Commentary on Romans

Quest. 1. Why the Apostle beginneth this treatise with an oath; I speak the truth in Christ, &c.

1. Hugo Cardinal. referreth it to the former doctrine of the certainty of predestination, because he had said, nothing could separate him from the love of God in Christ. 2. Origen and Chrysostom have relation to the Apostles extraordinary wish, v. 3. that he wisheth to be separated from Christ for his brethren's sake; which because it might seem strange and incredible, and contrary to the Apostles confidence uttered before, that nothing could separate him from Christ, he therefore useth this vehement asseveration, to show, that he spake from his heart. 3. Gryneus thinketh, that the Apostle by this vehement speech doth purge himself from those cauills and suspicions, which were taken up of him, as that he was an innouator of the law, a pestilent and seditious fellow. 4. Haymo thinketh, that the Apostle hereby doth confirm his love toward his nation, & showeth his grief and sorrow for them, as it followeth in the next verse. 5. But the very occasion indeed, why the Apostle breaketh out into this speech is, because he was to entreat of the rejection of the Jews, and vocation of the Gentiles; which left it might seem to proceed from the hatred of his nation, he protesteth his love toward them, both by showing his sorrow for their hardness of heart, c. 9. and by his prayer for their conversion, c. 10. and in staying the insulting of the Gentiles over them, c. 11. Lyranus. and so he protesteth that he speaketh the truth from his heart as he was bound in conscience, otherwise bearing a most loving affection toward his nation: to this purpose, Calvin, Martyr, Pareus, Tolet annot. 2.

Quest. 2. Of the form and words of the Apostles oath.

1. I speak the truth in Christ, &c. Origen is here somewhat curious, that there is some truth in Christ, some not in Christ, as the Pythonisse that cried after the Apostles, that they were the servants of the most high God, Act. 16. and Caiaphas, that ignorantly spake the truth, yet did not speak the truth in Christ. 2. but S. Paul here doth nothing else, but call Christ to witness, that he speaketh the truth, and so he appealeth to three witnesses, Christ, his own conscience, and the Holy Spirit, Theophyl. Pareus.

2. My conscience bearing me witness, &c. Origen again 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 witness both of good and evil, cannot be said to bear witness in the holy Ghost: only the Apostles conscience vbi cogitatio non habet quod accuset, where the thoughts have nothing to accuse of, is said to bear witness in the holy Ghost; as Lyranus interpreteth, a conscience been ordinata, rectified and well settled.

3. I lie not. 1. here are these two things seen 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 liar, 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 joineth both together, verity in his words and sincerity in his mind, Pareus. 3. and further it is the manner of the Hebrew speech, for more certainty, to deny the contrary to that which is affirmed, as 1. Sam. 3.18. Samuel told him every whit, and bid nothing from him: and John. 1.20. He confessed, and denied not: and so is it here: Tolet •• commentar.

Quest. 3. Whether it were lawful for Paul to grieve for the Jews, whose rejection was according to God's appointment.

v. 2. I have great heaviness, &c. 1. That it is lawful to mourn for the calamities, that fall upon those, whom we wish well unto, appeareth 1. by the example of holy men, that have so mourned: as Samuel for Saul, David for Absalom, Jeremiah for the captivity of his people, our Blessed Savior for Jerusalem. 2. Christians are not without natural affection, as to rejoice for prosperous things, so to mourn for the contrary: and grief ariseth à lasione rei amatae, from the hurt of the thing beloved.

2. But for the solution of this doubt, two things are to be considered in respect whereof the mind is diversely carried: for in our grief, as we respect the calamity which is befallen, we do mourn, but looking unto God's providence we are well apayed, and do moderate our passions, submitting them to the will of God: like as natural men among the heathen did prefer the public state of the commonwealth before their private calamities: as Crassus when his son was slain, encouraged the soldiers to fight manfully, for that chance only concerned him: And as a judge, in the execution of offenders, though as a man he grieveth, that they should be put to death, yet he is well resolved and contented in the contemplation of justice, that the equity of the law for the example of others should take place: yea as God himself 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 justice: So S. Paul here doth put on as it were two affections, one was natural of humanity, in pitying the fall of his nation, the other was supernatural in submitting himself and his will to the will and purpose of God.

Quest. 4. Of the meaning of the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which the Apostle useth, v. 3.

1. Concerning the two Greek words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , with the Greek letter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , Budaeus maketh this difference between them: he would have the first to signify the things themselves, which are dedicated to sacred uses, the other the persons, that were devoted to destruction: and he deriveth them both from the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , of hanging or setting up: that as the one were set up in the temples, so the others names were set up in places of execution, in hatred and detestation of them: But Beza very well observeth, that in the Scriptures they are both used in the same sense: so also Tolet annot. 3.

2. Chrysostom interpreteth anathema, separatum, separated, from the common use: and it first was used of such things, as for honor sake were separated, and not to be touched: then secondarily of such things as were separated and accused, and worthy to be detested of all: and this sense of the word is agreeable to the words of the Apostle, as the preposition 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifieth, from Christ: as Beza well noteth here: so then, that was anathema, which was so separate from common use, as it was not lawful to be redeemed, but it must be killed: and some things were so separated for honor 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 use the word anathema here, which answereth to the Hebrew word cherem, which signifieth to bequeath to destruction.

3. Whereupon Jerome will have this word to signify to kill: and so he thinketh the Apostle speaketh of the killing of his body: 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 Chrysostom maketh mention of with some derision: but that it cannot be so taken here, it shall be shown in the next question.

Quest. 5. Whether the Apostle did well in desiring to be separated from Christ, from whom he knew he could not be separated.

1. Jerome to avoid the difficulties, that might be here objected, thinketh that the Apostle speaketh only of a temporal separation by death, voluit perire in carne, &c. he would die in the flesh, that others might be saved in the spirit. epist. ad Algas. quest. 9. epist. ad Hedib. qu. 10. so also Haymo: But Chrysostom misliketh this sense, upon these reasons. 1. both because S. Paul had made mention twice before of death that it could not separate him from Christ, it had been therefore superfluous, and beside no great matter to speak of the same here again. 2. the death of the body for Christ doth not separate from Christ, but joineth more surely unto Christ.

2. Likewise Chrysostom derideth their conceit which take here anathema, in the better part, and interpret it, to be 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a treasure laid up; for thi • had been no great matter for the Apostle to have to wished, q • is delicatulorum hominum sic non optaret, the most nice and dainty man might have so wished: Chrysostom: and again in this sense the Apostle woul not have said, à Christo, from Christ, but coram Christo, before Christ, Mart.

3. Some refer this wish of the Apostle unto the time before his conversion, and here are three opinions: 1. Some give this sense, that for the zeal of the Judaical law, he wished then to be separate from Christ, and choose to be a persecutor of his disciples: Lyranus. and the ordinar. gloss. following Ambrose. 2. the commentary going under the name of Jerome saith, that the Apostle doth now lament and bewail his sin, for that before his conversion he wished to be separate from Christ for his brethren sake, ex Pareo: 3. Tolet preferreth this sense, I wished to be an anathema, from Christ, that is, to be a known persecutor of the Christians, and to be held of them accursed for my brethren's sake, Tolet. in commentar.

But these interpretations fail diversely. 1. this had been no great matter for Paul yet being an enemy to Christ, to have wished for the love unto his brethren so to continue still, Perer. dispute. 3. 2. neither had this been to the Apostles purpose, who intendeth by this his wish to show his love unto his brethren: but if he had only spoken of his desire before his conversion, it might have been answered, that howsoever he might stand well affected to his brethren then, his mind was altered now, Mart. Perer. 3. The Apostle had taken a vain oath herein, for there was none which doubted of his hatred to the name of Christ, before his calling, that he needed not to have confirmed it by an oath, Pareus. 4. neither doth he lament here for his own sin, but for the present condition and state of his brethren, as is evident v. 4. where he reckoneth up the ancient privileges of his nation, which they had now deprived themselves of, Mart. Pareus.

4. Some think that the Apostles meaning is, that he could have wished his calling had been deferred yet, and that he for a time had been separated from Christ, and not to have been yet called, but that his brethren might have come to Christ before him: but the same difficulty remaineth still, for if S. Paul might have wished before to be an anathema from Christ, for the glory of God, why not also now? ex Mart.

5. Some think that by an anathema, is understood only, dilatio visions & fruitionis Christi, a deferring of the vision, and enjoying of Christ: that S. Paul to convert his brethren to the faith, wished still to remain in the flesh, and to be absent from Christ, as see the like, Philip. 2.23. so Oecumenius, Lyranus: But this is not to be an anathema from Christ, only to have the fruition of glory deferred, Perer. numer. 12.

6. Some understand this separation from Christ, to be indeed deprived of the glorious vision of Christ: but they will have it limited for a time, volebat ad tempus privari fruitione Christi, he would for a time be deprived of the fruition of Christ, for the good of his brethren, Thomas in comment. But he that is once separated, and standeth as accursed from Christ, cannot but always so remain.

7. Some think that S. Paul spake thus, impetu quodam charitatis, wishing himself to be damned for his brethren, by a violent passion of charity, and not well considering what he wished: But then S. Paul had sinned, if he made such a vow or wish quadam incogitantia, without any consideration or bethinking himself: it had shown great rashness, ex Mart. Pareo.

8. Some think that the Apostle useth an hyperbolical speech, when one speaketh more then he intendeth, as the Prophet David saith, They that hate me are more then the hatres of mine head, Psal. 69.4. so here the Apostle, the more to express his love toward his brethren, doth use this hyperbolical speech, as though even for their sakes he wished to be a castaway, Dyonis. Carthusian. But thus they will only make this a colorable and flourishing speech of the Apostle, which was no doubt a zealous and serious wish and desire in him.

9. Pareus maketh mention of an odd interpretation, which he heard delivered by one ann. 1568. that afterward played the Apostate from Christ: who by Christ in this place understood the anointed Priests, alleging for his authority Eusebius, who in that prophesy Dan. 9. so understandeth the word Messiah, Christ: But beside that the word Christ, being absolutely put without any addition, is not so taken in Scripture, and Eusebius interpretation is therein distasted and misliked of the best interpreters: this had been a vain and superfluous wish in S. Paul, for in the beginning of his conversion he was odious to the high Priests, and even then, they took counsel to kill him, Act. 9.23.

10. There remain then two expositions, which may be joined both together in one: Chrysostom saith, that S. Paul desired, priuari fruitione & gloria Christi, to be deprived of the glory and fruition of Christ: Oecumenius goeth yet further, that he wisheth, vt per • eam perditionem glorificaretur Christus, that Christ by my utter perishing may be glorified in the salvation of the Jews: and Cassianus c. 6. collat. 23. interpreteth, to be an anathema from Christ, aeternis addici supplicijs, to be addicted unto everlasting punishment: Both these do hang one upon another, for he which is deprived of everlasting joy, is cast down to everlasting punishment: This then is the Apostles desire, aterni boni fruitione privari, to be deprived of everlasting happiness, Martyr: excludi ab omni salutis expectatione, to be excluded from all hope and expectation of salvation, Calvin: he wisheth aeternam abiectionem à Christo, to be cast off forever from Christ, Pareus: abijci in aeternos cruciatus, to be cast into everlasting torment, Osiander. And that this was the Apostles meaning, appeareth by the like zealous desire in Moses, who also wished to be blotted out of the book of life, rather then God should have been dishonored in the destruction of Israel: both of these were ready, suo exitio aliorum saluti subvenire, by their destruction to have helped forward the salvation of others, Gryneus, Mart.

But against this interpretation it is diversely objected. 1. Object. S. Paul could not wish to be separated from Christ, but he must desire also to be alienated from his love and favor: which thing to desire it had been sin.

Answ. Chrysostom answereth that the Apostle would not by any means be separated from the love of Christ, nam propter Christi amorem tautopere hoc ardet desiderio, for the love of Christ he is so much inflamed with this desire: it followeth not therefore, he desireth to be separated from Christ, therefore from his love: he wisheth not to be deprived amicita Christi, sed fructu amicitiae, of the friendship of Christ, but only of the fruit of his friendship, which was everlasting felicity, Pareus.

2. Object. If S. Paul herein respected the glory of God in the salvation of the Jews; why did he not likewise wish to be separated for the salvation of the Gentiles? Answ. S. Paul no doubt was ready to do the like for them: but there was not the like occasion, for the Gentiles flocked to Christ, and received the Gospel, but the Jews were stubborn, and everywhere resisted their calling: and therefore for them he maketh this vow: Mart.

3. Object. But S. Paul knew, that he could not indeed be separated from Christ, as he professed before, c. 8.38. that nothing could separate him from the love of God in Christ. Ans. 1. Lyranus thinketh that this vow of Paul, as likewise that of Moses was secundum dispositionem inferioris partis animae, according to the disposition of the inferior part of the mind, where the affections are: for love nec mensuram scit nec modum, knoweth neither measure nor manner, not in the deliberate and reasonable part of the mind. 2. But the better answer is: that it was votum conditionale, a conditional, not an absolute vow, if it were the will of God, as Christ's petition was for the passing away of the cup of his death, if it were his fathers will, Pareus: so the Apostle speaketh 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , after a sort, and with condition, if it might be, Gryneus: And to the same purpose before them Oecumenius, 〈◊〉 absolute haec dixit tanquam possibilia, sed sub conditione, he spake not these things absolutely, as if they were possible, but with a condition: for if Paul for the love of Christ could have been separated from Christ, he should again have been so much the more firmly joined unto Christ: for if love be the cause of union, then so great love of the Apostle would have caused so much nearer conjunction.

4. Object. Though a man be bound by the rule of charity to give his temporal life for an others spiritual life, yet he is not bound to give his soul everlastingly to perish, if it were in his choice, that others should not so perish: like as one is not bound to redeem an others bodily life by the loss of his, so neither the spiritual life of the soul, by the loss of his own: Tolet thus objecteth annot. 4. and therefore he inferreth that in this sense, it had been an inordinate and vain desire in the Apostle.

Answ. 1. Some think, that every man is bound to redeem the salvation of others, by the loss of his own, saving that few can attain unto such perfection of charity: for the rule of charity is this, that we should do that for others, which we would have done for our selves: now a man had rather, that another should give himself to ransom him, then he should perish: and Christ was enflamed with such charity, that he became a curse for us: and the like mind should be in Christ's members to wish to be accursed for their brethren: as Origen inferreth, Quid mirum, si cum Dominus pro servis sit factus maledictum, servus pro •••• ribus anathema fiat? what marvel is it, when the Lord was made a curse for the servants, if a servant become an anathema for his brethren? Pareus also giveth instance in Christ, who was made a curse for us, dub. 1. Contra. 1. That saying of our Savior, whatsoever you would that one should do unto you, do unto them: Augustine well understandeth, •••• cta & iusta voluntate, of a right and just mind, not otherwise: for if a man could be content upon a lewd mind, that his wife should commit adultery with another, it followeth not, that the other should yield his wife to his wicked desire: so for a man to wish, that another would give his soul for his, were no just or equal desire. 2. Christ, though he did bear the punishment due to us, and did bear the curse of the law, yet he was never avuls •• à Deo, separated or pulled away from God, Mart. and there is great difference between the person of the Redeemer, and his exceeding love, and those which are redeemed, who herein cannot be imitators of Christ.

2. As these do justify Paul's desire, having relation only to the love of his brethren: so Chrysostom aimeth only at the glory of God, that in respect thereof, Paul made no account of his salvation: but he expressly maketh not mention thereof, for modesty sake, lest he should seem to boast too much of his love toward Christ: But Tolet showeth the insufficiency of this reason, because Paul had professed before that nothing could separate him from the love of Christ: he might also as modestly have wished here to be an anathema for Christ.

3. I prefer therefore Calvin's solution, that neither Saint Paul had here respect unto the glory of God alone, or unto the salvation of his brethren alone, sed charitatem hominum in studio gloriae Dei contungimus, but we join the love of men with a desire of the glory of God, &c. he wisheth the salvation of his brethren with respect unto the glory of God: as Moses in the like case in making request for his people, therein desired the promoting of God's glory: Now the Apostle saith, for his brethren, vt inserviret causae, to apply himself to the cause in hand, which was to testify the great desire that he had to their salvation, yet as joined with the glory of Christ: as is evident v. 5. where he addeth, who is God over all, Blessed forever, Mart.

So then not withstanding these or any other such like objections, I prefer Chrysostom's interpretation of these words of the Apostle, who in the zeal to God's glory, & love to his brethren, wisheth that he were cut off from Christ, so they might be saved: according to that saying in the Gospel, that it were better that one of the members should perish, then that the whole body should be cast into hell: for the Apostle had herein respect unto the glory of God, should have more appeared, in the saving of the multitude of that nation, as the whole body, he being cut off but as one member; then that he should be saved, and the whole body perish: to this purpose Chrysost. upon that place in the Gospel.

Anselm likewise upon this place saith, that Paul optabat perire, desired to perish, so the rest might be saved; and this sense he confirmeth by the like desire of two great Prophets Moses and Micah, this latter, c. 2.11. wisheth thus, I would I were a man not having the spirit, and that I did speak lies, voluit se alienum esse à spiritis, &c. he wisheth to be a stranger 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 estranged and separated from Christ: In like manner, Moses obiecit se exitio, Moses did offer himself to destruction for the people sake: thus Anselm.

But 1. though we allow Anselm's interpretation, he is deceived in his first proof: for though the vulgar Latin do so read that place of Micah, yet it is truly according to the original translated thus, If a man walking after the mind, and lying falsely, &c. that is, if there were one, that were given unto lies, which would prophesy of prosperous things unto the people, he should be a meet Prophet for them: And the Prophet was not to wish upon any occasion, to commit sin, in telling of lies. 2. Concerning the other example of Moses, it is rightly alleged, 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 amiss briefly to touch it here: for it is a great hindrance to the studious reader, in a point wherein he expecteth present satisfaction, to make reference to another book, which it may be is not so ready at hand.

Quest. 6. How Moses wished to be blotted out of the book of life, for Israel's sake.

Moses words are these, Exod. 32.31. If thou wilt not (pardon their sin,) blot me out of the book which thou hast written: Because that desire of Moses, and this of Paul here are very like, as Jerome 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 flock committed to them: it shall not be amiss to insert somewhat here touching Moses wish. Two things do here breed question, the manner of Moses wish, and the matter, and sense thereof. 1. for the manner, Moses useth that boldness of speech that a subject will scarcely use speaking to his Prince, non solum cla ••• apud Deum, sed reclamat, he doth not only cry unto God, but he reclaymeth and crieth as it were against his mind: 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 liberty then and freedom of his speech is not to be attributed unto his arrogancy, but unto his friendship and familiarity: arrogantis est audacia, amici est fiducia, boldness and rashness showeth arrogancy, but confidence is in friendship. 2. But there remaineth a greater doubt as touching the matter and meaning of Moses vow and desire: for whereas God's book of life signifieth his ordaining of some unto eternal 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 men's present justice: in the first sense it would seem to be stulta petitio, a foolish request, to desire that which was impossible to be blotted out of God's decree of predestination, and in the other it would be thought to be impia, an ungodly desire, to wish to fall from the present state of justice: now for the solution of this doubt there are diverse answears framed.

1. Rabbi Solomon taketh this to be the book of Moses law, that it should have no denomination from him, but that his name might be taken out thence: but it appeareth in the Lord's answer, I will blot out of that book him that sinneth, that this book belonged unto more then Moses only.

2. Rab. Moses Gerundens. thinketh, Moses extra se captum, to have been as it were beside himself, and in his great zeal to his people to have 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 book here, for the historical narration in Scripture of the acts and doings of the Saints: and so he thinketh, that Moses only desired, that the great works, which God had wrought by his hand, should not be written of him. But this had been to pray against the setting forth of God's glory, which was manifested in those great works.

4. Cajetan understandeth it, de libro principatus, of the book of principality: that whereas God had appointed Moses to be governor of a greater nation and people, if he should destroy Israel, Moses desireth rather to be no governor at all, then that Israel should perish: But the words of the Lord, I will blot out him that sinneth, show that Moses speaketh not of a personal writing in any such book, which concerned him alone, but of such a book, wherein others were written as well as himself.

5. Augustine maketh this sense, qu. 147. in Exod. as thou hast made it certain, that I cannot be raced out of the book which thou hast written, so let me be as sure and certain, that thou wilt remit the sin of this people: But God's answer, I will blot out, &c. overthroweth this sense, for there the Lord answereth negatively, unto 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 inferior part of his mind, not in the superior part, which was his judgment and understanding: as Christ prayed that the cup might pass from him: but yet there is a more sufficient answer then this, see answ. 6. following.

7. Thostatus qu. 44. in 32. Exod. thinketh, that it is an hyperboricall speech, as that of Rachel, give me children or else I die, and yet she had rather have had no children, then to have died: yet in such passionate speeches, they show their servant and exceeding great desire: But in this sense Moses should have had no such meaning to be blotted out of God's book: the contrary whereof appeareth in the Lord's answer.

8. Oleaster will have this to be the meaning: blot me out of thy book, that is, obliuiscere 〈◊〉 perpetuo, forget me forever: for as we use 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 metaphorical speech, as is evident by the Lord's answer to Moses.

9. Heirome epist. 151. ad Algas. and Grego. lib. 10. Moral. c. 7. Euthym. in Psal. 68. upon these words, let them be blotted out of the book of the living, do take this book to be the decree only of this temporal life, and those to be blotted out, which are deprived of life: so Moses in their opinion wisheth only to be deprived of this mortal life: so also Pererius. But this cannot be so, for the Lord saith, he will blot out him which sinneth, now not only sinners, but righteous men are taken away out of this life.

10. But Chrysostom's exposition is best, who lib. 3. de provident. doth interpret these words of Moses, as the other of Paul, of the final separation from Christ, and of being deprived of the vision of God, and fruition of Christ: so also Bernard, Moses noluit introduci in gaudium Domini, &c. Moses would not be brought into the joy of the Lord, the people remaining without. Bernar. in serm. 12. in Cantic. the reasons for the confirmation of this, see in the end of the former question: and the solution of this doubt, how Moses could desire an impossible thing of God, see also there in the answer to the 3. objection.

Quest. 7. Whether in matters of salvation, one kindred after the flesh ought to have any priority before others.

v. 3. My kinsmen according to the flesh. 1. Basil regal. brev. res. 190. delivereth this doctrine, that in spiritual matters none ought to have more respect unto their kindred after the flesh, then unto others, that are not near in blood: And that saying of Saint Paul, may seem to confirm this opinion, 2. Cor. 5.16. Hence forth know we no man after the flesh, us though we had known Christ after the flesh, yet henceforth know we him no more. Contra. In this place the Apostle opposeth himself against these false teachers, which stood upon carnal perogatives, and the legal and carnal ceremonies, and the generation of Christ only after the flesh: these things Saint Paul would no longer know, that is, trust unto: before his calling he stood upon such outward privileges, as that he was circumcised, an Hebrew, of the tribe of Benjamin, and such like, Phil. 3.5. But he counted all these things a dross and dung in comparison of Christ: and he will not know Christ only according to the flesh, in respect of his outward state in the world, for our Savior himself saith, John. 6.13: It is the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing. Mar.

2. But that even spiritual things may by the rule of charity be first wished unto our ••• ted, it may thus appear. 1. because our natural affection is not destroyed by religion, but perfected; piety doth qualify and moderate natural compassion, it doth not extinguish 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 it. 2. charity must be ordinata, ordered: it proceedeth in degrees: first a man may express his love toward his own, 1. Tim. 5.4. Let them first learn to show godliness toward their own house. 3. S. Paul giveth this as a reason of his heaviness and grief for the Israelites, because they were his kindred after the flesh: where though he useth a limitation: that after the flesh they were only his brethren, but otherwise they were not, being unbelievers and contemners of the Gospel, yet it much moved him for them, because they were his kindred after the flesh.

Quest. 8. The causes which made the Apostle to be so much grieved for the Jews, v. 4.5.

He recounteth diverse privileges and immunities of the Jews, which made him the more to desire their conversion. 1. in respect of himself, they were his brethren, not so properly called, but they were his kinsmen after the flesh: though in other respects they were not his brethren: this phrase after the flesh, is afterward, v. 5. being spoken of Christ taken in another sense: it showeth him to be of another nature, then that which he had after the flesh: here it showeth not a diversity of nature, but a difference of brotherhood in Paul & thē.

2. Then he reckoneth up their privileges with relation unto God. 1. they are the Israelites: they are rather called by that name of Jacob, then by the name of Abraham and Izaac, for that these had sons, which belonged not to the people of God, but all Jacob's sons were the fathers of the Lord's people, and they are named of Israel rather then Jacob, because it was the more worthy name, both for that the Lord imposed it, and for the more excellent signification: Israel signifieth one prevailing with God. 2. Theirs was the adoption, that is, they were adopted to be a peculiar people unto God, selected from all the world: and therefore they are called, Exod. 4.22. the Lord's first borne: there is another adoption, when we are adopted to be the sons of God by grace, Rom. 8.15. but the Apostle speaketh here of the outward adoption and calling to be the people of God. 3. the glory which Chrysostom understandeth, in that they were the peculiar people of God, so also Haym. Gor. gloss. interl. Theodoret, of the miracles and great works whereby they became famous and glorious: Lyranus of the divine visions and apparitions: but it is better referred unto the Ark of the covenant, which is called the glory of God, 1. Sam. 4.21.22. Gryn. Calv. Mart. Tol. Pareus. 4. The covenants, giving of the law, the service of God: Origen by the covenants or testaments understandeth the diverse renewing of God's covenant with his people, so Mar. Osian. Hier. in epist. ad Algas. qu. 9. of the old and new Testament, so Haymo, but the new testament is afterward expressed in the word promises: the covenants were rather the two tables of covenant, as the Apostle calleth them, Heb. 9.4. and so here the Apostle reckoneth up three kind of laws which Israel had, the moral, contained in the tables of the law, the judicial, called here 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , the giving of the law, and the ceremonial, which consisted of the priesthood and sacrifices, called here the service. 5. the promises: which were of two sorts, either temporal, as touching the inheriting of the land of Canaan, or spiritual of the Messiah, Gryn. both legal promises and Evangelical, Mart. both of this life and the next, Pelican. these promises first belonged unto them, and upon their rejecting, they were fulfilled upon the Gentiles, Osiander.

3. The third sort of privileges are with relation unto the fathers, thence were the fathers, that is, of that nation were the honorable patriarchs, of whom they are descended: and God promised to be their God, and of their seed, Gen. 7.4. yea to a thousand generations, Exod. 20.6. though they were degenerate children, yet unto them belonged the promise made unto their fathers.

4. The forth kind of privilege is with relation to Christ: and of whom Christ came: some leave out the conjunction and, and understand the fathers of whom Christ came, so Orig. Haymo, Lyranus. following the vulgar Latin: But the better reading is with the conjunction, and of whom, that is, of the Israelites came Christ: so Chrysost. Theophyl. Tertul. l. de Trinit. Iren. l. 3. c. 8. Hilary lib. 8. Trinit. with others: according to the Greek original: for it is a commendation of the whole nation of Israel, and an excellent prerogative that Christ came of them according to the flesh.

Quest. 9. Of the excellency of the Israelites, and of true nobility.

1. The nobility of the Israelites diversely appeareth. 1. one thing that maketh a nation noble, is to have genus purum & impermixtum, to come of a pure and vnmingled stocks as the Athenians boasted that they came of themselves, without the mixture of any other nation, but it was most true of the Hebrews, they were descended of Abraham, and joined not in marriage but with themselves. 2. that is counted a noble nation, which hath a perfect government within it self, and live by their own laws, as the Hebrews did, who had their laws given them of God. 3. they were also of great antiquity. 4. and many excellent and worthy men came of that nation.

2. Some make small account of nobility, and urge much that saying of Iphicoabes, who being but a coblers son, grew to be a famous captain, which being objected unto him, answered, meum genus à me incipit, tuum in te definite, my nobility beginneth in me, and thine endeth in thee: and nobility they say is but an outward thing, even as the garments and robes of honor, which make not a man honorable.

Contra. 1. True it is that virtue without nobility is more commendable, then nobility without virtue; but when virtue is incident to them, that are descended of a noble race, it is so much the more glorious. 2. some may much degenerate from their noble ancestors, as corn and stocks transplanted may grow wild: as of such as have been ingenious and valorous, may descend cruel and savage ympes, as the posterity of Alcibiades, so degenerated: and of such as were gentle and affable may some come, that are dull and blockish, as the offspring of Cymon and Socrates. 3. yet there is a threefold privilege to be descended of noble and worthy parents. 1. there do remain some seeds of generous minds, which one way or other will in time show themselves in the posterity. 2. the example of the virtues of the ancestors is much to move and incline the posterity. 3. and beyond all this, the Lord hath promised to be the God of the faithful, and of their seed to a thousand generations: so that they which are descended, though diverse degrees off from true noble progenitors, are beloved of God for their fathers sakes.

Quest. 10. Of the meaning of these words, v. 5. who is God over all, blessed forever.

1. Erasmus is blamed both by Protestants, as Beza, and Papists, as Tolet annot. 9. for •• tering and changing the reading of this verse, making this the sense, God who is over all, be blessed forever: and will not have this clause referred to Christ: but that the Apostle doth conclude generally with a doxology, giving praise unto God: likewise he thinketh that this word ( God ) is inferted, urging that neither Hillarie hath it in Psal. 122. not Cyprian lib. 6. 〈◊〉 . Iudeos: whereas notwithstanding, Origen, Chrysost. Theophyl. and generally all expositors do so read, and manny of them use this place to prove the divinity of Christ.

2. S. Paul concludeth with this doxology for two reasons. 1. both as Chrysostom saith to set forth the praise of Christ; whom the Jews blasphemed: 2. and as Haymo, to show, that although he was sorry for the rejection of the Jews, yet he gave thanks to God for all, and rested in his good pleasure.

Quest. 11. Of the meaning of these words, v. 6. all they are not Israel, which are of Israel.

The Apostle here answereth an objection, that if it so be that the Israelites are cast off and forsaken, then it should seem that the word of God is of no effect, and his promises made void, hereunto the Apostle maketh answer by a distinction of the Israelites, that some are so only in respect of their carnal generation, some are the true Israelites, which are the children of the promise, and of the faith of Abraham: But here is some qu ••• ion about the scope and purpose of the Apostle.

1. Some think that the Apostle intendeth chiefly to prove the vocation of the Gentiles, that they are the true Israel of God, and so the promises of God are not made void: and these make the example of Izaak only typical, thereby shadowing forth the difference between the true believers and those only which have the outward calling: to this purpose Chrysostom, who applieth this example to the Gentiles, which are called by the word, and regenerate by baptism: so the onrdinar. gloss. and Tolet annot. 16. But if the Apostle intended only to show by this distinction, the calling of the Gentiles, he had not sufficiently answered the objection, which concerned the promises made to the Israelites his kindred after the flesh.

2. Neither yet is the Apostles scope to be restrained only to the nation of the Jews: as Pet. Martyr seemeth to think, Israelitico populo promissionem propositam fuisse indefinite, that the promise was propounded indefinitely to the people of Israel, which came of Abraham after the flesh, &c. and therefore he misliketh Chrysostom's application to the Gentiles: for it is evident that the Apostle in the end of the chapter treateth of the vocation of the Gentiles, whereunto he maketh a way by this distinction.

3. So then under the name of the true Israel of God, the Apostle comprehendeth those which did imitate the faith of Abraham, whether they were of the flesh and carnal generation of Abraham, or not, Gryneus: And Haymo maketh three kind of children of Abraham, some are secundum fidem & gratiam, both according to faith and the flesh, as the believing Jews: some only according to the flesh, as the incredulous Jews: some according • o faith but not in the flesh, as the believing Gentiles.

4. Tolet well observeth, annot. 16. that S. Paul's answer is not to the former objection, that God's promise took effect in some of the Jews, though not in all, to whom it was made: for then in part it had not taken effect, but the promise was made only to the true Israelites, and so in all them, to whom it was made, it was effectual.

5. And whereas the Apostle bringeth in the example of Isaac, to prove that all are not the children of Abraham, that are of his seed, because Ishmael was also of Abraham's seed, but was not the heir of promise: it must be observed, that neither all that descended of Israel, were excluded from the promise, for of him came many believing Gentiles, nor all included within the promise, that came of Izaak, for then all of Israel should be the true Israel: But these two are propounded as examples, Ishmael only of though •• which are borne according to the flesh, and Izaak of those which are borne not by the force of nature, but by promise and grace.

Quest 12. Of the meaning of these words, v. 10. and not only, &c. but also Rebecca, &c.

1. This is an imperfect speech, and not only, and therefore somewhat must be supplied: some therefore insert thus, and not only be, that is, Isaac, Beza, Genevens. some, and not only (illa) she, understanding Sarah, that is, the only non accepit devinum responsum, received not a divine answer, Irenaeus lib. 4. 〈◊〉 . or promissionem, 〈◊〉 promise, gloss. ordinar. or a son by the help of grace, Lyranus • • t the better supply is to put it neither in the masculine or feminine, but in the neuter, a •• not only ( hoc ) this, that is, it was not thus only in Ishmael and Isaac, but in this other example, which he now pro • oundeth: see the like phrase before, c. 5.11. and 8.23.

2. For whereas diverse exceptions might have been taken 〈◊〉 former example: as that they were of two mothers, and all •• same of diverse conditions, the one free the other bound: now the Apostle produceth another example, wherein neither of these two exceptions can have place: for Jacob and Esau came of one mother, and they were borne at one birth.

3. The vulgar Latin readeth, Rebecca, ex vna concubitu, at one lying in conception, but in the Greek it is not so, but she 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , having conceived by one: in the same sense the Syrian translator, companying with him: though it be not unlike, but that as they were borne together, so they were conceived together.

4. But Chrysostom here hath a strange opinion: that the Apostle leaveth this question vndiscussed, why the Lord did make choice of Jacob and refused Esau: he only answereth one question by another: for the Jews might have demanded, why they were rejected, and the Gentiles accepted, and he answereth by the like question concerning the fathers, Isaac and Jacob were taken, Ishmael and Esau refused: and goeth no further: like as in the 5. chapter, he showeth that Christ's righteousness is derived to us, as Adams sin is propag • ted, but there he leaveth, and proceedeth not to show, how sin is propagated from Adam: But Chrysostom is in both deceived, for both in that place he proveth the propagation of sin from Adam to his posterity, by the effect thereof, namely, death, all is sin in Adam, because by sin death entered: and in this place he showeth the first cause of the election of Jacob, and the reprobation of Esau, namely the free purpose of God, v. 11. that the purpose of God might remain.

Quest. 13. Whether these examples concern temporal or eternal election and reprobation.

It is by some objected, that these examples of Isaac and Ishmael, Jacob and Esau, do only show their temporal rejection, not their depriving of eternal life: but they are set forth only as types of the rejection of the Jews.

1. For the text cited out of Genesis, chap. 15. speaketh of servitude, that the elder shall serve the younger; but one may be in servitude, and yet not eternally rejected.

2. And this prophesy was not personally fulfilled in Jacob and Esau, but in their posterity.

3. That other place Malachi. 1.2. showeth wherein the love of God consisted toward Jacob, and his hatred toward Esau, because he gave unto Jacob the land of promise, but unto Esau he made his mountain wast, and gave him a dry and barren country: Thus Erasmus objected, in his diatrib. pro liber. arbit. and of late Humius and Huberus.

Contra. To these objections of Erasmus, Luther hath sufficiently made answer, lib. de orbit. c. 166. much differing herein from the Lutherans so called in these times.

1. First here Luther, and so Pet. Martyr upon this place answer by way of concession, that if it were admitted, that Saint Paul only speaketh of their temporal rejection, yet it is a strange argument to show, that election is not by works, seeing even the disposing of this temporal inheritance was not by works, but according to the purpose of God: secondly it is denied, that this testimony only concerned the temporal inheritance: for this external promise of the inheritance of Canaan, had relation to Christ, and the spiritual promises were therein exhibited: and so the Apostle draweth his argument, à sig no ad rem significatam, from the sign to the thing signified, Iun. lib. 2. parallel. 10. so also Pareus dub. 9. this right given unto the younger over the elder, was effectus singularis gratiae, complectens ea omnia, quae ad foedus Dei, &c. it was an effect of special grace, comprehending all things belonging to the covenant, and everlasting life.

2. As this prophesy was historically fulfilled in their posterity, so also it must have some effect in their persons: for it is said to Esau, Gen. 27.40. Thou shalt be thy brothers servant: which seeing it was not fulfilled visibly, for Esau had a more flourishing outward state than Jacob, it had a spiritual accomplishment in them, Esau being a servant in respect of Jacob, because he was cut of from the covenant off grace: And though there be not evident testimony of the reprobation of Ishmael and Esau, yet it is most probable: seeing Ishmael was a mocker and persecutor of Izaak, Gala. 4.29. and Esau is called a profane person, that they were reprobates: unless it can be shown that they returned in their life time to the fellowship of the Church, for without the Church there is no salvation: Par. dub. 4.

3. In Malachi, the Lord useth this as an argument of his love to Jacob, and hatred to Esau, because he had given a pleasant land to the one, and a barren ground to the other: but yet the Lord riseth higher; and showeth how that with Esau he is angry forever, and that he will be magnified in Jacob: that place then cannot be restrained to temporal things.

4. And if these examples only concerned temporal things, then had not the Apostle alleged them to the purpose: which was to show who were the children of God, and the children of the promise, v. 8. but this is not to be thought of the Apostle, that he cited Scripture impertinently: See further hereof, Synops.

Quest. 14. How this saying of the Prophet, Esau have I hated, agreeth with that, Wisdom. 11.2 • . Thou hatest nothing which thou shalt made.

1. Catharinus to dissolve this knot, referreth this hatred of Esau unto things temporal: that Jacob is said to be loved, and Esau hated, because Jacob had the better blessing, and more temporal gifts bestowed upon him, and Esau seemed to be neglected; like as the younger sons may say their father hateth them, when the inheritance is given unto the Elder: But it hath been shown before, that these examples are alleged by the Apostle to show who were the children of promise, and who not, and therefore they cannot be restrained to temporal things.

2. Augustine saith, non edit Deus Esau hominem, sed adit peccatorem: God hated not Esau as a man, but as a sinner: lib. ad Simpl •• ian. qu. 2. and he explaneth his mind thus further: distinguishing between these three, creaturam, peccatum, poenam peccati, the creature, the sin of the creature, and the punishment; the first God hateth not, nor the last, the one he made, the other he ordained, but he hateth the third, that is sin, which he made not like as a judge condemning a thief, neither hateth his person, nor the punishment, which is according to justice, but the crime of thes • , &c. upon this answer insisteth Pererius, and before him: Haymo, non edit naturam, quam fecit, sed peccatum, quod non fecit, he hated not the nature, which he made, but the sin, which he made not: so aso Gorran: and the ordinary gloss. he hated nothing in Esau, nisi original peccatum, but his original sin, &c. But the Apostle here speaketh of an hatred, before Esau had done any evil, and before the fight thereof.

3. Neither doth it satisfy, to say it is spoken comparatively, Esau was hated, that is less beloved: as a man is bid to hate father and mother to cleave to his wife, that is, love them less, then his wife: for the Apostle calleth them the vessels of wrath afterward, whom he is here said to hate; therefore such are not beloved at all.

4. This then is the solution: hatred in God signifieth three things. 1. the negation and denial of his love, and of this degree of hatred sin is not the cause, but the will of God, that electeth whom he will, and refuseth whom he pleaseth: thus God hateth Esau, and all the reprobate. 2. the decree of punishment, and this proceedeth from the foresight of sin, and thus God is said to have the wicked. 3. it signifieth the anger of God, and his abhorring of that which he hateth; and thus God is said to hate iniquitte: and of this hatred is that saying to be understood, thou hatest nothing, that thou hast made: for God in this sense hateth not his creatures, but sin in them: Pareus dub. 11.

Quest. 15. Of the meaning of these words, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy.

1. Origen and Heirome, epist. ad Heath. qu. 10. do think that this is an objection made by some as it were contradicting the Apostle; But this is the Apostles answer rather to the former objection: is their iniquity with God, that he should elect one, and reject another, both of them being in the same state and condition: to the which the Apostle maketh answer, God forbid, and giveth a reason of his answer here out of the Scripture.

2. Chrysostom thinketh, whom Theophylact followeth, that by this sentence the Apostle stayeth man's curiosity, from requiring the cause why some are elected, some are refused, which is best known unto God; as the Lord answered Moses who was desirous to know, why all of the Israelites being guilty of the same sin, in worshipping the golden calf, yet were not alike punished: to whom the Lord answereth thus in effect: non est tuum scire Moses, &c. Moses it belongeth not to thee to know who are worthy of my mercy, &c. But in this sense, there were small coherence in the Apostles speech: for then there should be no answer made unto the former objection, which the Apostle remooueth here: Tolet annot. 22. neither was this sentence uttered upon any such occasion, concerning the punishing of sin of the Israelites, and sparing of others; but whereas Moses had made request to see God's glory, and the Lord had granted him to see his backer partes, and so in part yielded unto his request, then this is added, as a reason thereof; I will have mercy, Mar.

3. Ambrose is far wide, who maketh this the sense of these words: I will have mercy on him, on whom I will have mercy, that is, quem praescivi, whom I foresaw like after his error to return unto me: so the ord. gloss. cui praescio misericordiam, whom I foresaw, mercy is to be shown upon: the like gloss Thomas maketh mention of in his Commentary, I will have mercy on him, quem dignum praenonero misericordia, whom I foresaw to be worthy of mercy. But this is not agreeable to the Apostles mind: 1. there had been no occasion of any such objection, if the cause were in the foresight of men's worthiness, why some are elected, and not others, for then there had been no show of injustice at all in God, the reason had been plain: Tolet annot. 22. 2. this, to give unto those which are worthy, respicit iustitiam Dei, respecteth the justice of God, whereas the Apostle here referreth all unto God's mercy; Martyr. 3. neither can that be a cause of election, which is an effect thereof: for to believe, and to be obedient, are effects of election, then the foresight thereof cannot be the cause: Pere. dsiput. 7. err. 39.

4. Neither is this only an Hebrew phraise signifying the same thing, as Tolet ibid. as the Hebrews for more vehemency sake do express the same thing, by an emphatical repetition: neither yet are these words so curiously to be distinguished with Anselm, as to refer thē to God's mercy in calling, in believing, & in working, that whom he showeth mercy upon in calling, he will show further mercy in giving grace to believe, and whom he giveth grace unto believe, they shall have grace also to work by their faith: Lyranus and Pererius understand the three degrees of God's mercy, in predestinating, in giving present grace, and glory to come, and so make this the sense, I will have mercy, in giving grace to him, on whom I have mercy, in electing him: and to whom I give final grace I will show mercy in giving him future glory: Junius much differeth not, I will have mercy (ex facto) in fact and indeed, upon whom I have mercy, decreto, in my decree of election: parallel. 11. But Pareus better showeth the reason of the ingemination and repeating of these words: to show, 1. this mercy, gratuitam, to be frank and free, and that there can be no reason or cause yielded why God showeth mercy, but his own gracious inclination to mercy. 2. arbitrariam, that it is arbritarie depending only upon the will of God. 3. constantem, that it is constant and immutable: where he showeth mercy, he will have mercy to the end. 4. immensam, this mercy is infinite and without measure, not only in bestowing one grace, but many.

5. Further it is to be observed, that thought the same word, to have mercy, be retained both in the Greek translation of the Septuagint, and in the latin in both partes of the sentence, yet in the Hebrew there are two words, the one in the former clause of the sentence, canan, which signifieth to show grace, and favor: the other in the latter part, is racham, to show bowels of compassion, and beside the Septuagint do put the verb in the present-tense, in the latter part of both the clauses, whereas in the original the same tense and time is kept in both; but this is no great difference, the sense still notwithstanding remaineth the same.

6. This then is the Apostles meaning; whereas it was objected that if God elect some and not others, their case being the same, the Lord might seem to be partial and unjust: he answereth in effect thus much, that whereas all are indebted to God, and without God's mercy like to perish, here is no injustice, if God remit his debt to one and not to another: as Augustine saith, debitum si non reddis, habes quod gratuleris, si reddis, non habes quod queraris, if thou do not pay the debt, which thou owest, thou hast cause to be thankful, if thou doest, thou hast no cause to complain: So then the Apostle here showeth, that between the decree of election and reprobation, and the execution thereof, there came between certain subordinate causes: all are sinners in Adam, for mercy presupposeth misery, where the Lord then findeth all in misery, there if he show mercy to some, and not to others, no man can accuse him of injustice, because he is not indebted or tied in his justice unto any, but all are by nature the children of wrath: if then he save some out of that mass of corruption, it is a work of his mercy, and no injustice is to be imputed unto him, where in justice nothing is due to any: to this purpose Beza. annot.

Quest. 16. How it is said, It is not in him that willeth, nor in him that runneth, but in God that showeth mercy.

1. Origen and Heirom. ad Hedib. qu. 10. think that the Apostle speaketh here in the person of one that contradicteth and objecteth against that which he had said: and Chrysostom saith, that the Apostle hero aliam obiectionem inducit, bringeth in another objection: But it is evident by this note of illation ( so then ) that the Apostle thus inferreth and includeth out of the former places of Scripture alleged.

2. Origen and Photios, with other Greek expositors, supply here the word solum (only) as if the Apostle should mean, It is not (only) in him that runneth, or in him that willeth, but in God that showeth mercy: and Origen will have this sentence to be understood comparatively, as those two other places, Psal. 127. Except the Lord build the house, they labor but in vain, that build it: and 1. Cor. 3. Neither be that planteth is anything, nor he that watereth, but God that giveth increase: But these places are not like: for the first is a civil action to build an house, wherein the will of man hath some liberty, though it cannot prosper without the blessing of God: and like as the outward ministry of man is nothing available unto salvation, without the assistance and concurrence of the spirit, so neither can the will or endeavor of man do anything of it self toward the attaining of salvation, but all must be ascribed to God's mercy: Martyr: and beside the antithesis or opposition, but in God that showeth mercy, excludeth that gloss, only: for God's mercy and man's will cannot in this opposition be joined as workers together, seeing the one is excluded, and the other admitted: Pareus: Calvin here also presseth Augustine's reason, that if the Apostles words admitted any such sense, then they might as well be inverted to say, It is not in God, that showeth mercy, but in him that willeth and runneth, that is, it is not only in the one, no more then in the other.

3. Some of the Romanists, that will not have man's free will utterly excluded in the work of salvation, have this devise: that although there be somewhat in him, that willeth and runneth, yet all is ascribed to God's mercy: because miserecordia Dei praeuenit voluntarem hominis, &c. the mercy of God preventeth the will of man, &c. and man's will being thus prepared, then worketh together with grace: Pererius numer. 46. taking upon him herein to confute Calvin: Thomas Aquine in his Commentary here moving this question, why, seeing that as free will is not sufficient without grace, so neither grace sufficeth without freewill, yet all is ascribed to God's mercy, answereth by a distinction; because the grace of God is agens principale, the principal agent, man's will, secundum & instrumentale, is the second agent, and the instrument, to the which the work is not ascribed, but to the principal agent: as the axe is not said to make a chest, but the artificer that worketh with it. Contra. Pet. Martyr useth the same similitude, but to a diverse ende: man's will indeed God useth as an instrument, but not any goodness in man's will, which it should of it self without grace: the will of man concurreth as a natural instrument, in respect of the natural faculty of calling: but it hath no inclination to that which is good, but as it pleaseth God to move it. Mans will then, is a natural instrument of the action, but not a moral instrument of the goodness of the action: this is wrought wholly by the mercy and grace of God: therefore the ordinary gloss here concludeth well out of Augustine, restat vt totum Deo datur, it remaineth, that the whole be given unto God: volentem praevenit vt velit, & subsequitur • e frustra velit, he preventeth man to make him will, and followeth him with his grace, that he do not will in vain, &c. And I prefer here the judgment of Tolet and Bellarmine before other Romanists; the first inferreth out of this place, non fuit nisi ex sola voluntate Dei, the calling of the Gentiles was only of the will of God: annot. 23. the other likewise so expoundeth this place, that it is only the mercy of God, nothing at all in the will of man, that he perseuereth to the ende: lib. 2. de grat. c. 12.

4. Ambrose by mercy understandeth the discerning judgment of God, as he giveth instance in David and Saul, how both of them asked pardon of God: but God discerned vter bono animo peteret, which of them asked of a good mind: and so he will have the meaning to be, that it was not enough for a man to will and endeavor, unless God did confirm and allow of his endeavor: But there is great difference between the mercy of God, and the judgment and approbation of God: for but part of the work is ascribed to the one, whereas the whole is due to the other: ex Mart.

5. Now touching the true meaning of the words: 1. neither with Anastasius qu. 59. are they to be restrained to Esau's running and coursing in the field to hunt for venison for his father. 2. nor yet with Tolet to Jacob's running to the flock to fetch a kid, Gen. 27. the Apostles doctrine is more general. 3. nor yet, as the same Tolet annot. 23. is this sentence only to be applied in general to the calling of the Gentiles, and the rejection of the Jews: but with August. epist. 101. do we interpret this place of the particular predestination of everyone, that it dependeth not upon the foresight of the will and works of men, but only on the mercy of God. 4. Osiander understandeth it of the willing and running of natural and unregenerate men among the heathen; that they were not called in respect of any such will or endeavor: but as well the calling and running of regenerate, as unregenerate men, are here excluded from being any cause of election. 5. Neither are those words to be divided, as though the willer were one, and the runner another: but the things only are discerned, by willing, is understood the inclination and endeavor of the mind, by running the external works and labor, Gryneus. 6. And here the nominative case must be supplied, which Beza will have to be election: that it is not in the willer or runner: and so Pareus: Haymo supplieth, the will is not of the willer, nor cursus, the running of the runner: Pet. Martyr better understandeth both; that two things are here implied: that neither election is in respect of anything in man, neither that he hath power to will or run of himself. 7. And Beza well interpreteth, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , of him that willeth, not volentis, of the willing, to take away all ambiguity: least the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , God, might be thought to be supplied, in the two first, as well as in the last: as though the sense should be this, It is not of God that willeth or runneth, but that showeth mercy.

17. Quest. How the Lord is said to have raised or stirred up Pharaoh, v. 17.

1. Photios in Oecumen. understandeth it of the raising up of Pharaoh to the kingdom: so also Rupertus Taitiens. I have raised thee, scilicet in regnum, that is, to the kingdom: so also the Rhemists in their annot. and Vatablus: But the Apostle goeth further, then to the time of Pharaohs coming to the kingdom. 2. Chrysostom, so also the Septuag. and Chaldee paraphrast, do refer it to the saving and keeping of Pharaoh alive from the plagues of Egypt, that God's power might be shown in him: and to the same purpose Ambrose, whom the ordinary gloss followeth, thus expoundeth, I have raised thee up, cum apud Deum mortum esses, being in effect dead before God, in suffering thee to live, &c. But many beside Pharaoh, were so reserved from the plagues of Egypt. 3. some understand it permissive, that God is said to have raised him up, in permitting Pharaoh to rage against his people: permittendo, non agendo, by permitting, not acting or doing anything: Rupertus before alleged: and these think that good things are done volente Deo, God being willing, mala permittente, and evil by his permission only. But Pet. Martyr here well showeth, that even permission also is not without the will of God, and that even good works belong unto God's permission: as Heb. 6.3. This will we do, if God permit: and this word of raising up, showeth more then a permission only. 4. Some refer it unto the means, as the signs and wonders, whereby Pharaoh was further hardened: so their meaning is, that God did raise him up occasionaliter, by ministering occasion only: as Anselm, excitavi te quasi sopitum per mea signa, I did raise thee up or awake thee by my signs, as a sleep: to the same purpose Lyranus, abusus est signis, he abused the signs, which were sent to bring him to repentance: Haymo much differeth not, duritiam cordis manifestavi, I manifested or made known by this means, the hardness of thy heart. But the Apostle ariseth yet higher to the counsel and purpose of God, he stayeth not only in the external and secondary means. 5. Beza and Gryneus understand it of the creating of Pharaoh, that he had made and created him to that ende: but the Apostle as before in the example of Esau and Jacob, so here, speaketh of the purpose and counsel of God, which went before their creation and birth. 6. Pet. Martyr hath this note by the way, that God might raise up in Pharaohs mind, vehementem cogitationem de tuendo regno, a vehement cogitation or thought to defend his kingdom: but he by his own corruption turned this cogitation into malice against the people of God. But this doth not fully satisfy: for the counsel and purpose of God concerning Pharaoh was long before the raising or stirring up of any such cogitation.

7. Neither must this be referred so unto God, as to make him the efficient cause of stirring up the malice of Pharaoh; as Pererius slandereth the Protestants to affirm, that God stirred up Pharaoh, that is, fecisse eum it a obduratum in malo, &c. to have made him so obdurate in evil, that by punishing of him diversely, he might take occasion to set forth his power and glory. Perer. dispute. 9. numer. 50. But far be it from us to make God the author of evil, or the proper cause of any ones hardness of heart: we are further off from this blasphemous assertion, then the Romanists themselves.

8. Neither do we restrain this only to God's decree of the rejection and reprobation of Pharaoh; as though God had ordained Pharaoh to this ende, to show his disobedience, that thereby God's power might appear: as Bellarmine imputeth this opinion to Calvin and Pet. Mart. Deum absolute Pharaonem excitasse, &c. that God absolutely had raised up Pharaoh to resist him, before any foresight at all of his sin: for God doth not ordain or appoint any unto sin. Neither hath Calvin any such saying; his words are these, God raised up Pharaoh to this ende, vt dum ill contumaciter diuinae patientiae resistor nititur, that while he seeketh to resist obstinately the power of God, he being subdued and brought under might show, how invincible the arm of God is. Pet. Martyr also thus writeth, I have raised the up to this end, to afflict my people, & mihi resisteres, and to resist me, that my power might be seen in thee. Neither of these affirm that God raised up Pharaoh, to this end to resist him, but the end was the demonstration of God's power, by his obstinacy and disobedience, which God procured not, but ordered it so, that his glory and power might be set forth by it.

9. Wherefore for the right understanding of this place, there are four things to be considered, which will deliver God from all suspicion of injustice. 1. his absolute power to dispose of his creatures, as it seemeth best unto himself, as they may best serve unto his glory; he may take unto himself, and leave whom he will, and none are to say unto him, What doest thou? Isa. 45.9. 2. God did foresee the malice and obstinacy of Pharaohs heart, whereby he fore-judged him worthy of perdition; as Habac. 1.12. the Prophet speaketh of the Chaldeans, Thou hast ordained them for judgment, and established them for correction: and in the next verse he speaketh of their wickedness, wherefore dost thou look upon the transgressors. 3. God by his secret working, but most just, is said to stir up the spirit & the wicked, not by inclining their corrupt wills unto evil, but by his secret power ordering them, to that end, which he hath appointed: as Ier. 51.11. God is said to have raised up the spirit of the King of the Medes, against Babel: and yet it is certain, that they sinned in this action, which God stirred them up unto: for God stirred them up to one end, to be ministers of his judgments upon that wicked nation; but they therein satisfied only their own cruel and covetous mind: as Isai, 10.5. the Lord saith concerning Ashur: I will give him a charge against the people of my wrath, &c. but he thinketh not so: they considered not wherefore the Lord 〈◊〉 them as the end of his wrath. 4. Lastly, the end must be considered, wherefore God raised up Pharaoh: to a most holy and just end, for the setting forth of his glory: as the wise man saith, Prov. 16.4. The Lord hath made all things for his own sake, yea even the wicked against the day of evil: In these foresaid respects God is said to have raised up and ordained Pharaoh, without any touch of injustice at all.

Quest. 18. How the Lord is said to harden whom he will, v. 18.

1. Origen thinketh that this sentence is part of an objection propounded in the person of some other: and so also Chrysostom. But it appeareth to be the Apostles own assertion, both by the note of illation, therefore he hath mercy, &c. and because the objection followeth in the next words, v. 19. thou wilt say unto me then: which showeth this to be no part of the objection; Beza, Gryneus.

2. Some think that God hardeneth by permission only, as Oecumen, indurat. i. dur ••• esse permittit, he hardeneth, that is, suffereth and permitteth to be hardened: so also Bellarmine, permittit eos male agere, he permitteth them to do evil. But this permission, doth suppose God, either otiosum, vel invitum, either to be idle and negligent, or against his will to suffer things: so it will cast upon God either an imputation of negligence or indulgence, as Heli permitted his sons to sin; or of impotency, in permitting things, which he cannot hinder: therefore this devise of bare permission, doth not satisfy.

3. Nor yet did God harden him, per patientiam, by his patience, in sparing to punish him, Origen: dilatione poenae, by deferring of his punishment, Basil in Oecumen. for in this sense Pharaoh rather hardened his own heart, in abusing God's longsuffering, as the Apostle speaketh of those, which through their hardness of heart despise the bountifulness of God, Rom. 2.42. God cannot be said this way to harden it.

4. Jerome thinketh that God doth harden the vessels of wrath, and mal •• fieth the vessels of mercy, causis praecedentibus, upon causes proceeding or going before, because some believed in Christ, some believed not, Jerome epist. 150. resp. ad qu. 10. But Pererius refuseth this opinion, and upon good ground; because he maketh the wills and dispositions of men, to be the first cause, why God showeth mercy on some, and hardeneth others: as the same heat of the Sun mollifieth the wax, and hardeneth the clay: whereas the Apostle soli voluntati diuinae aperte assignat, doth manifestly assign the cause to the only will of God: Pere. dispute. 10. numer. 55.

5. And far be it from any to think, that God is the proper efficient cause of the hardening of man's heart, which is the work of Satan: as Pererius slandereth Calvin to say, Deum causam esse efficientem indurationis, that God is the efficient cause of the hardening of the heart, &c. And thus he challenging Calvin, because he saith, that this word to burden in Scripture signifieth not only permission, sed diuinae irae actionem, but an action of the divine wrath: which is most true; but yet as the hardening and hardness of the heart is sin, the Lord hath nothing to do with it.

6. Pererius thinketh that by hardening here we may understand, ipsam reprobationis originem, the very beginning of reprobation, that is the will and purpose of God, non miserandi, not to show mercy: But hardening of the heart is an effect or consequence rather of reprobation, then reprobation it self: and thus he will make God the proper cause of this induration and hardening, which he charged Calvin with before.

7. To understand therefore how God is said to harden the heart: it must be considered, that there are two degrees thereof, desertio induritae, the leaving and forsaking of men in their hardness of heart; which is either non apponendo, vel subtrahendo gratiam, in not giving, or in subtracting his grace: as Augustine saith, he hardeneth not, impertiendo malitiam, sed non impertiendo gratiam, not by imparting malice, but by not imparting his mercy and grace: epistol. 105. ad Sixtumi non quia irrogatur aliquod quo fit homo deterior, sed quo ferrer melior, non irrogatur: not because anything is irrogated to make man worse, but nothing is irrogated, to make him better, • lib. 1. ad Simplici. qu. 2. and he likeneth it to the freezing and congealing of the water by the absence of the Sun, which is done, non impretiendo frigiditatem, sed non apponendo calorem, not by imparting coldness, but in not putting to heat. The other degree in hardening, is inflictio grautoris duritiae, the inflicting of a greater blindness, and hardness of heart: which is done three ways, either immediately, by God himself, or mediately by Satan, or by themselves, that are hardened: and so we read in Exodus, that God is said 8. times to have hardened Pharaohs heart, and thrice Pharaoh hardened his own heart, and five times his heart is said simply to be hardened, Pareus.

First God inflicteth the hardness of heart as a punishment, when either inwardly, he giveth them up to their own desires, not only in denying unto them necessary graces, but so working by his invisible power that their corrupt wills are more and more hardened: as it is said, Revel. 22.11. He that is filthy, let him be filthy still: hardness then of heart, as it is a punishment of former sins, is justly inflicted by God, as Augustine saith, prioribus meritia, &c. hoc redditum est Pharaoni, vt cor eius induraretur, this was given as a just recompense to Pharaohs former evil merits, in afflicting the people of God, that his heart was hardened, &c. As hardness of heart is a punishment of former sins, so it is of God. And God by his immediate power hardeneth the heart two ways: 1. the general facultio, whereby everyone moveth and willeth this or that, is of God: Luther useth this similitude, as Pet. Martyr allegeth him: like as the rider that forceth a lame and halting horse is the cause of his going: but his halting pase proceedeth from the lameness of the horse: so God hardeneth as the general mover, but the euillnes of the action proceedeth from the corruption of man. 2. But more then this, God doth by a more special providence so overrule even the hearts of wicked men, that they are ordered unto that ende, which the Lord will himself: 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 even wicked wills according to his own mind, &c. yet God giveth unto evil and perverse wills, non corruptionem sed ordinem, not corruption but order, &c. and he showeth it by this similitude: like as when one is cast down headlong, and is ready to fall, if one make a way seeing he must needs fall, that he tumble down one way rather then another, he in some sort may be said to incline and make a way for him to fall: and yet causeth or procureth not, but only disposeth his fall: And thus God may be said to harden •• erly.

Outwardly also God hardeneth by his works, as either his mercies shown upon others, as the Egyptians hated God's 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 upon them: or by his judgments inflicted upon the wicked themselves, 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 ministry and preaching of the word, which is sent to convert them, but they pervert it to their destruction: so it is said unto the Prophet Isaiah, 6.9. Go, &c. and shut the eyes of 〈◊〉 people, make their heart fat: 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 delivereth up men unto Satan to be seduced by him, and giveth them over into his power: as God is said to have stirred up David to number the people, 2. Sam. 24.1. which was indeed the work of Satan, 1. Chron. 21.1. so God bid the lying spirit to go and deceive 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 do harden their own hearts, when God giveth them over unto their own wicked and corrupt desires; as the Apostle speaketh of the heathen, that God g •• e them up to their own hearts lusts, Rom. 1.24. And thus Pharaoh is said to have hardened his own heart: And thus, as hath been shown, God is said to harden the heart: But it will thus be objected on the contrary.

1. Object. To tempt man is all one as to harden him, but God tempteth none, I am. 1.13. therefore neither doth he harden them.

Answ. God tempteth not with any such temptation, as proceedeth from a corrupt beg •• ing: such as are the temptations which are caused by man's 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 up to evil: neither doth he in this manner harden: but as God may tempt externally for the trial of men's faith and obedience, as he tempted Abraham, and so he tempted Israel in the desert: so the Lord by external means, and in such manner as he have said, hardeneth in his justice without any injustice at all, Martyr.

2. Object. If God hardened Pharaohs heart, why then did he send Moses so often unto him, to bid him let his people go? God should seem herein to be contrary to himself, in making show of one thing, and yet intending another.

Answ. Pet. Martyr here useth this distinction: God's will is to be considered two ways; there is voluntas signi vel antecedens, the will of the sign, or the will going before: and there is voluntas consequence seu beneplaciti, the will following, or of God's good pleasure: As when Jonah was sent to preach to the Ninevites, that they should within 40. days be destroyed, that was the will of the sign, or the revealed will of God: but yet the Lord upon their repentance purposed to spare them, that was the secret will, and good pleasure of God: yet were not these wills the one contrary to the other: but the one wrought for the other: as Jonah preaching brought them to repentance, that God's pleasure might be fulfilled in spring of the city: so Moses was sent to Pharaoh, to make him without excuse, that God's justice might be manifest in giving him over to the hardness of heart.

3. Object. Hardnes of heart is of God, hardness of heart is sin, therefore is would hence follow that sin is of God.

Ans. Hardnes of heart is not of God simply, or as it is sin, but accidentally only 〈◊〉 it is the punishment of sin: hardness of heart is then ascribed unto God, as the Judge to Satan as the tormentor and executioner, to the wicked themselves, as to the party guilty, Pareus, dub. 16.

4. God is not angry with his own work: but he is angry with men for their hardness of heart: therefore it is no way God's work.

Answ. Hardnes of heart as it is sin, or the cause of sin it is not of God, but the Lord is offended with it: but as it is a punishment of sin, so is it of God, and the Lord is pleased that the obstinacy of the wicked should be punished, Gryneus.

Quest. 19. Of the objection propounded, v. 19. Thou wilt say, why doth he yet complain, &c.

1. This is the third objection: the first was of inconstancy, which might seem to be imputed unto God in rejecting the Jews, which was answered before v. 6. the second of injustice, in casting off some and choosing others, before they had done any good or evil, 5.14. now the third is of cruelty, which might be furmised in God, i • being an 〈◊〉 those that are hardened, which notwithstanding is according to his own will: this ph ••• ion the Apostle now beginneth to answer.

2. Why doth he yet complain, or is angry, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the word signifieth both: the latin readeth queritur, complaineth: by the mistaking of which word, some taking it for •• ritur, with a dipthong, which signifieth to be sought or inquired: some have here 〈◊〉 threefold sense; as first it may be taken impersonally, why is it inquired, whence it 〈◊〉 one is good another evil; or passively, wherefore is it sought for, or why should any seek to be good, seeing all is as God will; or actively, why doth God complain of sinners, seeing all is according to his will: so Gorran and the ordin. gloss. but the last only is the right meaning, the other two senses do arise by the mistaking of the word.

3. God complaineth in many places in the Scriptures of the wickedness of men, as Isa. 1.26. How is the faithful city become an harlot: so our Savior taketh up this complaint over Jerusalem; how often would I have gathered together, &c. Matth. 23. now the objection is, why God should thus complain, seeing herein his will is not gainsaied or resisted.

4. And the force of the objection consisteth in these two points. 1. Ob. That which 〈◊〉 according to God's will, he cannot justly be offended with; but that some are hardened 〈◊〉 agreeable to God's will: here we must answer by a distinction of God's will; for that which is not contrary to God's revealed will, he cannot be displeased withal, but if the question be of his secret, and hid will, the proposition is not true.

2. Ob. That which cannot be avoided, is not justly punished, but the hardening of 〈◊〉 reprobate cannot be avoided, therefore, &c.

Answ. Here must be admitted a distinction of necessity, there is necessitas coactia •• , compelling and enforcing necessity, when the will is not free, but urged and compelled, and necessitas naturae, the necessity of nature: as men considering their natural corruption cannot but sin, there is necessitas infallibilitatis, a necessity infallible: as that which God hath decreed, cannot otherwise be, Martyr: of the two latter kinds of necessity, the proposition is not true, but only of the first: that which cannot be avoided, is not justly punished, if a man be willing to avoid it: seeing then the will of wicked 〈◊〉 is wholly ••• ried after sin, howsoever there is a necessity in their nature, and in respect of God's decree not to do otherwise: yet because they are not compelled, but they sin willingly, they are notwithstanding justly punished.

Quest. 20. Of the Apostles answer to the former objection, who art thou O man that pleadest, &c. v. 20.

1. The Apostles answer is first personal, showing the insolency and presumption of man, that dare take upon him, thus as it were to call the creator to account for his works: of such the Prophet Isaiah saith, 49.10. Woe unto him that striveth with his maker: the other? answer is real, that is, concerning the thing it self: which consisteth of a secret concession, that both are true, that God hardeneth whom he will, and that none can resist God's will; or do otherwise then he hath determined: and these is a nogation insinuated, that yet notwithstanding God is not unjust, which he showeth by the absolute power that God hath ever his creature, by the similitude of the potter, Gryneus: Tolet maketh here two answears of the Apostle in this similitude proposed, one to stay the curiosity of such gain sayers, v. 20. the other to satisfy the humble and willing to learn, that God casteth off none without their own demerits, v. 22.

2. Origen well observeth here a difference between those which ask questions, and make objections of curiosity, for they deserve no other answer but this, tu quis es, who are thou man, &c. and such as desire to be satisfied for their own instruction, non puio, quod si fidelis servus & prudens interroget, &c. I do not think that if a faithful and wise servant should have asked any question being desirous to understand; that it should have been so answered him: but his desire should have been satisfied as Daniel's was, c. 9.

3. Augustine concerning this answer of the Apostle, lib. 83. qu. 68. maketh mention of two cavils of certain heretics here objected, the one of the Marcionites and Manichees, that Paul having nothing to answearto these objections, fell to chiding: some other thought the Scriptures were corrupted, and that these words were inferred by others: To both these cavils Augustine answereth thus in effect: to the first, that seeing the Apostle spake by the spirit of God, it were blasphemy to think that he had nothing to say: and to the other, if this be admitted, that the Scriptures are corrupted, we should have no certainty of anything.

Quest. 21. How the similitude, which the Apostle bringeth in of the potter, is to be understood.

1. Jerome epist. ad Hedib. que. 9.10. maketh this a dissimilitude rather then a similitude, in this sense: O man think not, that God hath made thee like a piece of clay, without any will or motion: for the clay cannot answer the potter anything: but thou makest answer to God, O man who art thou that answearest, &c. to the same purpose Photios in Oecumenius, as he is here cited by Tolet ann. 26. But seeing that the Scriptures unto the which the Apostle here alludeth, do often compare God to a potter, and men unto the clay, under the potters hand: this interpretation seemeth to cross altogether the Apostles meaning, that neither God should be as the potter, nor men as the clay.

2. Chrysostom thinketh that S. Paul only allegeth this similitude to this ende ad obedientiae silentium exprimendum, &c. to show how we should be obedient and silent, not to be inquisitive in these things, as the clay is under the potters hand, suffering him to work his pleasure: But as we confess this to be true, so there is more comprehended in this similitude, which giveth unto God, an absolute power over men to dispose of them, as it pleaseth him, as the potter doth of his clay.

3. Origen would expound this place by the like, 2. Tim. 2.21. If any purge himself from these he shall be a vessel unto honor, here (saith Origen ) memoravit rationem, &c. he remembereth the reason, wherefore some are made vessels to honor, some to dishonor: if any man purge himself, &c. so Jacob was a vessel to honor, because he purged himself, &c. to the same purpose Ambrose in his commentary here. But 1. these two places are not alike: for S. Paul there speaketh, neither of the decree of election, nor of the cause of our vocation 〈◊〉 calling, but de officio, of the office and calling of a Christian, how he ought to be unlike to the reprobate, and carry himself as a vessel sanctified and purged for the glory of God: as Calvin well interpreteth that place. 2. and if it were thus, that God upon the foresight of works good or evil, should elect or reject, then should he not have the like power which the potter hath over the clay, Mart.

4. Wherefore the Apostle in the enforcing of this similitude reasoneth à minori, from the less to the greater, that if a potter have such power over his vessels which he maketh, God hath much more over his creature, to frame and fashion it, as it may best serve for his glory. But yet this similitude is not in every point to be pressed, but in diverse things there is a dissimilitude. 1. God maketh man of nothing, but the potter hath a matter prepared before, out of the which he maketh his vessels, Pareus. 2. the clay hath no motion or understanding, as man hath, Faius. 3. and it is a greater matter to destroy a man, then a piece of clay, Faius. But herein this similitude holdeth, 1. like as there is no difference in the matter, out of the which the potter frameth diverse vessels: so all men by nature were as one corrupt mass. 2. As the potter hath absolute power to do with his clay as he will, for the the use and service of the house: so God the Creator may dispose some to honor some to dishonor, as he seeth it to make most for his glory. 3. as the clay if it could speak, is not to reason with the potter, so neither is man to question with God, for making him so. 4. and as the potter, nihil adimit into, &c. taketh nothing from the clay, of what form soever he make it: so neither doth the Creator any wrong to the creature howsoever he dispose of it, Calvin: who thinketh that the Apostle in this place hath reference rather to that place, Isaiah 49.9.10. then to the other Ierem. 18.2. where the Prophet is bid to go down to the potters house: But the Apostle rather alludeth unto both these places, as Martyr observeth.

5. But against this application of the similitude, it will be thus objected. 1. Object. Erasmus objecteth, as he is here cited and confuted by Pet. Mart. that the Apostle treating only of the temporal rejection of the Jews, alludeth to that place of Jeremiah, which must be understood of the temporal rejecting and casting off the Jews. Ans. P. Mart. here answereth, that 1. neither in that place doth the Prophet only speak of temporal things, but as they were types and shadows also of spiritual, which must be joined together in those prophetical predictions. 2. neither doth the Apostle only here speak of the temporal rejection and forsaking of the Jews, but of the spiritual, as is evident, c. 10.1. mine hearts desire is, that they might be saved, &c. he maketh express mention of their salvation.

2. The Apostle seemeth to change the question, which was not whether the Lord had power as the potter, to dispose of his vessels as it pleaseth him: but why the Lord should complain and be angry with his work, which is made according to his own will. Answ. 1. Tolet and Faius here answer, that for God to complain, or be angry, is the same, as to make a vessel of dishonor: he maketh some vessels of dishonor, that is, he is angry with them, and complaineth of them: but this answer satisfieth not: for God complaineth in Scripture and showeth his anger against those, which were before ordained to destruction: therefore Pareus here better maketh this answer: that as the potter hath a double right to break in pieces the vessel which he maketh, both in respect of his power, because he is the potter, the maker and fashioner of it, and in respect of the vessel it self, if it chance to be tainted with some evil savor, he may with much better right break it into shiuers: so God, beside that by the right of his Creatorship, he may dissolve that which he made, he also is justly angry with the creature for the sin and corruption thereof, which it hath voluntarily committed.

Quest. 22. What the Apostle meaneth, by the same lump or mass, v. 21.

1. Some by the same mass understand the sin of idolatry, wherewith the Israelites were infected in Egypt, as well as the Egyptians, and yet the Lord out of this mass saved the Israelites and destoyed the Egyptians: But Pet. Martyr refuseth this interpretation. 1. because that which is generally delivered by the Apostle, they restrain to particular kind • of men. 2. the Apostle treateth not of the punishments inflicted by God upon some rather then others, the reason whereof is evident in the diversity of men's works: but he speaketh of the decree and purpose of God from the beginning.

2. Method. l. de resurrect. as he is cited by Oecumen. understandeth this lump or mass • of the elements, out of the which the Lord shall frame the bodies of men in the resurrectio • some to rise to honor, some to dishonor: But there is great difference between the decree o • election & reprobation whereof he treateth here, and the executiō thereof in the resurrecti ••

3. The most do understand the mass of corruption; when as all mankind by the transgression of Adam was polluted, and enthralled under sin: so Augustine, Vter{que} electus & reprobus, ex eadem massa tota damnata originaliter, &c. Both the elect and reprobate are originally out of the same mass of damnation, yet God as a potter out of the same mass, maketh one vessel to honor, another to dishonor, &c. decivitat. Dei, lib. 15. c. 1. Pet. Martyr also consenteth, consideravit hominem Paulus post peccatum, Paul here considereth man after his fall, as being most vile and abject both in body and mind, &c. likewise Pareus understandeth here, massam corruptam, the mass of corruption, because by this means the justice of God better appeareth in judging the reprobate and showing mercy on the elect, dub. 17. Bellarmine also lib. 2. de amiss. grat. will have by this mass understood, genus humanum peccato corruptum, whole mankind being corrupt by sin.

Beza refuseth this interpretation upon these reasons. 1. because in this sense the Lord cannot be said to make vessels of dishonor, but rather to leave them in their natural corruption, being already vessels of dishonor. 2. if God should first behold men as corrupt by sin, before he decreed and determined what should become of them, this might be some imputation to his wisdom, as first creating men before he had appointed how to dispose of them. 3. and in this sense, the reason of God's justice were evident, in leaving men already corrupt, so that there would be no place for that objection of God's injustice, here propounded by the Apostle.

4. Therefore Beza with whom Faius concurreth, doth by this mass understand the first creation of man out of the dust of the earth: as the very term of clay, which the Apostle useth showeth, out of the which Adam was taken.

5. But I think, that by this mass we may more safely understand, generally, the same original and beginning of man, whether in the creation, before sin yet entered, or in his corrupt state: for if it should be restrained only to the latter, it were a limitation of God's power, as though he had not absolute right to dispose of his creature, as it pleased him, without respect unto sin: neither yet must the latter be excluded, because the Prophet taketh clay in that sense, for mankind as it now standeth in the state of corruption, Isa. 45.9. showing that God may dispose of men in this world, according to his good pleasure: And Pareus, though he resolve, dub. 17. that this mass is better taken for the state of corruption, yet in his annotation upon the 22. v. he comprehendeth both: that God hath power ex eadem massa damnata, imo ex nondum creata, out of the same damned mass, yea out of the same mass, not yet created to make some after one fashion, some after another: for the Apostle in alleging this similitude of the potter doth not so much show what God doth, as what he may do: even as the potter hath absolute power to dispose of his clay, to make thereof what vessels he thinketh good: so God out of the same mass or matter, whether it be considered in man's creation or transgression, may diversely dispose of his creatures, they having all one and the same beginning, as the vessels out of the same clay.

23. Quest. Of the 22. v. What and if God would, &c.

1. What if God: some will have the 30. verse to answer unto this, what shall we say then, &c. but then the sense should be suspended too long: Theodoret thus expoundeth; if thou are desirous to know, why God punisheth some, &c. know that he doth it justly bearing with patience, &c. but here too much is inferted to make up the sense; some give this sense, quod Detu? what doth God? if he would, &c. but thus the order of the words is inverted, which stand thus, what if God would: therefore the sense is thus best explained: if we understand with Augustine, if God would, &c. what wouldest thou then answer or object to God: or with Calvin, Beza, Pareus, who can accuse God of injustice, &c.

2. Concerning the occasion of the words, it is this: whereas the Apostle before insisted upon God's absolute right and power over his creature, to dispose of it at his pleasure, as the porter doth his clay: least that the profane might have taken occasion hereby, to have accused God of tyranny, that he should cast off some unto everlasting destruction of his own will, now he showeth, that God's purpose in rejecting some, and electing others, is grounded upon most just reasons: for none are cast off but worthily for their sin: and so the Apostle here toucheth the reasons both why some are cast off, others elected: there are three reasons rendered of the former; because they are vessels of wrath, that is God is justly offended with them for their sins; then he showeth his power in judging them, and further they abuse God's patience, and therefore are justly punished, the cause why God electeth others, is for the setting forth of the riches of his glory.

3. Where they are called vessels, some of wrath, some of mercy: we are to consider, that this word vessel is used in a threefold respect, natural, civil, spiritual, and eternal: in the first respect, the body is said to be a vessel with relation to the soul, because it is as the vessel thereof: as the Apostle saith, 1. Thes. 4.4. Let everyone know how to possess his vessel in holiness: in the Second, some are said to be vessels, in respect of their calling public, as Paul was God's chosen vessel, to carry abroad his truth, Act. 9.15. private, as the woman in the family is called the weaker vessel, 1. Pet. 3.7. But here they are called vessels in respect of God's eternal purpose: that some should be ordained for wrath forever, some for everlasting glory.

4. But where the Apostle saith, to show his wrath: Origen here hath a note somewhat curious: he observeth that in Scripture the Lord is said to manifest his wrath, but his goodness he hideth, as Psal. 31.29. How great is thy goodness, which then hidest for them that fear thee, &c. and the reason he saith is this, because it is expedient for men, esse sub 〈◊〉 irae, to be under the fear of God's wrath, &c. But the word tzaphan used in that place, signifieth as well to lay up, as hide: and in this place the Apostle speaketh as well of the declaring of the riches of God's glory toward the vessels of mercy, as of manifesting his power towards the vessels of wrath.

5. Now whereas the Apostle calleth as well the reprobate as the elect, the vessels of God, the one of his mercy, the other of his wrath, thereby we see, that God useth them both, as his instruments, though not in the same manner: for he poureth of his grace into the vessels of mercy, and so maketh them fit instruments for himself; the other he useth also not by infusing that euilnes unto them, which they have, but by moderating, ordering, and overruling the same, as it pleaseth him.

6. We must also consider that there are two kinds of vessels of wrath, there are some such in respect of their present state, which may become vessels of glory, such was Paul: some are vessels of wrath in the eternal decree of reprobation, as Judas was: and those the Apostle speaketh of here.

Quest. 24. In what sense the vessels of wrath are said to be prepared to destruction. v. 21.

1. Whereas the vessels of wrath are said to be prepared in the passive, but it is said in the active, God hath prepared the vessels of mercy, Ambrose as Pet. Martyr citeth him, ascribeth the first unto God, that the vessels of wrath are prepared to destruction, and B •• r thereunto consenteth: but the preparation of the vessels of mercy he referreth to God's prescience: whereas God did not only foresee, but ordained also the vessels of mercy: but seeing that the one is uttered in the passive, the other in the active, the vessels of wrath are not so prepared of God, as the vessels of mercy are.

2. Chrysostom goeth another way, for he thinketh, that the vessels of wrath are made so propria iniquitate, by their own iniquity, and the vessels of mercy are made propria benevolentia, by their own good will, and he addeth, licet potior pars sit Dei, modicum t ••• s ipsi attulerunt, for although the better part be God's, yet somewhat they bring of their own: and Origen thinketh that they are called vessels of mercy, quia seipsos emundaverunt, &c. because they have purged themselves from the filthiness of sin: But in that they are called vessels of mercy, and God is said to prepare them, it is evident, that it is only in God mercy, that calleth them, and God prepareth them, not themselves.

3. But this is the reason of this different speech, because the vessels of mercy God only hath prepared, they have nothing of themselves: but the vessels of wrath are partly prepared of God, partly of themselves and of Satan: if we consider the nature of these vessels, they were created of God, or the end it is also ordained of God, but in respect of their sin, they are prepared of themselves by the corruption of their own nature, and by the malice of Satan: So they are neither wholly prepared of God to destruction, nor of themselves, but partly by both, as hath been shown: See Pareus dub. 18.

Quest. 25. Of the testimony cited v. 21. out of the Prophet Hosea.

1. Concerning the allegation of the words there is some difference: for both the order of them is inverted, and the words themselves somewhat altered, for that clause, which the Apostle putteth last, is first in that place, Hos. 1.23. and where the Apostle saith, I will call her beloved, which was not beloved, the Prophet saith, I will have mercy on her, that was not pitied: S. Peter in alluding to this place, 1. epist. 2.10. he keepeth the same words, but he changeth the order, ye were in times past not under mercy, but now have obtained mercy: this part of the sentence he maketh the last, which with the Prophet is the first: to reconcile this doubt, 1. the vulgar Latin retaineth both, beloved, which was not beloved, and she which obtained not mercy, hath obtained mercy: but Beza coniectureth well, that one of these was put into the text out of the margen, by the unskillful writers: for there is but one in the original. 2. Jerome to whom Erasmus subscribeth, thinketh there were two readings of this place: some had 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , not beloved, some 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , not pitied, and the letter he would rather to be received: but seeing the first reading is in the ancient original, as appeareth by the Syriac translation, it is therefore the rather to be preferred. 3. wherefore I approve Junius solution, lib. 2. parall. 13. and Pareus in this place, that the Apostle in citing these testimonies doth follow the sense rather, then the words, for brevity sake, and the better to apply them to his present purpose.

2. But as touching the scope of that place, and the meaning of the words, whereas the Prophet seemeth directly to speak of the Israelites, the question is, how the Apostle applieth it to the Gentiles. 1. Origen answereth that God speaketh not in mountains and rocks, and other terrene places, but in the heart, there the conscience telleth everyone whether he belong to the people of God or not, &c. But this is not sufficient to look unto the inward testimony of the heart, we must have also external testimony from the Prophets of the calling of the Gentiles, otherwise the Jews will not be answered.

3. Therefore Chrysostom thinketh, that the Apostle maketh this collection à pari, from aparitie and equality, Erasmus saith, à simili, from the like, that seeing the Israelites for their sin were cast off to be no people, they were in the same case with the Gentiles, that were no people also, and therefore aequa ration vocentur, they may with as good right be called. 3. some of our new writers, as Calvin, Pet. Martyr, think that the vocation of the Gentiles is proved out of this place by a certain consequent: for the Prophets use, when they denounce judgments against the people for their sins, to raise them up with spiritual comfort again in Christ, and vbi erigitur regnum Christi, where the kingdom of Christ is set up, there must be a concourse of all people, from all parts of the world, Calvin.

4. Augustine whom Haymo followeth, understandeth this place of the Jews, which were no people, when they refused Christ, and said, we know not whom he is, but were his people being afterward converted unto Christ as 3. thousand were called at one sermon by S. Peter, Act. 2. But this had not been to the Apostles purpose, who intendeth to prove the vocation of some from the Gentiles.

5. Therefore the Prophet directly in that place prophesieth, that they should become the people of God. 1. because the Gentiles were known by this name, not the people of God. 2. and of the Israelites literally it cannot be understood, for they never returned again to be a people.

Quest. 26. What is meant by the short sum or account which God shall make in the earth, v. 28.

1. Touching the words here alleged, they are somewhat diversely set down in that place, Isaiah. 10.21.22. for there the sentence standeth thus, the consumption decreed shall overflowe with righteousness: but here the word, ouerflowe is omitted, which some understand of the overflowing of the justice and righteousness of God, by the knowledge of Christ, into all the world, Calvin: some of the efficacy of the faith of the Gospel, which shall ouerflowe to wash away and cover their sins as an overflowing stream doth wash and cover the earth, Osiander. and the word charatz, determined and decreed, is translated abbreviated and shortened, thus the Septuagint do read that place keeping yet the sense: which being a received translation thorough the world which had so continued 300. years, the Apostle refuseth not to follow.

2. Concerning the meaning. 1. some interpret this word consummate, to be Christ, who was as it were abbreviated, and shortened in respect of his incarnation, Anacletus epist. 2. Hier. epist. ad Algas. qu. 10. 2. Origen applieth it to Christ's abridging of the law into two precepts, the love of God, and our neighbor, and to the short sum or compen •••• of the faith set forth in the Creed: so also Cypr. de orat. Dom. and Haymo. 3. Tertullian understandeth it of the doctrine of the Gospel which is abridged, the multitude of legal cerimonies being cut off. lib. adverse. Marcion. so also Chrysostom and Theophylact. 4. Photios understandeth it of the perfection of the Gospel, after the which no other doctrine shall succeed, as it succeeded the law. 5. Ambrose lib. de Tobia. c. 50. referreth it to the consummation or consumption of our sins in Christ. 6. Gorran wresteth it to the counsels of perfection given in the Gospel, which the law had not: but all these are wide; for the Apostle here mindeth not any comparison between the law and Gospel.

3. Therefore this sense is not agreeable to the scope of the Apostle, to understand by this short sum, the final remainder of the Israelites, that should be saved: that like as few of them returned from the captivity of the Chaldeans which the Prophet historically intendeth, so but a few of them should come unto Christ, from the captivity of sin and Satan: and so the Apostle to this ende allegeth these testimonies to prove by the Prophets the abjection of the Jews, as he out of the former affirmed the vocation of the Gentiles.

Quest. 27. Why God is called the Lord of hosts. v. 29.

1. In the Greek the Hebrew word Sabaoth is retained, which signifieth hosts: 1. Faius giveth this reason, why some Hebrew words are retained in the Greek, and some Greek in the Latin, as kirieleeson, Lord have mercy upon us, yea and some Latin words are still kept in the Greek original, as Modius, quadrans, consul, Centurio, and the like, that there might appear vnum corpus ecclesiae, but one body of the Church, consisting of all these languages. 2. But a better reason is rendered by Beza annotation: that these Hebrew words being familiarly known, were still used of the Christians, because from the Jews and Hebrews first was derived the Christians faith, and so from the Greeks to the Romans: And the reason why some latin terms were taken up by the Grecians, was the large dominion of the Romans, who together with the bounds of their Empire, did also propagate their language. 3. but these peregrine and strange words were not used upon any superstition, as though there were any holiness in the words: as the Romanists for that cause may seem to commend the use of a strange tongue in their service.

2. Now God was called the Lord of Sabaoth. 1. some think in respect of the stars and host of heaven, which the heathen worshipped, to show that he was superior to the gods of the heathen. 2. some understand the Angels by these hosts, Lyranus. 3. some Angels, Men, and Devils, and therefore the Prophet doth say thrice, holy, holy, holy, Lord God of Sabaoth; Isaiah. 6. Gorran. 4. some think that there is a relation to the hosts of the Israelites, in the midst whereof the Ark went in the wilderness. 5. But rather generally here must be understood the whole host of heaven and earth, Mar. as Gen. 2. • and not only in respect of the number of them, but propter 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , for the decent and comely order, wherein all things were made: Faius. 6. and this title is given unto God in the Old Testament, not in the New, to signify, that the law was then data in timore, given in fear, but in the new in love, Hug.

28. Quest. What is understood by seed.

1. Origen by this seed understandeth Christ, who as the seed is left in the earth, so he was to be buried, and rise again, and so fructify to the everlasting good of his Church: but for this seed, we had all been as Sodom, still in our sins: Junius in his parallels upon this place misliketh not this application to Christ; thinking, that whereas the Prophet hath the word sarid, remnant, the Apostle of purpose turned it seed, with reference to Christ, that came of the Jews; but Beza and Martyr reject this, as not agreeable to the scope of the Apostle here. 2. Photios in Oecumen. understandeth the Apostles, but for whose preaching, the whole world had been left in their sins as Sodom. 3. Gorran interpreteth this seed to be the word, without the which we had been as Sodom and Gomorrhah, paret essemus in poena. quia similes in culpa, we should have been equal in punishment, because like in sin. gloss ordinar. 4. But the Prophet hath relation to the overthrow and destruction of Sodom and Gomorrhah, wherein there were none left, Chrysost. save only Lot and his company, who were strangers, and so not of the city: so without God's mercy the people had been utterly destroyed in the captivity of Babylon, if the Lord had not reserved a remnant to himself: and so when Christ came to offer them spiritual deliverance, the whole nation generally refused him, only a small number cleaved unto Christ: thus Martyr, Pareus.

29. Quest. How the Gentiles obtained righteousness that sought it not, and the Jews missed of it, that sought it.

1. Whereas this might seem a strange paradox, that they which seek righteousness, should not have it, and they which seek it not, obtained it; Origen thinketh here, by a distinction to dissolve this knot: it is one thing, saith he, sectari, to follow, which is understood of a prescript form of doctrine, such as the written law was, which the Gentiles had not, and therefore could not follow it: it is another 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. Chrysostom thinketh that the Apostle showeth here the reason of the electing of the Gentiles, and rejecting of the Jews, namely the faith of the one, and the incredulity 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 God's decree, of the ende, which is the glory of God, which two the Apostle hath handled hitherto, and of the means, saith of the one, and incredulity of the other, which the Apostle toucheth here.

3. Tolet here distinguisheth between the law of righteousness, and righteousness it self: the Jews followed the law, but not righteousness, because they did not the works of the law, but abounded in sin: but it is evident, that the Apostle by the law of righteousness, understandeth the perfection, which the law required, which were the works of the law, unto the which the Jews attained not.

4. Some by the law understand only the ceremonies and rites of the law, by observing whereof the Jews could not attain unto righteousness: but it is evident that throughout this epistle the Apostle understandeth even the works of the moral 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 between, iustitiam legis, ex lege, the justice of the law, and justice by the law: the justice of the law, is such works, which the law requireth, but the justice by the law, is such works as men do according to the prescript of the law, of their own strength without faith: the Apostle rejecteth this in the matter of justification, but not the other: to this purpose Bellarmine lib. 1. iustificat. c. 19. And so the Apostle here saith, that the Jews sought the law of righteousness, but while by their own power they sought to fulfill it, they could not attain unto it: he allegeth to this purpose Augustine, who saith, iustitiam legis non implet iustitia quae ex lege est, &c. the righteousness which is of the law fulfilleth not the righteousness of the law, &c. and the righteousness by the law he interpreteth to be that, quam homo suis viribus facit, &c. which a man doth by his own strength.

But 1. it is evident, that the Apostle indifferently useth these phrases, the righteousness of the law, and by or from the law: as he taketh the righteousness 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , of God, Rom. 3.22. and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , by or from God, Phil. 3.9. for one and the same: so whether we say the righteousness of faith, which the Apostle calleth the law of faith, Rom. 3.27. and the word of faith. Rom. 10.8. or the righteousness 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , by or through faith, there is no difference, but in words. 2. Origen hath the like curious distinction upon these words of the Apostle, Rom. 3.30. who shall justify circumcision of faith, and uncircumcision through faith, between 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , of faith, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , through faith, he maketh this difference; that to be justified ex fide, of faith, is to begin with faith, and end with works, and to be justified through faith, is to begin with works and end with faith, &c. whereas the Apostle intendeth one and the same manner of justification: the like curiosity there is in this distinction, between the righteousness of the law, and by the law.

3. And the very words of the Apostle, They followed the righteousness of the law, show as much, which he interpreteth afterward, They sought it by the works of the law, that is by the righteousness of the law: the works of the law, are the righteousness of the law, which are excluded from justification, Rom. 3.28. neither did the Jews so cleave unto the works of the law, as that they excluded the grace of God: for the Pharisee in his vain glorious prayer, Luk. 18. giveth formal thanks unto God. 4. And although Augustine seem to make some difference between these terms, yet he is far off from thinking, that we are justified by the fulfilling of the law, but by faith only: his meaning only is, that we have no power to do the works of the law of our selves, but by the grace of God's spirit; and concerning justification by faith only, and not by works, he saith, quantaelibet fuisse vertutis antiquos iustos praedicas, non eos salvos fecit nisii fides, of how great value soever you report the ancient righteous persons to have been, nothing saved them but their faith, &c.

5. Some by the righteousness of the law in the first place understand the righteousness prescribed in the law, but in the latter, the true righteousness of the Evangelical law: and make this to be the sense, while they followed the legal righteousness, they could non attain unto veram iustificationis rationem, the true way of justification, Calvin, quae est propria Evangelij, which is peculiar and proper to the Gospel, Hyper. so also Tolet, and Lyranus understandeth in the latter place, legem fidei Catholicae, the law of the Catholic faith; and before them Origen thus expoundeth, that while they followed the law according to the letter, they attained not unto the law of the spirit: for if the Apostle did mean the same law, he would not have said, that they attained not unto that law, which they had: to this purpose Origen: But the Apostle saith not, they attained unto, or had the law of righteousness, but only followed it; and in both places the law of righteousness is taken in the same sense: that whereas the Jews endeavored by keeping of the law to be justified, they failed, and came short even of that justice which they sought for in keeping of the law: Martyr, Pareus, and so Chrysostom excellently showeth a threefold difference here between the Gentiles and the Jews: first the Gentiles 1. found justice, 2. which they sought not for, 3. and the most perfect justice, even of faith, which exceeded the justice of the law: But the Jews, 1. missed of justice, 2. which they earnestly sought for, 3. yea they attained not unto the justice of the law, which is the less and inferior kind of justice, because they sought not aright, namely by faith.

Quest. 30. How Christ is said to be a stumbling stone and rock of offense, v. 33.

1. In the citing of this testimony three things are to be noted. 1. that this former testimony is collected out of two places of Isaiah, the first words, I lay in Zion a stone, are taken out of the 28. c. v. 16. the other, a rock of offense, and a stumbling stone, are found, c. 8.14. 2. The Apostle in both places admitteth diverse words, only alleging that, which was most pertinent to his purpose. 3. whereas the Prophet saith, I lay in Zion, lapidem probationis, a stone of trial, and the Apostle translateth it, lapidem offendiculi, a stumbling stone, Junius lib. 2. parall. 15. doth thus reconcile them, that which the Prophet setteth down in general, that Christ is a stone of trial to all, the Apostle doth particularly apply, and by way of consequent unto believers: that unto them, he is a stone of trial, in that they take occasion to stumble at him: But other interpreters think, that these words, a stumbling stone, and rock of offense, 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 rock of offense, is diversely interpreted. 1. the ordinary gloss which Gorran followeth, doth thus earnestly distinguish between a rock and a stone, the one is rough and vnhewne, the stone is wrought and fashioned: so Christ was a rock of offense, before he was as it were hewed and squared in his passion, when they took offense at Christ, because he made himself the Son 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 rock of offense and scandal in respect of the Jews, and a stumbling stone to the Gentiles: the one were thereby turned out of the way, and the other were kept from coming into the way: But this is alleged specially against the Jews, that stumbled at Christ: as he was a stumbling block to them, so he was foolishness to the Gentiles. 3. Tolet annot. 39. doth thus distinguish these two: the stone to stumble at, is the stone, which men fall upon, and so the Jews were offended at Christ; the rock of offense, is that which falleth upon them: so Christ was lapis offensionis propter eorum incredulitatem, a stumbling stone, because of their incrudulitie: and a rock of offense, per punitionem, by their punishment: so the ordinary gloss. Christ is called the one in respect of his stare and condition, quo apparuit malis, wherein he appeared to the evil: and the other, in regard of that, quod in futura faciet malis, which in time to come he shall do unto the wicked in punishing of them: he is a stumbling stone, in praesenti per culpam, in the present by their fault, which believed not upon him: in futura per poenam, and a rock of offense in time to come by their punishment: Gorran. And this difference Tolet would further approve, by the signification of the words: for abeu is a little stone, fir for one to stumble at, but tzur a rock, is a great stone able to overwhelm one: and both these kind of offenses are noted by our Savior, Matth. 21.44. Whosoever shall fall on that stone shall be broken, but on whom it falleth, he shall be broken all to powder: so Augustine well observeth this difference, serm. 40. de verb. Domini. Iudaeos offendisse in Christum, &c. that the Jews stumbled at Christ, when he was a small stone in the world: but being a great rock in the day of judgment, he shall fall upon them, &c.

All this is a truth, that Christ shall fall upon them, that fell and were offended at him: but this is not the Apostles meaning here, for he allegeth this testimony for proof of that, which he allegeth before, they have stumbled at the stumbling stone: And Saint Peter likewise understandeth this place, that Christ passively is a stone and rock of offense to stumble at, not actively in falling upon them, 1. Pet. 2.8. a stone to stumble at, and a rock of offense to them which stumble at the word, &c. so then the one word is 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , an exposition of the former.

3. Now these were the things, which the Jews were offended at in Christ, 1. at the vilitie and baseness of his person: for they expected a glorious Messiah, that should be of power and state in the world. 2. at his conversation, because he did company with sinners: 3. at his doctrine, because he reproveth them for their corruptions of life, and superstitious doctrines, Martyr, Pareus. 4. They blasphemed both his humanity, in saying he was a man given to eating and drinking, a companion of Publicans and sinners, & in blaspheming his divine nature, saying that he cast out devils through Belzebub the prince of the devils.

4. But where it is said, I lay in Zion a stumbling block, four things are here observed. 1. who layeth this stone God. 2. who was this stone, Christ. 3. where laid, in Zion, in the Church of God, among the Jews: to what end, to stumble at: yet this was not the principal end for Christ was appointed to be a precious, and eiect stone: but he is, a stone to stumble at, through the obstina • ie and hardness of heart of unbelievers: both these ends are set forth by Simeon, Luk. 2.34. This child is appointed for the fall and rising again of many in Israel: and by Saint Peter, 1. ep. c. 2.7. Unto you which believe, it is a precious (stone) &c. and to those, which are disobedient, &c. a stone, to stumble at: But the principal 〈◊〉 which the Lord intendeth, is the building and raising up of many by this stone: the accidental end, is the falling, and stumbling of many through their own unbelief.

Quest. 31. Of the meaning of these words, he that believeth in him shall not be ashamed.

1. The Apostle here followeth the translation of the Septuagint in the original Isaiah. 28.16, the words are, be that believeth, shall not make hast: Beza thinketh, that the Septuagint for iachish, which signifieth, be made hast; did read 〈◊〉 , ashamed: But allowing that the Septuagint did read the original, as now it is, there is no great difference in the sense: for that which the Prophet did express by metaphor, the Septuagint do mandate properly: Tolet annot. 35. or rather they put the consequent for the antecedent, 〈◊〉 the effect for the 〈◊〉 : because he which is rash and maketh hast, is ashamed in the end, and confounded him. lib. 2. per act. 15.

2. Touching the meaning of the Prophets words, be that believeth • shall not make hast: 1. Lyranus giveth this sense: that in the prophets times, the faithful should with patience wait for the coming of the Messiah, and not seek to prevent the time: and when the Messiah should come in the flesh, they should not make hast, in wishing his second coming before the time. 2. Paulus Burgensis thinketh to mend this exposition, and maketh it 〈◊〉 worse: he understandeth it of those; which were not hasty to believe in Christ, but yet at the length believed, as Christ saith to his two Disciples, Luk. 24.25. O slow of heart to believe all, that the Prophets have spoken: But this was a rebuke unto them, whereas the other is a commendation of those which believe.

3. Martyr better expoundeth it of the patience of the Saints, which do wait for the fulfilling of God's promises in due time, not hasting to use unlawful means: and more particularly the Prophet there reproveth those which would not wait upon God for his deliverance, but depended upon present helps; Iun. annot. as also it hath a spiritual application against those, which made hast in endeavoring to be justified by their own works, and so prevented and forestalled their justification by faith.

4. And whereas the Apostle saith, shall not be confounded: some do refer it to the day of judgment, when the faithful shall not be confounded or ashamed, cum venerit no futuro, when Christ shall come in judgment: gloss. interline. Haymo: But it is more general, showing that the faithful neither in the time present, nor to come shall be ashamed; and not to be confounded, signifieth, non frustrari, not to be frustrate or disappointed of their hope; Mar, and here more is understood then said, he shall not be confounded, that is, shall be confirmed, comforted, established, Faius: so David saith, Psal. 25.1. In thee have I trusted, let me not be confounded.

Quest. 32. Whether it be the property of faith to make one not to be ashamed, which is ascribed to hope. c. 5.5.

This doubt is easily removed, for though hope have this property, that he which hath a steadfast hope in the end, is not ashamed, because he is made partaker of his hope, whereas he which hath a vain confidence, is abashed and ashamed, when he seeth himself deceived, and disappointed, yet this property hope hath, because it is grounded upon faith, which is by the Apostle called the ground of things hoped for, Heb. 11.1. therefore this effect, not to be ashamed, is ascribed also to faith, because it is always accompanied with hope, and hope is included in faith: Martyr.

Doct. 1. Concerning oaths.

v. 1. I say the truth in Christ, I lie not. 1. hence it is evident, that it is not lawful to swear by any creatures but only by God: for whereas an oath is nothing else but an appealing unto the testimony and judgment of God, who both searcheth the heart, and punisheth perjury, for the confirmation of the truth in a doubtful matter: and so two things are requisite in him, whom we swear by, both knowledge to discern the heart, and power to judge, because both these are peculiar to God, to be a searcher and knower of the heart, and to be able to punish: therefore it followeth, that God only is to be called to witness in an oath; and beside it is a part of invocation, which only belongeth unto God. 2. hence also we have an evident argument of the divine nature of Christ, because the Apostle here sweareth by his name. 3. As also here we learn how oaths may be distinguish • and the diverse kinds of them: as there is an oath called promissorium, a promising oath, which is of the time to come, when one promiseth and undertaketh by his oath, to do this or that: as Elijah sware unto Obadiah, that he would show himself, that day unto the King, 1. king. 18.15. there is assertorium, an affirming oath, which is of the time present or past, as when one sweareth, that such a thing was done or not, or such a thing is true: and this kind of oath is either iudiciale, in public judgment, when an oath is required of the parties, or voluntarium, when one taketh a voluntary oath, such is the Apostles here.

Doct. 2. Of the moderation to be used by Preachers.

v. 2. I have great heaviness, &c. S. Paul, thought in this chapter he be to entreat of the rejection and reprobation of the Jews for their unbelief, yet he first showeth his loving affection unto them: neither concealing the truth for affection, not yet exasperating them with rigorous speech: so the Preachers of the word, should use such moderation, that neither in their silence and forbearing to speak the truth, they should incur the just suspicion of flattery, nor yet in their sharp invectives against those, whom they do reprove, they should be justly blamed for their indiscreet severity: Mar.

Doct. 3. That Christ is God and man.

v. 5. Who is God over all, &c. 1. Christ is God, because the Apostle sweareth by his name, v. 1. and he is called God blessed over all, &c. 2. he is also perfect man, because he is said to come of the fathers concerning the flesh, &c. 3. and yet these two natures concur to make but one person, because it is said of Christ, who is God over all blessed forever, &c.

Doct. 4. Of the diverse kinds of divine promises.

v. 8. Children of promise &c. some promises are general to all, as that the world should no more be destroyed with water, that the seasons of the year, as seed time and harvest, and the rest should continue: or peculiar to the Church of God, which are either concerning things temporal, comprehended under the name of bread in the Lord's prayer, which the Lord promiseth so far forth as he seeth it to be meet and convenient: or spiritual, which are either peculiar unto some special callings, as were the gift of tongues, knowledge of secrets, elocution and utterance to the Apostles: or general, belonging to the whole Church, and the same external, as the promise of the word and Sacraments, or internal, as of faith, hope, justification, remission of sins: The Apostle speaketh here of spiriuall and special promises, which were shadowed forth in those times by temporal blessings.

Doct. 5. Of election.

v. 11. That the purpose of God might remain according to election, &c. Concerning election these points are hence concluded: 1. that God hath decreed some to be elected unto salvation before the beginning of the world. 2. That the decree of election is the purpose of God to show mercy on some in, bringing them unto glory. 3. that the free and gracious purpose of God is only the cause of election, without the foresight of faith or works. 4. that it is certain and immutable. 5. the effects thereof are vocation, justification, sanctification, c. 8.30. whom he predestinate them he called, &c. 6. the ends two, the happiness of the elect, and the glory and praise of God, in the setting forth of his mercy.

Doct. 6. Of reprobation.

v. 18. Whom he will he hardeneth: Concerning reprobation, these points also are here set forth. 1. that some are reprobate from the beginning, as God hated Esau before he was borne. 2. what reprobation is, the purpose of God in leaving some in the mass of corruption, and in ordaining them to be damned for their sins. 3. the cause of reprobation, is the purpose of God to leave some in their natural corruption. 4. the effects are, desertion, hardening of heart, the subtraction of the grace of God. 5. the ends, the just condemnation of the wicked, and the demonstration of the power of God. See more hereof among the Controv. following.

Doct. 7. Of scandals and offenses.

v. 33. Rock of offense. 1. A scandal is anything done or said, whereby one is made the worse, either of himself or by some accident. 2. it is of two sorts, given justly, or unjustly taken, as the offense at Christ was taken and not given. 3. the cause of offenses, is first the malice of Satan, and obstinacy of unbelievers, and the just judgment of God concurring there withal, as the Jews by their own blindness stumbled at Christ, and received that as a punishment of their unbelief.

Controv. 1. That succession of Bishops is no sure note of the Church of Christ.

v. 5. Of whom came the fathers: 1. Though the Jews might allege, that they had the fathers, yea, they could show a perpetual succession of high Priests from Aaron until the times of our blessed Savior, yet for all this they were rejected, and not acknowledged for the Church of God: In like manner the Romanists, pleading for themselves by succession of Bishops, do but build upon a weak ground, unless they could also show a continual succession of true doctrine, together with an outward succession of persons and pace.

2. Our Blessed Savior was a Priest after Melchizedek, without any such continued succession, and the Apostles, the first planters of the Gospel, could show no succession from the high Priests: neither is it necessary in these times, where religion is corrupted, and the Church deformed, to expect a local succession for the restoring of religion.

3. Yet the succession of godly Bishops is much to be accounted of where the true faith is continued withal: and for this reason did the fathers, Tertullian, Irenaeus, Augustinae, ascribe so much to the succession of Christian Bishops, who transmitted unto their successors true and found doctrine together with their place: See more of succession, Synops. Centur. 1. err. 20.

2. Controv. Against the old heretics the Manichees, Arians, Nestorians, confuted out of the 5. v.

1. Where the Apostle saith; of whom came Christ according to the flesh, the Manichees are confuted, which denied Christ to have any true flesh, but only in show; whereas the Apostle saith, that Christ came of the Israelites concerning the flesh: he therefore had true 〈◊〉 , because he took his nature of them. Likewise their heresy is confuted, that think Christ brought his body, from heaven, and took it not of the Virgin Marie: for then how could it be true, that Christ according to the flesh came of the fathers?

2. The Arians also are confuted, who denied Christ to be God, but only affirmed him to be a creature: for the Apostle saith of Christ, who is God blessed forever: as Athanasius epist. ad Epictet. urgeth this place against those, which denied the humanity of Christ: so Tertullian. lib. de Trinit. Hilar. lib. de Trinit. Theophylact upon this place do allege it against those, which impugn the divine nature of Christ.

3. The Nestorians also which denied the uniting of Christ's two natures into one person, but only affirmed it to be by grace, are here refelled: for the Apostle speaketh of one and the same Christ, which according to the flesh came of the fathers, yet was God above all blessed forever: Irenaeus lib. 3. cap. 18. applieth this place against such a like heresy of those which divided Jesus from Christ, and affirmed Jesus to be one, and Christ another.

3. Controv. Against the profane and impious collections of Eniedinus, and Socinus late heretics.

Whereas the Apostle expressly saith of Christ, who is God over all, blessed forever, &c. these two forenamed heretics contend by their impious cavils to show, that Christ's divine nature is not proved out of this place.

1. This phrase, who is blessed forever, is always in Scripture given unto God the father: as Rom. 1.23. 2. Cor. 1.3. and 11.31.

2. Not everyone, that is called God in Scripture, is consequently that chief and great God.

3. Christ is said to be over all, that is, men, as the most excellent man of all, not over all whatsoever.

4. He is said to be over all with a limitation, for he is not over him that hath subdued all things unto him, 1. Cor. 15.27.

5. And in that he is over all, he hath it not by nature but of gift, Philip. 2.9.

Contra. Erasmus seemeth first to have given occasion to these newfangled Dogmatists, who likewise in his annotations upon this place, thinketh this Scripture not so fit to prove the divine nature of Christ: adding that herein there is no danger, seeing there are more direct places to prove Christ's Godhead by: But Pet. Martyr here answereth well, non convenit vt Ecclesiae armamentarium sine causa exhauriatur, &c. it is not convenient, that the armory of the Church should without cause be diminished: seeing the fathers, as Origen, Chrysost, Theophylact, Cyprian, cont. lud. lib. 2. c. 5. Hilarius in Psal. 122. do all allege this place for the proof of Christ's deity, it is not fit, that we should suffer it to be wrestled out of our hands: their cauills are thus answered.

1. Where the father is said to be blessed forever, the Son is not excluded, and in some places Christ is said expressly to be blessed forever, as Matth. 21.9. Blessed is be that cometh in the name of the Lord: and if the Creator be blessed forever, Christ is included by whom all things were created, John. 1. Coloss. 1.

2. He which is said to be God over all, as Christ here, must of necessity be that chief and great God.

3. Some indeed read super omnia, over all things, as Origen, the Syrian and Latin interpreter: and this is agreeable to that place, Coloss. 1.17. He is before all things, and in him all things consist: and the Apostle nameth both things visible and invisible: and so Origen well expoundeth, he is above all things, that is, powers, principalities, and everything that is named.

4. He is above all things, that is, all creatures, and above all, as the father is above all, and yet neither above the Son or the holy Ghost: the father then is here excepted: for Christ and his father are one, non post patrem ipse, sed de patre, he is not after the father, but of the father, Origen.

5. S. Paul in that place speaketh of the exaltation of Christ as he is Mediator and according to his human nature: and so he hath it by gift: but as he is God, he is over all by his eternal generation, as the only begotten Son of God.

Controv. 4. That the water in Baptism doth not sanctify or give grace.

Chrysostom showeth here a fit analogy and resemblance between the birth of Izaak o • Sara by the word of promise, v. 9. and our spiritual regeneration in baptism: the barren womb of Sarah, he likeneth to the water, which of it self hath no efficacy, erat vterni ill aqua frigidior, propter sterilitatem & senectutem, that womb was more unapt for generation, then water, because of the barrenness and old age thereof: like as then Izaak was borne of that barren womb by the word of promise, ita & nos oportet ex verbo nasci, so we are borne of the word: To this purpose Chrysostom, who maketh the element of water of it self but a dead thing, and like unto Sarah's barren womb, which could not have conceived, but by the word of promise: So the Apostle saith, Ephes. 5.25. Cleansing it by the washing of water thorough the word: the water cleanseth, but by the operation of the word: This then overthroweth that opinion of the Romanists, which affirm that the sacramental sign in the sacraments confer grace: See further hereof, Synops. Centur. 2. err. 76.

Controv. 5. Against the vain observation of Astrologers in casting of nativities.

v. 10. Rebecca, when she had conceived by one, &c. Augustine lib. 2. de doctrine. Christian. c. 21. by this Scripture confuteth the folly of Mathematicians, who in casting of men's natiuities do observe the aspect of the planets, and so do calculate and conjecture of the disposition of men: for Esau and Jacob were borne at the same time of one and the same parents, and yet they were of diverse dispositions and qualities, and conditions of life.

Controv. 6. That the souls had no beeng in a former life, before they came into the body.

It was Origen's error who therein did too much Platonize, that the souls in the former life, according to their works good or evil, were accordingly appointed of God to salvation or damnation. But this error is evidently convinced by the Apostle here: for Esau and Jacob had neither done good nor evil, before they were borne: Lyranus addeth two other reasons to convince this error. 1. if there had been another life before, then the world was not created in the beginning, as it is said Gen. 1.1. for that the souls had a being and beginning before. 2. and temporale non potest esse causa aeterni, no temporal thing can be the cause of that which is eternal: the actions then and works of the soul, could not be the cause of the act of God's eternal will.

Controv. 7. Whether the foresight of faith or works be the cause of election.

This was in time past maintained by the followers of the Pelagian sect, as it appeareth by the epistles of Prosper and Hilarius Arelatens. sent to Augustine: and not much differing is the opinion of the Greek expositors: as Theodoret in these words ( that the purpose of God might remain according to election, ) understandeth the purpose of men foreseen of God, according to the which he electeth: But the Apostle evidently calleth it the purpose of God, and therefore not of men: Chrysost. and Photios cited by Oecumenius, do here understand the purpose of God: but where it is added, according to election, they say this election presupposeth a difference and diversity of wills foreseen of God.

The late Lutherans tread in the same steppes • who at the first did hold that the foresight of faith was the cause of election: but now they have somewhat refined that assertion: and their opinion now is, fidem non esse electionis causam meritoriam, sed instrument alem, that faith is not the meritorious but the instrumental cause of election: their arguments are these.

1. Argum. Photios thus reasoneth: electio de illis fit; qui aliqua in re differunt, election is said to be of those, which differ in something: God then did see some difference in them which he elected from others.

Contra. 1. Augustine at the first was somewhat moved with this argument, which made him devise another sense of the Apostles words, to this effect: that it was said unto the children being not yet borne, and before they had done either good or evil, the elder shall serve the younger: least the purpose of God should remain 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 •• tered by the Apostle affirmatively, That the purpose of God might remain, &c. it cannot therefore be drawn to a negative sense: And indeed Augustine whether upon this or some other reason, otherwise expoundeth these words, epist. 115.

2. But the best answer is, that the proposition is not true, for election in God presupposeth not a difference: God may make election even in things in themselves equal, by the right of his Creatorship, and make a difference: as evidently appeareth in the creation of the world, when all things were equal at the first, in that indigested himpe and mass, whereout the creatures were made: and yet our of it were different creatures made: some lightsome, as the Sun and stars, some dark 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 indeed 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 counsel of God.

2. Arg. 1. S. Paul saith, Ephes. 1.4. He hath elected us in him, that is, in Christ: but none are in Christ without faith: that then which joineth us to Christ, is the cause of election. 2. again, 2. Thess. 2.13. we are said to be chosen to salvation 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 instrumental cause of salvation, why not also of election? Thus the Lutherans reason for the foresight of faith.

Contra. 1. Not everything whereby we are joined unto Christ, is the cause of election: but that whereby we were first given unto Christ, which is the absolute and free mercy of God: who elected us of his free grace and mercy, and in Christ appointed to bring those whom he elected unto eternal life: And the Apostle doth expound himself, what he meaneth, by being elected in Christ: that is, he hath predestinate us to be adopted thorough Christ: faith then in Christ is not the cause of election, but a mean subordinate to bring the elect unto salvation.

2. We are said to be chosen in faith, not faith foreseen, as the cause of election, but in faith present as a mean unto salvation.

3. The same answer may serve to the third place objected: which must be understood likewise, de fide praesenti, non praevisa, of faith present, not of faith foreseen: for God thorough his mercy elected us, being yet his enemies: his love therefore was before any foresight of faith: by his mercy he made us acceptable unto himself, by the election of grace, before he saw anything in us.

4. It followeth not, that everything which is the cause of salvation should be the cause of election: it is true in the general cause, which is the mercy 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 salvation: but it therefore followeth not that faith should be the cause of election. And Hunnius that was at the first a great patron of this cause, in the ende argueth, that faith in the mystery of election was to be considered neither vt causam meritoriam, as a meritorious or instrumental cause, sed vt partem illius ordinis, &c. but as a part of that order which God had appointed, that is, a mean unto salvation, 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 justice a man of no good parts or qualites is preferred before him that is well qualified: But there is no fear of this in God's election: for he findeth all alike in themselves: none endued with any good gifts or qualities, but as he giveth them: therefore herein he is no accepter of persons, in preferring one before another, all being alike. Now on the contrary side, that the foresight of faith or anything in man is not the cause of election, but only the good pleasure and will of God, it may be thus further confirmed.

1. The Apostle in saying, not by works, but by him that calleth, excludeth whatsoever in man: for if either the foresight of faith or of any other thing, and not only of works should be the cause of election, then it should not be only 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 us that we should be holy: Pareus.

3. The eternal decree of God is not founded in that which is temporary: the faith or good works of men are but temporary things: and therefore they cannot be the ground and foundation of God's eternal decree. Faius.

4. Faith is the work of God, John. 6.29. therefore not the cause of his election: so the same thing, should be the cause of it self: and so also be before it self. Pareus.

5. If election depended upon the foresight of good works, then it would follow, that we are justified by works: for from election and predestination proceedeth our vocation, and from vocation justification: and if election be out of the foresight of works, then justification 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 unto 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 attain unto everlasting glory: Lyranus. upon this place.

7. Tolet also annot. 16. urgeth this reason: whereas the Apostle saith, v. 14. is there iniquity 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 been apparent, and there had been no show at all of any injustice in God, and so no place for this objection at all: See further of this question before, c. 8. contr. 16.

Controv. 8. That not only election unto grace, but unto glory also is only of the good will of God.

Stapleton antidot. p. 126. will have this place of the Apostle to be understood only of election unto grace, which is the first effect and fruit thereof, and this only proceedeth frō the free grace and mercy of God, but the election unto glory, which is the last effect thereof is not without the foresight of works: he reasoneth thus.

Argum. Election to glory is not only of him that calleth, for it is also by justification, for whom he justified he also glorified, Rom. 8.30. but the election whereof the Apostle speaketh here is only of the caller, therefore he speaketh not here of election unto glory, but of election only to the first grace.

Contra. 1. Other Romanists herein dissent from Stapleton, as Bellarmine lib. 2. de grat. c. 15. showeth that men are freely elected not only unto grace, but unto glory: so also Peter. dispute. 5. and before them Thomas in his commentary denieth, that praescientia meritorum, the foresight of merits is the cause of predestination to glory; likewise Lyranus. here.

2. And for the argument: Glorification, as well as grace is only of God that calleth as the efficient cause: justification goeth before glorification, not as an efficient, or meritorious cause, but as a mean appointed of God to that ende.

3. But that the Apostle speaketh evidently of election as well unto glory as unto grace it is evident. 1. he treateth of election unto the promise: for he maketh express mention of the children of the promise, v. 8. but the promise comprehendeth both the first grace in our vocation, and the rest that follow, justification, glorification. 2. he speaketh of election joined with the dilection and love of God, Jacob have I loved: but whom God loved he loveth to the ende, and bringeth them unto eternal life. 3. v. 23. the Apostle in direct terms maketh mention of the vessels of mercy prepared to glory: he therefore speaketh here of election to glory.

Controv. 9. That the Apostle treateth as well of reprobation in this place, as of election.

Huberus, who defendeth universal grace, will have the Apostle here only to speak of election, and not of reprobation: for he holdeth all generally to be elected: the same is the assertion of Stapleton antid. p. 565. against Calvin, that S. Paul treateth only of election here, and not of reprobation at all: he reasoneth thus.

Argum. 1. Only election is of God that calleth, the purpose of God is according to election, therefore the purpose of God is of election.

Answ. 1. The purpose of God is according to election, but not only, which must be assumed, or else nothing can be concluded: but the purpose of God is as well concerning reprobation as election: the purpose and counsel of God is general to both, and it sorteth it else either into the purpose of election or reprobation.

2. And that the Apostle intendeth in this discourse, as well to speak of reprobation as of election, it thus appeareth. 1. by the text it self: he expressly mentioneth both the love of God to Jacob, and his hatred of Esau, v. 22.23. he speaketh of the vessels of wrath and of the vessels of mercy. 2. so much also is insinuated by the nature and property of election: for an election of some supposeth that there is a rejection and reprobation of others: As when Moses saith unto Israel, the Lord chose you above all people, it followeth that as they were elected, so all the rest were refused and rejected.

Controv. 10. Whether as well the decree of reprobation, as of election, be without the foresight of works.

Here are two opinions opposite in two extremes one to the other; the one was of the Pelagians, who utterly condemned the absolute decree of reprobation, without any respect of works; and Catharinus also in his commentaries upon this epistle: some other do make the decree of reprobation and damnation to be a free act of the will and purpose of God, as election is. But beside these there is a third opinion between both, that the decree of reprobation, neither issueth only from the free and absolute will of God, not yet altogether dependeth of the foresight of sin; but proceedeth in part from them both. We will now examine these opinions in order.

1. Of the first sort that hold the decree of reprobation altogether to proceed from the foresight of sin, some do hold strange paradoxes, as Catharinus before named, whose opinion is this, that God appointed all to be saved, but some absolutely, as Marie, and other holy men and women, some conditionally, if they believed and did works, they should be saved, if otherwise, they should be damned; not much differing is the opinion of Becanus, a late Popish writer, who affirmeth that God simply in the beginning appointed all to be saved voluntate primaria, by his first and principal will, but secundaria voluntate, by his secundarie will he would some to be condemned for their sin, cap. 1. loc. 12. de pradestinat. &c. 5. loc. 4.

But the former of these opinions, is distasted by the Romanists themselves, as Pererius in c. 8. ad Rom. dispute. 25. refuseth it upon this reason, because vna est ratio, &c. there is one and the same reason of all that are predestinate unto salvation; how then can some be certainly appointed and absolutely, some uncertainly and conditionally; for all which are ordained unto life, are written in the book of life, out of the which none can be blotted out. And against Becanus assertion it may thus be objected.

1. If God indeed would have all to be saved, why are not all saved? for none can resist the will of God; this then showeth either God to be impotent in not performing his will, or variable in changing his purpose concerning those, whom he first intended to be saved; neither of which imputations must be laid upon God. 2. seeing God getteth glory as well by showing his power and exercising his justice upon the wicked, as by showing mercy upon the elect, the one is as primarily the will of God as the other; for God primarily intendeth his own glory, but in the punishment of the wicked God's glory is set forth, therefore the decree of justice as well as of mercy standeth with the primary and principal will of God.

2. Augustine though nothing favoring these erroneous conceits, yet he referreth reprobation unto the foresight of original sin, and considereth man in massa corrupta, in the mass of corruption, as all have transgressed in Adam, Vniversa massa poenas dedit, &c. the whole mass (of mankind) is worthy of punishment, and if the punishment of damnation, should be rendered unto all, non injust proculdubio redderetur, it should not be rendered unjustly, &c. and again in another place, vna quaedam massa peccati supplicium debens diuina iustitiae, &c. there is one mass of sin, which is indebted to the divine justice: quod sieve exigatur, sieve donetur, nulla est iniquitas, which though it be exacted or pardoned, there is no iniquity: ad Simplic. lib. 1. qu. 2.

In this assertion there is no inconueniencie, to say that God beholding and foreseeing all men by the voluntary transgression of Adam in the state of corruption, did of his free mercy elect some to be saved in Christ, the others he left in their corruption, and so for their sins decreed thē to damnation: for here can be no imputation of injustice at all: for it is free where one hath diverse debtors to remit the debt unto one, and to exact it of another.

So then if the reason be demanded, why some are rejected of God, it may be answered, that man's voluntary transgression, bringing all his posteririe into bondage, being foreseen of God, is a sufficient cause of their rejection; but if it be further demanded, why God out of this mass of corruption, hath elected some, and not others, there no other reason can be given, but the good pleasure of God, Ephes. 1.5. so that the absolute decree of reprobation, is grounded upon the foresight of man's corruption, but of the comparative, as why one is rejected and left, and not another, no reason can be rendered, but God's gracious and free purpose.

Against this opinion of Augustine, there are two principal objections. 1. Pererius dispute. 12. thus objecteth: the Angels had no original sin, they were all created in the state of grace, and yet some of them were elected, some reprobate: therefore sin is not the cause of reprobation.

Ans. 1. As the Angels were created in the state of grace, so also was Adam in Paradise; and as Adam fell by voluntary transgression and so enthralled his posterity, so did the Angels that fell, abuse the gift of freewill, and so for their pride were justly condemned forever: so then the foresight of the apostasy of the reprobate Angels, was the cause of their rejection and condemnation: as the Apostle saith, Iud. 6. The Angels, which kept not their first estate, he hath reserved in everlasting chains: as man then hath original sin, out of the which proceed actual sins, which are the ground and cause of reprobation and condemnation; so the Apostate Angels for their sin of pride were rejected: only here is the difference, that the Angels fell irrecoverable, falling by their own pride being not seduced: but man falling by the sedition and temptation of the devil, hath a redeemer in God's mercy provided for him.

2. Pareus thus objecteth: the foresight of original corruption is general and common to all mankind, therefore it cannot be the cause of the reprobation of some only: dub. 8. argum. 4. so also Ursinus catech. 3. p. 357.

Ans. Not simply the foresight of original corruption, which all are subject unto, but it being considered together with God's decree, because he purposed to deliver some, and not others, is the cause of reprobation.

3. Some do wholly refer the decree of reprobation and election only to the will and purpose of God: and think, that no other cause can be rendered, why God hath elected some, and condemned others but the absolute will, pleasure, and purpose of God: their reasons are these.

1. As God loved Jacob, before he had done any good, so he hated Esau, without any respect unto the evil which he did, Rom. 9.11.

2. The Apostle also saith, v. 18. That God hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will be hardeneth: God's will is the cause of both.

3. And God is compared to the potter, that as he hath power over the clay to make thereout vessels of honor, or dishonor, as he thinketh good: so much more the Lord may out of the same mass, make some vessels of mercy, some of everlasting shame.

4. Our Blessed Savior maketh this the reason, why God had hid the mystery of salvation from the wise men, and revealed it to babes, because O Father, thy good pleasure was such, Matth. 11.25.

Ans. 1. Why God loved not Esau as well as Jacob, the cause was only the gracious purpose of God: and hereof neither the good works of the one, nor the evil works of the other were the cause: yet both of them being considered in their original corruption, as it was God's mercy to deliver the one, so it was no injustice to leave the other. 2. here the hatred of God is taken only for the not conferring of his grace and love, which God freely bestowed without respect unto works: but that hatred, which is an ordaining of men unto everlasting punishment, is not without respect unto their sins.

2. Mercy presupposeth misery, and hardening a corrupt inclination in the heart before, for the which it is hardened: here then man's miserable estate is insinuated, out of the which some by God's mercy are delivered.

3. By that similitude the Apostle showeth what God may do by his absolute power, not what he doth: he dealeth not with men, as the potter with the clay, though he might; that is stricto & absoluto iure, by his strict and absolute right; but aequissimis rationibus, upon most equal and just conditions: he might do as the potter doth, but yet he taketh not that rigorous and strict course.

4. It is indeed God's good pleasure to reveal the secrets of his will to whom he pleaseth, and to hide them from whom he will: because he is not bound unto any, he may do with his own, as he please and bestow his graces freely: but if he should keep them from all, none had cause to complain, seeing their natural blindness and corruption was brought upon them by the voluntary corruption of Adam: and though it was God's gracious favor, to reveal unto some his will, yet the rest were hardened and blinded justly through their own willfulness and obstinacy against the truth.

And further against this opinion of the absolute decree of reprobation, without any respect unto the sins of men original and actual, these two strong objections are made: first there would be an imputation of injustice upon God, if he should decree any to be condemned but for sin: for like as none are indeed in time condemned but for sin: as the Apostle saith, Ephes. 5.6. For such things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience, &c. so the decree of damnation before all time must be upon the foresight of sin.

Secondly, whereas God in Scripture is set forth to be exceeding abundant in mercy, as Psal. 25.10. All the ways of the Lord are mercy and truth: and Psal. 144.9. His mercies are over (or above) all his works: and James 2.13. mercy rejoiceth against judgment: Now the Lord should be accused of severity and inclemencie, and far more ready and prompt unto justice, then mercy, if he out of his own will should decree more to be condemned, then to be saved: these objections, the former position of the absolute decree of damnation being maintained, cannot possibly be answered.

4. Whereas to shun these rocks of offense, and to prevent these objections, some here have found out a middle or mean way, to refer the decree of reprobation partly to the will of God, as the efficient, partly to the foresight of sin, as the material cause thereof: And here these distinctions are brought in.

1. Lyranus thus distinguisheth, that reprobation is either taken large, largely, and so it signifieth only simplicem negationem ad gloriam, a simple denial of glory: and this hath no cause in God's prescience, but only in the will of God: or it is taken proprie, properly, for ordinario ad poenam, an ordaining unto punishment, and so it is not willed or decreed of God, nisi propter culpam, but for sin: Bellarmine also fleeth to the same distinction of negative reprobation, which is not to have mercy, & positive to decree unto condemnation: of this the foresight of sin (he saith) is the cause, of the other the free will of God: But seeing this negative reprobation containeth a privation and denial of everlasting glory, this also must arise from the foresight of sin: for God excludeth none out of his kingdom but for sin: as the Apostle saith, 1. Cor. 6.9. Know ye not, that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

2. Gorran hath this distinction: there is a double kind of reprobation, temporalis, the temporal, which is, non appositio gratiae, the not affording or giving of grace, and eterna, voluntas non apponendi, the eternal, which is the will or purpose of not giving of grace: this is without the foresight of any merit, but not the other: like unto this is that difference which some make between the decree, and the execution of the decree: the first is without respect unto sin, but sin cometh between, before the other: But this doth not satisfy, as Pareus well observeth: for the same cause moved God to decree punishment, which moveth him in time to execute punishment.

3. Some do thus consider of predestination, that it is of two sorts: there is decretum 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , a decree simply called, of those things whereof God is the author and efficient cause himself, such is the decree of election unto life: there is decretum 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , secundum quod, a decree after a sort, which may also be called, permissivum, the decree of permission, as the other is effectivum, an effecting and working decree: of this latter sort is the decree of reprobation: the means which lead thereunto, God only permitteth, and effecteth not, as the sin and iniquity of men, for the which they are worthily condemned: to this purpose Rollocus in 8. ad Roman. p. 181.182. But this doth not satisfy: for the decree of damnation is as well an effecting decree, as is the decree of election: God willeth and decreeth the damnation of the wicked as effectually in his justice, as he effectually willeth the salvation of the elect: as the wise man saith in the Proverbs, 16.4. That the Lord hath made all things for his own sake, yea even the wicked for the day of evil.

4. Junius against Puk • us resp. ad ration. 72. maketh two degrees of reprobation: decretum praeteritionis, the decree of preterition, which is the purpose of God, not to show mercy, and this is absolute without any respect unto sin: then there is decretum ex praescientia, the decree of reprobation, issuing forth of God prescience: and so none are decreed to be condemned, but for sin: some call the first decretum non miserandi, the decree not to show mercy, the other decretum puniendi, the decree of punishment: Pareus dub. 8. p. 913. citeth Mr. Perkins, who calleth them, decretum deserendi, the decree of desertion, and ordinatio ad poenam, an ordaining to punishment: Pareus out of his own judgment saith, that there are two acts of reprobation, negativus, the negative, that is not to have mercy, and affirmativus, the affirmative, which is to condemn: the negative act, is either reprobation from grace, or from glory: the first of these which is a rejection from grace, be thinketh only to proceed from the good pleasure of God, but not the other: all these distinctions are the same in effect, which else where I have followed, allowing that distinction especially of Junius, as giving full satisfaction in this matter: But now I find some doubts and objections, which are not yet removed by these distinctions.

1. Seeing damnation necessarily followeth rejection, and where grace is denied, glory cannot follow: if the denial of the one should be the absolute act of God's will, so by consequence should the other also.

2. And the Scripture showeth that the cause why God rejecteth man, is for that they reject God first; as Samuel saith concerning Saul, 1. Sam. 15.23. Because thou hast cast away the word of the Lord, the Lord hath cast away thee: and Rom. 1.24.27. the Apostle showeth that the giving up of the Gentiles unto their hearts lusts, was a just recompense of their error; therefore because the subtraction and denial of grace, the hardening of the heart, the blinding of the mind, are punishments of sin, and sin goeth before the punishment thereof, it followeth that these things, as they are not temporally inflicted but for sin, so neither are they eternally decreed but upon the foresight of sin.

3. If God should absolutely reject any otherwise thou for sin, and more are rejected, then elected, then should God's justice far exceed his mercy, and his severity far surpass his clemency.

To this last objection Thomas Aquin. maketh this answer by a distinction, that bonum proportionatum communi status naturae, &c. the good things which are proportioned to the common state and condition of nature, are found in the most: but bonum quod excedit come •••• statum, &c. the good things, which exceed the commō state, are found in few: as they are found more, which have sufficient knowledge and direction for the government of their life, then they which want it, such as are idiots and fools; but there are few, which are found, that have the profundity and depth of knowledge: and of this kind of everlasting life, it exceedeth the common state and condition of human nature, and therefore it is no marvel, if it be found in the fewest and smallest number: to this purpose Thomas 1. part. qu. 25. artic. 7.

But this answer is not sufficient; he hath given a good reason, why eternal life is not merited, or procured by man's deserts, because it is a gift, which exceedeth the proportion, and condition of man's nature; but yet the reason appeareth not, neither is the doubt satisfied, why, seeing God aboundeth in mercy, everlasting life is not given unto the most: therefore Thomus addeth further, that God's mercy appeareth in that he directeth some unto life from the which the most decline, by the common cause and inclination of nature: And indeed this is the best and most sufficient answer, that God's mercy herein exceedeth his justice, that whereas all men by nature are the children of wrath, and God might justly • aue them in their sin, as he did the reprobate Angels, yet out of that mass of corruption he saveth some, to bring them unto glory; so then, unless the fall and transgression of man he presupposed, there is no way to magnify God's mercy above his justice. Thus Thomas Aquin, though he mislike Augustine's opinion (who maketh the foresight of original ••• ne the ground of the decree of reprobation) and thinketh that God absolutely rejecteth the reprobate without any foresight of sin, yet is constrained to seek shelter here for the ••• iding of this objection.

5. Wherefore fully to decide this great question, and controversy touching the decree •• reprobation, we will determine of it in this manner.

1. There is reprobatio indefinita, & definita,