would no such glorie But in this collection the Apostle should denie that Abrahams workes had no praise or glorie at all among men whereas the Apostle seemeth to graunt so much that his workes might be praise worthie among men but before God they could not iustifie him 3. Chrysostome hath here a distinction of glorying one is by workes which a man cannot haue with God an other is by faith which is before God and Pet. Martyr approoueth this distinction and thinketh that by the glorie of God c. 3.23 are depriued of the glorie of God the Apostle meaneth our iustification by faith wherein the glorie of God sheweth it selfe but an other word is vsed there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth glorie here the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 glorying or reioycing and indeede before God we cannot glorie either of works or faith for he is said to glorie with God that can bring any thing to God of his owne now seeing faith also is a gift of God we cannot glorie in it as the Apostle saith 1. Cor. 4.7 why gloriest or boastest thou as though thou hadst not receiued it But whereas the Apostle saith he that glorieth let him glorie in the Lord he speaketh not of any glorying of any gift which any man hath but of the meere grace of God and the meaning is let him giue all glorie vnto God confessing that he hath nothing of himselfe 4. Now whereas the Apostle saith he hath wherein to glorie Oecumenius vnderstandeth this of glorying in himselfe but so would not Abraham glorie at all among men therefore by glorying here is vnderstood nothing els but the praise and commendation of men his workes might cum honor abilem reddere make him honourable with men but not with God Lyran. Tolet here distinguisheth betweene the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here vsed which signifieth praise and glorie and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before expressed c. 20.23 which signifieth glorying boasting annot 3. but this distinction to be perpetuall he sheweth not Quest. 4. How the Apostle alleadgeth that testimonie concerning the imputation of Abrahams faith for righteousnesse v. 4. 1. The Apostle readeth in the passiue it was imputed whereas Gen. 15.16 whence this testimonie is cited it is put in the actiue vaiaâ—h shebeha and he imputed it 1. the reason hereof Tolet. annot 5. thinketh to be that the Septuagint and the Hebrewes did read without prickes and then the word might be taken either actiuely or passiuely but this is no found opinion to thinke that the Hebrew pricks came in so late for so there should be great vncertentie of the Scripture and further set the pricks aside yet the word is not expressed with the same letters when it is actiuely and passiuely put for Gen. 15.6 the word is as before it is set downe but Psal. 106.31 where it is put passiuely the word is techasheb it was imputed the letters are diuers and further in this place Gen. 15.6 there is an affix of the feminine gender which sheweth a difference in the verie letters of the word beside the pricks 2. some thinke that the Apostle writing by the same spirit which Moses did by his Apostolike authoritie did so cite this Scripture Faius but this would haue giuen great offence vnto the Iewes and converted Gentiles if the Apostles should haue cited the Scriptures otherwise then they were found in the old Testament 3. Therefore it was more safely affirmed that the Apostle followeth the Septuagint which was the receiued translation among the Gentiles Mar. specially seeing they keepe the sense of the place and the rather because this reading in the passiue is warranted by an other Scripture Psal. 106.31 where it is read in the passiue and it was imputed vnto him 2. An other difference in this reading is that the Apostle beside that he changeth the voice turning the actiue into the passiue doth not interpret the Hebrew affix he imputed 〈◊〉 that is Abrahams faith God imputed for so the word cenunah faith beeing vnderstood after the manner of the Hebrewes in the verbal word heemin he beleeued answereth vnto the affix ha of the feminine gender but this the Apostle afterward euidently supplieth v. 9. that faith was imputed to Abraham for righteousnes 3. A third difference there is that in the Hebrew text there is no preposition set before the word tzedekah iustice as here the Apostle translateth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for righteousnes but there Moses saith he imputed it vnto him for righteousnes but this doubt is easily remooued for Psal.
106.31 the phrase is put with a preposition litzedakah it was imputed to him for righteousnes so that beside the identitie of the phrase there is no difference to say it was imputed vnto him for righteousnes or as righteousnes this reading of the Apostle is warranted by that other place in the Psalme 4. S. Paul with the Septuagint read he beleeued 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God but in the Hebrew it is Iâ—iehovah in God Augustines distinction therefore doth not alwaies hold that it is one thing Deo credere to beleeue God an other in Deum credere to beleeue in God Mart. for these two both in the Hebrew and Greeke phrase are taken for the same though in the Latin tongue there is a difference 5. Quest. Of the meaning of the words Who counted this for righteousnes vnto Abraham 1. Some of the Hebrewes peruerting that place Gen. 15.6 doe vnderstand it of Abraham that he imputed this faith vnto himselfe for righteousnes but beside that it is a very improper and vnfit thing that a man should impute vnto himselfe his owne righteousnes the Apostle taketh away this doubt v. 9. weere he saith was imputed to Abraham he could not be both the imputer and the person also to whome the thing is imputed 2. And as vnreasonable is their glosse who vnderstand an other third person not expressed that the world imputed it to Abraham that is held him for that cause to be a righteous man ex Beza annot for how should the world be here vnderstood whereof there was no mention before the words then doe easily demonstrate who it was that imputed it namely he in whome Abraham beleeued he beleeued God and he that is God counted it vnto him for righteousnes 3. Tertullian lib. de patient doth read it in the passiue and referreth it vnto Abraham iustitiae deputatus est he was deputed for righteous whereas the Apostle doth not speake of the imputation of his person but of his faith as he saith v. 9. faith was imputed to Abraham 6. Quest. What it was that Abraham beleeued The Apostle may seeme vnfitly to alleadge that place of Abrahams faith which was onely concerning the promise of multiplying his seede which kind of beleefe is of an other nature then iustification by faith to this obiection diuers answers are made 1. Pererius here hath one answer that S. Paul speaketh not of the first iustification of Abraham when of a sinner he became righteous but of his second iustification which was an encreasing of the first and this is done per quemlibet actum meritorium by any meritorious act so that to beleeue any promise of God by such a faith informed by charitie is meritorious of a further degree of iustice But beside other errors which are here couched together as of the first and second iustice that charitie is the forme of faith that we are iustified by the merit of faith all which are before confuted in the controversies of the former chapter I doe here oppose against Pererius one of his owne order namely Tolet. annot 5. who directly prooueth that S. Paul speaketh of Abrahams first iustification which he prooueth by that place Iam. 2.25 that when Abrahams faith was imputed to him for righteousnes he was called the friend of God now saith he secunda iustitia non amicum sed gratiorem amicum fecit the second iustice doth not make one Gods friend for he was Gods friend before when he was first iustified but it maketh him a better and more acceptable friend 2. Peter Martyr hath here two answers 1. he that spake here vnto Abraham was Christ and therefore in beleeuing God he beleeued Christ and so this saith was imputed vnto him for righteousnes 2. all the promises of God were grounded vpon the mercie and goodnes of God and the mercie of God is grounded on Christ the Patriarkes then though it were but a temporall promise which was made yet in beleeuing of it did repose their trust vpon Gods mercie in Christ but both these answers are vnsufficient for they shew not directly that Abraham was iustified by faith but onely by a certaine consequence 3. Therefore the best answer is that Abraham in this multiplying of his seede did vnderstand Christ for his faith had respect not onely vnto this promise of the multiplying of his seede as the starres of heauen Gen. 15.5 but to the other promises before going as that in his seede all the families of the earth should be blessed Gen. 12. And that in these promises the Messiah is vnderstood thus it may appeare 1. because so S. Paul expoundeth seede of Christ Gal. 3. and the Hebrews also doe vnderstand this seede wherein all the families of the earth shall be blessed of Christ. 2. this multiplying of Abrahams seede as the sand of the sea or starres of heauen was not fulfilled in the carnall seede of Abraham which contained it selfe within the compasse of Canaan but it was accomplished in the spirituall seede of Abraham in the conuersion of the Gentiles to the faith of Christ. 3. neither could that blessing of all the families of the earth be vnderstood of any carnall blessing but of the spirituall benediction of the Gentiles conuerted to the faith of Christ as it is said Isa. 53.11 My righteous seruant by his knowledge shall iustifie many 4. yea in that they are promised to be as the starres of heauen that is shall haue celestiall glorie this promise the seede of Abraham could not attaine vnto but by Christ the king of glorie Psal. 24.8 5. our blessed Sauiour saith that Abraham was glad to see his day he saw it and reioyced which sheweth that he had an euident knowledge and expresse faith of Christ. Pareus Perer. 4. But Stapleton in Antidot denieth that this faith of Abraham was a speciall faith of the remission of sinnes but onely the Catholike faith which is to assent vnto euery word of God Contra. 1. If Abraham did assent vnto the word of God then also to this word concerning the remission of sinnes in Christ vnlesse they will denie that Abraham had any word at all for the remission of his sinnes whereupon then arised that his singular ioy in Christ for wherein can a man ioy then in the remission of his sinnes and consequently that his name is written in heauen Luk. 10.20 2. If they hold the hope and assurance of remission of sinnes to be no part of the Catholike faith as indeede the Papists doe not make it let them keepe such Catholike faith to themselues we will none of it what comfort can one haue in that faith which can not assure him of Gods fauour and of the remission of his sinnes 7. Quest. Why Abrahams faith was imputed vnto him at this time and not before Although Moses then first maketh mention of Abrahams iustification by faith Gen. 15.6 yet it hath relation to all other acts of his faith going before for it was an act of faith that
Gods promises taketh him in effect not to say the truth and so dishonoureth him 5. Tolet nihil impossibile Deo credidit he beleeued that nothing was impossible vnto God 6. Lyranus he ascribed the promise not vnto his merit or worthinesse but vnto the goodnesse of God 7. But with Beza I ioyne all these together agnito collandato Deo c. he acknowledged and praised God that he is true and gratious so Bucerus illum verum omnipotentem credit illum invocat colit c. he beleeueth him to be both true and omnipotent and doth call vpon him worship and adore him Thus Abrahams faith is set forth quod credidit confidenter that he beleeued confidently He did not doubt of the promise of God thorough vnbeleefeâ— gratanter he beleeued thankefully because he gaue God the glorie and certainely he was fully assured Gorrhan Quest. 37. What was imputed to Abraham for righteousnesse v. 22. Therefore euen it was imputed to Abraham for righteousnesse 1. Tolet will haue this referred not simply vnto Abrahams saith to prooue that not his workes but his faith were imputed vnto him for righteousnesse but vnto the qualitie of his faith which was perfect because he was assured he beleeued confidently But seeeing the Apostle addeth that it was not written for Abraham onely but for vs also that faith should be imputed to vs for righteousnesse it is euident that the Apostle hath not relation vnto the particular qualitie of Abrahams faith but generally vnto the condition and nature of faith whereby all that beleeue are iustified for otherwise none should be iustified but they which haue the like perfect faith as Abraham had 2. Origens collection here also is not found that because the Greeke coniunction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and is here vsed inferreth that the like may be said of other his vertues as pietie mercie charitie quod reputata est ad iustitiam that it was reputed vnto him for iustice But this glosse is contrarie vnto the text which saith Abraham beleeued God and it was counted vnto him for righteousnesse this iustice is imputed vnto his faith not to any other of his vertues for it is the office onely of faith to beleeue and not of the rest now the Apostle inserteth the coniunction and because the sentence is so expressed by Moses which dependeth on the other clause Abraham beleeued God then it followeth and it was counted to him for righteousnesse Quest. 38. Of these words Now it is not written for him onely c. ver 23. 1. Here then is confuted their error who thinke that the Prophets did write vpon speciall and particular occasions onely for that age wherein they liued But the Apostle sheweth that this Scripture was written for our vse as he saith againe c. 15.4 Whatsoeuer is written is written for our learning Pareus 2. But all things which are written of Abraham are not written for our imitation as his arming of himselfe to recouer Lot that was taken captiue his offring vp of his sonne in sacrifice and such like acts for we must distinguish betweene the vniuersall or generall calling of those holy men which was to be worshippers of God and their particular which was for some speciall seruice in their generall calling the holy Patriarkes are by vs to be imitated and in such actions as thereunto belonged as Abraham is set forth to vs an example for beleeuing but the particular acts which they did by some speciall and extraordinarie direction of the spirit are not by vs to be imitated Martyr 3. Yet there is somewhat to be obserued euen in the singular and extraordinarie acts of the fathers worthie of our imitation As in Abrahams readinesse to sacrifice his sonne thus much we learne that as he preferred the commandement of God before the life of his sonne so we should preferre the will of God before all other things Martyr And so Origen here obserueth well est viri sapientis c. it is the part of a wise man to obserue quoâ—â—â—â— vnum quodque opus quod de Abrahame scribitur c. how euerie worke which is written of Abraham may be fulfilled in him 4. The same Origen also here hath an other good observation not onely the things written of Abraham are written for vs sed quae de Isaac scripta sunt similiter accipienda c. 〈◊〉 the things written of Isaac are so to be taken likewise and so of Iacob c. for the Apostles rule is generall as is alleadged before that whatsoeuer is written is written for our â—â—â—â—ing Quest. 39. How Abrahams faith is to be imitated by vs. v. 24. But also for vs to whom it shall be imputed c. 1. Here the Apostle sheweth that our faith must be answerable vnto Abrahams in these three things 1. first in the benefit of imputation of righteousnes as iustice came vnto Abraham by imputation so also it is giuen vnto vs the same kind of iustice before was alwaies in the Church from the beginning of the world to the ende 2. he sheweth to whom this benefit of imputation is imputed namely vnto beleeuers such as Abraham was vnbeleeuers then are excluded 3. what must be beleeued euen the same thing which AbrahaÌ„ beleeued of God that he was able to quicken the dead so we must beleeue in God that raised vp Iesus from the dead in which faith two things are contained the manner we must beleeue in God which noteth a firme and stedfast assurance and the matter which sheweth three things the author God that raised Iesus that is raised and the end in confessing him to be our Lord that is our Sauiour Mediator and Redeemer 2. But it will be obiected that Abrahams faith is inimitable because it was great and miraculous and a perfect faith Answ. 1. It was a perfect faith in comparison of ours but not perfect in it selfe for there is no mortall mans faith so perfect but it is mingled with some doubting 2. we are not required to imitate his faith in the quantitie and greatnesse thereof but in the qualitie that we beleeue in God as he did Faius and yet Abrahams faith was a great faith rather in respect of the fathers which liued vnder the old Testament then of the faithfull vnder the newe Quest. 40. Wherein Abrahams faith and ours differ and wherein they agree 1. They differ in promissionis specie in the kind and qualitie of the promise for Abraham was promised beside the spirituall blessing in the Messiah the possession of the land of Canaan the multiplying of his seede the victorie of his enemies the inheritance of the world to vs is onely promised the inheritance of the kingdome of God 2. in obiecto fidei in the particular obiect of faith Abraham beleeued in him which doth quicken the dead but we beleeue in him that raised Iesus from the dead which particular point of faith was not so plainly reuealed to Abraham 3. Abrahams faith was exemplarie for vs
or life without Christ. v. 17. Much more shall they which receiue c. raigne in life c. As in Adam sinne and death entred and so raigned ouer all so life raigneth by Iesus Christ then they which are not graft by faith into Christ but remaine onely in Adam cannot be pertakers of life they are still vnder the kingdome of sinne and death wherefore the Turkes Iewes and all other that are without the knowledge and faith of Christ howsoeuer they dreame of a kind of Paradise and terrene happinesse after this life yet they can haue no assurance of life seeing they are strangers from Christ So S. Peter saith Act. 4.12 That there is no other name giuen vnder heauen whereby we must be saued Doct. 6. That life doth accompanie righteousnesse v. 17. The Apostle saith that they which receiue the gift of righteousnesse shall raigne in life then as sinne raigned vnto death so righteousnesse raigneth vnto life wheresoeuer then righteousnesse is found whether inherent as in the Angels or imputed as in the faithfull who haue the righteousnesse of Christ imputed vnto them by faith there is the kingdome of life then they which doe feele the kingdome of righteousnesse to be begunne in them who both by faith are iustified in Christ and their faith is effectuall working by loue they are assured to enter into life as S. Paul knewe after he had kept the faith and fought a good fight that there was a crowne of righteousnesse laid vp for him 2. Tim. 4.8 Doct. 7. Of the vse of the lawe v. 20. The lawe entred c. that the offence should abound c. This is the proper vse of the lawe to bring a man to the knowledge of his sinne and to shewe him in what state he standeth by nature a transgressor of the lawe and so subiect to the curse but we must not rest in this vse of the lawe there is a second and more principall ende that by the abounding of sinne grace may more abound and in this sense the Apostle calleth the lawe a schoolemaster to bring vs to Christ Galath 3.19 that we by the lawe seeing our owne weakenesse and vnsufficiencie should seeke vnto Christ Iesus to finde righteousnes in him which cannot be obtained by the lawe 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. Whether a good conscience and integritie of life be the cause of peace with God Pererius disput 1. in c. 5. numer 2. vrgeth that place of the Prophet Isay c. 32.17 s he worke of iustice shall be peace euen the worke of iustice and quietnesse and assurance for euer whereupon he inferreth that opera iustitiae c. the workes of iustice and the keeping of Gods commandements doe worke in vs this tranquilitie and peace of the minde Contra. It might be here answeared that peace of conscience is the worke of our true iustice that is Christ who is called the Lord our iustice or righteousnesse Ierem. 23.10 but that this interpretation agreeth not with the former words v. 16. Iudgement shall dwell in the desert and iustice in the fruitfull field where the Prophet speaketh of the externall practise and exercise of iustice 2. Iunius seemeth to vnderstand these disiunctiuely the fruites of the spirit which should be powred vpon them v. 15. should bring faith iustice peace as the Apostle sheweth these to be the fruites of the spirit Rom. 14.17 righteousnesse peace ioy in the holy Ghost so also Faius But this distinction here cannot be admitted because it is directly said the worke of iustice shall be peace tranquilitie 3. But the best answer is that righteousnesse procureth peace not effective because it worketh this inward peace which is wrought in vs by the grace of iustification but declarative it declareth confirmeth and assureth vnto vs our peace as S. Peter exhorteth that we make our election and calling sure by good workes 2. Pet. 1.9 not that our workes make our election sure in it selfe which dependeth on the purpose of God but it is made sure vnto vs so the peace of conscience wrought in vs by faith is confirmed and ratified vnto vs by a good life euen as good workes are testimonies of our faith and in that sense are said by S. Iames c. 2. to iustifie Controv. 2. Against invocation of Saints 1. By whome we haue accesse through faith this text is well vrged by Peter Martyr and Pareus against the invocation of Saints for if by Christ we haue accesse vnto God what neede we the helpe of other mediators and intercessours the Papists then doe much derogate vnto the glorie of Christ in bringing an other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to enter vs and cause vs to haue accesse vnto God And further two arguments may be vrged out of the Apostles words he saith we haue accesse by him through faith but Saints are not the obiect of our faith we must onely beleeue in God Ioh. 14.1 Ye beleeue in God beleeue also in me 2. we haue accesse vnto this grace namely whereby we are iustified but by the Saints we are not iustified therefore by them we haue not accesse and entrance Controv. 3. Of the certaintie of saluation and of finall perseuerance v. 5. We haue accesse vnto this grace wherein we stand Calvin out of this place refuteth two errors of Popish sophistrie the one that the faithfull for the present cannot be certaine of the grace of God and of the remission of their sinnes the other that they are not sure of finall perseuerance But to stand in grace signifieth to be sure of the grace and fauour of God one may attaine vnto the fauour of the Prince but he is not sure to continue in it But Gods fauour in Christ is most constant whom Christ loueth he loueth to the end Iob. 13.1 Tolet here foisteth in one of his Popish drugs that tranquilitie and peace of conscience and certaintie of remission of sinnes is not the fruit or worke of faith in the faithfull for the wicked that knowe not their sinnes haue also a quiet conscience Tolet. annot 1. Contra. There is great difference between a senslesse and a quiet cōscience the wicked feele not the pricke of conscience because their sinnes are concealed from them but the faithfull haue peace of conscience after the sight of their sinnes which they know to be remitted in Christ So Paul was aliue without the law but afterward when sinne reviued he died Rom. 7.9 where then the conscience is cast into a slumber of securitie sinne reviuing awaketh troubleth it but where sinne is remitted in Christ the conscience ceaseth to be troubled and perplexed as in the wicked Controv. 4. That the tribulation of the Saints is not meritorious though it be said to worke patience We must vnderstand that the Apostle diuersely vseth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worketh for it is sometime ascribed vnto the principall efficient cause as vnto God the author and worker of all good things in vs 2. Cor. 5.5 sometime
vs as we must die for our brethren which is not to die in their stead but onely to profit them by our example Answ. The Apostle doth not simply compare the death of Christ and of the faithfull dying for their brethren together but onely in this that in both loue is expressed to the brethren though not in the like measure But Christs death doth not onely by the example thereof profit the Church as the death of the martyrs did but thereby mans saluation and redemption also was wrought 2. Obiect S. Paul saith that he suffered for the Colossians 1. Coloss. 1.24 which was not to satisfie for them or he suffered in their stead but onely to confirme their faith and so to edifie them Answ. There is great difference betweene the sufferings of Christ for his Church which was to redeeme it and the sufferings of Paul for his brethren which onely was to edifie them 3. Obiect As Christ is said to haue died for vs so likewise the Scripture saith he died for our sinnes Galath 1.4 the meaning is not in stead or place of our sinnes but. because of our sinnes in the same sense he died for vs that is for our cause not in our stead Answ. This is a childish cauill for the Scripture sheweth a manifest difference betweene these two phrases to die for vs that is to saue vs and to die for our sinnes not to saue them but to purge them and take them away 4. Obiect That which no lawe or custome euer allowed is not to be affirmed of Christ but one to die for an other is warranted by no lawe nor custome indeede one may pay an others pecuniarie mulct or debt because ones money may become an others but the death of one cannot be an others Answ. 1. The assumption is not true for euen among the Romanes there were some found that did offer themselues to present destruction for their countrey as Decius the Consull and Curtius these examples are farre vnlike vnto Christs yet they shewe that it is not against all vse and custome one to die for another 2. The proposition fayleth diuersly 1. Christs example is singular the like president cannot be found as the Apostle sheweth v. 7. that he died for his enemies which neuer any did therefore we must not seeke for lawe or custome to measure this singular act of Christ by 2. it is also false that no lawe nor rule can be found for this for it is reuealed in the Euangelicall lawe that God gaue his sonne to die for the world the lawe of Moses indeede required that the same person that sinned should die but that which was impossible to the lawe is fulfilled in Christ Rom. 8.2 yea the blind high Priest spake the truth vnwittingly Ioh. 11.50 That it was expedient that one die for the people and that the whole natiō perish not he little thought that Christ should redeeme the people from euerlasting death yet ignorantly vttered that which the Lord intended 5. Obiect It is a great cruelty and iniustice to punish him that is innocent and to let goe vnpunished the offenders they then accuse God of cruelty and iniustice in deliuering vp his innocent sonne to death for vs sinners Answ. 1. Gods acts are not to be measured according to the rules of humane proceedings for the like temper of iustice and mercie cannot be found among men neither haue any the like absolute power as God hath to dispose of all things according to his will and pleasure who if he should as he made the world of nothing so being it of a sudden to nothing againe should not therefore shewe himselfe either cruell or vniust 2. Neither is it vniust for the innocent to suffer punishment for the offenders vpon these conditions 1. If both of them be of the same nature 2. If the innocent partie doe willingly offer himselfe 3. If he can by his owne strength ouercome the punishment 4. and if thereby he can effectually procure the saluation of others all which doe concurre in Christs voluntarie suffering for vs. 6. Obiect The Scripture saith The same soule that sinneth shall die Ezeck 18. it was therefore vniust that Christ should die that had not sinned and those escape which had sinned Answ. These legall sentences shewe what God might according to the iustice of the lawe haue required of euerie one they are no rules of Gods proceeding in mercie with his children according to the promise of the Gospel 7. Obiect God might if it had pleased him haue freely forgiuen men their trespasses therefore Christ needed not to haue died for them Answ. 1. First it is no good argument à posse ad esse from that which may be no that which is God might doe it therefore he did it or would doe it is no good consequent 2. Neither is it true that God could otherwise haue forgiuen men then by the death of Christ his iustice beeing presupposed for God cannot denie himselfe seeing the sentence was past that they should die the death if they transgressed this decree must stand and the death deserued must be satisfied for neither is this any want or defect in Gods power but an argument of the perfection of his nature that he cannot lie neither is mutable 8. Obiect It is perfect mercie to forgiue freely and perfect iustice that the offender should be punished onely but in God is perfect mercie and iustice Answ. 1. It is true that perfect mercie and perfect iustice considered apart and by themselues haue these effects and properties but so can they not be incident into one and the same subiect therefore seeing Gods mercie and iustice are tempered together they must be so considered as the one destroy not the other 2. Indeede the rigor of the lawe requireth perfect iustice but in the Gospell of Christ is propounded a way how the seueritie of Gods iustice should be moderated with equitie and tempered in mercie or else no 〈◊〉 should be saued 9. Obiect One man can but redeeme one and therefore either there must be found out an infinite sort of redeemers for all men or Christ redeemed but one Answ. The antecedent is false for many times for one captiue Prince a thousand common prisoners are set at libertie much more auaileable for all was the redemption purchased by Christ the Prince of our saluation ex Pareo Controv. 7. Against other obiections of Socinus and other impugning the fruit and efficacie of Christs death in reconciling vs to God his father 1. Obiect Whereas the Apostle saith v. 8. God setteth forth his loue toward vs hence it is obiected that seeing God loued vs before the foundation of the world and whom he loueth he is not angrie with therefore Christ needed not to haue died to reconcile vs to God and to appease his fathers wrath toward vs. Answ. 1. The antecedent is true concerning those whom God loued simplie and was neuer offended with them because they had not sinned
veniall sinne annot 1. Ioh. 1. sect 5. Contra 1. We confesse that the guilt and punishment of originall sinne is washed away by faith in Christs blood but yet the staine and blot remaineth still though in Christ we are deliuered from the punishment due vnto sinne yet the euill qualitie of our nature is not purged away namely our naturall pronenes and aptnes to euill which shall not fully be purged vntill the resurrection when we shall put off all corruption together with mortalitie to this purpose Augustine saith well Meminisse debemus omnium peccatorum plenam remissionem c. we must remember that there is full remission of our sinnes in baptisme hominis vero qualitatem non totam continuo mutari c. yet the qualitie or condition of man is not straite chaunged de peccator merit remissi lib. 1. c. 25. 2. and that originall corruption hath the verie nature of sinne euen after baptisme the Apostle sheweth euidently Rom. 7.7 where he calleth the concupiscence of our nature sinne see further hereof Synops. Centur. 3. er 11. Controv. 14. What originall sinne is against the Romanists and â—some others and specially against them which hold it to be Adams sinne imputed onely to his posteritie 1. Faber Erasmus in their annotations vpon this place seeme to be of opinion that originall sinne is onely a pronenesse and aptnesse vnto sinne which is graft in vs by nature But this is refelled by the Apostle here who saith that in Adam all haue sinned and therefore death also is entred vpon all death is the stipend of sinne if then death actually is gone ouer all so also sinne 2. Flacius Illyricus held originall sinne to be a kind of substance But this is a dangerous opinion God onely is the Creator of substances and natures but he made not sinne 3. As he giueth too much to originall sinne making it a substantiall thing in man so the Romanists too much extenuate it allowe it too little 1. Pighius and Catharinus thinke that originall sinne is nothing else but the preuarication and transgression of our first parents made their posterities onely by imputation because Adam in himselfe contained all mankind and God made his couenant not onely with him but with all his posteritie beeing then in his loines and so his sinne is imputed vnto them but there is nothing in men naturally that hath the proper nature of sinne which is defined to be dictum factum vel concupitum c. somewhat said done or coueted against the law of God which cannot be in infants to this purpose Catharinus and before him Pighius in 1. contr de peccat origin Contra. 1. Bellarmine lib. 5. de amissi grat c. 16. and Pererius disput 16. in 5. c. ad Roman would confute this opinion and prooue that originall sinne is a reall and inherent corruption in the nature of man and not imputed onely because as we were sinners in Adam so we are made iust by Christ which is not by the imputation of his righteousnesse but by an inherent iustice which is giuen vnto vs by the merits of Christ c. But this were to confute one error by another for the Apostle euidently and expressely sheweth c. 4.3 that Abrahams faith was imputed and counted vnto him for righteousnesse and therefore the iustice whereby we are counted iust before God is the iustice of Christ imputed to vs by faith so also Adams sinne is imputed to his posteritie but beside there is an euilnes and prauitie of nature procured by the transgression of Adam as beside the imputed righteousnes of Christ there is also in the faithfull an inherent righteousnesse also which is their holines and sanctification but they are not thereby iustified before God 2. We haue better reasons out of the Scripture to refute this assertion for where there is no sinne death hath no power because all are sinners by nature they all die otherwise the Apostle had not reasoned well that death raigned from Adam to Moses because all had sinned v. 14. And v. 19. the Apostle saith that by one mans disobedience many are peccatores constituti made sinners which is more then to be counted sinners or to haue sinne imputed 3. That definition is of actuall sinne which is of such things as are said done or coueted against the law of God But sinne is more generally taken for any thing which is contrarie to the law of God now the naturall rebellion and resistance of the flesh in not beeing subiect to the will of the spirit but continually striuing against it which is to be seene euen in children who seeth not that it is contrarie to the law of God and hath in it the nature of sinne 4. Dauid complaineth that he was borne in sinne and conceiued in iniquitie Psal. 51. and S. Paul Rom. 7. calleth his naturall corruption sinne dwelling in him So that these holy men confessed that they were sinfull by nature Otherwise if there were not in vs originall sinne by nature of our owne but onely Adams imputed it would follow that his posteritie should be punished not for their owne but anothers sinne which were against the rule of Gods iustice Martyr Controv. 15. That originall sinne is not onely the privation of originall iustice Bellarmine with other of the Romanists will not haue originall sinne to be any euill positiue qualitie in man but onely carentia iustitiae originalis habitualis aversio à Deo a wanting of originall iustice and an habituall aversion from and a forsaking of God Bellar. lib. 5. de amission grat c. 15. Lyranus addeth an other clause that originall sinne is a defect or want of originall iustice cum debito habendi eam with a due debt or obligation to haue the same c. Now their cheefe reason that originall sinne is no euill habite or positiue qualitie but onely a defect or privation is this because God is the author of all positiue things that haue a beeing or existence but he is no way the cause of originall sinne Bellarm. ibid. Thoring replic ad addit 5. Paul Burgens And if it were an habite Adam could not haue transmitted it to his posteritie Bellarm. ibid. Contra. 1. Paulus Burgens taketh exception to Lyranus difinition of originall sinne that it is not a meere priuation but habitus corruptus a corrupt habite like as in a disease there is not onely a priuation of health but there is also some positiue thing habet humores male dispositos the humors also are euill affected and disposed and so is it in originall sinne there is an euill qualitie and habite beside the want of originall iustice and therefore it is called concupiscence quae sonat aliquod positivum which foundeth and signifieth some positiue thing c. This exception of Burgensis is iust and his opinion herein is agreeable to the Apostle who calleth originall sinne peccatum inhabitans an in-dwelling sinne Rom. 7.20 and corpus mortis the bodie
of death originall sinne then hath a kind of existence for how else could it be called a bodie of sinne or death see more hereof elsewhere Synops. Cen. 4. err 14. 2. Concerning the reasons obiected 1. God is the author of euerie substance and of euery naturall qualitie but not of vnnaturall dispositions or qualities as neither of diseases in the bodie nor of vices in the minde this euill qualitie was procured by mans voluntarie transgression 2. and though habites which are personall and obtained by vse and industrie are not transmitted to posteritie yet this euill habite was not personall in Adam as he is considered vt singularis persona as a singular person but by him it entred into the nature of man as he was totius humanae naturae principiū the beginning of the whole nature of man 3. Burgensis taketh another exception vnto Lyranus addition and he thinketh that Adams posteritie is not bound to haue the originall iustice which was giuen to Adam for they haue no such bond either by the law of nature for that originall iustice was supernaturally added or by any diuine precept for God gaue vnto Adam no other precept but that one not to eate of the forbidden fruite and therefore they were not bound at all to haue or reteine Adams originall iustice Thus Burgens Contra. 1. Herein I rather consent vnto Thoring the Replic vpon Burgens who thus argueth that this debt or bond to haue originall iustice was grounded vpon the law of nature which is the rule of right reason for by nature euery one is tied to seeke the perfection and conseruation of it kind and this originall iustice tended vnto the perfection of man which though it were supernaturally added vnto man yet it was not giuen him alone sed pro tota natura for the whole nature of man and so he concludeth well that man is culpable in not hauing this originall iustice though not culpâ actuali quae est suppositi by any actuall fault which belongeth to the person or subiect yet culpâ originali quae est natura by an originall fault which is in nature To this purpose the Replic And this may be added further that if Adams posteritie were not debters in respect of this originall iustice then were they not bound to keepe the law which requireth perfect righteousnesse and so it would follow that they are not transgressors against the law if they were not bound to keepe it the first exception then of Burgensis may be recieued but not the second 2. Pighius also who denieth originall sinne to be a privation or want of originall iustice holdeth it to be no sinne to want that iustice which is not enioyned by any law vnto mankind for no law can be produced which bindeth infantes to haue that originall iustice and therein he concurreth with Burgensis Contra. But this obiection is easily refuted for first man was created according to Gods image in righteousnesse and holines which image Adams posteritie is bound to retaine but he by his sinne defaced that image and in stead thereof begate children after his owne image Gen. 5.3 in the state of corruption And whereas Pighius replieth out of Augustine that the image of God in man consisteth in the three faculties of the soule the vnderstanding memorie and will Augustine must not be so vnderstood as though herein consisted onely the image of God but as therein is shadowed forth the misterie of the Trinitie for the Apostle expressely sheweth that this image of God is seene in righteousnes and holines Ephes. 4.24 An other lawe is the lawe of nature which is the rule which euery one is to followe Cicero could say that convenientur viuere c. to liue agreeably to this law is the chiefe ende of man to this lawe euen infants are also bound there is a third lawe which is the morall which saith thou shalt not lust which prohibiteth not onely actuall but originall concupiscence And whereas Pighius here obiecteth that a lawe is giuen in vaine of such things as cannot be avoided therein he sheweth his ignorance for it is not in mans power to keep the lawe for then it had not beene necessarie for Christ to haue died for vs who came to performe that which was impossible by the lawe Rom. 8.3 yet was not the lawe giuen so in vaine for there are two speciall vses thereof both to giue vs direction how to liue well and to bring vs to the knowledge of sinne xe Mart. 4. This then is originall sinne 1. it consisteth partly of a defect and want of originall iustice in that the image of God after the which man was created in righteousnesse and holines was blotted out by the fall of man partly in an euill habite disposition and qualitie and disorder of all the faculties and powers both of bodie and soule This was the start of man after his fall and the same is the condition of all his posteritie by nature Augustine also maketh originall sinne a positiue qualitie placing it in the concupiscence of the flesh not the actuall concupiscence but that naturall corruption which although it be more generall then to containe it selfe within the compasse of concupiscence onely yet he so describeth it by the most manifest effect because our naturall corruption doth most of all shew and manifest it selfe in the concupisence and lust of our members 2. The subiect then and matter of originall sinne are all the faculties and powers of soule and bodie the former is the pravitie and deformitie of them the efficient cause was the peruersnes of Adams will the instrument is the carnall propagation the end or effect is euerlasting damnation both of bodie and soule without the mercie of God Martyr 3. Originall sinne is taken either actiuely for the sinne of Adam which was the cause of sinne in his posteritie which is called originale origmans originall sinne giuing beginning or passiuely for the naturall corruption raised in Adams ofspring by his transgression which is tearmed originale originatum originall sinne taking beginning 4. Of this originall sinne taken both waies there are three misserable effects 1. participatio culpa the participating in the fault or offence for we were all in Adams loines when he transgressed and so we all sinned in him as here the Apostle saith 2. imputatio reatus the imputation of the guilt and punishment of sinne we are the children of wrath by nature subiect both to temporall and eternall death 3. there is naturae depratatio vel deformitas the depravation and deformitie of nature wherein there dwelleth no good thing Rom. 17.18 Controv. 16. Of the wicked heresie of Marcion and Valentinus with the blasphemous Manichees 1. Origen out of the words of the former verse where the Apostle speaketh of our attonement and reconciliation by Christ confureth the heresie of Marcion and Valentinus whose opinion was that there was some substance quae naturaliter Deo sit inimica which naturally is
Cor. 15.32 S. Paul had fought with beasts at Ephesus after the manner of men as others vsed to doe 4. sometime it is referred to the humane and ordinarie phrase of speaking as in this place 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doct. That baptisme is not to be iterated v. 3. Haue beene baptised into his death c. Hence it is inferred that baptisme is not to be iterated or more then once to be administred because as men are but once naturally borne and are once to die so because in baptisme our spirituall birth and death are represented it sufficeth once to be baptised this maketh against the Hemerobaptistae which thinke it necessarie daily and often to be baptised but as man hath but one naturall birth so our supernaturall birth in baptisme is sufficient 2. Doct. That infants haue sinne In that the Apostle saith of all that they are baptised into the death of Christ that is to die vnto sinne that the bodie of sinne might be destroied as he saith v. 6. hence Augustine concludeth lib. 6. cont Iulian. c. 1. that children haue sinne for to what end else should they be baptised to die vnto sinne 3. Doct. Of the comparing and conferring of Scriptures together v. 3. All we which haue beene baptised vnto Iesus Christ c. Hence Origen noteth because the Apostle addeth not all we that are baptised in the name of the Father the Sonne and holy Ghost that it is his manner when he citeth any Scripture not to alleadg the whole text but those things onely quae praesentis causae requirit assertio which the state of the present cause requireth Pareus further addeth that what is breefely touched in some place of Scripture is more at large handled in another as here the misterie of baptisme is opened which is but breefely set forth in the first institution of baptisme where Christ onely biddeth to preach and baptise in the name of the Trinitie 4. Doct. Of the misteries set forth in baptisme v. 3. Here are three misticall points expressed in baptisme 1. in that we are said to be baptised into Christ whereby is signified our implanting and grafting into Christ which word the Apostle vseth v. 5.2 there is a communicating of the death and resurrection of Christ his death with all the fruites thereof is applied vnto vs 3. our renouation and newnes of life with our spirituall dying vnto sinne is also shadowed forth in baptisme Pareus 5. Doct. Of the distinction of sinne raigning and not raigning v. 12. Let not sinne raigne c. All sinne in the wicked and vnregenerate is peccation regnans raigning sinne whether it be originall or actuall because they giue the reine vnto sinne and obey the lusts thereof In the regenerate though to speake properly there be no absolute kingdome of sinne because it cannot possesse them totally and finally but at length they wrestle forth yet euery sinne in the regenerate committed against their conscience and depriuing them for the time of the hope of remission of sinnes is a raigning sinne when they doe not resist it but obey the lusts thereof such was Dauids adulterie sinne not raigning in them is their originall concupiscence their infirmities sinnes of ignorance omission and such like which they doe daiely mourne for and striue against 6. Doct. What manner of seruice must be performed to righteousnesse v. 19. As you haue giuen your members servants to vncleannes c. so c. We must serue righteousnesse as before we serued sinne 1. libenter willingly and cheerefully 2. vigilanter 3. celeriter speedely not putting off our seruice 4. potenter mightily with all our strength and power 5. ardenter earnestly zealously not coldly or slackely 6. indesinenter constantly without ceasing intermission or giuing ouer Gorrhan 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. Against the administring of the sacraments in an vnknowne tongue v. 3. Know ye not c. Hayma taketh this to be a reprehension of the Apostle reproouing them for their ignorance as if he should haue said certe id puto ignoratis I verily thinke ye are ignorant and if ye be I will shew it vnto you c. But Origen better inferreth that the Apostle speaketh taquam scientibus edoctis as to men of knowledge c wel taught hereupon he sheweth that in the Apostles time the vse was otherwise then in his daies non et numie fieri videmus typus tantum modo mysteriorum bis qui baptizantur sed virtus corum ratio tradebatur then not onely the type it selfe and misterie of the sacrament was deliuered to those which were baptized as now is vsed to be done but the efficacie and reason thereof c. the meaning of the sacrament explaned so that none were ignorant what was signified thereby as the Apostle speaking here of baptisme and of the spirituall vse and signification therof appealeth vpon their knowledge which sheweth the superstition of the Romanists who cause the sacraments to be administred vnto their people in the latine tongue and so they are kept in ignorance not knowing the right vse of the sacraments but resting onely in the outward ceremonies superstitious vsages which they haue brought in and added to the sacraments Controv. 2. Concerning inherent iustice Stapleton a notable champion for the Romanists Antidot p. 312. thus reasoneth out of the Apostles words v. 2. for inherent iustice they which are dead to sinne are wholly renewed in the inward man and so by their renouation are acceptable vnto God and thereby iustified but by the grace of Christ we die vnto sinne not to liue vnto the same any more Ergo thereby we are accepted of God and reconciled to him Contra. The proposition diuersely fayleth 1. this renouation of the inward man is not totall or perfect but onely in part though sinne doe no longer raigne in them that are iustified yet the reliques thereof remaine still the vnderstanding will and affections are but reformed in part for the Apostle faith we know in part 1. Cor. 13.9 and as our knowledge is such is our charitiâ— indeede in the next world when we are glorified all imperfection shall be done away and we shall be perfect as God is perfect but while we dwell in these houses of clay we are compassed with many imperfections 2. This our renovation though it be not perfect yet is accepted thorough the perfect obedience of Christ but it is not accepted as our iustification whereby we are reconciled vnto God for that which instifieth vs must be perfect which is onely the righteousnesse of Christ applyed vnto vs by faith See further touching inherent iustice Synops. Centur. 4. exr 56. and Contr. 14. following Controv. 3. That the Sacrament of baptisme doth not conferre grace by the outward worke v. 3. Knowe yee not that all we which haue beene baptized into Iesus Christ haue beene baptized into his death c. Hence the Romanists would inferre that baptisme doth worke in all regeneration for
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
but this supplie is not necessarie the sense is full and perfect without it as afterward shall appeare 2. Some doe transpose the words thus because the law was weake by reason of the flesh Syrian interpreter but in the originall the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherein do follow after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the law it were an hard construction to set the relatiue before the antecedent 3. Neither neede we with Camerarius to supplie the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for or because as thus to read because of that which was impossible to the law c. which reading Pareus followeth and Beza misliketh not 4 Neither need we here to admit an Hebraisme with Tolet who will haue the participle sending according to the phrase of the Hebrew to be taken for he sent because he would coine those words and for sinne vnto the last clause which doe hang on the words going before 5. Neither is it put in the nominatiue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this sense such was the weaknes of the law as Beza for here also diuerse words must be supplied 6. But the best reading is to put it in the accusatiue the thing impossible to the law in as much as it was weake c. and to referre it to the last clause condemned sinne in the flesh by way of opposition in this sense God sending his Sonne c. condemned sinne in the flesh which was impossible to the law as the Latine well obserueth and so our English translations doe well expresse it thus for that which was impossible to the law c. Quest. 5. What is meant by the similitude of sinnefull flesh 1. The Maniches and Marcionites did wrest the Apostles words to signifie that Christ had no true humane flesh but a similitude and likenes onely But Basil epistol 65. well answereth them that this word similitude must not simply be referred to flesh but to sinnefull flesh for Christ was like vnto vs in all things sinne onely excepted 2. The Commentatie which goeth vnder Hieromes name saith it is called the similitude of sinnefull flesh quia erat ad peccandum proclivior because it was prone vnto sinne but yet he took it without sinne for Christs flesh beeing conceiued without sinne had no pronnes or aptnes at all vnto sinne vnlesse he meane humane flesh in generall and not that particular flesh which was assumed by Christ. 3. Some by the similitude of sinnefull flesh interpret similem per passibilitatem mortâ—â—tatem like in mortalitie and suffering gloss inter Lyranus so also Melancthon peccatur in speciem visa est it seemed as sinnefull flesh because he sustained the punishment doe vnto our sinnes likewise Osiander because he bare our punishment he was taken of some to be a great sinner But this sense is to much restrained and too particular 4. Nor yet doth Erasmus well translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in specie in the shew of sinnefull flesh for so the Angels and Christ himselfe before his incarnation appeared in humane shape 5. But Theophylact well interpreteth he had our flesh secundam substantiam sed peccaâ—â— expertem in substance but void of sinne so also Basil with other Greeke expositors carâ—â—â— nostram in naturalibus affectibus he tooke our flesh with the naturall affections he tooke our verie flesh as Phil. 2.7 he was found in shape as a man Pareus Beza with others Quest. 6. Of these words and for sinne condemned sinne in the flesh 1. Origen by sinne vnderstandeth sacrifice for sinne so many of our new wiâ—â—â— Melancthon Bucer Calvin Osiander Martyr so also Pererius Vatablus disput 4.10 so they interpret pro peccato 1. per peccatum by sinne by sinne that is by his sacrifice so sinne he condemned sinne in the flesh but though elsewhere sinne is taken in that sense for sacrifice for sinne as 2. Cor. 5.21 he made him to be sinne for vs which knewe no sinne yet it is but an hard construction here for the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth not by or thorough but pro for 2. Augustines exposition is yet more hard who by sinne vnderstandeth the flesh of Christ which he tooke like vnto sinnefull flesh and therefore it is called sinne lib. 3. contra 2. epist. Pelag. c. 6. but the Apostle saith afterward he condemned sinne in the flesh this should be superfluously put if by sinne he had meant the flesh before 3. Hillarius in Psal. 67. by sinne which is condemned interpreteth the deuill who was condemned and iudged in Christs death by that sinne which he had committed by the Iewes in putting Christ to death this seemeth hard also 4. Anselme by death in the first place will haue death signified which is the effect of sinne and so Christ by his death condemned sinne but the Greeke preposition will not beare this sense 5. Chrysostome and Theodoret whom Tolet followeth deuise this sense that Christ condemned sinne tanquam reum iniquitatis as guiltie of great sinne and iniquitie because it rose vp against Christ beeing innocent and caused him to die so they doe giue vnto sinne a certaine person which for the great offence which is had committed was condemned 6. But all these expositions fayle herein because they ioyne these words and for sinne to the last clause condemned whereas they are a part of the former member how God sent his Sonne in the similitude of sinnefull flesh and for sinne that is vt tolleret peccatum to take away sinne so Beza Pareus Rolloch and this exposition Oecumenius also maketh mention of so that this is the ende why God sent his Sonne to take away sinne 7. There is also an other exposition which the ordin gloss hath and Gorrhan peccatum de peccato sinne of sinne they interpret to be the corruption of our nature springing from the sinne of Adam But this fayleth with the rest in seuering the words from the former sentence Quest. 7. How Christ condemned sinne in the flesh 1. Tolet vnderstandeth it of the dominion of sinne which it had before in our members but now in Christ sinne is depriued of his dominion 2. Beza referreth it to the sanctification of our nature in Christ which he tooke without sinne and by flesh he vnderstandeth the humane nature sanctified in Christ 3. Chrysostome ioyneth these two together that Christ both non peccavit sinned not at all and so sinne ouercame not him and in that he died vicit condemnavit peccatum he ouercame and condemned sinne likewise Haymo saith Christ two wayes condemned sinne because he sinned not in his flesh mortificando in cruce and he condemned it by mortifying the same vpon the crosse 4. Erasmus giueth this sense convicit coarguit peccatores he convinced and reprooued sinners that is he shewed them to be hypocrites and deceiuers which hitherto had deluded the world with a false shewe of iustice and yet they put Christ to death as a transgressor of the law but the Apostles intendment
Obiect The Apostle saith v. 15. If ye liue after the flesh yee shall die but if ye mortifie the deedes of the bodie ye shall liue therefore mortification is the cause of life and saluation Contra. 1. Hence followeth that mortification is necessarie vnto saluation yet not as a cause but as a necessarie condition without the which there is no faith and consequently no saluation 2. eternall life is the gift of God c. 6.23 therefore not due vnto our merits euill workes are the cause of damnation because they iustly deserue it but it followeth not that good workes are the cause of saluation for they are both imperfect and so vnproportinable to the reward and they are due otherwise to be done and therefore merite not Controv. 4. Against the Arrians and Eunomians concerning the deitie of the holy Ghost v. 2. The law of the spirit of life c. hath freedome Chrysostome homil de adorand spirit from this place prooueth the deitie of the spirit against the Arrian and Eunomiâ—au heretikes who made great difference in the persons of the Trinitie the Sonne they affirmed to be a creature and much inferiour to the Father and the holy Ghost they made servum ministrum silij a seruant and minister of the Sonne Chrysostome confuteth them by this place for if the spirit be the author of libertie and freedome to others then is he most free himselfe and not a minister or seruant as the Apostle saith 2. Cor. 2.17 where the spirit of the Lord is there is libertie Controv. 5. Against the Pelagians that a man by nature cannot keepe and fulfill the law This error is confuted by the expresse words of the Apostle who saith that the law was weake by reason of the flesh and so not able to iustifie vs by the flesh the Apostle vnderstandeth not substantiam caruis the substance of the flesh as the Maniches were readie to catch at these and the like places to confirme their wicked opinion who held the flesh of man to be euill by nature nor yet the carnall rites and obseruations of the law which were not able to cleanse the obseruers of them as Origen here interpreteth and Lyranus following him But by the flesh we vnderstand with Chrysostome carnales sensus the carnall affections carnalitatem quae rebellabat the carnalitie of man which rebelled against the spirit gloss ordinar concupisentias carnis the concupiscence of the flesh Haymo prauitatem naturae the pravitie of nature Martyr which hindereth that none can keepe the law to be iustified by it This then manifestly conuinceth the Pelagians for if the flesh make the law weake and vnable to be kept then none by the strength of their nature and flesh can fulfill the law Controv. 6. The fulfilling of the law is not possible in this life no not to them which are in the state of grace 1. The Romanists out of these words of the Apostle v. 4. That the righteousnesse of the law may be fulfilled in vs which walke not after the flesh doe inferre that they which walke not after the flesh may fulfill the law so that either it must be denied that none in this life walke after the spirit or it must be graunted that by such the law may be fulfilled Pere disput 5. Bellarmine addeth that if the law cannot be fulfilled Christus non obtinuit quod vâ—luit Christ hath not compassed or obtained that which he intended for therefore he died that the iustice of the law might be fulfilled Contra. 1. Indeed Origen whose errors and erroneous interpretations our aduersaries themselues will be ashamed of sauing where they serue their turne first deuised this interpretation who by the law here vnderstandeth the law of the mind which is fulfilled quando lex peccati in membris c. when the law of sinne in the members resisteth it not and Haymo hath this glosse that we beeing redeemed by Christ might spiritually fulfill the workes of the law per cuius impletionem possumus iustificari by the fulfilling whereof we may be iustified But this place is better vnderstood of the obedience of Christ who fulfilled the law which is imputed vnto vs by faith and thus doe not onely expound our new writes Melancthon Bucer Hyperius Calvin Beza with others but some of the auncient expositors as Theophylact quae lex facere nitibatur ea Christus nostri gratia executus est those things which the law endeuoured Christ hath performed for vs so also Oecumenius scotus finis legis per Christum partus est exhibitus the scope and end of the law is obtained exhibited by Christ yet we must endeuour to keepe those things which are deliuered per conuersationem bonam fidem by a good conuersation and faith 2. And that this is the meaning of the Apostle 1. the phrase sheweth that the law might be fulfilled in vs he saith not by vs Beza 2. because there is none so perfect in this life that neither in thought word nor deed transgresseth not the law 3. The law was weake through the infirmitie of the flesh but the infirmitie and weakenes of the flesh remaineth still euen in the regenerate therefore neither in them the righteousnesse of the law can be fulfilled 4. To the contrarie arguments thus we answer 1. the Apostle saith not that they which walke after the spirit fulfill the law but the law is fulfilled in them that is imputed vnto them by faith in Christ. 2. though the faithfull cannot fulfill the law yet Christ performed what he intended that he might keepe the law for them and they be iustified by faith in him 3. this clause then which walke not after the flesh is added to shew who they are for whom Christ hath fulfilled the law and to what end namely to such as walke in newnes of life 5. Some doe thinke that the Apostle speaketh here of two kinds of fulfilling the law one imputatione by imputation of Christs obedience which is our iustification the other inchoatione by a beginning onely which is our sanctification begunne in this life and perfited in the next when it shall be fulfilled Martyr Pareus But the other sense is better for the Apostle speaketh of a present fulfilling of the law in them which walke according to the spirit not of a fulfilling respited and excepted in the next life which is most true but not agreeable to the Apostles meaning here 6. So the Apostle in this place setteth forth three benefits purchased vnto vs by Christ 1. remission of our sinnes in that Christ bare in himselfe the punishment due vnto our sins 2. then the imputation of Christs obedience and performing of the law 3. our sanctification that we by the spirit of Christ doe die vnto sinne and rise vnto newnes of life which our sanctification is necessarily ioyned with our iustification but no part thereof 1. because it is imperfect in this life it is perfect after a sort perfectione partium by
10. and in staying the insulting of the Gentiles ouer them c. 11. Lyran. and so he protesteth that he speaketh the truth from his heart as he was bound in conscience otherwise bearing a most louing affection toward his nation to this purpose Calvin Martyr Pareus Tolet annot 2. Quest. 2. Of the forme and words of the Apostles oath 1. I speake the truth in Christ c. Origen is here somewhat curious that there is some truth in Chrst some not in Christ as the Pythonisse that cryed after the Apostles that they were the seruants of the most high God Act. 16. and Caiphas that ignorantly spake the truth yet did not speake the truth in Christ. 2. but S. Paul here doth nothing els but call Christ to witnesse that he speaketh the truth and so he appealeth to three witnesses Christ his owne conscience and the Holy Spirit Theophyl Pareus 2. My conscience bearing me witnesse c. Origen againe here doth distinguish of the conscience for the Gentiles also had a conscience which did accuse or excuse them Rom. 2.15 but such a conscience that is a witnesse both of good and euill cannot be said to beare witnesse in the holy Ghost only the Apostles conscience vbi cogitatio non habet quod accuset where the thoughts haue nothing to accuse of is said to beare witnesse in the holy Ghost as Lyranus interpreteth a conscience bene ordinata rectified and well setled 3. I lie not 1. here are these two things seene in Paul which Aristotle requireth in a wise man which are non mentiri not to lie and the other mentientem manifestare to be able to detect a lyar and to manifest the truth as here S. Paul toucheth both Gryneus 2. and this is added because one may lie in telling the truth supposing it to be false so the Apostle ioyneth both together veritie in his words and sinceritie in his minde Pareus 3. and further it is the manner of the Hebrewe speach for more certaintie to denie the contrarie to that which is affirmed as 1. Sam. 3.18 Samuel told him euerie whit and bidde nothing from him and Ioh. 1.20 He confessed and denied not and so is it here Tolet â—â— commentar Quest. 3. Whether it were lawefull for Paul to grieue for the Iewes whose reiection was according to Gods appointment v. 2. I haue great heauinesse c. 1. That it is lawfull to mourne for the calamities that fall vpon those whom we wish well vnto appeareth 1. by the example of holy men that haue so mourned as Samuel for Saul Dauid for Absalom Ieremie for the captiuitie of his people our Blessed Sauiour for Ierusalem 2. Christians are not without naturall affection as to reioyce for prosperous things so to mourne for the contrarie and griefe ariseth à lasione rei amatae from the hurt of the thing beloued 2. But for the solution of this doubt two things are to be considered in respect whereof the minde is diuersly carried for in our griefe as we respect the calamitie which is befallen we doe mourne but looking vnto Gods prouidence we are well apayed and do moderate our passions submitting them to the will of God like as naturall men among the heathen did preferre the publike state of the commonwealth before their priuate calamities as Crassus when his sonne was slaine encouraged the souldiers to fight manfully for that chance onely concerned him And as a iudge in the execution of offenders though as a man he grieueth that they should be put to death yet he is well resolued and contented in the contemplation of iustice that the equitie of the lawe for the example of others should take place yea as God himselfe delighteth not in the death of any yet is well pleased in the punishment of the wicked according to the rule and course of his iustice So S. Paul here doth put on as it were two affections one was naturall of humanitie in pitying the fall of his nation the other was supernaturall in submitting himselfe and his will to the will and purpose of God Quest. 4. Of the meaning of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Apostle vseth v. 3. 1. Concerning the two Greeke words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the Greeke letter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Budaeus maketh this difference betweene them he would haue the first to signifie the things themselues which are dedicated to sacred vses the other the persons that were deuoted to destruction and he deriueth them both from the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of hanging or setting vp that as the one were set vp in the temples so the others names were set vp in places of execution in hatred and detestation of them But Beza verie well obserueth that in the Scriptures they are both vsed in the same sense so also Tolet annot 3. 2. Chrysostome interpreteth anathema separatum separated from the common vse and it first was vsed of such things as for honour sake were separated and not to be touched then secondarily of such things as were separated and accused and worthie to be detested of all and this sense of the word is agreeable to the words of the Apostle as the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth from Christ as Beza well noteth here so then that was anathema which was so separate from common vse as it was not lawefull to be redeemed but it must be killed and some things were so separated for honour sake as the sacrifices some for horror and detestation as the leprous persons which were separated from the congregation Pareus and in this sense doth the Apostle vse the word anathema here which answeareth to the Hebrew word cherem which signifieth to bequeath to destruction 3. Whereupon Hierome will haue this word to signifie to kill and so he thinketh the Apostle speaketh of the killing of his bodie but cherem simply signified not killing but with horror and detestation as of a thing accursed 4. Some take the better sense of the word as it signifieth some precious thing and treasure whose opinion Chrysostome maketh mention of with some derision but that it cannot be so taken here it shall be shewed in the next question Quest. 5. Whether the Apostle did well in desiring to be separated from Christ from whome he knewe he could not be separated 1. Hierome to avoide the difficulties that might be here obiected thinketh that the Apostle speaketh onely of a temporall separation by death voluit perire in carne c. he would die in the flesh that others might be saued in the spirit epist. ad Algas quest 9. epist. ad Hedib qu. 10. so also Haymo But Chrysostome misliketh this sense vpon these reasons 1. both because S. Paul had made mention twice before of death that it could not separate him from Christ it had beene therefore superfluous and beside no great matter to speake of the same here againe 2. the
alienum esse à spiritis c. he wisheth to be a straunger from the spirit and to be a false Prophet so that his people might escape all those plagues which were foretold as S. Paul here wisheth to be estraunged and separated from Christ In like manner Moses obiecit se exitio Moses did offer himselfe to destruction for the people sake thus Anselme But 1. though we allow Anselmes interpretation he is deceiued in his first proofe for though the vulgar Latine doe so read that place of Micah yet it is truely according to the originall translated thus If a man walking after the mind and lying falsly c. that is if there were one that were giuen vnto lies which would prophesie of prosperous things vnto the people he should be a meete Prophet for them And the Prophet was not to wish vpon any occasion to commit sinne in telling of lies 2. Concerning the other example of Moses it is rightly alleadged but because there is some question about Moses manner of wish how it is to be taken though elsewhere it be handled at large it shall not be amisse breefely to touch it here for it is a great hinderance to the studious reader in a point wherein he expecteth present satisfaction to make reference to another booke which it may be is not so readie at hand Quest. 6. How Moses wished to be blotted out of the booke of life for Israels sake Moses words are these Exod. 32.31 If thou wilt not pardon their sinne blot me out of the booke which thou hast written Because that desire of Moses and this of Paul here are verie like as Hierome saith If we consider Moses voice making request for his people we shall see eundem fuisse Mosi Paulo erga creditum gregem affectum c. that both Moses and Paul had the same affection toward the flocke committed to them it shall not be amisse to insert somewhat here touching Moses wish Two things doe here breede question the manner of Moses wish and the matter and sense thereof 1. for the manner Moses vseth that bouldnes of speach that a subiect will scarcely vse speaking to his Prince non solum claâ—â—â— apud Deum sed reclamat he doth not onely crie vnto God but he reclaymeth and crieth as it were against his minde But Philo remooueth this doubt because the Scripture saith that God talked with Moses as with his friend he speaketh therefore freely and boldly as to his friend this libertie then and freedome of his speach is not to be attributed vnto his arrogancie but vnto his friendship and familiaritie arrogantis est audacia amici est fiducia boldnes and rashnes sheweth arrogancie but confidence is in friendship 2. But there remaineth a greater doubt as touching the matter and meaning of Moses vowe and desire for whereas Gods booke of life signifieth his ordaining of some vnto eternall life which is of two sorts either secundum praedestinationem according to the decree of predestination which cannot be altered or secundum praesentem iustitiam according to mens present iustice in the first sense it would seeme to be stulta petitio a foolish request to desire that which was impossible to be blotted out of Gods decree of predestination and in the other it would be thought to be impia an vngodly desire to wish to fall from the present state of iustice now for the solution of this doubt there are diuerse answears framed 1. Rabbi Salomon taketh this to be the booke of Moses law that it should haue no denomination from him but that his name might be taken out thence but it appeareth in the Lords answer I will blot out of that booke him that sinneth that this booke belonged vnto more then Moses onely 2. Rab. Moses Gerundens thinketh Moses extra se captum to haue beene as it were beside himselfe and in his great zeale to his people to haue spoken he knew not what But seeing Moses prayer was so well accepted of God it is not to be thought that he offended in making so rash and inconsiderate a prayer 3. Paulus Burgensis varieth not much from the first interpretation he taketh the booke here for the historicall narration in Scripture of the acts and doings of the Saints and so he thinketh that Moses onely desired that the great workes which God had wrought by his hand should not be written of him But this had beene to pray against the setting forth of Gods glorie which was manifested in those great workes 4. Caietan vnderstandeth it de libro principatus of the book of principalitie that whereas God had appointed Moses to be gouernour of a greater nation and people if he should destroy Israel Moses desireth rather to be no gouernour at all then that Israel should perish But the words of the Lord I will blot out him that sinneth shewe that Moses speaketh not of a personall writing in any such booke which concerned him alone but of such a booke wherein others were written as well as himselfe 5. Augustine maketh this sense qu. 147. in Exod. as thou hast made it certaine that I can not be raced out of the booke which thou hast written so let me be as sure and certaine that thou wilt remit the sinne of this people But Gods answear I will blot out c. ouerthroweth this sense for there the Lord answeareth negatiuely vnto Moses that he should not be blotted out then Moses wish was to be blotted out 6. Lyranus saith that Moses did thus wish secundum desiderium partis inferioris animae according to the desire of the inferiour part of his minde not in the superiour part which was his iudgement and vnderstanding as Christ prayed that the cup might passe from him but yet there is a more sufficient answear then this see answ 6. following 7. Thostatus qu. 44. in 32. Exod. thinketh that it is an hyperboricall speach as that of Rachel giue me children or else I die and yet shee had rather haue had no children then to haue died yet in such passionate speeches they shewe their seruent and exceeding great desire But in this sense Moses should haue had no such meaning to be blotted out of Gods booke the contrarie whereof appeareth in the Lords answear 8. Oleaster will haue this to be the meaning blot me out of thy booke that is obliuiscere 〈◊〉 perpetuo forget me for euer for as we vse to commit those things to writing which we would remember so the things which we desire to forget we blot out But it is more then a metaphoricall speach as is euident by the Lords answear to Moses 9. Heirome epist. 151. ad Algas and Grego lib. 10. Moral c. 7. Euthym. in Psal. 68. vpon these words let them be blotted out of the booke of the liuing doe take this booke to be the decree onely of this temporall life and those to be blotted out which are depriued of life so Moses in their opinion
vnto that ende which the Lord will himselfe and so Hugo well saith that God invisibili operatione malas voluntates ad suum arbitrium temperat ordinat c. by his invisible operation doth temper and order euen wicked wills according to his owne mind c. yet God giueth vnto euill and perverse wills non corruptionem sed ordinem not corruption but order c. and he sheweth it by this similitude like as when one is cast downe headlong and is readie to fall if one make a way seeing he must needes fall that he tumble downe one way rather then an other he in some sort may be said to incline and make a way for him to fall and yet causeth or procureth not but onely disposeth his fall And thus God may be said to harden â—â—erly Outwardly also God hardeneth by his workes as either his mercies shewed vpon others as the Egyptians hated Gods people because the Lord blessed them and in this sense it is said that God turned their heart to hate his people Psal. 105.25 that is by creation of those benefits which he bestowed vpon them or by his iudgements inflicted vpon the wicked themselues as Pharaohs heart was the more hardened by the plagues which were sent of this kind also it is that the wicked are many times hardened by the ministerie and preaching of the word which is sent to conuert them but they peruert it to their destruction so it is said vnto the Prophet Isay 6.9 Goe c. and shut the eyes of 〈◊〉 people make their heart fatt the Prophet is said to harden their heart because it was hardened by occasion of his preaching Secondly God hardeneth by his instruments as when he deliuereth vp men vnto Sathan to be seduced by him and giueth them ouer into his power as God is said to haue stirred vp Dauid to number the people 2. Sam. 24.1 which was indeede the worke of Sathan 1. Chron. 21.1 so God bid the lying spirit to goe and deceiue Baals Prophets 1. Kin. 22.21 and the Apostle saith of the wicked that the God of this world hath blinded their minds 2. Cor. 4.4 Thirdly the wicked doe harden their owne hearts when God giueth them ouer vnto their owne wicked and corrupt desires as the Apostle speaketh of the heathen that God gâ—â—e them vp to their owne hearts lusts Rom. 1.24 And thus Pharaoh is said to haue hardened his owne heart And thus as hath beene shewed God is said to harden the heart But it will thus be obiected on the contrarie 1. Obiect To tempt man is all one as to harden him but God tempteth none Iam. 1.13 therefore neither doth he harden them Answ. God tempteth not with any such temptation as proceedeth from a corrupt begâ—â—ing such as are the tentations which are caused by mans own concupiscence for as God not tempted he hath no corrupt affections to be tempted so neither doth he tempt by inciting or stirring men vp to euill neither doth he in this manner harden but as God may tempt externally for the triall of mens faith and obedience as he tempted Abraham and so he tempted Israel in the desert so the Lord by externall meanes and in such manner as he haue said hardeneth in his iustice without any iniustice at all Martyr 2. Obiect If God hardened Pharaohs heart why then did he send Moses so often vnto him to bid him let his people goe God should seeme herein to be contrarie to himselfe in making shewe of one thing and yet intending an other Answ. Pet. Martyr here vseth this distinction Gods will is to be considered two waies there is voluntas signi vel antecedens the will of the signe or the wil going before and there is voluntas consequens seu beneplaciti the will following or of Gods good pleasure As when Ionas was sent to preach to the Niniuites that they should within 40. dayes be destroyed that was the will of the signe or the reuealed will of God but yet the Lord vpon their repentance purposed to spare them that was the secret wil and good pleasure of God yet were not these wills the one contrarie to the other but the one wrought for the other as Ionas preaching brought them to repentance that Gods pleasure might be fulfilled in spring of the citie so Moses was sent to Pharaoh to make him without excuse that Gods iustice might be manifest in giuing him ouer to the hardnes of heart 3. Obiect Hardnes of heart is of God hardnes of heart is sinne therefore is would hence followe that sinne is of God Ans. Hardnes of heart is not of God simply or as it is sinne but accidentally onely 〈◊〉 it is the punishment of sinne hardnesse of heart is then ascribed vnto God as the Iudge to Sathan as the tormentor and executioner to the wicked themselues as to the partie guiltie Pareus dub 16. 4. God is not angrie with his owne worke but he is angrie with men for their hardnes of heart therefore it is no way Gods worke Answ. Hardnes of heart as it is sinne or the cause of sinne it is not of God but the Lord is offended with it but as it is a punishment of sinne so is it of God and the Lord is pleased that the obstinacie of the wicked should be punished Gryneus Quest. 19. Of the obiection propounded v. 19. Thou wilt say why doth he yet complaine c. 1. This is the third obiection the first was of inconstancie which might seeme to be imputed vnto God in reiecting the Iewes which was answeared before v. 6. the second of iniustice in casting off some and choosing others before they had done any good or euill 5.14 now the third is of crueltie which might be furmised in God iâ— beeing an 〈◊〉 those that are hardened which notwithstanding is according to his owne will this phâ—â—â—ion the Apostle now beginneth to answear 2. Why doth he yet complaine or is angrie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word signifieth both the latine readeth queritur complaineth by the mistaking of which word some taking it for â—â—ritur with a dipthong which signifieth to be sought or enquired some haue here 〈◊〉 threefold sense as first it may be taken impersonally why is it enquired whence it 〈◊〉 one is good an other euill or passively wherefore is it sought for or why should any seeke to be good seeing all is as God will or actiuely why doth God complaine of sinners seeing all is according to his will so Gorrhan and the ordin gloss but the last onely is the right meaning the other two senses doe arise by the mistaking of the word 3. God complaineth in many places in the Scriptures of the wickednesse of men as Isa 1.26 How is the faithfull citie become an harlot so our Sauiour taketh vp this complaint ouer Ierusalem how often would I haue gathered together c. Matth. 23. now the obiection is why God should thus complaine seeing herein his will
a strange tongue in their seruice 2. Now God was called the Lord of Sabaoth 1. some thinke in respect of the starres and host of heauen which the heathen worshipped to shew that he was superior to the gods of the heathen 2. some vnderstand the Angels by these hosts Lyranus 3. some Angels Men and Deuils and therefore the Prophet doth say thrice holy holy holy Lord God of Sabaoth Isay. 6. Gorrhan 4. some thinke that there is a relation to the hostes of the Israelites in the middest whereof the Arke went in the wildernes 5. But rather generally here must be vnderstood the whole host of heauen and earth Mar. as Gen. 2. ◠and not onely in respect of the number of them but propter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the decent and comely order wherein all things were made Faius 6. and this title is giuen vnto God in the old Testament not in the New to signifie that the law was then data in timore giuen in feare but in the new in loue Hug. 28. Quest. What is vnderstood by seede 1. Origen by this seede vnderstandeth Christ who as the seede is left in the earth so he was to be buried and rise againe and so fructifie to the euerlasting good of his Church but for this seede we had all beene as Sodome still in our sinnes Iunius in his parallels vpon this place misliketh not this application to Christ thinking that whereas the Prophet hath the word sarid remnant the Apostle of purpose turned it seede with reference to Christ that came of the Iewes but Beza and Martyr reiect this as not agreeable to the scope of the Apostle here 2. Photius in Oecumen vnderstandeth the Apostles but for whose preaching the whole world had beene left in their sinnes as Sodome 3. Gorrhan interpreteth this seede to be the word without the which we had beene as Sodome and Gomorrha paret essemus in poena quia similes in culpa we should haue beene equall in punishment because like in sinne glosse ordinar 4. But the Prophet hath relation to the ouerthrow and destruction of Sodome and Gomorrha wherein there were none left Chrysost. saue onely Lot and his companie who were strangers and so not of the citie so without Gods mercie the people had beene vtterly destroied in the captiuitie of Babylon if the Lord had not reserued a remnant to himselfe and so when Christ came to offer them spirituall deliuerance the whole nation generally refused him onely a small number cleaued vnto Christ thus Martyr Pareus 29. Quest. How the Gentiles obtained righteousnes that sought it not and the Iewes missed of it that sought it 1. Whereas this might seeme a strange paradox that they which seeke righteousnes should not haue it and they which seeke it not obtained it Origen thinketh here by a distinction to dissolue this knot it is one thing saith he sectari to follow which is vnderstood of a prescript forme of doctrine such as the written law was which the Gentiles had not and therefore could not follow it it is an other thing to follow the law of nature which the Gentiles had and followed but the Apostle here speaketh not of any law which the Gentiles followed at all but that they obtained that which they neither sought not followed 2. Chrysostome thinketh that the Apostle sheweth here the reason of the electing of the Gentiles and reiecting of the Iewes namely the faith of the one and the incredulitie of the other But these are not the causes of the decree of election and reprobation but the effects for three things the Apostle treateth of in this chapter concerning election and reprobation of the beginning thereof in Gods decree of the ende which is the glorie of God which two the Apostle hath handled hitherto and of the meanes saith of the one and incredulitie of the other which the Apostle toucheth here 3. Tolet here distinguisheth betweene the law of righteousnes and righteousnes it selfe the Iewes followed the law but not righteousnes because they did not the works of the law but abounded in sinne but it is euident that the Apostle by the law of righteousnes vnderstandeth the perfection which the law required which were the works of the law vnto the which the Iewes attained not 4. Some by the law vnderstand onely the ceremonies and rites of the law by obseruing whereof the Iewes could not attaine vnto righteousnesse but it is euident that throughout this epistle the Apostle vnderstandeth euen the workes of the morall law as c. 7. he directly maketh mention of that law whereof one precept is thou shalt not lust 5. Some make a difference here betweene iustitiam legis ex lege the iustice of the law and iustice by the law the iustice of the law is such workes which the law requireth but the iustice by the law is such workes as men doe according to the prescript of the law of their owne strength without faith the Apostle reiecteth this in the matter of iustification but not the other to this purpose Bellarmine lib. 1. iustificat c. 19. And so the Apostle here saith that the Iewes sought the law of righteousnesse but while by their owne power they sought to fulfill it they could not attaine vnto it he alleageth to this purpose Angustine who saith iustitiam legis non implet iustitia quae ex lege est c. the righteousnesse which is of the law fulfilleth not the righteousnesse of the law c. and the righteousnes by the law he interpreteth to be that quam homo suis viribus facit c. which a man doth by his owne strength But 1. it is euident that the Apostle indifferently vseth these phrases the righteousnesse of the law and by or from the law as he taketh the righteousnesse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of God Rom. 3.22 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by or from God Phil. 3.9 for one and the same so whether we say the righteousnesse of faith which the Apostle calleth the law of faith Rom. 3.27 and the word of faith Rom. 10.8 or the righteousnesse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by or through faith there is no difference but in words 2. Origen hath the like curious distinction vpon these words of the Apostle Rom. 3.30 who shall iustifie circumcision of faith and vncircumcision through faith betweene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of faith and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through faith he maketh this difference that to be iustified ex fide of faith is to beginne with faith and end with works and to be iustified through faith is to beginne with works and end with faith c. whereas the Apostle intendeth one and the same manner of iustification the like curiositie there is in this distinction betweene the righteousnesse of the law and by the law 3. And the verie words of the Apostle They followed the righteousnesse of the law shew as much which he interpreteth afterward They sought it by the workes of the
or euill the elder shall serue the younger least the purpose of God should remaine according to election which he supposeth to rise of some difference in the parties elected to this purpose Augustine lib. ad Simplician quest 2. But this parenthesis or interlaced sentence is â—â—tered by the Apostle affirmatively That the purpose of God might remaine c. it cannot therefore be drawne to a negatiue sense And indeede Augustine whether vpon this or some other reason otherwise expoundeth these words epist. 115. 2. But the best answear is that the proposition is not true for election in God presupposeth not a difference God may make election euen in things in themselues equall by the right of his Creatorship and make a difference as euidently appeareth in the creation of the world when all things were equall at the first in that indigested himpe and masse whereout the creatures were made and yet our of it were different creatures made some lightsome as the Sunne and starres some darke and obscure as the earth and earthly things And so the Lord in his decree of predestination made a difference in his election according to his good pleasure of things which differed not before And so there is a difference indeede in those which are elected from others sed non invenit Deus sed ponit ipse in hominibus differentiam but God findeth not any such difference in men but he maketh it Pet. Martyr the difference then dependeth not of the nature of the things but of the purpose and counsell of God 2. Arg. 1. S. Paul saith Ephes. 1.4 He hath elected vs in him that is in Christ but none are in Christ without faith that then which ioyneth vs to Christ is the cause of election 2. againe 2. Thess. 2.13 we are said to be chosen to saluation in faith 3. and Heb. 11.6 It is impossible to please God without faith the elect are pleasing to God therefore by faith they were accepted 4. and seeing faith is the instrumentall cause of saluation why not also of election Thus the Lutherans reason for the foresight of faith Contra. 1. Not euerie thing whereby we are ioyned vnto Christ is the cause of election but that whereby we were first giuen vnto Christ which is the absolute and free mercie of God who elected vs of his free grace and mercie and in Christ appointed to bring those whom he elected vnto eternall life And the Apostle doth expound himselfe what he meaneth by beeing elected in Christ that is he hath predestinate vs to be adopted thorough Christ faith then in Christ is not the cause of election but a meane subordinate to bring the elect vnto saluation 2. We are said to be chosen in faith not faith foreseene as the cause of election but in faith present as a meane vnto saluation 3. The same answear may serue to the third place obiected which must be vnderstood likewise de fide praesenti non praevisa of faith present not of faith foreseene for God thorough his mercie elected vs beeing yet his enemies his loue therefore was before any foresight of faith by his mercie he made vs acceptable vnto himselfe by the election of grace before he sawe any thing in vs. 4. It followeth not that euerie thing which is the cause of saluation should be the cause of election it is true in the generall cause which is the mercie of God which causeth as well the one as the other but not in the next and immediate causes as for example the father is the cause of his son and the son of the nephew and yet the son is not the cause of the father so election is the cause of faith and faith of saluation but it therefore followeth not that faith should be the cause of election And Hunnius that was at the first a great patrone of this cause in the ende argueth that faith in the mysterie of election was to be considered neither vt causam meritoriam as a meritorious or instrumentall cause sed vt partem illius ordinis c. but as a part of that order which God had appointed that is a meane vnto saluation Pareus dub 6. 3. Arg. If God simply should elect some and refuse others without foresight of their faith how is he not an accepter of persons Ans. The accepting of person is when against the rule of iustice a man of no good parts or qualites is preferred before him that is well qualified But there is no feare of this in Gods election for he findeth all alike in themselues none endued with any good gifts or qualities but as he giueth them therefore herein he is no accepter of persons in preferring one before an other all beeing alike Now on the contrarie side that the foresight of faith or any thing in man is not the cause of election but onely the good pleasure and will of God it may be thus further confirmed 1. The Apostle in saying not by workes but by him that calleth excludeth whatsoeuer in man for if either the foresight of faith or of any other thing and not onely of works should be the cause of election then it should not be onely in the caller as the Apostle here saith Mart. Pareus Tolet annot 19. 2. The effect of election is not the cause faith with the fruits thereof are the effects of election Ephes. 1.4 he hath chosen vs that we should be holy Pareus 3. The eternall decree of God is not founded in that which is temporarie the faith or good workes of men are but temporarie things and therefore they cannot be the ground and foundation of Gods eternall decree Faius 4. Faith is the worke of God Ioh. 6.29 therefore not the cause of his election so the same thing should be the cause of it selfe and so also be before it selfe Pareus 5. If election depended vpon the foresight of good workes then it would followe that we are iustified by workes for from election and predestination proceedeth our vocation and from vocation iustification and if election be out of the foresight of works then iustification also which followeth election by degrees Mart. 6. Lyranus addeth this reason further Deus non vult finem propter ea quae sunt ad finem God will not appoint the ende for those things which tend vnto the ende but rather these are for the ende now faith and works are but the way to the ende and therefore they cannot be the cause of the appointment of the end that is that men should attaine vnto euerlasting glorie Lyran. vpon this place 7. Tolet also annot 16. vrgeth this reason whereas the Apostle saith v. 14. is there iniquitie with God if he had meant that the difference in the decree of election ariseth out of the foresight of faith then the reason had beene apparent and there had beene no shew at all of any iniustice in God and so no place for this obiection at all See further of this question before c.
kind was the zeale of the false Apostles Gal. 4.17 They are ielous ouer you amisse they would exclude you that ye should altogether loue them they seemed to beare a great zeale and loue vnto the Galathians but it was onely for their owne aduantage and such was the zeale of Demetrius to Diana Act. 19. because his profit was hindered by the decay of Dianaes worship but a true and vnfained zeale is that when one seeketh onely the good of that which he loueth without respect to himselfe as Saint Paul was thus iealous ouer the Corinthians to seeke to ioyne them for their owne good vnto Christ. 2. Cor. 11.2 Now of this vnfained zeale there are two kinds one which hath knowledge the other is without and this is of two sorts for there is here a twofold knowledge required both of the thing which is desired and affected and of the wrong which is offered the Iewes wanted one of these for they had a knowledge of God though not perfect but they were ignorant of the other they thought the worship of God to â—â—nsist in the rites and ceremonies of the law and so Gods glorie to be hindered by the Preaching of the Gospel the Gentiles were ignorant of both for neither had they the knowledge of God at all neither did they know the way how to worship him and so were ignorant what hindered or furthered Gods glorie 3. Now in that the Apostle maketh this as a reason why he wished well vnto them and prayed for them because they had zeale though not according to knowledge this doth not iustifie their zeale or prooue that we may reioyce or take delight in any thing that is euill but because their zeale was a good thing in it selfe and they failed in the manner onely the Apostle so farre commendeth them as it is said that Christ loued the young man that professed his obedience and obseruance of the law though he were farre from perfection Mark 10.21 because he saw some good things in him So the Apostle commendeth the zeale of the Iewes here 4. Origen here obserueth that as the Apostle saith of zeale that they had a kind of zeale but not according to knowledge the like may be said of faith charitie and other graces that men may haue them after a sort but not according to knowledge as he hath faith without knowledge that is ignorant that faith without workes it dead and so he hath charitie without knowledge that beasteth of it before men Quest. 5. Why the Iewes are said to stablish their owne righteousnesse v. 3. 1. Theodoret thinketh it is called their owne righteousnesse because now the law was ceased and the obseruation of the rites and ceremonies thereof so also Gorrhan vnderstandeth it of the ceremonies of the law which now were abolished and of the traditions which themselues had invented but the Apostle meaneth principally the moral law and that workes thereof 2. Augustine thinketh it to be so called their owne righteousnesse that is an humanes and imperfect righteousnesse because they were not able to fulfill the law tract 26. in Iob. so also Anselme 3. Lyranus because the law was giuen them and so the righteousnesse thereof they tooke peculiarly to be theirs excluding the Gentiles 4. Chrysostome saith â—â— is tearmed theirs because it consisted in their owne labour whereas faith was the gift of God without their labour 5. Origen saith their owne righteousnes was that which so seemed vnto men but did not make them iust before God so also Tolet as the Apostle saith Rom. 4.2 If Abraham were iustified by workes he hath wherein to reioyce but not with God 6. But properly that is called man 's owne righteousnesse which is supposed to be inherent in him is wrought by his owne workes and labour that is Gods righteousnes which is without man and extrinsecally is applied vnto him by faith 3. This proper iustice of man signifieth not such righteousnesse as man seeketh to worke of himselfe but euen such as man worketh by grace for Gods righteousnesse and mans are opposed not onely in respect of the cause and beginning but in the forme and manner how it is applied the one by faith the other by workes and in the subiect the righteousnes of faith is inherent in Christ and applied to vs by faith the other hath man for the subiect thereof 4. The Iewes in refusing this righteousnesse of God commit three great faults 1. they are ignorant of true righteousnesse by faith 2. they ambitiously seeke to be iustified by their owne righteousnesse 3. they are contemners of Gods righteousnesse which is by faith and will by no meanes be subiect vnto it Quest. 6. How Christ is said to be the ende of the law The end of a thing is taken fowre waies 1. for the determination and extremitie and finall ending of it as Psal. 3.19 Whose end is damnation 2. it is also taken for that which first mooueth the agent and for the which all other things are intended 3. the end is the scope and marke which is aymed at as the end of faith is the saluation of our soules 1. Pet. 1. 4. the end also of a thing is the perfection thereof as loue is said to be the end of the commandements 1. Tim. 1.5 according to these diuerse acceptions is this place diuersely interpreted 1. Some take it in the first sense that Christ ended the ceremonies and legall rites in which it is said the law and the Prophets were vnto Iohn Matth. 11. but this is not the meaning here for thus Christ was an ende onely to the ceremoniall not to the morall law 2. The second way Christ is the end of the law but not directly for in generall the law was ordained to make man righteous and to iustifie him by the keeping thereof but seeing this righteousnesse could not be obtained by the law nor in the law the law bringeth vs vnto Christ and in him we obtaine righteousnesse which the law required but performed not so then the end of the law which was to iustifie a man is fulfilled in Christ thus Chrystsost quid vult lex hominem iustum facere c. what would the law make a man iust c. this the law could not effect but Christ hath effected it so Melancthon Christ is the perfection of the law donat id quod lex requirit he giueth that which the law requireth that is iustification by saith in Christ who hath fulfilled the law for vs so also Beza 3. Christ also is the end and scope aymed at in the old Testament all the Prophets gaue witnesse and testimonie vnto Christ as Lyranus citeth R. Selam and other learned Hebrewes that confessed that vniuersi Prophetae non sunt locuti nisi ad dies Messiae that all the Prophets did not otherwise speake but hauing relation to the Messiah as our Sauiour saith Ioh. 6.26 Moses wrote of mee 4. Christ also is the perfection and consummation of the law
Trinitie concurreth in their diuine power and essence as they are one God yet with a speciall relation to their persons as God the Father Sonne and holy Ghost both created redeemed the world and sanctifie the elect but the worke of the creation is specially ascribed to the person of the Father the redemption to the person of the Sonne the worke of sanctification to the person of the holy Ghost considered together with their infinite and omnipotent Godhead Quest. 17. Whether to beleeue in the heart be not sufficient vnto salvation without confession of the mouth v. 10. With the heart man beleeueth vnto righteousnesse and with the mouth he confesseth to salvation 1. Lyranus thinketh that the Apostle onely giueth instance here of those which are in casis mortis at the point of death in whom it is sufficient to beleeue and confesse when they haue no time to worke But the Apostle describeth one generall way and rule whereby all are iustified 2. The Greeke scholiast thinketh that whereas the beleefe of the heart is sufficient yet mention is made of confession in two respects both in regard of others which by this confession are to be instructed and the time of persecution when it is necessarie to make publike confession of the faith But this which the Apostle requireth is to be performed of euerie beleeuer and at all times 3. Bellarmine inferreth out of this place fidem non sufficere ad salutem that faith is not sufficient vnto saluation but that the confession of the mouth and other works are also required as causes concurring vnto saluation which place he saith is so euident that in the colloquie at Altenburge one for ad salutē to saluation would haue put de salute of saluatiō But we are not driuen to such a straight as to vse any such shift we will send Bellarmine to his auncient Cardinal Tolet who vpon this place thus writeth oris confessio nos non iustificat à peccato c. sed iustificati tenemur eam palam profiteri c. the confession of the mouth doth not iustifie vs but beeing iustified we are bound publikely to professe it that we may obtaine euerlasting saluation c. confession then of the mouth is not required as a cause of saluation because it is no part of iustificatiō but as a necessary effect that followeth 4. Pet. Martyr thinketh that by saluation here is not vnderstood as in the former verse the remission of sinnes but vlteriorem perfectionem a further degree of perfection in them that are iustified as the Apostle in the same sense biddeth vs to works out our saluation with trembling and feare Phil. 2. so also Gorrhan interpreteth ad salutem to saluation ad salutis perfectionem to the perfection of saluation But this were to giue way vnto them which ascribe onely the beginning of saluation vnto faith and the perfection vnto works 5. Wherefore the Apostle maketh not here confession the cause of saluation as beleefe is of iustification but faith is the cause also of confession which is required not as a cause but tanquam medium as a way and meane vnto saluation for iustification and saluation are here to be considered as the beginning and ende by faith we are iustified which faith must bring forth liuely fruits as the confession of the mouth and the profession of the life before we can attaine to saluation to this purpose Pareus dub 8. likewise M. Calvine saith the Apostle sheweth onely how a true faith may be distinguished from a fained faith the faith which iustifieth must be such a faith as bringeth forth liuely fruits as the franke confession of the mouth And Beza addeth that the Apostle maketh faith and beleefe here the cause both of iustification and of saluation because the confession of the mouth to the which saluation is ascribed is an effect and fruit of faith and so according to that rule in Logike causa causae est causa causati the cause of the cause is the cause of that which is caused by that cause And so as Beza well concludeth confession is via qua pervenitur the way whereby we come vnto eternall life as also other good workes in the life are the way but not the cause which as Origen collecteth are here also included vnder confession for he can not confesse Christ to be risen from the dead which doth not walke in newnes of life as the Apostle saith which God hath ordained for vs to walke in them Eph. 2.10 now we vse to walke in the way 18. Quest. Of these words Whosoeuer calleth vpon the name of the Lord shall be saued v. 13. 1. The word here translated saued in that place of the Prophet Ioel 2.32 signifieth to be deliuered which in effect is all one the Septuagint reading 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall be saued doe put the consequent for the antecedent for he that is deliuered shall consequently be saued the Prophet there prophesieth of the spirituall benefits which the Church of God should receiue by the Messiah and so we are here to vnderstand not any temporall but a spirituall and eternall deliuerance 2. This sentence is brought in by the Apostle vpon these two occasions both to prooue his former generall proposition that God is rich in mercie to all both Iew and Gentile for the Prophet generally saith whosoeuer excluding none whether Iew or Gentile Calvin as also the Apostle sheweth the difference betweene the iustice of the lawe which requireth doing and the iustice of faith which requireth nothing but beleeuing and confession in the invocating of the name of God Melancth 3. Calleth 1. Gryneus thinketh that invocation the principall part of the worship of God is here taken for the whole as also Origen saith invocare nomen adorare Deum vnum to invocate the name of God and to worship God are one and the same But as Pet. Martyr thinketh invocation here rather is taken properly for the prayers of the faithfull 2. neither doth he speake of any invocation but of that which is in faith whereof the Apostle maketh mention 1. Cor. 12.3 No man can say that Iesus is the Lord but by the holy Ghost so the ordinar gloss he that prayeth invocateth but this he can not doe nisi prius credat vnlesse he beleeue before 4. Shall be saued He saith not he shall obtaine that which he prayeth for for many times one may pray ignorantly for that which is not meet for him but yet by his faithfull prayer he shall come vnto saluation Mart. 5. By the name of the Lord Origen well vnderstandeth Christ Iesus as he sheweth by that place of S. Paul 1. Cor. 1.3 with all that call on the name of our Lord Iesus and he further thus inferreth if that Enoch Moses Aaron did call vpon God and he heard them sine dubio c. without doubt they called vpon the Lord Iesus and Gorrhan giueth this reason why Christ is said to be the
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
the conuersion of a few but the falling away of the Iewes to a few 2. Wherefore these three words the Apostle vseth as of equipollent and of one signification 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their fall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their diminution v. 12. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 their reiection and casting off Par. 3. and in that he saith they are diminished he sheweth that they are not vtterly perished the imminution of a thing is not rei excisio sed decisio is not the cleane cutting off but an impayring onely Par. 4. How much more their abundance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fulnes 1. by this fulnes is not onely vnderstood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the multitude of the Iewes which shall be called but also excellencie of the spirituall graces wherewith the Iewes in their generall conuersion toward the end of the world shall be encreased Gryneus 2. neither are we so to vnderstand the fulnes of the Iewes as though euery one in particular should be called but as then most of them were averse from Christ so in the end most shall be conuerted Martyr as by the fulnes of the Gentiles v. 22. is vnderstood the generall and vniuersall calling of them not of euery one in particular 3. and this fulnes is not to be vnderstood so much with a relation on to the Gentiles as though their number should be more full by the conuersion of the Iewes for their fulnes must be first come in before the Iewes be conuerted v. 25. as with reference to the whole number of Christs Church that although there is a fulnes of the Gentiles without them yet as Origen saith plenitudo portionis Domini nondum dicitur completa the fulnes of the Lords portion cannot be said to be compleat vntill the Iewes also be conuerted 4. But it will be obiected how much more the fulnes of the Iewes shall be profitable to the Gentiles if more Gentiles shall not be called by the conuersion of the Iewes which the Apostle seemeth to denie v. 25. for the fulnesse of the Gentiles must first enter Pet. Martyr doth vnderstand it of the confirmation of the faith of the Gentiles who seeing the zeale of the Iewes shall thereby be confirmed so the ordinarie glosse their fulnes being conuerted ditabit gentes doctrina exemplo shal inrich the Gentiles by their doctrine and example Osiander addeth the Church of God shall be encreased gloriosa populi Iudaici accessione by the glorious accession of the Iewish people Pareus goeth further the Gentiles also by the fulnes of the Iewes shall be prouoked to emulation some further accession shall be made euen to the number of the beleeuing Gentiles though in respect of their vniuersall calling the fulnes of the Gentiles shall be entred before 5. So these benefits shall accrue vnto the Church of God by the conuersion of the Iewes 1. the consociation and ioyning together both of the Iewes and Gentiles the wall of partition beeing taken away Ephes. 2.14 2. the Church of God shall be encreased when the children of Iudah and the children of Israel shall be gathered together to the Church Hosh. 1.11 3. The faith of the Gentiles shall be greatly confirmed 4. God shall receiue greater glorie when his goodnes and the veritie of his promises shall be made manifest in the saluation both of Iews and Gentiles Gryneus Quest. 17. How it standeth with Gods iustice to cast off the Iewes that the Gentiles might enter in Obiect Seeing the Apostle saith that through the fall of the Iewes saluation came to the Gentiles their ruine is the riches of the world God may seeme to deale hardly in casting off his owne people to receiue strangers and beside it seemeth contrarie to that rule euill must not be done that good may come thereof Ans. 1. It were indeede an hard thing to cast off some to receiue others if they were cast off without their owne fault or if the Lord were tied by any bond not to cast them off or if their casting off did not tend to their further good but it is otherwise here for the Lord did not cast off the Iewes but for their vnbeleefe and he is not bound to bestow or continue his grace he may conferre it and withdraw it vpon whome and from whome he please and beside the reiection of the Iewes was for their more plentifull calling afterward 2. Neither was their reiecting simply the cause of the calling of the Gentiles but ex accidente accidentally as we say it was properly the punishment of their infidelitie and a demonstration of the iustice of God but God that can turne euill vnto good did vse this as an occasion to induce the Gentiles to beleeue 18. Quest. Why the Apostle maketh mention of his Apostleship and how he is said to magnifie his office v. 13. 1. For the occasion of these words 1. Tolet thinketh that the Apostle giueth here occasion of his former speach that the diminishing of the Iewes was the riches of the Gentiles which was by reason of his ministerie who was appointed the Apostle of the Gentiles 2. Chrysostome saith the Apostle sheweth two reasons of his commendation of the Gentiles both because he was their Apostle and to the ende that by their praise the Iewes might be prouoked 3. Hyperius maketh this a third reason of the calling of the Iewes from the ende of his office and ministrie 4. Lyranus will haue the third part of the chapter here to beginne that as he had shewed before that the falling of the Iewes was neither generall vnto v. 11. nor vnprofitable v. 11.12 so now he sheweth that it is not irrecouerable 5. but the best coherence and connexion is this that whereas he touched two ends of the reiection of the Iewes before the saluation of the Gentiles and the conversion in the end of the Iewes this latter he confirmeth by the vse and ende of his ministrie and he sheweth that he in the execution of his office id meditari to meditate or propound to himselfe the same thing that God doth that is in preaching to the Gentiles he intendeth the salvation of the Iewes 2. But whereas in the originall the words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifie in as much as the vulgar latine readeth quamdiu as long as and so Origen who giueth a double sense that it may either signifie the time of this life as long as he is an Apostle here insinuating that he should afterward in the next life haue the same dignitie to be an Apostle where in Origen falleth into his fantasticall speculations of the next world as though their should need any ministerie of the word or Apostleship there or this quamdiu so long is all one as if he had said sine fine without end as long as I liue but the word is not taken here for quamdiu how long but for quatenus in as much as as Matth. 25.45 In as much as ye did it to one of the
Antichrist are wicked and abhominable 2. Princes are commanded to render vnto the whore as she had done to them and to recompence her double Revel 18.6 this is their warrant the commandement of God 3. and it is prophesied and foretold that the Princes shall hate the whore and make her naked deuoure her flesh and consume her with fire Rev. 17.16 This prophecie shall not fall to the ground and Princes for their part must endeauour to make it good 4. Controv. Whether the ciuill Magistrate hath any power or authoritie in matters of Religion Because there is a great question mooued betweene the Romanists and vs concerning the power of the Ciuill Magistrate in causes Ecclesiasticall and in religious affaires first of all it is necessarie that the state of the question be considered which shall be deuided into certaine propositions of two sorts first generall touching the foundation and institution of Kings and other superiour Magistrates and then more particular of the execution of their office 1. There is in the Commonwealth a superior authoritie called architectonica as the framer and chiefe builder of the Commonwealth to the which it belongeth to institute and ordaine lawes and to see that iustice be exercised according to those lawes this beeing the supreame and highest authoritie can not be in subiects and so not in the Ecclesiasticall persons but in the king onely 2. To this power it belongeth to prouide for the good in generall that belongeth to the subiects whether it be ciuill or spirituall for the good of the subiects is the intendment of the lawmaker 3. Yet least this power should erre in making of lawes it receiueth direction for the ciuill lawes from the rule of equitie and prudence confirmed by experience for Ecclesiasticall lawes from the word of God 4. Vnder this supreame authoritie there is the Ciuill and Ecclesiasticall power but not alike the Ciuill is simply inferior vnto it altogether depending of it but the Ecclesiasticall though it be subiect vnto it in respect of the externall policie yet in respect of the obiect which is spirituall the word of God and of that direction which it giueth out of the same to the magistrate it is not simply inferior as the other 4. This supreame architectonicall power though properly it be ciuill in respect of the obiect acts condition and state thereof yet in some sort it is also an Ecclesiasticall power as it hath ouersight also of the Church 5. This princely power though it haue the ouersight and chiefe care of Church and Commonwealth as the chiefe steward and disposer yet it can not execute all the offices and functions belonging to either as some it can not excuse ob defectum facultatis for want of facultie and skill as to minister Physick to teach in schooles some for the defect of dignitie in the things themselues which beeing base are not incident into the maiestie of the King as to digge to plow and such like some propter defectum iuris for the defect of lawfull right and calling as the Prince is not to preach the word to conferre orders to minister the Sacraments because he is not thereunto called nor appointed 6. This supreame and Princely power though it be incident both to the Christians and Pagane magistrats yet it is so much the more perfect in a Christian gouernment in as much as both of himselfe by the light of nature and in himselfe by direction from others in ciuill things and by illumination of Gods spirit within and iustruction without in spirituall matters he hath better vnderstanding Now concerning the execution of this supreame and princely power these propositions are to be maintained which are without any controversie 1. Princes ought not onely to take care about the affaires of the Common-wealth and to be altogether carelesse of religion but euen vnto Ecclesiasticall affaires and matters of religion they ought to extend their Princely care and watchfulnes 1. the Prince is the minister of God for our good but the good of the subiect is not onely ciuill and temporall but spirituall concerning religion 2. euen the heathen did ascribe vnto their kings a principall care euen of religion whereupon the Emperors of Rome were styled Pontifices maxiâ—i the high Priests or Prelates and Aristotle writeth lib. 3. politic c. 10. that the Lacedemonian kings had the command of warre rei divinae cultum exercuisse and did exercise diuine worship vnlesse they were such sacrifices as were necessarily to be done by a Priest that therefore which by a common consent of nations was giuen vnto kings ought not to be denied to Christian Princes 3. the care of religion otherwise concerneth the Prince rather then priuate persons these onely are to wish well vnto it and to accept of it but the Prince ought to be an agent without whose power nothing can be effected publikely for the maintenance of religion 2. It belongeth to the Imperiall power to maintaine true religion and to see that no confused mixture of religions be admitted for this is giuen as a reason in the time of the Iudges why some followed idolatrie and strange worship because there was no king in Israel but euery one did that which was good in his owne eyes Iudg. 17.4 if there had beene then a king they should not haue beene suffered euery one to follow their owne fansies 3. Christian Princes are by their laws and edicts to restraine all blasphemie idolatrie heresie sacriledge and such like because Princes are to be feared for euill works their office is to restraine euill works whatsoeuer such as these are and they are appointed to procure the good of their subiects and consequently to take out of the way all impediments which may hinder their good such as these are the Romanists graunt thus much that the Princes by their lawes should prouide against heresie but they will exclude the Prince from all iudgement of heresie which must be in their opinion determined onely by the Church but of this matter more shall be said afterward 4. The Ciuill Magistrate is not to assume vnto himselfe or take vpon him the execution of any Ecclesiasticall function as to preach to binde or loose to minister the Sacraments because they are not thereunto called and without a calling none are to intrude themselues into those ministeriall functions Hebr. 5. the examples of Ieroboam who would haue sacrificed and his hand withered 1. king 13. and of Vzziah who attempted to haue offered incense and was therefore stricken with the leprosie 2. Chron. 26. doe teach kings to keepe themselues within the limits and bounds of their callings 5. Neither hath the Prince authoritie in matters of religion concerning the worship of God and the doctrine of faith to appoint what it pleaseth him but he must therein be directed by the word of God for this was the sinne of Ieroboam that set vp two golden calves of his owne invention and if it be not lawfull for
to restraine the euill there is no inconvenience for so the Apostle would haue the Corinthians to ende among themselues the controversies that did rise and not one to haile an other before the Magistrate 1. Cor. 6. but for such matters they should be as Magistrates to themselues where no question the Minister and Pastor is not excluded among others but that he may and ought to haue a chiefe hand in the carriage of such matters and so Augustine expoundeth that place in Psal. 118. concion 24. When they bring saith he their causes vnto vs non audemus dicere c. we dare not say man who appointed me a iudge among you constituit enim talibus causis Ecclesiasticos Apostolus cogniturus in foro prohibens litigare Christianos for the Apostle hath appointed ecclesiasticall persons to take cognizance of such causes forbidding Christians to striue in courts c. so it seemeth in those daies that godly Bishops and Pastors were emploied in ending controversies and suits among the people and further Augustine hath this excellent saying touching this matter otium sanctum quaerit charitas veritatis negotium iustum suscipit necessitas charitatis quam sarcinam si nullus imponat percipiendo vacandum est veritati si autem imponitur suscipienda est propter charitatis necessitatem c. the loue of the truth desireth an holy kind of ease and leisure and the necessitie of charitie vndertaketh iust busines which burthen if none impose we must attend the searching of the truth but if it be imposed it must be vndertaken for the necessitie of charities sake lib. 19. de civit Dei c. 19. In the which saying of Augustine I obserue three things 1. what causes were referred vnto Ecclesiasticall persons not criminall but civill not matters which touched the life but controversies which violated charitie 2. how and vpon what occasion they dealt in such causes they hunted not after them neither sought them but they were brought vnto them they ambitiously intruded not themselues into the Magistrates office 3. with what moderation they did onely attend such matters of necessitie and in such sort as it hindred not their better studies and searching of the truth which excuseth not them which so entermeddle in ciuill busines as they neglect their calling So then to conclude this point there are some things in the Civill and Ecclesiasticall power that are compatible some incompatible and can not be ioyned together like as a ciuill Magistrate ought not to preach or minister the Sacraments so neither can a Minister meddle with the sword but some things are compatible as the ciuill power to maintaine peace extendeth it selfe to the externall policie of the Church â— and so are helpers to the Ecclesiasticall state so the Ministers may be assistants to the ciuill state to advise and direct them See further hereof Synops. Centur. 1. err 52. Controv. 6. Whether it be lawfull for a Christian to be a Magistrate and to vse the sword in time of peace and warre v. 4. He beareth not the sword in vaine Hauing hitherto out of this chapter resisted diuerse erroneous opinions of the Romanists we haue now occasion to deale with the fantasticall and brainesicke position of the Anabaptists who denie that any Christian ought to take vpon him to be a Magistrate or to vse the sword in exercising ciuill iustice at home or militarie discipline abroad not much vnlike was the saying of Iudus Gaulonita of whom Iosephus maketh mention in the beginning of his 18. booke antiquit Iudaic. who affirmed that the Iewes were not bound propter libertatem legis by the libertie of their lawe to yeeld obedience to Caesar or to any profane Prince c. in the Councell also of Vienna was condemned a certaine sect called Beghardi who held that a man might attaine to that perfection as that he was not bound to the observation of any precepts nor was subiect to the obedience of any we will examine some of the Anabaptists reasons 1. Argum. The Apostle saith that Christ made some Apostles some Evangelists c. Ephes. 4. not that he made them Princes and rulers Ans. 1. Christ came not to invert or innovate the ciuill state which was instituted before but to appoint a newe order of teachers for the building of his Church 2. and the Apostle speaketh there onely of such Ministers as were called to teach those indeede he made not Princes this letteth not but other of his members not called to teach may be Rulers 2. Argum. Christ forbiddeth his Apostles to be Lords and Rulers as the heathen were But with you it shall not be so Math. 20. and this he saith not onely to his Apostles but to all Mark 13.27 That which I say vnto you I say vnto all c. Answ. In that place Matth. 20. Christ forbiddeth not all Christians Lordly dominion but onely his Apostles that were apointed to preach the word that there might be still a difference betweene the Ciuill and Ecclesiasticall power but in the other place our Sauiour speaketh of spirituall watchfulnesse which concerneth not onely the Apostles but all Christians and therefore speaketh to all 3. Argum. S. Paul forbiddeth the Corinthians all strifes and controversies which doe appertaine vnto the Magistrate 1. Cor. 6. Ans. The Apostle doth not simply forbid all suites but 1. before the heathen iudges 2. among brethren 3. for small causes and trifling matters 4. and with a desire and mind to procure trouble one to an other for otherwise S. Paul had transgressed against his owne rule when he appealed vnto Caesar. 4. Argum. Our Blessed Sauiour forbiddeth to seeke reuenge but if one smite vs on the one cheeke to turne the other also Matth. 5. Ans. All priuate reuenge is forbidden but the Magistrate is Gods minister and therefore as reuenge belongeth vnto God so the Magistrate in Gods place may take reuenge and one may implore his helpe as he may commit his cause to God so it be not done with a revengefull minde 5. Argum. Our Sauiour biddeth vs to loue our enemies but to wage battell with them and to put malefactors to death is not to loue them Ergo. Answ. We are bidden to loue our enemies not simply but 1. as they are men 2. as they are our enemies that we should not attempt any thing against them of a priuate grudge or with a reuengefull minde 3. and we must not seeke their destruction but amendement yet we are not to loue our enemies 1. as they are euill least we should loue in them their vices which God hateth 2. as they are enimies of God and his Church 3. and in forbearing to punish them to their owne hurt and euill example of others So the Magistrate may loue the malefactor in seeking his amendement and yet may punish his vice in him so the Prince may loue his enemies in seeking all meanes to winne them and yet wage battell with them as enemies to God and the commonwealth 6.
whereby Christ ruleth in our hearts by his spirit Par. via ad regnum the way vnto the kingdome Sa this kingdome of God is gratia qua Deo reconciliamur the grace whereby we are reconciled vnto God Tolet the meaning then is that this kingdome of grace consisteth not in these externall things as in meates and drinks God is not thereby worshipped neither doth the observation of such things make vs acceptable vnto God 1. Cor. 8.8 5. Augustine epist. 86. maketh mention of one Vibicus who by this text would prooue that Christians were to fast vpon the saturday which was the Iewes Sabbath because the kingdome of God is not meate and drinke but Augustine there answeareth then at other times as vpon the Lords day and when els we fast not non pertineamus ad regnum Dei belike we should not belong vnto the kingdome of God the Apostle then excludeth not the vse of meates and drinkes simply but the placing of religion in them 6. But it will be obiected is not a man bound to eate and drinke to sustaine nature for otherwise he should be guiltie of his owne death and is it not acceptable vnto God to fast from meates for the subiugation of the flesh how then doe not these things belong to the kingdome and seruice of God Answ. Meates and drinkes of themselues belong not to the kingdome of God which is spirituall but as they are referred and doe helpe toward the spirituall good as they may be an obiect of our patience in the want of them and of our temperance in vsing them soberly when they abound but then not the vse of the things themselues but our obedience to the ordinance of God in vsing them for our necessitie and refraining as occasion serueth doth commend vs vnto God 33. Quest. Of righteousnes peace and ioy in the holy Ghost 1. But righteousnes now the Apostle sheweth wherein the kingdom of God consisteth he reckoneth not vp all those spirituall things wherein the kingdome of God standeth but giueth instance in some for the rest Hyper. Here 1. Chrysostome by iustice or righteousnes vnderstandeth vita virtutis studio commendata a life studious of vertue 2. Haymo the iustice of the next life where one shall not hurt an other 3. some that particular iustice which is to giue euery man his owne Gorrh. Perer. 4. some the iustice obtained by the death of Christ and giuen vnto those which beleeue Piscator 5. but it both comprehendeth the iustice of faith and the fruits thereof in our regeneration Martyr Pare so Lyranus iustitiam per fidem formatam iustice formed by faith 2. Peace 1. Haymo vnderstandeth the perfect peace which the Elect shall haue with God and his Angels in the next world 2. Chrysostome pacificus convictus cum fratre peaceable liuing with our brethren 3. but beside the externall peace it signifieth the inward peace of conscience betweene God and vs which is a speciall fruit of iustification by faith Rom. 5.1 beeing iustified by faith we are at peace with God 3. And ioy 1. Haymo expoundeth it to be ineffabile gaudium ex visione Dei the vnspeakable ioy by the sight of God in the next life 2. some gaudium de fraterna pace the ioy that springeth of brotherly peace gloss ordinar 3. gaudium de bonis spiritus sancti ioy arising of the gifts of the spirit in receiuing them thankfully Hugo 4. some referre it to the manner how the workes of iustice should be done that is prompte chearefully readily Perer. numer 17. 5. But this ioy is taken generally for the spirituall ioy which the faithfull haue in God which ariseth partly of the expectation and hope of the reward to come and of the present feeling of Gods fauour in Christ in the remission of sinnes Mart. and this ioy maketh the faithfull to be ioyous in tribulation as the Apostle saith Iam. 1. Count at exceeding ioy when ye fall into diuers tentations this ioy proceedeth partly ex spe futuri praemiij out of the hope of the reward to come partly ex dilectione Dei out of the loue of God for that which one loueth he reioyceth and delighteth in Tolet. 4. The Apostle addeth in the holy Ghost 1. to shew the author and efficient cause of those graces which is the spirit of God as S. Paul saith Galat. 5.22 The fruit of the spirit is loue ioy peace Pareus 2. as also to shew a difference betweene ciuill and worldly ioy and spirituall for concerning worldly ioy our blessed Sauiour faith Woe vnto you that now laugh for ye shall waile and lament Luk. 6.25 but of the other ioy he saith Your ioy shall no man take from you 3. he sheweth also the forme and manner of these good things that they are spirituall not carnall as consisting in meate and drinke and such outward things Quest. 34. Of these words he which in these things serueth Christ is acceptable to God c. v. 18. 1. The vulgar Latine readeth he which serueth in this that is in the spirit as Origen and Ambrose interpret but in the originall it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in these things and so translateth the Syrian interpreter and so also the sense is better to shew that the kingdome of God consisteth in righteousnesse peace and ioy because they which are exercised in these things are pleasing vnto God and they which please God shall enter into his kingdome the like saying the Apostle hath 1. Tim. 4.8 bodily exercise profiteth little but godlines is profitable to all things c. 2. In these things that is in righteousnesse peace and ioy better then by these things as Beza Martyr Erasmus for he sheweth the manner how we serue Christ not the cause Pareus 3. Serveth the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seruing so that we see that distinction betweene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worship and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 service not to be perpetuall the first whereof the Papists take for that adoration which is peculiar to God the other to be that which may be yeelded vnto Saints 4. Here is no place for merite for the Apostle speaketh not here of externall workes but of internall wrought in vs by the spirit and so Lyranus well interpreteth he that serveth interius in mente inwardly in his mind therefore that is but a corrupt glosse of Gorrhā he that pleaseth God meretur regnum aeternum meriteth eternall life for he pleaseth God not by his owne merite but because he serueth Christ as Origen well saith qui servit Christo in quo complacuit Deus placet Deo he which serueth Christ in whom God is well pleased pleaseth God 5. Is accepted of men 1. That is but a curious distinction which the ordinarie glosse hath he pleaseth God secundum gaudium in respect of his ioy for God loueth a cherefull giuer and is accepted of men in respect of iustice and peace but in all these rather he that serueth Christ is approoued
reprobation in this place as of Election 10. contr Whether as well the decree of reprobation as of election be without the foresight of workes 11. contr Of the difference betweene the decree of election and reprobation and of the agreement betweene them 12. contr Whether mercie be a naturall propertie in God or an effect onely of his will against Socinus 13. contr Whether the mercie of God in the forgiuenesse of sinne be an effect of Gods free and absolute will onely and be not grounded vpon Christ against the heresie of Socinus and Ostorodius 15. contr Of the sufficiencie of Scripture 16. contr Of the certaintie of saluation 17. contr Against the works of preparation Controversies vpon the 10. Chapter 1. contr Against inherent iustice 2. contr Against the workes of preparation which are done without faith 3. contr That it is impossible for any in this life to keepe the lawe 4. contr Against the doubting of salvation 5. contr Against vnwritten traditions 6. contr Against freewill 7. contr Against Limbu Patrum that Christ went not downe thither to deliuer the Patriarkes 8. contr Whether the righteousnesse of faith and the righteousnes of the law be one and the same or contrarie the one to the other 9. contr Whether the righteousnesse of the lawe and that which is by the law doe differ 10. contr That Baptisme doth not giue or conferre grace 11. contr Against the dissembling of our faith and profession 12. contr That faith is not onely in the vnderstanding 13. contr The Scriptures the onely sufficient rule of faith 14. contr How the Apostle saith there is no difference between the Iew and the Grecian v. 12. 15. contr Against the maintainers of vniversall grace 16. contr That faith iustifieth not by the act thereof but onely as it apprehendeth Christ. 17. contr That faith onely iustifieth not invocation 18. contr Against the invocation of Saints 19. contr That we must pray with confidence and assurance 20. contr Against the vaine pompe of the Pope of Rome in offering his feete to be kissed 21. contr Against humane traditions 22. contr That the Ministers and Preachers of the Gospel haue a lawfull calling against Stapleton 23. contr That the Hebrew text is more authenticall then the vulgar Latin translation 24. contr Against the works of preparation 25. contr Against the Iewes that will not haue the Prophet to speake of them in these words I haue stretched out my hands c. Controversies out of the 11. Chapter 1. contr That none which are elected can finally fall away 2. contr Whether the complaint of Elias of the paucitie of true worshippers be well applied to the decay of religion vnder the Pope at the time of the first reformation 3. contr That works are excluded both from election and iustification 4. contr Against free-will 5. contr That vniversalitie and multitude is not alwaies a note of the true Church 6. contr Of the sufficiencie of Scripture and of the right way to interpret the same 7. contr Against the Iewes 8. contr Whether any of the true branches may be broken off 9. contr Against the heresie of Valentinus and Basilides that held some things to be euill some good by nature 10. contr That there was the same spirit of faith and the same spirituall substance of the Sacraments vnder the old Testament and in the New 11. contr That the Scriptures are the iudge of euery one in particular 12. contr Against the Popish vncertentie and doubtfulnes of saluation 13. contr Against the Manichees and Marcionites 14. contr Against the works of preparation 15. contr Against the erroneous opinion of Origen concerning the purgatorie of hell Controversies vpon the 12. Chapter 1. contr Concerning the power of free-will 2. contr Whether the Masse be a sacrifice properly so called 3. contr Of the difference betweene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 worship and seruice whether they signifie two kinds of religious worships the one peculiar to God the other to the creatures 4. contr Of the comparison betweene virginitie and mariage 5. contr The minde it selfe and not the sensuall part onely hath neede of renovation 6. contr Of the perfections of the Scripture against traditions 7. contr Against free-will 8. contr Against the arrogancie of the Pope 9. contr Against the superstitious orders of the Popish Clergie 10. controv The Pope not the head of the Church 11. contr That to loue our enemie is a precept and commanded not counselled as indifferent Controversies vpon the 13. Chapter 1. contr Whether the Pope and other Ecclesiasticall persons ought to be subiect to the Ciuill power 2. contr Whether the Pope haue a spirituall power ouer Kings and Princes 3. contr That the tyrannie and idolatrie of the Pope may be gain said and resisted 4. contr Whether the Ciuill magistrate haue any power or authoritie in matters of religion 5. contr Whether Ecclesiasticall persons as Bishops and others may haue the temporall sword committed vnto them 6. contr Whether it be lawfull for a Christian to be a Magistrate and to vse the sword in the time of peace and warre 7. contr Whether lawes Ciuill and Ecclesiasticall doe bind simply in conscience 8. contr Whether Ecclesiasticall persons are exempted from tribute 9. contr Whether the fulfilling of the law be possible in this life 10. contr Against the Marcionites which denied the morall precepts to be now in force but to be ceased 11. contr Against iustification by the works of the law Controversies vpon the 14. Chapter 1. contr Whether to abstaine from certaine meates be an act of religion and a part of Gods worship or a thing in it selfe indifferent 2. contr That faith is not onely an assenting of the wil but an act also of the vnderstanding and it is ioyned with knowledge 3. contr That it is necessarie that festivall daies should be obserued among Christians 4. contr That festiuall daies ought not to be consecrated to the honour of Saints 6. contr Whether all the festivalls of Christians are alike arbitrarie to be altered and chaunged as shall seeme good to the Church 7. contr Against Purgatorie 8. contr Whether Christ by his obedience and suffering merited for himselfe eternall glorie and dominion 9. contr Of bowing the knee to the name of Iesus whether it be necessarily inferred out of this place v. 11. and Phil. 2.10 10. contr That Christ is prooued to be God by this saying of the Prophet cited v. 11. as I liue euery knee shall bow vnto me against the blasphemie of Georg. Eniedinus 11. contr That morall works which are done without faith are sin howsoeuer outwardly they appeare good Controversies out of the 15. Chapter 1. contr Whether S. Peter were iustly reprehended of S. Paul for refusing to eate with the Gentiles 2. contr That Christ is not set forth onely as an example for vs to imitate but as our Sauiour to redeeme vs. 3. contr Against the enemies and adversaries to the Scriptures the
law written Contra. 1. The Apostle inferreth not that euery mouth is stopped by the written testimonies but that generall word is vsed least the Iewes should thinke themselues excluded so then not that writing but the thing written that all men are sinners serueth to stoppe all mens mouthes and especially the Iewes it conuinceth both Iewes and Gentiles the Iewes both for the manner because the written law was giuen vnto them and for the matter also they were sinners the Gentiles it conuinceth for the matter they were guiltie of all these sinnes 2. Though law be there taken generally both for the naturall and written law by the which came the knowledge of sinne and yet both Cain and Iosephs brethren had beside the naturall law instructions receiued from their fathers yet in this place it is euident that the Apostle meaneth the written and speaking law whatsoeuer the law saith 2. Origen beside hath here an other strange conceit he thinketh that not onely men but Angels and spirits are here saide to be vnder the law because they also haue a law and rule giuen them to be ordered by but seeing the Angels are not saued by faith in Christ which the Apostle treateth of here he saith directly that by the works of the law no flesh shal be iustified in his sight the angels can not be said to be vnder the law for they are not in the flesh 3. Theodoret here hath this distinction that the law saith thus to them which are vnder the law seà non de ijs but not onely of them for the Prophets haue many comminations concerning the Egyptians Babylonians and other nations Pererius also hath this obseruation that wheÌ„ as any prophesie is directed against other nations they are touched by name but those things which are set downe in generall and absolutely without any such particular direction doe properly appertaine vnto those who are vnder the law c. And although the Scripture make mention of other nations yet the speciall intent thereof is to profit the Church of God Faius 4. Now the occasion of these words of the Apostle is this the Iewes hearing these generall sentences setting forth the iniquitie of the world might thinke that the Gentiles were specially meant and so shift them off from themselues Therefore the Apostle sheweth that these things were specially directed to the Iewes and that by these three arguments 1. from the relation which the law hath to them to whome it is giuen it seemeth specially to concerne them therefore because the Scriptures wherein these things were found written were giuen vnto the Iewes to them they were specially directed 2. from the end that euery mouth should be stopped if the Gentiles should be vnderstood and not the Iewes also then they might haue somewhat to glorie in and to exalt themselues against God therefore that all occasion of boasting should be taken away euen the Iewes are conuinced by these testimonies to be sinners 3. an other ende is that not onely all occasion of boasting should be taken away but that the whole world should be found 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 guiltie and culpable before God Chrysostome by this word vnderstandeth him qui sibi ipsi aâ— defensionem non sufficit who is not sufficient or able to defend himselfe but it signifieth more one that is guiltie and subiect to condemnation Pareus 5. Tolet thinketh not this to be the occasion to meete with such a secret obiection of the Iewes for they could not be ignorant saith he but that whatsoeuer was written in the Scriptures was spoken to them but rather to shew the reason why they could not be iustified by the law because the law which was giuen vnto them condemned them annot 11. Contra. The Iewes did know that the Scriptures did speake vnto them but not of them they might flatter themselues as though such things were vttered against the Gentiles and therefore as Augustine saith in Iudaeis confringenda erat superbia c. the Iewes pride was to be taken downe exposit epist. ad Galat. and both these may very well stand together that an obiection of the Iewes is met withall and a reason also shewed that the law which condemned them could not iustifie them 6. But the Psalme whence the Apostle alleadgeth his first words toucheth those which said there is no god Psal. 14.1 but so did not the Iewes Hierome answereth they did confesse God with their mouth sed factis negabant but denied him in their works 23. Quest. How no flesh is iustified by the workes of the law v. 20. 1. By the works of the law in that he decreeth iustification to the very workes not to the persons or workers onely it is euident that the places before alleadged as v. 10. there is none righteous no not one are to be vnderstood generally of all and not of the most although some should be excluded that did some good workes either among the Iewes or Gentiles for euen the workes of the law which they did were not able to iustifie them Melancthon 2. By the workes are not here vnderstood those quae praecipiuntur which are commanded and required by the law for if a man could performe those works he should finde life thereby but such quae praestantur which are performed of men Beza either before grace which can not iustifie because they can not be good or acceptable to God without faith or in the state of grace which can not iustifie neither because they are imperfect Pareus 3. By the law here he vnderstandeth both the natural whereby the Gentiles were conuinced and the written law giuen to the Hebrewes for the Apostle disputeth generally against both the Gentiles and Hebrewes proouing them both to be transgressors of the law and so not able to be iustified thereby Pareus and by the works of the law are vnderstood not onely the ceremonials and iudicials as the ordinarie gloss but the morall works which the Gentiles did by the light of nature for otherwise the Iewes onely should be excluded whereas the disputation of the Apostle is generall both against Iewes and Gentiles Pareusâ— Tolet. 4. The word flesh is diuersly taken in Scripture it signifieth the humane nature of man as Ioh. 1.6 the word was made flesh or the corruptible and mortall state of man as wheâ— the Apostle saith flesh and blood can not inherit the kingdome of God or the sinfull state and condition of man in which sense it is saide they that are in the flesh can not please God in which sense Origen would haue it taken here that they which are carnall not spirituall aâ—â— denied iustification by works but in this sense the meaning of the Apostle should be much peruerted who generally affirmeth that there is no iustification for any by the works of the law but by faith but yet the Apostle vseth this word flesh to put man in minde of his fresh condition and state beeing not apt of it selfe to bring forth